Loot distribution for bosses/uncommon encounters (Performance to reward ratio)

Hi! I'd like to discuss a topic that has taken my interest and hear your opinions on it. Me and a friend had a discussion about this, so i'd like to see a third view. For my explanation i'll use a dragon as an example as its easy and simple to understand.

[NOTE THAT ALL THIS IS JUST MY OPINION, WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS IS ALL]

When a big world boss appears (in this case a dragon) and players from different groups and guilds and even solo players fight it, how should loot be distributed?

In my opinion, performance should be rewarded but participation and socializing should be rewarded too. Your personal drop table for the boss (and drop percentages) should differentiate from other players based on your parties performance with the exception of a single default drop that everyone gets.

Its sometimes frustrating for parties/players who put in more effort or are more skilled, and then don't get rewarded based on a RNG loot roll. On the flipside, its often frustrating for players who aren't as skilled yet to get absolutely nothing just because they aren't as good yet, and an RNG roll would work in their favor.

Let's say this dragon has a few drops;
- [Legendary] Dragontooth dagger
- [Rare] Dragonscale shield
- [Uncommon] Dragon-tooth (Resource, crafting material)
- [Common] Dragon scales (Resource, crafting material)

The party (or player?) with the highest {damage/heals/damage absorption} will be the only ones with a chance to get the [Legendary] Dragon-tooth dagger (Or a higher chance? /discuss).

The 2nd and 3rd parties or players will have a better chance at receiving the [Rare] Dragonscale shield

The parties or players that contributed the least, won't have (or have a lower) chance at receiving said drops, but will still be rewarded a chance to receive those items regardless. Not through a direct lucky drop, but through resources that you can craft into said items. They can receive the [Uncommon] Dragon-tooth to maybe in the future craft that [Legendary] Dragontooth dagger when they have the materials, or receive the [Common] Dragon scales to craft that [Rare] Dragonscale shield or maybe to craft some dragonscale armor.

I'd like to keep the rewarding feeling of having a rare drop, so ofcourse it wouldnt take a small amount of those resources, they'd need a bunch of those resources + additional resources they have grinded for. But even then, when those parties try their best, eventually they'll be rewarded for it regardless, this is especially important when its an uncommon event that you cant find every single day, you dont want to make them feel like they missed out on something amazing or rare. There's bound to be some players with lower end PCs who can't outperform the gaming gods on their 400fps ultra settings.
_______________________________
As a quick sidenote, i personally would still love to have some rare weapons where there's only a few in the whole world, i just dont want that to happen for all higher tier items to reward the lower-end players. This is all speculation and idealization, i dont think for sure this is the best way of doing it, i just want to discuss this topic and see your views on it. It's interesting to talk about, hope you think so too.
_______________________________

Sorry if its long, tried explaining it as compact as i could.
Thanks for reading

- A fellow AoC enthusiast.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

CounselorMin

I like your suggestion, but wonder how difficult it would be to have such a system. Are there any MMOs that have had something like this? RNG appears to be a hallmark of many MMO games, and as much as it is complained about I think it is merely something that will be inherent in any game. It certainly is just a question of a sliding scale of RNG: some games have it much, much more, and some do not.

I hate where the current MMO genre is in loot distribution, such as in retail WOW where it is all personal and merely luck of the draw. There needs to be some community aspect to loot distribution. We all have our different beliefs on the best system for that, but I just hope that AoC has a community focused loot distribution system; however that is spelled out I certainly find the developers here to be trustworthy individuals to come up with a good system.

Good post! Best wishes on enjoying the game. Hopefully we get to see it sooner rather than later!

Jxshuwu

CounselorMin wrote: »

I like your suggestion, but wonder how difficult it would be to have such a system. Are there any MMOs that have had something like this? RNG appears to be a hallmark of many MMO games, and as much as it is complained about I think it is merely something that will be inherent in any game. It certainly is just a question of a sliding scale of RNG: some games have it much, much more, and some do not.

I hate where the current MMO genre is in loot distribution, such as in retail WOW where it is all personal and merely luck of the draw. There needs to be some community aspect to loot distribution. We all have our different beliefs on the best system for that, but I just hope that AoC has a community focused loot distribution system; however that is spelled out I certainly find the developers here to be trustworthy individuals to come up with a good system.

Good post! Best wishes on enjoying the game. Hopefully we get to see it sooner rather than later!

Thanks for your reply! I also have high hopes for the team to be able to figure out a good system on drops, this is merely an idea they could pick apart.

I share that i dislike the current loot system of mmos, RNG does not feel rewarding at all, working for something does.

Thanks again for reading.

Ostaff

Personally, I don't think animals and beasts should drop any type of gear at all. And I think mobs should only drop what they actually have on them. I personally hate RNG, it is literally the lazy man's coding method and you see it so relevant because...well.. heck... look at the mmos that are out.

So loot drops to me would be like this:

1) Sentient npcs will drop what they are actually wearing and what may be in their pouches/bags/packs.
A. The gear they drop will be in the condition that the gear will be after they have fought. Ie. None of it would be 100% new, it would all be used if it was used in the fight.
B. Gear may be destroyed during the fight and thus not dropped or salvaged. i.e. You have a mage that uses a fireball on the npc which destroys their backpacks and any combustible goods within it, or you have a fighter that "sunders" their armor/weapon which means it is no longer around. Potions that are quaffed, are used and therefore not accessible.

2) Non-sentient creatures will only drop body parts in the condition that the creature is in when killed.
A. Slashing or cutting damage has a seriously chance to reduce the quality of the hide and the amount able to be skinned.
B. Poison and Magic may taint the body and make many parts unusable.
C. Blunt weapons may break bones and render bone structure unusable.

The material able to be dropped is not random and is preset depending on the type of mob, and the material itself has a threshold of damage that may occur before lowering its quality and possibly destroying it all together.

This means that a party needs to be more thoughtful and skilled when dealing with the npc over and above just how much damage they are able to provide to it. It calls for strategy in dealing with its attacks as well as what to use against it.

Loot distribution should be handled by the party in three manners:
1) Leader Decides
2) Random (This is the only time I accept RNG being used as its not from the developer being lazy but the actually players in deciding how their loot should be done)
3) First pickup (There is no auto loot and each item must be picked up seperately)

Then there is loot acquired from skill which should go to the person performing the skill. Ie. Skinning (which is not just based upon their skinning level but also upon the end quality of the skin and how damaged it was to start with).

Having non-sentient npcs drop only material increases the value of player crafting and stops the balance creep between game items and player made items.

Jxshuwu

@Ostaff This does seem cool, but i don't think it would be a good idea to overtune it. I think that items being damaged upon attack makes total sense! For example, the more you hit a shield, the lower its durability will be when you pick it up. The only thing i can see become an issue, is the effect specific attacks have.

If a fire mage destroys cloth or any other burnable items (or reduces its durability heavily) it could cause people to not want a fire mage in their party. I believe there would need to be some heavy balancing on every class whilst at the same time, keeping it 'realistic', which is a lot of work combined with general balancing in the game. It might also cause players to use weapons their class isn't supposed to use (unless they aren't able to do so? im not sure) just to prevent loot from being damaged.

Besides that, i think that items being battle-scarred would be cool indeed as long as there is an option to restore them also! Because its a bummer if you loot a rare drop, but its simply unusable. Loot in chests could maybe often be in pristine condition. Maybe there could be a scrap system where you scrap broken weapons/armor into materials for new crafting opportunities.

i HEAVILY agree that loot being dropped should be relevant to the appearance of who/what you're fighting.

Thanks for your reply

Ostaff

Jxshuwu wrote: »

If a fire mage destroys cloth or any other burnable items (or reduces its durability heavily) it could cause people to not want a fire mage in their party. I believe there would need to be some heavy balancing on every class whilst at the same time, keeping it 'realistic', which is a lot of work combined with general balancing in the game. It might also cause players to use weapons their class isn't supposed to use (unless they aren't able to do so? im not sure) just to prevent loot from being damaged.

From my understanding, a mage is not limited to fire or ice or etc only. Having certain types of magic will cause them to slot their skills apropiately instead of having one slot fits all which is the norm for mmos. And heck, even if they can't.. I am perfectly fine with having a fire magic unusable against certain mobs... since there will also be mobs that you would want a fire mage for. I strongly disagree with any "one player fits any occasion"... I think player classes and gear should all have pros and cons for where they are needed and where they are completely useless. The greater the variety, the better in my opinion.

And yes, there would definitely need to be a "repair" option on damaged loot, which would of course call for a professional in that area's attention, however there should also always be a chance of that legendary loot being completely useless due to the party using the wrong damage or skill levels against it. The trade off is "you can kill it easier with that type of skill/damage, but you also risk losing the loot you want." So.. take it easy and maybe get nothing? Or take it the hard way and ensure you get what you want?

Vhaeyne

Personal opinion, but also I think this is how it works in Ashes anyways.

Loot should drop to the party that does the most damage only. There should not be any participation trophy's for just showing up as a solo player or small group. This is to improve socialization. Solo players or small groups should have to find ways to increase their numbers to ensure they have a chance at loot. This involves socialization.

In a competitive game like ashes bosses are less about the boss itself or the act of killing the boss, and more about the path of securing the boss. I am not saying fighting bosses should be trivial, but in my experience world bosses are always lean to being trivial.

What is never trivial is getting a cohesive group that can out compete other players attempting to do the same thing. If loot dropped for everyone involved in the encounter it would take some of the competition out of the game. Competition is good because you need to have people you dislike to make things real. You might remember the names of people that took a boss from you. Now you have a genuine revenge motive. People who have never been in a real guild war might not understand this, but there is so much more satisfaction in killing a group of people who slighted you vs the team a game matched with. The drama makes the game come alive.

Most importantly competition enhances "Risk vs Reward" which is one of the primary focuses of Ashes.

Jxshuwu

@Vhaeyne

If a world boss spawns, wouldn't it make sense for smaller parties and bigger parties to work together if they're part of the same node as it'll progress it which is beneficial to both? As for competition, a neighboring node's community might try to swoop in to try to steal it from the other node's players, which is the competition you mentioned (the people you ''dislike''). The risk would inherently be that neighboring nodes might come and pvp your ass to steal the rare resources.

Imo, that's more than enough risk vs reward. I Don't feel like there's a need to make it hardcore in any way, i dont think that's what AoC is aiming for.

Also just want to somewhat repeat what i said earlier, not rewarding the 'underdogs' is basically just neglecting a big part of the community simply put. Just rewarding the best causes elitism which is already a massive issue is most MMO's today.

As for players needing to search to ''grow'' to ensure socialization happens, is not a positive thing i think.
Reason being, some players want to keep their party compact and small. People should have the freedom to just play with their friends, and not be a part of some big name guild just to have access to some hot items.

If that would be the case, it wouldn't be positive socialization, but moreso a chore.. i.e ''gotta find a guild with X power level so that i can have a chance at X item'' that's not positive socialization.

Biccus

my opinion on it is the "winner" should not be based off damage only, it should be the group with the highest damage done + healing done + damage taken (to make people actually want to bring a tank).
completed items only chance to drop for the winning party
top 3 have crafting materials available with quality dictated by ranking.
rest of them get some certificates. In the described example it could be something like broken dragon scales. unusable for crafting but sellable to hunter NPCs.

Vhaeyne

Jxshuwu wrote: »

@Vhaeyne

If a world boss spawns, wouldn't it make sense for smaller parties and bigger parties to work together if they're part of the same node as it'll progress it which is beneficial to both? As for competition, a neighboring node's community might try to swoop in to try to steal it from the other node's players, which is the competition you mentioned (the people you ''dislike''). The risk would inherently be that neighboring nodes might come and pvp your ass to steal the rare resources.

Imo, that's more than enough risk vs reward. I Don't feel like there's a need to make it hardcore in any way, i dont think that's what AoC is aiming for.

Also just want to somewhat repeat what i said earlier, not rewarding the 'underdogs' is basically just neglecting a big part of the community simply put. Just rewarding the best causes elitism which is already a massive issue is most MMO's today.

As for players needing to search to ''grow'' to ensure socialization happens, is not a positive thing i think.
Reason being, some players want to keep their party compact and small. People should have the freedom to just play with their friends, and not be a part of some big name guild just to have access to some hot items.

If that would be the case, it wouldn't be positive socialization, but moreso a chore.. i.e ''gotta find a guild with X power level so that i can have a chance at X item'' that's not positive socialization.

No,

You don't want to promote people being underdogs. Underdogs should have to band together and form larger raids or break up and join larger guilds. Which are both examples of promoting socialization. The competition creates constant pressure for guilds to improve. Otherwise you could just get on with your social circle and never have to socialize. If all of my friends play Ashes at launch and loot is split the way you are proposing, we will not have as many reasons to meet other people outside of our circle.
Historically if small groups of people could provide enough of their own resources and fighting power there would have never been a reason to form whole nations. Not splitting the loot helps to emulate that dynamic.

Most importantly though:
What is also very likely to happen under your proposed system is your node neighbors will flat out kill you if you show up to a boss with a small group or as a solo player. In lineage 2, people would kill members of their own party/clan if they felt they were trying to avoid a death penalty instead of fighting to the death.
I have zero doubt that if six of your friends showed up to a dragon fight and my guild of 30 to 40 people were there. We would kill you without even thinking about it. You maybe our friends in a node siege, but that don't mean we don't want the best for our clan. It is not about being elitist, it is just the nature of a open world with PvP.

You are actually better off this way as a small group, because you at least have a chance of seeing the fight without getting PKed and learning from it. You would know what to do better when the next dragon spawns and have the pressure to improve your guilds numbers.

You still have the freedom to just play with your friends, but that does not apply to everything. It doesn't apply to node sieges, why would you expect it to also apply to raid loot? (the best loot in the game)

Ashes is just a different style of game.

Noaani

To me, there are two types of raids in this discussion - or at least, there should be.

The first is the type of raid that a guild goes out to kill. This mobs presence in the world isn't an immediate threat to anyone that leaves it alone. This is essentially content for guilds to fight over.

The other type of content are the encounters that spawn to wreak havoc on an area, or where there is some other specific reason large groups of people would want them killed.

In regards to the first type of content, the rewards from it should be considered rewards for the successful raid - and the members of that raid should consider themselves a single "team" that work together often. As such, it is 100% appropriate to reward their effort with a few top quality items/materials, and leave it to them to sort out. This is also where the games loot system in regards to damage comes in to play - the group of people that deal the most damage get all the rewrads.

For the second type of content though, there should be some amount of reward in regards to particpating, and perhaps also performance based. I see these kinds of encounters as being similar to the rifts from Rift, which used a performance based system to determine rewards. This is the kind of content you want the community to get involved in, to cooperate to take on. It is not supposed to be a conflict between players to get the best loot.

However, it should be remembered, the primary reward for killing this second kind of content is that you don't lose your home. Any gold or items (which would all be of lower quality to the first type of content) are very much secondary considerations here.

George_Black

When it comes to open world, I think players should not expect to have things handed down to them and get participation trophies.

The open world will be dangerous and people will use force to protect their interests with PvP or PK.

If there is an open boss that has high dmg, high hp and some minions or mechanics/behaviour, and awards good exp and materials, gold, full items, I think the strongest party or raid (two or more parties connected under a command scroll) should have privilage to the drops.
So for 10s or 15s, only that party or raid can /pickup the loot.
The rest of the players that are nearby, having attacked or not the boss, should receive a system message along the lines "conditions have not been met to /pickup that item" for at least 10s or 15s.
During that time PvP may ensure, to prevent the strongest party from picking up the loot. Kill them, CC them.

How is the strongest party or raid determined? By a system calculation of the most DPS+AGRO (+heal). Some system that should take in consideration that this party or raid tanked and damaged the boss. Why? Because a bunch of other people might form a party or a raid with just dps randoms, whereas the initial party used strategy.

That's how it worked in L2, the best mmo of all time.
I hope the improvement AoC can add to open world raiding are:
the conditions to spawn a boss
the mechanics to be more fun than a simple dps race.

Other than that, I would like to see looting being similar to L2.

Noaani

George Black wrote: »

L2, the best mmo of all time.

I'm sorry, that just made me laugh.

Saedu

Biccus wrote: »

my opinion on it is the "winner" should not be based off damage only, it should be the group with the highest damage done + healing done + damage taken (to make people actually want to bring a tank).
completed items only chance to drop for the winning party
top 3 have crafting materials available with quality dictated by ranking.
rest of them get some certificates. In the described example it could be something like broken dragon scales. unusable for crafting but sellable to hunter NPCs.

I'd only count damage taken from the boss to a class/pet that is designed to be a tank. You don't want to count damage done from competing groups, etc. Also I believe Steven mentioned that there would be a bonus to the first group to tag the boss, which I agree with (perhaps something like 10%).

Vhaeyne

George Black wrote: »

L2, the best mmo of all time.

So say we all.

Biccus

Saedu wrote: »

I'd only count damage taken from the boss to a class/pet that is designed to be a tank.

Sorry yes. That was where my mind was at when suggesting it.

Saedu wrote: »

I believe Steven mentioned that there would be a bonus to the first group to tag the boss, which I agree with (perhaps something like 10%).

He said that the ones that tag the mob have to then account for 40% of the damage done for looting rights. Ones that don’t tag the mob have to account for 60% to obtain the looting rights.

How that translates to raid/world bosses I’m not sure was mentioned.

Jxshuwu

@Vhaeyne A few things you mentioned are very interesting! If you don't mind, i still have some stuff i'd like to touch regarding this. Hope it isn't too much.

''You don't want to promote people being underdogs. Underdogs should have to band together and form larger raids or break up and join larger guilds. Which are both examples of promoting socialization.''

If a guild of 40, and a party of 6 which are part of the same node (Note that in the system i mentioned, loot will not be TAKEN from the 40 to give to the 6, the 6 will simply also get the 'default' drop) and work together to take on that world event boss. Is that also not a form of socializing? It doesn't immediately mean they want to be underdogs, but simply have a preference of how they enjoy playing their content in the game or maybe their guild is still trying to grow.

''The competition creates constant pressure for guilds to improve.''

Wouldn't it be possible to improve as a more compact guild? Do you need to be big?

My best example, is in Albion online, you didn't have to be part of a massive guild to be powerful. Some guilds strictly examined and picked the players they wanted in their guilds, ended up with just 20 members and reached top 5 (Quality > Quantity) whereas there was massive guilds with over 300 members who didn't even reach top 20.

''What is also very likely to happen under your proposed system is your node neighbors will flat out kill you if you show up to a boss with a small group or as a solo player.''

Getting killed by a neighboring node over the boss, is just healthy competition is it not?

''You still have the freedom to just play with your friends, but that does not apply to everything. It doesn't apply to node sieges, why would you expect it to also apply to raid loot? (the best loot in the game)''

Since raiding will be split into parties the size of 8/16/40 they will already have access to pretty good loot on their own i think right? (could be wrong, correct me if i am). I Don't think smaller parties should be able to invade raids or anything of the sort, i more so mean open world bosses.

Its purely my opinion, but i firmly believe that staying in a smaller guild should be a possibility whilst still being able to do SOME end-game content. The reason being, when i played MMO's who didn't allow that to happen, 90%~ of the players would just join the big dog guilds already, and smaller guilds had a difficult time to grow creating 0 new competition, the only competition would be the already bigger guilds fighting over nodes. (this isnt a fun or enjoyable obstacle, its quite literally next to impossible at some point).

I believe socialization can be done on any scale, it doesn't have to be ever-growing. There should just be a cycle of players always needing other players through the means of crafting, repairing, and prob a bunch of other things.

Like @Noaani said, if some monster attacks a node both smaller parties and bigger guilds want to protect, how would you distribute the loot for this uncommon event? I believe my general system would do pretty well there. As for just world bosses on a spawn timer, i agree they can and should be fought over.

Jxshuwu

@Ostaff

''So.. take it easy and maybe get nothing? Or take it the hard way and ensure you get what you want?''

This is a pretty interesting concept to me, difficulty = better rewards. I honestly doubt this system would be implemented in AoC, but that does sound cool.

Also, ''Ensure what you want'' do you literally mean ensure? Or a higher chance to obtain the item you want?

Jxshuwu

@Biccus

''my opinion on it is the "winner" should not be based off damage only, it should be the group with the highest damage done + healing done + damage taken''

Fully agree with this and the fact that the damage taken only takes tanks/tank pets into account like the other reply said. Would also definitely help with more class diversity, more tanks and healers throughout the game.

'' In the described example it could be something like broken dragon scales. unusable for crafting but sellable to hunter NPCs.''

I think everything you said is a good idea, but this last thing doesn't sound too good to me. I personally really dislike unusable items, people should have an option as to what to do with an item, choices is what makes things fun. They can either sell it for some money, or decide to keep it for crafting purposes. I think just giving them a crafting material that's more common is a better option here. + It being a crafting material brings people together more.

Jxshuwu

@George Black

What if its an uncommon event, like an example i previously used, a monster attacks a node and defeating this monster as quickly as possible is of similar interest to both a smaller party and a larger group of players. How would you distribute loot in this scenario? Reward the lower tiers with nothing for defending their beloved node, helping both themselves AND the big dogs? What you said completely makes sense though, but i dont think it fits in every scenario.

Vhaeyne

Jxshuwu wrote: »

@Vhaeyne A few things you mentioned are very interesting! If you don't mind, i still have some stuff i'd like to touch regarding this. Hope it isn't too much.

Sure, I don't mind.

Jxshuwu wrote: »

''You don't want to promote people being underdogs. Underdogs should have to band together and form larger raids or break up and join larger guilds. Which are both examples of promoting socialization.''

If a guild of 40, and a party of 6 which are part of the same node (Note that in the system i mentioned, loot will not be TAKEN from the 40 to give to the 6, the 6 will simply also get the 'default' drop) and work together to take on that world event boss. Is that also not a form of socializing? It doesn't immediately mean they want to be underdogs, but simply have a preference of how they enjoy playing their content in the game or maybe their guild is still trying to grow.

So if all parties involved get loot that drastically changes the meta. A 40 man raid would adjust their party size to unsure that they get the big loot, and have small side parties that get the extra loot. How many side parties would they make? As many as would get loot. Only if the number of parties that are allowed to hit the boss is more than they could muster would they allow small parties not in their guild to live and leech off of the left overs. I personally don't think Steven would ever go for this.

He has talked many times about how fighting over resources in L2 was some of the most fun he has had in MMOs. It also could be seen as a "Participation Trophy" which is not something he is famous for enjoying.

Jxshuwu wrote: »

''The competition creates constant pressure for guilds to improve.''

Wouldn't it be possible to improve as a more compact guild? Do you need to be big?

My best example, is in Albion online, you didn't have to be part of a massive guild to be powerful. Some guilds strictly examined and picked the players they wanted in their guilds, ended up with just 20 members and reached top 5 (Quality > Quantity) whereas there was massive guilds with over 300 members who didn't even reach top 20.

No, you don't to be in a big guild, you just need to be big alliance/guild to secure big raid bosses.

A smaller guild could spec their perks in ways a larger guild could not. Maybe in a way that makes the guild an attractive alliance member.

Jxshuwu wrote: »

''What is also very likely to happen under your proposed system is your node neighbors will flat out kill you if you show up to a boss with a small group or as a solo player.''

Getting killed by a neighboring node over the boss, is just healthy competition is it not?

I could have worded that better. I meant neighbors from within your own node. Like just because you are a part of the same node does not mean they will just let you be there for the boss fight.

Yes, anyone from an outside node attacking you is healthy competition, but that also applies within the node.
I can't tell you how many times in WOW/other games my friends and myself wished we could kill our own faction over the slightest thing. I know we are not the only ones out there who play like this.

Jxshuwu wrote: »

''You still have the freedom to just play with your friends, but that does not apply to everything. It doesn't apply to node sieges, why would you expect it to also apply to raid loot? (the best loot in the game)''

Since raiding will be split into parties the size of 8/16/40 they will already have access to pretty good loot on their own i think right? (could be wrong, correct me if i am). I Don't think smaller parties should be able to invade raids or anything of the sort, i more so mean open world bosses.

Sure, if a boss is not considered high value, and is for a smaller group size. Like a lower level world boss. By all means if a smaller group can take it, they should.

Back in L2 when leveling I tried to hit any raid boss with any group that had a slot open if my guild was busy or I was playing in off hours. It is a good way to get a shot at loot or XP and a good way to put a good name out there for yourself and your guild.

I have been mostly talking about high value bosses that will be hotly contested.

Jxshuwu wrote: »

Its purely my opinion, but i firmly believe that staying in a smaller guild should be a possibility whilst still being able to do SOME end-game content. The reason being, when i played MMO's who didn't allow that to happen, 90%~ of the players would just join the big dog guilds already, and smaller guilds had a difficult time to grow creating 0 new competition, the only competition would be the already bigger guilds fighting over nodes. (this isn't a fun or enjoyable obstacle, its quite literally next to impossible at some point).

I believe socialization can be done on any scale, it doesn't have to be ever-growing. There should just be a cycle of players always needing other players through the means of crafting, repairing, and prob a bunch of other things.

Like I said, the hope of the guild perk system is to allow smaller guilds to be partitions in a greater alliance. If you make a guild of guys who specialize into something an alliance does not have. That is highly marketable. You should have no problem being able to have the agency of a private guild and the help of a whole alliance if your guild is good at what it does and provides a mutual benefit to the alliance.

To me, this is good economics and socialization at play.

Jxshuwu wrote: »

Like @Noaani said, if some monster attacks a node both smaller parties and bigger guilds want to protect, how would you distribute the loot for this uncommon event? I believe my general system would do pretty well there. As for just world bosses on a spawn timer, i agree they can and should be fought over.

The loot rules are pretty clear at the moment. The tagger requires 40% of the DMG to get loot, any other party's have to deal 60% of the DMG to get loot. In the case of three or more parties it is going to be hard to beat the tagger. So be quick at tagging I guess.

Also remember this is all just my opinion/speculation that is informed from reading a ton of the wiki, watching as many interviews as I can, and playing a ton of Lineage 2 and Darkfall online. Things might change down the line. Right now it seems clear that Ashes is pro "Risk Vs Reward" and anti "Participation Trophies".

I hope these clarifications where helpful.

Child Item