BiS gear at the Vendors

[Arnenna]

At the moment the only fact is that only one kinship is clearly doing it. I'm disputing your assumption that it is widespread by referencing the FACT that only one kinship is proven to be doing it, if you can in any way prove that other kinships are doing it then the fact will be that it is a growing problem. Until then, it is incorrect to assume that it is a broad issue.

I've never disagreed that at the moment the only fact is that only one kin is clearly (as in openly) doing it. I've agreed with you on that. You can dispute my assumption that it's potentially more widespread, or has potential to become so, as much as you want. Feel free. I don't have to prove anything, its an assumption, that may or may not be correct, and that's for Turbine to discover and for yourself and I to hopefully never find out is fact because that kind of thing would be confidential for them. Making an ssumption is never incorrect. Stating things as facts when they are not is though.

[Wulfdur]

Why don't you suggest to Turbine that they add special incentive into the raid for guys such as yourself? A system where when a kin has depleted the raid so fully, that the rewards can be chosen, and the choice be a nice big chunk of gold per boss, or a piece of armour that you don't need. That would be better than devaluing raid loot right? The suggestion forum is right here to make suggestions like that. I'd support an idea like that for you, always. I know that raiders like yourself need incentive to keep playing too.

That's really excellent suggestion ! This is getting really constructive now , would be very nice to implement a reward system where u can only pick either of 2 option, "armor/gear" or "hefty gold/barter coins" (Ancient Ithil Coins in this case, as long as they can be bartered for grind items, like starlits, emp scrolls, essence recipes, solvents etc. everything that people usually spend gold anyways That way would still have incentive to run the content as much as possible). People would pick armor if they can use the armor, or pick gold/coins if they don't need.

Easiest way to implement this atm would be adding barter option of "armor", "jewellry", "class item" to hefty "Ancient Ithil Coins". @Devs please consider this if you want your content being run as long as possible. If this was implemented, we would not bother selling the loot at all, I think.

[Arnenna]

That's really excellent suggestion ! This is getting really constructive now , would be very nice to implement a reward system where u can only pick either of 2 option, "armor/gear" or "hefty gold/barter coins" (Ancient Ithil Coins in this case, as long as they can be bartered for grind items, like starlits, emp scrolls, essence recipes, solvents etc. everything that people usually spend gold anyways That way would still have incentive to run the content as much as possible). People would pick armor if they can use the armor, or pick gold/coins if they don't need.

Easiest way to implement this atm would be adding barter option of "armor", "jewellry", "class item" to hefty "Ancient Ithil Coins". @Devs please consider this if you want your content being run as long as possible. If this was implemented, we would not bother selling the loot at all, I think.

Good, I'm glad you like it. I really like it too, and you have my full support on it if you want ever want to raise a thread for it. I'll back up anything that is good for the game, even in areas where I don't often play. I'm not a PVP-er, but I'd back up incentive for players that are. If it keeps players playing, then its good in my book. It would be a much better option than having a raiding system where the rewards are running out for raiders too soon, and would give them that much needed incentive to raid for themselves, and not others. Agreed?

[Joedangod]

You can dispute my assumption that it's potentially more widespread, or has potential to become so, as much as you want. Feel free. I don't have to prove anything, its an assumption, that may or may not be correct

This is how misinformation is spread.

[Oelle]

yea, there is too much gold in the game. i'd prefer another moneygrab like kinship-castles/settlements, but if raiding gear can be bought after a half year of the raid being out for a lot of gold... why not? any goldgrab is appreciated.

and yup, there should be loot-ids or whatever in the moment a boss dies, not in the moment the chest is opened.
there are accountbound items if its intended to get loot for alts. things should be accbound or unbound, but you shouldnt be able to complete an instances, change toons and loot with them.

[Arnenna]

This is how misinformation is spread.

Oh give this up already, the only person reading my comments as something they are not around here is you. You know "might be" and "could be", still mean might be and could be, no matter how differently you wish to read them.

Now, if you wish to continue with the direction of trying to say that I am spreading misinformation - the report button is down there on the left. I suggest you use it. If turbine agree with you, that "might be" and "could be" actually mean "is", then I have a bit to worry about. If they can read words for exactly what they are, then you have some worries about making false accusations.

It doesn't matter how much you claim that I am making such claims as fact. If I'm not actually making those claims as fact (which I'm not) then your claim that I am means zilch, and I'd kindly ask you to refrain from spreading misinformation yourself (which you are).

[Joedangod]

Now, if you wish to continue with the direction of trying to say that I am spreading misinformation - the report button is down there on the left. I suggest you use it. If turbine agree with you, that "might be" and "could be" actually mean "is", then I have a bit to worry about. If they can read words for exactly what they are, then you have some worries about making false accusations.

"Note: This is ONLY to be used to report spam, advertising messages, and problematic (harassment, fighting, or rude) posts." Perhaps you should check what the report button does. Misinformation isn't a crime in any form, it's a nuisance not unlike those doomsayers who insist the game is ending every Tuesday. Although I am curious, what false accusations have I made? Anything I have said about you has been derived directly from quotes of what you said. I have not said anything that is proven to be factually untrue, in fact if you do manage to prove me wrong in any case I would happily accept the evidence and admit I was wrong. You just haven't ever attempted that.

[Phindecano]

+1
Just like it used to be until RoI. I really don't understand why Turbine started messing with the Loot System in the first place. Everything was fine until they thought it would be a good idea to suddenly change a working system with the RoR expansion.

Many kinships were selling DN/BG loot back to Moria/Mirkwood days. Selling raid loot / slots for unique titles even for real money is a common practice in WoW and other MMOs. Let's be honest, no one cares about Arnenna's drama.

[Arnenna]

yea, there is too much gold in the game. i'd prefer another moneygrab like kinship-castles/settlements, but if raiding gear can be bought after a half year of the raid being out for a lot of gold... why not? any goldgrab is appreciated.

and yup, there should be loot-ids or whatever in the moment a boss dies, not in the moment the chest is opened.
there are accountbound items if its intended to get loot for alts. things should be accbound or unbound, but you shouldnt be able to complete an instances, change toons and loot with them.

If loot drops off the bosses and binds on acquire, then it cannot be sold for gold. And that's how it should be. Maybe I'm just misreading your post, and correct me if I'm wrong, but to me, it looks like the first part is in favour of selling raid loot after 6 months (Throne is only 4 months old though), and the second half is in favour of BtA loot dropping directly off the bosses. If loot is accbound or unbound, then one can simply send it to an alt, so not sure how you think that solves anything.

[Joedangod]

If loot drops off the bosses and binds on acquire, then it cannot be sold for gold. And that's how it should be. Maybe I'm just misreading your post, and correct me if I'm wrong, but to me, it looks like the first part is in favour of selling raid loot after 6 months (Throne is only 4 months old though), and the second half is in favour of BtA loot dropping directly off the bosses. If loot is accbound or unbound, then one can simply send it to an alt, so not sure how you think that solves anything.

The people selling loot would simply 11 man it and just take the 1 buyer with them, probably telling him to sit outside in some of the more challenging boss fights (because face it, a lot of cases it's easier and faster to just underman something than it is to explain it to someone who has either no idea, no will to actually take part or not enough gear to be an asset. The only fix is a personal loot system which a lot of raiders hate due to the sheer RNG factor involved, yeah there's still some RNG involved in master looting and /rolling but at least you can call in favours/buy the roll from someone else if you constantly fail to get the one item you are after.

[Arnenna]

"Note: This is ONLY to be used to report spam, advertising messages, and problematic (harassment, fighting, or rude) posts." Perhaps you should check what the report button does. Misinformation isn't a crime in any form, it's a nuisance not unlike those doomsayers who insist the game is ending every Tuesday. Although I am curious, what false accusations have I made? Anything I have said about you has been derived directly from quotes of what you said. I have not said anything that is proven to be factually untrue, in fact if you do manage to prove me wrong in any case I would happily accept the evidence and admit I was wrong. You just haven't ever attempted that.

I'm very capable of admitting when I'm wrong, but that's got to be proven first and in this case, it hasn't been, and may never be. It's been stated that there is more than one kin, but its just a statement so far, but that doesn't mean it's an untrue statement. If it is true, then my asumptions are a little bit closer to fact than they first were, that this "may" be more than one kin. No misinformation there. That's all real.

You quote my post, and then add one line, that says, "this is how misinformation spreads" and then you say you haven't made a false accusation? It is a false accusation. Firstly, to be able to spread misinformation, one needs misinformation, meaning information that is false. Seeing that I haven't presented anything as fact, and we do not have facts for me to present as fact, all my thoughts on this are purely assumption based on one thing (as I have stated, numerous times). So, its not misinformation, its opinion and your accusation is incorrect.

If you think my posts that "spread misinformation" are a nuisance, that would fall under "problematic" I would think, so . . . report away. Be my guest.

[Arnenna]

The people selling loot would simply 11 man it and just take the 1 buyer with them, probably telling him to sit outside in some of the more challenging boss fights (because face it, a lot of cases it's easier and faster to just underman something than it is to explain it to someone who has either no idea, no will to actually take part or not enough gear to be an asset. The only fix is a personal loot system which a lot of raiders hate due to the sheer RNG factor involved, yeah there's still some RNG involved in master looting and /rolling but at least you can call in favours/buy the roll from someone else if you constantly fail to get the one item you are after.

I read earlier how it works, that wasn't what I asked Oelle though, I asked how Oelle thinks Accbound or bound loot that can be sent to alts anyway can work t ostop alt loot. If it can be sent, then it's no different.

You'd think if a lot of the raiders hate personal loot, they'd be a lot more vigilant in trying to prevent Turbine any reasons for going that route. Seems not. I've only seen a few.

[Joedangod]

You quote my post, and then add one line, that says, "this is how misinformation spreads" and then you say you haven't made a false accusation? It is a false accusation. Firstly, to be able to spread misinformation, one needs misinformation, meaning information that is false. Seeing that I haven't presented anything as fact, and we do not have facts for me to present as fact, all my thoughts on this are purely assumption based on one thing (as I have stated, numerous times). So, its not misinformation, its opinion and your accusation is incorrect.

If you think my posts that "spread misinformation" are a nuisance, that would fall under "problematic" I would think, so . . . report away. Be my guest.

Problematic being defined as "Harassment, fighting or rude", none of which fits misinformation. Misinformation is not just false information, it accounts for information that is unproven as well. You don't make a plan for something you don't actually know is a problem or not. As such my statement was perfectly accurate and fair to the situation.

[Arnenna]

Problematic being defined as "Harassment, fighting or rude", none of which fits misinformation. Misinformation is not just false information, it accounts for information that is unproven as well. You don't make a plan for something you don't actually know is a problem or not. As such my statement was perfectly accurate and fair to the situation.

I don't think Harassment, fighting or rude in those brackets on that little icon is the full extension of the list. Read the User guidelines, they will better inform you.

Misinformation is indeed false information, and I haven't given any. I've said it could be more than one kin, and you know what, it could be. I haven't said that it is more than one. If you think that is against forum rules, then use that report button. I really don't believe turbine will agree with you, especially considering I've used no names or kin names, even when you've tried to convince me that I should in order that people like yourself, don't read something that isn't there, and think it's about everyone, when I categorically use the word "some".

You however, have made statements such as "It doesn't happen on other servers" and "only one kin are doing it - FACT". That there is based on assumption of what you think is happening, so, who exactly is it that you think is spreading misinformation here again?

[Joedangod]

You however, have made statements such as "It doesn't happen on other servers" and "only one kin are doing it - FACT". That there is based on assumption of what you think is happening, so, who exactly is it that you think is spreading misinformation here again?

Hilariously, again it's you. The exact words I listed were "One kin is doing it - FACT". I did not place a limit saying that no more than 1 kin is doing it. What I did was point out that we only have evidence that a single kin is doing it which is true, there really is only evidence that Raging Raiders is doing it, nobody else has shown an example of it happening elsewhere. You are adding your assumptions to that fact yet still trying to maintain that it is part of that fact, which it isn't, it's an assumption made on the basis of a fact.

[mmogaming]

We should really talk about alt-looting or even create a new thread for it. If you ask my opinion... alt-looting should not be allowed, players inside the raid should get loot-locks of the chest at BOSS KILL TIME, instead of whenever you open the chest...

This will ensure that the toons that killed the boss can only get the loot.. This will also prevent abusing/exploiting the raid locks mechanism that all other SHAMEFUL c**p kins and pugs in Arkenstone doing, which is killing the boss repeatedly 6-7 times with the same toon but dropping the group right before boss kill, doesn't get locks on that toon , then alts and comes back with c**p toon that is NOWHERE raid-ready and gets loot and lock on that toon only. This is so pity if u ask me, It is not allowed in my kin runs, and we kill the bosses 3-4 times the hard way with our toons , stay inside and get our locks as the WAY LOCKS ARE INTENDED.

+1
Just like it used to be until RoI. I really don't understand why Turbine started messing with the Loot System in the first place. Everything was fine until they thought it would be a good idea to suddenly change a working system with the RoR expansion.

Dropping from raids before a boss is being killed has been a "raid mechanic" in LOTRO forever. Even Rift Raids, many of the raiders were performing this process to obtain gear for alts/friends.

I believe Turbine tried its best to curtail this by making the armor drops account bound; thus, you could gear characters on the same account. They also made sure that you could only enter the raid if you are level 105, thus you cannot have a level 10 come in and take loot.

Locking the chest to whoever is present in the raid is a solution, however, the players that are paying / playing for multiple accounts would absolutely have an uproar. Alt-gearing / alt-raiding is going to always been an issue. Its an issue not only in LOTRO but most MMO games we play. In fact, most MMOs are making it easier for alts to obtain gear.

Overall valid pt however, the LOTRO game has other flaws at the moment, which really needs to be looked at first.

[Oelle]

If loot drops off the bosses and binds on acquire, then it cannot be sold for gold. And that's how it should be. Maybe I'm just misreading your post, and correct me if I'm wrong, but to me, it looks like the first part is in favour of selling raid loot after 6 months (Throne is only 4 months old though), and the second half is in favour of BtA loot dropping directly off the bosses. If loot is accbound or unbound, then one can simply send it to an alt, so not sure how you think that solves anything.

i dont really care who gets the loot. i dont raid t2c and dont need gear at all. still wear mostly lvl100 non-essence stuff plus 2 or 3 essence items to get over 20k morale and overcap mits. thats enough for all nonraid t2 instances. I dont care about loot being sold by vendors, but i welcome any goldsink.

its okay for me, if loot is characterbound and untradeable.
its okay for me, if loot is accbound and you give it to an alt after completing the raid with your main.
its okay for me, if loot is not bound at all and you trade it after getting it.
its okay for me, if after a certain time when something can be called 'old', a vendor is added who sells the stuff for gold.

doing an instance, not looting, inviting others and letting them loot... i call that exploiting (exploiting is using gamemechanics in a way that are not meant to be used in that way).

[NeebPlayer]

I wouldn't be opposed to this. There is a lot of good to be drained from the system. It kinda bothers me that everything is so expensive now and it's considered normal. Earning money is easy, but it's still work and no fun.

[Naranor]

Commy so funny, they haven't skill for raiding and money for trading. But they have flowers over 9000 flowers. Everyone must picking flowers.

[Arnenna]

Commy so funny, they haven't skill for raiding and money for trading. But they have flowers over 9000 flowers. Everyone must picking flowers.

Ohh, you think? More than enough money for trading, its purely a case of who I'd prefer to trade with. NPC's or raiders, and that wouldn't be the latter, which is already in game. Time is the issue when it comes to raiding. As for flower picking, I'm afriad my attention span for that activity fell way short of 9000, and that's over 7 alts. I don't think I could reach that figure with 70.


What's so funny to me is that you assume a player has no money for trading, in the thread they raised, to ask if they could trade their money with NPC's. Kinda silly. I seriously doubt they could find any possible benefit from it, if they had no money to trade with.

[Naranor]

Why so agressive?
Do not answere. I know, problem with undestanding that it's mmorpg. And in mmo people must cooperate for result. It's may be raiding, massive rp, trading. So flowers and nps vendors its things that
should not exist.

[siipperi]

Why so agressive?
Do not answere. I know, problem with undestanding that it's mmorpg. And in mmo people must cooperate for result. It's may be raiding, massive rp, trading. So flowers and nps vendors its things that
should not exist.

Its just huge bait thread, best is just ignore it.

Edit. Actually best is to post funny gif then ignore.

[Arnenna]

Why so agressive?
Do not answere. I know, problem with undestanding that it's mmorpg. And in mmo people must cooperate for result. It's may be raiding, massive rp, trading. So flowers and nps vendors its things that
should not exist.

No agression on my part. I was responding to your comment . . . . "they haven't skill for raiding and money for trading." There is plenty of money around for trading, however I'd rather trade with game NPC's than with a handful of raiders playing monopoly. End result is the same, and there is no requirement to do any group "work" to trade with either.

If Turbine are willing for a player to hand over a large sum of gold to a player, and obtain Throne gear, then they should also be willing for a player to hand over a large sum of gold to an NPC for that same gear. Or . . . if one is objectionable - they should both be.