Few people like me and oyu do that, but since Aikar and EMC goal is to create communities of players to play together(playing with friends have always been rewarded), then playing with friends while fighting bosses should be rewarded all friends
I've fought multiple bosses in groups, and I've never had this issue. People that do that to their "friends" don't keep friends and wind up getting a bad rep. People without friends and with a bad rep have trouble utilizing the economy and event system. People in that hole of deficiencies get bored and stop playing. The large majority of players on this site will share the loot in that sort of situation, and that means that this rule change would more often be used to abused by a different type of user. The type of user I'm going to refer to as a "shark". A shark will hide behind the rules if it's beneficial for them. Right now that only really extends to unfair happenings in events, shop sign errors, and inventory remains in the waste. I don't think it's wrong to be a shark, they're really just levering their advantage within the bounds of the rules, I just don't want to give them more tools to play with. If there's no clear boundary they tend to try and evenly share, (to assure themselves at least half the loot) which is where we want it to stay right now. Tl;dr: -1
And mu point is these items shouldent be free game lol thats what makes it unfair, the fact that just anyone can go and take the stuff!
Ok, so I'm not sure if this is a feasible option but what about using WoW rules. Roll for loot. I'm not sure if there's a way to implement a roll system into the game but if Aikar or a dev can code it then everyone in the group rolls and highest out of 100 wins the item. That way it's random and you can only blame the numbers and everyone who participated gets a chance.
In that case it would be fine if each player got equal drops, but in the scenario that the author made, Player2 didn't actively fight or even do anything aside from sitting under the boss when it died.
this is argued a lot and i think it is a crap issue it shouldn't happen -_- make a group then they can not attack it but.... they should add loot protection to groups for 5 mins
You don't seem to understand the point I made. Giving one person the sole responsibility to divide up the loot is a bad idea. We all know that some players would be more than happy to keep all the loot to themselves, regardless of who did what in the fight. In the instance that the OP described, yes a system like that would have worked, but a system like that will not always work. As I stated earlier, there is no system that could be put in place that would be completely fair 100% of the time.
Ayups. Well, not to me but to Aya. Who wasn't too upset by all this but a bit disappointed because she would have given all the drops away anyway had the player only asked. So she simply ended up de-friending them, putting them on /ignore and that was that. Now, I like your idea and several others in this thread but honestly... I don't think you can solve this problem, at all. No matter how much you try to automate it: such a system will always suffer from "the weakest link". And that weakest link is always the player who doesn't want to share. An automated division sounds nice, but would result in issues. Now, I roughly know the Marlix drops but I'm more familiar with the Momentus, so I tried to look it up. Only to discover that the wiki page doesn't show any of them. Which is weird, so I investigated and we seem to be having a problem with the template, I'll try to get that fixed later on. So in the mean time I'll give you guys a copy of the wikipage 'source code' (sort off) so that we know what we're talking about: Note: at this time I don't know how accurate this (still) is. I just discovered some wiki pages which share the same problem, so I cannot rule out the fact that us contribs missed a few things here. But lets use this table for now.. So... A normal drop could be a few skeleton heads, shiney arrows, a marlix bow and more optionally a stable or vault voucher. Lets say: 4 Skeleton heads, 24 shiney arrows, a Marlix bow and a vault voucher. A vault voucher roughly sits at a 10k value, a bow around 30k (all rough guesses on my part) while a skeleton head would be around 30 - 40r and I have no idea about those arrows but that also can't be that much. Now, in my example a group of 4 players was taking on Marlix. 2 attacked Marlix and 2 helped to keep the enraged guardians away from them (which is a tactic some of my friends and me actually use). First problem: those two "protecting players" would never get any drops with an automated divide even though they have an invaluable role: allowing the others to actually attack Marlix. So how are we going to divide this? Are we going to base ourselves on amount of items or rupee value? Lets say amount of items... In my example we'd be looking at: 2 skeleton heads and 12 shiney arrows for each player. Then one gets the bow and the other gets the vault voucher. So what to do when you can't easily divide this? One skeleton head for one shiney arrow or should we apply two or three arrows for one head? And if so: why? Maybe give more items to the player who did more damage? Great idea: one player gets 3 skeleton heads and 24 shiney arrows, the other gets 1 skeleton head, the marlix bow and the voucher. That's 27 items vs. 3, so really fair wouldn't you say? I don't think that'll work. So monetary value: 4 skeleton heads amounts to roughly 120r, 24 shiney arrows can't be that much more, lets say 144r (6r per arrow) and then we get 30k for the bow and 10k for a vault voucher. So when the system gives the bow to one player the other will always end up with less value. So I don't think that would work either. Maybe if the drops get increased. But that is something depending on both the difficulty setting and a random factor. Worse: it would also harm the economy! Remember the time when Aikar made a small error and Marlix & Momentus would spawn all over the place (I loved that moment... 3 hours into the waste: WHAM, another mini-boss!). Result was that the price of vault vouchers plummeted. Which is another issue: if the staff would actually use monetary value to sort out the drops they would more or less also put price tags on these items. But.... Isn't that a job for the community? One of the reasons staff tries to stay away from all that is just because of that reason: allowing the players to 'run' the economy. Not the staff! Seriously... In the end I don't think you'll be able to automate this in a fair way. The only thing which works here is to make sure that the players you bring along are trustworthy. Here's how I (usually) work: I mostly fight these bosses alone. If I do team up then I either ask that we make agreements up front, or I focus myself on the token / rupee drop and ignore everything else. True story: player came up to me (well, town chat) last night asking if someone could kill Momentus for them. First I thought they simply wanted it gone so I said that I did expect to get the drops. Player agreed, "I only want my stuff back". That was new information for me and it changed my stance immediately! Because this was not a player who merely wanted Momentus gone. This was a player who gave this a fierce effort, lost and now worried about their stuff. Which I told him: knowing this I'd definitely be willing to share. I looked around (diff. 6, so Momie didn't attack me), found his stuff and a little more and returned that first. Once again saying that I'd be happy to share: it wasn't needed, player was already happy enough to get his stuff back. Momie was mine. So I fought Momie, it went decently well and I ended up with a vault voucher, zombie heads, dragon fragments and shiney flesh. So I kept the voucher and shared the rest anyway: /mail'd it to the player. He can always chose to/dispose of that if he wants to Last time I fought Momentus with 3 others we ended up with a toothpick. Problem: Who is going to keep it? We all had one thing in mind: fairness. So in the end I suggested that I'd ask a friend of mine to auction it off and then share the auction results with the rest. Where I'd obviously share some of my part (1/3rd) with said player for their efforts. Which even didn't go right at first: the player made a calculation error and didn't give the three of us enough money. Something they discovered only a few weeks later, fessed up and immediately paid back the rest. I think none of us realized that at first, probably because none of us really cared all that much (I think). So yeah... I seriously don't think you'll be able to fix this.
