cenobite451Member, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 87
edited January 2014
For what it's worth:
Given the choice, I hit need for an item I'll actually use (this includes shards and such - even if only as artifact fodder), greed if I'll sell it on the AH or pass it to an alt (epics, mainly), and pass on everything else.
Why anyone in their right mind would have a problem with this system I have no idea, but I've more or less given up trying to argue the point. So most of the time (with pre-made groups anyway) I end up just asking everyone not to pick things up in the middle of combat, so I don't hit shift+1 by mistake and have everyone thinking I'm a ninja...
Seriously though, I do wish people would pick up a dictionary and familiarize themselves with the definitions of "need" and "greed" - it'd make life so much simpler...
More than half of my ignore list is because of need/greed issues.
Either I choose need and refuse to greed (and get kicked) or because another player chooses need after agreeing to greed.
Every day, I make new enemies in game because of loot rolls.
Cryptic. You better do something about this soon.
How about this idea ....
No more need/greed/pass popups during combat. Distribute loot randomly.
Didn't get the loot you need? Then, sell what you got at the auction house and buy the loot you need.
Also, reduce the number of green and blue weapon/armor drops in epic dungeons.
So many green/blue drops in epic dungeons is annoying.
my guild does all need runs... everyone needs AD to upgrade companions, sell for zen, upgrade enchants and artifacts etc... PK is a perfect example of a dungeon that drops every classes stuff (though now there are HR's not sure hr stuff drops there). Sometimes as a TR i get lucky and get 3 drops from bosses, sometimes i get nothing, and every time i have joined a pug that says greed only i greed on the tr stuff only to have the cw's need on their stuff. So i make it very clear that i will not greed on TR stuff at the beginning. When we do Cn ring farms we all need until someone wins a ring, then wait until everyone else wins a ring before needing again.
Needing prevents ninja looters (and there are a ton of them in the game), if people want to ignore me for needing on my classes item (tr's items are cheapest on AH anyways) by all means ignore me now, i've done my share of greed runs and not once did it actually become all greed. I wont be duped again, its not worth my time. However i am lucky in that i don't have to pug very often, and usually its only for VT, and most of that is bop anyways...
I haven't read most comments here, but I once suggested that when you "need" something, it becomes bound. I think it serves the meaning of "need", most endgame players I meet agree on greed runs cause some classes loot are more valuable than others, they want greed runs to sell stuff on AH, "greed". And the argument that you can need the gear cause you need AD is weak, everyone always need AD.
I think that would stop ninjas, etc. And it's more fair to classes that gear are undervalued in market.
0
cartivaMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited January 2014
I generally need on the stuff for my class, greed on misc items like enhanc, pass only on other class stuff. Sometimes in the heat of battle I hit the wrong button when 4 loot windows block my whole screen. I usually don't realize it until after the dungeons is over and see what I got.
Keira Taletreader 60 GF 13.9 GS Erdan Loreweaver 60 CW 11.3 GS Mika Hawklight 60 DC 11.5 GS Rukia Stealthfoot 60 TR 11.5 GS Ka D'Argo 60 HR 13.7 GS Ivan Ironfist 60 GWF 11.6 GS
I've thought about this for some time. I would prefer a system I call "Take or Pass".
For non-class specific items: everyone auto greeds. Winner has choice to take item or pass. If they pass the choice of Take or Pass goes to next highest roll.
For class specific items: members who match class get first roll and winner to Take or Pass. If all matching classes for item pass (or if there is none) it goes to a roll for all remaining members of different classes.
They should weight drops by the classes in the party. I know they already do this when you're solo -- you get your own class-specific items a lot more often than class-specific items for other classes. So if the group is DC GWF CW CW CW you'd get three times as much CW stuff as DC or GWF stuff for the CWs to need on, and only a tiny amount of stuff for the missing classes. Then you could need for your class and it'd be fair regardless of party composition.
It'd also take care of the 'HR stuff is more expensive' argument, since the HR stuff is only dropping because the HR is there. If you want the expensive HR stuff, run with 5 HRs, and then you all can need. Simple!
If it's Blue & I can use it, I roll Need & equip it if I win.
If it's Green & I can use it, I roll Greed.
If I can't use it, I Pass no matter what color it is.
There's simply entirely too much Green stuff dropping in the world as it is, for me to care whether or not I win one in a dungeon
Fare you well
Let your life proceed by its own designs
Nothing to tell
Let the words be yours, I'm done with mine ...
0
bioshrikeMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,729Arc User
edited January 2014
The problem, IMO, is that we need a truly fair method of loot distribution, regardless of class - where everybody gets an equal chance at every sought-after drop. If all members of a team are contributing equally, then why shouldn't they get a chance at some boss drop. Now, if the drop is BoP, then I can understand maybe not letting other classes roll on it, but for BoE stuff, include everybody - which is why I'm an advocate for a "Greed only" or "Want/Pass" loot mode.
<::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::)xxxxxxxx(:::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> "Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
Everyone does get an equal chance. It's in the initial roll of the drop. RNG is the fairness in the loot roll, you guys are asking for more RNG. A roll on top of the intial roll.
Only time I see two rolls more fair in this system is if the loot tables had different percentages for particular pieces of gear.
Everyone does get an equal chance. It's in the initial roll of the drop. RNG is the fairness in the loot roll, you guys are asking for more RNG. A roll on top of the intial roll.
No - I am advocating that all players, regardless of class, have a chance at all items that drop - even if those items are for a different class than their own.
<::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::)xxxxxxxx(:::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> "Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
But what if someone truly needs it and he's playing the class it dropped for. He's going to ask for others to pass in a pug? Who may not even speak the same language?
So instead of not seeing a gear in endless runs, you can do 30 runs which drop it everytime to lose each roll against classes which don't wear it?
In order for your system to work, it would of had to be in there right away.
But what if someone truly needs it and he's playing the class it dropped for. He's going to ask for others to pass in a pug? Who may not even speak the same language?
So instead of not seeing a gear in endless runs, you can do 30 runs which drop it everytime to lose each roll against classes which don't wear it?
All I am asking for is an optional loot mode that is basically "Want or Pass" - with no consideration for item or class. This would be an OPTION - something that people could use IF they wanted to - it would in no way be forced upon anybody. What it would do, however, is to keep people honest when it comes to "greed only" runs that many teams currently partake in.
<::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::)xxxxxxxx(:::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> "Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
Optional would be fine. But its a setting you'd have to set immediately in the dungeon, and never after. Otherwise you have shenaningans the party lead could do.
Optional would be fine. But its a setting you'd have to set immediately in the dungeon, and never after. Otherwise you have shenaningans the party lead could do.
I definitely agree that it'd need to be set via some sort of vote option, and not be able to be changed by one player alone.
<::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::)xxxxxxxx(:::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> "Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
I personally say eliminate it entirely, have a system where everyone's loot is their own class or not, and have a system where you can trade items between players for a limited amount of time who were in the same group/dungeon that this loot fell from. That way everyone's happy and no one can ninja loot stuff that shouldn't be theirs.
Everyone does get an equal chance. It's in the initial roll of the drop. RNG is the fairness in the loot roll, you guys are asking for more RNG. A roll on top of the intial roll.
This true for a Party that consits of 5 different classes.
If you have 3 CW 1 DC 1 TR party the a CW would never get 100% win for some wearables, e.g. helmet, but would still have to compete against 2 other CWs.
I agree that in a 5 different class run that RNG has decided already. But not with only 4 or less different classes.
Imaginary Friends are the best friends you can have!
This true for a Party that consits of 5 different classes.
If you have 3 CW 1 DC 1 TR party the a CW would never get 100% win for some wearables, e.g. helmet, but would still have to compete against 2 other CWs.
I agree that in a 5 different class run that RNG has decided already. But not with only 4 or less different classes.
Actually this could be an incentive for the system - it encourages diverse groups rather than just stacking CWs.....
0
cenobite451Member, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 87
I haven't read most comments here, but I once suggested that when you "need" something, it becomes bound. I think it serves the meaning of "need", most endgame players I meet agree on greed runs cause some classes loot are more valuable than others, they want greed runs to sell stuff on AH, "greed". And the argument that you can need the gear cause you need AD is weak, everyone always need AD.
I think that would stop ninjas, etc. And it's more fair to classes that gear are undervalued in market.
I'd never thought of this, but it's a spectacular idea. It'd pretty much kill all incentive to cheat the system in one fell swoop, and get the need/greed system actually working as intended. Definitely got my vote.
(Also, I like mconosrep's point about group diversity.)
I'd like a party vote at the beginning to disable the need option permanently for the run. Better yet would be drops that were only for the player, like the round robin but actually random per person. The boss might drop an epic item for more than one person for instance. Eliminate the need to roll on anything and a ton of drama would disappear from dungeon runs.
"We have always been at war with Dread Vault" ~ Little Brother
Comments
Given the choice, I hit need for an item I'll actually use (this includes shards and such - even if only as artifact fodder), greed if I'll sell it on the AH or pass it to an alt (epics, mainly), and pass on everything else.
Why anyone in their right mind would have a problem with this system I have no idea, but I've more or less given up trying to argue the point. So most of the time (with pre-made groups anyway) I end up just asking everyone not to pick things up in the middle of combat, so I don't hit shift+1 by mistake and have everyone thinking I'm a ninja...
Seriously though, I do wish people would pick up a dictionary and familiarize themselves with the definitions of "need" and "greed" - it'd make life so much simpler...
Either I choose need and refuse to greed (and get kicked) or because another player chooses need after agreeing to greed.
Every day, I make new enemies in game because of loot rolls.
Cryptic. You better do something about this soon.
How about this idea ....
No more need/greed/pass popups during combat. Distribute loot randomly.
Didn't get the loot you need? Then, sell what you got at the auction house and buy the loot you need.
Also, reduce the number of green and blue weapon/armor drops in epic dungeons.
So many green/blue drops in epic dungeons is annoying.
Needing prevents ninja looters (and there are a ton of them in the game), if people want to ignore me for needing on my classes item (tr's items are cheapest on AH anyways) by all means ignore me now, i've done my share of greed runs and not once did it actually become all greed. I wont be duped again, its not worth my time. However i am lucky in that i don't have to pug very often, and usually its only for VT, and most of that is bop anyways...
I think that would stop ninjas, etc. And it's more fair to classes that gear are undervalued in market.
Erdan Loreweaver 60 CW 11.3 GS
Mika Hawklight 60 DC 11.5 GS
Rukia Stealthfoot 60 TR 11.5 GS
Ka D'Argo 60 HR 13.7 GS
Ivan Ironfist 60 GWF 11.6 GS
For non-class specific items: everyone auto greeds. Winner has choice to take item or pass. If they pass the choice of Take or Pass goes to next highest roll.
For class specific items: members who match class get first roll and winner to Take or Pass. If all matching classes for item pass (or if there is none) it goes to a roll for all remaining members of different classes.
Take or Pass makes the system faster.
It'd also take care of the 'HR stuff is more expensive' argument, since the HR stuff is only dropping because the HR is there. If you want the expensive HR stuff, run with 5 HRs, and then you all can need. Simple!
If it's Green & I can use it, I roll Greed.
If I can't use it, I Pass no matter what color it is.
There's simply entirely too much Green stuff dropping in the world as it is, for me to care whether or not I win one in a dungeon
Let your life proceed by its own designs
Nothing to tell
Let the words be yours, I'm done with mine ...
"Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
Only time I see two rolls more fair in this system is if the loot tables had different percentages for particular pieces of gear.
Fox Stevenson - Sandblast
Oh Wonder - Without You
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
- Dylan Thomas
No - I am advocating that all players, regardless of class, have a chance at all items that drop - even if those items are for a different class than their own.
"Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
So instead of not seeing a gear in endless runs, you can do 30 runs which drop it everytime to lose each roll against classes which don't wear it?
In order for your system to work, it would of had to be in there right away.
Fox Stevenson - Sandblast
Oh Wonder - Without You
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
- Dylan Thomas
All I am asking for is an optional loot mode that is basically "Want or Pass" - with no consideration for item or class. This would be an OPTION - something that people could use IF they wanted to - it would in no way be forced upon anybody. What it would do, however, is to keep people honest when it comes to "greed only" runs that many teams currently partake in.
"Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
Fox Stevenson - Sandblast
Oh Wonder - Without You
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
- Dylan Thomas
I definitely agree that it'd need to be set via some sort of vote option, and not be able to be changed by one player alone.
"Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
If you have 3 CW 1 DC 1 TR party the a CW would never get 100% win for some wearables, e.g. helmet, but would still have to compete against 2 other CWs.
I agree that in a 5 different class run that RNG has decided already. But not with only 4 or less different classes.
Actually this could be an incentive for the system - it encourages diverse groups rather than just stacking CWs.....
I'd never thought of this, but it's a spectacular idea. It'd pretty much kill all incentive to cheat the system in one fell swoop, and get the need/greed system actually working as intended. Definitely got my vote.
(Also, I like mconosrep's point about group diversity.)