The Legendary Marmot -- Lore Does Loot Again

[Noep]

your funny voice (u know the second one u used in each example)

classic ;p

lol

[Baelor]

I think you should follow through on the cat-launching idea.

[Lore]

Slejloreface, you skipped over relational DKP systems in your DKP discussion!

It's fairer than a basic DKP system, with just as much upkeep and a little less on the reward/progression scale, depending on how you set it up.

Relational DKP and EPGP are almost completely identical as far as any discussion in the video is concerned. Everything I said about EPGP, I'd say about Relational DKP also. Whether it's fairer or not depends on your definition of "fair".

[Ibiza]

Whistle stop from Robin Hood. You're my new hero.

[hellhound2]

Our guild uses a % style DKP system, works fairly well but has the same holes as any dkp system does, main thing i guess is that it keeps inflation and new members dont have to wait as long to get to a competitive postion

but the negative i guess is is the higher level guys dont take as much loot as they should and lower guys get it for like 2 dkp where the top guy gets it for like 19-20

[phaze]

Good overview, Lore!

On the topic of bidding Point Systems and the common problems that arise, I have a few comments.

Spike bidding: only works if (A) knows for certain that (B) will bid at least X amount. If (B) doesn't, (A) just ended up winning the item for more than (A) wanted to spend. So it's a dick move that can be countered. On the flip side, you could argue that if (B) is willing to spend that much on the item, he should be prepared to pay that price regardless of (A)'s behavior; (B) is fully responsible for making intelligent bids. I always tell my gang to just bid what the item is worth to them, and ignore the points of everyone else. In practice, I've never seen issues with spike bidding.

Collusion: a lot of point systems put quite a bit of effort into methods to prevent this, most commonly by assigning point values (or minimums) to every single item of interest in the raid game. But I prefer an adaptive approach. I like using a scaling minimum bid, to remove the benefit of colluding with others to drop the price. I've found that a good floating value for min bids is 1/3 of the player's current point total. This way, players can collude all they want; they still have to shell out a sizable chunk of their earnings.

Inflation: the nice thing about a points system with bidding, is that inflation is mostly a non-issue. Bids can scale up with point totals. If you choose to use a scaling min. bid, you really take inflation out of the equation; it does a great job of discouraging hoarders.

So if you use a point system with bidding (or are thinking of using one) and the above issues are coming up, just keep in mind there are methods of reducing/eliminating them. My above comments are just one way, there are others too.