the wording isnt the hang up, i think the mechanics are. I think the qualifying being mob specific is a really bad idea. I understand an activity qualifier to prevent blatant leeching but beyond that I think it encourages someone to go out and snipe mobs quick to get full loot and goes away from the whole goal. NOT EVERY CLASS HAS AN AURA.
so hold up, you are saying if player A has an aura, and player B is within range for the aura, that player B gets access to loot even if they do absolutely nothing? You arent thinking your own mechanics through very well. futher - you cant make mechanics based on likely team dyanmics
the mf one is clear how it is an issue. It is a huge mf boost without a clear time drawback. the normal tradeoff is stack mf but lose clear speed. if I can have a dummy sit with 1000 MF and not have to worry if they do damage thats a boost. the reason you are opposed to average mf or killing blow mf being used is because you know its a boost
yes, I get that but your mercs or someone probably will in the group. this is all about group play. if one person/merc has a aura everyone gets chance. This discourages people from being lone wolf because they wont get the team benefits
yes, I stated it was discussed and agreed it was a incentive for more group play and additional builds like item barb
yes exactly what I’m saying. the aura or perhaps their MF was the contribution.
Player A - has aura
Player B - has aura on them - does absolutely 0 dmg or even attempt to - can just walk and pick up loot.
MF -
just because ploot players want the change doesnt mean its ok. And for the like 7th time. It is fine if you guys want to argue you should get the MF boost, but you cannot at the same time argue it doesnt change the effective item drops. That is a blatant lie.
MF boost and acknowledge its a boost
or no mf boost, cant argue both
your literal design is asking to ENCOURAGE players to make characters with only MF gear to boost a teams MF while not actually fighting? really? arguments like this are why anti ploot people will only become further anti ploot btw
but it’s true versus people that argue “we need higher drop rate” if we Insititute ploot because less drops vs FFA for some people argument. This takes advantage of already existing mechanics such as item barb. it doesn’t auto boost amount of loot dropped automatically.
lol there a lot more there than that but if you want to zero in on this one part yes more players will be in more group games playing builds that are already in the game that would otherwise be collecting dust. so its a design option that would be a improvement
making a character to do nothing but provide MF isnt “playing a build” that would otherwise be collecting dust. just admit the MF boost would be exploited and you are ok with it, thats a fine argument to make. just realize it will be met with counters by the majority of players because they understand basic mechanics and the implications.
you are thinking narrowly how you might play and not the global impact and the behaviors that are encouraged
I’ll bite. This is not conflicting at all. Players in a game are either partied (teammates) or not. Partied teammates within 100 yards automatically get a chance at loot. Unpartied players can get a chance as long as they in some way deal damage to the Mob or object.
I understand the confusion, however in this argument you are nitpicking details of the idea’s implementation, rather than providing an argument against the implementation altogether.
It will not split players in any meaningful way, no more than hardcore v softcore, online v offline, private v public, player caps, and level restrictions. It will be less splitting than hardcore vs softcore and online vs offline, as in those cases separate economies are created. In all other splitting occurrences players are still able to interact with eachother whenever they wish, and most importantly, trade items.
And to emphasize, a ploot option in any form that doesn’t create soul bound items, will have no net effect on your economy positive or negative. The exact same amount of items will be generated and enter circulation in either case.
Common counterarguments to ploot options are that players can accomplish this already by playing offline or playing privately, which of themselves are encouraging further splits and in the case of suggesting players just play offline are damaging to the online economy. So, at best, I find that “playerbase splitting” and “economy damaging” arguments are disingenuous, at best.
Here you are again arguing details of the implementation and not the idea itself.
For what it’s worth I believe many players would welcome the idea that another player’s higher MF would affect the drops rather than whoever has the killing blow, and a “magic find build” in a party would be as welcomed an addition as a BO barb or a Teleporter.
Here you are arguing the presentation / communication of the idea rather than the idea itself.
I mean it kinda would be. people aren’t making them now really.
we seem to be slightly miscommunicating on this part. I mention the item barb, the group MF, because most players argued for more drops. This is a fairer system than just more loot for everyone just because. This would still require teamwork, which for the most part, there isn’t too much of in D2R online games right now. This overall design is a combining of several models into one fluid most approved model.
it wont increase drops in the sense of no increase to drop rate tables. now if you put together a group of 8 and have a high MF person opening tons of chests there will be some increase but the loot that drops would still be evenly distributed. Baal would still drop his usual 3-5 items
im not nitpicking details, i clarifying and pointing out inconsistencies. The issues being “nitpicked” arent my fault.
the OP suggests either you have to hit the chest to get it or be within 100 yards. obviously both arent true. the clarifications have only made it muddier where apparently as long as an aura is cast on you then you get access to loot even while making 0 contribution by the OPs plan
I said, its fine if you are ok with the splitting, but to suggest it will be split the same as the colorblind option is ridiculous. it will 100% split players. maybe you arent realizing the theme of my arguments:
The OPs plan and the following claims of what it WONT do are in very clear conflict. It is very dishonest. If you erased the claims of what it wont do then you could probably argue im nitpicking.
The MF issue is a very real issue and it WILL change the net result of items being dropped compared to current FFA rules. It’s not about whether it will be welcomed or not, its whether it changes the drops which both you and the OP claim it wont which is blatantly wrong. Average MF or killing blow MF are the only ways imo to not result in a net gain to item quality from the current rules.
My last argument is against the communication, because OP is grandstanding and so against counters and when you want a community to be open to an idea - claiming it is great isnt a good start.
So now here we are, you have made no additions other than to suggest im nitpicking at even obvious mechanic flaws that need to either be clarified or changed and showing you are ignorant to the reality of the suggested MF change.
Your counter seems to have missed this section - which is my concern
This will NOT:
Increase the amount of loot that drops or is in the trading market
Make several copies of each loot for each player
Make it soulbound or otherwise untradable
Split the community, its a optional setting like choosing hell or nightmare or colorblind
im not saying more items will drop from the MF change, but BETTER items will drop which is not the same as it currently is and makes your argument dishonest. its fine if you want increased item quality drops, just say so then
the issue is this right here. this is in DIRECT CONFLICT with what you are suggesting. I dont know how many times i can say this before your thick skull gets it. You cannot argue for increased effective MF and say items wont be better. Pick ONE and only one. Given your inability to read at this point I do consider myself superior just to be clear.
This will NOT:
Increase the amount of loot that drops or is in the trading market
never said they wouldnt be better. I said there wouldn’t be a change to drop rates/tables. There should obviously be a type of incentive to trying this out in a PTR.
yes obviously. As to whether you actually are… well that’s debatable.
You said in your op it will not change the items in the market.
Items that drop from 1000 mf and 500 mf will be different. The MF change and your claim the items in the market will be the same is a lie. They cannot both exist. you get that right?
I didnt think I was superior when I started this convo, but you have given me plenty of reason to change that stance
" This will NOT:
Increase the amount of loot that drops or is in the trading market"
You are precisely nitpicking details. How MF applies and how players would qualify for a loot roll are details. They are not arguments against the idea of timed loot altogether.
And you continue to misunderstand basic game mechanics even after clarification. Any party member within 100 yards under OPs proposal would get an equal roll on the loot, no damage or aura required. An unpartied player would have to contribute damage in some form, by spell, ability, minion, or aura (you are aware, of course, that there are damage-dealing auras like Holy Fire).
Average MF is fine, I don’t particularly care in this context, as again, that’s an argument of how to implement and not an argument against implementation.
You don’t care about splitting playerbases. You are fine with an average MF implementation. You don’t understand basic tagging mechanics.
In summary, you have nothing against the basic idea of Timed Loot at all.
so again ill ask is there now more of those items? no are they better quality? maybe depending on group build at time of drop.
I stand by the satement this is worth putting into a PTR to get real data from
yea me either. Now I think you are a dumbass that can’t see the forest through the trees. I have debated every angle and you haven’t given anything of substance why this wouldn’t be worth putting into a PTR. that’s what the topic is about if you missed that.
how MF applies when the OP is saying items wont change is VERY relevant and way beyond nitpicking. This is a direct change to the economy as a whole.
I never said these were arguments against timed loot as a whole? Why are you saying I did?
"Any party member within 100 yards under OPs proposal would get an equal roll on the loot, no damage or aura required. "
That is not what the OP is claiming and this is his thread.
" Average MF is fine, I don’t particularly care in this context, as again, that’s an argument of how to implement and not an argument against implementation."
again, never said it was. i literally said if you are going to do this then you have to go KB or avg, so not sure where you got the idea I thought this was an argument against timed loot?
I never said any of my arguments were against timed loot. they were against the OPs claims of what it wont do and his mechanic designs.
That is you trying to claim im arguing things I am not