Suggestion: Marginally Better Loot for Person With Star

[Borror0]

Leader 1 loots.
Player2: Hey, pass me the star.
Ding.
Leader 2 loots.
Player 3: Hey, pass me the star.
Ding.
Leader 3 loots.

etc.

No, thanks.

That wouldn't happen since loot is generated when the chest is opened.

[Wyrmnax]

No, thanks

Else we would never get anything done. There would always be 5 shroud grups open, each with 2 persons on it.

During the time where yu gain xp it would be good, but once you get to places that all you go for is the loot, this change would screw it terribily

[shores11]

Given a lot of players don't seem to want to take the star/lead groups, it seems there needs to be some very minor incentive to take that role.

How about a very minor upgrade to loot for the person with the star? Doesn't have to be much, just enough to encourage those who wouldn't otherwise to do so. Not enough that people only will lead groups.

/not signed

This is a very bad idea.

[Aspenor]

That wouldn't happen since loot is generated when the chest is opened.

That doesn't mean it still wouldn't happen in some pugs, which would annoy the **** out of me.

[Anderei]

/not signed,

when grouping with people i know, we constantly pass the star around depending on who is Afk, who got a friend to invite etc., because actually the star doesnt matter.

while the star idea might fit to a PUG-scenario, its a horror when people go questing who know each other.

For me is and always has been everybody in the group is an equal, the star means nothing, if you think you're something special because of the star... seriously dont want to stay there for long.

and even in a PUG scneorio, imagine you disconnect, you reconnect in a minute, and then pickup refuses to give the star back, because he wants the +1. nah

[Yazston_the_Invoker]

Sorry, just doesn't sound right to me. Even something very minor may make people go out of their way to be leader, and a best case scenario, you only end up with an idiot at the helm, or someone who doesn't want to lead, just have the star. In these cases, it may cause alot more drama than already exists, once someone calls them out on it, or when the person who REALLY does the leading wants the star for his/her efforts.

I, for one, like to be in charge...it's in my nature. I like to be the one making the decisions in almost every case...as long as I'm confident I would make the best decisions. This is why, even though I like to lead, I am almost always NOT in the lead, since I simply don't have the experience with most quests to contradict someone who plays the game more often (In 4 years, I haven't put enough time in to get any one toon past lv11).

Now, for someone like me, I don't necessarily need extra incentive...what I need is someone to explain to me the ins and outs of most quests, so that I can feel confident that I will be making the best decisions. I feel that this would be a better way to get people to lead...make the leaders yourselves. Give the idiots the basic knowledge they need to complete the quests successfully. If you see a bad leader, no need to rip into him, but if you have an idea what went wrong, perhaps calmly explaining it to the rest of the group may help at least one of them develop a better understanding of tactics. Best idea that I have is, if you see a player you haven't grouped with, and you know the quest well, take it upon yourself to check if he/she knows the quest, and if not, keep them informed as you go...make sure they understand what's going on and why, instead of simply telling them how not to screw the group and/or kicking them for their n00bness.

That being said, it would be nice to have some kind of incentive for a GOOD lead. Perhaps give groups the option of anonymously giving the leader a thumbs-up at the end of a quest run...make it invisible to the leader, but perhaps if the leader gets 4 or more thumbs-up, he might get an extra item as end reward, or an extra percentage towards raid loot...perhaps even more minor than that, but in this way, it might encourage groups of 4 or more, and it might encourage the leader to do a better job?

Then again, maybe not...

[Lleren]

It is an interesting idea.

Might be better to have it be slightly better loot luck for the entrie group in the case of a full group. That way folks that are heading out to farm for named items are more likely to go with others and not just solo.

If you really want to increase pugging, increase loot luck again for each different guild involved in the pug.

[Scraap]

On the specifics: disagreed.
On the intent of ensuring full crews, a counter-proposal: what about simply lerping* the value (assuming the loot is ordered by value, and not just thrown in a list randomly) such that you have a higher probability of better loot based on party size?

(*lerp is a specific programming phrase commonly denoting skewing the result of a range of two numbers towards one or the other based on a percentile. see shader hlsl for the curious)

[Peo]

On the specifics: disagreed.
On the intent of ensuring full crews, a counter-proposal: what about simply lerping* the value (assuming the loot is ordered by value, and not just thrown in a list randomly) such that you have a higher probability of better loot based on party size?

You actually would set things up worse than they are now. A lot of people would create delays in starting a quest unless you have a full party which would lead to people thinking they had to have half or more of a group before they even put up an LFM thus even less PLs.

If you want to up loot, which seems to be what this thread is than party leading at this point, try upping the end chest for all optionals completed. Right now there is zero reason to do optionals in many quests.

[Pyromaniac]

If you want to up loot, which seems to be what this thread is than party leading at this point, try upping the end chest for all optionals completed. Right now there is zero reason to do optionals in many quests.

Actually I don't care about the loot, just lots of ingame people not wanting to lead groups/put up LFMs and forum threads about no LFMs...but then again I have the star pretty often.

Would be nice if other players put up LFMs more though.

[Peo]

Actually I don't care about the loot, just lots of ingame people not wanting to lead groups/put up LFMs and forum threads about no LFMs...but then again I have the star pretty often.

Would be nice if other players put up LFMs more though.

It is the nature of humanity to follow, it's what makes being a leader so cool

I would like to add a complaint to this thread though. I rarely have problems forming a group as my FvS and Cannith and any time my wizard and fighter pals is in the party it seems I get over requested. I've tried for WW, and two separate Sharn as a Barbarian on the server that starts with A and they went completely ignored. I for one am completely baffled by this. A DPS is a required slot just like healer or arcane is and no one does DPS better than a barb. They should be the first pick of any lot that pretends to do combat.

To put things in perspective my 5th level barbarian is dealing 1d12+24 damage per hit. Excluding the flaming prop. With only a +1 weapon. Only +1 enchantment to str. And unbuffed (not even counting raging). Are you even close to that with your 10th level buffed up ranger/bard/monk/cleric/fvs/rogue yet?

[Uska]

Sorry think its a really really terrible idea

[Zenako]

It is the nature of humanity to follow, it's what makes being a leader so cool

I would like to add a complaint to this thread though. I rarely have problems forming a group as my FvS and Cannith and any time my wizard and fighter pals is in the party it seems I get over requested. I've tried for WW, and two separate Sharn as a Barbarian on the server that starts with A and they went completely ignored. I for one am completely baffled by this. A DPS is a required slot just like healer or arcane is and no one does DPS better than a barb. They should be the first pick of any lot that pretends to do combat.

To put things in perspective my 5th level barbarian is dealing 1d12+24 damage per hit. Excluding the flaming prop. With only a +1 weapon. Only +1 enchantment to str. And unbuffed (not even counting raging). Are you even close to that with your 10th level buffed up ranger/bard/monk/cleric/fvs/rogue yet?

Thats easy to explain. Just like you like to play your offensive minded Barb, there are a lot of other players who are comfortable being melee hack and slashers and would love to have someone else be the nursemaid. From that perspective, they see all the "glory" being with the ones killing the mobs and winning the quests, and other roles are their to just support them.

So any group that already contains the core support roles is attractive to join and will get requests, since they know they won't likely be waiting for someone to join later and be that support. A LFM with only DPS in it, while effective at killing might well be very challenged at surviving, and can often be a nightmare to tend to or herd in the same direction.

Long time players often do not bother with posting for missing roles, just adjust and work it anyway. It tends to be the newer players posting DPS groups and waiting for a healer to take pity on them and join.

[Nahual]

How about we just start a rumor that having the star actually gives +1 loot to all
and none the wiser.

I bet people start saying this in pugs in a week.

[MonsterAbuser]

Scenario:

Party leader accidentally misclicks mid-quest and passes the star to some PuGer they don't know.

PuGer refuses to give the star back so that he can get uber lootz.

Bickering ensues.

Imagine that happening in a raid where raid loot is at stake.

Scenario:

Party leader accidentally misclicks mid-quest and passes the star to some Vet they don't know.

Vet refuses to give the star back so that he can get uber lootz.

Bickering ensues.

[Scraap]

You actually would set things up worse than they are now. A lot of people would create delays in starting a quest unless you have a full party which would lead to people thinking they had to have half or more of a group before they even put up an LFM thus even less PLs.

If you want to up loot, which seems to be what this thread is than party leading at this point, try upping the end chest for all optionals completed. Right now there is zero reason to do optionals in many quests.

While I can see that the likelihood of party delay times might go up a bit, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree that that would be more of a problem than the current setup, since in my view, and with the pugs I've run with on several servers at several levels of play, the prevalent consensus is that it's better to short-man or even solo most quests, since with a full-party dungeon scaling kicks in that much harder, making it more difficult to complete, hence the suggestion to keep the loot-tables the same, but draw more from the higher end the fuller the party. It makes it so it's still *possible* to draw the +5 loot-of-awesome-spiffiness, but more likely if you're doing so collaboratively. Kind of like a codification of the meta game trading that goes on.

(edit: full disclosure, I typically short-man/solo myself most days simply due to lack of time, so I do realize I'm advocating against my own interests here, but it does seem the design is supposed to lean more towards collaborative play, and that's the core issue under discussion when we start talking stars)

[xTethx]

Quit being a sissy and take the star yourself.

[Guildmaster_Kadish]

Absolutely disagreed. No one would ever want to join a group.

[Guildmaster_Kadish]

Scenario:

Party leader accidentally misclicks mid-quest and passes the star to some Vet they don't know.

Vet refuses to give the star back so that he can get uber lootz.

Bickering ensues.

You are aware of what a "PuGer" is, right?

Just a hint: it has nothing to do with being a "noob" or a "newb" or a "vet."

[Guildmaster_Kadish]

A counter-proposal: what about simply lerping* the value (assuming the loot is ordered by value, and not just thrown in a list randomly) such that you have a higher probability of better loot based on party size?

I here I thought the raidloot change was bad....