PDA

View Full Version : Random Reloaded v4 (loot system)



Stephanius
06-15-2009, 05:12 AM
Dear Tankspot users,

in an attempt to not only read a lot of useful information here but also provide some, I decided to share the loot system my guild has been using for a few years in the one or other form in WoW. Deciding on a loot system usually means one or more people looking at the alternatives that are our there, so I think that while our system is defenitely not for everyone, it may be worth throwing it out there. =]

Everyone has to tailor their loot system of choice to their guilds needs. My guild is huge (150+accounts) and over 10 years old (Ultima Online -> WoW). We have been clearing Naxx25 twice per week before Ulduar and are currently working on General Vezax in Ulduar25.

We have a core group of regular raiders and a bigger group of semi-regular raiders. Our raiders are split into four divisions: tank, magic dps (all damage casters), weapon dps (melee and hunters) and healing. Besides being useful for smooth operations, team setup and raid invites, this puts people who need the same or smiliar loot in the same team regardless of class.

Our system places all raiders in a rank, which influences their chances to win a roll of dice. Effectively, the dice of each raider are loaded in their favour if their division leader wants them to, hence the name. The reasons for this are twofold - performance and attendance (Example: If someone is not raiding regularly, giving them loot doesn't help the guild very much.).
We have at different times considered changing to some form of DKP or EPGP system, but the attached effort compared to the benefits have not convinced us.

The random element is both strength and weakness:
It is a strength since the lottery effect is shown to be very powerful - people repeat quests or farming for ages with even a slight chance of a reward they want. In a dkp system the outcome for a drop can be certain up front.
It is a weakness, because sometimes the result is not what one wants to see.

So, without further introduction, let me present the rules we use:


IV. Looting on official guild raids
We distribute loot with the optimal use of the loot for the guild in mind, but keep things as simple and equal as possible. On official raids we use the in-game loot mode 'Master Looter' with threshold 'epic'. The master looter will offer loot in raid chat and distribute it with the master looter function to the inventory of the person who won it according to the rules set forth below.

Random Reloaded v4
In WoW, the person who is gear-wise the least likely to contribute to the raid is the one with the highest chances of winning loot, simply because each item is a potential upgrade. The veteran raider who is looking for that one trinket, armor piece or weapon is much less likely to get their wish on any given run. What we are doing now is preventing that this situation which we can not change has an unnecessary harsh impact on us as a community - because we are again in a situation where it is needed. Instead of tallying up points in an arbitrary system to give priority on loot to people who have the seniority, we use a much simpler system to achieve the same goal without the bookkeeping.

Everyone can roll on every item they need. Depending on your rank you have a different rolling range. Your rank is determined by what you are contributing to the raid. This allows us to quickly and fairly determine who gets an item. Please note that this system does not give absolute priority to anyone, its just relative priorities between different ranks. The highest roll wins.

http://www.emerald-knights.com/images/WotLK/rrv4.jpg
Note: Either TS does not support BBcode tables or I am just too stupid. Sorry.

Exceptions:


Exceptional rarity. If the rarity of an item make /random not reasonable, for example a legendary item or critical recipes or keys, the raid leader or an officer may intervene and distribute the item outside of the loot system.
Suitability. If the person who did win the roll has a significantly worse use of the item than others who were interested, for example an item that is not designed to be used for the class and spec of the winner.
Off-spec. The needs of non-raid spec or activities are secondary to raid spec need. /roll 1 indicates off-spec interest in a drop.
Every Paladin, Shaman and Druid* has to pick one off-spec (the other classes have no off-spec or only one available anyway).
* Feral druids are allowed off-spec rolls on cat or bear gear respectively in addition to their off-spec choice between resto and balance.
Alts. Generally, there will be no alternate characters on official runs, but if there are any for any reason, their need is secondary to the need of the main characters, but superior to the main-character's off-spec use. /roll 2 indicates an alt's interest in an item for raid spec.
Bind-on-Equip. BoE items are not available for off-spec. They are only available for alternate characters if the character is present in the raid when they drop.
Buyout. If a BoP drop has not been claimed by anyone according to the rules set forth above, it is available for purchase at the cost of the disenchanting equivalent.



You can find the whole thing here:
http://www.emerald-knights.com - EK Public Forum - Guild Rules (http://www.emerald-knights.com/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=28&topic=11520.0)

That's it. I hope this may be useful to someone.
Of course I am also happy to hear what you guys think of it. =]

Cheers, Steph.

GravityDK
06-15-2009, 06:20 AM
That's really interesting. Do you have any loot drama when a Knight Champion loses to a lesser Knight?

Warwench
06-15-2009, 06:26 AM
seems overly complicated and not entirely fair.

<3 EPGP.

Stephanius
06-15-2009, 06:50 AM
seems overly complicated and not entirely fair.

<3 EPGP.

=]

I wasn't claiming to have found the end-all be-all solution. I am just showing one alternative.

The good bit is that what you see is everything - there is no accounting behind it like with DKP or EPGP. We use customized in-game ranks to tell mains of various ranks and alts apart.

Stephanius
06-15-2009, 06:50 AM
That's really interesting. Do you have any loot drama when a Knight Champion loses to a lesser Knight?

Usually not, no. =]

Some people blame their dice, which to me is much preferable blaming the person in charge of loot. The result is quite transparent to everyone after the rolls are done.

If you compare the odds of one KC rolling against a Knight, the chance to win is 3:1 (50% chance that the Knight's roll lands in the top half of his rolling range and 50% chance again to win against the KC's roll for a combined 25% chance to win). We used to have 7:1 before with a limit on how many items you can get per run before, but even this did not cause problems.

This is largely due to the vast majority of our members agreeing with the ranking itself being fair. We have only very few KC ranked players, approx a dozen, another two dozen or so KE rank while the others are Knights.

Of course, what ranges and what criteria for a rank one uses can be completely custom, I just thought to bring the idea itself forward.

GravityDK
06-15-2009, 10:57 AM
I like it, has merit.
Like you said, if it suits the guild culture and needs, it's quite functional. I think a low-admin system is always good!

phaze
06-16-2009, 07:44 AM
Grats on finding a system that works for your guild!

My guild used a weighted-roll system back in vanilla WoW (similar concept to yours, but different implementation). One of the biggest conflicts we had with such approaches was that they don't encourage 'lucky' rollers to continue to attend once they get the big item(s) they were wanting. This in turn cycles in more people to fill their spot, who may also get lucky and leave early. Your core raiders might get unlucky and miss out on upgrades for a while, which can slow down your progression.

The other major downside to weighted-rolls is that they require lots of extra work to add in memory (your multiple raider ranks, for example), or to handle progression nights (lots of deaths, and minimal/no loot). We had major attendance problems under our old system, when making the jump to BWL (a big step up in difficulty, at the time).


If your guild is not negatively impacted by your system, then stick with it; each guild is different, and matching the system to the guild is always a priority.

For my guild: to better encourage progression, we switched to a bidding point system in BC, and have had solid success with it since.

docseuss
11-17-2009, 03:02 PM
I would like some possible feedback on a loot system that I have been kicking around. I'm trying to take the human factor out as much as possible.

Please comment where you see I may have made mistakes in calcs. or judgment. I am thinking about developing this Raid addon to make the tracking of this easier, but I'd like to know what you all thought before I invest any time into it. Thanks in advance!

Objective: Helps with loot distribution by calculating a loot score based on 4 factors. Attendance (including standby), Guild Bank contributions based off gold/item value, Gear Scores (Need before Greed), and items won. Based on a characters Loot Rank a grid will display the order in which raid members should receive loot. Also since each calculation has a factor in which it is multiplied you can change the factor to increase or decrease the weight of any one calculation.

Calculations are based as follows:

Gear Score: Average raid gear score (AGS) - Lowest Raid Gear Score (LGS) = Raid Gear Score Weight (RGSW) / Number in Raid (NR). or (AGS - LGS) / NR = Raid Gear Score Factor (RGSF). So for example if a 10 man raid had 2 people with Gear Scores of 258, 3 people with Gear Scores of 245, 4 with Gear Score 213, and 1 with Gear Score of 226 for an average of 232.9 (AGS) - 213 (LGS) = 19.9 (RGSW) / 10 (NR) = 1.99 (RGSF). Now that you have the Raid Gear Score factor you add or subtract that factor from each score plus or minus the AGS. So each person in this raid with a gear score of 258 would loose (258 - 232.9) * 1.99 = 49.95 points, each person with a score of 213 would gain (232.9 - 213) * 1.99 = 39.60 points, and each person with a Gear Score of 226 would gain (232.9 - 226) * 1.99 = 13.731.

Attendance Score: Attendance Percentage 80 (AP) * Attendance Factor (AF) 1= 80 + Standby Percentage (SP) 20 * Standby Factor (SF) .75 = 15 = Attendance Score (AS) 95. So for example if a character was invited to 10 raids and they attended 8 out of those 10 raids their Attendance Percentage (AP) would be 80 * Attendance Factor (AF) 1 = 80. Now lets say that the next 5 raids the character was not invited but signed up and was placed on standby and was online for 3 out of the 5 of those raids their Standby Percentage would be 60 * Standby Factor (SF) .75 = 45. Their total Attendance Score (AS) would then be 125. Attendance would actually be calculated off of total raid time not necessarily raid amounts. It just makes it an easier example. Also standby credit would only be counted by the amount of actual time online during raid. A lookup table may have to be created in order to give credit for alt play time. Of course another method could be to have the person whisper Raid Leader in order to register the character/alt with the raid they are on to gain credit.

Bank Score: Bank Score would be based off of item/gold deposits to the guild bank. Item values would be translated to a gold value via the Auctioneer DB http://auctioneerdb.com (http://auctioneerdb.com/) so that characters depositing more value added items get proper credit. Each gold piece would be equal to amount deposited * Bank Point Factor (BPF). A method for tracking alt deposits would have to be designed. For example if a character deposited 5 fish feasts at a an Auction House mean price value of 19 gold 48 silver, 3 Flask of the Frost Wyrm at an Auction House mean price value of 27 gold 70 silver, and finally they deposited 100 gold their Bank Score (BS) would be 280.5 gold * Bank Point Factor (BPF) .5 = 140.25. There would have to be a check to make sure that people on the raid DEing or collecting BoE items did not get credit for depositing those into the guild bank.

Item Won Score: Item Won Score (IWS) could be based off of Items Won (IW) 2 * Item Won Factor (IWF) 10 = Item Won Score (IWS) 20 or it could be more complicated and be based off of Average Item Gear Score (AIGS) 226 * Items Won (IW) 2 * Item Won Factor (IWF) 10 = 238. Item Won Score is a negative calculation so this score would be subtracted from total.

Taking the calculation examples from above and using the IWS calc of (IW) * (IWF) we would have the following Loot Ranks.

The people having a gear score of 213, with everything else being equal, would have a Loot Rank score of 284.85.

The people having a gear score of 226, with everything else being equal, would have a Loot Rank score of 258.98.

The people having a gear score of 245, with everything else being equal, would have a Loot Rank score of 221.17.

The people having a gear score of 258, with everything else being equal, would have a Loot Rank score of 195.05.

So if a piece of loot dropped for Pallies and one had a gear score of 258 and the other had a score of 226 then the Pally with a Loot Rank score of 258.98 would win the loot. If for some rare occasion the Loot Rank number was equal then it would go to roll off or loot council.

Anyhow I know calculations in paragraph form is not always the easiest, but I was trying to give examples/descriptions along with the calcs.

Thanks!