"Equal Opportunity Loot" (EOL) System Proposal

[nenja]

Earlier today, I sent this in a private message to Rogean for consideration. I want to share it here as a system for consideration to address a number of issues currently present and to be exacerbated with later expansions. The constant flow of threads related to the /list mechanic and associated items gives us a small glimpse into perhaps the biggest flaw with EQ - loot system - and what is really a more systemic issue that can relatively simply be remedied. I look forward to a constructive dialogue on people's thoughts.

Rogean,

I am hoping you will consider an idea for a change to the loot system on Project 1999 Green/Teal servers. I believe my proposal will address many of the issues which plague the community on these servers and which have required some amount of effort by not only you but the other p99 staff as well to police. This message became a bit longer than originally expected, so I apologize for that, but I wanted to be sure it was fairly well outlined.

Currently, rare named NPCs and raid boss NPCs have a static number of items they will drop upon death and an assigned chance for each of the possible items in their loot table. The issues with this system are many and well known by now. These include but are not limited to: kill stealing, camp stealing, training, complicated, divisive, and contentious guild loot distribution methods (DKP, loot council, etc.), existing absurd raid rules, policing of those raid rules, physically unhealthy play behaviour (8+ hour camping sessions), discourages new players from committing to the game once it becomes apparent their ability to obtain some items will be outright impossible or would require years of their life to achieve, and now the recent /list mechanic implemented on Green/Teal to address what would otherwise have been a mess. I appreciate the effort you and the rest of the p99 development staff have made to try and get ahead of a foreseen issue, but I think we can do better. The current state of EQ, loot, spawn rates, etc., was born out of a number of motives and interests but I think it's safe to say that two principles guided those decisions: a game publisher wanting subscribers to continue their paid subscriptions through forced loot gating mechanisms (e.g. keys, some loot in general) and to give some items a sense of value due to rarity.

Since we're already straying a little from the Keep-It-Classic (KIC) mindset - which I think is good - with the implementation of the /list mechanic, perhaps we can address the overall problem at once and still stay true to the latter of those two aforementioned principles. I propose we implement an CBL system, which is based loosely on a system introduced to World of Warcraft (likely other MMORPGs I'm unfamiliar with) and has been one of the single greatest QOL changes to that game. Roughly, the idea is as follows:

Allow anyone that had 'engaged' with the NPC in question or anyone able to get to the corpse before its decay a chance to loot the corpse, regardless of who "tagged" it first
All players able to loot the corpse have an equal chance to receive a single item from the NPC based on the NPCs loot table's item "drop" chances.


Let's consider a recently relevant example, the 'ghoul assassin'. As you likely know, this NPC will drop one of two items, the Guise of the Deceiver (later the Mask of Deception) and the Serrated Bone Dirk. The mask is the 'common' and the dirk the 'rare'. For simplicity sake, let's say that means a 66% chance for the mask and a 33% chance for the dirk, one of which is currently guaranteed to drop with every kill. Under the CBL system, the NPC is no longer guaranteed to always drop an item but instead provides each person looting the corpse a chance to receive an item. To this end, we set the % chance to lower values, e.g. mask = 10%, dirk = 5%. In this case, 85% of the time, the player would receive nothing, 10% of the time the mask, and 5% of the time the dirk. These chance values are, of course, arbitrary, but I know it is simple enough to determine values which would result in reasonable drop rates which also maintain a reasonable degree of rarity (more on this later).

What benefits does this mechanism provide?

Fosters player coordination and cooperation rather than greed driven competition (e.g. guild raid bosses, small cliques of players locking down certain named/rare NPCs for the sake of personal gain, etc.)
Vastly improved player satisfaction
Vastly healthier player habits (i.e. no perceived or necessary 8+ hour camp sessions, no sense of need for 3 AM "bat phone" calls to get ahead of other guilds, etc.)
Maintains reasonable item rarity while also resolving the unreasonable rarity of certain items (e.g. Earth Staff from Magi P'Tasi in Plane of Hate).
No need for DKP/Loot Council/Other loot distribution systems, which create inherent tension, suspicion, and strained relationships amongst guild members
No need for the current complicated and absurd raid rules
No need for guild raid rotation in certain zones (e.g. Plane of Sky or similar)
No need by p99 administration staff to police or be asked to police raid rules or similar
No need to further develop, maintain, and police the /list system to account for the many ways some players will continue to seek to diminish the enjoyment of the game for others


I expect the primary argument against this system will be that it makes some items worthless from an economic standpoint. This is untrue, as items will still maintain a degree of rarity and some players will always prefer to pay for those items over trying to get them through camping the respective NPC. Likewise, it is because of how unreasonably 'rare' some items are, for a number of reasons, that results in the majority of undesirable player behaviors we experience on these servers and which diminishes overall enjoyment by the community at large.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this and those of the p99 staff, discussing how it might work on p99, and to answer any questions you may have.

Thanks.

[kul69]

Not classic.

[Phaezed-Reality]

sounds like world of warcraft

[Graahle]

Stopped reading at "Equal Opportunity".

As if that isn't force-fed to us irl enough already.

[Nirgon]

EQ and no unhealthy play sessions lol wew good one

[nenja]

Not classic.

Thank you for your constructive input, to which I would respond that neither is the new /list mechanic, among other things. I think we can create a more enjoyable experience for all by having discussions around existing mechanics/systems which don't necessarily make sense long-term, as we've seen on Blue.

[nenja]

Stopped reading at "Equal Opportunity".

As if that isn't force-fed to us irl enough already.

Care to propose a different name then? I've changed it to read "Chance Based Loot", if that helps. The title of the post or name of the system really shouldn't be the focus of this discussion.

[WaffleztheAndal]

You obviously put a lot of time into this, but this just isn’t going to happen. This is wildly off the classic track.

[Wurl]

Good joke, thanks man.

[Ataria]

Care to propose a different name then? I've changed it to read "Chance Based Loot", if that helps. The title of the post or name of the system really shouldn't be the focus of this discussion.

Names/labels irrelevant. It's the meaning, which is opposite the core of what eq has always been.

[oldhead]

Listen, they cant reinvent this game. You are chaining the mechanics of the game play entirely. That isnt as easy as just patching in some list system script.

You are touching on the basics of loot mechanics in a game. You will need to design and develop your own MMO if you want to see that.

oh and not classic.

[cd288]

Sounds like something someone who would enjoy WoW would ask for. And I don't try and say that offensively.

This is EQ. One of the reasons people are here is because they don't like the whole modern equal opportunity everyone gets everything type of MMO.

[nenja]

Listen, they cant reinvent this game. You are chaining the mechanics of the game play entirely. That isnt as easy as just patching in some list system script.


As a software engineer by profession, I think you are oversimplifying the effort likely required to "patch in some list system script." Consider each of the parts and I think you will begin to better understand.

To this end, p99 has been around 10+ years now. The amount of time invested addressing the number of complaints, relations issues, implementation of a non-classic /list system, etc., is likely far greater than what would be required to revise the loot system.

[jacob54311]

You obviously put a lot of time into this, but this just isn’t going to happen. This is wildly off the classic track.

Yeah. They are leaving in things nobody really likes such as the hybrid xp penalty.

They aren't going to make such a massive change to how looting is done.

Getting a rare, high demand item like manastone is going to take a lot of time. That's all there is to it. All these changes to list people are suggesting just make me more convinced of that. None of them change the mathematical reality that if you have so many people willing to queue up and wait hours upon hours for a chance to loot one and an item that drops maybe once every ten hours or so, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A LONG WAIT.

[nenja]

Sounds like something someone who would enjoy WoW would ask for. And I don't try and say that offensively.

This is EQ. One of the reasons people are here is because they don't like the whole modern equal opportunity everyone gets everything type of MMO.

No offense taken. Full disclosure, I played WOW from 2005 through the first few expansions and then more recently because my wife still plays it. However, my first MMORPG experience was with EQ for many years. I understand it well. If my proposal is seriously considered, it would be apparent that I'm not proposing everyone suddenly has an "easy" mechanism by which to get loot. This is where the simple math around drop chance/probability values comes into play.

[Madbad]

stupid idea.

not any less classic than list system tho.

[nenja]

Yeah. They are leaving in things nobody really likes such as the hybrid xp penalty.

They aren't going to make such a massive change to how looting is done.

Getting a rare, high demand item like manastone is going to take a lot of time. That's all there is to it. All these changes to list people are suggesting just make me more convinced of that. None of them change the mathematical reality that if you have so many people willing to queue up and wait hours upon hours for a chance to loot one and an item that drops maybe once every ten hours or so, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A LONG WAIT.

Read my post. As I said, my system uses a chance-based system. The chance of getting an item can still be rare without requiring a player to be on a list for tens of hours straight for even a remote chance at an item due to current /list system behavior. These /list camps, however, are only one, small example.

[jacob54311]

As a software engineer by profession, I think you are oversimplifying the effort likely required to "patch in some list system script." Consider each of the parts and I think you will begin to better understand.

To this end, p99 has been around 10+ years now. The amount of time invested addressing the number of complaints, relations issues, implementation of a non-classic /list system, etc., is likely far greater than what would be required to revise the loot system.

The list system is far greater time investment to program than what would be required to radically revamp how looting works?

I find that a bit hard to believe.

[nenja]

The list system is far greater time investment to program than what would be required to radically revamp how looting works?

I find that a bit hard to believe.

That is not what I said. Reread my response. I refer to the cumulative time investment of many things, not just the /list system.

[bum3]

Not a horrible idea.. but the fact you posted it here means you don't know your audience. These are the same poop socks who voted no for server split and posted over and over about how it failed and was the worst thing to ever happen. Man I remember when people asked for guild instance raiding. Was the end of the world even thought people still had to earn their loot.

[cd288]

No offense taken. Full disclosure, I played WOW from 2005 through the first few expansions and then more recently because my wife still plays it. However, my first MMORPG experience was with EQ for many years. I understand it well. If my proposal is seriously considered, it would be apparent that I'm not proposing everyone suddenly has an "easy" mechanism by which to get loot. This is where the simple math around drop chance/probability values comes into play.

What you're proposing is equal opportunity. It doesn't matter what the drop rates are. The point is that every single person gets to loot a corpse and have a chance at a drop. Instead of the mob being killed and, in a group or raid setting for example, rolling on it or spending DKP for one person to win the drop. If you don't win the drop, tough luck; better luck next time. There's no need to change the system.

Also, ninja looting is a far less significant issue on P99 than you make it seem. It's pretty easy to track this via logs and impose discipline on the person who did it. There's literally no need to change the loot dynamics besides "I want to be able to have equal opportunity to get what I want."

[jacob54311]

Read my post. As I said, my system uses a chance-based system. The chance of getting an item can still be rare without requiring a player to be on a list for tens of hours straight for remotely a realistic chance at an item. These /list camps are only a small example, however.

According to you, drop rates would be adjusted so that the item wouldn't be any less rare, even though anyone who can get to the corpse can loot it, even if it's been looted by others (the mess this would create would be horrific, but the workability of this system is besides the point - we're talking about the time investment). So you're still getting one manastone roughly every ten hours or so.

You'd still have a situation where an item is rare, takes a lot of time to drop, and there are so many people willing to wait for one to drop. You've just done away with a line up and created a situation where there is a mob of people all clicking on mob corpses all hoping for that once in ten hours on average item to drop. And that's once in ten hours you get one for the entire mob - remember we've adjusted the drop rate so its not dropping any more often - not once in ten hours per player.

You've gotten rid of the queue, so players wouldn't have an incentive for do 50 hour stretches WITHOUT STOPPING, since you can leave and come back and still have the same chance of getting one. You're still looking at a big time investment, unless you're extremely lucky and win the lottery early in the process.

I can't imagine anyone wanting to play the game this way, though. Huge mobs of players would be hanging around near mobs' spawn points, waiting for someone to kill the mob with phat loot so they can ALL loot the corpse. Instead of loot showing up on a corpse and the players who actually killed it deciding who gets what, everyone gets a lottery style chance of looting something? No thanks.

[Nirgon]

stupid idea.

not any less classic than list system tho.

its an automated system of classic GM enforcement, because the blue community is extremely toxic and can't be trusted

[jacob54311]

That is not what I said. Reread my response. I refer to the cumulative time investment of many things, not just the /list system.

You're being silly. It'd be a major time investment.

Comparing the time it would take relative to the time it takes to do just about EVERYTHING else doesn't make it seem any less so.

[Haynar]

I am speechless.

[Evia]

OP I can appreciate all the hard work and effort that went into this proposal, certainly. I just think you might be missing the quirky appeal of EQ. The thing is classic EQ loot system is definitely flawed, yet in these flaws is where the ‘magic’ or whatever you wanna call it, is. You change the loot system like that and we’re just tip toeing ourselves right down the same road we eventually went towards with Luclin/PoP and onward. What makes a manastone worth as much as it is/will be is the fact it gets removed... but also because it takes real effort and luck to snag one.

The competition is fierce and not everyone is going to get one and THATS THE POINT, That’s why ya’ll neckbearding in the first place. If everyone could just prance down NP to loot a manastone then the manastone would pretty quickly be meaningless. Feel stoked Rogean threw ya a bone with the list system to give the casuals even a slight chance.

[Phaezed-Reality]

. The thing is classic EQ loot system is definitely flawed, yet in these flaws is where the ‘magic’ or whatever you wanna call it, is.

This is literally the magic you are talking about. and it's beautiful.

[ZiggyTheMuss]

You seriously just suggested they create instances for loot.

GTFO

[Nisrak]

Sorry OP, but there are some major issues with your proposal:

- If I make a level 1, follow around some lvl 50, and tag everything he kills, then I get a copy of all of his loot?

- This removes the incentive of ever grouping or staying at a single camp. Think of a rogue sneaking between camps and tagging every named just as the group kills it. He can essentially get the loot of 10 camps at once!

- How would you tune the drop rate? Base it off of 6 people killing it? 10 people? For something like manastone, you will likely have 50+ people "looting" it every spawn.

- If you normalize it based on the number of people looting, then this is exactly the same as just giving it to a /random person on the list if it drops.

By the way, this is not how WoW loot works (at least not when I've ever played).

[jacob54311]

Sorry OP, but there are some major issues with your proposal:

- If I make a level 1, follow around some lvl 50, and tag everything he kills, then I get a copy of all of his loot?

- This removes the incentive of ever grouping or staying at a single camp. Think of a rogue sneaking between camps and tagging every named just as the group kills it. He can essentially get the loot of 10 camps at once!

- How would you tune the drop rate? Base it off of 6 people killing it? 10 people? For something like manastone, you will likely have 50+ people "looting" it every spawn.

- If you normalize it based on the number of people looting, then this is exactly the same as just giving it to a /random person on the list if it drops.

By the way, this is not how WoW loot works (at least not when I've ever played).

You don't even need to tag the mob.

"Allow anyone that had 'engaged' with the NPC in question OR anyone able to get to the corpse before its decay a chance to loot the corpse, regardless of who "tagged" it first"

[Swish]

Can't count the times I said "not classic" in this thread but I'm sure there's more coming.

[Nirgon]

Things that have to exist because of the extreme toxicity of blue players

- nerfed sea furies
- rooted dragons
- /list

Mind you, because of blue not red...

Shoulda made ToV and sea fury island PVP arena areas

[ZiggyTheMuss]

Things that have to exist because of the extreme toxicity of blue players

- nerfed sea furies
- rooted dragons
- /list

Mind you, because of blue not red...

Shoulda made ToV and sea fury island PVP arena areas

Add the AOE limit as well to this

[YendorLootmonkey]

If the have-nots become the haves, how ever will the original haves get their validation?

[Nirgon]

High amounts of effort are required for some things

Traumatizing, I know

[nenja]

You seriously just suggested they create instances for loot.


I suppose that's a way of looking at it.

Sorry OP, but there are some major issues with your proposal:

- If I make a level 1, follow around some lvl 50, and tag everything he kills, then I get a copy of all of his loot?

- This removes the incentive of ever grouping or staying at a single camp. Think of a rogue sneaking between camps and tagging every named just as the group kills it. He can essentially get the loot of 10 camps at once!

- How would you tune the drop rate? Base it off of 6 people killing it? 10 people? For something like manastone, you will likely have 50+ people "looting" it every spawn.

- If you normalize it based on the number of people looting, then this is exactly the same as just giving it to a /random person on the list if it drops.

By the way, this is not how WoW loot works (at least not when I've ever played).

I'll try to address each of your points.

First, is this different from people running level 1 or equally low characters to a camp spot and looting an item on their "twink"? I don't think you can deny this happens currently

Second, the low level player is not getting a "copy of all loot". It is chance based per character. It's entirely possible neither end up with loot.

Third, it does not remove the "incentive" of staying at a camp because nothing is guaranteed. And is this really different from players you've grouped with who won the /roll on an item and then immediately left group? If not, consider yourself lucky. It's happened to me plenty under the current system.

My proposal that "anyone who is able to loot the corpse before it decays" was me being proactive in addressing those who would complain that such a system would disallow them from being able to run their level 1 twinks or alts to loot an item if that character was not able to be present for the kill (e.g. You log on a healer, because it's needed, but your main is a tank or damage).

Tuning would need to be considered, obviously. If you want to say 50+ people will be looting a body (e.g. large raid), then maybe we start there and tune accordingly. I think it's safe to assume raid targets would have a larger number (100+) of people looting than one-off dungeon named (10-20?) and therefore NPCs could be lumped into categories (e.g. Raid boss targets vs dungeon group targets).

Part of the intent is to encourage players to work together rather than against each other. Think about the cluster that TOV or Tunare are when 3-4 guilds are all trying to get the same bosses. That wouldn't even be a thing with this system, since they could all work together. Or ST, VP, etc., etc.

In WOW, it looks like this is called Personal Loot and was introduced with Mists of Pandaria. It removed the need for guilds to have to deal with DKP systems, tracking, decay, etc. and complaints of bias. I can assure you that no one complained about the Personal Loot system and became the default for most.

OP I can appreciate all the hard work and effort that went into this proposal, certainly. I just think you might be missing the quirky appeal of EQ. The thing is classic EQ loot system is definitely flawed, yet in these flaws is where the ‘magic’ or whatever you wanna call it, is. You change the loot system like that and we’re just tip toeing ourselves right down the same road we eventually went towards with Luclin/PoP and onward. What makes a manastone worth as much as it is/will be is the fact it gets removed... but also because it takes real effort and luck to snag one.

The competition is fierce and not everyone is going to get one and THATS THE POINT, That’s why ya’ll neckbearding in the first place. If everyone could just prance down NP to loot a manastone then the manastone would pretty quickly be meaningless. Feel stoked Rogean threw ya a bone with the list system to give the casuals even a slight chance.

I think people are reading this and interpreting it as, "everyone will get whatever they want." As said, if tuned appropriately, the time spent to get an item should be roughly equal but with less of the bullshit that currently exists (e.g. DKP dumping by player A - key member of guild X - just before they /gquit for guild B, camping something for 20+ straight hours (e.g. Pained Soul, anyone?)). I personally have no interest in a Manastone, but reading post after post about people who are really hating the /list system, led me to think of alternatives to the current system(s).

I appreciate, at least, that some of the more recent responses seem more constructive. I think rather than saying, "This would never happen," it would be interesting to ask ourselves, "How would it be received if it did?" It's easy to form a simple opinion without giving something a chance.

[nenja]

Shoulda made ToV and sea fury island PVP arena areas

Lol. This would be great.

[Swish]

Things that have to exist because of the extreme toxicity of blue players

- nerfed sea furies
- rooted dragons
- /list

Red shouldn't have had seafury loot nerfed there, took a good pvp spot away.

[Rooj]

Remember in that other thread when I told you you were so incredibly wrong about this and you disagreed?
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3027794&postcount=396
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3027802&postcount=397

I hope you have changed your mind. Not only have you tried to bring entirely new mechanics into Classic Everquest, but you've tried to bring mechanics from modern MMOs to a community and game that generally has distaste for those mechanics. People didn't come here to play World of Warcraft or Guild Wars 2 (except you it seems).

Yes, I am telling you here and now, that most of these Everquest players would rather have the current List system rather than a modern Participation Trophy system. If you cannot comprehend that, then you don't comprehend Classic Everquest or old school MMOs in general.

Your suggestions also removes guilds competing for end-game mobs, which is basically all end-game even is on Everquest.

I just... I just don't get it. You have tried to completely and utterly change the foundation and spirit of Everquest in just a few paragraphs and I am truly astonished right now. Everquest is a TWENTY year old game that is still running official servers and the mechanics of loot and raiding on Live ARE STILL THE SAME TODAY.

[Nisrak]

I suppose that's a way of looking at it.
First, is this different from people running level 1 or equally low characters to a camp spot and looting an item on their "twink"? I don't think you can deny this happens currently

This is very different from me, as a level 1, following around someone I don't know and mooching off all of their kills. Every raid will have an army of newbies following it.

This idea would completely change the game. Tuning drop rates would be near impossible, but let's just say that you are able to tune them so that the same number of each loot item drops, on average. That means that, no matter who actually kills the mob, every single person who can get to the corpse has an equal change of getting loot. This is exactly the same as every person who gets to the corpse just doing a /random...

Let's think for a second about this in the context of ToV, for example. As ToV respawn timers near, every (even somewhat) serious player camps every single alt outside of ToV. When something spawns, everyone kills and it then every player repeatedly switches characters for a chance at loot. Now, we are talking easily 1000+ characters looting every dragon. If loot chance is tuned correctly, people who actually killed it now have a 1/1000 chance of getting an item (as does my level 1 alt who is camped outside).


In WOW, it looks like this is called Personal Loot and was introduced with Mists of Pandaria. It removed the need for guilds to have to deal with DKP systems, tracking, decay, etc. and complaints of bias. I can assure you that no one complained about the Personal Loot system and became the default for most.


WoW only has this within groups or raids. Loot is still limited to only players who participated in the kill (tagged it first). Also, almost all raid and group content in WoW is instanced, so it's a moot point.

[Nagoya]

Nenja you understand you can start a business and develop games right? I promise we'll like your facebook page.

Here we would like to play EQ tyvm.

[zodium]

this is okay but not as good an idea as legacy items dropping 6 at a time

[jacob54311]

this is okay but not as good an idea as legacy items dropping 6 at a time

Need command /manastone

Once every ten hours type /manastone for your chance at a manastone.

[zodium]

Need command /manastone

Once every ten hours type /manastone for your chance at a manastone.

no, just drop boots and stones for a full group. legacy items drop 6 at a time.

[stewe]

So basically you want to turn EQ into WoW and give everyone instant gratification with their own personal loot, this will NEVER happen

[jacob54311]

So basically you want to turn EQ into WoW and give everyone instant gratification with their own personal loot, this will NEVER happen

Sounds worse than WoW, since everyone who can get to a corpse gets a chance at the loot. And the player or group that actually got the kill has their chance of getting the loot greatly reduced.

Makes sense!

[Tethler]

Even though I would personally benefit from this change, I'd still go with a firm NO. Things lose value when everyone has one. Handing out welfare loot in WoW was what started it's downfall.

Also, not classic.

[chaos1990]

some welfare sleep after 15 hours of bullshit would be nice

[Tethler]

some welfare sleep after 15 hours of bullshit would be nice

Just sleep then. Nobody needs a manastone, and anyone risking ill health over jboots camp is dumb as hell since it will still be attainable via quest after removal from Najena.

[Phaezed-Reality]

Some of you are going to have to put your erudite pants on and realize that everquest is not fair, never will be fair, and this isn't the place to try to become a snowflake from everfrost. Nothing is going to be handed to you in norrath. Everquest is not the land of equal opportunity. It's whoever is the best and has the most time wins. EVERYTIME.

Get these #antonicanhandouts out of #norrath

[unleashedd]

yall confusing equal opportunity with equal outcome

[Malikail]

Stopped reading at "Equal Opportunity".

As if that isn't force-fed to us irl enough already.

Amen. Too much of this kind of stuff already

[Cuktus]

So, as I understand your system, there would simply be more loot? Like, if a raid of 30 kills Vox, it drops 30 or so items. If a raid of 100 kills Vox, she will drop 100 items? Am understanding this right? Cause that's insane. Just absolutely bonkers. Forget about lvl 1 twinks running to loot, why would they? EC gonna be using mana stones as paper weights. Puppet strings for toilet paper.

Now, if your saying Vox will only drop, say 7 items and everyone has a random chance of looting X from her, well, also insane. If the enchanter gets no drop swords all month while the warriors keep looting no drop robes, who is winning?

List may not be perfect, but lord, you trying to bring down the whole economy.

[zaneosak]

People refuse to just enjoy Everquest anymore. Everybody thinks they are entitled to every piece of loot or camp or zone or experience that they can think of. It's so absurd. "Equal Opportunity Loot" system? Are you shitting me? Last time I checked I have as much opportunity as anybody if I want to put in the time to get the camp, the time to get my spawn to pop and the luck to get the item I want and the /ran 100 to beat everybody else in my party. This is a video game, for shits sake.

[baakss]

In WOW, it looks like this is called Personal Loot .........I can assure you that no one complained about the Personal Loot system and became the default for most.

You can assure me that no one complained about the Personal Loot System? So if I google Personal Loot, I'm not going to turn up a bunch of complaints about it?


Cause the first page of results looks pretty bad:


https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comments/9k63pj/personal_loot_is_garbage/

https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comments/8f9ax1/personal_loot_the_real_problem/

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20769038533

https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wow/t/personal-loot-and-why-the-game-is-going-downhill/200492

https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comments/9dh2f5/personal_loot_is_already_a_problem/

https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comments/9cywga/forced_personal_loot_in_guild_groups_is_awful_and/

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20769539412

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20768737274

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20769688288

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20767589351

[aaezil]

Lets fundsmentally change the entire loot system because i want it to be easier to obtain x y z items

Nope, next.

[Prova]

30% of all earned pixels should go into a pool for those of us who are too lazy to camp them ourselves. Part of it can also pay for the pixel police who will make it so. We can also elect a pixel president who will run on serious pixel issues. I imagine that 2020 will be 'manastone for all'. But wait, you say. Only 35 manastones dropped this year, and we have thousands of needy Norrathians. Surely if we raise the pixel pool percentage just enough, everyone can have a manastone. RIGHT GUYS? RIGHT?

[Sillyturtle]

I can appreciate your passion and the spirit in which you propose this.


But it’s a TERRIBLE idea for this game.

No. Emphatically and resoundingly No.

[Lulz Sect]

sounds like world of warcraft

[Argh]

Denial
Anger
> Bargaining
Depression
Acceptance

[Polycaster]

If you scrubs put as much effort into playing the game as you do trying to rules-lawyer yourself into free gear, you'd probably still not have any loot because you suck that bad.

[Malikail]

If you scrubs put as much effort into playing the game as you do trying to rules-lawyer yourself into free gear, you'd probably still not have any loot because you suck that bad.

buahahahahaha :)

[Uuruk]

Not classic.

neither are lists dipshit

[Bardp1999]

Your idea sucks OP

[Rooj]

neither are lists dipshit

You... know this isn't true, right? Not our /list mechanically, but lists were 100% a part of EQ back then.

[Uuruk]

You... know this isn't true, right? Not our /list mechanically, but lists were 100% a part of EQ back then.

yes, afk checks are classic as shit.

[Mblake81]

https://i.imgur.com/5DjDspH.jpg

[Rooj]

yes, afk checks are classic as shit.

You made it sound like you meant lists in general, not anything about AFK checks. Say what you mean. And to be fair once again, if you are AFK and not actively killing a PH then you lose a camp. The list and AFK check here is just code enforced, rather than player and GM enforced. Not saying the AFK check couldn't use an adjustment, I'm sure it's annoying, I'd probably have preferred it just be that you need to be on every PH's hate list to keep the #1 spot on the list or something. Cause going AFK and only being at the screen at respawn time is pretty normal play.