EG point system or other?Follow

Our shell in FFXI did a point system where you got X number of points for farming events (depending on how time consuming). Then for boss fights that dropped treasure, you placed a blind bid for the drops using as many of your points you wanted (we knew in advance who wanted what so as not to overlook anyone during the treasure pool window). So even someone who just started could get something no one particularly wanted, and it also prevented "point bloat" among those who were around awhile.

I'm not sure how many other ways I can say that every group is different and will have different needs when it comes to loot distribution. Please stop speaking in absolutes.

If your LS is too casual for a point-system to work, don't use one, you probably don't need it anyway because you aren't pushing progression like that.

In my own history I've had guilds that used free-roll (need/greed/pass) to handle loot. I've had guilds that used loot councils. I've had guilds that used point-systems. Each worked for the respective guild just fine. My PERSONAL favorite was EPGP because I thought it handled time-investment vs reward quite well without being overly punishing if someone had to miss a raid here and there, as long as it didn't happen a lot. The guild I was in at the time was focused on progressing through the raid, and everyone was committed to that goal.

There's no such thing as one system that works for everyone. There's no such thing as a best system to handle loot. There's no such thing as a system that ALWAYS works, nor is there a system that NEVER works.

Oh and...



That's just asinine and you know it.

Your assertion was that game designers are lazy when they don't pre-program a method by which the game keeps track of data that's used only for administrative purposes for a tiny fraction of guilds? Did I get that right?

That's not laziness, that's project management. While a system like that might, in some edge cases, be helpful to have built-in; everyone who wants it is going to handle it on their own, and they're all going to do it differently because (wait for it) no system works best for every group of people.

For game design purposes, it's worthwhile to implement a system whereby groups of strangers who will never meet again can distribute loot reasonably fairly. The need/greed/pass system handles that fine. Though it'll probably need some heavier regulation in a game where class-changing is possible.. that's beside the point.

I guess I don't object to your premise so much as I object to your assertion that this represents laziness on someone's part. Remembering that time spent on one thing means that developer isn't doing something else during that time period, it makes the most sense to develop systems that will be used by more people rather than systems that will be used by a handful of people per server TOPS who are going to be perfectly willing to handle it themselves anyway.

Oh i have no problem agreeing with stuff that makes sense, as funny as it might sound, i am not a troll, do i get a giggle here and there from a sarcastic comment ? Yes sure i do, but the only difference we have had is about dailies which well you have your opinion, and i have mine.

Re: is it laziness? You could attribute it to a lack of ingenuity, potentially even resource management, but generally, no, I don't think so. Designing a system isn't that hard--one guy can and often does do that in his spare time if it tickles his fancy. It's the implementation that eats into resources. It's mainly just that it's so much easier to copy the systems in another game, which is why 95% of games do it. To me, that's laziness and nothing else.

Re: is it needed? Well, there's no reason a guild shouldn't be able to choose the reward rules that they like best, and most players do not enjoy the bureaucracy of guild management or the drama that comes with it. So, unless your argument is that you don't like additional options that solve problems, then I don't think there's an argument to be had. Actually, if there's even one fair option for determining loot distribution that is automated by the game, I'm sure the vast majority of players would prefer that their guild just use that rather than convoluting things with a player-instituted system. If nothing else, it makes guild management that much simpler--leaders can focus on running events rather than tracking minutia like attendance and points. Basically it works for better for everyone who doesn't like administrative bureaucracy, and those players can choose a free loot option and impose their own rules if they want to.

So I'll reiterate: it's lazy and in this generation inexcusable that designers have put the feedback loops in the hands of players when that's a good 50% of their job. And some have recognized this, and that gave birth to the merit-based systems that most people dislike because of faulty metrics. But the solution is longitudinal tracking systems which are better integrated into the game and less sloppy--not to give up and copypasta a system because, gosh, doing something different sure is hard. Especially so when you have a multimillion dollar budget and it would definitely yield a favorable ROI.

There is. The Need/Greed/Pass system. It completely removes the need for a guild to control drops using something like DKP. If you are there, and you can use it on your current class (or main class), you lot it. If others can lot also, it's left up to game programming, which right there refutes your whole laziness claim. The game has a built-in system of fairly distributing loot. Certainly there will be players that abuse it, but there will always be players like that. And if it's a big deal, there is the whole quartermaster system in games where the party leader can decide the loot. It's not ideal, but if it's with people you don't trust, it's a good alternative. So already, there are a minimum of two systems incorporated for loot distribution. One is automated by the game (random rolls for need/greed gear), and one that allows the players to choose. That to me dispels your whole concept of the lazy designer.

If you'd like to propose a new system, I'd be curious to hear it as I'm certainly open to something that might be better.

The Need/Greed/Pass system relies on randomization and doesn't provide for a merit-based system. You do understand that I'm arguing for more options, right? The opposing argument here is tantamount to saying that the Need/Greed/Pass system didn't need to be developed because players used to be able to lot, and that's all the loot distribution rules you need.

Let's set aside the lazy designer discussion--it's a loaded argument on both ends. The bottom line is that there are many games being designed which evoke a need for a longitudinal merit-based system and there are no tools to effectively automate this process (the closest thus far has been the use of token systems, which have their own drawbacks). And yes, of course there are ways to address this. Fundamentally, even, it's a very simple question: Should the game be able to decide when a player has earned a reward and then provide it to them? And I reiterate: isn't that one of the main things, if not the definitive thing, that games do?

Even simple tools like in-game attendance and points trackers would be an extremely obvious step in the right direction, but there's really no reason that games can't be built to track this progress automatically. And players can still be given plenty of freedom with the application of these tools to decide how many points certain events should be worth, what constitutes attendance, and so forth.

My point is, you are playing on a machine which is specifically made to handle complex data manipulation! Who in their right mind thinks that it can't perform the task of one **** retentive gamer with an abacus and a penchant for making lists? That's a stone age approach to the problem. "No need airplane. Have wheel." We already have technology that tracks when people clock in and out and pays them accordingly, and programmers who can write that code in an afternoon.

You could certainly argue that such an approach might fundamentally encroach on the social experience of the guild, or even absolve the value of public loot to an extent. And I'd be happy to have that conversation with all bias aside. My only objection was to the notion that my point was intentionally asinine, and whether you agree with it or not, I believe my point is well-defended.

Stuff I'd like to be built into the game for administrative purposes:

- A module that logs exactly when someone logs on and logs off the linkshell, then allows this to be exported via an XML file to third party programs. Call this the "time clock" function - you can see who has clocked in, when, where, and when they left.

- The ability to integrate with those third party programs via an API, so someone could call up what the program has in the database and display it in the chat log.

When I ran Dynamis, we used a customized version of EQDKP called FFDKP, developed by Ismarc of Seraph. FFDKP allowed individual players to camp out exactly one item. Items with no one camped went open lot (although they still cost points.) Everything else was called rot drops (and rot drops still cost points.) Some of the competitions for certain items were fierce - the RDM hat from Xarcabard in particular once had like 7 people after it - but people who stuck with the shell for a long time eventually got everything they wanted, and then some. I finished all 20 relic armor sets before we shut down our linkshell for good (when SE changed the Dynamis city runs to their current system.)

The Meebles static that I mentioned up thread? Yeah, last night I walked away with a sexy pair of SMN pants, because I'm the only one in the group that plays SMN regularly and the rest of the group knows that. We have no need for any kind of points or lotting system.

Edited, May 5th 2013 11:12am by Catwho

Agreed.



For an mmo, no, I don't think that's the definitive thing games do. It never really has and I don't think it should be. For offline games, I absolutely agree that loot disctribution and when to give out player rewards is up to the developers, but one of the points of an MMO is the freedom in deciding how to distribute your loot. I don't think the game needs to have a system that actually disperses rewards and keeps track of something like attendance/points. I think that is completely up to the guild, and should be. I understand you don't agree with that, I just think it's something that is a personal preference.



And that would be my argument. I don't want a game to decide everything for me. I'd rather have a group of players I trust decide how best to distribute the loot. Because, while it is definitely possible and probably not difficult to code something like what you are talking about, a game engine can't make judgement calls. It can't say something like "Oh, you were available for the event but didn't go, so you get points anyways". Well, maybe it can, but that seems pointless to me when it's just as easily done by the guild itself, and allows far more freedom in the decision-making process. Again, I think it's more a personal opinion than a matter of right or wrong.

And this is exactly why you pick a job that you want to loot on prior to the run. Heck, you can even set something up where you have a priority job lotting system. You set up your top 5, when stuff drops, people with it in slot 1 lot first and so on down the list until it is distributed. It's a fair system, and allows you to play on a different class than what you are lotting for, something that is completely specific to games like XI and XIV where multiple jobs are available on 1 character.

I'm having visions of exploding databases here.

So your proposal here is to store data of more or less the following structure?

 
For every player 
    For every instance AND every world event AND every endgame fate AND every custom farming event 
        For every encounter 
            Attended? 
            Available? 
            Main job? 
            Alt Job if Asked? 
            Points Gained? 
            Item Received? 
            Time Spent on Progression? 

Now let's multiply that over a half dozen years of the game's lifespan, maybe a couple expansions, and let's generously say a million players. All of which has to be stored in perpetuity because the game has no business determining what does and does not constitute an event for a particular linkshell.


Now let's also remember that only a small fraction of the game's entire population will ever care one iota about endgame activities. And only a fraction of THOSE people will ever need something like this. The overwhelming majority of people will never have a use for this system because it will never apply to them.

Let's use some numbers rather than speaking in abstracts here for a second.

WoW tier 13 (Dragon Soul) had roughly 10% of all guilds in the game progressing through it. Keeping in mind that this number only reflects guilds that progressed as a guild and not as an elaborate pick-up-group (PUG). Of those guilds, only about 10% cleared the instance on normal mode (these are your casual raiders). And only about 10% of those cleared it on heroic (these are your more serious raiders). So 1% of guilds .. 1% .. were focused on progression.

That 1% is the group that probably used specialized loot systems above and beyond "roll if you want it." Out of the 10 million people playing WoW at the time, that number probably represents about 1.2 to 1.3 million people. And I think that number is probably pretty generous.

Data integrity requires that this data be tracked for every instance of a character object. This is a massive amount of data to be tracked for only a tiny subset of people to ever use. And that subset of people will not blink even once about tracking it themselves.

Hell, my guild at the time used EPGP (I was in that 1% of guilds that cleared heroic). Everything was handled with an addon. It required almost no backend work on our part to keep track of loot versus time spent. Points were gained automatically, points were spent automatically, decay was handled automatically. And all without imposing our datasets on the rest of the WoW population.

There is no hundred percent fair system for all players when that system is run by a human generated point/ladder system.
Fair doesn't exist. Fair is how one perceives things to be. Rationality would suggest that a person who dedicates all their effort and misses no opportunity should get the gear first and other players would feel it to be right. If that were the case, there wouldn't be so many iterations of different point systems. I have been the guy who never misses an opportunity to score points while everyone else was here and there in attendance and effort. I received alot of gear before other people, sometimes even getting my drops, moving back down to the bottom of the rights list, then I would move up the ladder one, two, three times overtaking them through utter dedication.

No, a good in-game loot system would take that into account. You can't prevent anything in life. You can only some what lessen or delay the possibility of something happening. Dictators try and force and find out ultimately. That no matter how much they do, they cannot force happiness or compliance. A majority of people will leave when they reach whatever goals they set out to accomplish. One day, three months, ten years.


This does not fix things either. If the individual player is given access to need/greed/pass. They have their own perception of what they feel is right even if other members disagree in their own perceptions. This also doesn't take into account attentive play or cooperation. It's like the lotto. The few who are lucky win and the rest spend their hard earned money or time for little return. Need all the time and if your lucky, watch yourself get booted from the guild or listen to discontent while other members leave.


Any leadership regardless if it's a democracy or run by a dictator has a hint of corruption, some form of drama, or biaism. Look no further than the US government, and they been working at this for hundreds of years! Emotions are always present in humans whether they are apparent or under the surface.

People drive people apart. The only methodical solution that neither brings nor pushes people apart. Is one where opinion or perception is not applicable. An in-game distribution model that is global, takes attendance and completion of events into account, and doesn't rely on rolls to accomplish that.

If a member never misses, is on time, and completes every event. Should his or her points decay?
No matter what it is answered here, I guarantee you that someone in that guild disagrees. In an ideal world everyone would be 100% dedicated and present. But this isn't how it works. Any player who can only commit 99% or less loses. Regardless if real life matters are the only thing that prevent them from doing this.

TLDR: In any player driven system for rewarding loot. The players with less time get punished. In any in-game system for rewarding loot using RNG. All but the lucky players get punished.

@Bartel: I agree! It should be about preference. Right now the people who prefer to have the game do the heavy lifting do not have an effective, extensible option to suit their preference.

Also, I think you're confusing my point about what game designers do fundamentally with what has been practiced in this specific genre historically--we create feedback loops. That is what we do. This is just some bizarre status quo where designers have resolved not to design feedback systems because we're still coming from a background of MMOs that wanted to allow players to do things "realistically." We've subverted that mentality in almost every other system, literally.

One of the main reasons people don't do endgame content is a lack of leadership. Leaders and managers are a finite resource--tools that make being a leader/manager easier increase access to endgame content. Or arguably, this demonstrates that player-ran loot systems ultimately deter players from engaging in endgame content. Not a strong point in favor of player-based systems.

Look at GW2--they just decided to say ********** it," and abandon the idea of loot pools altogether--every player gets their own pool. And while criticisms of the approach apply, people are largely fine with that decision. Granted that was one of the laziest approaches to loot distribution design that I could ever conceive of, but there's nothing inherently wrong with the decision.

@Callinon: That would be a problem if you used that approach--so you either don't use that approach, or you devise a solution to that approach. I'm not talking about black magic here--it's programming. It's easy to toggle on/off features, for example. Honestly, the most infuriating thing for me is when other game designers just come up with one reason after another why they can't do something when their job is to design systems--there are problems at every turn, with every solution and every objective. Your JOB is to SOLVE them. You do it all the time--"Oh, this doesn't work." Well, it actually does if you do this and this. Or you can do this and that. There are always hundreds if not thousands if not millions of potential solutions to any given systems problem. If you can't deal with that, you can't design systems.

Sorry, but you unknowingly stumbled over one of my pet peeves: people who are constantly noting that there's a potential obstacle and giving up on the idea right away. Those people can't be game designers. They can steal game designs, but they can't actually create the systems that move the practice forward, because they're not problem solvers--they're problem identifiers who quit way too easily.