I do not mean for this post to come off negative in any way. I am a fan of the harvesting info we have so far. I'm just not completely sold on this particular branch of harvesting.
My concern is centred around looting. IF, and this is a big IF, any item can be salvaged and reduced to raw materials doesn't that mean we all NEED every item?
I feel for the group member who NEEDs an item to wear as an upgrade who loses out to a player who NEEDs an item in order to salvage materials. Will this make NBG very subjective, or even obsolete, and lead to unnecessary conflict? hence the post title; Is salavging anti soical.
I'm swinging both ways on this and would welcome your comments.
Blood
Well that would mean "if every item is tradeable, isn't it anti social to sell them?".
Salvaging is more to me an issue to less desired items, than an antisocial behaviour. You're not going to salvage a 1000 platinium sword, because it's better to sell it to buy something else.
But you're going to consider salvaging the 25plat offhand that is rarely used or desired and drops 70% of the time instead of the sword.
I dont think this approach necessarily leaves to conflict as this just slightly expands the definition of 'need' and is something the group must take into account when deciding the loot rules for the group. I would expect that for most items that drop off a named, salvaging that item either 1) wouldn't be the best use of the item (would you really salvage a +haste belt just for some materials?) or 2) wouldn't be possible in the first place. Instead, it would be the mundane items that would be most used in salvaging. And when those mundane items are mostly sold to vendors for money anyway, each person can do with the items they receive in-turn as they see fit with no real need to declare 'need' on everything.
Trasak said:Even for a crafter who might learn a recipe from salvaging a named item salvaging is always going to be considered a "greed" roll. DAoC had a crafting system very dependent on salvaged items and it was handled as a greed roll there.
Actually, whilst I agree with you, not everyone does. This thread was inspired by another recent thread which clearly shows some people are wlling to NEED roll to salvage:
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/9539/scenario-you-find-a-rare-item-drop-from-a-boss
Blood
vjek said:Yes, salvaging is anti-social, but so is competitive loot. :) Which is why most modern MMOs don't have competitive loot, then the social toxicity evaporates.
I see your point but I'm not sure I agree. Competitive looting can be fun. What isn't fun though is when people disagree over what qualifies as NBG, For example how would you roll for these drops?
Slavaging, as interesting as it is, makes this issue more complicated and undoubtedly adds more opportunity for conflict.
Blood
With salvaging, every crafter needs everything that can be salvaged. They could argue, successfully, that without items to salvage, they're not advancing. They need to salvage to advance salvaging, and as a bonus, get raws.
The conflict arises when every person in every PUG needs on everything. That's simply "normal" now. Greed rolls only work if people are time travelers and back in 1999. In 2021, no-one greed rolls, because there's a chance one person in the group needs and then they win it. Why take the risk? Result: Everyone needs on everything.
Believe me, Bloodfire, I would rather a human race where people chose appropriately, but this is not that human race. :)
To answer your questions, I wouldn't need on anything unless it was a PUG, because I would know everyone else in the group, and wouldn't care who got what, because they're my friends, and as friends, we will help each other out.
Historically, when developers wanted to move beyond the primitive mechanics of EQ1 and add things like Salvaging, they also added personal loot with appropriately tuned drop rates to address these concerns. That's where the conflict evaporates. I don't care what you get because I get what I get, we just work together to reach our goals without stabbing each other in the face (or stealing each others loot, however you want to look at it ).
I don't think anti-social isn't the right terminology, but we get what you mean.
It does add another loop hole that allows people to take advantage of NBG loot distribution. Many of the conversations about NBG lately seem to conclude that it isn't the most fair way to distribute loot and that it's on its way out as being the "norm" when grouping.
I have to admit, I've been convinced. A couple months back I would have said NBG was my favored method. I have been persuaded by the conversations lately and I see the faults in NBG. Rolling "need" for salvage is just another loop hole that can be taken advantage of. FFA/Greed loot for non-no drop items is the easiest way to regulate loot distribution fairly when grouping with people you don't know.
Bloodfire said:I do not mean for this post to come off negative in any way. I am a fan of the harvesting info we have so far. I'm just not completely sold on this particular branch of harvesting.
My concern is centred around looting. IF, and this is a big IF, any item can be salvaged and reduced to raw materials doesn't that mean we all NEED every item?
I feel for the group member who NEEDs an item to wear as an upgrade who loses out to a player who NEEDs an item in order to salvage materials. Will this make NBG very subjective, or even obsolete, and lead to unnecessary conflict? hence the post title; Is salavging anti soical.
I'm swinging both ways on this and would welcome your comments.
Blood
I see you are extending the point I made in my other thread about Salvaging and NBG. It's a good question.
Group loot rules should always be set before the adventure starts, or once a player joins the group. You salvaging an item in my opinion is not a reason to need an item. You do not need the item, you need the material. That materia will more then likely come from another item as well. So the belt that drops would be NBG for that belt to be used by that player. Not their friend, not their toon, not their GF/BF. That toon is not in the group. Seems we always over complicate this process. If a mob drops a rare sword, you should count on the cleric not getting that item unless everyone who needs gets theirs first. If you want to slave the material know that you will be sitting there for a bit after the warrior gets his sword.
The value of salvaging mundane items will be directly related to how much material is consumed while leveling crafting. The value of salvaging “Named Items” will be relative to what components they might yield, how frequently they yield them and how much of a bottle neck they are to crafting player desired items.
I really hope we hear from Ceythos or Brad soon on:
1: The philosophy of design they are considering for the crafting UI system and player interaction (menu clicks, representative mini games, or crafting simulation mini games)
2: The crafting progression structure (linear, tree or short vertical with a lot of horizontal)
3: How value added the system is intended to be. (Will the stack of raw materials to make the items be more valuable than the completed item on the player market?)
4: The level of resource consumption vs time consumption to leveling crafting (What takes more time crafting or farming crafting materials? Heavily affected by the answer to 1)
5: The relative power level of crafted items vs their material sources. (Will we actually want player crafted items)
Until we know these answers the value of salvage results could be anywhere from worthless to worth more than the salvaged item ever will be.
Im a crafting nut so I hope the following is close to the answers
1: Crafting Simulation with minimal hand holding
2: Short vertical to learn all the basic recipes and skills with each material and mastering recipes being its own horizontal progression.
3: Crafted Mundane items have a higher vendor value than the mundane raw materials and enough mundane raw materials for them to basically be vendor food. Magic items being slightly more powerful than the salvaged items used to create them.
4: Harvesting mundane training raw materials should only take a 10th of the time to craft them into objects. Harvesting the rare materials to make high value player wanted items will be tied to risk vs reward of the item.
5: For crafting to really function as part of the economy then the highest quality results need to be slightly better than all but a few very special quest items. The balance being that you might need to salvage 10 copies of one item in order to successfully craft the version of the item that is 5% better than the freshly dropped version.
Bloodfire said:Will this make NBG very subjective, or even obsolete, and lead to unnecessary conflict? hence the post title; Is salavging anti soical.
NBG in pick up groups is almost entirely (99% of the time) subjective and mostly total nonsense, the need is just want with higher levels of immediacy in a item system where almost everything is tradable and non-binding upon equip or otherwise no-drop.
Trasak said:Even for a crafter who might learn a recipe from salvaging a named item salvaging is always going to be considered a "greed" roll. DAoC had a crafting system very dependent on salvaged items and it was handled as a greed roll there.
That's pretty much how I've always approached it, and I'm an avid crafter. Usually if your group isn't playing scoop the loot the usual etiquette is that an upgrade is need and all other things fall to greed. Again, a lot of that comes down to etiquette and established group rules. So I don't find it anti-social, no. But in terms of group rolls, I've always gone with if it's an upgrade for the character you're playing in the group you roll need. If it's an upgrade for an alt, crafting, or to sell, you roll greed. But If you need it for crafting or an alt you can always ask. If the group is fine with it most times you'll get it. Most people aren't greedy and are willing to share or help out.
This is a problem easily solved either way by establishing the group loot rules up front. But I get the concern. I've hit more than a few people in recent years that ignore those rules and roll need on everything. I'd suggest correcting that in tells once, and if they continue to ignore the group rules, send them on their way.
Kratuk said:Trasak said:Even for a crafter who might learn a recipe from salvaging a named item salvaging is always going to be considered a "greed" roll. DAoC had a crafting system very dependent on salvaged items and it was handled as a greed roll there.
That's pretty much how I've always approached it, and I'm an avid crafter. Usually if your group isn't playing scoop the loot the usual etiquette is that an upgrade is need and all other things fall to greed. Again, a lot of that comes down to etiquette and established group rules. So I don't find it anti-social, no. But in terms of group rolls, I've always gone with if it's an upgrade for the character you're playing in the group you roll need. If it's an upgrade for an alt, crafting, or to sell, you roll greed. But If you need it for crafting or an alt you can always ask. If the group is fine with it most times you'll get it. Most people aren't greedy and are willing to share or help out.
This is a problem easily solved either way by establishing the group loot rules up front. But I get the concern. I've hit more than a few people in recent years that ignore those rules and roll need on everything. I'd suggest correcting that in tells once, and if they continue to ignore the group rules, send them on their way.
Your NBG etiquette is pretty spot on with what I have seen over the years as well.
vjek said:With salvaging, every crafter needs everything that can be salvaged. They could argue, successfully, that without items to salvage, they're not advancing. They need to salvage to advance salvaging, and as a bonus, get raws.
I would agree with your point if we found that in Pantheon the only means by which players can obtain certain materials would be through salvaging. Is this approach something we expect in Pantheon?
Vandraad said:vjek said:With salvaging, every crafter needs everything that can be salvaged. They could argue, successfully, that without items to salvage, they're not advancing. They need to salvage to advance salvaging, and as a bonus, get raws.
I would agree with your point if we found that in Pantheon the only means by which players can obtain certain materials would be through salvaging. Is this approach something we expect in Pantheon?
It's something I expect, if crafting is going to truly be meaningful/capable of crafting equivalent gear to almost any dropped versions. Remove decent/good items from the world/economy to add other decent/good items.
Vandraad said: ... I would agree with your point if we found that in Pantheon the only means by which players can obtain certain materials would be through salvaging. Is this approach something we expect in Pantheon?
I understand your perspective and why you're asking the question, but ultimately, it doesn't matter.
Both salvaging and item sacrifice are, currently, launch day goals based on current public information.
If they're in the game, people will play the game with the expectation they can increase those skills.
Both of which requires (needs) items. Beyond that? Doesn't really matter.
Iksar said:Vandraad said:vjek said:With salvaging, every crafter needs everything that can be salvaged. They could argue, successfully, that without items to salvage, they're not advancing. They need to salvage to advance salvaging, and as a bonus, get raws.
I would agree with your point if we found that in Pantheon the only means by which players can obtain certain materials would be through salvaging. Is this approach something we expect in Pantheon?
It's something I expect, if crafting is going to truly be meaningful/capable of crafting equivalent gear to almost any dropped versions. Remove decent/good items from the world/economy to add other decent/good items.
I too expect that some materials would only be obtainable through salvaging but the underlying argument is also about needing those materials for skill-ups. These two things might not necessarily be bound together in that there could be multiple skill-up paths that are not all tied to meterials only obtained by salvage. So if, for example, you were working on blacksmithing and trying to get from 80 to 100 it very well may be that one path of recipies uses materials obtainable from NPC vendors while another path uses materials obtained from harvesting nodes while yet another path of recipies does use materials only from salvage. To then try to claim need when clearly there are multiple routes available is more difficult to justfy so group will more likely fall back on pure greed roles.
I don't think this is something we can expect the game to define for us. If the game features a loot rolling system with a "need" button and a "greed" button, it will be up to each individual group to define that and insure it's communicated. There will almost certainly be some players and groups who define salvaging as "greed" and others who define it as "need".
To put it another way, games never set out to enforce Need Before Greed when it came to looting. They simply gave players the option, since it was assumed that players would be talking to each other and working out how they wanted to handle loot in their groups. The fact that we collectively have come to expect the game to somehow tell us what each button is supposed to mean is not a problem with the games, but with us as players.
Bottom line for me: Whether I, as a crafter, view salvaging as a "need" depends on what salvaging gets me. If it gets me the chance to learn a recipe? Hell yes that's a Need. If it gets me the chance at rare components or enhancers for crafted items? Definitely. If it only gets me raw resources that I could get via other mechanisms? Nah, probably not. However if it's the only reliable way to get those resources? Yup. Need all the way.
That's not social or antisocial. It's just me being realistic about my own needs as a player.
Vandraad said:I too expect that some materials would only be obtainable through salvaging but the underlying argument is also about needing those materials for skill-ups. These two things might not necessarily be bound together in that there could be multiple skill-up paths that are not all tied to meterials only obtained by salvage. So if, for example, you were working on blacksmithing and trying to get from 80 to 100 it very well may be that one path of recipies uses materials obtainable from NPC vendors while another path uses materials obtained from harvesting nodes while yet another path of recipies does use materials only from salvage. To then try to claim need when clearly there are multiple routes available is more difficult to justfy so group will more likely fall back on pure greed roles.
Well at the same time I don't really believe in NBG for public/pickup groups with near fully tradable itemization. To me it's all just want that people (conveniently) confuse as need, just because whatever item/drop more immediately serves their desires than that of others. So I personally wouldn't care what someone did with an item provided they rolled and won it fair and square.
