Which loot system do you prefer for group content?

Alpha 1 is right around the corner so i would like to discuss one of the most game defining systems in a MMORPG - the loot system. For people new to the genre here is a small explanation of all possible looting rules that i know. I will add some pros and cons to each system if i have some time or if someone has good arguments for/against each system.

Master Loot: The party/raid lead is in charge of all loot and can decide which items go to whom.

Pros:
No random distribution
Enables discussion
Cons:
Exploitable if wrong person is the leader
Personal favors play a big roll

Dice Roll: This is often coupled with the Master Loot system: Each person who wants to have a specific item rolls a dice from 1 to 100. The highest roll wins the item.

Pros:
No tension between party members
Cons:
Not everyone should roll at every item (greed/need)
If unlucky, you dont get any items for a long time

Highest Bid: Each dropped item has its own auction between all party members. The item goes to the person who bids the most gold on it, the gold is automatically distributed to all other party members.

Pros:
Greedy people need a lot of money
If a rare item drops, everyone gets gold
Itemvalue is relevant
Cons:
The rich get most items
People who dont need the item might bid so you have to pay more

Free Loot: The items is not protected by any system and can be looted by every party member.

Pros:
Builds a lot of trust if done correctly
Cons:
Possibel to create a lot of tension between party members
Ninja looter

Personal Loot: Items will be automatically distributed to every party member, without any social interaction.

Pros:
No tension between party members
Cons:
No social interaction between party members
Luck plays a big role

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

BlackBrony

In our guild we used First on the list, gets to choose.

If you want the item, you go to bottom, if you pass you keep your position for next item. If you REALLY wanted something you just held your position until your drop came.
Meanwhile you gave all other items to other players.

I mean, it made sense and it was easy book keeping and no luck was involved or money.

The other system are bound by luck, extreme wealth or extreme trust.

daveywavey

If you're only ever raiding with the same 7 players, then that's fine. But, that's MORPG, it's not MMORPG.

If I'm in Raid 1, and the loot that would have progressed me is given to someone else, then when I play with Raid 1, it'll still help out. But, when I play with Raid 2, it does absolutely nothing for us whatsoever. If I get that loot, then Raid 1 is still improved, and Raid 2 is also improved.

Have you guys only ever played with one set of raiders?

Noaani

daveywavey wrote: »

Have you guys only ever played with one set of raiders?

Yes.

VECNA

I do like NEED or GREED, BUT with an added feature that would add an Anti NINJA LOOT AI that sees WHO REALLY NEEDS the item, and kicks out any Need Rollers who don't NEED the gear and are just trying to NINJA LOOT.

Also if there is gear ratings, than when doing a NEED roll you would get a +(Unknown Number) to your roll based on your gear (ex. Helmet or Sword) compared to the other people that are rolling.

THIS IS A SIMPLIFIED EXPLANATION

Ex. all 3 NEED on a lvl 10 (EPIC) SWORD
Player 1: has a lvl 10 (Green) Uncommon
Player 2: has a lvl 10 (Blue) Rare
Player 3: has a lvl 10 (Purple) Epic

Now Player 1 NEEDS it the MOST. So it will give him +50 to his roll of d100
For Player 2 it's an Upgrade but he doesn't NEED it as badly as player 1 so he gets a +25 to his d100 roll.
Now Player 3 is the player type WE ALL HATE. He has an EPIC SWORD and is rolling NEED on another EPIC sword of the same level. Here is where the Systems Anti NINJA LOOT AI steps in an says "SORRY YOU CAN'T ROLL NEED" because it has detected that that person doesn't NEED the item. If the Anti NINJA LOOT AI can't be implemented then give them give them -25 to their d100 roll.

daveywavey

vecna wrote: »

THIS IS A SIMPLIFIED EXPLANATION

Ex. all 3 NEED on a lvl 10 (EPIC) SWORD
Player 1: has a lvl 10 (Green) Uncommon
Player 2: has a lvl 10 (Blue) Rare
Player 3: has a lvl 10 (Purple) Epic

Now Player 1 NEEDS it the MOST. So it will give him +50 to his roll of d100
For Player 2 it's an Upgrade but he doesn't NEED it as badly as player 1 so he gets a +25 to his d100 roll.
Now Player 3 is the player type WE ALL HATE. He has an EPIC SWORD and is rolling NEED on another EPIC sword of the same level. Here is where the Systems Anti NINJA LOOT AI steps in an says "SORRY YOU CAN'T ROLL NEED" because it has detected that that person doesn't NEED the item. If the Anti NINJA LOOT AI can't be implemented then give them give them -25 to their d100 roll.

What if Player 3 has a sub-standard level 10 (Purple) Epic that doesn't give them the stat boosts they need for their build to work effectively, or it's part of the wrong armour set? They'll still need it. You'll just end up with players running around with basic gear knowing that they're more likely to get the drop.

Vhaeyne

vecna wrote: »

I do like NEED or GREED, BUT with an added feature that would add an Anti NINJA LOOT AI that sees WHO REALLY NEEDS the item, and kicks out any Need Rollers who don't NEED the gear and are just trying to NINJA LOOT.

Also if there is gear ratings, than when doing a NEED roll you would get a +(Unknown Number) to your roll based on your gear (ex. Helmet or Sword) compared to the other people that are rolling.

THIS IS A SIMPLIFIED EXPLANATION

Ex. all 3 NEED on a lvl 10 (EPIC) SWORD
Player 1: has a lvl 10 (Green) Uncommon
Player 2: has a lvl 10 (Blue) Rare
Player 3: has a lvl 10 (Purple) Epic

Now Player 1 NEEDS it the MOST. So it will give him +50 to his roll of d100
For Player 2 it's an Upgrade but he doesn't NEED it as badly as player 1 so he gets a +25 to his d100 roll.
Now Player 3 is the player type WE ALL HATE. He has an EPIC SWORD and is rolling NEED on another EPIC sword of the same level. Here is where the Systems Anti NINJA LOOT AI steps in an says "SORRY YOU CAN'T ROLL NEED" because it has detected that that person doesn't NEED the item. If the Anti NINJA LOOT AI can't be implemented then give them give them -25 to their d100 roll.

Nice name Vecna!

I also want zero part in your proposed system. I have a few reasons.

Number one there is no way to asses how much each player is pulling their own weight. Sometimes in group content, you get the luck of the draw with who is online when you are online. You just need to pug things to get what you want done. You can get stuck with some real pieces of work. You might make it through the content, but that docent mean green gear Andy gets to be a bad player, and be rewarded extra for having crap gear.

Number two, the system is easily gamed. I could get to a gear level capable of completing the content, and never put the gear on. In fact under your system I would not, it would be too much of a money making buff to start in green or gray gear all day. Remember very very little in AOC binds to your character. If you tell people that they get a penalty for wearing gear to their loot roll, everyone will be running around in grays all the time. trying to undercut the loot roll.

Lastly it goes against the spirit of competitive gaming. The fairness is in that everyone has equality of opportunity. Your idea boarders on equally of outcome thinking, which is not something I am for in a brutal fantasy world.

I get it that sometimes people get unlucky. I have been there myself many times. I have also been full BiS many times. What gets you there is dedication. Eventually you will get the drops, and it feels so much better when you do. Especially when you have been loosing rolls consecutively for weeks to months.

Noaani

vecna wrote: »

For Player 2 it's an Upgrade

Any system in which the game is telling a player if an item is an upgrade to them or not is a system that is better off not existing.

Caeryl

Noaani wrote: »

daveywavey wrote: »

Have you guys only ever played with one set of raiders?

Yes.

That explains a lot

Noaani

Caeryl wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

daveywavey wrote: »

Have you guys only ever played with one set of raiders?

Yes.

That explains a lot

In most games, raid content is designed around the notion that people will form guilds and run the same content together several times a week.

For people wanting to run content with different people all the time, these games usually provide group content.

Edit to add; this doesn't mean people are not welcome to run raid content in pick up raids. All it means is that raids have a specific design intention, and players using that content for a different purpose need to do so with the knowledge that they are indeed using that content for a different purpose.

The reward structure for raids is set up so that it rewards guilds that put the effort in to work well as a single unit, and as with literally anything else in MMO's, should not be altered to better suit people that are using the content in situations other than it's designed intention.

daveywavey

So, of your 8-player group, if two of them were offline, you'd just say: "Awww crap. Guess we can't raid, now." Or, would you go to your guild to find two players you know could fill in? Doesn't mean it's a pug, just cos you're not with the full set of your regular group.

BlackBrony

daveywavey wrote: »

So, of your 8-player group, if two of them were offline, you'd just say: "Awww crap. Guess we can't raid, now." Or, would you go to your guild to find two players you know could fill in? Doesn't mean it's a pug, just cos you're not with the full set of your regular group.

Noaani belongs to serious guild, that just doesn't happen unlesss someone dies or you had a huge accident. From all I gather he's a really serious raider, so the chances of that happening are slim.

Warth

daveywavey wrote: »

So, of your 8-player group, if two of them were offline, you'd just say: "Awww crap. Guess we can't raid, now." Or, would you go to your guild to find two players you know could fill in? Doesn't mean it's a pug, just cos you're not with the full set of your regular group.

but what's the problem here?
Those 2 people can gladly join, but in cases like these it's important to talk through loot distribution beforehand.

Master Loot just ensures, that the previously discussed loot distribution is adhered to. No Ninja Loot Shenanigans.

If people are too socially inept, to figure out the loot distribution beforehand, then that's completely unrelated to the looting rights/system.

xlangatangx

I don't really care what the loot rules are. The folks I play with all want each other to have the best gear for their class, so it will be shared regardless of the rules. FFA is usually the easiest for us, so I guess that's my answer

Caeryl

Warth wrote: »

daveywavey wrote: »

So, of your 8-player group, if two of them were offline, you'd just say: "Awww crap. Guess we can't raid, now." Or, would you go to your guild to find two players you know could fill in? Doesn't mean it's a pug, just cos you're not with the full set of your regular group.

but what's the problem here?
Those 2 people can gladly join, but in cases like these it's important to talk through loot distribution beforehand.

Master Loot just ensures, that the previously discussed loot distribution is adhered to. No Ninja Loot Shenanigans.

If people are too socially inept, to figure out the loot distribution beforehand, then that's completely unrelated to the looting rights/system.

The loot distribution being the two who joined, who allowed you to complete that raid, leave with nothing? Yeah that is the entire problem here. When loot distribution is set up to leave people who assist empty handed, and that’s considered normal, you have now disincentivized people from assisting anyone but their own raid groups.

Why would I ever come to a raid to fil when I know they likely won’t compensate me in any way? It would be more beneficial for both me and my guild to gather our own raiding party and go clear that raid you wanted to go after.

You take away incentive to cooperate rather than compete.

Noaani

daveywavey wrote: »

So, of your 8-player group, if two of them were offline, you'd just say: "Awww crap. Guess we can't raid, now." Or, would you go to your guild to find two players you know could fill in? Doesn't mean it's a pug, just cos you're not with the full set of your regular group.

No, 8 players isn't a raid, it is a group.

I have not played a game where a raid is considered less than 20 players, and guilds organize themselves so they will always have enough players online when they have a raid scheduled.

If there are not enough players in the guild on a given day to raid, we wouldn't raid. We would do group content, or something else. However, if we were only 2 players short, we would just run the content with two empty spots.

Warth

Caeryl wrote: »

Warth wrote: »

daveywavey wrote: »

So, of your 8-player group, if two of them were offline, you'd just say: "Awww crap. Guess we can't raid, now." Or, would you go to your guild to find two players you know could fill in? Doesn't mean it's a pug, just cos you're not with the full set of your regular group.

but what's the problem here?
Those 2 people can gladly join, but in cases like these it's important to talk through loot distribution beforehand.

Master Loot just ensures, that the previously discussed loot distribution is adhered to. No Ninja Loot Shenanigans.

If people are too socially inept, to figure out the loot distribution beforehand, then that's completely unrelated to the looting rights/system.

The loot distribution being the two who joined, who allowed you to complete that raid, leave with nothing? Yeah that is the entire problem here. When loot distribution is set up to leave people who assist empty handed, and that’s considered normal, you have now disincentivized people from assisting anyone but their own raid groups.

Why would I ever come to a raid to fil when I know they likely won’t compensate me in any way? It would be more beneficial for both me and my guild to gather our own raiding party and go clear that raid you wanted to go after.

You take away incentive to cooperate rather than compete.

why wouldn't you give them anything? Sounds like you being a dick is a bigger problem than the loot rukes in this scenario.

Caeryl

Warth wrote: »

Caeryl wrote: »

Warth wrote: »

daveywavey wrote: »

So, of your 8-player group, if two of them were offline, you'd just say: "Awww crap. Guess we can't raid, now." Or, would you go to your guild to find two players you know could fill in? Doesn't mean it's a pug, just cos you're not with the full set of your regular group.

but what's the problem here?
Those 2 people can gladly join, but in cases like these it's important to talk through loot distribution beforehand.

Master Loot just ensures, that the previously discussed loot distribution is adhered to. No Ninja Loot Shenanigans.

If people are too socially inept, to figure out the loot distribution beforehand, then that's completely unrelated to the looting rights/system.

The loot distribution being the two who joined, who allowed you to complete that raid, leave with nothing? Yeah that is the entire problem here. When loot distribution is set up to leave people who assist empty handed, and that’s considered normal, you have now disincentivized people from assisting anyone but their own raid groups.

Why would I ever come to a raid to fil when I know they likely won’t compensate me in any way? It would be more beneficial for both me and my guild to gather our own raiding party and go clear that raid you wanted to go after.

You take away incentive to cooperate rather than compete.

why wouldn't you give them anything? Sounds like you being a dick is a bigger problem than the loot rukes in this scenario.

Because they went out of their way to assist you in completing content you otherwise wouldn't be able to clear without them. It's both laughable and incredibly selfish of to you believe you're entitled to people's time while offering them nothing in return.

Edit: Pointed out I misread it. I would reward them in every case. But with Master Loot and artificially scarce rewards, unless you’re paying them gold outright, how could you reward them? And that still does not solve the issue of the game being the system that should encourage participating in a raid. You cannot and should not depend on players to be the primary reward sources.

Noaani

Caeryl wrote: »

Warth wrote: »

Caeryl wrote: »

Warth wrote: »

daveywavey wrote: »

So, of your 8-player group, if two of them were offline, you'd just say: "Awww crap. Guess we can't raid, now." Or, would you go to your guild to find two players you know could fill in? Doesn't mean it's a pug, just cos you're not with the full set of your regular group.

but what's the problem here?
Those 2 people can gladly join, but in cases like these it's important to talk through loot distribution beforehand.

Master Loot just ensures, that the previously discussed loot distribution is adhered to. No Ninja Loot Shenanigans.

If people are too socially inept, to figure out the loot distribution beforehand, then that's completely unrelated to the looting rights/system.

The loot distribution being the two who joined, who allowed you to complete that raid, leave with nothing? Yeah that is the entire problem here. When loot distribution is set up to leave people who assist empty handed, and that’s considered normal, you have now disincentivized people from assisting anyone but their own raid groups.

Why would I ever come to a raid to fil when I know they likely won’t compensate me in any way? It would be more beneficial for both me and my guild to gather our own raiding party and go clear that raid you wanted to go after.

You take away incentive to cooperate rather than compete.

why wouldn't you give them anything? Sounds like you being a dick is a bigger problem than the loot rukes in this scenario.

Because they went out of their way to assist you in completing content you otherwise wouldn't be able to clear without them. It's both laughable and incredibly selfish of to you believe you're entitled to people's time while offering them nothing in return.

He asked why you wouldn't, not why you would.

Also, I have never seen a raid in a situation where they need pickups to complete the content, where they are unable to complete the content without the pickups, and yet are able to complete the content with those pickups. It just isn't a situation that has ever come up.

In WoW, strategy on encounters is the same across all guilds. In most other games with raid content, it is not. In these games, it would often take you several raiding sessions just to show these pick up players what they need to actually do on any given encounter that poses even a remote challenge. Since most of these encounters that pose a challenge have mechanics whereby any one member of the raid making a mistake would wipe the whole raid, taking along pick up players just isn't a great idea, generally speaking.

The notion that a guild raid would NEED to take along two pick up players in order to be able to complete the content is so foreign to me - in almost 20 years of raiding I have never once come across it. I've run raids where we had empty raid spots, sometimes as many as a third of the raid (raiding around the holidays), but I've still never even considered taking pick up players along on a guild raid.

Vhaeyne

Noaani wrote: »

No, 8 players isn't a raid, it is a group.

I have not played a game where a raid is considered less than 20 players, and guilds organize themselves so they will always have enough players online when they have a raid scheduled.

If there are not enough players in the guild on a given day to raid, we wouldn't raid. We would do group content, or something else. However, if we were only 2 players short, we would just run the content with two empty spots.

FFXIV a raid is Exactly 8 players, and the game is much better for it. You lose out on some of the flexibility with party composition, because the game expects you to have 2 healers, 2 tanks, and 4 DPS, but it makes for some extremely compelling raid bosses.

When I was younger, I thought that bigger raids = bigger awesome, but what I learned is that in practice bigger = raids means more people can be carried. In a 8 to 10 man raid, no one should be getting carried. In every game I have played smaller raids have been more difficult. There is less room for error and more people have to do mechanics. FFXIV is actually pretty good with this because the encounters are designed in a way so that in savage everyone has to do some sort of coordinated mechanic every 20-30 seconds at a minimum.
All kinda off topic stuff.

Another thing you and your guild may want to look into is having a B-team to rotate players into if you are missing people from the A-team. You can also have people from the A-team help with the B-team if they are stuck on prog. Easier with smaller group content, but it can be done with 40 man raids, you just need 80 people... lol. It keeps people in the B-team and A-team trying to keep or gain a their spots in the better raid group.

Noaani

Vhaeyne wrote: »

In every game I have played smaller raids have been more difficult.

The opposite has been true in every game I have played.

Everything that can be done in 8 player "raid" content can be done in the 8 player group content that Ashes will have.

What having more players than this in a raid allows for is straight up more flexibility in regards to encounter design. You could have an encounter that requires the raid of 40 to break itself up in to 5 "groups" of 8 (still formed in a single raid), and each of these groups is then given a different coordernated mechanic that they need to not only coordernate within their own small group, but coordernate that mechanic with the other 4 groups that are all doing a different mechanic.

While it may well suit some guilds to have two raid teams, a top end raid guild would have no real need for this. If a guild does find themselves short often though, this would be a good solution.

The first main downside to it though, are that if you need to pull players from your second raid to your main raid, you would still need to have enough players online to allow that second raid to actually run raids. Since top end guilds would likely run with 48 - 52 players in the guild in a game with 40 player raids, if you are wanting to run a guild with 2 40 player raids, you would probably find that you need 110 - 120 players.

The second downside - though this one is specific to Ashes - is that recruiting all of those people mean your guild has to give something else up. We don't know what it is, but we know it is something.

Child Item