Posts Tagged loot

Bridging the 10 to 25 Gap

bridge 450 Bridging the 10 to 25 Gap

In the post on guild mergers, I talked a little about what to do when you’re trying to expand from a 10 person to 25 person guild.  Today, I’d like to expand on that a bit outside of the context of mergers or alliances (the latter of which will be covered in a future post).  Hopefully this one won’t turn into an opus (I honestly didn’t expect the last few to run so long, that was just how they looked when I finished writing).

So, you’ve got a 10 person guild.  Perhaps you started it with a few friends, perhaps it was a group of former guild members who left your old guild at the same time, or perhaps you just stuck it out in the trade channel until you had enough people to run a regular 10 person raid.  You may be happy with the situation, but a few of your guild members are making noise about the better loot that they want out of the 25 person raids.  You’re not certain, but you suspect that the sentiment is a common one – people want to run what they perceive to be the “best” content, and for many people that means 25 man raids.

Some practical ideas on how to proceed then:

Is This a Good Idea?

First, make sure the sentiment is commonly held.  It may just be one person rabble-rousing, and you may be better encouraging them to seek a guild that is running 25 person content rather than try to push the guild into what can be a tumultuous period in its life.

There are two points to remember here: Blizzard has decided, at least in WotLK, that 25 person content gives one tier better loot than 10 person content.  They have not, however committed to continuing to do so in Cataclysm.  Remember than the 10/25 versions of every raid were a bit of an experiment for Blizzard.  I think everyone will agree that the experiment has been been successful on the whole, but the item level spread could do with some improvement.  We might see changes to the way the 10/25 split is handled in Cataclysm.

The second point is to remind people that a boss with more HP and damage numbers doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s a harder encounter.  Does it feel more epic?  Sure.  But in terms of raw difficulty, many 10 person encounters are harder.  You can’t recover from the loss of a healer (especially if you’re only using two).  You may not have the full complement of buffs and debuffs to boost your DPS.  For a good while after WotLK released, Sartharion-3D was considered to be significantly harder on 10 than on 25.  I know a former guildie who is more proud of his “of the Nightfall” title than “Twilight Vanquisher”.

What’s driving your members to raid?  Are they in it for the loot, or for the challenge of the fights and the feeling that comes from defeating an encounter after several weeks of refining strategy and execution?  I am more proud of what my guild accomplished in Blackwing Lair (Razorgore to Nefarian in six weeks) back in patch 1.9 than I am of my experience clearing WotLK Naxxramas in three weeks.  The raid size isn’t the point here – it was learning to master things like taunt rotations on the drakes, healing teams on Chromaggus and the periodic loss of a role on Nefarian.  These were new concepts to people used to steamrolling through Molten Core, and to get together with a group of people and overcome them was very rewarding.

I haven’t really felt that same level of accomplishment since (though I am proud of what my guilds have done in WotLK).  Then again, I’ve never been in a guild that pushed hard mode content.

You may find that what people are really craving is that feeling of accomplishment rather than the high item level loot.  When I inspect someone and see item level 239 items (which can only be found in Ulduar-25 hard mode), I’m impressed moreso than people wearing item level 245 (easily obtained from Trial of the Crusader on normal).  If so, perhaps now is the time to revisit the hard modes you didn’t complete.  The extreme hard modes from older content tiers are still something to be proud of beating (though obviously less so the further you get into ICC).

(more) Ways To Get There...

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Time-to-Emblem Ratios

Inv misc pocketwatch 01 Time to Emblem RatiosSpell holy summonchampion Time to Emblem Ratios

Why do people leave groups in the new LFG system the moment a dungeon is assigned?

The instances I see this most often on are:

  • The Culling of Stratholme
  • Halls of Lightning
  • Halls of Stone
  • The Oculus

If you jump out of the group, you can’t re-queue for 15 minutes.  For a tank or healer, that means 15 minutes plus a few seconds until your next group.  For a DPS, you’re probably talking more like 30 minutes until your next group (on my battlegroup at least).

The thing I don’t get is that the ratio of time spent to emblems earned is better than it has ever been in the past.  Nobody’s doing these dungeons for the experience or the achievements – those are for groups you organize among your guildies or friends.  It’s a pure loot grab, sometimes with an eye for loot in the instance itself (for new 80s, or anyone if you get assigned one of the new dungeons), but most often by way of emblems.

Let’s look at the MPE (minutes per emblem) of various dungeons.  I’m assuming a competent heroic group chain pulling, including optional bosses and that this is not the first random heroic of the day.  If these numbers don’t agree with the time it takes you to run the dungeon, contribute to the poll to help make things more accurate.

Minutes Per Emblem

Instance Min Time Min Emblems Min MPE Full Time Full Emblems Full MPE
Ahn'kahet 20 5 4 30 7 4.3
Azjol-Nerub       15 5 3
Culling of Stratholme 23 6 3.8 25 7 3.5
Trial of the Champion       15 5 3
Drak'Tharon Keep       20 6 3.3
Gundrak 18 6 3 20 7 2.8
Halls of Reflection       25 5 5
Pit of Saron       25 5 5
Forge of Souls       20 4 5
Nexus       20 7 2.8
Oculus       25 8 3.1
Violet Hold       20 5 4
Halls of Lightning       20 6 3.3
Halls of Stone 15 4 3.75 25 6 4.1
Utgarde Keep       15 5 3
Utgarde Pinnacle       20 6 3.3

Assume that you get an instance you don’t like.  You ditch, and get into another one immediately after the cooldown expires.  I’ll use CoS followed by Utgarde Keep as an example.  The aggregate MPE is 6 (15 minute cooldown plus a 15 minute run for 5 emblems).  The only instance which gives that crappy a rate of return it the Pit of Saron.  If you’d just stuck with CoS, you’d end up with an aggregate MPE of 3.3.  You’ll only find three instances on the list above with a better return on your time investment.

So if you’re just there for loot, why are you shooting yourself in the foot, making the Dungeon Finder experience worse for others, and as some have suggested, exacerbating the problem by leaving a bunch of “just need a tank for Oculus” groups at the top of the DF queue?

Either you’re a mercenary or you’re not.  If you’re looking for specific loot, queue for specific dungeons you want.  If you’re in it for emblems, just suck it up and let the system work the way it was intended.  Your failure to perform simple division makes you look like even more of a fool than when you just ditched the group.

Ah, and note to self: Mondays still happen when you’re on vacation.  Post deadlines do too.  :)

Until Next Time (when I hope to have something a bit more substantial for you instead of minor rants)

Update 5 Jan 2009: with the announced changes to Oculus, the instance is one of the lowest minute-to-emblem ratios around.  It’s sad that this change was required, and even sadder that people are saying they’ll still drop group when assigned to it.  Some people’s children….

Update 7 Jan 2009: Smells like wow.com’s been here.  Updated a few mistakes in the original post and added min/max emblem calculations

Update 7 Jan 2009: I’ve added a http://blog.cold-comfort.org/long-heroic-runs/ to help get better data on the time it takes to run each dungeon.

Update 9 Jan 2009: With 30 some-odd repsondents to the poll, my original estimates seem to agree  with our readers, save for Ahn’kehat, which was bumped up by 5 minutes for both full and minimal clears and Nexus, which came down from 25 to 20 minutes.


Tags: , , , , ,

Primordial Trophies and Orbs, Oh My!

trophy Primordial Trophies and Orbs, Oh My!

When a new content patch is on the horizon, I like to go through my policies and see what needs to be updated – typically with regards to loot.  I continue to do this for Cold Comfort even though the guild is in stasis at the moment.  It’s a good exercise, and it helps build up a history with which to demonstrate my ideas on policy transparency.

For patch 3.3, I wanted to update the policies to remove old instances and set a policy for dealing with new items that would drop in Icecrown Citadel.  In doing so, I realized that I had never drawn up a policy for distribution of the non-gear items that drop in Trial of the Crusader.

I’ve heard many people complain about how their guild deals with things like Trophy of the Crusade.  Certainly the way that Blizzard set up the various grades of tier 9 armor didn’t help much, but most policies I heard about seemed to split one of two ways:

  • make them purchasable in the exact same way as gear, with anyone who is interested bidding on them
  • distribute them via some loot council system (even if the main loot system is DKP-like) when a member reaches some threshold (such as having the other materials required for turnin)

The way that you obtained tier 9.25 and 9.5 armor made either approach painful.  In the first case, people would try to grab the trophy early to ensure that they controlled when they were able to upgrade their gear.  In some cases, this let them skip the 9.10 tier entierly.  The second technique led to the opposite behaviour – if you didn’t know exactly when you were going to get your trophy, you might hold off buying your 9.10 set so that you weren’t emblem-starved when you did receive the token.

Crusader Orbs were also tricky, as they were used in 36 recipes to make gear on par with Normal 25 / Heroic 10 drops, but the items crafted were bind on equip.  Imagine that a Blacksmith tank has just purchased four orbs to craft Saronite Swordbreakers for themselves.  While waiting to do the last Titansteel transmute they need, Armguards of the Shieldmaiden drop.  The items are roughly equivalent (depending on the mix of stats you have on the rest of your gear).

Should the member be able to give the orbs back and get their DKP back?  If the items were given via loot council rather than purchased, does the member now owe the orbs to the bank because they would not have received the orbs if they’d already been wearing the dropped item?  What if they’d already crafted the item – are they now at the back of the line for orbs, even though they just wasted them?

Primordial Saronite, the new “orb” of Icecrown Citadel adds yet another variable.  While it’s used for half as many recipes, it is also used in large quantities to progress through the quest to form the legendary weapon Shadowmourne.  While you can purchase the Saronite for 23 Emblems of Frost, doing so would take weeks of pouring all your emblems into the task, and prevent you from purchasing any other EoF rewards in the process.

Even Blizzard doesn’t really have guidance for how Primordial Saronite “should” be distributed, acknowledging that it’s a problem of social dynamics (more) My Plan...

Tags: , , , , , ,

Performance-Based Loot Systems

STRONGMAN Performance Based Loot Systems

While browsing the US guild relations forum, I was struck by this post: PerLoot – a new Loot System

Not struck by the brilliance of the system, mind, but the process by which a reasonable goal (rewarding people who perform better) fell apart in the implementation.  What’s worse is that the original poster didn’t seem to realize how much things had fallen apart.

In summary, the poster proposed a loot system whose rewards were based upon performance in raids.  The better you perform, the more loot you get.  They proposed to measure performance by the meters – your DPS divided by your GearScore times the cubic root of the number of dispels or interrupts you perform.  The post made no allowance for how tanks would be handled, but did say that they would gauge Discipline priests differently “because they heal by prevention”.

The premise that gave birth to this loot system is attractive: ultimately, loot distribution should reward those who perform well.   I’m sure most people who generally perform above the average of their raid feel they should be rewarded for doing so.  But the loot system as proposed fails on so many levels.

(more) How Do You Fail Me?

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Managing Your Loot Standings

inflation Managing Your Loot Standings

When comparing loot systems, pay special attention to how easy it is for established players who raid often to gain a massive point lead over new members or those who can’t raid as often.  While attendance needs to factor into buying power, certain systems are more susceptible than others.

There are two different problems, depending on whether your loot system has fixed prices or not: inflation and list camping.

Inflation affects systems where the cost of an item is driven by player bidding.  For whatever reason, one or several players have very large point balances.  The going rate for drops rises because the person with a high balance can easily beat anyone who is new.  People with low balances don’t even have the chance to compete – they could bid their entire balance of points and still have that only equal 1/10th or 1/5th of the balance of an established raider.

List Camping tends to affect systems where item prices are fixed.  For the same reasons, someone ends up with a large point balance, so that they have first pick of anything that drops.  When they want an item, they get it at the fixed price, but it doesn’t make much of an impact on their balance.  They essentially stay at the top of the list forever, and when new tiers of content are released, they get geared up first because they keep getting first pick.

That your members will take advantage of these situations isn’t a given.  I’ve been in some guilds where people with high balances sometimes feel guilty for always getting first pick, and deferred to lower-geared players to benefit the raid.  But this relies on magnanimous behaviour, which also isn’t a given.  If the person decides to, they can grab a ton of gear, and it’s not unheard of for people in this situation to do just that in the days and weeks leading up to a /gquit.

Before I talk about ways to address this, let’s look at a few of the common loot systems and the extent to which they are susceptible to these problems.

DKP with Fixed Costs

DKP with fixed costs is susceptible to list camping once you have all the gear you need from the current content.  If the loot system continues without a reset through multiple content patches, the lead someone has can become insurmountable.

DKP with Open Bidding

DKP with open bidding is susceptible to inflation, as a well-geared member can gain points while never bidding on gear.  If members collude to keep prices low (say an under the table deal to allow one person to pick up an item at the minimum bid price), then it can be susceptible to list camping as well.  While this system allows for the greatest level of flexibility for members, it is also the easiest to corrupt.

Zero-Sum DKP

Zero-sum DKP is not susceptible to inflation (as the number of total points in the system remains constant), but it can be susceptible to list camping.  Just how susceptible depends on whether you combine zero-sum with open bids or fixed costs.  While this may make zero-sum DKP sound attractive, the major failing of this system is the inability to provide rewards for anything other than loot dropping.  Without a way to incentivize progression content, zero-sum can be very demoralizing after a night of wipes.  It is better suited to farm content, but I’ve seen many guilds choose to go directly from their primary loot system to open /roll rather than maintain a parallel zero-sum system for lower-level content.

EP/GP

EP/GP is protected against both list camping and inflation, as the points you receive for raiding (EP) are not directly used for purchasing gear (only to rank people in priority order).  In addition, weekly decay of both EP and GP means that the larger the gap between high and low ranked members, the more that is lost during decay.   This discourages list camping – with a 10% decay, it takes just seven weeks to remove half of your EP and GP.  As any regular reader will know, I’m a big fan of this system because it doesn’t share the downsides of the other loot systems (though it does have it’s own cons, including the inability to spend what you feel an item is worth to you regardless of your priority).

Ni Karma

Ni Karma is a “boosted roll” system, in which your points can be used to supplement your roll if you so choose.  There are no item prices, so inflation is not a problem, but you can end up with people at the top of the list after a long period of taking no loot.  Due to the way in which the points are used (a winning boosted roll halves your balance), you can only effectively camp the list for one item.  Unfortunately, this can lead to people not taking minor upgrades because they are focused on winning the one item they really want and want to save their points.

Suicide Kings

Suicide Kings is not subject to inflation, as nobody has a balance, just a relative position on a list.  When you take loot, you drop to the bottom of the list of people who are in the raid (not the absolute bottom of the list).  Like Ni Karma, this can result in list camping for one particularly desired item, as once loot is taken you aren’t likely to get another piece right away.  I don’t see this system being used very much, as it has the same “lack of progression incentives” as zero-sum DKP (and can in fact be called a “zero-sum spend-all” system).

Suicide Kings doesn’t tend to be as popular as it was when first introduced, as the “cost” of an item (such as it is in this system) varies based upon who attends a given raid.  While this is also true of open-bid DKP, Suicide Kings doesn’t give members the level of power they have in open-bid DKP, which makes this downside more glaring.

(more) Reining things in...

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Sullying Our Good Name

reputation Sullying Our Good Name

On my main’s server, I’ve been running PUGs pretty much daily for the last few weeks.  The time just isn’t right to form Cold Comfort the guild it seems, so I’ve resolved to try again closer to the release of Cataclysm, when there is bound to be a fair amount of shakeup and re-rolling.

Standards

As any regular reader will be aware, I have reasonable but strict standards for the people I play with.  I’m not going to tell a tank that they need 35k buffed HP to do Naxxramas, or that you have to have surpass 4k dps to join an Onyxia-10 PUG, but if I invite you to my group for Trial of the Champion and you fail more than once to avoid Radiance when fighting Eadric, then I’m not going to group with you again.  The record of failures I’ve observed in one fight was 11 spread among 3 people.

I use the excellent addon Do I Know You? to keep track of such people because it instantly tells me when someone whispers me if I’ve marked them as negative in the past.  I track more than just people who don’t meet my standards: trade spammers, griefers, people who have caused loot problems, people who ditch on groups and especially that bloody Death Knight who won’t shut up about how the Dragonball-Z game is available on PS3 but not on XBox-360 all get on the list.

Over time, patterns start to emerge with regard to the guild tags of people on my list.  On my main server, two guilds in particular are responsible for a disproportionate number of negative entries, and as such I won’t accept invites from members of those two guilds.  It’s not a foregone conclusion that any group I join started by someone from the two is going to go poorly, but I’ve wasted enough time in the past and play roles that are in enough demand that I’m not robbing myself of opportunities by doing so.

If a guild on a realm gets a reputation for actively antagonising the other members of the realm, the decision not to group with them is pretty obvious.  Has the guild been proven to harbor ninja looters?  Don’t group with them.   Did they transfer in to steal a server first from a home grown guild?  Don’t group with them.  Simple.

The position I take on the smaller stuff – just not being a good player -  is one that I seem to take a bit more seriously than others.  I want to play with skilled people.  If your guild is made up of people that tend to end up on my “do not group with” list, the impression I get is that you recruit for numbers, not for skill.

Is this fair?  Should guilds be responsible for their members’ actions, and what, if any actions by a guild member outside of a guild event reflect on the guild?

It’s my $15 a Month

We all pay our $15 / £9 / €13 per month to play WoW, so shouldn’t we be able to do whatever we want?  Why should I have to conform to a playstyle or set of rules that I don’t like just to stay in my guild?  There’s a nearly year old post on Fel Fire that is still a good read on this subject.  In essence, your guild can’t force you to do anything, but they can say “these are the requirements for continuing to be a member – break them and you’re out”.

So, when leading or joining a guild, it’s a good idea to be clear on what is and is not tolerated.  I touched on this more specifically a few weeks ago; in the same way as guilds tend to gloss over the bigotry issue with terms like “respect your guildmates” they gloss over other unwanted behaviour with terms like “respect the members of the realm”.  Use words and like “respect” that have different meanings for different people and you’re just setting yourself up for an argument when someone crosses the line you’ve drawn in your mind but is still far from it in theirs.

(more) What should be written down?...

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Breaking Up a Guild Bank

piggy_bank_hammerI’ve mentioned in a few past articles about choosing to disband or close up a guild when the needs of the members can no longer be met.

When this happened to the guild I started WotLK with, we had to decide how to distribute the contents of the guild bank.  You hear horror stories about this from time to time, and I thought it would be useful to share the method that we used to distribute the guild’s wealth evenly.

Clearing Out the Trash

Most guilds end up with a lot of useless items in their guild banks over time.  Nobody wants them, they aren’t useful for raids, but they won’t sell on the AH.  Things like the Gnomish Army Knife that engineers have to make en masse while leveling and low-level tradeskill mats.  If you have a free-for-all guild bank tab, you can just move all these items there and leave them out of the valuation step.  You could also vendor them and distribute the gold (even if it may be a paltry sum).

You can also choose to disenchant BoE gear that may be lying around so that it can be distributed as shards, dust or essence.  Though it seems counter-intuitive, leaving BoE gear for direct distribution can make things difficult, as they can pack quite a bit of worth into a single item.  If the items have a particularly high value, consider selling them on the AH and adding the proceeds to the gold balance for later distribution.

(more) Quantifying Effort...

Tags: , , , , , ,