Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

Act of Looting

    • 2752 posts
    May 5, 2022 12:08 PM PDT

    It's all just want and there is no need in a near full tradable system that also isn't heavily itemized for specific classes, need is thinly veiled greed. One's immediate use of an item should not hold any more weight than another members desire to sell for their own upgrade. If some in the group want to roll/pass on behalf of another member then they are also free to do so. This leaves more room for player reputation and making friends compared to a system automatically deciding these things.

    Not to mention what having coded NBG systems does to how the game itself is engaged. It changes how/where anyone of any given class plays, what zones or groups they seek/focus on, and what members people filter out of groups. Instead of any camp being a good opportunity to progress, one must seek specific camps that drop items for their class. Then whenever possible one should exclude adding others to the group that might also be able to roll need on the drops they want. Instead of Want/Pass where it doesn't matter if there are multiple of the same class/archetype or not in any group, take whomever needs a group.

    • 5 posts
    May 5, 2022 8:50 PM PDT

    I humbly submit my thought on this.

    Class-based system-enforced need-before-greed BOP.

    This is a normal system with a tiny twist.

    Rolling NEED on an item binds it to the winner. Rolling GREED does not. This would only work in dungeons, not raids, but the point stands. If people want to sell it, great. If somebody wants to USE it, and CAN use it, IE: Shaman rolling need on a shaman item, then they can do so. But a paladin can't roll need just to be a jerk if he can't use the item. A shaman could, to be a jerk, but yeah. The system isn't perfect.

    Anyways. That's my thought. This would allow for people to give equal rights to selling items everyone wants to greedily sell, which is great. And people who need the loot will need it, with no thought to selling it down the road once they finish using it, which, honestly, is almost the same dang thing as someone flat out selling it.

    Just my 1 cent.

    • 2138 posts
    May 6, 2022 9:04 AM PDT

    I love the round and round on this:

    Yes, Mobs should have approirpate loot on them to the mob: i.e. Caster NPC's will have caster stuff, Melee NPC's will have Melee stuff, in a castle or high intelligence NPC area, there will be some of both. Since selling to other players will not be the main focus because adventuring is, one can sell to merchants but whatever. Loots can be divvy'd to whomever can best use it if the group desires and the winner can give up what they are replacing for another roll by the remaining people- higher odds for their hand-me-down for the NBG nay-sayers that THEY may be able  to sell this hand-me-down to a merchant. Relentlessly and mindlessly farming one quest item like a mental patient banging his head on the wall for money for spells- well- you do you I suppose. I am interested in grouping with people of character but be that as it may. The Devs are in control, you take what is given and like it or find clever ways to work with what they give clues to. If that means as you are learning to fight in the Ogre-ish way you have to choose which disciplines or spells you want based on the description since you cannot afford them all right now, then you choose and live with it and back fill later. You dont need to use the poison buff, if there is nothing to poison you. Yes an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure but is it worth waiting 20min while you mem a stack of spells, cast buffs, wait to remem another stack of spells, cast those buffs, only for you to be out of mana and the beasty has already roamed away - we could have had him, we dont need half of this s**t and it will be days untill this coincidence of pathing happens again that we just stumbled upon. Just...go. Deal with decisions on down time. 

    But I could also see the rare item being on a non-standard creature, as this would allow a population to consistently be in an open, contested, outside, talk-out-loud, socialize area. Like, powerful rings or small jewelry being found in fish, or animals, or semi-sentient creature races. 

     

    • 2756 posts
    May 7, 2022 3:35 AM PDT

    fazool said:

    People need to fully understand economics to understand that NBG isn't real.

    Excluding no-drop items, if an item can be traded/sold then it has the exact same *VALUE* to every player regardless if they can use it or not....

    You're absolutely right, of course, and, at risk of getting a little off-topic, I hope VR don't 'push' any particular looting type, like need-before-greed, because that would then become the de-facto choice that everyone would assume is fairest.

    Hot topic ensues:

    It isn't, of course, the fairest. Only truly random allocation of loot is fair. Anything else is a human *attempt* at fairness that is warped or flawed. This has been discussed before at length in the forums, but basically, only randomness is properly without systematic flaw or bias of human interpretation. It's the only system that, over time, is guaranteed to even up everyone's 'luck'.

    There could, though, be a 'pass' option, which is effectively need before greed, except with the assumption that everyone needs everything that is saleable, but can pass if they want to give up their chance at it, if they are feeling kind or don't want to fill up their packs.

    This is also the most social option, since, after the computer takes care of the unbiased and fair random allocation, players can, of course, discuss, trade, plead and indulge in whatever social discourse they like re. the loot, but with the basic understanding that what has happened is already fair and equal and anything beyond that is completely at players' discretion and kindness and not to be expected or pressured in any way.

    • 2756 posts
    May 7, 2022 3:46 AM PDT

    Iksar said:

    It's all just want and there is no need in a near full tradable system that also isn't heavily itemized for specific classes, need is thinly veiled greed. One's immediate use of an item should not hold any more weight than another members desire to sell for their own upgrade. If some in the group want to roll/pass on behalf of another member then they are also free to do so. This leaves more room for player reputation and making friends compared to a system automatically deciding these things.

    Not to mention what having coded NBG systems does to how the game itself is engaged. It changes how/where anyone of any given class plays, what zones or groups they seek/focus on, and what members people filter out of groups. Instead of any camp being a good opportunity to progress, one must seek specific camps that drop items for their class. Then whenever possible one should exclude adding others to the group that might also be able to roll need on the drops they want. Instead of Want/Pass where it doesn't matter if there are multiple of the same class/archetype or not in any group, take whomever needs a group.

    Yes, a very important impact of any NBG-type system is that it effects the dynamics of the game in negative ways.

    If monsters only drop items of a certain kind and players of a certain kind will 'need' those items, you end up with no casters wanting to go to a castle full of knights and no warriors wanting to go to a wizard's tower, etc, etc.  VR would need to add 10x more content so everyone has a good amount of places they will feel rewarded by going.  Also some kind of enhanced LFG tool to help groups fill roles, etc, etc.  Nasty.

    There are lots of impacts from a need-based system, not just the more obvious human-interpretation and human-choice biases and unfairnesses of it.

    And if you try and apply some kind of no-drop, class-based looting, then *shrug* you may as well go full individual looting and non-tradable items. Systems that are 'fair' and 'equal' in that way have the cost of being unreal, boring, less meaningful and fun. Not to mention you miss out on the huge social potential of free trading.

    • 888 posts
    May 8, 2022 12:15 AM PDT

    fazool said:

    People need to fully understand economics to understand that NBG isn't real.

    Excluding no-drop items, if an item can be traded/sold then it has the exact same *VALUE* to every player regardless if they can use it or not.

     

    Group Scenario:

    A warrior who has a +7 sword

    A wizard who has +1 wand

    A tradeable +8 sword drops.  NBG claims the warrior automatically gets it. But the wizard needs it more.  The wizard can sell it and buy a +8 wand.  At the very least they both should have an exactly equal chance of winning the item.

     

    *VALUE* to a player cannot be defined by usability - those are two completely different terms.

    I find this explanation well-reasoned and very convincing. There is still two reasons I think NBG can be useful: 

    1. It benefits the group right away if the warrior in your example wins and immediately equips the sword. The wizard winning the roll won't help the current group.
    2. It feels right, thematically, socially,  and RP-wise. There isn't a scene in Lord of the Rings where Gandalf loots an ax and Gimli loots a spell book. Random loot rolls are more immersion breaking and feels more like meta-gaming.

    One other way to handle this is to have all loot require fixing in town prior to use, since if it can't be used right away, that nullifies both arguments above in favor of NBG.

    • 2756 posts
    May 8, 2022 10:51 AM PDT

    Counterfleche said:...It feels right, thematically, socially, and RP-wise. There isn't a scene in Lord of the Rings where Gandalf loots an ax and Gimli loots a spell book. Random loot rolls are more immersion breaking and feels more like meta-gaming...

    I understand your feelings here, but I have to say fantasy films with close-knit heros trying to save the world together is pretty far away from what you encounter most of the time in MMORPGs, even when considering the lore and role-playing tendencies. You are looking at groups of random adventurers that probably have known each other for a matter of hours (in game, at least) and are pursuing various quests, in the business of having fun and becoming more powerful.

    There aren't scenes every few minutes in Lord of the Rings where Frodo strip searches every nearby corpse just in case they have something useful or valuable on them, either.

    What is immersion breaking, to me, is bickering and dickering over each group member's interpretation of 'need' every time a defeated enemy has something slightly interesting on their corpse. Or, of course, you can silently grind your teeth in frustration over someone unfairly choosing 'need' when they shouldn't have because they have a different/wrong idea of what 'need' means. Either case is no better.

    Random allocation means no thought, time, interpretation or skewed personal opinion of 'fairness' is needed, as it simply *is* fair, and any bickering or dickering is either headed off completely, or can be decided by optional social interaction, role-playing, or whatever factors, afterwards, without disturbing uninterested parties.


    This post was edited by disposalist at May 9, 2022 1:29 PM PDT
    • 2752 posts
    May 9, 2022 10:51 AM PDT

    Counterfleche said:

    1. It benefits the group right away if the warrior in your example wins and immediately equips the sword. The wizard winning the roll won't help the current group.

    Is this really an important thing? Presumably your group has already met the challenge(s) of whatever camp and won vs whatever named mob(s). So any degrees of help that sword might bring is just excess. Not to mention in the case of a PUG that warrior might leave in X minutes, so your group ends up with X minutes of minimal increase in overall group strength at the cost of _____ gold/plat.

    • 74 posts
    May 9, 2022 11:07 AM PDT

    Iksar said:

    Counterfleche said:

    1. It benefits the group right away if the warrior in your example wins and immediately equips the sword. The wizard winning the roll won't help the current group.

    Is this really an important thing? Presumably your group has already met the challenge(s) of whatever camp and won vs whatever named mob(s). So any degrees of help that sword might bring is just excess. Not to mention in the case of a PUG that warrior might leave in X minutes, so your group ends up with X minutes of minimal increase in overall group strength at the cost of _____ gold/plat.

     

    It just feels right, though. Doling out items to those who would immediately put them to use just feels better in practice. Maybe that's just coming from an older-school tabletop background, but nobody in a D&D group argues that the Wizard should get the full plate over the Paladin, unless they've done some very interesting multi-classing. Yes, grouping in an MMO doesn't have the same dynamic of knowing that sword will benefit the entire party for the rest of the game until something better comes along, because grouping in MMOs is temporary. But the feeling behind it is still there. It's just thematically appropriate, in all the ways that old school gamers feel deep in their bones.

    I understand sometimes one is farming for other things, or for an alt, and that's easily covered with a bit of communication with the group. "Hey, I'm also looking for Druid type items for my alt, is it cool if I need on them too?" Then you come to an agreement. Maybe the group agrees, but only after the existing Druid in the group gets first pick. Maybe it's a no but you shot your shot, and you're free to find another group if the loot for your Alt is the focus of the night. And maybe the group has no problem at all. Little communication goes a long way, but without it it just feels wrong to ignore who presently needs something. Money can be had any number of ways, but that sword right there is only dropping from this one mob.

    In another game, (big pvp emphasis, lootable kills, etc), my guild groups always had a "treasurer" who took all the loot during farming, and then when we got back to town (or someone was leaving), would divy out the shares, subtracting market prices for the Big Named Drops that would crop up. That worked out surprisingly well. It also helped that the treasurer was usually a class with a metric fuckton of escape abilities, in case we got ganked. So we always fought to the death to buy time for the loot to make it to town haha.

    • 2752 posts
    May 9, 2022 11:32 AM PDT

    TheWingless said:

    It just feels right, though. Doling out items to those who would immediately put them to use just feels better in practice. Maybe that's just coming from an older-school tabletop background, but nobody in a D&D group argues that the Wizard should get the full plate over the Paladin, unless they've done some very interesting multi-classing. Yes, grouping in an MMO doesn't have the same dynamic of knowing that sword will benefit the entire party for the rest of the game until something better comes along, because grouping in MMOs is temporary. But the feeling behind it is still there. It's just thematically appropriate, in all the ways that old school gamers feel deep in their bones.

    I understand sometimes one is farming for other things, or for an alt, and that's easily covered with a bit of communication with the group. "Hey, I'm also looking for Druid type items for my alt, is it cool if I need on them too?" Then you come to an agreement. Maybe the group agrees, but only after the existing Druid in the group gets first pick. Maybe it's a no but you shot your shot, and you're free to find another group if the loot for your Alt is the focus of the night. And maybe the group has no problem at all. Little communication goes a long way, but without it it just feels wrong to ignore who presently needs something. Money can be had any number of ways, but that sword right there is only dropping from this one mob.

    In another game, (big pvp emphasis, lootable kills, etc), my guild groups always had a "treasurer" who took all the loot during farming, and then when we got back to town (or someone was leaving), would divy out the shares, subtracting market prices for the Big Named Drops that would crop up. That worked out surprisingly well. It also helped that the treasurer was usually a class with a metric fuckton of escape abilities, in case we got ganked. So we always fought to the death to buy time for the loot to make it to town haha.

    It's important to remember the differences between game types. D&D being a group based game but pretty much no other "players" in the world. It makes sense to see items where they would be most beneficial to the group because that is all the players have. I imagine the dynamic would shift quite a bit if groups were not static (if not already friends in RL) and there was a rich item economy among tons of other players in the world. At least in my experiences of D&D the group almost exclusively finds the gear for the party while adventuring and rarely gets something half decent shopping, so the gold value something might have is mostly pointless to pursue for upgrades. So sure it *feels* right in the context of D&D, but I really don't get those feelings in an MMO setting where most everything has value and one often joins an ever rotating and expanding amount of groups with new random people. 

     

    The fact that money can be made from a wide range of places does not negate that X item just dropped that has a value of 1,000 gold and maintains that value long after it is equipped and eventually sold when the next upgrade comes. It's not the item that just dropped for the group it's 1,000 gold, which for some players/classes could represent weeks of soloing/selling "trash"/etc (maybe more depending on players time). 

    • 888 posts
    May 9, 2022 1:26 PM PDT

    I now agree that NBG is flawed and it's not my preference for Pantheon. My last post was a list of the remaining reasons in my 'pro-NBG' list. I should have better clarified that they are much less important reasons and that the reasons to not have NBG greatly outweigh them.

    disposalist said:

    Random allocation means no thought, time, interpretation or skewed personal opinion of 'fairness' is needed, as it simply *is* fair, and any bickering or dickering is either headed off completely, or can be decided by optional social interaction, role-playing, or whatever factors, afterwards, without disturbing uninterested parties.

    Absolutely true. It will probably be more fair since the the more honest players will be more likely to not roll Need, thus the greedy players win more rolls.

    Iksar said:

    Counterfleche said:

    1. It benefits the group right away if the warrior in your example wins and immediately equips the sword. The wizard winning the roll won't help the current group.

    Is this really an important thing? Presumably your group has already met the challenge(s) of whatever camp and won vs whatever named mob(s). So any degrees of help that sword might bring is just excess. Not to mention in the case of a PUG that warrior might leave in X minutes, so your group ends up with X minutes of minimal increase in overall group strength at the cost of _____ gold/plat.

    No, it's not that important. It's a minor consideration at best.

    • 2756 posts
    May 9, 2022 2:03 PM PDT

    Iksar said:

    TheWingless said:

    It just feels right, though. Doling out items to those who would immediately put them to use just feels better in practice. Maybe that's just coming from an older-school tabletop background, but nobody in a D&D group argues that the Wizard should get the full plate over the Paladin, unless they've done some very interesting multi-classing. Yes, grouping in an MMO doesn't have the same dynamic of knowing that sword will benefit the entire party for the rest of the game until something better comes along, because grouping in MMOs is temporary. But the feeling behind it is still there. It's just thematically appropriate, in all the ways that old school gamers feel deep in their bones.

    I understand sometimes one is farming for other things, or for an alt, and that's easily covered with a bit of communication with the group. "Hey, I'm also looking for Druid type items for my alt, is it cool if I need on them too?" Then you come to an agreement. Maybe the group agrees, but only after the existing Druid in the group gets first pick. Maybe it's a no but you shot your shot, and you're free to find another group if the loot for your Alt is the focus of the night. And maybe the group has no problem at all. Little communication goes a long way, but without it it just feels wrong to ignore who presently needs something. Money can be had any number of ways, but that sword right there is only dropping from this one mob.

    In another game, (big pvp emphasis, lootable kills, etc), my guild groups always had a "treasurer" who took all the loot during farming, and then when we got back to town (or someone was leaving), would divy out the shares, subtracting market prices for the Big Named Drops that would crop up. That worked out surprisingly well. It also helped that the treasurer was usually a class with a metric fuckton of escape abilities, in case we got ganked. So we always fought to the death to buy time for the loot to make it to town haha.

    It's important to remember the differences between game types. D&D being a group based game but pretty much no other "players" in the world. It makes sense to see items where they would be most beneficial to the group because that is all the players have. I imagine the dynamic would shift quite a bit if groups were not static (if not already friends in RL) and there was a rich item economy among tons of other players in the world. At least in my experiences of D&D the group almost exclusively finds the gear for the party while adventuring and rarely gets something half decent shopping, so the gold value something might have is mostly pointless to pursue for upgrades. So sure it *feels* right in the context of D&D, but I really don't get those feelings in an MMO setting where most everything has value and one often joins an ever rotating and expanding amount of groups with new random people. 

    The fact that money can be made from a wide range of places does not negate that X item just dropped that has a value of 1,000 gold and maintains that value long after it is equipped and eventually sold when the next upgrade comes. It's not the item that just dropped for the group it's 1,000 gold, which for some players/classes could represent weeks of soloing/selling "trash"/etc (maybe more depending on players time). 

    I disagree with the 'feels right' thing too, I'm afraid, no offense, Wingless. In D&D? Sure. You're talking about playing with a small number of IRL friends (probably) physically in front of you week after week. An utterly different dynamic to a server with 1,000 players of mostly strangers.

    A community, sure, which is why fairness is in looting is important so as to maintain harmony. Fairness that isn't open to (mis)interpretation, bias, systematic 'error' or abuse. Like randomness.

    And, as I said earlier, after random allocation takes care of unarguable fair allocation, *then* the winner can be altruistic or trade or whatever to a group member that could use the item. In my experience, that often happened. Personally, I would often lend or loan the item on a promise of money later (and I don't rermember ever being let down). I would often sell it really cheap right there or trade for an item that was roughly as valuable.

    I'll not repeat Iksar's well made points, but let's just say with 1,000 players and pickup groups, there are a *ton* of situations where NBG is not fair and leads to issues.

    As for guilds, though? Totally different. Then, yes, you are more likely (but still not always) going to give items to those guild mates that need them because you want the guild to be powerful and you have a very good expectation that those altruistic actions will be reciprocated.

    I don't think, when people talk about loot methods like NBG, they are imagining using it with guild mates. With a guild, you hardly need any formal loot method. Someone there will usually be a 'senior' member and master loot.

    Imagine an interesting kink, though: Characters from a guild get into a pickup group... Imagine how NBG gets bent...

    "Hey, you rolled Need, but you gave it to your guildy. If you didn't need it you shouldn't have clicked Need"
    "But I *could* have Needed it. It's for my class type too. It was fair to click Need"
    "But you clearly didn't actually Need it, you gave it away. It was not fair"
    "Well, I could have used it, but my guildy needed it more, so I swapped it for his item"
    "We could all do that, though. I could have given it so someone who needed it and they could have traded me something"
    "But it's not for your class"
    "But if you're going to trade it, like you did, *anyone* could technically *need* it to trade for their own class item"

    etc...

    In my experience of NBG in Everquest and other games, that kind of thing happened a good amount and lead to unnecessary ill-feeling. It lead to pick-up groups ideally not wanting guild members, with NBG 'block voting', in their groups. It lead to groups not inviting classes that could legitimately click Need on the good known drops. People could just chose a different loot system? That lead to arguments about loot systems and interpretations and arguments about how particular systems are executed, etc, etc, etc...

    One way that never lead to ill-feeling, except for people just getting unlucky, which is ill-feeling aimed at the universe, not other players? Random allocation.

    • 74 posts
    May 9, 2022 2:15 PM PDT

    I will never take offense to someone disagreeing with me, haha, none taken. :) For my take on NBG, I actually don't think it's the right choice for this game. I was merely mentioning the "feel" of it because there are certain people who will die on that hill, without perhaps realizing why they feel the way they feel. So we need to address and consider all the factors like that. And that instinctive, small group 'fair' tabletop mentality is at the root of this, in my opinion. It absolutely does not, in a practical sense, apply to MMO's, what with the ephemeral nature of grouping and all. But practicality and feelings don't always go hand in hand.

    Personally, I'm down to purely random or a want/pass system (with a rarity level in place that triggers it, of course, modifiable either as a group or on an individual basis), and that's it.

    • 2756 posts
    May 9, 2022 2:41 PM PDT

    TheWingless said:

    I will never take offense to someone disagreeing with me, haha, none taken. :) For my take on NBG, I actually don't think it's the right choice for this game. I was merely mentioning the "feel" of it because there are certain people who will die on that hill, without perhaps realizing why they feel the way they feel. So we need to address and consider all the factors like that. And that instinctive, small group 'fair' tabletop mentality is at the root of this, in my opinion. It absolutely does not, in a practical sense, apply to MMO's, what with the ephemeral nature of grouping and all. But practicality and feelings don't always go hand in hand.

    Personally, I'm down to purely random or a want/pass system (with a rarity level in place that triggers it, of course, modifiable either as a group or on an individual basis), and that's it.

    I get it and you are absolutely correct, I think, that some 'feel' it's 'right' without really realising why they feel that (and that it's not hehe).

    I used to feel the same and, though I saw problems with it, I thought it was the best of all the not-really-fair-but-better-than-nothing options.

    I finally changed my mind after really thinking about it in a previous discussion in these forums (or, in fact, a previous generation, because it was several years ago).

    I think there are lots of issues like this, too, where people 'feel' a particular way is 'right' without really thinking deeply and it's a tough thing VR have to deal with.

    They have free reign over their creative design choices and they show every indication of making good choices over tough areas, but there are one or two where I worry they will go with the normal/easy option or leave it up to 'the community' to decide or handle, when they really need to use their experience and expertease and make executive decisions that will head off the problems we know can occur.

    Things like looting systems might seem minor, but what VR go with will have a profound effect on the feel of a vital part of the game.

    Being rewarded with treasure is fundamental. Community is fundamental. How players are encouraged or enabled to share loot is fundamental.


    This post was edited by disposalist at May 9, 2022 2:44 PM PDT
    • 945 posts
    May 10, 2022 7:25 AM PDT

    This is a great question.  I believe everyone can appreciate multiple styles of looting depending on their mood and experience with the game.  With that said, I think EQ 'added' a decent looting system (Advanced Looting System) that allowed for filtering of loot.  If there are systems in place on the high population classic EQ emulator servers, they are there for a reason - take notes. 

    A lot of people advocating for clicking on individual items are living in a nostalgic reality (which is fantasy).  Psychologically, when reaching for nostalgic memories, our minds instinctively recall the positive memories of the past because they are more crystalized than the negative memories.  If one were to actually relive the past, they would scold themselves for forgetting the pain that accompanied the fond memorins, but they would then choose to relive it again if given another chance because they would forget the negative memories... again.  In a video game, instead of scolding themselves, they will just quit the game, until another game came along and they did the cycle over again... and again.  

    Having fond memories is great, and sharing those memories with others is even better, but don't live in nostalgia.  Forcing (giving no alternative to) individual loot clicking in an attempt to capture a nostalgic moment will be an additional, proverbial, nail in the coffin.  (Again... EQ has even gotten past the strict individual looting system)

    My personal preferred loot system would be:
     - In group/raid situations, "Master Looter(s)" can be chosen (unlimited number, so a group leader can allow an entire party ML rights if they choose).  
     - Master looters click on a corpse, all loot available on all nearby corpses is presented in a loot window (categorized by each corpse).
     - Coin is distributed to raid/group (No option for a single player to get coin - this allows all participants to obtain SOMETHING for their effort).
     - ML can individually loot an item by clicking it, at which point if it is of "X" quality (determined by group/raid leader) all members are presented with looting option of loot/pass (no NBG - just yes or no, then RNG... if someone really wants something that another wins, they can negotiate/trade later).
     - All non-quest items are tradeable within the group/raid until group/raid is disbanded
     - If ML selects loot everything, all loot below "X" quality is looted from all corpses
     -- If someone has opted out of looting items below "X" quality, loot will stay on the corpses, requiring someone with a lower threshold to loot it, or let it rot.
     - Once ML has stopped looting, they are presented with an option to "allow open loot" (this option should be capable of auto answering yes/no).
     - Contested loot automatically goes to winner (this avoids looting confusion and mitigates ninja looting - which is another nail in the coffin)
     - Trash loot does not exist unless it can be dismantled/disenchanted into a useable resource that does not consume inventory space or is highly stackable and unencumberring
     --- Players can opt into looting/receiving trash loot
     --- Trash loot could be auto distributed to group/raid (upon "loot all") to any player that has their threshold low enough to receive it.
     - Upon disbanding a group/raid, members can choose to donate X%, or a set amount of their coin to group/raid member(s).  This allows for accolades or perhaps guild contributions for consumables/repairs or thanking players that were simply helping others through content who had no need/desire for equipment that may have dropped.


    This post was edited by Darch at May 10, 2022 8:45 AM PDT
    • 2752 posts
    May 10, 2022 10:11 AM PDT

    Darch said:

    A lot of people advocating for clicking on individual items are living in a nostalgic reality (which is fantasy).

    Having fond memories is great, and sharing those memories with others is even better, but don't live in nostalgia.  Forcing (giving no alternative to) individual loot clicking in an attempt to capture a nostalgic moment will be an additional, proverbial, nail in the coffin.  (Again... EQ has even gotten past the strict individual looting system)

    I am not sure I follow the thinking here...What is so bad about having to actually loot the things you kill? 

    • 945 posts
    May 11, 2022 3:09 PM PDT

    Iksar said:

    Darch said:

    A lot of people advocating for clicking on individual items are living in a nostalgic reality (which is fantasy).

    Having fond memories is great, and sharing those memories with others is even better, but don't live in nostalgia.  Forcing (giving no alternative to) individual loot clicking in an attempt to capture a nostalgic moment will be an additional, proverbial, nail in the coffin.  (Again... EQ has even gotten past the strict individual looting system)

    I am not sure I follow the thinking here...What is so bad about having to actually loot the things you kill? 

    I'm not saying that looting individually is "bad", I'm saying "giving no alternative" to a repetitious/tedious/menial/rudimentary task that serves no purpose other than generating a time sink in an attempt to give the illusion of productivity via habitual behavior rewards will turn players away after a period of time (varying from player to player, but an eventual inevitability).  If a player enjoys that, giving the option to do so should be up to that player.

    • 2756 posts
    May 12, 2022 3:37 AM PDT

    Except that clicking on corpses and dragging items is not just a time sink. It's an analog for the process of looting. If it is optional, some of the meaning and worth of 'treasure' is removed.

    At the risk of repeating what I've said already, I think; looting treasure shouldn't be trivial; not just to make busy work, but to make it something that is risky and meaningful.

    A very important part of the feeling of danger (and the actual risk) of an environment is from wandering monsters, re-spawns, proximity to potential adds, etc.  Places that are harder to access and traverse, like dungeons, are more exciting and challenging because you don't just have to overcome the monsters, encounter by encounter, you also have to not risk dying in a hard-to-recover area, you have to determine areas to recover mana and health, etc and, yes, you have to make decisions about looting while in danger.

    Looting can be (should be, in my opinion) a big part of the risk/danger element. Killing a monster is often half the battle, so to speak. Do you have time to loot the treasure before the monster's friends arrive? Do you even have time to look at what the treasure is, or might you have to retreat, agonising about whether you should fight your way back for it? Did the corpse even end up somewhere you can get to it, or should you not have fought on that narrow bridge?

    One thing that would apply regularly would be, do you need to defeat a 'whole' encounter before treasure can be looted? You could automate that and just say 'no' to make encounter design easier and looting more straight-forward, but maybe you *should* be able to do that *if* you are swift enough and can take the pummeling the live monsters deliver while you loot? Maybe the attempt should abort if you take a critical hit? Etc

    I could go on, but I think I've presented my thoughts?

    In summary: There are many aspects of 'manual' looting that impact the challenge, meaningfulness, worth - pretty much all aspects - of encounters, environments and the treasure within. It would be a shame to lose all that just to avoid some clicking. It's one of those convenience vs. depth things.

    • 793 posts
    May 12, 2022 5:15 AM PDT

    Yes, taking down a named mob, but taking a beating in the process, only to have adds suddenly arrive. Having to fight the adds while someone loots the named mob you all just dropped, so that we can get the loot and start retreating before the group suffers catastrophic losses.

    It adds a depth and danger to the game, that doesn't exist if I kill something aand everything it had on it, just appears in my packs with no interaction.

    Now that doesn't mean I think we should have to drag and drop every piece of loot, but we shoudl have to interact with each mob.


    This post was edited by Fulton at May 12, 2022 5:17 AM PDT
    • 945 posts
    May 12, 2022 5:30 AM PDT

    Fulton said:

    Yes, taking down a named mob, but taking a beating in the process, only to have adds suddenly arrive. Having to fight the adds while someone loots the named mob you all just dropped, so that we can get the loot and start retreating before the group suffers catastrophic losses.

    It adds a depth and danger to the game, that doesn't exist if I kill something aand everything it had on it, just appears in my packs with no interaction.

    Now that doesn't mean I think we should have to drag and drop every piece of loot, but we shoudl have to interact with each mob.

    I agree with this... having to drag and drop each piece individually from the corpse to your inventory is just a tedious time sink and in those stressful situations it promotes ninja looting and/or looting during combat while not even looking at the items being spam clicked.  If you can't take down the whole encounter to alot time for looting, then the sense of danger still exists regardless if you have to drag each item individually or if you have to just double click it.

    disposalist said:

    In summary: There are many aspects of 'manual' looting that impact the challenge, meaningfulness, worth - pretty much all aspects - of encounters, environments and the treasure within. It would be a shame to lose all that just to avoid some clicking. It's one of those convenience vs. depth things.

    I get what you are saying, but this should be an option that players can opt into or out of as I said in my original post.  Forcing players into behavioral habits is a quick way to lose some players - imagine if every class played like the vanilla EQ Bard where in order to play effectively you had to "twist" songs every 4 seconds... forever (until they added /melody).  Some people REALLY enjoyed that and felt that the /melody ruined the class for them, while others (the majority) thought it made the Bard actually playable for them.  The players that enjoyed pressing 20 buttons per minute could choose to do so while those who chose not to could still enjoy the game.  Loot is THE most important psychological aspect of "reward" in any MMO when considering Risk vs Reward... its the reward for investing one's time and often stressful emotions - if the reward itself induces more stressful emotions, some players will not get their reward from the looting process but will only do it out of necessity - when it becomes necessity (instead of desire) it starts to feel more like a job than a game.


    This post was edited by Darch at May 12, 2022 5:47 AM PDT
    • 2752 posts
    May 12, 2022 9:44 AM PDT

    Darch said:

    I'm not saying that looting individually is "bad", I'm saying "giving no alternative" to a repetitious/tedious/menial/rudimentary task that serves no purpose other than generating a time sink in an attempt to give the illusion of productivity via habitual behavior rewards will turn players away after a period of time (varying from player to player, but an eventual inevitability).  If a player enjoys that, giving the option to do so should be up to that player.

    I can't say I agree that it is tedious or serves no purpose other than generating a time sink. It's a small part of risk/reward, you can kill things that are far away from you so you need to deal with anything between you and the corpse to loot it (whether that is a chasm or handful of other mobs etc) or if more mobs are still being fought and things are going south it's a consideration to try to quickly loot or not.

    On top of that, for me it's always at least a little exciting to loot a corpse. To open that window and see what possible treasures might have dropped, be it normal or a named mob (unless the games itemization sucks and normal mobs just have trash). 

    I don't see people turning away because they have to click on corpses to loot that corpse vs just pressing a button and opening a window to see all dropped loot within an area. The magic button that shows all loot in an area takes the joy out to me. 

    • 36 posts
    May 12, 2022 12:50 PM PDT

    I prefer the original way of looting in EQ where you right click on a corpse and a loot window opens. Later, they introduced something called Advanced Looting that was just so cumbersome and confusing to a lot of people. I'm ok with a better way to loot, like setting a rule for random rolling on an item etc. and the loot automatically goes to the winner's bag.

    • 13 posts
    May 13, 2022 7:36 AM PDT

    Speaking from a healer stand point  , looting is very weird for us. 

     

    In EQ we were unable to loot that often cause we had to stay seated, there were ways around that ofcourse but that usually required grouping with trust worthy ppl.

    I would personally like to see a looting similar to how EQ does it now. If one person loots the corpse then everyone see's it. Everyone makes a choice to either pass or roll.

    It can also be nice for if the mobs drop the same items over and over like vendor trash. I can set an option to always roll or loot any item I chose.

     

    But really at the end of the day either way they do it wont really matter to me.

    • 3852 posts
    May 13, 2022 8:44 AM PDT

    I agree that physically looting a corpse is better than having the goodies magically appear in our inventory or on a "roll for it" screen.

    The one thing that would bother me is if the person clicking the body got the loot rather than other party members having a chance to roll on it, since that would encourage greed at the expense of cooperation and would seriously disadvantage certain classes.

    • 888 posts
    May 13, 2022 6:50 PM PDT

    I like the idea of having designated looters (probably DPS classes) and having meaningful, tactical looting. That looting action should take a specific time which is skill based but is modified by circumstances. For instance, others still being in combat nearby should slow looting. Everything looted should show up in a pop-up window for the whole group and there should be map-able keyboard shortcuts that allow us to roll all, reject all, roll #, etc. The time allowed for this should be at least a full minute so the tank / healer / support who are still semi-busy don't miss out.

     

    I also have wrist pain when using a computer (which I manage with good ergonomics and Imak gloves), so I know how horrible mass-clicking design is. By having one or two designated looters, people with wrist issues aren't forced to click as much.