Jump to content


Photo

Most Efficient Way of Gearing up a Guild for PvE Progression?


  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#61 zeidrich

zeidrich

    Yet again, dead again.

  • Members
  • 3,046 posts

Posted 08 January 2007 - 07:03 PM

The main reason I don't mind an equal distribution token system is this:

Take a rogue and 2 paladins;

One paladin is gearing as a tank.
One paladin is gearing as a healer.
The rogue is gearing as a rogue. :)

Both the tanking paladin and the healing paladin are going to be wanting some DPS gear eventually, but in a typical situation, you want your players to roll on items that will help raid progression before they roll on offspecs.

So you want the tank to get tank items, the healer to get healer items and the rogue to get rogue items.

Now assume you have equal drop rates on the tokens.

Your tank paladin will get his tank set about the time your healing paladin gets his healing set about the time the rogue gets his rogue set. This is also about the time your locks and hunters get their set.

After that the instance is obviously on farm and your paladins are going for their DPS set while the rogues are still sticking around for weapons/trinkets etc.

As long as you don't charge (or charge little) for a characters second token set, this is fine, and the paladins are going to get their upgrade sets while they also stick around for weapons/trinkets.

Now consider that the token drops are based on # of options in the group, so that the Pally/Rogue/Shaman tokens drop twice as often as the mage/lock/hunters:

You're still going to be going off the premise that you should get your raid progression set first, I don't think anyone is ever going to argue that. So the tank paladin, rogue and healing paladin all get their healing sets.

Meanwhile, the hunters/mages/warlocks are in half of their set because half as many tokens have dropped for them. This is where you're going to have trouble. As well, if you're operating a bidding dkp system the rarer tokens are going to go for more dkp than the common ones.


IMHO:

Assuming equal token drops:
Your raiding classes will all get their raiding sets at approximately the same rate assuming even attendance.

Assuming it takes longer to distribute all wanted random non-token items than it does to get a set:
Your hybrids will accumulate a second set after they've obtained their raid-progression set while you're gearing more casual members and waiting for that rare drop.

Consider you move right to the next tier of dungeon as soon as you can hack it:
All of your classes will be about equally geared.


Now assume number of token drops are based off the number of sets available.
Your hunters/mages/warlocks will get their sets half as fast as your warriors/priests/druids who will still not get their primary sets as fast as your paladins/shamans/rogues.

Assuming you wait until all classes have a full set:
All of your hybrids will have a full suit of offspec gear, (cool for me, but big deal progression wise).

Consider you move right to the next tier of dungeon as soon as you can hack it:
Your Warriors/Priests/Druids will be near fully geared in a raid set. Some of your Pallys/Shaman/Rogues will be fully geared and your hunters/mages/locks will be in half a set and bitter as heck.

Believe it or not, I'm sorry it came to this. Not really intensely sorry, but that kind of mildly disappointed, resigned sorry that happens when I see a puppy walk head-first into a window, back up, stare bewildered at it for a second, then walk head-first into the window again.


#62 Tel

Tel

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 395 posts

Posted 08 January 2007 - 07:06 PM

Unless you are the top dog guild on the server (and this may be blurred now with the ease of realm transfer) it is a terrible idea to gear up a main tank. A higher rung guild will see the epics on him and snatch him up and he will be so flattered and taken back by the gear he could obtain that is impossible in his current guild that he will leave. Do not think that it will not happen, because it will.

The second issue is once you have geared your MT to the teeth he has very little reason to keep on going to raids. Sure there are alot of loyal people who have devout loyalty to their guild even when fully geared and will show up regardless of loot. But once that carrot-on-the-stick of upgrades is nullified because the guild cannot progress further the main tank will probally ebay/quit and leave you back high and dry.

Long story short: loot priorities do not work.

I disagree, I think that its entirely dependant on your guild attitude and enviroment. I think if you're soley a 'progression machine' guild that isnt top dog, then you'll end up losing players to the further progressed guilds. If however (like the guild I'm currently in) you foster a more community minded attitude, where everyone gets their say, and they are there more for the community than the 'phat lewts' then you're far less likely to have your members poached.

We've geared up a few main tanks in our time, and not one has left for another guild. One quit to get a job and go to uni, one rerolled to play with RL mates, and all the others are still with us at Saph/KT, since Ragnaros...

I think loot priorities need to be looked at while bearing in mind what sort of guild you want to be, whether that be Epic producing machine, casual 5man-ers or whatever. It makes a big difference as to how best to divide your loot.

#63 FunBall

FunBall

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 405 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 09:55 PM

Why not 3 for the price of 1? It'll be perceived as unfair. Whether or not it is is completely beside the point. It'll be perceived as unfair. And, really, it is - isn't one of the prices you pay for flexibility having to work harder to be good at all of your flexible roles? If hybrid classes were gearing all their roles at the same time, it removes one of the restrictions that justified them approaching pure class performance; do you really want 3 pieces of gear at once if it suddenly provides ammo to the people who don't want you to be good at anything?

The fairness issue is pretty reasonable. I don't think it should be perceived as unfair, but it would. Would it provide ammo to people that don't want hybrids to be good at anything? Not realistically, we can still get all 3 sets of gear. Spec and the fact that only one set of gear can be worn in a fight still require the hybrid to make a choice.

There was never any blue post that I know of that said "we think some classes should be able to gear up more easily than others". Real fairness would be providing every class with a set of gear that lets them do anything for their class in a similar time frame. Your idea of combining all the hybrid tokens and boosting drop rates does a decent job of that. Giving every class their full set of gear for that slot with one drop does the same thing.

I don't expect Blizzard to adjust their systems to account for poorly designed systems in some people's cases (and *yes*, charging hybrids full price for everything *is* a flawed system given current loot and raid design).

I don't agree that it is flawed. You can argue that it is a solution to a problem, but it is short sighted to suggest that it is the only acceptable solution.

Looking at Burning Crusade, it becomes more difficult to justify a discounted or free set piece. Certain "off-specs" are already considered good for raid groups, and will continue to be seen that way. Our DKP system wouldn't support it at all, and it would be a flaw to give those items away. Gloves of the Hidden Temple for a discounted price are a lot different from making the choice between giving a Priest his shadow chest or giving a Warrior his tanking chest.

You've advocated giving Hybrids all 2/3 set pieces for the same DKP price as a pure DPS class (or close to it). You've suggested increasing the drop rates so that Hybrids can finish all of their sets at the same time DPS are finishing their sets on average. There isn't much of a leap to simply giving all sets at once to a Hybrid, except that it feels different. The end result is essentially the same.

#64 Mags

Mags

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 08:27 AM

Like Halka, I'm part of "casual raiding guild". We basically started as groups of friends then expanded to tackle harder and harder content - initially in alliances, and then on our own. These days we're probably closer to a raid guild than a casual guild, but we don't have required attendance, we don't force specs, and we try our best to keep the raid schedule from taking over the entire week.

I think the major secret to our success has been low turnover. We have a motivated core of people who attend raids regularly supplemented by players whose schedule doesn't allow them to raid as much. We still have the same 5 or 6 tanks we had when we first started raiding. 75% of the people who were there for our first Raganaros kill a year ago are still with the guild. Sure people have left, and new people have arrived, but by the standards of most guilds we have been very, very stable.

We had a zero-sum DKP system, and we didn't prioritize loot in anyway (except for dark iron resist gear). There is danger if you allocate all the tanking gear to one warrior that they will leave, setting back your raiding while you gear up another tank. Because we had a group of similarly geared tanks, we could rotate them as needed.

Successful raiding also requires a dedicated team of support people helping out on the back end of things: raid leader, dkp accountant, bank person and so on. I strongly suggest spreading these responsibilities around as much as possible. Leaving the load to one person is recipe for burn-out.

The burning crusade is essentially a "gear reset" - your progress in prior instances isn't necessarily a burden on success in the new expansion instances. I would suggest initially concentrate on simply enjoying the new content while you discuss what goals you want to achieve as a guild and how to get there.

Chris

#65 Miaxi

Miaxi

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 255 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 09:48 AM

Why in god's name do you even plan to pick up multiple sets? You should min/max for your primary role (as in shadow priest or offtank/DPS-druid) first or you'll end up with two mediocre sets of gear instead of one great one and lag behind the single-role classes again. Face it, the only specs that can reliably switch roles during combat are elemental shamans, shadow priests and balance druids - and they already come with gear that supports that. A min/maxed feral druid will barely have mana to shift back if he tried to heal and robbing his party of improved leader of the pack for those seconds lowers your group's overall efficiency.

#66 Ayr

Ayr

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 227 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 10:03 AM

Why in god's name do you even plan to pick up multiple sets? You should min/max for your primary role (as in shadow priest or offtank/DPS-druid) first or you'll end up with two mediocre sets of gear instead of one great one and lag behind the single-role classes again. Face it, the only specs that can reliably switch roles during combat are elemental shamans, shadow priests and balance druids - and they already come with gear that supports that. A min/maxed feral druid will barely have mana to shift back if he tried to heal and robbing his party of improved leader of the pack for those seconds lowers your group's overall efficiency.

For the same reason even fury warriors benefited from having tanking sets pre 2.0. Different encounters will require different roles - I am fully certain I will be fully healing even as a shadowpriest quite often, and I want to have as good as possible healer set for that. Ofcourse min/max for the primary role takes precedence over everything else, but that doesn't mean I can afford not to itemize the other aspects of my class.

#67 Miaxi

Miaxi

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 255 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 10:07 AM

Why in god's name do you even plan to pick up multiple sets? You should min/max for your primary role (as in shadow priest or offtank/DPS-druid) first or you'll end up with two mediocre sets of gear instead of one great one and lag behind the single-role classes again. Face it, the only specs that can reliably switch roles during combat are elemental shamans, shadow priests and balance druids - and they already come with gear that supports that. A min/maxed feral druid will barely have mana to shift back if he tried to heal and robbing his party of improved leader of the pack for those seconds lowers your group's overall efficiency.

For the same reason even fury warriors benefited from having tanking sets pre 2.0. Different encounters will require different roles - I am fully certain I will be fully healing even as a shadowpriest quite often, and I want to have as good as possible healer set for that. Ofcourse min/max for the primary role takes precedence over everything else, but that doesn't mean I can afford not to itemize the other aspects of my class.

DPS warriors only pick up tanking gear if it is necessary for an encounter (4 horsemen) or otherwise gets disenchanted (Patchwerk shield). They pass tanking sets to dedicated protection warriors. If you want to be dedicated shadow priest, you should treat healing gear the same way. Hybridizing just doesn't work in WoW.

Besides, a top-geared shadow priest who can keep up VE ticks without running out of mana, will heal better than if he swapped into his half-completed healing set. I have seen shadow priests solo-heal 5-mans with just VE.

#68 Ayr

Ayr

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 227 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 10:19 AM

Oh I don't mean equal priority vs. same class members of different spec, or for that equal priority on tokens vs. other classes who still need items for their primary spec. I just pointed out that itemizing all aspects of a class is beneficial - for example, fury warriors picking up tank gear to help tank multiple trash pulls. And while VE is awesome, I am very confident shadowpriests will be needed to heal in full healing gear quite often.

#69 Miaxi

Miaxi

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 255 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 10:42 AM

Oh I don't mean equal priority vs. same class members of different spec, or for that equal priority on tokens vs. other classes who still need items for their primary spec. I just pointed out that itemizing all aspects of a class is beneficial - for example, fury warriors picking up tank gear to help tank multiple trash pulls. And while VE is awesome, I am very confident shadowpriests will be needed to heal in full healing gear quite often.

Of course you will pick up a healing piece here and there but, just like dedicated DPS warriors, you would treat it as your secondary set or you would gimp your DKP for primary pieces. It's a simple matter of cost vs. effectiveness - you are constantly struggling to compete with single-role classes on rings, necks and trinkets and if you spend double on just your set, you'd be using sub-par pieces in those slots forever and thus lagging behind in your primary role.

#70 Ayr

Ayr

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 227 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 11:31 AM

Oh I don't mean equal priority vs. same class members of different spec, or for that equal priority on tokens vs. other classes who still need items for their primary spec. I just pointed out that itemizing all aspects of a class is beneficial - for example, fury warriors picking up tank gear to help tank multiple trash pulls. And while VE is awesome, I am very confident shadowpriests will be needed to heal in full healing gear quite often.

Of course you will pick up a healing piece here and there but, just like dedicated DPS warriors, you would treat it as your secondary set or you would gimp your DKP for primary pieces. It's a simple matter of cost vs. effectiveness - you are constantly struggling to compete with single-role classes on rings, necks and trinkets and if you spend double on just your set, you'd be using sub-par pieces in those slots forever and thus lagging behind in your primary role.

I think we both agree on that. I'm just saying that the need for hybrids to itemize all the aspects of their class is there. Everything else on depends a lot on personal preference, DKP system, attendence and derived DKP, and will vary a lot from guild to guild and person to person. For example, I probably won't let a healing robe that is an upgrade for me get disenchanted, even if it moves me down on the DKP list for that top notch DPS neck.

#71 Lina

Lina

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 07 February 2007 - 02:37 PM

Here is a concern I have with regard to how my guild hopes to gear up for fast PvE progression for BC.

Currently my guild is restructuring our loot system into a Zero Sum DKP. We never had a DKP system before put into practice. For the most part I think its a great idea and needs to be implemented but there is one decision that I fear could cause a lot of trouble down the road.

To give some history, our guild despite a very slow start quickly managed to raid deep into Naxx well until the expansion. The guild never suffered attrition and most of the members still persist. I'd say about a strong raiding core of 45 people not counting reserves. The environment is excellent and few problems have ever come up. Everyone contributes immensely. Since our core was 45 people this doesn't fit into a 25 man structure so leadership is proposing to have a Raid Core and a Reserve Core. Only one 25 man raid will be running at any given time.

Now for the issue:

To start, the raid core will be comprised of around 30 people and the remainder of the guild will be in the reserve core (15+). The raid core will have priority over the reserve core in terms of invite. On top of that, while both groups will have the opportunity to earn equal dkp, the raid core will have absolute priority on dkp spent. Essentially the reserve must wait until the raid core is fully equipped before even considering to buy items. Leadership says its to prevent future poor attending members from acquiring loot beneficial to the raid.

My fear is that in the long term the reserves will lose the desire to show up if not given the opportunity to be on equal footing as the raid core. Most of these people are not slackers and if it wasn't for the raid cap would all be showing up daily. Does this not penalize reserve members who want to work hard to equip themselves for raid progression? Isn't DKP in itself and invite priority enough of a fail-safe to ensure that the guild is equipped well enough for PvE progression? Is this an effective way to gear up a guild for PvE Progression?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

#72 norg

norg

    King Hippo

  • Members
  • 589 posts

Posted 07 February 2007 - 02:50 PM

My fear is that in the long term the reserves will lose the desire to show up if not given the opportunity to be on equal footing as the raid core. Most of these people are not slackers and if it wasn't for the raid cap would all be showing up daily. Does this not penalize reserve members who want to work hard to equip themselves for raid progression? Isn't DKP in itself and invite priority enough of a fail-safe to ensure that the guild is equipped well enough for PvE progression? Is this an effective way to gear up a guild for PvE Progression?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

It's effective in terms of maximising gear on your most regular players, but it's pretty fucking risky. Obviously there's massive potential to alienate your 'reserves', and it will also cause big problems if any of your core decide to quit.

#73 thebuddha

thebuddha

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 187 posts

Posted 07 February 2007 - 05:34 PM

To start, the raid core will be comprised of around 30 people and the remainder of the guild will be in the reserve core (15+). The raid core will have priority over the reserve core in terms of invite. On top of that, while both groups will have the opportunity to earn equal dkp, the raid core will have absolute priority on dkp spent. Essentially the reserve must wait until the raid core is fully equipped before even considering to buy items. Leadership says its to prevent future poor attending members from acquiring loot beneficial to the raid.

I think a lot of the potential for drama comes from whether or not the people who are not in the core group are there by choice or not. If you and the officers just pick the 15 people you don't like (and/or don't feel are qualified etc.) then I'm sure there's going to be some massive resentment. I kind of feel that you'd almost be better off just /gremoving them--that way you would avoid the drama. Perhaps your first step should be to lay out the rules and requirements of core vs reserve and ask people which group they want to be part of, and then see where that leaves you. If everyone wants to remain core then I suppose you have no choice but to pick yourself.

On the other hand, you could approach it completely differently. At the moment, there's lots of different avenues to get raid-quality gear in TBC. Hell, some of the 5 man loot is better than the first tier of raid instances (Karazhan and Gruul). Another choice would just be to keep all your members and close recruitment and let the problem sort itself out by attrition(once again this would depend highly on your guild). I doubt that everyone of your current guildmates wants to continue raiding hardcore. TBC is the perfect excuse for people who want to go casual or quit and many people are using it as such.

#74 Sservis

Sservis

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 55 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 11:36 PM

Picking up all 3 sets (or 2) for one token is really no better than simply adjusting the drop rates to make sure that tokens drop based on set distribution rather than class distribution. So the drop rate would be:

3+3+1 = 9/19 chance
1+1+1 = 3/19 chance
2+2+3 = 7/19 chance

The split should have been done better; paladin/warrior/rogue (3/2/1) + shaman/priest/mage (3/2/1) + druid/lock/hunter (3/1/1, but counterbalanced by druids being the most likely of the 3-role classes to pick up all 3 sets).

Personally, I'd group them by number of sets and have nonuniform drop rates.

3/3/3 = paladin/shaman/druid
2/2 = warrior/priest
1/1/1/1 = hunter/mage/lock/rogue

Then you can balance the drop rates around the number of sets and no class on any token finishes theirs early. (3/2/1 or even 2/2/1 means that the 1 will finish before the higher set count classes).

I'd also implement per instance drop rates that are biased by the classes that you bring.

Warrior/Druid/Priest/Mage/Mage group would work as follows

Overall the players have 9 sets to buy. Each token drops in proportion to the number of sets required off that token by the group

3/3/3 token drops 3/9 of the time (1 player, 3 sets)
2/2 token drops 4/9 of the time (2 players, 2 sets each)
1/1/1/1 token drops 2/9 of the time (2 players, 1 set each)

9 tokens drop, druid should get 3 tokens, priest/warrior each get 2, and the mages each get 1 (ignoring randomness)

The only balance "issue" with this would be extra shards for some players. So make all the sets nonshardable, nonsellable.

#75 malthrin

malthrin

    stalemate associate

  • Moderators
  • 9,107 posts

Posted 09 February 2007 - 12:23 AM

Nah, having the DPS token such a low drop rate opens you up to the possibility of an unlucky guild seeing very few of them. I prefer Kalman's rebalancing of the classes on tokens with an equal drop rate.
Lampkin in EJBSG 28 | Anders in EJBSG 24 | Cavil in EJBSG 20
Boomer in EJBSG 19 | Roslin in EJBSG 17 | Roslin in EJBSG 13 | Roslin in EJBSG 8
MTG Online draft viewer

#76 Tempestra

Tempestra

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 296 posts

Posted 09 February 2007 - 01:21 AM

As an officer in my guild, I'm not overly concerned with my feral OT getting extra set pieces to round out his healing or nuking builds. Our hybrids do flow back and forth sometimes, but most enjoy playing one role above others. I see no reason to balance drop rates so that the hybrid classes can finish 3 sets by the time focused DPS classes can finish 1. While backup gear is somewhat more useful than a shard or gear for an alt, it's not that important.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users