Classic Loot Etiquette - Have a question

[Mukind]

Dude, that's not what he said lol.



Mukind's point directly contradicts your point. It's like the exact opposite stance lol.. literally anything to get your shot at retail players..

I don't know why its so.. "slimy" "scummy" "trash" etc to think that someone making 500g selling a BoE should be equal to someone saving 500g by not having to buy the BoE. That's really what it comes down to. The only counterpoint I keep seeing is "tHaTs NoT hOw We DiD tHiNgS dArN rEtAiLeRs!!!!"

https://www.reddit.com/r/classicwow/...s_us_a_lesson/
This thread is littered with posts saying all need in random groups is the way to go. I'm not saying Reddit's opinion is worth more than peoples' opinions here, but its clearly not just a small minority of greedy retailers who think all need is the way to go.

no one is there to farm anything for you

unless i agreed, i'm taking my roll on that purp. I want hand of edward the odd.

It's not even pre bis or useful in any scenario. You will never need the extra mitigation it provides. You're not saving 500g lol, if you used it you would be wasting that gold.

[klaps_05]

Clearly Classic needs forced personal loot for everything, after all, thats why it was made mandatory in retail.

[Mukind]

You didn't mention your class or role but I'm going to guess that you're a non-Warrior and non-Paladin dps and want to sell that book on the AH. If someone in the group is going to use the item, they should get it. I've rolled Need on BoEs in dungeons but I tell the group that I need it and will use it. Nobody seems to care, however, those were blue items.

A) It's a shit tier item, you have a much stronger argument for something like robe pattern because it's actually useful. Quel serrar is never useful it's just an RP weapon

B) You're wrong go away pleb, you don't even know waht is useful. Who the fuck are you to say who can and can't roll on an item? lol

[Nite92]

If agreed upon yes. That statement is true. You agreed, that's final.

But gold needing, without agreement, is plain ninjaing. The people it hurts are the people who actually needed it. Any argument of "I CaN bUy MY bIs" is just retarded. But what do you expect from the classic community? Fairness and respect? Lol.

But you can buy your bis, and he his. The item which dropped, gives you, even though you might not need it, the ability to get a similar item for your class. These things are literally the same, only that you need to sell something first before you can get the item you want.

[Twoddle]

So again, you ninja loot on the assumption someone else is?

Kinda. Look up prisoners dilemma. You do roll need all the time on BoE, because it's a most reasonable strategy in an environment where you can't trust other players to not roll need.

If you create that meta then you create an environment that is more toxic for everyone else

It's not toxic, it's the right answer in this situation and game theory proves that.

This is true, the game theory optimal solution IS to roll NEED. You can choose to cooperate, roll greed and risk getting the suckers payoff OR you can roll need and never lose out.

That's the way it is, Blizzard created the bullshit system. We are all collectively worse off and rolling need is the optimal choice.

[MrKnubbles]

Why?

You're applying BoP principles to a BoE item. BoE items were made differently for a specific purpose. As such they should be treated differently. That BoE is essentially just a fat pile of gold to whomever wins it. Why should the tank be more entitled to said fat pile of gold than anyone else in the party?

BoE's, by design, may be meant for use by specific classes, but they're meant to be won by anyone.

They're not going to get a fat pile of gold if they equip it. That's what I'm saying. If they will use the item then they should get it, not if their class is eligible to use it.

- - - Updated - - -

A) It's a shit tier item, you have a much stronger argument for something like robe pattern because it's actually useful. Quel serrar is never useful it's just an RP weapon

B) You're wrong go away pleb, you don't even know waht is useful. Who the fuck are you to say who can and can't roll on an item? lol

Did you actually just say that Quel'serrar is useless? It's one of the best tank weapons.

[Mukind]

They're not going to get a fat pile of gold if they equip it. That's what I'm saying. If they will use the item then they should get it, not if their class is eligible to use it.

- - - Updated - - -



Did you actually just say that Quel'serrar is useless? It's one of the best tank weapons.

What fight do you think mitigation is more important than threat?

They do not exist lol

It's an RP weapon. Your'e talking about like less than 1% mitigation and giving up threat is not rational in any scenario

[Raelbo]

They're not going to get a fat pile of gold if they equip it. That's what I'm saying. If they will use the item then they should get it, not if their class is eligible to use it.

Irrelevant. Whether you choose to equip the item or sell it on the market, your nett benefit is equal because you're either saving that fat pile of gold (as opposed to spending it on the AH) or you're earning the fat pile of gold from selling it.

For a tank equipping the item, it's exactly the same as taking the item, selling it on the AH and then using the gold to buy it. Extending this logic to other members of the party, they could take the BoE, sell it on the AH, and use the gold to buy a BoE for their class/spec.

Sorry, but you've not presented any argument supporting your notion that the class that can actually equip the BoE is going to benefit more than anyone else,most likely because any such argument would be fundamentally flawed on the basis that BoEs are fungible. Unlike a BoP, a BoE is a token that can be exchanged for something of high value for whoever wins the item.

Look, I totally get where you're coming from. But you're just not seeing the bigger picture here. As I already said, BoE's were specifically designed to work differently for BoP's for a reason. The fact that a portion of the playerbase aren't able to see that doesn't change this.

While I completely respect every person's right to play the game the way they want to (meaning you're more than welcome to pass on rolling for BoE's intended to be used by another class) there is an objective measure of what is fair, reasonable and rational. And expecting everyone else to pass on that "fat pile of gold" just because you can actually use it is neither fair, reasonable nor rational. It's self-serving and narrow-minded. If you want to use that BoE badly enough, then fork out your gold and go buy it on the AH. Because that's essentially what you're expecting the other members of your party to give up if they're going to give you the item.


PS: What I am saying applies strictly to Pugs. For a group of friends/guildies, it makes far more sense to decide collectively on how to deal with BoEs such that it yields maximum benefit to the group: whether that means selling it and using the gold on other stuff, or giving it to a character that will benefit directly.

- - - Updated - - -

This is true, the game theory optimal solution IS to roll NEED. You can choose to cooperate, roll greed and risk getting the suckers payoff OR you can roll need and never lose out.

Exactly this ^^

If everyone could be relied upon to follow good etiquette then everyone would roll greed. But the fact that some people will take advantage of the good etiquette of others opens you up to abuse. It might not be great etiquette to all be rolling need, but it is pragmatic and sensible. Good etiquette in the scenario described in the OP is actually to do exactly as the rogue did and give those who were unfortunate enough to not roll need a chance to roll anyway, and hand the item over if they win.

[AeneasBK]

It's not toxic, it's the right answer in this situation and game theory proves that.

https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2010-06-05

You don't seem to understand Game Theory in the same way I do. "Rat Out" is clicking "Need for AH spec"

[MrKnubbles]

Irrelevant. Whether you choose to equip the item or sell it on the market, your nett benefit is equal because you're either saving that fat pile of gold (as opposed to spending it on the AH) or you're earning the fat pile of gold from selling it.

For a tank equipping the item, it's exactly the same as taking the item, selling it on the AH and then using the gold to buy it. Extending this logic to other members of the party, they could take the BoE, sell it on the AH, and use the gold to buy a BoE for their class/spec.

Sorry, but you've not presented any argument supporting your notion that the class that can actually equip the BoE is going to benefit more than anyone else,most likely because any such argument would be fundamentally flawed on the basis that BoEs are fungible. Unlike a BoP, a BoE is a token that can be exchanged for something of high value for whoever wins the item.

Look, I totally get where you're coming from. But you're just not seeing the bigger picture here. As I already said, BoE's were specifically designed to work differently for BoP's for a reason. The fact that a portion of the playerbase aren't able to see that doesn't change this.

While I completely respect every person's right to play the game the way they want to (meaning you're more than welcome to pass on rolling for BoE's intended to be used by another class) there is an objective measure of what is fair, reasonable and rational. And expecting everyone else to pass on that "fat pile of gold" just because you can actually use it is neither fair, reasonable nor rational. It's self-serving and narrow-minded. If you want to use that BoE badly enough, then fork out your gold and go buy it on the AH. Because that's essentially what you're expecting the other members of your party to give up if they're going to give you the item.


PS: What I am saying applies strictly to Pugs. For a group of friends/guildies, it makes far more sense to decide collectively on how to deal with BoEs such that it yields maximum benefit to the group: whether that means selling it and using the gold on other stuff, or giving it to a character that will benefit directly.

You're assuming that the player will just buy the item off the AH if they don't win the roll but that's not the case in most situations. I'm not a greedy player and have no issues passing on a BoE to a stranger if they're going to use it. I would also be upset if someone rolled Need on a BoE, with intentions to sell it, if someone else in the party wanted to equip it. We have different opinions on the matter, that doesn't mean that either person is right or wrong, but I do believe that my way of thinking is less greedy.

[AeneasBK]

Extending this logic to other members of the party, they could take the BoE, sell it on the AH, and use the gold to buy a BoE for their class/spec..

This makes the completely false assumption that BoEs for their class and spec even exist, or exist in remotely equal numbers. But its a popular notion at any rate

[anon5123]

When it comes to a BoE epic, everyone just rolls need to prevent ninjas, regardless of who actually needs/can use the item.

- - - Updated - - -

For a tank equipping the item, it's exactly the same as taking the item, selling it on the AH and then using the gold to buy it. Extending this logic to other members of the party, they could take the BoE, sell it on the AH, and use the gold to buy a BoE for their class/spec.

So I should go ahead and just roll need on everything because "I need the gold to buy boes"

lol

[Acolyyte]

Just dont do pugs, simple.

^Strong disagree. PUGs are one of the best parts of WoW Classic. I've made some awesome friends by running dungeons with strangers. That's actually where my core dungeon group came from, was cobbling together random friends made from pugging. I love doing things with guildies, but one of the best parts of WoW classic is the awesome community.

Okay now on to loot rules. When it comes to BoEs, I have a macro set with the following rule to post in party chat:

"Hey guys! To avoid confusion and possible conflict, I propose a BoE rule. If one drops, we all roll Need. If someone fucks up and rolls greed, but their number is higher, they still win. That sound okay to everyone?"

9/10, people will agree to this and be happy someone floated the idea. I find that clear communication of expectation is highly beneficial when running dungeons. I have other macros to inform my party that, even though i'm the healer, I'm running the dungeon contingent on the right to roll on specific pre-raid bis pieces for my shadow set (i'm my guild's shadow priest) and am running as a healer to make the process go quicker. I use kind, polite language while also inferring that if they don't agree to my contingencies, then we can amicably part ways and find group mates that better align with our individual goals.

[Charge me Doctor]

https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2010-06-05

You don't seem to understand Game Theory in the same way I do. "Rat Out" is clicking "Need for AH spec"

there is only one way to understand game theory. Sadly, there is literally no way to make everyone to abide this unspoken rule. BoE item is also not a 1 year in prison (way to misunderstand prisoners dilemma by sticking to that example, instead of applying it to your situation), at worst you get nothing, at best you get bunch of gold (yes, even if it's your BiS item you are going to equip right away, because you achieve the same thing) which you can use to buy your BiS BoE. By living in this imaginary world where all pugs will roll greed on BoEs for no apparent reason you only able ninja looters to benefit from others.

[AeneasBK]

Sadly, there is literally no way to make everyone to abide this unspoken rule.

And to use that as an excuse to behave poorly is where our understanding of game theory differs. Hell, to understand the concept of game theory and to promote poor behaviour because of it seems directly counter to my understanding of it. Once you realise that we'd all rather people treat us as we'd like to be treated; to still treat others however we want is the poorer decision.

You're correct though that there's nothing that can be done about it. Personally I'm not gonna sell out my personal principles over some pixel gold even if that isn't the popular choice.

[Charge me Doctor]

"Hey guys! To avoid confusion and possible conflict, I propose a BoE rule. If one drops, we all roll Need. If someone fucks up and rolls greed, but their number is higher, they still win. That sound okay to everyone?"

9/10, people will agree to this and be happy someone floated the idea. I find that clear communication of expectation is highly beneficial when running dungeons. I have other macros to inform my party that, even though i'm the healer, I'm running the dungeon contingent on the right to roll on specific pre-raid bis pieces for my shadow set (i'm my guild's shadow priest) and am running as a healer to make the process go quicker. I use kind, polite language while also inferring that if they don't agree to my contingencies, then we can amicably part ways and find group mates that better align with our individual goals.

Which is a reasonable approach, but you still put all your eggs in one basket by expecting everyone to abide by those pre-made rules, and even tho i understand that your "9/10" is imaginable number, 1/10 situation you are going to have someone run out of a dungeon with lots of gold in their pocket for no reason, ruining your dungeon run and ruining mood of others.
You could pass all that hustle and drama by simple saying that everyone should roll need on it

- - - Updated - - -

And to use that as an excuse to behave poorly is where our understanding of game theory differs. Hell, to understand the concept of game theory and to promote poor behaviour because of it seems directly counter to my understanding of it. Once you realise that we'd all rather people treat us as we'd like to be treated; to still treat others however we want is the poorer decision.

You are not behaving poorly by rolling need on a BoE item, you should realize at this point liquidity of value of a BoE item. You give everyone a fair chance of gaining gold that they can spend (as in everyone rolls need on it). You can't expect a complete stranger to pass his chance on getting value in favor of another stranger because... reasons (as in this spoken/unspoken rule of "not rolling on a BoE if you can't equip it, or it's a BiS for another guy in your group but a minor upgrade for you if you decide to actually wear it"), or simply able ninjas to "behave poorly" (as in, waiting for everyone to roll greed and roll need himself)

[AeneasBK]

You are not behaving poorly by rolling need on a BoE item, you should realize at this point liquidity of value of a BoE item.

I mean, you are in terms of the game theory aspect of this discussion. But we can drop that if you want.

[Kirbstermcgee]

I totally understand the logic behind wanting to roll all need. However its clear the logic to all roll need quickly turned into an excuse to justify a ninja. Again, I dont care how you play the game. Fortunately for me I run a pretty tight shift in any pugs I organize(if im doing a pug) so its easy to weed out any potential problem players. And quite frankly I have time to keyboard warrior debate right now. But just to lay it out so everyone is aware this is the thought process:

>People are afraid one person in the group might ninja need a drop.

>In an attempt to avoid this people feel that if everyone rolls need, then all rolls are created equal so the ninja looter will have a harder time winning the roll. This would be a great strategy to use to then give the item to the person whom actually needs it.(Needing it is determined if it is an upgrade and will be equipped, not gold. You do not "need" for gold, there is another button for that called Greed)

>Then the "Need for Gold" argument comes up to defend the justification of keeping the item.

>The All Need strategy then allows everyone in the group some sort of justification to keep the item even if they were not intended to use it.

>Then the "Well they might sell it for gold too so i might as well sell it for gold" argument comes up.


I respect those in this thread that are at least honest with their preference of the All Need System. They prefer that system because "fuck errybody else I want gold". Thank you for being honest. But I would encourage those who are defending the All Need System for the sake of anti ninja looters to reflect on why you opt to go that route. Its because you too are a ninja looter looking for a justified reason get some extra gold. Its plain and simple. You're not a white knight trying to prevent ninja looters as much as you just looking for an excuse to justify stealing and abusing a game mechanic, just like a ninja looter would waiting for everyone to greed and then need. Its the same thing.

Its the internet, and its a video game. It is to be expected to see the worst of people. But lets just call it like it is, you arent trying to prevent ninja looters. You're trying to look for an excuse to ninja loot yourself and still appear to be the White Knight fighting the good fight against what you truly are. Who cares though, were not in a group together nor will we ever if that's how you play the loot system. But just call it what it is and dont pretend its anything but.

[ihate2beapessimist]

There is no ettiquette, if you want something you click NEED and pray to the RNG gods.
If you dont need it, click GREED and pray you can sell it.

If you click NEED on something that others perceive you dont actually need, then youll be ostracized and criticized. But thats about it, Blizz wont take the item from you.
If you are hunter and see DalRends drop, go ahead and need on em, make those pesky rogues and warriors mad. Make sure you give them a /rude while you hearthstone out. But know that every action has consequences...

[Sidewinder]

A little clarification: I am a mage, I rolled greed. There was a hesitation by all other members who agreed to need roll, sans the warrior. I asked if I could roll after the rolls completed since I would have wanted to if it was not being given to tank. Their need roll went out and I immediately rolled 100 and beat them. Without any additional conversation, the rogue opened trade and gave me the book. The warrior accused the rogue of ninjaing not knowing he had traded me the book.

The warrior then kicked us all from group and ninjas the rest of the tributes.