On Time for raids? probably not... QQ

[Cookie]

Next time they QQ, just tell them that if they wanted the item that badly, they should've bidded what they thought it was worth. Too cheap to bid more? Then they obviously didn't want it that badly. Don't have enough dkp? Come to more raids.

You are encouraging their behaviour by ticketing.

But I'm not a fan of hidden bids, I think it's an unfair system because I'm paranoid. I'd rather have open bids or flat or % dkp fees to the person with the most dkp.

[phaze]

But I'm not a fan of hidden bids, I think it's an unfair system because I'm paranoid. I'd rather have open bids or flat or % dkp fees to the person with the most dkp.

Say Player A bids 40 for an item. Player B sees them make that bid, and also wants the item and is willing to bid 80 for it. Player B will instead bid 41 to win it, just like The Price Is Right. This also means whoever speaks up first on a bid is at a disadvantage, unless you allow multiple-round bidding (auction style).

Want silent bidding to be fair? Take bids silently; then once bidding is closed, the winner pays 2nd bid + 1. So, taking the above example: A bids 40, B bids 80. Bidding is closed, so B gets the item for 41 points. Both players bid what they felt it was worth to them, without trying to game the system. This approximates what would naturally happen in an auction: the winner is the one willing to pay the most, but they'll stop just after the 2nd place guy bows out.

[Cookie]

Say Player A bids 40 for an item. Player B sees them make that bid, and also wants the item and is willing to bid 80 for it. Player B will instead bid 41 to win it, just like The Price Is Right. This also means whoever speaks up first on a bid is at a disadvantage, unless you allow multiple-round bidding (auction style).

Want silent bidding to be fair? Take bids silently; then once bidding is closed, the winner pays 2nd bid + 1. So, taking the above example: A bids 40, B bids 80. Bidding is closed, so B gets the item for 41 points. Both players bid what they felt it was worth to them, without trying to game the system. This approximates what would naturally happen in an auction: the winner is the one willing to pay the most, but they'll stop just after the 2nd place guy bows out.

I don't think you got my point. I don't think it's unfair due to the bidding process, it's just something that's as prone to corruption as loot council. The person taking bids can easily tell their friends what everyone else is willing to pay so they bid accordingly.

I'm not a fan of +1 bids either, I'd rather have a time limit on bids with a minimum increment. People trying to top eachother with +1 is just a waste of everyone else's time.

[phaze]

The person taking bids can easily tell their friends what everyone else is willing to pay so they bid accordingly.

Not trusting your raid leader (or whoever is in charge of handing out the loot) is a problem no matter which loot system you end up using.

[Truthbebold]

Say Player A bids 40 for an item. Player B sees them make that bid, and also wants the item and is willing to bid 80 for it. Player B will instead bid 41 to win it, just like The Price Is Right. This also means whoever speaks up first on a bid is at a disadvantage, unless you allow multiple-round bidding (auction style).

Want silent bidding to be fair? Take bids silently; then once bidding is closed, the winner pays 2nd bid + 1. So, taking the above example: A bids 40, B bids 80. Bidding is closed, so B gets the item for 41 points. Both players bid what they felt it was worth to them, without trying to game the system. This approximates what would naturally happen in an auction: the winner is the one willing to pay the most, but they'll stop just after the 2nd place guy bows out.

You are totally thinking about this the wrong way. Like i said before my guild uses silent bidding.
The rules: everyone rolls first. then if someone chooses to bid dkp because they lost the roll they whisper the raid leader once. They are allowed only 1 bid which only the raid leader knows.

The "one" bid and the "silent bidding" is ment for the person wanting the item to bid how ever much it is worth to them..

I just won the holy paladin helm off 25m iron council. I rolled a 5/100 (go figure) so i used dkp. I bidded 30 dkp and won it. The next person after me bidded 8 dkp.

Thats the Point right there, we want people to over spend their dkp therefor keeping there dkp lvls low. and making people spend what the item is worth to them.

Some items i would spend all my dkp, others i would spend 5 dkp. but for another person in the raid they might spend all there dkp on the item i would only spend 5 on..

So baically the item ends up going to the person who needs it the most. (Most beneficial looting method for our guild)

Thanks
Truth

[phaze]

So baically the item ends up going to the person who needs it the most. (Most beneficial looting method for our guild)

If this is the core purpose of your loot system, then you can do away with the unneccessary rolling that occurs in parallel with the point bidding. The change shouldn't affect your distribution, and it simplifies your process. But that's up to you.

[Acheronia]

Divine Edge - FAQ - WowStead

That link points to the FAQ on my guild site, where I explain our looting system, EPGP. Most people reading will know all the details, but the link is mainly for the benefit of those that don't.

I deal with complaints about loot in a very simple manner: I don't. It's not up for discussion. I refer them to that very same link and tell them they're welcome to ask me about how the looting system works. End of discussion.

I also don't fight with people for being late or not showing up. 15 minutes before the raid starts, I invite everyone who accepted. All the people that join the raid get a 50 point bonus. I immediately start looking for alternative people to fill the remaining spots, starting with the rest of the guildies, then friends and friends of friends, and then lastly LFG.

Work out a little routine for yourself how to deal with this with the least amount of begging, pleading, threatening, fighting and shouting. You'll only end up extremely unhappy. Stick to your routine. The people will soon find out that they either fall in line or they fall out and are replaced by people who actually want to be there.

[holyjebus]

thanks veneretio, what you said was straight to the point and made a lot of sense to me not saying the other idea's are bad i think there is a different solution for different problems and different people, but thanks the best soultion for me is and has been said by veneretio. cheers mate

[Genova]

Make sure your DKP system is very well stated on your website, forums and guild charter as well. If it is right there in text, then people have no reason to complain. Putting it in text like that makes it static and if anyone ever has issues or doesnt like it... remind them they agreed to it and if they dont like it... the door is >>>>>>. Knuckle down on them, most people will whine and groan if they think they will get their way... stop letting them get what they want by whining. Sure a few people will most likely leave (you dont want whiners in your guild anyway), but recruit and replace them. Another thing is make sure all new recruits know the loot system and understand it, it'll save you time in raid having to explain it.

[Kerchunk]

In my opinion a well-run loot council populated by guild members that are universally trusted is the best way to distribute loot. People struggle so hard to come up with a system that takes into account the myriad of factors we all want to consider when distributing items, but you just end up with something that looks like a problem from someone's 3rd-year calculus final and it does nothing to quell people who are going to find a reason to bitch about loot no matter what.

Loot council, if run correctly, is free to take into consideration recent loot acquired, importance to current raid progression, senriority, recent and lifetime attendance, attitude, contributions outside the raid in terms of 10-man attendance, donations to the guild (gold and materials), respect for fellow raid members, ability to take/follow direction, willingness to dual spec or modify specs to benefit the raid, etc., etc.

Every DKP or modified-DKP system I've experienced has favored two things above all else - seniority and attendance. If you have been around awhile and attend a good amount of raids, then you get whatever loot you want even if you happen to be recently playing poorly, not executing well on particular fights, treating people with disrespect, QQing about loot or progression, etc.

Loot council keeps old raiders accountable. If they don't stay in shape, stay up to date on fights, and keep contributing in ways other than just "showing up" then they can get supplanted by newer members who are outperforming them or might be more important to current raid progression (say, for example, a veteran Warlock just quit and you replaced him but you want to gear up the new guy quickly to ensure a smooth transition).

No DKP system I've seen can adapt to the constantly changing and circumstances of a guild the way loot council can. It's prone to abuse, but as long as the person responsible for choosing members of the loot council is fair and a good judge of character, then you can always smooth out the potential for corruption and favoritism by bringing new blood and a fresh perspective into loot council to vote on item distribution.


One of the very nice things about loot council is it's able to respond very quickly to people who complain/QQ. Make an issue out of loot? The council is going to consider that next time an item drops that you need. Continue to cause drama? Find another guild. It works really well in weeding out people who raid for loot as opposed to the ones who raid for community and progression.

[phaze]

In my opinion a well-run loot council populated by guild members that are universally trusted is the best way to distribute loot.

Also known as the 'benevolent dictator' form of ideal government. Nice in theory, not such a great track record in practice.

It's prone to abuse

The leading complaint of people who don't like Loot Council. Some guilds just aren't suited for dictatorships.

The other major complaint against Loot Council is lack of transparency: players don't know where they stand when it comes to who gets upgraded next. For some guilds this isn't a big deal, while for some guilds it is.

Every DKP or modified-DKP system I've experienced has favored two things above all else - seniority and attendance.

That's their purpose, yes.

One of the very nice things about loot council is it's able to respond very quickly to people who complain/QQ. Make an issue out of loot? The council is going to consider that next time an item drops that you need. Continue to cause drama? Find another guild. It works really well in weeding out people who raid for loot as opposed to the ones who raid for community and progression.

Raid discipline does not have to be tied to your loot distribution method. If players can't keep up, it's ok to bench / kick them, rather than bring them along while preventing them from gaining upgrades.

There's nothing inherently good/bad about loot councils or point systems, for handing out items. It's all about finding the one that works best for your guild.

[Kerchunk]

Also known as the 'benevolent dictator' form of ideal government. Nice in theory, not such a great track record in practice.

The leading complaint of people who don't like Loot Council. Some guilds just aren't suited for dictatorships.

I'm not sure what you think a "loot council" is but "dictatorship" is exactly the opposite. A council implies a group of people, a dictatorship one. A loot council properly assembled consists of trusted, senior, high-attendance raiders from a variety of classes who can offer opinions on itemization and gearing across many classes while also assessing raiders' attendance, raid awareness, attitudes, contributions, abilities to listen and take direction, etc., etc.

A council votes, and if the vote is close a discussion ensues as to the benefits and drawbacks of awarding gear to the disputed parties. If no consensus can be reached, a /roll among the disputed raiders can easily resolve close calls or tie votes.

Raid discipline does not have to be tied to your loot distribution method. If players can't keep up, it's ok to bench / kick them

It's not always that simple. Not every guild has the benefit of a wait list of raiders waiting to replace people who are benched or kicked. Some guilds have trouble fielding a full 25 on raid night, so just booting people left and right is not an option. Guilds need to foster better raiders from the ones they have by encouraging improvement in rotations, raid awareness, behavior, etc.

When people are under-performing in our guild they see immediate results. Gear starts to go to players who are doing their jobs better. You would be amazed how quickly this makes people shape up and get their heads back in the game. It works a lot better and more effectively than just repeating the same instructions over vent in an angrier voice.

There's nothing inherently good/bad about loot councils or point systems, for handing out items. It's all about finding the one that works best for your guild.

Agreed, but I stand by my claim that loot council is the most dynamic and flexible of all systems. DKP seems to unviersally favor two things above all others: attendance and seniority and while that works okay in most cases, sometimes there are other factors which need to be considered.

[Penlowe]

I'm afraid most of the responders have gotten sidetracked by the loot system itself and not the root of the issues.

A. show up on time for raids/show up at all.
B. Understand that the item will drop again and to not QQ about it, instead /cheer the person.
C. What to do with the people that don't get invited to the raid.

A & B the problem is the same: lack of discipline. Not lack of discipline on the part of the players, lack of discipline on the part of the raid leader(s), officers and GM. If you do not enforce the rules you have written you can't expect them to follow them. This is not an age related issue either.
Kicking butt & taking names is not fun, but if you don't enforce the rules you've laid out (preferably on your website somewhere that every raider is required to read) you will never stop having problems with A & B.
If your posted rules are good, them announce that the butt kicking has begun and stick to it. If not, it's time to start writing. Some guilds have a Sargent at Arms solely for the purpose of discipline preparing for and during raids, which greatly relieves the RL.

For issue C I advocate awarding whatever brownie points you can as long as they stay on line for the duration of the raid if your guild defines itself as a raiding guild. Track attendance & rotate them in if your system allows, encourage running 5 mans.
If your guild doesn't define itself as a raiding guild, even though you do raid, do NOT tolerate whining from folks who are not raid ready/ capable, that's worse than any discipline issue among dedicated raiders. In my book, Joe Schmo who plays 3 hours a week and doesn't even have a dungeon blue set whimpering in guild chat about 'wishing he could see Ulduar just once' isn't worth having in your guild. The appropriate response is 'put up or shut up' although it can be tempered much more kindly.