Raiding as we go forward

[TheLuminaire]

... if we go for a points system, which from the discussion on the CA board I'm not sure is the common desire, then we should steal all the good brainpower invested by the Basiners, unless someone has a huge objection to some aspect of it. 

Why? 

We already raid with Basiners in Honorables, so they will be familiar with the system.  They are smart people and have spent much effort thinking about it, and living with it and if it works then that is an endorsement.
[right][snapback]86414[/snapback][/right]

Very good point. Why invent the wheel? Good to be consistent with the groups you raid with as well.

[Bolty]

This really is going to be the case with newcomers, or infrequent raiders no matter what kind of points system you have.  It's one of those things you just have to 'bite the bullet' with.[right][snapback]86410[/snapback][/right]

And as a newcomer to the CA/Lurkers raids, whenever I'd get there, I wouldn't expect to win anything as a newcomer.

A) it wouldn't be fair to those who have paid their dues making my trip possible, and
B) i'd be having a heck of a fun time just BEING there.

Do point systems suck? Yeah, pretty much. Are they a necessary evil? I think so. If IA claims that they can successfully raid without such a system, maybe we should inquire how they do it.

-Bolty

Edit: damn emoticons!

[LochnarITB]

Yes, I take a deep breath when I give away items worth 20g, 50g, 100g -- but I remember it is a game and I can replace (in time) anything I've gifted. The key is that we all know that an item we are hording in our banks isn't helping anyone. We should all have an understanding that our group goals are primary to selling, or hording something.

[right][snapback]86362[/snapback][/right]

An example of this happened for me Saturday(?) after the raid. I had won a lava core (I was surprised because I didn't even see the item come up or the roll). I searched for uses for the lava core for Lochnar. For whatever reason, I didn't find any. I was at the AH but couldn't bring myself to list it. I mentioned in guild chat that I was feeling guilty. I was informed that there is indeed an item to be crafted, the flarecore mantle, fire resist high stat shoulders that would be great. However, at this stage in our MC progress, it would seem to me that fire resist is much more critical for tanks. If we can get the other mats to get something crafted for at least the MT, I would certainly put my core in the pool. It isn't doing anything but taking up one of my in demand bank spaces right now. Of course, I would love to have the shoulders, but they don't serve the group nearly as much as tank fire resist. It would also be an eternity to get the rest of the mats, including 3 more of the lava cores.

As to a point system in general, I don't see any way we are going to get around it. Since I had won the arcanist boots from the first Luci kill, I had intended to pass on any mage gear that dropped until I had the feeling that several mages had gotten stuff, although I can't define when I would have felt proper in jumping back into the pool for rolls. However, I don't expect other people to volunteer out and certainly wouldn't look down on anyone for not doing so. Also, at this point, I feel that people are grumbling a little too early. We have not had enough drops to even begin calling any distribution unfair. Even looking at Anadrol's wins, it can be argued that it is for the good of the group that he has better items (lucky %^%^&! :P ).

[Tuftears]

We already raid with Basiners in Honorables, so they will be familiar with the system.  They are smart people and have spent much effort thinking about it, and living with it and if it works then that is an endorsement.

Minor point of order, the BRP system is in active use by Tichondrius Basiners, but it may not be that familiar to Stormrage Basiners - I wouldn't expect to be able to give the average Basin person on Stormrage a quiz on what the BRP system is and expect them to get it all right. Whatever system we decide to use, we should plan to teach it to all our raid members, whether Basin or Lurkers or Carpe Aurum.

Some SR Basiners don't make a habit out of reading the forums either. They just prefer to go by what they see in-game.

[Quark]

According to IA's webpage:

7.

Loot System.

In Aeternum uses a council system that comprises Members, Officers, and the Guild Leaders.

A private loot channel will be set up, and will contain up to 3 officers and 2 random members. In the event that less than 3 officers are online, random members will be asked to fill empty spots. We hope that such a council will minimize bias and avoid questionable assignments.

Here are the factors (in order of priority) that will be used in the decision process:

  1. Attendance - Loot will be most useful to the guild if it is used often.
  2. Dedication - Those who go above and beyond should be rewarded.
  3. Amount of loot rewarded recently - Loot should be distributed equally to those that consistently attend and are dedicated, unless the item is in high demand.
  4. Current item - If the items is only a slight upgrade for someone, than it should go to someone else who has a greater need.

Doesn't sound so bad by itself, but you could see how loot ends up for newcomers/low attendance people. Don't forget IA expects a certain amount of attendance, and we don't.

[Kevin]

According to IA's webpage:
Doesn't sound so bad by itself, but you could see how loot ends up for newcomers/low attendance people.  Don't forget IA expects a certain amount of attendance, and we don't.
[right][snapback]86429[/snapback][/right]

I was talking to some IA members today and they do have a hidden point system. As I understand it there are numbers that are assisgned to those priorities to help keep them straight. Points are never subtracted though they are just weighed against loots already won. It's not a traditional point system but numeric values are used to help make the decision.

I personally like an idea like this as well which is why I was talking to IA members about it. It also plays a bit to our alliance set up. Guild Master (or designated member) from Lurkers, CA, HH, Forces of Will, the Basin, whoever else get to do the decision stuff.

Our current system will continue to work (and the status quo is what will happen tomorrow night as well regardless) and may continue to work forever, though since I've had grumbles about it already I'm not as optimistic about it.

I also wonder about people like me and Bun-Bun who have in fact taken 2 different chars into the raids. Taranna has been in Onyxia as much, if not more than Gnolack and I think they have the same number of runs in MC. A straight point system would pretty much have to be character based I would think or else I could run with Taranna 8 times in a row then spend all my points with Gnolack. So if we do something like IA does that counts for my dedication regardless of who I take but only Gnolack or Taranna gets attendance stuff or something. Sure if Gnolack may not be there but Telsak always will Telsak should have a priority on the tank gear. If I get no consideration that GG is there regardless of char then I could end up in a situation where all the warriors and all the druids are getting stuff ahead of me even though GG is there every night. And in a way that makes sense and I don't think I would get too bitter about it, but I'm not the only one in that boat. Dragoon, Tal, Lissa, Bun-Bun, and Treesh have 2 capped chars each that are part of the alliance. Though I think Bun and I are the only ones who have run both of our capped chars so far. So that is something to think about in this case. I have actually decided who I was going to take simply based on who was already there. It's been Gnolack some nights, it's been Taranna others. Though it's becoming more Taranna for Onyxia and Gnolack for MC.

Anyway just some rambles. Again. :)

[Skandranon]

I was talking to some IA members today and they do have a hidden point system.  As I understand it there are numbers that are assisgned to those priorities to help keep them straight.  Points are never subtracted though they are just weighed against loots already won.  It's not a traditional point system but numeric values are used to help make the decision.

That's true. I should have clarified: statistics are kept so that the members who end up in the loot channel can look up the attendance and previous loots in order to decide according to the criteria. But, as you said, points are not deducted or bid or anything; they're just sort of a measure of dedication, since no member can be expected to perfectly recall which other members were or weren't there (and what they did or did not get) on a large number of previous raids. Is it a point system? I wouldn't call it that.

I personally like an idea like this as well which is why I was talking to IA members about it.  It also plays a bit to our alliance set up.  Guild Master (or designated member) from Lurkers, CA, HH, Forces of Will, the Basin, whoever else get to do the decision stuff.
[right][snapback]86438[/snapback][/right]

While I personally think the loot council is the best loot system I've ever seen in use, I'm not sure it plays to the guild alliance quite as much as you think. Especially in a council appointed as one member from each guild, there's enormous potential for drama; after all, guilds are of different sizes and bring a different contribution to the raid, and one or more guilds may feel shorted on representation and loot. If there's a multiple-way fight over a particularly prized piece of loot, like the Staff of Dominance, it may very well be that each council member votes for their own guildmate, resulting in a massive tie. Then there's collusion and quid pro quo votes. And even if all the guildmasters are upright and honest and impartial (which, I hasten to say, is very likely with the quality of player you have) the potential is there for some bitter member to accuse the council of any of the previous potential abuses and ignite a drama firestorm.

The loot council relies on the total abnegation of the "loot-for-me" instinct in favour of the less common "loot-for-the-guild". For you it is slightly harder: one must push aside "loot-for-me" and "loot-for-my-guildies" in favour of whatever the loot council decides is right, which some of you may not choose to do. There's nothing wrong about it, and it's not, although some might want to portray it that way, more selfish, either.

You are a coalition of guilds and you are that way because you want to maintain separate guild identities, to a certain degree. Again: nothing wrong with it, and it's even admirable, in a sense. But you do need to be aware of the additional difficulties it brings up. Yes, it may very well be that every single person in the alliance is happy when someone gets loot, no matter who that person is or what guild tag they wear - but I wouldn't count on it. And given your structure, they are not "wrong" for feeling that way; indeed, there is no right or wrong where such things are concerned, only the inevitability that some will feel differently from others. Any system you use, loot council or not, will have to find mechanisms to resolve it.

[Brista]

I've been reading this discussion with interest as I get closer to raiding on my EU server

What I don't understand is how class conflicts are resolved

Suppose Stabby Dagger of Uberness drops which will be incredible on a Rogue, good on a Dual Wield Warrior and a noticeable upgrade for a Hunter

Does the master looter call for Rogues first, without the other classes getting a sniff? I can see the logic of that but it has the downside that as a Hunter, once you have your gun and your set there's no point going because you'll never get any decent melee weapon over the hordes of others ahead of you in the priority system

[Alrin]

Well quite frankly, if a uber dagger drops on an MC run, I would be very disappointed in seeing a hunter get it. It's not that hunters dont need loving too, its just that there are soo many items in MC that are clearly NOT for rogues. Or they get prioritized away to other classes etc.
I would prefer putting it in the hands of a class that would use it to the best of its ability.
Even though a hunter can equip it and gain nice stat boosts, the dps would be a moot point for them, they got their ranged weapon.

So in that case, I would only allow rogues to roll on it and other classes after that if the rogues all pass / have it whatever.

But that's just me.

[martini]

When we went through all of this with The Basin, I was initially oposed to a point system. However, the absolute fact of the bell curve distribution of random numbers, which ends up with most people somewhere in the middle, and a few really, really rich people, and a few really, really poor people made me realize that /random isn't my definition of "fair". I'd hate to be on the rich side, looking at someone who's put in just as much as me and is on the poor side.

To mirror what Tuftears said, the BRP system is more often in use by our Tichondrius guild, but they use it all the time, with good results. It also went through a long discussion process, and was the best thing we could come up with.

With respect to what GG said about alts, right now the points are account-based. However, people are asked to choose one raiding character, and concentrate on gearing that character up. This is for a couple reasons: one, it's better for the raid to have you with one great char and someone else with a great char, both of whom come on the run, than it is to have you with 2 great chars, of whom only one can possibly come on the run. Secondly, it's more fair to the people playing the game if every person gets around the same amount of loot, even if they don't have time to get 8 characters to 60. However, some people, for the good of the raid, choose whatever character of theirs is most needed, and that's appreciated, so people can bring an extra warrior when the raid is short on them and still earn points for the mage that is the delight of their heart.

With that said, no matter the loot system, I'll be trying to make as many of these raids as I can, as they have been well-run and a ton of fun. :D

[kandrathe]

You don't need to be in MC to have these issues.

If I'm on a DM-North run and a Barbarous Blade drops I would understand if any 2 hander melee class wanted to roll on it. Now if the Stabbity Dagger had +20 agility, +20 Stamina, +60 RAP and 2% chance for Critical Strike, then the Rogues might understand why a Hunter would want to roll on it.

I'm praying our Rogues get a chance at this one; Core Hound Tooth from Majordomo's chest.

[Drasca]

Now if the Stabbity Dagger had +20 agility, +20 Stamina, +60 RAP and 2%
[right][snapback]86907[/snapback][/right]

Of course, your best Hunter PvE weapons would be choppy 1H axe (of Rinjin I think) from Strat-Baron side with +15 agilty and I think +1 crit from Maleki.

[Pesmerga]

Of course, your best Hunter PvE weapons would be choppy 1H axe (of Rinjin I think) from Strat-Baron side with +15 agilty and I think +1 crit from Maleki.
[right][snapback]86918[/snapback][/right]

Bone Slicing Hatchet, 13 Agil, 5 Stam, from Maleki.

I want two. :)

[kandrathe]

Bone Slicing Hatchet, 13 Agil, 5 Stam, from Maleki.

I want two. :)
[right][snapback]86919[/snapback][/right]

I use Mirah's Song and Bone Slicing Hatchet when I solo, but I'm collecting the mats for Katrin to make me 2x Dawn's Edge because +2% crit chance will increase my ranged damage much more than +22 agility.

For raids +stamina is far more important now. So I have a Battlefell Sabre of the Monkey and the Bone Slicing Hatchet when I raid.

[Pesmerga]

Idea #4: Loot List

I really like this idea, honestly.

Ten people in the raid (for simplicity sake)

Darian, Mio, Ramala, Garrin, Tal, Flyndar, Aleri, Gnolack, Mirajj, Taha

Something Roguely drops. Darian can't use it, neither can Mio, but Ramala wants it, and since he's next in the list, it's his) He moves to the back of the line.

Darian, Mio, Garrin, Tal, Flyndar, Aleri, Gnolack, Mirajj, Taha, Ramala

Uber Hunter Gear drops. Both Mirajj and Mio want it. Mio is highest on the list. He wins! :P To the back of the list he goes.

Darian, Garrin, Tal, Flyndar, Aleri, Gnolack, Mirajj, Taha, Ramala, Mio

Hopefully that makes sense to everyone. First person in the list gets first stab at it, and if he doesnt want it, it trickles down to the next person and so on.

The fun part (the part that I like) is what happens when new people are added, or someone is missing.

Tuftears joins the raid, and gets added to the back of the list. Mirajj has to work, and is not in the raid, but does not get removed from the list. This will allow Tuftears to move up the list as more people get loot, but will not deny Mirajj's spot. If everyone ahead of Mirajj got loot, and so did Taha, the list would like as follows.

Mirajj, Ramala, Mio, Tuftears, Darian, Garrin, Tal, Flyndar, Aleri, Gnolack, Taha

So, you are not penalized for missing raids due to prior commitments, and those behind you and new still have the same chance at getting the phat loot.

Comments? Questions? Concerns? Free Pie?

[martini]

We discussed a similar idea here.

Basically, the list is virtually the same as the zero-sum point system we have now, with the key exception being that on the list system, you'd move down to the bottom of the list no matter how good the item was that you looted, whereas with a point system, you can say that one item is worth 5 points due to suckiness, and one is worth 1,000 points because it is the uber item of pwnage. :) Of course, the way that the list system makes up for this is to give people the choice of whether to move down the list for the item, or to pass it along and keep their top spot. But, if the people at the top are really fixated on one piece of loot (hunter/priest epic quest starters from Domo, for example), the people at the bottom of the list could very well rake in a pile of goodies without giving anything up.

The main issues that came up in the discussio were how to slot new people into the list (not just guests, but what about people in allied guilds who have just capped and geared up to be able to raid?). Also, people with alts can game the system a bit, not sure how big of a deal that is.

If you'd like to see all of the loot systems we discussed, they're mostly on page 3 of the Raid Leader Discussion board. Basically, they were: stick with /random 1000, "the list", weighted rolls, and a zero-sum no-bid point system, which is what the raid leaders ultimately decided upon. Personally, I prefer the point system.

[Icebird]

In operation a zero-sum DKP system operates pretty much like the loot list described. Once you win an item, you will usually drop to the back of the queue to get a new one.

In a non-inflationary DKP system, newcomers will actually enter in the middle of the list (since over time you would expect half the raid to have positive points and half to have negative points). They would be behind people who have been raiding before and not won anything, but ahead of players who had recently won an item.

And how you determine the initial order of the list? It would suck to be seeded #40....

There really is no perfect system. It's simply a matter of finding the system with the least flaws for your particular group.

Chris

[LochnarITB]

I actually like the idea, but I see two problems immediately. First, how do you order the initial list? With 40 people, being the last person is a significant setback to getting something nice. Second, if someone is there the first time and then doesn't raid with us for quite some time, their name will float to the top. If they then raid once again, they are now at the top and can grab the first juicy piece that drops, even though others have put much more time into getting us built up. Oh, and a third, how do greens, vendor trash and crafting items fit into the scheme. If we used it, I would think /random would be best for the green and vendor stuff and that crafting items would go into the avarice pool, possibly with a crafting council set up to determine who gets what crafted item next. Just my $.02.

[oldmandennis]

I'll make this quick since this thread is quite long and I don't have a personal intrest.

/agree with Loch about the problem of missing players and the loot list idea. Especially with such a casual group.

Loot council sounds like a good idea if people have absolute trust in the leaders. A couple of accusations of favortism could tear the guild apart. It might be very very hard with multiple guilds involved. Often even if the leaders are getting along, the underlings might not.

Major problem as I see with zero-sum: no reward for learning encounters. At some point much of MC will be cake, but you will be banging your head against BWL. The people doing the hard work in BWL getting the strats down will recieve no reward. Also, if items have a set, significant price, eventually the only person who doesn't have on might not want to pay the price. D/E for the loss. Bidding with a real but trivial minimum fixes that, but adds 5 min to each encounter.

Non zero systems don't inflate indefinatly. As people pile more points on, they bid more on the good stuff, knocking down the pile of points and the prices. It fluctuates, but it doesn't inflate forever. E.g. from our system that works pretty well: Attendance is worth 1 point and boss kill is worth 1. Typical run kills 4 bosses, and yields 10 or so epics. 40 ppl x 5 points = 200 points into the system / 10 items = 20 points per item. That's about what most things go for. The first warrior piece after a long drought might go for more, and underrepresented classes stuff goes for less. The highest was a Warrior set chestpice, for 40.

You shouldn't do it in Excel, it should be visible to the entire raid. My guild alliance uses eqdkp. It requires php and mysql. It's pretty cool for users, no idea how hard it is to setup/update. I think I've heard it supports zero sum too.
Homepage
Example

[Olon97]

The less frequently mentioned element of any of these systems is whatever your pointst system does, once you reach critical mass, the invite system can play a role.

For instance, on the Tich Basin runs, a class with too many people for a reasonable "mix" will see less raid time than a class that's still in shortage state. If the two classes both had people interested in a particular roll, then the people who have never been waitlisted against their own will will have a mini-inflation advantage over those who have taken turns sitting out raids.

You can turn this element around for things like BWL (or even MC), something like "first 25-30 spots reserved for those experienced with the encounter", making those who haven't spent a decent amount of time learning the fights fight over 10-15 remaining spots. The incentive for the lootless "learning" runs, is a small extra preference for the invite list when the learning runs turn into "farming" runs.

I'm a little suspicious of "participation points" inflation being countered by heavy bidding. It could just as easily be amplified by collusion and light bidding. Bottom line is in an inflationary system, a new participant is very likely to come in below almost all veteran participants, even if some of those veterans have had a large amount of recent loot. Have never been in an inflationary points system, so that's just speculation.