Fine, you can have Personal Loot

Diablo II: Resurrected General Discussion
435

That sounds like a good thing.
Still i dont get what it has to do with pLoot (if it is not already covered by a good participation rule)
Either use FFA for it or use a “service run” setting for it.

But as you already said, it is mainly used by players below level 80. In my experience that is basically when the game starts and the runs are happening between players who all participate and who all deserve a fair share of the loot.

I would like a system that covers most of these cases and allows people to get reasonable items for their participation. If in these kind of runs, it already works on a bilateral level, then FFA works for them. So you still have that option to fall back on.

Understood. We were talking about different things then.
I did not take part in these kind of runs, i think, but it is good they exist and they enrich the community.

Still you might want to consider that adding a drop-mode to embed these rules into the system might be a good idea.
My proposal #1: a special service run/boost mode

  • all drops apart from quest drops belong to the creator/one specific player
  • all drops are made public after a certain time

My proposal #2: pLoot system with damage component to determine service player

  • player who deals most damage gets most loot (e.g. > 50% dmg → 50% loot)
  • all drops are made public after a certain time

Seems like you are not part of the problem then. Good.
I do not think, we have to disagree on stuff here. As i said, i think, it might be a good idea to come up with a rule-set for the other kind of runs, where you do not have a benevolent player doing all the work.

436

i mean ffa loot generally already does this though…
roughly 80% of the time you will get loot from the monster you kill unless your a zon and killed a monster that was significantly closer to another player.

bosses are obviously not ideal and there is no real way to make it anything but a complete hope u click fastest when all 8 players are attacking the exact same monster who drops the best loot and it all falls in one tiny area and u all know that.

but in 99.9% of the game thats not just act bosses FFA loot works wonderfully… as you are generally closest to the monster you are killing and at the very least looking at that exact spot and hitting alt RIGHT as it dies…, this already gives you a massive advantage of getting any loot drops from it… and yeah around 20% of the time you wont… but thats much better than any alternative

1 Like
437

I agree. i said above that if the team is split, the players should get loot as in the normal game.
I would even be willing to reduce it to boss-loots only, but i think there might be some exceptions here (e.g. throne room), so i think a distance rule might be better suited.

I think you misunderstand the 1/8 for a global-everybody gets 1/8 thing.
I do not think that me or the others arguing for pLoot here are asking for a global 1/8 distribution. The key to me is participation, which could include: activity (vs afk), damage, distance (balanced out for ranged combatants)

438

yeah generally it goes… if i haven’t picked it up in 3-5 second… its yours, that means i don’t want it, (or I’m so damn slow i don’t deserve it XD)

and yeah if i let someone make the next game for quest the boss drops are obviously theirs. that goes without saying. everyone knows you only get 1 quest drop per char and if only 1 person needs quest then boss drops are theirs.

1 Like
439

I have suggested before to include that into pLoot.
That was exactly my vision:

  • distribute items based on some rule into personalized loot
  • still visible to other players
  • becomes public after x seconds (balanced against game fluency)

I just didnt know that these rules already were fleshed out as you described above. Which makes it even more reasonable to create a special loot mode for it in my view.

Yes, i agree that it should be considered in pLoot (or some other loot mode).
It should be a pretty easy rule to code into pLoot. (if quest.isOpen(playerX) then loot.giveTo(playerX)). The most complicated thing would be if multiple players have an open quest, in which case i would again suggest to use pLoot to distribute it between the two (maybe without the damage rule, because they might have been shuttled).

This would secure their loot against ninja-looters (who unfortunately exist) or people not aware of that rule (who also exist). And as you said: you have only 1 quest loot per boss and difficulty, so when it is ninja’d, it is gone.

440

Personal loot would make more items to be circulated, thus the value of some items will decrease so will the rarity. Which isn’t a bad thing, however game would become easier(by 0.02% :D). Unless, there is no trading, but diablo 2 without trading, would become D3ish.

I have no issues with shared loot as I’m used to playing 00’s mmorpg’s where the party would get the priority of pickup and other scavengers around have 30s pickup ban.
So if you aren’t invited into party play you get the last draw if there is any left.

Another interesting mechanic is random party member loot allocation regardless of which player of the party picks the item up first, everyone gets a chance for item to go to their inventory. After that you just trade.

441

Actually, it is the exact opposite. As described below, personal loot results in less good items in the economy and makes it harder to gear up.

Also, personal loot disincentives service runs, since the carrier can no leech extra gear whose existence is based on others being in the game. Also, this means that the undergeared characters do not get a rapid way to gain xp. Therefore, the game is harder with personal, in contrast to those who think personal loot makes things easier.

2 Likes
442

Should this even be a thing, though? Honestly. Maybe it’s just me, but I’d rather get my own experience and drops than have someone else get them for me.

And that’s a problem. I don’t think anyone should be punished on loot based on their class or build choice. Do you?

Well, yeah, there is. You stop linking loot to clicking the fastest.

There’s also bots to worry about, and lag.

Soulstone is Runed | DiabLoL 2 Ep23 - YouTube

1:40.

If the drop rate didn’t change, how would more items be circulated?

1 Like
443

How? It is literally the same items that drop. So how can there be more?
To add to it, since the items are distributed amongst more players, they would actually be more likely to be able to us them (since they might not have found them already), hence reducing the amount of unused items in circulation, which would again increase their trade value because of less supply. There would also be slightly less demand, since some people would actually find the items they need themselves.
Self-found, a very well-known play-style of diablo.
For those others who get loot that they do not intend to use, they can simply trade it, as ppl are doing now. The difference being that nowadays some people grab all they can get and trade it (resulting in few people having alot of supply), while with a split loot multiple people would have the same items (resulting in many people having alot of supply). The trade mechanisms stay the same, but there are smaller “monopolies” for high quality items and every player has value to trade instead of having to sell their last shirt for an item they desperately need.

In my version of pLoot this would not apply, since i would make drops public after a reasonable amount of time (e.g. 3 seconds). Which basically means that the looter does not opt to pick up the item and leaves it for the rest of the team.

He is talking about a very specific version of runs, where one highly-geared player basically carries 7 low-level/low-gear players. He does 90-99% of the work, while the others just follow in his footsteps.
It is basically the interactive version of “gief free plz”. Maybe not everybodies cup of tea, but it is a playstyle that should still be possible.
In my view loot mode should give the carrier the first chance on looting and after a certain time (e.g. 3 seconds) the rest of the players can take them.

Interesting. So there are even 2 DiabLoL episodes about the ninja-looting subject already.
(200k views, 17k upvotes, 112 downvotes. but it also has some more narrative topics like necro-gameplay, black wall and soulstone quest).

1 Like
444

There are some Diablol episodes show lots and lots of ninja looting; however, I think the majority of episodes highlight at least some.

1 Like
445

There are more. The running gag involves the Amazon finding an item and the Assassin coming out of nowhere to grab it before she can.

Anyway, the example I linked was more about lag than ninja loot.

1 Like
446

Hmm…
So party of 8 would get exact same x amount of drop only personal? As similar as it would have been in solo play? Do I get it right now?

So if they would decide to trade those items instead of keeping them doesn’t it make it more items in circulation? There would be more supply as there would be x8 more items. Let’s say bot party of 8 would be able to get a lot of items to flood the market with. Making it even worse than it is now.(Let’s hope that bots get eradicated).

I see it opposite, again, if items are not bound to player then it would make it hell a lot of a monopoly for some serious farming parties of 8. Isn’t that the reason why D3 has bound/limited items per character?

Do you see my point? I understand that drop rate stays as it is and could be the main factor here, but once it drops there is x8 of everything(party of 8).

I was referring to more items in general, not different items dropping for each party player, sorry, should have explained my thought clearer, apologies.

447

The game already calculates the number of drops based on the number of players in game. More players mean more total drops. Irrespective of the loot allocation system (FFA or personal/instanced loot), the total number of drops remain the same.

This is not what is meant. If there is 200 total drops in an 8 player FFA game, then there will also be 200 total drops in an 8 player personal/instaned loot game where each gets about 25 drops with binomial variance. *

  • This assumes the the players stick together as instanced loot only giives a drop if you are nearby to the monster killed.
2 Likes
448

When we propose the drop rate remain the same, we mean it stays the same.

As it is now, you kill a monster, an item drops. First to pick it up gets it. Under the proposed personal loot system, you kill a monster, an item drops. A random roll determines who can pick it up. Same amount of loot.

2 Likes
449

Thanks for the summarised version!
Hmmm, that sounds reasonable! I wouldn’t mind such a change, however I reckon devs wouldn’t want to make such a drastic mechanical change to the game, not at the initial release. Same goes for the charm inventory etc. If you look at the interviews they are very reserved whenever such topics are brought up. Visual changes are easier to fulfil as there is more freedom.

I agree, this version of pLoot wouldn’t damage the game.

1 Like
450

They are reserved; however after the alpha and Blizzard’s two D2R surveys, they discovered that the playerbase supported the changes already introduced and wanted more.

How Diablo 2 Is Changing on Its Path to Resurrection… While Staying True to Its Roots - IGN

The quote below is from this article.

The team also wanted to gauge the fanbase’s reaction to some of the small quality of life changes that had been implemented, such as automatic gold pick-up. “For the most part people really liked them,” Gallerani says. “In fact they want to see more. The game is still a work in progress - this was a tech alpha - so even from the design side we have a lot of thoughts about [additional] quality of life updates and ways we can make them better.”
“A lot of the feedback has been specific, low level, little things across the board,” Gallerani continues. “The community has been amazing, we have sites of people putting together surveys and PowerPoints for us. It’s awesome to see them share how they feel about it.”

“We can’t promise that we can or will change everything,” Lead Artist Chris Amaral adds. “But when there are things we agree with, we can push them a little further.”

1 Like
451

Thanks for taking the time to align on this topic.

Unfortunately it is full of misunderstandings (which the post history shows).
I think, the frequent posters here (Orrion, MicroRNA, me) all agree on the same points:

  • amount of item should remain the same as in FFA
  • players who participate more should receive more items
  • ninja-looting (looting without participation) should be prevented
  • the loot mode should be optional

So now we have another name who agrees with these statements (i assume).

There are some minor differences (e.g. pLoot stays private vs becomes public, pLoot is visible vs invisible to other players) that even we disagree on though. But i think no matter which of these minor points would be chosen, we would still be fine with it.

The hard part is to come up with a good rule to check for the “participation” and what is actually a “fair share”.
In my view the hardest condition should be the damage dealt. Because that is what is the main denominator of speed.
I dont think that we can include non-damage play like tping to baal room sufficiently in automated rules. So those things would be a blindspot still, unless anybody has a good idea about it.

Let’s say, we link the drop-portion of each player directly to his damage ratio. (the loot percentages can be read as Chance to receive a loot item per loot drop of the measured monster)
E.g. “service player game”:
damage 90%x1 player, 10%x7 player → 1 player gets 90% of the drops, 7 players get 10/7% of the drops each.

E.g. “even leveled CS/Baal run”:
damage 12,5%x8 player → Each player gets 12,5% of the loot

E.g. “even CS/Baal run with 2 leechers”:
damage 16%x6 player, 4%x 1 player 0%x 1 player → 6 players gets 16% of the loot, 1 player gets 4% of the loot, 1 player gets nothing.

To me these numbers look already pretty fair. I dont even think, we need to calculate activity and distance into them. Distance might complicate things (what is my distance if the enemy/my hero teleports during the fight?). Activity is hard to measure (but what about players who go afk until the boss spawns? Is a teleport sorx eligible for more loot because she participates earlier? What about shrine scouts? What about that guy who goes for mephi for 8ppl loot, while the sorx is teleporting for the entire team? Should he receive the same loot as the sorx?).
In the end, the important part is that you bring your damage to the books, right? What do you guys think?

Also, how would we deal with situations where there are multiple monsters? E.g. the throne room or baal clones. Should the damage on a baal clone or a tentacle enable a player to receive baal loot? Is he eligible for the loot or is he focusing on the wrong enemy?
What about the throne room? Let’s say a cold sorx kills all mummies, but a skeleton drops a zod rune. Would she be elegible for the rune drop because she actively participated in its vicinity or not because she did 0 damage to the cold immune enemy?

1 Like
452

Ideally, yes, but I’m not sure that’s possible or feasible.

This is why I tend to think that shouldn’t be messed with. At the point you use damage done to determine loot, you start moving the game away from the player being able to choose what they want to play. One of the reasons I dislike FFA is because characters at range have a disadvantage, meaning what you choose to play has an effect on your ability to claim loot. The same would be true if you make loot distribution influenced by damage done - except it would be far worse, especially if you didn’t choose a build that absolutely excelled at AoE.

453

Fair point. But isnt damage dealt the most important factor for fast runs? (counter examples like a bo barb or a teleport sorx come to mind)
So let’s assume you do 100 damage and i do 90 damage . Wouldnt it be fair for you to get slightly more loot? Afterall, i am benefitting from your greater damage and you are benefitting from my damage, so we split based on that ratio.

What characters would benefit too much from a system like that and which characters would lose?
In my experience every class has multiple playable styles which all are pretty suitable to dish out their fair share of damage (~12,5%) - to a single enemy (static field might be too easy to get a high ratio though, but then again without static field it would take longer). If you deal more damage, you effectively help everbody else move faster, thus increasing their loot indirectly. Still you are giving them their fair share.

What builds would lose in such system?

Yes, dealing with multiple enemies is a topic i tried to avoid in my examples for the sake of giving an example that we can already identify some inherent problems with.

I personally think when it comes to multiple enemies, it should depend on damage dealt in “the same room” or something similar. So even a player with less aoe could hold their ground.
And regarding aoe, i am not sure how to deal with that. Certainly a javazone or a orb sorx can deal more damage to a crowd than an amok barbarian. Still the amok barbarian is taking down a pesky *high-hp monster and tanking damage.
Maybe there is a way to factor those things in.

454

Ideally, yes… but given that characters are capable of soloing the 8 player mode, if you put 8 people in the group the damage won’t be broken down evenly even if all 8 are equally capable.

Let’s take D3. I can log onto my Wizard who is perfectly capable of soloing a 100+ GR easily and dishing out trillions in damage… but if you put that Wizard in Torment 16 with a GoD DH, I’m probably not going to do much damage.

I couldn’t say, offhand. It’s been too long and I wasn’t a D2 build expert anyway.

Maybe there is. I’m just not sure it’s worth it.

I wouldn’t be opposed to bonus drops awarded based on factors like that, but that does technically change the drop rates and while I wouldn’t mind a slight increase there are some people that would.

1 Like