Scout Roll Agreement 2017

[Savok]

I would like to think that I'm in a big guild and I will definitely say that I have won my fair share of wins (looking for 1 more!), but every roll I have won has been looted by myself. With the proposal of 'you win you do what you want' I can definitely see the bigger guilds coming in to out-roll (by numbers) smaller groups or individuals, and/or those who don't need or want to greed sell their win. If you think there are a lot of people at Scout now just wait for the numbers to explode. Keeping the roll 'you win you loot' will keep these numbers down for those who actually want the upgrade. Once I get another bracer I never want to see Scout again.

I do love seeing an unguilded toon who otherwise would have no chance of winning against the giants on their own come up with a pretty decent piece of gear as much as seeing a raid level toon looking to max out their resists. I'll congratulate either just the same on a job well done and notate +10 hours for the next cycle.

To me turning up to an item you don't need is the same as those who farm AC rings or Fungis or such - you know the person who is there every f$%#ing day to farm multiple drops to sell when they could just let the camp go to someone else who needs it. It becomes a vicious cycle of person A farms item to sell and person B has to farm pp to buy item from person A causing person C who would exp/use drops person B is killing to go and kill player D's mobs etc.

It's a game, play to have fun but don't play at someone else's expense. Grow the F$%k up.

[loramin]

It seems to me this could all be solved very simply. When you agree to the terms of the roll, you should have to specify whether or not you are rolling for yourself. This would have no effect on your winning the roll. Why? Because the roll is about avoiding autofire and similar macro clicking issues, nothing else.

So why declare that it's not for you? Because a lot of people who happily help with the fight after may not want to help someone doing it for a friend, or doing it to sell. If they're going to help someone, it seems reasonable that they should get to know who they're ultimately helping.

Maybe I'm missing something, but that seems like the option that will satisfy the most people. Equally important, it would actually be viable (since, as we have to remember, everything about this is "opt-in"), because as part of a valid player-made agreement the GMs could intervene if someone lies.

[Kesselring]

Originally Posted by Legidias [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

As they should be able to, since rolling only gives you rights to the mob. Theres no reason this one encounter is different. Everyone has earned their chance to roll, and no one is entitled to special benefits. This is not your guild showing up to raid a mob for your benefit, this is random people coming together to make it a fair shot for everyone involved.



I have stated multiple times I have not ever won a charisa roll. I do not have a bob / talisman on my main or any alts. I still believe mob belongs to roller and any way they want to do loot belongs to them. Because this is completely fair and unbiased. You do not get to tell someone what they do with loot. I personally do not get any benefit from this. However, I am not greedy and do not feel self entitled to loot which everyone else here has spent time to try and get, selling the rights to loot or no.

It's not telling someone what they do with loot, its them getting the loot for an upgrade. That's how people want it, I'm just trying to get you to understand that. It isn't some sort of DKP system that just because you put in time you get to decide what u want to do with the item you spend your DKP on. Anyways, I don't care either way. If we gonna let other people loot it if their friend wins the roll then I'll start showing up for my friends, no biggie to me either way. Like I said I'm just trying to tell you why people think it should be this way and not the other.

[ErlickBachman]

Originally Posted by Cecily [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The poll is "Do you agree to roll on scout?" The thread and OP are talking about something else entirely. The yes votes aren't necessarily on his side, like mine for example. Whole thing feels like a dirty EULA.

Thats because it is a dirty EULA from someone who wants the server to bend the knee to his/her lack of skill in a 18 year-old elf sim.

[Legidias]

You dont win this by exclusion (as also IRL several points in history have shown). You exclude people from being able to sell, then they show up with a separate roll to sell and it turns into clickfest.

No one here yet on the arbitrary loot side has answere why YOU deserve it more than someone who has showed up to just as many as you have, even though they might have won it already.

No, it is entirely people trying to decide what others can do with loot from a mob. It is not about upgrade, it is about people who feel self entitled to loot. If youre gonna argue about its not about time, then sure, you have even 1 less leg to stand on. THen you have no arguement whatsoever as to who """"deserves"""" loot.

And again, if you can convince 20 people to show up to roll for you, good job on having 20 peopel willing to sacrifice their time for you.

I understand your side as well, and Im trying to calmly explain to YOU how it is a biased way to do loot. This is not a loot council raid, you do not get to designate who gets loot.

[Zemus]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It seems to me this could all be solved very simply. When you agree to the terms of the roll, you should have to specify whether or not you are rolling for yourself. This would have no effect on your winning the roll. Why? Because the roll is about avoiding autofire and similar macro clicking issues, nothing else.

So why declare that it's not for you? Because a lot of people who happily help with the fight after may not want to help someone doing it for a friend, or doing it to sell. If they're going to help someone, it seems reasonable that they should get to know who they're ultimately helping.

Maybe I'm missing something, but that seems like the option that will satisfy the most people. Equally important, it would actually be viable (since, as we have to remember, everything about this is "opt-in"), because as part of a valid player-made agreement the GMs could intervene if someone lies.

+1

Don’t know if I have ever ran into loramin in game, but his arguments are so damn reasonable. Big fan, big fan.

[Legidias]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It seems to me this could all be solved very simply. When you agree to the terms of the roll, you should have to specify whether or not you are rolling for yourself. This would have no effect on your winning the roll. Why? Because the roll is about avoiding autofire and similar macro clicking issues, nothing else.

So why declare that it's not for you? Because a lot of people who happily help with the fight after may not want to help someone doing it for a friend, or doing it to sell. If they're going to help someone, it seems reasonable that they should get to know who they're ultimately helping.

Maybe I'm missing something, but that seems like the option that will satisfy the most people. Equally important, it would actually be viable (since, as we have to remember, everything about this is "opt-in"), because as part of a valid player-made agreement the GMs could intervene if someone lies.

Sounds fair. Most assholes showing up to sell disk rights have kill force anyways.

[Pokesan]

you see, the people objecting to my rolling to sell are extremely self entitled. furthermore,

[loramin]

Originally Posted by teija [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Loramin's compromise seems like a good middle ground tho people can just lie.

In theory they can't though. Let's say Bob agrees to the roll conditions, and says he's rolling for himself, then he wins the roll and gets help with the fight. Then Bob gives the loot rights to someone else (friend, guildmate, person who gave him plat, whoever). If anyone sees it happen they can petition.

Since Bob entered in to a player made agreement when he told everyone "please help me this is for myself", and since the staff has stated (I believe) that they will enforce such agreements ... plus since there's a general rule about not defrauding people (and Bob essentially defrauded everyone who helped him), in theory he would suffer consequences.

[Canelek]

Aside from gaining CoV faction and walking to quest giver within Skyshrine, is there actually any effort involved prior to the turn in?

As for the actual encounter, if I understand correctly, the folks rolling on the opportunity help with the encounter, since it is rather silly to have to bring a group in the current landscape.

So, with this quest being extremely short (faction work aside) and simple, what is the hangup aside from potential profitability (plat or RMT)? Despite the very nice quest rewards, let's not pretend these items take extreme effort (or DKP) to achieve.

That being said, I am all for a roll and all for the winner of said roll doing whatever he wants with it just like every other casual greed item. It may not be fair with the /more dedicated/ players bringing their hairy pals along to weigh the odds, but it is not like one has to being a group along to have a shot, and it is sure as shit better than competing a click with some jackass with a macro-app thingy.

And fair is not exactly classic. Classic is the all about the "vehement dedication" of playtime and general neckbeard strength.

On Veeshan there was this one guy named Eudas who 6-boxed content and pissed off most people. But at the end of the day, dude had six boxes going around 1999-2001 or so, which was pretty damn dedicated. Dude probably had toenails entwining with the pepperoni-laced neckbeard hair due to said dedication.

That was certainly classic. Weird as shit, but classic.

What were we talking about?

Er

Yeah