| Author |
On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Valth
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: 08.08.10 |
| Posted on Feb 12 2012 23:42 |
|
|
I’m writing this post to ask for opinions on a change to the lord lotto system, which is currently a straight lotto.
This system is terrible for the leader, who, for a vast majority of the gear runs, does 90% of the work, only to be given the same lotto chance as someone who isn’t typing a single command. If you don’t believe that former statement, just look at how successful various lords do on multiday, running in 2-4 man groups with their multiday armies.
And to get this out of the way, yes, I am/was one of the more prolific gear leaders, focusing mainly on the reboot items, so what is written will certainly benefit me.
I’d like to convert the current lotto system into one where the leader wins, at worst, on the third pick. That is, the lotto proceeds as normal with upgrades/straight lotto for the first two lottos, after which, if the leader has not yet won, is allowed to pick an item from the lotto pool. If enough items are gained such that a second round of lotto is necessary, he will not gain this extra benefit.
The pro/cons of this system:
Pros:
1) Gives incentives for leaders to try to lead gear, as if they are able to camp 3 pops (not uncommon in many runs), they will be able to win a piece for sure.
2) Will not give leaders a straight advantage in the reboot gear runs for the top item. SoL and Lode will have zero benefit (lol rod/box), scepter will have a minor benefit, and SoS/Katar will both have a very reasonable benefit.
Cons:
1) May cause the leader to feel it is “necessary” to camp at least 3+ repops, which, in many gear runs, requires a second spellup. This extends the length of many lord runs from 45 minutes to a 90 minute affair, from group gathering to finishing lotto.
2) May cause a squabble over “who should lead,” because leader slot will then become a much more valuable commodity.
With respect to the con list, point 1) is not that big a deal in my opinion, as the lord population will probably be able to self-govern and not follow leaders who take multiple spellups but leave immediately after getting 3 pops. Point 2) may also be problematic, but with a current lack of lord leaders, I am unsure how problematic.
I chose to put the 3rd lotto rather than the 1st or 2nd because it seems to be a good balance in terms of “pointless addition” and “powerful addition.” Obviously, another “problem” may arise in the fact that leaders will stop leading after they win what they need. I don’t really see this as a problem myself, though.
Here are the following runs which I feel may become stretched into a two spellup affair if this system takes place:
Garden (either run)
Dstone
Shackles
Rohp (if collecting keys at the same time)
Zgaunts (sort of)
Gulch (initial run only)
Of these 6 runs, shackle/rohp are often camped for a second spellup anyways. Zgaunts is a weird run where I have camped it for a huge variety of repops, so I dunno how to make a general statement there. Gulch is problematic if going after the robe of magnificence only, but since the gear room is easily camped afterwards, is less of an issue. Dstone and Garden are really the only two runs I can think of getting significantly stretched, and again, the lord community is under no obligation to follow a leader who continuously stretches out a run for their own benefit. The rest of the gear runs either aren’t camped (glyph, istone), can get 3+ items in one spellup (eering, air gear), or are often camped for two spellups anyways (bodice, crown).
Thoughts/opinons on this are welcome. I could go into a full list of gear runs if anyone is actually interested, but for now I will leave it at this.
- Atris |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Takayuchi
Member
Posts: 25
Joined: 21.03.11 |
| Posted on Feb 12 2012 23:55 |
|
|
Lotto is an informal and community-enforced system, leaders are perfectly within their rights to deviate from that loot distribution method as they see fit. Notorious examples include HWO and lotto sol, but it\'s not unheard of for leaders to simply say \"This is a spires camp and I am keeping one bracer\" at the beginning of a run.
I don\'t think this system is necessary for reboot or shard realm runs, as it will definitely cause fighting over the lead slot with no real benefit to the community. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
SePadre
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: 02.04.07 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 02:47 |
|
|
|
I used to lead lord quite a bit, and when I lead it was typical for gear. If I was going for a piece of gear that was going to be camped I told the group before we left that one of the lowest base pieces or lowest max pieces that we camped was mine, and that I\'d exclude myself from the lotto. Something that might seem surprising is, no one ever backed out. I got probably 90% of my lord ac from leading and taking the lowest base for myself. Once you have a piece, the odds for upgrading is significantly better than trying to win your first. Lotto is what the leader wants it to be. Just let the group know how it is before you head out. Most people that follow, agree with you, that the leader does most of the work and that without leaders, most of them wouldn\'t have any gear. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
tammo
Member
Posts: 1
Location: san diego
Joined: 17.10.10 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 02:47 |
|
|
Seems to me we have leaders, but they are only leading their own alts on multiday. Why lead a bunch of people when you can lead yourself and get 100% of the loot?
An obvious solution to a shortage of leaders would be to get rid of multiday.
And while your topic is not necessarily a shortage of leaders, but gear distribution, takayuchi is right in that the leader does specify gear distribution method. If people don\'t like your method, they won\'t follow... simple. The real problem is lack of leadership and multiday seems to have a large part to do with this.
Edited by tammo on Feb 13 2012 02:51 |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Zaffer
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 12.03.09 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 03:29 |
|
|
Or, don\\\'t get rid of multiday, but have the lordhog script run to remove all the gear mobs at 00:01 on the 6th, and replace them at 23:59.
Personally, I don\\\'t really care. No matter how you lotto, you\\\'ll still end up with some useless twit that AFKs winning gear.
Side note: The less attention I pay, the more gear I win. Why would I pay attention and win less?! Bulletproof logic! |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Zaffer
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 12.03.09 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 03:31 |
|
|
Also... there seems to be an issue with the special character escaping!
I did not type any backslashes... The site just thinks they are cool. Which they are.
It\\\'s cool. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Zaffer
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 12.03.09 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 03:32 |
|
|
|
tammo wrote:
Seems to me we have leaders, but they are only leading their own alts on multiday.
To be fair... Eglarion leads two people. Him and Seperia on multiday. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Valth
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: 08.08.10 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 03:39 |
|
|
I feel like a general agreed upon lotto system would be better, lest we become inundated with \"Lord run, follow me 2e. I will keep (x items under y scenario assuming z conditions)\", where x y and z become more and more arbitrary. I would rather not have to ask every new leader what their system is. Maybe I\'m just weird like that though.
On the other note, removing gear on multiday will not make the current set of lord multiday runners lead more public runs, 100% guaranteed. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Elec
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 01.05.11 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 11:07 |
|
|
1. I doubt that the incentives would work the way Atris describes. The reason most people lead lord is that they want the gear. If they get the gear, the motivation drops. Speaking for myself, I haven\'t led gulch since I won the robe (which was on my first or second run). Even though I like to think that I enjoy leading mostly because I like it (I already have most of t1 ac/hit/archer and I just swap gear across alts - I don\'t run much lord on multiday).
2. Having said that, it\'s really up to the leader to say how to distribute gear, since he/she does most of the work.
3. I also think that multiday has reduced lord gear runs. I remember that Eglarion used to lead a lot earlier when he was an elf sor (though that could be just because he wanted to remort). Also on Styrr. Logically speaking, since we remove gear mobs in HoG, we should also do it on multiday, since the group is mostly like 2-4 people. I am not saying that multiday is same as HoG and that gear running with 10 windows open requires no skill, but it\'s qualitatively different from a normal run. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Seperia
Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 13.02.12 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 12:37 |
|
|
Please leave Eglarion and I out of this conversation. Eglarion does not lead regular lord because he got tired of how people acted. Pure and Simple. Us running lord multiday had no affect on him leading lord for the masses. Eglarion stopped leading lord long before we began running lord on multidays. He stopped leading because of players being afk, not knowing how to play their characters, and the constant harassment he was getting. It is why he sticks to mudding with his friends only now. There have been occasions when Eglarion has tried to lead lord on some alt and within a run or two, he has become annoyed and given up. If you want him to lead lord and run gear for you, which he loves doing whether he has the eq or not, then people need to change their behaviors in his groups.
As for the actual topic which should be discussed, lotto, lotto w/o, hwo, or something that is explained before you leave thorn is plenty. Any leader who thinks they are doing all the work and deserves the eq and doesn\\\'t think the rest of the group counts should just run on multiday.
I would suggest that if you want to discuss multiday you start a new thread. However I would also remind you that there are players who are here for just such a reason and preventing the camping of lord eq on muliday or removing multiday altogether would result in players leaving the mud, as some are here specifically for that reason.
Seperia |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Elec
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 01.05.11 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 14:19 |
|
|
1. I have, of course, no inside information about why Eglarion stopped leading. You do, and of course you are right. My speculation is therefore void. But I was not particularly targeting Eglarion.
2. The subject of the post was lord lotto and leading. I was replying to the broad point about Atris saying that there would be more incentive to lead with so and so changes. It does seem to me, logically speaking, that multiday is also an incentive/disincentive for leading.
3. Personally, I don\'t care about multiday gear runs. If people want to run them, do it. My remarks were solely about the (potential) effect of multiday gear runs on incentives for leading. My argument was just based on the logic of HoG vs multiday. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
laazarus
Member
Posts: 35
Joined: 21.12.07 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 15:26 |
|
|
i can\'t imagine multiday is keeping people from leading lord. it\'s only one day a month after all. and by the same token, it\'s hard to imagine multiday being so important to some that they would leave the mud if it were canceled. really? multiday hasn\'t been around that long, and i for one wouldn\'t shed a tear if it went away. if someone starts a new thread on the topic of multiday i\'m sure a lot of people would comment.
as to lotto method on lord gear runs, i agree with what most people have said - the leader can specify, before the run starts, whatever rules they want to use. everytime i\'ve seen this done it works fine and no one has complained. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Arngrim
Member
Posts: 6
Location: Las Cruces, New Mexico
Joined: 15.07.11 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 17:05 |
|
|
I suggest no change to the lotto system. Leaders can always elect the alternative lotto options listed in lordschool. I think the change that was suggested would further decrease the amount of gear runs. Most people won\'t continue to lead a specific gear run after they gather the gear they were after.
I\'m not a supporter of multi-day and never have been. Maybe just don\'t allow it at the lord level? That would ensure everyone gets a shot at the gear they want, specifically ro gear; and people could still have a little fun once a month at hero.
It\'s wrong to trace the death of lord tier to the absence of leaders. There are usually capable gear leaders online. Hero is simply more interesting to run. It goes quicker and can be run with less groupies. I\'m not suggesting lord be made easier, but 20 or 30 groupies for some of the gear is a bit of a tall order considering the declining playerbase. All of that being said. Here is my position.
No change to lotto system
Axe Multi-Day, but if you insist on keeping it, don\'t allow lords to multi
Tone down those mobbies so i don\'t need an army to fight them.
I think if those changes are made, it could breathe new life into lord tier and encourage more players to lead. It would also provide for a better chance of winning the lotto.
Would love to hear some feedback.
-Arny
Arngrim Skythain, Grand Duke of the High Elves |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Zaffer
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 12.03.09 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 17:23 |
|
|
|
Arngrim wrote:
It\\\'s wrong to trace the death of lord tier to the absence of leaders. There are usually capable gear leaders online. Hero is simply more interesting to run. It goes quicker and can be run with less groupies.
I really don\'t see how hero is more interesting to run when most runs (announced at least) are just EHA runs. Which, are basically just lord runs at the hero tier. You can do smaller runs at hero, obviously, but you don\'t need 10+ to run lord either.
A partial issue behind the lack of lord runs is likely rebirth in conjunction with changes to remort. Introduce something that allows people to make other character combinations (or at least without as much work), and once they get to the required lord level... they start to concentrate on the character at lowmort/hero. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Arngrim
Member
Posts: 6
Location: Las Cruces, New Mexico
Joined: 15.07.11 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 17:32 |
|
|
|
Zaffer wrote:
You can do smaller runs at hero, obviously, but you don\\\\\\\'t need 10+ to run lord either.
You don\\\'t need 10+ for lord. You do need 10-20 for gear, and that is the issue at hand. However, i will conceed that hero is no more interesting than lord. Just quicker and can be enjoyed with less groupies.
Arngrim Skythain, Grand Duke of the High Elves
Edited by Arngrim on Feb 13 2012 17:34 |
|
|
| Author |
RE: RE: Atris\\\' Idea |
Dharm
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 13.02.12 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 18:09 |
|
|
Posted on Feb 13 2012 13:08
I think Atris has brought up a good point.
Why should leaders continue to lead lord when someone who puts 0 effort into running has the same chance to win an item that the person who diligently played for over an hour has to win. It\\\\\\\'s all about equitable distribution of the gear. For those engineeering/math types like me, the equation SHOULD be something along the lines of:
% win = 100*{(%effort + %time + %contribution) / 3}
where:
%effort - The amount of effort a person puts into playing
%time - How much of the gear run did you stay for
%contribution- How useful was the character you ran for the piece of gear aquired.
BUT it currently is:
100* [1 / current group size] = % chance to win
The problem lies in a fair way to convert %effort and %contribution into actual numbers. Does a caster contribute more to the group? What about the archer who longshots the mobs on the way to the gear room? How about the lonely priest healing? The leader? The tanks? The rouges? Without each of those people the group would not function and the gear would not be attained. Each person is uniquely needed on a gear run, without them it would not succeed.
I applaud Atris for taking the lead on this and hope that more people think up unique ways to distribute the gear. I do not think that a system that says \\\\\\\"this is how gear should be distributed\\\\\\\" should be implemented. I want the right to choose how I distribute the gear my runs gather. A few years ago, when I lead frequently with Morsq (back when Karnath was first implemented)
EDIT
I got frustrated after 10runs of not winning and announced at the beginning of my run that:
END EDIT
1.) I intended to camp for 2 spellups, 2.) If we collect 3 or more crowns, the lowest base goes to me. People still followed.
Clear concise communication is all that\\\\\\\'s required. Oh, and people actually reading what is written on the screen.
Edited by Dharm on Feb 13 2012 19:38 |
|
|
| Author |
RE: RE: Multidaythoughts |
Dharm
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 13.02.12 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 18:12 |
|
|
I am not quite sure how this turned into a \"ban\" multi-day at lord thread, but that saddens me greatly. Mutli-day at lord is very fun and multi-day in general is a welcome addition to the mud and requires a great amount of skill and a lot of dedication to pull it off successfully.
Remember when we used to allow multi-playing on a regular basis?? It\'s nice that we are able to get back to our roots, even if it\'s just once a month. With our counts so low, maybe more frequent multi-day is the answer..... |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Arngrim
Member
Posts: 6
Location: Las Cruces, New Mexico
Joined: 15.07.11 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 18:18 |
|
|
Thankyou dharm. The more i read and think about this, the clearer it becomes that a leader should have the right to retain one of pieces if they are camping. I think if your group is collect 3 or more of the same item, the leader should retain the one with the lowest base.
Arngrim Skythain, Grand Duke of the High Elves |
|
|
| Author |
RE: On Lord Lottos and Leading |
Ponomariov
Member
Posts: 9
Location: Helsingborg, Sweden
Joined: 09.05.07 |
| Posted on Feb 13 2012 21:56 |
|
|
|
Seperia wrote:
Please leave Eglarion and I out of this conversation. Eglarion does not lead regular lord because he got tired of how people acted. Pure and Simple. Us running lord multiday had no affect on him leading lord for the masses. Eglarion stopped leading lord long before we began running lord on multidays. He stopped leading because of players being afk, not knowing how to play their characters, and the constant harassment he was getting. It is why he sticks to mudding with his friends only now. There have been occasions when Eglarion has tried to lead lord on some alt and within a run or two, he has become annoyed and given up. If you want him to lead lord and run gear for you, which he loves doing whether he has the eq or not, then people need to change their behaviors in his groups.
As for the actual topic which should be discussed, lotto, lotto w/o, hwo, or something that is explained before you leave thorn is plenty. Any leader who thinks they are doing all the work and deserves the eq and doesn\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t think the rest of the group counts should just run on multiday.
I would suggest that if you want to discuss multiday you start a new thread. However I would also remind you that there are players who are here for just such a reason and preventing the camping of lord eq on muliday or removing multiday altogether would result in players leaving the mud, as some are here specifically for that reason.
Seperia
Snicker. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: One last thing |
Dharm
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 13.02.12 |
| Posted on Feb 14 2012 01:02 |
|
|
I also should say that if a prescribed new \"normal\" lotto system is generated I\'ll have no problem with it. What do you think of this tweak on what you said Atris.
What if the leader ALWAYS received the third pick in the lotto on the bigger runs instead of getting the third pick if he simply have not won yet. That would mean you would lotto with the lotto exclude command...Thoughts? |
|
|
Guests Online: 11
