0.10.3c Patch Notes

Chris needs to add a "Poll" to patches like this one.

I Vote thumbs up for the patch.

"

Chris wrote:

"

EndOfEnds wrote:

Thank you for finally doing something about the loot system.

I'd still like you to address the ability to block other players by standing on loot, though.

I do agree that needs addressing. We want there to be tension around the drops, but agree that players shouldn't be able to physically deny the drops in that way.

This has happened so many times to me, it's so aggrevating.
I literally hate the game when this happens.

I would greatly appreciate the ability to scale the timer for a game I create and make public. The current problem is: many players enjoy playing "No-ninja" games, but inevitably, when something good drops, it gets ninjad even as I am trying to pick it up. Just two days ago, my first GCP dropped ever. It was a short distance away and it was in a big champion mob fight. Needless to say, it got ninjad. I have spent many many hours playing, and my first GCP gets ninjad in a "No-ninja" game. 1.6 seconds was way too short. 2.6 is better, but why not implement a player adjustable timer when a public game is created? Include the "loot time" number in the list when browsing. This would allow players to play co-op as we want without ninjas.

People who want to play FFA loot can do so with their 0 sec timer, or 1.5 sec timer, or whatever. If players like the "tension" for competitiveness, a bulk majority of games will be populated with short timers. But, if you have a tracking mechanism, you could see how players like playing; there may be more people than you think who like a 10 sec or 20 sec timer. This would fix the problem of players "standing" on the loot, and the frost wall barricade. Just allow us to play co-op as we want to play, not as how you "think" we should play.

If you suggest "play solo" or "don't party", that is not the solution to the problem. Parties are required to level up. The game was meant to be multi-player. So why should those of us who want to play multi-player be forced to have stuff stolen?

Chris, I ask you in earnest, have you ever had anything in real life stolen? Have you had your car broken into? I have. When that GCP dropped and it was stolen, it was the same sickening feeling all over again. What is the point of creating that feeling in players? Why would you want to force people to experience that sickening feeling just because you "want tension" for loot drops?!

Not everybody likes the sickening feeling of being stolen from. Not everybody likes "tension". It's a game, I play it to escape stress, not to get stressed.

"

Alesana wrote:

I like the fact magic is no longer allocated.
I'd like a party option so that names stay on loot after timer expires, so people trying to play nice can play nice easier.

Agree with both sentiments here! An option to include names would be nice. Everything else about patch should satisfy (mostly) both sides of issue...that extra little bit of time should help a lot.

I didn't have trouble getting loot often at all before patch and apparently after patch is more or less the same to me. I still hump my loot. Problem is there is still spell/body blocking. Ninja=kick groups are still here to stay sadly. Maybe it'll fizzle out soon enough?

Worst part? People still want other options available to them.

As we can see already, you have in this thread:

- a person who wants true FFA (no timers)

- a person who likes the timers now

- a person who liked timers before

- a person who wants instanced loot

- I'm sure you're gonna have people come in here asking for longer timers :P

Is it design implementation that is the issue with creating party leader options? I'm sure loot competition is what you guys would like, but extending timers or timers in general I feel is going away from the vision you guys once had which is sad, considering you had a bunch of people who liked it, and you should just let the players decide for themselves what loot system they wish to play with.

My two cents.

Yes definitely agree with the name option especially since it will reduce confusion and most importantly for Map to Maker parties it will be easier to deter ninjaing of maps as the ninja name would be known.

Awesome improvement. Really liking it now.

"

JMacker wrote:

Chris, I ask you in earnest, have you ever had anything in real life stolen? Have you had your car broken into? I have. When that GCP dropped and it was stolen, it was the same sickening feeling all over again. What is the point of creating that feeling in players? Why would you want to force people to experience that sickening feeling just because you "want tension" for loot drops?!

The one big mistake GGG made was by putting names on drops in the first place. This should never have happened. If you were never able to claim a drop then it never was yours in the first place and have therefore not lost anything. As it now stands you have a 2.6 second head start over other party members to claim a drop.

The only thing that still needs to be sorted out is the pathing issue where players are able to prevent people from reaching a drop. That and make it 3 seconds.

"

JMacker wrote:

"

Chris wrote:

"

EndOfEnds wrote:

Thank you for finally doing something about the loot system.

I'd still like you to address the ability to block other players by standing on loot, though.

I do agree that needs addressing. We want there to be tension around the drops, but agree that players shouldn't be able to physically deny the drops in that way.

This has happened so many times to me, it's so aggrevating.
I literally hate the game when this happens.

I would greatly appreciate the ability to scale the timer for a game I create and make public. The current problem is: many players enjoy playing "No-ninja" games, but inevitably, when something good drops, it gets ninjad even as I am trying to pick it up. Just two days ago, my first GCP dropped ever. It was a short distance away and it was in a big champion mob fight. Needless to say, it got ninjad. I have spent many many hours playing, and my first GCP gets ninjad in a "No-ninja" game. 1.6 seconds was way too short. 2.6 is better, but why not implement a player adjustable timer when a public game is created? Include the "loot time" number in the list when browsing. This would allow players to play co-op as we want without ninjas.

People who want to play FFA loot can do so with their 0 sec timer, or 1.5 sec timer, or whatever. If players like the "tension" for competitiveness, a bulk majority of games will be populated with short timers. But, if you have a tracking mechanism, you could see how players like playing; there may be more people than you think who like a 10 sec or 20 sec timer. This would fix the problem of players "standing" on the loot, and the frost wall barricade. Just allow us to play co-op as we want to play, not as how you "think" we should play.

If you suggest "play solo" or "don't party", that is not the solution to the problem. Parties are required to level up. The game was meant to be multi-player. So why should those of us who want to play multi-player be forced to have stuff stolen?

Chris, I ask you in earnest, have you ever had anything in real life stolen? Have you had your car broken into? I have. When that GCP dropped and it was stolen, it was the same sickening feeling all over again. What is the point of creating that feeling in players? Why would you want to force people to experience that sickening feeling just because you "want tension" for loot drops?!

Not everybody likes the sickening feeling of being stolen from. Not everybody likes "tension". It's a game, I play it to escape stress, not to get stressed.

Your GCP wasnt stolen..you FAILED to grab your item before it became FFA. In other words..YOU..as a gamer..failed! I don't see how that translates into an item was stolen from you.

double post

Overall I think it's an improvement. Until the game can be optimized the loot timer needed to be increased. This isn't just a wooden PC issue, in 6 man parties even if you see your loot and click it first things like latency and fps drops can cause disproportion. Being melee range on anything less than optimal situations was worse. The distanced traveled helped in these situations, still not enough to counter certain people with better latency and gaming rigs to more or less get loot that the person it was designated for had 0% chance of picking up. There are people that play top of the line PC games on brand new PCs on max settings and are fine on most games and these people still drop to 5-20 FPS in 6 man parties, its optimization and until its fixed you can't have loot as cutthroat as it was, I think the time allocated is better now. Certain people, no matter how much time given, will never notice chrome items or 6 links and they will complain no matter what, but the timer needs to reflect how well your game is optimized.

The removal of designating blues was needed. I highly doubt people look at the blue items first when a boss drops a huge pile, they just grab the rares. Protecting and distributing blues always seemed silly to me. In friendly parties I can't remember who the rares AND the blues go to when it comes to trading blues for chromes so it was always ffa with blues, in my experience anyways.

The only part that's not good is the removal of my name and others names on the loot. Normally I train my eyes to look for certain names, like my own or item names and socket colors and links. Now I have no reference on the loot except the shading. Instead of looking for my name on items I now have to basically scan the entire pile and on the fly and search for slight hue differences in loot which is incredibly more difficult. QQ or whatever you want to label it but even though it adds much needed balance to loot, and makes it so more loot can fit on the screen which is also amazing, it does, at least so far seem to make the process of finding YOUR loot more difficult overall as well as causing disaster in friendly parties that liked to rely on the random distribution the game provide and will now have to ninja in their own parties or figure out other methods of distribution.

This could be fixed in a way that sounds easy but may be difficult to implement. Either designate each position in the party with a color and then border that player's items and picture on the left side of the screen with that color, sort of like map borders are white. The leader could be red and his picture and all his drops, while greyed out, will have his red color border so that there is at least someway of identifying whats yours, other than its brighter than the rest. The second player could be blue the third green and so on. Either this or even a small number like designate 1-6 to the position in the party and somewhere on the loot's name it would show a number while its greyed out. Without a way to scan and distribute based on identifying it's much more chaotic. There was never a problem in identifying what was yours other than how much space the loot took up, removing blues sorta solved this problem already I feel you went too far.

Definitely way more good than bad, but could be tweaked.