Need/Greed/Pass

[joejoeirish]

I ama little tired groups that always want to "pass" on everything BOP and then roll seperately and trust the winner to pick up item. What's the point?

That is wasteful and confusing. If you need it, need it - and the roll will be done automatically. If you don't need it, greed it or pass. Problem solved.

And this system leaves less room for error and is faster.

It's the same as how people never never use the meeting stones and complain they can't find a group- instead typing only in "LFG" channel.

Blizzard changed both of these things to make them better yet many players refuse to adept, even after many months.

Now the meeting stones will function like warlocks summon I guess, making it almost too easy to get a group at the instance without traveling. they already added FPs in Ratchet and Un'Goro. To me this makes it less of a "world" and more like a series of instances like a GW or D&D online, IMO.

[Wicke]

Well-said. I can understand why guilds might employ this system, but for a group of any other variety to do so has always struck me as very silly. Particularly the ones who then complain about ninja-looting -- they do realise that if they use the need/greed system then ninja-looting can't happen, right?

[swaldman]

I ama little tired groups that always want to "pass" on everything BOP and then roll seperately and trust the winner to pick up item. What's the point?

That is wasteful and confusing. If you need it, need it - and the roll will be done automatically. If you don't need it, greed it or pass. Problem solved.


I tend to agree. Never understood the "everybody pass" rule. Personally I go with need/pass, as do most on my server.

It's the same as how people never never use the meeting stones and complain they can't find a group- instead typing only in "LFG" channel.

This one, however, has good reasons. The meeting stones do not select by class. WHile it is fun to do instances with wacky groups once in a while, most people want a balance. Plus, if nobody else uses the meeting stones then they won't help much :-)

Now the meeting stones will function like warlocks summon I guess, making it almost too easy to get a group at the instance without traveling.

Good idea in principle, but I can already see the problem - every group will have 3-4 members who sit around in IF waiting for somebody else to travel and summon them.

they already added FPs in Ratchet and Un'Goro. To me this makes it less of a "world" and more like a series of instances like a GW or D&D online, IMO.

I don't mind the Ratchet one...in fact I welcome it... but the Un'goro one makes no sense at all, and is in direct conflict with the storyline of the quests next to it (the NPCs are all supposed to be stranded there with no communication to the outside world!)

[Herald of Doom]

Disenchanting

HoD

[mesonm]

Is this just a rant?

Nice...

As for WOW being less like a world now, you are free to walk, IMO.

[Mallstrop]

I ama little tired groups that always want to "pass" on everything BOP and then roll seperately and trust the winner to pick up item. What's the point?
[/quote

It allows the item to stay on the corpse, if no one needs it then there's a chance that an enchanter can turn it in to a shard if the winner wants it.

[quote]
It's the same as how people never never use the meeting stones and complain they can't find a group- instead typing only in "LFG" channel.

The meeting stones system is awful, there's no way to pick what members you're going to get in your group, personally I normally take along a tank, healer, and probably a mage for sheep and water, that's not possible with the stones.

[Therasil]

With the new LFG UI in the upcoming patch making PUG's will be so much easier. Also no more LFG channel spam since it's not there anymore =P

[joejoeirish]

You guys are right about the meeting stones. The new LFG UI will hopefully be much much better. That was just a point.

As far as how the new summing thing will work out and evolve we will jsut see. I tend to agree it might lead to "No, YOU travel to the instance and summon me" type of thing. Maybe it would be better if you needed 4 total players there to be able to summon that LAST STRAGLER as oppossed to just two where the other 3 can just hang out in IF. But this will play out soon and we will see.

I was just bringing this up since many other MMOs use the "everyone in a tavern" to group then warp to a dungeon "every group in an instance" -- then back to a tavern again! Its OK, but that's not WOW.

Instances are fun and create balance consistency for the dungeons and raids of course. But I also like the idea of a dynamic world where you can run into anyone-- friend or foe-- that can help you or hurt you with your Quests along the way! Or just create a way to have a suprise PvP battle or meet an old friend on the road that u teamed with before! Those are some of the most fun moments I've Had. I also like the idea that what you are doing is visible and consistent with everyone on the server-- not just you! Things like World PvP are a great addition even though its a small part of the game right now. To me that's what the Massive in MMO stands for.

To me the "normal" servers should be PvP and the others should be called PvE. This is just a naming change but would encourage more to be on the PvP servers (which seems to be happenning anyway!).

[Wicke]

I'd like to see them just do away with the 'normal' tag altogether, actually. Label realms PvE, PvP, RPPvE and RPPvP. Calling a realm 'normal' creates too much bias -- I've seen a fair few folk join WoW who are concerned about rolling on a PvP realm because they want to experience the 'normal' ruleset before any alternative ones.

[cyks]

The reason most people still pass on BoP items is to either allow time to actually check to see if it's better then what they have (although the longer timer does away with most issues), or more commonly to continue fighting if needed without having a good portion of the screen covered.


Using the old meeting stones? No chance- and thank you Blizzard for doing away with them. The few times I've used them I've found myself grouped up with nothing but rogues and other hunters 6+ levels below me.

[joejoeirish]

good point, that's kinda what I was trying to say, that labelling the PvE "normal" creates a bias. And since I started on a "normal" for the same reason you mentioned-- I wish I was on a PvP. But I don't wanna pay 25 bucks for a transfer.

IMO-- for our normal fee- we should be allowed one free tranfer a month--- or at least a one time one tranfer! That's just a minor gripe.

[Trepidation]

Need/greed only means loss of chance to melt and make valuable shards.

I wish they had a system of where if it is BoP it is Need or nothing and if BoE it is need/greed/nothing. This would go a long ways to solving this problem...but that would be logical.

[joejoeirish]

Well, if only one person selects "need" then it doesnt really matter if you pass or greed it. Cuz it's gonna got to the person or persons who selected need.

[Fursphere]

I don't mind the Ratchet one...in fact I welcome it... but the Un'goro one makes no sense at all, and is in direct conflict with the storyline of the quests next to it (the NPCs are all supposed to be stranded there with no communication to the outside world!)

last time you did those quests? They changed the story line to fit the flight point. They are no longer "stranded" - they are now an "expidition"

:)

[Fursphere]

Need/greed only means loss of chance to melt and make valuable shards.

I wish they had a system of where if it is BoP it is Need or nothing and if BoE it is need/greed/nothing. This would go a long ways to solving this problem...but that would be logical.

Ahh, but how many times does something get sharded, and it never gets rolled on? Or the enchanter keeps all the "dust", and only allows the shards to be rolled on. etc... etc..

Personally, just greed it, so the whole group has a change at the green item, so they can vendor it, AH it, or shard it with an alt.

BoPs... many are worth more to sell to vendors than sharding. Something has to pay those repair costs. :)

[Tanitha]

What's your solution, joejoeirish? More out of idle curiosity, rather than anything else.

[joejoeirish]

no solution, I really don't see a big problem. It's really just a minor thing anyway. It's all in how people play the game. I just think people should adapt and use the tools that become available when they are added to the game. I think the need/greed rolling system was well designed and thought out. Maybe the timer could be a little longer and the popup not in the middle of the screen. But other than that it is a good "two-tiered" rolling system.

My orginal point is that people should just use it as it was designed. But of course, the guild or team leader sets the loot rules, and I will follow them.

[Herald of Doom]

BoPs... many are worth more to sell to vendors than sharding. Something has to pay those repair costs. :)
Very dependant on server, but I can safely say everything on my last few runs the shards were worth four times than the vendorvalue. BoE is definately n/g though (with the added option of world drop BoE purples, our guildpolicy is everyone greedrolls :) )

HoD

[Tanitha]

My orginal point is that people should just use it as it was designed. But of course, the guild or team leader sets the loot rules, and I will follow them.

Thanks for that! I can kinda see why people choose the "Pass" option to have it disenchanted and then /roll'ed for. But, I haven't been in those types of scenarios yet so that's only based on what I've read on these forums.

[MadVlad]

Ahh, but how many times does something get sharded, and it never gets rolled on? Or the enchanter keeps all the "dust", and only allows the shards to be rolled on. etc... etc..

Personally, just greed it, so the whole group has a change at the green item, so they can vendor it, AH it, or shard it with an alt.

BoPs... many are worth more to sell to vendors than sharding. Something has to pay those repair costs. :)

This would be solved by allowing enchanters to disenchant in the "Will not be traded" slot in the trade window.

[Dynatos]

good point, that's kinda what I was trying to say, that labelling the PvE "normal" creates a bias. And since I started on a "normal" for the same reason you mentioned-- I wish I was on a PvP. But I don't wanna pay 25 bucks for a transfer.

IMO-- for our normal fee- we should be allowed one free tranfer a month--- or at least a one time one tranfer! That's just a minor gripe.

Don't worry. You can't transfer from 'normal' to 'PvP', so you won't need to pay $25. :wink:

[joejoeirish]

really? Why is that?

[djiss]

because leveling a 60 on a PvE server is easy mode, you dont have lev 60 ganking you all the way you level.

not fair for players who leveled their toon "fair & square" in those more difficult conditions