+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 86

Thread: The Weekly Marmot - Is LFR Dropping Enough Loot?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    33
    If you go to Interface/Controls! and check "Auto Open Loot Rolls Window!" does that not show you the drops?

    I had it on for one five man and it was too spammy for me so I turned it off so I have no idea if it does work in LFR but I see no reason why it wouldn't.

    The only peeve I have is the same as Bythedar's other than that I'm fine with how things are.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,055
    Showing loot rolls doesn't work for lfr because it is not a "drop" that everyone rolls against each other for. The new lfr system is a hidden personal roll. So if the internal number is say...20%, then maybe you get a hidden 1-100 roll. If you roll above 80, loot appears in your bag. It's different from the 5 man system of high roll wins.
    "he doens't need healing, he doesn't need healing, he doesn't nee-WHAOSHIT!wtf was that man!". Please stop leaning on TDR. -Teng

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    33
    ahhh...I see. Thanks for the clarification.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    On the cloud.
    Posts
    2,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Tengenstein View Post
    I'd like if LFR didn't drop upgrades from 5man HCs. I just don't like raiding with rogues that can't tricks or tanks that think taunting on CD is how you tank. actual LFR fine, but i'd rather run with 24 NPCs.
    Spam til it's immune!

    I think if you made the coins a much harder grind than valor then gave them a 100% loot drop chance instead of 28.5 gold, I'd be more inclined to bother with it. I've become incredibly casual this expansion, and the way loot drops in LFR now I feel like I'm wasting my time, having seen the content. I'd spend the time to farm coins if they guaranteed my loot, but the last 20 or so coins I've spent have been gold. I can make gold incredibly f*cking easily, I'd rather spend time doing that than killing an easy boss with 15 non-English speakers calling me a noob fat american just for logging in, and getting 300 gold as a reward for the 4 hour time investment.

    LFR is great for bad players, not casuals.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tengenstein View Post
    just don't let them melee you up the bum.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,974
    spam it till it's immune, unfortunately most bosses aren't on the taunt DRs el numpty americano.
    Harsh Words and Steel: A Protection Warrior Guide
    MoP RPS Calculator

    Hunters, Just get a Sporebat, most LFRs will be missing that buff.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    24

    Solution for Loot Drops in LFR

    They should just turn killing bosses into archeology. If you had enough kills of the same boss, you would then recieve fragments of the boss that when solved turned into something cool. Seriously 28g or 58g is not enough - i dont think that you should feel like once you got X amount of loot from said content that it should make you want to stop playing ..there definitely needs to be more incentive for players by having either random finds in the instance, better loot such as for professions, or an accumulation of points that go to a vendor with less quality items that were still usefull. an extra roll from charms on a chance at 28g is just a joke in a half. Im not saying that the reward should be greater than the gear itself , but by adding something else into what you can earn from time spent in - should be good enough that i want to run it again and again and again even if its for the consulation prize. would people ever stop complaining? prob not - but the #1 thing holding people back from enjoying the game is just feeling one of two things. either its not worth it to do the content because they wont get anything from it or there are other better geared people ready to kick them out of the instance because they cant preform well enough because.... it would be nice to hear people make remarks as to how well they accomplished the goal of getting the boss down rather than having this worry of who got loot and knowing they got nothing when they blah blah blah... it could be balanced without having such a slap in the face as a few gold pieces without imblalancing the game completely .. make me want to have fun playing this game its all i ask

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    20
    Thank you so much for the LFR Lore. Did I mention lately that you Rock? Thank you for illustrating the issues without the judgement of a large number of players who seem to hold ill feelings towards some of these new more casual attitudes towards the game. I sometimes feel like a young person in a large world of old people trying to convince them that our perspective and feelings are important too (i.e. bridge the wow generation gap ) The sad thing is I'm 37 years old and I should be exactly the opposite. The reality of the issue for me, though, is like you said. I'm a busier person, and I have all my toons with all the professions I rely on on a server where busy players who may not be as skilled as other players have a really hard time getting in a raid team in MOP.

    The lfr is still kind of fun, but it feels really empty, and for the reasons you stated well in the Marmott. This hurts, because for players like myself, the LFR totally saved WoW for me, and kept my playing through some the drier times at the end of Cata. What to do is a mystery. I know I have come to consider supporting the idea for a progressive rng loot rate system, where every time you kill a boss and get nothing, the odds increase slightly for the next time - perhaps to simulate the idea that someone got that loot - now there's one less person who needs it ... so why should my odds not go up a little bit. I think the coding and mechanics involved in this would be too much to ask for though, so that still brings us back to either an increased drop rate all around, a token system where I could at least guarantee I could get one LFR piece I really want every so many weeks, or at the very least, what Ghostcrawler suggests where if you win a piece and choose not to accept it, you get a bonus roll for something else (I'd like to see it be a random appropriate piece from "any" boss in that instance though, making the entire raid slightly more worth the effort).

    For me, whether or not I get to raid this tier, it will not be complete if at least 2 or 3 of my toons find a way to get a tier bonus set and the majority of my slots being at least 473 (i.e. the first level above dungeons). I don't mind taking time to do this - I just want to know that the odds are there to give me a reasonable expectation of achieving my goals for the work I put in. Right now I'm not convinced that the odds give me a favorable prospect. For me, much more of a bummer than having nothing gear-related to accomplish at then end of the tier would be to go through the entire tier, and feel like I didn't accomplish my goals - especially when I feel that main reason is that the odds seem stacked against me (like the dissappointment you must have felt when you were unable to down heroic Ragnaros before Dragon Soul came out).

    I would be satisfied with a token system, even if it took 3 weeks to a month to get that 1 guaranteed piece. That would at least guarantee that none of my toons would have to go through the entire tier with the tier token set being a pipe dream, unless I let it be that way by not running the lfr faithfully.

    Thanks again for doing this Marmott, and great show once again.

    RielthasKildogg

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    4,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Toypop View Post
    Unfortunately that was a piece of flawed reasoning emanating from the official forums that has since spread and been regarded as "fact".

    It is flawed because it assumes that were the colluding players replaced with purely random independent minded players, that 100% of those new independent players need the same items as you.

    I am sure you can see the error.
    I really don't because for there to be the "flaw" you have assume there would not be other players replacing the "friends" for rolls; I firmly believe that number of people your rolling against rarely varied enough to make a difference - collusion or no collusion.

    If there were 5 people rolling on the items, I had a 20% chance to win; if it was me against 4 random people I have a 20% chance to win, if it's me against 4 guildies I still have a 20% chance to win. I don't win, I really don't care who did, it wasn't me, come back next week.

    I think the argument that if it weren't for the friends, there would not be other people rolling is just as flawed. There is no evidence whatsoever for the statement that a "fully random group would have offered you better odds a majority of the time." You have to assume that the friends would have been replaced by either people who can't roll on the item (wrong role), would not roll on an item they already have or the group comp would have been more favorable to you. All leaps of faith.

    And anyway, so what, if friends helped friends, it's a social game; I never really saw the big deal in that whole line of QQ, just sour grapes from people who want to gear up in one run.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    197
    This might be a little long but I have an idea.

    This is based on the idea that on average at a 20% drop rate you will win close to 3 pieces of gear per week. I don't know what the actual chance is and I suspect in may be 15%, but I'm going to base it on 20%.

    The first part of the idea is that you don't get a random roll on each boss but you get 5 LFR loot rolls per week which you can use on any boss you want. These rolls would give you a 50% chance of getting loot, because RNG is part of loot, but at 50/50, the chances of having a prolonged streak of no loot is getting very minimal, at the cost of having a slightly smaller average loot per week chance. That's only part one though.

    Part two is that each boss will drop a piece for your class that can be for any spec at random, before you choose whether to use your roll or not. You get to see what your loot will be before you exercise the choice to roll on it. If you're a resto druid the drop could be the healing trinket you covet or a pair of agi boots, that's the random part. You exercise the choice to roll and therefore have some feeling of control over when you go for a piece of loot. Charms could stay the same as they are now as a mainspec slot machine, so if the boss doesn't drop the piece you're looking for you get a second shot at it.

    I think this would help with all the LFR loot issues I see right now. It should allow people to gear for offspec from any spec they want, it would provide a better experience as you actually get to see a drop from every boss, and it would help decrease extended streaks of not winning something you can use.

    Thoughts?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    On the cloud.
    Posts
    2,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Tengenstein View Post
    spam it till it's immune, unfortunately most bosses aren't on the taunt DRs el numpty americano.

    Shit, forgot about that. The BR players usually say it broken English. HUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUE.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tengenstein View Post
    just don't let them melee you up the bum.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by Theotherone View Post
    You have to assume that the friends would have been replaced by either people who can't roll on the item (wrong role), would not roll on an item they already have or the group comp would have been more favorable to you. All leaps of faith.

    And anyway, so what, if friends helped friends, it's a social game; I never really saw the big deal in that whole line of QQ, just sour grapes from people who want to gear up in one run.
    All you have to assume to make the point is that the people that replaced the groups of colluding players would be less likely to roll against you. All else held equal, this follows directly from the assumption that in some cases those players would roll against you solely for the purpose of transfering the item to someone else in the group. If each player in a purely random group has (all things considered) an N% chance of rolling against you then the players in the colluding group have a (N+X)% chance of rolling against you, where X is the additional chance that comes from the loot-trading possibility. As the % chance is zero-sum any positive value of X would mean that you would have less access to loot in a group of colluding players than in a purely random one.

    Many people posited the idea that the N% chance would be different between the two situation but with no rational proof and only subjectively determined correlations.

    For me, I think that the advantages to 'friends help friends' are already far too severe and in an inherently solo-focused feature of the game (LFR) its perfectly fine for those advantages to not exist. I don't want to 'gear up in one run' but I don't want to gear up substantially slower than other people (and be disadvantaged to a greater extent in other content as a result) just because I run LFR by myself.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    4,033
    Quote Originally Posted by tawnos View Post
    All you have to assume to make the point is that the people that replaced the groups of colluding players would be less likely to roll against you. All else held equal, this follows directly from the assumption that in some cases those players would roll against you solely for the purpose of transfering the item to someone else in the group. If each player in a purely random group has (all things considered) an N% chance of rolling against you then the players in the colluding group have a (N+X)% chance of rolling against you, where X is the additional chance that comes from the loot-trading possibility. As the % chance is zero-sum any positive value of X would mean that you would have less access to loot in a group of colluding players than in a purely random one.
    So what you're saying is that because people could trade they would roll when they otherwise would not? I don't know if I agree with that, but it's kind of moot point now.

    Personally, I see little differnce in the time it's taken for me to gear my hunter and my pally, then when I was gearing alts in DS LFR. The inability to trade gear is a bit of a hinderence, but honestly both my hunter and my pally have geared up pretty fast.

    Then again since I'm not actively raiding normals in any meaningful way, I'm not really in that whole gotta get gear as fast a possible world. Makes the game very different for me, if I get the piece I want great, if not, oh well, try next week; I've got lots of other things to do to keep me occupied.

    I'm also soured on the whole I need my purples and I need them now menality of the game - people act like if they have to try again next week the world has ended and their lives are now devoid of meaning. It's just stupid.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,055
    I can attest to the fact that people brought a different alt than they originally intended to make sure you were on the same trinket, weapon or tier in order to stack the odds. However, if a 5 man came in grouped for an agi roll for some hunter, then if I was on my pally, I benefited based on having more agi users or hunter tokens in the group instead. We may have benefited as often as we lost out to raid stacking. There are too many variables for us to say unless we have access to Blizzard's internal numbers. And yes, we often brought an alt that didn't need gear or didn't get to raid so that we could roll for stuff we didn't need or already had. My guild did not do this to be jerks, in fact we are very anti-jerk. We did it as self defense because it happened against us so often.
    "he doens't need healing, he doesn't need healing, he doesn't nee-WHAOSHIT!wtf was that man!". Please stop leaning on TDR. -Teng

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by Theotherone View Post
    I really don't because for there to be the "flaw" you have assume there would not be other players replacing the "friends" for rolls; I firmly believe that number of people your rolling against rarely varied enough to make a difference - collusion or no collusion.

    If there were 5 people rolling on the items, I had a 20% chance to win; if it was me against 4 random people I have a 20% chance to win, if it's me against 4 guildies I still have a 20% chance to win. I don't win, I really don't care who did, it wasn't me, come back next week.

    I think the argument that if it weren't for the friends, there would not be other people rolling is just as flawed. There is no evidence whatsoever for the statement that a "fully random group would have offered you better odds a majority of the time." You have to assume that the friends would have been replaced by either people who can't roll on the item (wrong role), would not roll on an item they already have or the group comp would have been more favorable to you. All leaps of faith.

    And anyway, so what, if friends helped friends, it's a social game; I never really saw the big deal in that whole line of QQ, just sour grapes from people who want to gear up in one run.
    I am afraid that you are just plain wrong and beliefs don't come into it. It is not about "assumptions" but rather "probabilities". I have already acknowledged that a "worse case scenario" random group would be no better than the hijacked group, the issue comes down to how probable that "worse case" random group is.

    I hardly think it is a leap of faith to assume that a, the random player might not need the item and b, they won't need on it.

    Unless the random guy has so far won nothing at all from RF then clearly there will be items they no longer need. There were a few individuals who continued to need on "unneeded" items for the purposes of using them as a bargaining chip for trading later but that was always considered socially unacceptable and the majority didn't do it.

    Far from being a leap of faith, there was a fair to good probability that a random player wouldn't compete against you on some items. If you want "evidence" than I and hundreds of thousands of others players can tell you about how they passed on items they no longer needed.

    Presumably you benefited from trading and like many promoting the system on the official forums you wished to retain it as it removed the compulsion to run RF far sooner due to the faster gearing rate.

    I can understand and respect why normal/hc raiders "forced" into RF were keen to collude, grab their upgrades and stop running it as soon as possible. The correct solution was to remove the need for them to run RF at all, not continue with the hijacking system.

    The strawman at the end was unnecessary. No one said they wanted to gear in one run. We all want to gear quicker but I am sure the majority of players understand perfectly well why we can't gear in one run. Ironically if anyone wanted to gear in one run it was surely the people colluding and not the QQ'ers!

    Sure you can argue that it is all a load of QQ over pixels but at the end of the day if pixels don't matter then why did the players feel the need to collude in the first place....?

    I don't object to players using the system with friends, but if they can't put together a full guild run and need to start drawing resources from the pug community then they should not able to manipulate the loot system to the detriment of those players. Helping friends is good, helping friends whilst negatively impacting on the reward chance of random players whilst using a system designed for random play is an entirely different matter.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    10
    As far as I know the chance for loot in lfr and coins is 15% on both. So its no wonder its pretty rng atm.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1
    I know some people have already mentioned this, but I don't like that I can't pass on loot or for that matter trade it to someone who needs it. I have gotten the same ring off Elegon 3 times and I don't need it. I would much more prefer to pass it on to someone else instead of selling it for a minimal amount of gold.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    99
    I like the idea of the coins and the progressive increased chances like Tokyopop said, but obviously with a lower ceiling. There should always be the chance that somebody has this sad story about a loot that never drops, it is part of what RPG are; there should be people (and I'm sorry for him but that is how it is) that have been running every instance since the beginning and don't get certain pieces of loot.

    About the arguments you make:
    Showing the loot to others. So we can do bitter comments on the guy who won it, about how bad he is and how he doesn't "deserve" the loot. If we are going to forget LFR DS we have no basis to discuss this problem (which exists).

    Cheering for others. Just like you said you cheer your friends in your Guild because you care about them in LFR there is enough people to make unpleasant get loot, this is why Blizzard don't want to show the loot AND maybe you can say, well don't show who won it but then it could happen that people nag in whispers to the possible people getting the piece that was show. I'm not saying that everybody is a bad person or something but it is enough people that forced blizzard to make a change.

    Bad math example aside, because a 2 characters are an anecdotal argument, never an statistics one. I agree that LFR should pursuit the individual reward rather than the group or mass reward, this is the core problem.

    About how much loot there should be, I don't know if 15% is the right number, yeah real solutions are in other place like you said but even now 15% is a number based on mass reward not in the individual reward. Clear example was the pass option in DS. Even if the chance for loot is statistical equivalent to 15% in the actual system, the pass option make more loot useful to each group. Of course what Blizzard cares is about longevity of the content but I think the way they created that number is a wrong. So I think that if they revisit this, that number would end up a big higher.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    99
    About off-spec in LFR. My 2 healers tale:
    MSV 2 Part 2.
    I queue as DPS. Play DPS in the 3 first parts and get roll for my offspec. In WoE I switch for healer and pray that DPS do enough DMG so nobody start asking which DPS arent doing enough damage after a wipe. If we win, I roll in the healer trinket, I have one already this way. If we wipe I switch to DPS then after the boss die I quick switch to healer spec so I can do my charm roll for the healer trinket.

    Similar in Terrace, tsulong switch to healer, here I have less problems because having 8 healers isn't that bad (I'm not the only one doing it) you just notice how the day phase the bar grows faster than usual.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by eald View Post
    About how much loot there should be, I don't know if 15% is the right number, yeah real solutions are in other place like you said but even now 15% is a number based on mass reward not in the individual reward. Clear example was the pass option in DS. Even if the chance for loot is statistical equivalent to 15% in the actual system, the pass option make more loot useful to each group. Of course what Blizzard cares is about longevity of the content but I think the way they created that number is a wrong. So I think that if they revisit this, that number would end up a big higher.
    This is very much along the line of a point I have been making - that 15% is low when there's no ability for any members of the group to help or even care about any others. Its simply a way of stretching out content. As I've said, "You can only stretch out a good thing so much before it becomes long, stretched out crap, and no matter how much you stretch out crap, its still crap"

    And yes, to confirm for anybody who has a debate, Blizzard has made it clear that the odds of any item droping on any particular roll (original boss kill or usage of a charm) is 15%. They roll for you secretly a number from 1 to 100, and any roll 85 or above rewards you with some appropriate piece of loot.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by idthepit View Post
    I know some people have already mentioned this, but I don't like that I can't pass on loot or for that matter trade it to someone who needs it. I have gotten the same ring off Elegon 3 times and I don't need it. I would much more prefer to pass it on to someone else instead of selling it for a minimal amount of gold.
    This one comes up on the official forums a fair bit.

    If the win rate is too low or too unpredictable then the solution is to directly boost that win chance or do so in the way I described at the start where win chance improves over time.

    Enabling trading is a poor solution because you suddenly become dependent on random acts of charity to achieve the correct gearing rate. Effectively you are making random RF players "loot masters". Not good!

    I suspect that trading would simply boost the amount of overall gear upgrades being awarded (not necessarily fairly, evenly or consistently) and would fail to replicate the organised group system where odds improve over time. In fact, there is a danger with an overall increased upgrade rate that Blizzard would lower the drop chance to balance it out...

    Regardless it would put us back in a system where players feel compelled to run in organised groups to achieve the "correct" gearing rate which defeats the purpose of the RF system. There are 3 raid modes and 2 of them already cater to organised groups. The "correct" gearing rate and a simulation of the organised guild "improving odds" system should be achievable in RF whilst solo queuing. It wouldn't be rocket science to implement.

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts