As i said i don’t like such systems just like exclusivity deals.
I must be missing a point here or missunderstand something completly.
EDIT: Sometimes you can’t find your own mistakes and i think i am at that point right now.
Roll for item #1: You have 12.5% chance of winning
Roll for item #2: You have 12.5% chance of winning
Roll for item #3: You have 12.5% chance of winning
Etc. forever after.
That certainly doesn’t mean you will always, or ever, win exactly 12.50000000000% of the items.
Over long enough time, it will be fairly close in most cases though.
But there are no adjustments or nudging toward ensuring you get close to 12.5%, nor should there be. A few outliers will exist, or maybe more correctly, will theoretically exist, as they might be too rare to realistically emerge in the D2R population, which I believe was MicroRNAs point
2 Likes
Lol. Ya make things optional and have a ladder system in place at same time. Seems legit.
I already knew i was bad at probability calculations in school and you just shown that i am still bad at it. Thank you 
That’s on me though…
1 Like
If the two options are equal, the ladder wont be affected.
If the two are not equal, then the goal should be to make them equal.
Or, heck, instead make sure that FFA is slightly better than Ploot, to “preserve” FFA as the efficient choice for people competing on ladder.
Anyway, a test ladder for 3-6 months could show us how equal the two systems would be, allowing for adjustments.
And if it turned out it would be unrealistic to balance them enough for ladder, well, there is always the fallback option of only allowing Ploot in non-ladder.
Seems unlikely that would be necessary though.
Especially since ladder is about fast lvling. And Timed Allocation Ploot is pretty much guaranteed to reduce XP gain a bit (potentially more time spent looting)
Sorry, Shadout, this all seems overcooked to me. Complexity introduces ways for people to nitpick the design all to hell, no matter its merits.
I’d be fine with an “you eat what you kill” system - which allows whoever kills a monster/boss to have about 2-5 seconds to grab an item, otherwise it goes to FFA.
Perhaps simplicity would introduce fewer ways for people to stomp their feet and resist anything that resembles progress…
Who determines who killed a monster? The killing blow? Because that would be extremely imbalanced, and wreak havoc on the build balance.
A /roll 1-8 is not overcooked. The loot system I have proposed basically cant get more simple.
Yeah, that has to be a central part of it, to ensure loot is not wasted, and everyone potentially can get the item.
Simple would be keeping the system as it is. No work required.
FFA is also simpler than any Ploot system. A mob dies, loot drops. Easy peasy.
2 Likes
And the below is an example of how those people would not stop stomping their feet 
1 Like
Personally, I don’t have a problem with “last hit” getting the prizes. Most people complaining about FFA/pLoot are probably envisioning Diablo + Baal drops during rushes/leveling runs. Since the carrier is in the middle of things, they’re probably the most deserving of the best loot.
If that’s too simplistic, I’ve posted elsewhere - I’d support a system that awarded loot for white/blue monsters with a “last hit” gets the drop. For bosses, the game could tally the apportionment of damage and then allocate using a random chance based on the relative damage. Programmatically within the graphics wrapper, this isn’t hard to accomplish, requiring few network resources as well.
But let me finish with this thought: I really don’t mind FFA at all. Played it for decades (!) without complaint. I’ve joined several of these conversations for one reason:
To at least try and educate purists to stop telling potential players to “go away!” any time they might have the slightest suggestion that moves D2 beyond the scope of holy writ.
If we keep telling them to leave, they will. And this will result in D2R never getting the patching it most-certainly will require.
Discouraging younger/new players is in no one’s interest!
This guy, your script is messed up because the odds are small and I dont know how to code so im going to make up random excuses. This is reality bro its RNG. You obviously don’t know how ploot is coded an works. Maybe go play POE in a 8man group an watch. There is no 1/8 even split an it can infinitely be lopsided. This is “random” so 1/8 guarantee is impossible. Nice try though. But sounds like you guys are just rhykker fanboys an have no clue how the actual allocation works.
- There doesn’t have to be only 1 carrier. Whereas there can only be one killing blow.
- Nor are the people contributing the most necessarily in the middle of things (such as if you are ranged).
Anyway, imo a Timed Allocation system should not aim to be “fair”, in the sense that those contributing the most should get rewarded more. Neither FFA nor ploot works like that, and shouldnt work like that. It would not fit Diablo 2 imo, even if we could actually design a “fair” system, which I would argue is impossible.
The only “fairness” in the Timed Allocation ploot system most people seem to be proposing around here, is the “fairness” of the dice roll.
That is many times more complicated than my /roll X system though 
And imo it would also be wildly unbalanced.
1 Like
Your code is bugged and you are not calculating drops correctly.
What you are doing for each item drop:
Check player 1: If chance-is-fulfilled give item to him
Check player 2: if chance-is-fulfilled give item to him
Check player 3: if chance-is-fulfilled give item to him
…
This results in player 8 having only the chance to get an item if the 7 players before all miss their chance.
Player 1 only needs to hit his specific chance.
For 0.125 it shouldnt make a difference, but obviously you have some other calculation issue going on there that makes the chances ~80% for every player to get an item if the players before have received no item.
This results in:
p1: 80%
p2: 20% * 80% = ~16%
p3: 20% * 20% * 80% = ~3,2%
…
So almost exactly the numbers of your example.
Fix your code and the numbers will be as MicroRNA has posted.
Edit: it even says in your logoutput that your assignment chance is not 0.125, but 0.801 instead.
So it is exactly what i said it was.
And you added a loop to ensure that the chance will be anything but 0.125.
You can tell from the code that you most likely ran the same code multiple times just to see how you’d get the most ridiculous numbers from it.
Further above in your log file you can see an example that is alot closer to 0.125 (still not even remotely there, but it seems to be somewhere close to 30% dropchance (of the remaining loot) per player).
So even that already bonkers example was “too fair” for you to use as a “debunk example”.
Very dishonest. But frankly, exactly the way we got to know you already in your other posts.
You are either the most blatant and dishonest liar on this board or so incredibly stupid that you would have trouble keeping your oxygen supply on a livable minimum.
Given your lousy attempt to cheat yourself through and argument you are most likely both.
2 Likes
Ok. I’ve been playing this game for 15 years and it’s one of the main features that sets it apart from successors like diablo 3 or Poe. The economy and competitiveness of the game revolves around being FFA.
I’m not judging anyone. In my opinion people who are interested in starting to play the game are now judging that their will should prevail, disregarding the fact that the game has had a solid community for over 20 years. Again, it’s a remaster and not a remake. So if a 20-year-old game has a feature that you don’t like, it doesn’t seem fair to me to change something that worked for so long just to please a minority with a modern and less competitive mentality.
PoE has loot options including FFA as does Grim Dawn, so it really doesn’t set it apart.
The loot system has nothing to do with the economy. If 3 items drop in a FFA game and those same 3 items drop in an auto allocated game, that’s 3 items.
If being competitive in this regard is your goal, then guess what?.. with a toggle you and all the other FFA people can keep playing that way.
You are judging. You are assuming everyone who wants a choice hasn’t been playing the game as long as you or someone else thus invalidating their opinion.
And the D2LoD community is anything but “solid”. Most people currently play a heavily modded private server version, not the original.
This really is a tired argument. A remaster doesn’t negate the possibility of changes. This is proven by the fact that many changes have already been made.
So, if a 20 year old game that’s being modernized (remastered) in several ways has features we don’t like, we talk about making optional changes so the people can opt out if they don’t like the direction the changes went.
1 Like
Optional Ploot in Diablo 2 is like having optional Easy difficulties in Dark Souls.
Absolutely does not belong in the game. And yes, having it as an option impacts everyone. First, by taking dev time away from other issues. Second, by altering the competitive balance between all players in the trading/economy portion of the game. Third, by ultimately increasing the drop rates, because players will scream bloody murder when they kill the countess and don’t get any runes, or Mephisto and don’t get the Shako.
When people filled out these online surveys that got tossed around, I guarantee you that the vast majority of the respondents who said they want Ploot weren’t thinking about the “balanced” form that is so carefully detailed by a few posters here. They were thinking of instanced loot where everyone got a full drop.
Now that would be blasphemy, and should never ever happen.
Timed Allocation Loot is nothing like it.
And more nonsense!
Which other issues would it take dev time from?
At some point Blizzard will have addressed the bugs, console interface etc. Then they can work on stuff like Ploot.
What is altered, and how would that in any way affect the trading/economy?
Probably yes.
A better survey should clarify.
However, those people, who are already extremely into changes, as well as people who answered No to Ploot in the surveys exactly because they did not want D3-style drops, would likely support a more sensible, balanced solution like Timed Allocation. Cementing a vast majority in favor of Ploot.
I disagree with you there. The FFA system is somewhat a trademark of Diablo II, yes but let me simply copy& paste the rest from an earlier post i made in this thread.
You can argue that based on the lifetime of Diablo II now the FFA loot system somewhat defined Diablo II. However that only makes sense now because the game is being remastered after 21 years. The loot allocation wasn’t a problem back then and reviews from back then clearly show that. It also proves the point that the community is now more knowledgeable about other options.
After doing some research on that matter i’d say the FFA system is not a core pillar of the game and it is a made up arguement for not changing the game.