Loot system part 2

[Menedil]

Currently we're trialling using rep levels in ZG to measure attendance and base loot priority for epic loot on this. It's a nice and easy way of seeing who's raided enough to deserve loot. Unfortunately this wont work in AQ20 as you can get CC rep from a lot of other things, so we need to adapt the system a little.

The principle is the same, a main character has to do x amount of raids before they can get priority, and a alt character has to do x+y amount of raids before they can get an equal priority on epic loot. With roughly 3k rep per ZG clearance, that means a main must raid ZG 3 times, and an alt 6 times before being able to get epic loot (or something like that)

To make it work for both while not adding too much effort in what we do, it could be incorporated into the signup system which is going to be re-written specifically for our needs anyway, and adding such features wont add much extra work as its just a matter of writing a few new db queries and some copy and paste work.

The proposal is:

For someone to sign up, they get one "attendance point" (AP).
If they enter the instance, they receive a second AP.
If they are for in for the whole raid, they receive a third AP.

If we are to make it consistant with rep levels, then 9 AP would be needed for a main to be able to roll on epic, and 21 for an alt. Attendance points are separate for each instance.

The only extra work that would need to be done by raid leaders is notifying the system if a raider leaves early. All people who signup receive one point, people who are approved receive a total of three, unless they are marked as having left early - and we rarely have people leave due to the speed we can clear the instances.

Other loot priorities:

Recipe/Plans/Etc: The first drop of each of these will go to a player of commander rank or higher. If the recipe is BOP and no commander or higher with the required tradeskill is present, a trusted member will be chosen.

ZG Enchantment items priority:

Equivalent AP as per current rep level requirements, revered for first enchantment item, exalted for second. Note that this is for the enchantment quest item, not the enchantment itself, so people who actually paid for librams etc before the patch and put extra work in are not put at a disadvantage - they put extra effort in which did not stop anyone else getting an enchant. Mains have priority over alts.
When a person allready has 2 enchants he cannot get another enchant for 3 months. This way when we get tier 3 or tier 2 for RG2 they still can get another enchant but not immediatly.

ZG/AQ Quest Item reward loot:

People with required reputation for the loot get priority for the items.

ZG trinket:

We made a few changes in the rules. If you have 3 parts you still have priority. The first 2 parts will be given out on a reputation basis. This so members who are exalted have a better change of getting the trinket.

AQ20 Skill Books:

Priority will be based on AP also.

Blue Items : No Priorities.

Items will not be given class priorities (other than what is already specified in the item descriptions), however if such a situation as a rogue wanting a +healing cloak arises, exceptions can be made.

AQ enchants/plans etc

We will give those to the officers first cause they are the ones who will be in the guild the most and are most attachted to the guild. This way we have the least risk to loose enchants like what happened with snowstormer.

1 last point: When a person signs up and doesnt show up without a valid reason we think he/she should get some penalty after 3 times in say 3 months. A way of punishment would be to reset their points to 0. Though it can be harsh, but it will reinforce the system. Plz keep in mind the "punishment" topic is still under discussion.

The timetable for this is 1 week in the commanders forum then 1-2 weeks in the raiding forum for the members to see before we implement it.

Edit: A few small parts added at the zg enchants part and at the bottom (the punishment and the timetable topic) Also added the aq enchants plans point, also ZG trinket thing has been added.

[Bastet]

Nice system. theres just a few points i found

If we are to make it consistant with rep levels, then 9 AP would be needed for a main to be able to roll on epic, and 18 for an alt. Attendance points are separate for each instance

i think that should be 21 points for an alt if it would be for the correct rep level

And theres one more thing, but ill ask you/luna IG

[Menedil]

youre right about the 21 point thing was pretty tired when typing that up. The exact numbers can be tweaked a little perhaps, rep level was just convenient at the time.

[Padding]

Yes i like the attendance point system. Seems very fair for all the people.

Now 1 major point i think you might wanna se if you can implement is to have some points you can give for the different bosses. If we want to down ossirian on a regular basis, it could be interesting to see if it helps giving people some extra points (or something) to actually put the extra effort to down ossirian. Many times we have seen people leave before the last boss, and maybe it could help if we give them something extra. I know that this is getting close to DKP and as i also wrote earlier, DKP might just be the most fair thing of it all

People that signs up and doesnt show up (dont make a valid reason fair since they can just say that the internet was down) should be decuted the points that they might've reached that evening i think. So they could loose a run's points if they doesnt show up.

Items will not be given class priorities (other than what is already specified in the item descriptions), however if such a situation as a rogue wanting a +healing cloak arises, exceptions can be made.

If i understand this correctly, this might be a major mistake. If this also concerns regular loot, then we might have people wanting an item which we dont think is good for that class. Therefore you should have a "guideline" of the big items (only epics) for them to have priority. It should be a bit broad tho, so both healing and dps-paladins for example, can get the items they want.

We really dont want the old example with UG getting a dagger he could use, when obviously it was better for a rogue

ZG Enchantment items priority:

Equivalent AP as per current rep level requirements, revered for first enchantment item, exalted for second. Note that this is for the enchantment quest item, not the enchantment itself, so people who actually paid for librams etc before the patch and put extra work in are not put at a disadvantage - they put extra effort in which did not stop anyone else getting an enchant. Mains have priority over alts.
When a person allready has 2 enchants he cannot get another enchant for 3 months. This way when we get tier 3 or tier 2 for RG2 they still can get another enchant but not immediatly.

ZG/AQ Quest Item reward loot:

People with required reputation for the loot get priority for the items.

Yes ok, but where is the rules for the Trinket of ZG. Yes i know im a pain the ass for keep mentioning it, but lets face it... its one of the best things in the game (imo) and a lot of people really want that thing. At least im one of them really going for it, but alas my luck is not good, and next time im gonna ninja one of them, try to stop me  :devil:

The only extra work that would need to be done by raid leaders is notifying the system if a raider leaves early. All people who signup receive one point, people who are approved receive a total of three, unless they are marked as having left early - and we rarely have people leave due to the speed we can clear the instances

I beg the differ in AQ, unless it something new in the later runs. Usually people always says bye-bye around ossirian, and i want to penalise those leaving and give something extra for those that stick around to the kills

Hm... that seem to be all for now, i feel there was a lot other things i wanted to say but i cant remember just now

I'll be back to post later if it comes to me

[TeaLeaf]

Nice work.  The only things I would add are:

Padding, we usually do Ossirian early in the AQ raid, so if people leave to avoid Ossirian then they leave after only 3 bosses are downed.  

You need to add that recipes/enchants/plans etc go to the hierarchy first.  When all of those in charge have them then yes it can go to other members in the raid who can roll or rock for it whatever takes your fancy

TL.

[lunares]

If i understand this correctly, this might be a major mistake. If this also concerns regular loot, then we might have people wanting an item which we dont think is good for that class. Therefore you should have a "guideline" of the big items (only epics) for them to have priority. It should be a bit broad tho, so both healing and dps-paladins for example, can get the items they want.

We really dont want the old example with UG getting a dagger he could use, when obviously it was better for a rogue

In reply to your point here padding about priority about loot.
We have had some problems with ppl not using their common sense, cause that would solve a lot but ppl dont work like that.
I think you would like to hear that mene and me decided that id the hammer from ossirian drops we think the dps pallies can roll for it. We dont want to use the priority as much but sometimes with some ppl it is needed sadly.

lunares

[lunares]

Originally posted by TeaLeaf@Jul 3 2006, 01:42 PM
Nice work. The only things I would add are:

Padding, we usually do Ossirian early in the AQ raid, so if people leave to avoid Ossirian then they leave after only 3 bosses are downed.

You need to add that recipes/enchants/plans etc go to the hierarchy first. When all of those in charge have them then yes it can go to other members in the raid who can roll or rock for it whatever takes your fancy

TL.

[post=135070]Quoted post[/post]

[/b]

Good point TL has been added to the system.

[Padding]

In reply to your point here padding about priority about loot.
We have had some problems with ppl not using their common sense, cause that would solve a lot but ppl dont work like that.
I think you would like to hear that mene and me decided that id the hammer from ossirian drops we think the dps pallies can roll for it. We dont want to use the priority as much but sometimes with some ppl it is needed sadly.

Im not sure i understand the point you want to make here, but as i understand the loot rules you want to make, you are letting people get the items they can use, whether other classes are better for it. If thats correct, then i think there should be some guidelines to certain weapons who they are intended for. Kinda like we are looking at generally in all 40-man raids becoz of retribution paladins etc

[lunares]

Originally posted by Padding@Jul 3 2006, 05:02 PM
Im not sure i understand the point you want to make here, but as i understand the loot rules you want to make, you are letting people get the items they can use, whether other classes are better for it. If thats correct, then i think there should be some guidelines to certain weapons who they are intended for. Kinda like we are looking at generally in all 40-man raids becoz of retribution paladins etc

[post=135103]Quoted post[/post]

[/b]

This is what we are planning but the main thing for us is alt/main priority which we have solved by the attendance system. Also we want to rely on ppl as much as possible. Tbh if i see some ppl rolling for the sake of rolling (you will notice those after a while) well i am gonna be diplomatic :devil: . And ofc we will be discussing loot if its for "debatable" (lack of a better word) classes. But plz keep in mind we also need ppl to use their own common sense (yes i use that a lot lately) cause whatever system you think of it can be abused.
I hope this answers your question, if not lets talk about it on TS makes things generally a bit more easy to get the right words etc.

And a question to menedil here: If you make the system is it possible to manually add those points? cause the point padding made is a fair 1. If there will be a new instance or attendance is low we could offer bonus points then, which can boost morale.

lunares

[Padding]

Thx for explaining it for me.... i just wanted it to be totally clear, and now i get it and i agree with it

[Bastet]

Also had a good chat w/ mene, nice system allthough it might (will) need some little touch ups while actualy running (as most systems do)

[Menedil]

Originally posted by lunares@Jul 3 2006, 05:46 PM
And a question to menedil here: If you make the system is it possible to manually add those points? cause the point padding made is a fair 1. If there will be a new instance or attendance is low we could offer bonus points then, which can boost morale.

lunares

[post=135116]Quoted post[/post]

[/b]

yep, the way i have it planned this will be a feature.

edit: hoping to have something to show by the weekend that is in at least a semi-working state.

[lunares]

The commanders think they have most rules done now. We want to give the (field) marshalls 2 more days. Then we make this public for a week before implementing it.

Lunares

[Padding]

Im gonna repeat myself 1 more time.... please put up rules for the trinket. What would be fair would be something like this:

1. roll if you have 2 parts
2. roll if you have 1 part
3. roll if you have 0 parts (exhalted first)
4. roll if you have 0 parts (revered)
5. roll if you have 0 parts (honored)

Each week i (and probably a lot others) are "losing" the possibility to start collecting the trinket even tho we are exhalted and might've been for some time. That really isnt fair, so i would expect something like the above system ^^^

[Menedil]

ZG trinket:

We made a few changes in the rules. If you have 3 parts you still have priority. The first 2 parts will be given out on a reputation basis. This so members who are exalted have a better change of getting the trinket.