Okay I'm hoping to get some serious banter going about loot systems in raiding guilds.....pros, cons, gotchas etc.

Basically within my guild we are experiencing two very distinct camps on how to handle loot.

1) Instant gratification - you earn DKP, you raid, loot drops you spend DKP, you take shiny item home with you.

2) Delayed/auctioned - you earn DKP, you raid, loot drops, it's banked until later, then an auction is started via forums. You bid on loot for so many days, highest bidder wins.

3) screw DKP random everything (just threw this in, it's not really something we even consider)


In the first two scenarios there is a bit more to them but this is just a summary. In each system there would be attendance requirements, such as you can't bid/roll/buy loot if you haven't shown a committment to raiding. But what do you do about age of points? AFK people from the game? What other holes can you see in either system?

Earn DkP then bid your DkP on the drops as they drop during the raid. Not sure how you can bank no drop stuff 'til later, unless ya'll raiding 1 groupable names.

:devil

After taking part in option 1 for almost 3+ years of raiding....It worked fine for the most part...(few cry babies in the mix but any system will have that)

Although I think if I was ever to be a part of a loot system ever again, I would entertain the bidding concept just for the fun factor and to piss off those people who like to horde raid points but never fricken spend them because they are freaks..

Let me explain. This is for EQ2 where fabled and mythical loot drops are TRADEABLE. So NO DROP isn't really an issue there.

The loot systems will always be an issue with some folks, regardless of how you set it up. Those are also usually the folks you see bouncing from guild to guild, always seeking greener pastures.

The system that has worked for my guild is no more fool-proof than any other, but it has worked for all these years and people continue to want to do it.

First, everyone keeps an up-to-date magelo with link on guild page.

Second, when an item drops, the designated officer is sent links by those who want the upgrade showing what they are presently equipped with, and the person who can most benefit is usually awarded the item.

Third, it is expected that awarded droppable gear is returned to the guild once upgraded to be given to someone else, or if not an upgrade to anyone any longer used for guild tribute. Everyone eventually will get ugrades, usually with the officers taking theirs last.

Some scoff at the system, but it has worked all these years and we are still doing things the same way now as when I joined back in 2002, and people continue to apply for membership after reading the rules.

That is similiar to the system that Casus Belli used Bylmet. Didn't work out too well for them in the end. One of the problems with it, besides the human factor...is that it takes too long to determine. Raiders hate sitting on our asses while officers take 29.56 minutes to figure out 3 loots and a rune.

Also, if you make a mistake and a bad call is made, people get pissed. Your opinion or whoever, for that matter...will be wrong, especially when you start taking into account the focus part of the items, and then other factors such as, combat effects, mana regen accuracy, avoidance etc.

I'm speaking only about EQ1 of course, EQ2 is a lame attempt without any staying power. IMO! :spade

That system won't work in the higher end game. In my never so humble opinion. :)

:devil

Number 1 imo, but that is not the only decision that needs to be made :)
In my opinion, an ideal dkp system is as follows:

Total points earned per raid = total points spent at that raid.

So like if the raid spends a total of 10dkp on loot for one particular mob, and there are 20 people at that raid, each person will get 0.5 points each for that raid.

Fixed points cost for each item based on item stats, like 1point per 10 hp or mana or whatever, and an extra point for each effect or something. (This method is more fair because each person will pay the same amount of dkp for any given item, i ran into a problem in foad when we were doing bidding by auction, with the two greater runes that would drop off of the OoW events we farmed frequently. Two identical items, and the person who won the first one would be the person that bidded the highest of all the people that wanted. Which gave rise to the person who bidded the second highest getting the second rune for a lower price.)

Priority between members is given firstly by attendance brackets. Say 0-50%, and 51-100%, or 70+ or something that can be decided on for each guild - and secondly by the amount of points that said person has.

An effect of this is that half of the guild is in negative, and the other half is positive. You also need no inflation on item prices, because at any time, the total dkp of the guild = 0 (This number may change if people leave the guild. and even that dilemma could be repaired by, say, the smoothing of the leaver's points over the rest of the raid attenders in the next 10 or so raids).

-

With number 2, you'd have to differentiate between those who were at the raid and those who weren't for it to not suck in my opinion. I also don't think people need days to make up their mind whether they are going to bid or not, or if they need to take days before they reach their reserves, so they can find out just how tight their ass can be for each transaction. Overspending is better for the guild than hoarding! (This is, of course, assuming that you're going for a random points per item system)

Another problem is that loot would drag on and on, noone wants to wait 3 days before they get the loot they earned the previous weekend, and the cost to the guild is that the benefit gained by that item is delayed (unnecessarily?).

When i was running foad i had to consider many options and choose that which i thought was best suited for us, so i've put quite a lot of thought in, and formed my opinions accordingly :) Either way, it's an interesting topic of debate.

Definetly number, you earn it you can burn it. From all the systems I've been a part of its defiently the most relaxed.

Some good discussion going here guys. And I will just ignore Trikki's comment about EQ2 :p

The pro-auction camp says that the system better benefits those raiders who work the hardest and show the most dedication. Just b/c they miss a raid b/c of some unforeseen circumstance doesn't mean they shouldn't get to bid on some good loot. They feel that b/c they raid more and miss one they are better to get the loot that will help the guild the most.

The pro-instant camp feels the way that Grumblin does. Why wait for loot that can help the player and the guild? Why reward someone who wasn't there regardless of how much they were in the past?

That system won't work in the higher end game. In my never so humble opinion. :)
Someone needs to tell FoH that.

And Sol Invictus too.

There is no better system than bidding imho.

By bidding do you mean a delayed auction system or you mean right then and there at the raid?

I liked RiPs way of doing loot best with a few exceptions. (Live auction style, with point decay over time.) (to prevent numerous things)

a) People who really didn't want the item would bid other people up in points to make them spend more than they should have.

b) People making "deals" with eachother. "Ok since we're the only 2 on the raid that can use it, I'll let you have it for cheap if you let me have Fubars Rod of Doomsausages next time it drops.

c) New people to the guild/raid hoarding their points for that one sweet sweet item that provides them with 1 upgrade, when they could have upgraded 5 other slots for the same amount of points and had twice as big of an upgrade overall.

IMO point decay or loot probation of some type is necessary. It prevents people from stockpiling up points and going AFK for 3 months, coming back, and then spending the points they had saved up on the new stuff that's dropping that they didn't really earn.

I won't turn this into a shit slinging thread. Just saying that in EQ1, these were problems. Hopefully people wont and dont make the same mistakes now.

A fairly large consideration has to do with loot income versus time expended. It's a lot easier to get away with officer awards, which I prefer, if you have such a large loot income that barring stupidly rare drops, everyone knows they will eventually get theirs. Guilds with stable leadership and large loot income relative to their size do well with officer awards, guilds with changing leadership or inconsistent leadership, or high attrition or recruitment, ir low income relative to size are far better off with some sort of non-partisan tracking system.

If you go with some sort of point system, I would highly suggest one that is both open and self-regulating. For instance, have an attendance tracking that gives N points per time with slightly higher N points for that period if you accomplished something. Players accumulate points over time, and pay points in public auctions (possibly with class restrictions). At the end of whatever administratively convenient period you total up all points awarded and spent, then after a few months of letting players build up a base point pool you start applying a deflator to make the system zero-sum -- a net % reduction in all awards to match the points expended for bids.

It's also helpful if you try to drill into people that points aren't your "salary," they're more like a loan against future participation. I've considered how a mostly negative point system might work that way, ie every starts at -100 and has to earn their way positive to have any chance of winning contested loot, but that would likely affect the overall guild mindset in undesirable ways.

DKP for the win.

The system we had in RiP owned. Any kind of 'santa' or officer decided bullshit is retarded. It takes longer to decide, it's going to create much more animosity, and it's still the same as a dkp system in essence, albeit less tangible.

For example, a nice rare purple might drop in Molten Core. You really want this, but you want that other purple from Ragnoros even more! So instead of asking for the first one, you horde your intangible points and save them for a later date. This results in rotting loot that doesn't need to rot because if there was a point system someone could just grab it for minimum bid.

Another side of the argument involves attendance. DKP rewards the ultra active in an obvious manner, they will have more points. However, let's say you can only raid 65% of the time. In a dkp system this is no big problem, you earn points slower, but eventually you will amass enough that you are able to acquire an item. In a 'santa' system, however, the officers will look at your attendance and say "Hrm, this guy has only showed up to about 65% of the raids, where this other guy has shown up to nearly all of them." And almost every time, the latter will recieve the item. This leaves the quasi-actives in a really shit place. You either wait for the uber dorks to fully gear up, or you realize that your attendance or lack thereof is irrelevant, and stop going. Either way, it does not bode well for the guild nor does it lend much credibility to the santa system.

If someone can offer a feasible argument in favor of a santa system, I am really anxious to hear it. I've been guilded in many different guilds in many different games, and I've just never seen anything that would make me believe that a santa system is better than dkp.

An officer award system run right is the most optimal distribution for a guild as a whole.

When we used officer awarded loot in RiP, I can only think of one time ever that there was any dispute with the loot calls. Stuff got awarded where it would serve the guild best. People were happy.

After we moved to the bidding system, our first three +BS mod daggers went to one rogue, even though we had 3+ highly active rogues at the time. Yeah, that was great for the guild.

DKP puts all the wrong kinds of ideas in peoples' heads about loot and their role in a guild.

In a pure setting, where guildmembers would never be in flux, where people would never retire, where everyone played roughly the same time of day, an award system based on "best upgrade for the guild" is ideal. Unfortunately, that sort of utopia doesn't exist. Such systems also don't encourage people to upgrade themselves. They actually encourage you to participate less, and not to work outside of the system.

VA's DKP system is a mostly zero-sum fixed-price system that uses its inflationary points to reward participatin in key/flag/wipe/epic-type events. Items have a fixed purchase price (to prevent collusion, to prevent "I'm the only bard, I bid 0.1!", and to speed the distribution process). Events have a set value, distributed among the participants with a hard cap on total earned. [If you learn how to solo Quarm, you still only get the capped value.] While not utopian, and far from perfect, it's done a fairly good job at distributing loot for a couple years now -- and I don't know a single officer in the guild who isn't happier that they have fewer headaches over loot becasue of it.

As we introduce new items, and new encounters, the cost of those items and "reward" for those encounters goes up - automatically deflating the values of old items. While the best items in our system used to cost 30, and it used to take a month to get 30 points, now you can, on a good day, get 20 DKP, and a top-tier item costs about 100. [Items are more frequent now...]

We have our share of hiccoughs, but it's working as intended(tm).

Any kind of 'santa' or officer decided bullshit is retarded.
Speaking of the devil I heard through the Grapevine FOD finally dethrowned Radical?

I'm in Bytesum's guild (Lost Fires), and I think the officer award (I think that's the type of system it's called, or at least a form of it) is by far the easiest way to distribute loot.

Couple of reasons for that...

Example #1: VA's DKP system is a mostly zero-sum fixed-price system that uses its inflationary points to reward participatin in key/flag/wipe/epic-type events. Items have a fixed purchase price (to prevent collusion, to prevent "I'm the only bard, I bid 0.1!", and to speed the distribution process). Events have a set value, distributed among the participants with a hard cap on total earned. [If you learn how to solo Quarm, you still only get the capped value.] While not utopian, and far from perfect, it's done a fairly good job at distributing loot for a couple years now -- and I don't know a single officer in the guild who isn't happier that they have fewer headaches over loot becasue of it.

Someone please explain to me why anyone wants to distribute loot in a system that is set up like a reading a law book? That is WAAAAY too confusing to me, loot should be simple. I don't want to have to worry about 50 different reasons why I shouldn't bid on an item, and instead just do the loot and go on with the raid.

"Send links to XXX officer if you want it" is way more easier to follow than "Oh, gee, am I going to bid on this or not, because I can possibly get XXX piece of loot in the future if XXXX wins this."

Example #2: Also, if you make a mistake and a bad call is made, people get pissed. Your opinion or whoever, for that matter...will be wrong, especially when you start taking into account the focus part of the items, and then other factors such as, combat effects, mana regen accuracy, avoidance etc.

My main beef with this in DKP systems is that the people who raid all the time get first choice in loot because they also tend to be the ones who have the most amounts of DKPs, and usually there ends up being an elite core of the guild, then everyone else gets the scraps. Oh, wait, that sounds like the whole point about favoritism in the officer award system...

Also, may I remind everyone about what happened with Invictus Maneo's recent breakup about how DKP systems aren't perfect, and people get pissed over loot even there?

This points out the human factor, which, I agree, can be a potential drawback. But, I must point out that if a DKP system isn't set up well, there are ways to cheat the system in those things too.

Gear is all about choices. Sure, you can't make the 100% correct decision all of the time, but if you are able to satisfy some of the people most of the time, and eventually spread loot around to everyone, it works, IMO.

Example #3: That is similiar to the system that Casus Belli used Bylmet. Didn't work out too well for them in the end. One of the problems with it, besides the human factor...is that it takes too long to determine. Raiders hate sitting on our asses while officers take 29.56 minutes to figure out 3 loots and a rune.

Ah, but to get around that, why not use the Magelo site and come up with top 10 lists of who needs what? Then just look at the top 10 list, then see who is on the raid, and that narrows the choices down. That's how LF does it, and it actually goes pretty fast. I don't know if Magelo was around or highly popular back when CB was going well, but it works quite well for LF.

Some other factors to consider:

1) How much individuals go for out of guild advancement. LF has just started raiding elementals, but I personally have gear that is Time equivalent. It's very possible to work ahead of the guild, thanks to OoW and DoN. These two expansions really helped close the gap between the casuals and the raiders, as has been pointed out many other places. Of course, the higher end the content, the harder it is to get groupable or small raidable equipment, but for those at the mid end of content, it's great.

2) Choosing good officers. This is basically a function of picking the right people for the job. If the officer is able to make choices without putting personal feelings into them, then this system is a better choice.

3) Keeping recruiting standards high. Also, recruiting should not just be taking anyone who applies and making them instant full members with full loot rights. I've known a few guilds that have gone for the mass recruitment tactic, and they tended to be the flash in the pan type of guilds, that raided hardcore for several months, then fizzled due to either interpersonal problems or loot.

To me, a guild member should be willing to put the good of the guild over personal achievement. This is true of ANY system, be it DKP or officer award or what. In short, I just think that DKP systems don't really give the loot to who would benefit from the loot the most.

DKP is not hard to understand and it doesnt take a amazing amount of time.

CB did officer determined loot, and it worked well because it was a smallish and very tight group. VA's DKP system works well because Palimax and Larlaana are almost fiendishly efficient in keeping things updated ( maybe not directly, but they make sure it gets done). The thing is, every guild will find a way that works, or trouble arises. Whats right for one group may not work for another.

Someone please explain to me why anyone wants to distribute loot in a system that is set up like a reading a law book? That is WAAAAY too confusing to me, loot should be simple. I don't want to have to worry about 50 different reasons why I shouldn't bid on an item, and instead just do the loot and go on with the raid.Odd. I'm not sure what can be simpler than "Take tells, and highest DKP total gets item." The entire system is automated, computerized and availble to everyone.

I have been in both DKP and Officer assigned loot. I have had and seen the least amount of hard feelings in DKP. The problem with officer assigned loot is its not always followed. Favorites play a huge part.

With DKP if you have the most points you win. The end. Fairly simple and fair to everyone. Those that raid less can save points if they want the best best stuff, or they can buy a lil bit less than best best stuff for cheap. Works great either way.

/sigh while I appreciate everyone's replies some of you missed that it was EQ2 and NOT EQ1. It's a bit different, we don't have magelo (we have SoE's shitty version). Loot isn't No Drop and raids are capped at 24 people.

I was hoping to hear from the few of you who are playing EQ2 and what your thoughts were. If any have one please reply =)

I dont how that its EQ2 makes a difference.

The most fair way imo is to earn raid points and bid on drops when they drop. Make it public bids and then no one has any right to complain.

/sigh while I appreciate everyone's replies some of you missed that it was EQ2 and NOT EQ1. It's a bit different, we don't have magelo (we have SoE's shitty version). Loot isn't No Drop and raids are capped at 24 people.

I was hoping to hear from the few of you who are playing EQ2 and what your thoughts were. If any have one please reply =)And that makes the examples given bad how, exactly?

B/C people were talking about using magelo. No magelo in EQ2.

I agree that some of the suggestions could be used in both but I want to know how people are doing it in EQ2, b/c the arguments I'm hearing is that "well that's how they do it in EQ1, this isn't EQ1 this is EQ2"

Well in Legion, EQ2 guild I'm part of, we use DKP with all items gathered up and bid on at the end of the night.

Atm I'm thinking some of the folks have a me mentality. With perfect MT items being bid on crazy like by scout classes as an example so the price rises.

That's my problem with bidding/auction. Since most items can actually work for all classes most folks overlook where it would do the guild the most good.

Fandros

During my 4 years in EQ I have seen (and participated in as officer) 3 different kinds of loot systems.

Imho it highly depends on your guild setup, there isn't an ultimate loot system.

1. Pure NBG, council of officers awarded all loot. I have seen this in action during Kunark - Velious in a raiding guild.

The downside was that loot distribution always took almost half an hour, it wasn't uncommon that loot almost rotted.
Also the factors (how big of an upgrade, attendance etc etc) were based on perception and not solid facts so personal feelings (I like this guy more than that guy) played a big factor.

The upside was that in a 'smaller' guild where you have low turnover and everyone knows the rest of the guild members then this can work pretty well and help the guild progress.


2. DKP assisted NBG, in this case both attendance and loot was recorded in a DKP like point system but the final call was still in the hands of the officers to award loot.
The reasons why I liked this one was that contribution/loot ratio was clearly visible to all members so favoritism wasn't an issue (basically DKP points kept the officers in line) and loot decisions were rational so rangers didn't get aggro weapons and wizards didn't walk away with healing focus items.


3. Bidding DKP, welcome to the jungle.
The upside that loot distribution was fast, everyone could decide how badly they want the item and spend accordingly. The power is clearly in the hands of the bidder.
The downside is the dkp burners who drive up the prices if they see that someone really wants an item. Prices highly depend on who is present at the time of the bidding, the same item can go for min bid on monday and for triple price the next day.

It isn't really productive from the guild advancement's point of view but works fine for magelo whores.

If your guild stays busy enough raiding, in the end there is usually enough loot for everyone that any loot system will work. Its the guilds who can't raid shit, leaving its members hungry. My last guild, Talisman, used DKP with little to no troubles at all. It was very similar to SOT's (which I was a part of for many years) only difference was we put down 10x the targets in Talisman than in SOT so we had loot comming out our asses that even everyones third alts could have.

Good point Ib, EW's loot system likely worked mainly because we raided many targets nightly.

Fandros

If your guild stays busy enough raiding, in the end there is usually enough loot for everyone that any loot system will work. Its the guilds who can't raid shit, leaving its members hungry. My last guild, Talisman, used DKP with little to no troubles at all. It was very similar to SOT's (which I was a part of for many years) only difference was we put down 10x the targets in Talisman than in SOT so we had loot comming out our asses that even everyones third alts could have.Amusingly enough, my ex-wife (not my ex-girlfriend) was a Talisman cleric until she jumped ship for WoW beta and...whatever she does now.

What was her clerics name? Only was in Talisman from June- end of December when I hung it up. Fun guild.

Alendora, IIRC, and her now long since ex (the guy she saw after me, but not the guy she eventually married) was a ranger of some sort :)

Edit, Jessnut borrowed a Talisman account back in the day, maybe even the rangers -- I recall he was a rogue back in the NToV days, or something like that -- and made the infamous Wipeout video.

Thread on Talisman: http://www.talismanguild.org/TalismanVB/showthread.php?postid=15488
Video at our site:
http://www.vallisaspectus.org/html/movies.shtml

So does anyone know of a guild that uses the delayed auction system?

Has anyone ever used it?

I know that on the spot DKP or NBG is probably more prevelant but I'm just curious if anyone out there is doing delayed auctoin and if so what experiences they are having with it.

CB's system (if you wanted the item you just sent a tell to an officer) worked well most of the time when there was ample loot (ToV, VT, etc...) . But that said, I sure would have loved a DKP many many times once we hit PoP. The main problem with CB was that 50% of the guild was casual. Most of the casual people (this included half the officers) didn't want that kind of system.

....And no, Gandien wasn't "casual" and he had shit for gear..... he just didn't care about loot.

I loved some of the mis-tells about loot that would slip through the cracks of the officers channels LOL!

My short stent with EW was during there Time farming stage... now THAT was fun. 30+ loots in a night is great. And while there may have been some drama on the "me" part, mostly people backout out if they saw someone with more senority asking.... that seemed really fair to me.

I have been quite pleased with VAs DKP system overall. (yes, Palimax, its true :D ). Compared to the highest bidder type of systems I've participated in in the past, VAs system actually works very well with our mix of hardcore and casual players. Naturally, the high play time folks will get upgrades faster and sooner, but the rest of us can still upgrade at a reasonable pace. No system is perfect, but it seems to cause relatively little drama and is fair and open to all.

Also, may I remind everyone about what happened with Invictus Maneo's recent breakup about how DKP systems aren't perfect, and people get pissed over loot even there?

IVM didn't break up because of DKP.

From what I heard from Ummkay, IvM broke up because one of the officers got mad at Umm for boxing in some other guildmember on a raid, then getting loot for that guildmember... Then Umm took a bunch of people to another server...

Could be wrong, but that sounds like DKP issues to me.

From what I heard from Ummkay, IvM broke up because one of the officers got mad at Umm for boxing in some other guildmember on a raid, then getting loot for that guildmember... Then Umm took a bunch of people to another server...

Could be wrong, but that sounds like DKP issues to me.
Could and are. Making Ummkay an officer was one of IvM's worst decisions. And him being a charismatic leader of people who led people to a new guild is definitely a bit of spin.

Hmmm no nodrop loot! Man that changes things.

Officer assigned loot: Drama drama drama. Lovely. "core gets first pick of all loots! no fair! sigh..."
Note that Santa loot systems are not the same as officer assigned. Santa refers to randoming for the right to assign loot to someone else. The benfit for the guild for that is to encourage everyone to make buds with everyone else, theoretically, but ends up being formation of cliques anyway. At least that asshole who nobody likes but doesn't do something worthy of getting kicked from the guild won't be getting much in the loot department. If your guild fosters a drama=suck culture, then bitching about not getting loot will have positive feedback, leading to the bitcher getting even less loot.

The good and the bad about dkp:
The good:
dkp can be used to create awards for non loot dropping situations.
Loot decisions are not causes of drama. Drama reduction=the win.

The Bad:
New recruits begin with higher priority than old timer casuals who go negative, if the system allows and keeps track of negative dkp.
There is no negative feedback for too much or too low dkp, leading to the same "core gets first pick on everything" problem people had with officer assigned loot, abeit without the drama. Instead you get your casuals who are no longer motivated by dkp to do stuff. "oh, this is a raid with new loots, I'm not gonna bother going till the core are satiated", leading to attendance problems (when you need to fill that last 1/2 of the raid with whichever casuals are on that day). So, instead of drama about loot decisions, you get drama about "why do we have attendance problems on new raids?"

No bid issues:
In non bidding situations, high priority (high dkp levels) leads to getting the first pick on the best deals (dkp/loot value) which has positive feedback twoards maintaining their priority. Bad deals get picked up by those persuing the "scavenging" strategy, which further reduces their priority.
Loot that is an upgrade to many people rots because people would rather maintain the priority they have.

Bid system issues:
In open auction systems, you get the problems mentioned previously.

Second price auction:
Sending tells to the officer is a sealed bid, so second price auctions are the way to go if you use a bid system. All interested send in a bid, highest bid wins, pays the second highest bid's price. Yes, this means if there is just a single bid, they get it for free.

Game theory proofs show that in second price auctions, the best strat for bidders is to bid exactly what they think the item is worth, as bidding in another manner (upping the bid to make someone else pay more...bidding lower to try and get a good deal...etc...) ends up working against one's own interest.


My personal preference is "dkp since last raid loot". Where, basicly, every loot costs all your current dkp. You earn your preference, but it's only good for exactly ONE item, at which point you have to start earning your preference again from scratch.

This has the negative feedback on hoarding that the "dkp decay" folk are trying to create without having it affect the casuals. It also prevents casuals from ever going so far into dkp debt that they will never get priority over fresh recruits. Recruits are, in turn, protected from the "never catch up to those with seniority" problem by the fact that every time someone loots, they go back to fresh recruit status of priority.

Re: "that's they way they do it in eq1 this is eq2" arguments:
You'll always get folk making objections based on name calling rather than logic. Even "we've done it this way and it seems to be working, why change" is a better argument.

With eq2, the only change I would make to "dkp since last loot" is just have whoever has highest current dkp get first pick, then next gets second pick...etc, and taking an item costs all one's current dkp.

I loved officer distribution at the beginning and hated it at the end, especially since I was the designated loot awarder. Never once awarded myself loot, which was kinda cool I guess, I did get a nice robe once when it dropped in TOV and the guild forced me to take it as I was looting my corpse and hadnt gotten to check loot... I wore that robe for close to 3 years

VC now uses a 'you earned it you burn it' DKP system which is pretty low hassle and moderate time spent tracking. We have an official point board but we also have people track their own points (which got decimated when EZboards got hacked GRRRR) as backup. So yeah, if someone wants to buy a loot for an alt they bring to a fight, they can, which can raise eyebrows but since its been legal since the start everyone is pretty cool with it.

Every guild is different tho, you have to balance a whole lot of factors to deciding what works for you. For years I swore I would never be a part of a DKP based guild but when we implemented it, it became so easy to use and made everyone happy. So even if you choose one system that doesnt lock you in forever.

Kad

Well after weeks of debate we finally came up with a RaidPoints/auction system. All non-distributed loot goes to the bank where it can be bid on for alts with points their main's earn. We award points for being on time and points for duration. We also enact a 5% decay at the first of every month. It's well received and has been working pretty good for us so far. Time will tell and show us our kinks.

However, in this latest patch we discovered some of the fabled loot is NO DROP! ACK so we may have to modify some mechanics if SoE decides to go that route with all fabled loot. But we'll manage.

I'm anxiously awaiting to get EQDKP installed b/c tracking this shit is a heinous right now. Though luckily I am using Excel and have it saved in multiple locations. ;) No ezboard SNAFUs here.

Up yer decay rate at least to 10 so the math is easy :)

Decay has to be normalized. You need to push both ends toward the center, and you need to weight it heavily on the far ends of the curve.

Of course, I'm not entirely convinced taxing the rich and spending it on the poor is a great DKP idea, but if you HAVE to implement it...

Trickle down loot???

Only systems that work are the ones where its pretty much the membership deciding who gets what and officers are mostly moderators. The fewer things officers have to micro manage, the better and it keeps things as simple as bidding on Ebay. People get out what they put in and if you want more stuff, attend more raids to earn more points. That being said, DKP with confidential auction done in tells to an officer is only way to go. It never hurts to have the point threads publicly posted on the web boards either so you can reference them while bidding is going on and don't over bid. Never set a specific value for anything. The cost of the item is ultimately always what the highest bidder is willing to pay. A 100 dkp item might sell for 10dkp the next raid. Also, never award credit. When people are out of points, tough shit. You are broke and thats that. It then offers an opportunity for the casual guys to afford some upgrades. Also, it spares the guild membership disgrace of extending a line of credit to a person who used it to get pimped out, only to detag right after with a 300 dkp debt and go on to those "greener pastures."

Its not a perfect system. None are. You will find a yawning gap between your hard core raid addicts and the more casual part timers, which can lead to them becoming less of an asset over time. Also, those that sit on points and go WAY over the mean average balance per member also can fuck the system by creating inflation. Everyone in that item class has to blow all their points if they want to even come close to getting an item that can be bought by the point hog who can outbid everyone and still have points left to buy 10 more of said item at max bid. Some counter this and also punish those that are no shows for a long period of time by docking everyone's DKP account a set number of points at a random date monthly. This encourages you to spend and keep logging on, or you will have raided for nothing.

Still everyone stays happy as long as you stick to a particular area long enough for a majority to get awards and that really is the key to it all. All the big ballers can spend beaucoup points on the first few ubermob kills and the more casual players can afford the stuff at much reduced costs when the majority has them. If the officers choose to move on to the bigger and better things right after only themselves and a few core raiders have every rare drop and thus keep the prices up for all the gear at a level only they can afford, you best find yourself another guild.

I agree with pretty much all you say Lumm, except the confidential tells to officers for bids. We toyed with this idea but didn't want any gray area where someone could claim favortisim. Therefore our system is completely public to the members. Auctions, points, decay, all of it. No gray areas that I have found yet but time will tell. Funny though we just calculated our first bit of decay and some of them whinned like little bitched for losing barely a point. /sigh that is the one area I see having to constantly justify. Other than that I think we're solid. Thanks for everyone's input, it helped allot.

Yeah, decay deals with the "what have you done for me lately" issue. I'm still a fan of second price auctions though... Everyone wins: it's in everyone's interest to bid exactly what they value an item at (minimizing the gaming of the system), and the winner gets a discount off of what they would have paid. The only trouble with it is the necessity of sealed bids, revealed after the fact. If bids are public, then might as well just force everyone to bid all their points, to prevent collusion, and then we're back to "DKP since last loot".

Making Ummkay an officer was one of IvM's worst decisions.

and I'll take the blame here for the horrible lack of foresight. We all (the officers of IVM) knew the kind of person Ummkay was. Ultimately it came down to me feeling he was the best tactical leader we had left, and I felt with that he should be an officer, given his shortcomings. That was probably the single worst decision I ever made in EQ. Though with or without this decision IvM was going to fail. I don't think, nor will I give him the satisfaction of this, that Ummkay is even an contributing factor to the ultimate failure of IvM as a guild. The fall of IvM can be traced ALL the way back to the beginning of PoP when Fantor retired.

Making Ummkay an officer was an egregious error in judgment, but was not even in the top 10 reasons ultimately in the failure of IvM as a guild. The failure of IvM as a guild (Fantor leaving withstanding) can be attributed mostly too leadership leaving the guild without any communication, a lack of any strong leadership for the last 6 months (me included), and an inability to attract competant recruits.

Of course for me in the end it was for the best that IvM ultimately folded, I'm having more fun in EQ than I have in 2+ years. I'm with a very competant raiding guild with very strong and competant leadership.

can this now be moved to nag please?

Taleren I am thrilled to hear you are having fun in EQ after a long time. Out of every bad thing that happens, something good comes from it is my belief, for the most part. :)

and I'll take the blame here for the horrible lack of foresight. We all (the officers of IVM) knew the kind of person Ummkay was. Ultimately it came down to me feeling he was the best tactical leader we had left, and I felt with that he should be an officer, given his shortcomings. That was probably the single worst decision I ever made in EQ. Though with or without this decision IvM was going to fail. I don't think, nor will I give him the satisfaction of this, that Ummkay is even an contributing factor to the ultimate failure of IvM as a guild. The fall of IvM can be traced ALL the way back to the beginning of PoP when Fantor retired.

Making Ummkay an officer was an egregious error in judgment, but was not even in the top 10 reasons ultimately in the failure of IvM as a guild. The failure of IvM as a guild (Fantor leaving withstanding) can be attributed mostly too leadership leaving the guild without any communication, a lack of any strong leadership for the last 6 months (me included), and an inability to attract competant recruits.

Of course for me in the end it was for the best that IvM ultimately folded, I'm having more fun in EQ than I have in 2+ years. I'm with a very competant raiding guild with very strong and competant leadership.


I didn't say it was why they broke up, I said it was a terrible idea!

Making Ummkay an officer was an egregious error in judgment, but was not even in the top 10 reasons ultimately in the failure of IvM as a guild.

He was the straw that broke the camels back. :spade

:devil

Didn't he stir up the shit in CB also?