Cultural Lotting Changes, now with no risk of being closed

Servers are back up :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by katz

There is nothing new about linkshell leaders giving out favours to favourite people. Just like there is nothing new about ninja lotter (IYO). As I have previously stated everyone who is in my linkshell has the right to lot on anything that drops. If you took part in the activity then it is fair that you can lot on it. It can be the first time it dropped, it doesnt matter, you helped it happen. This is a much fairly system than most linkshell run. I dont care if you want it to store in your mog house when someone else could be using it, your reason for wanting it is as valid as someone elses. This is in my opinion there is no such thing as a ninja lot. I can see a need for people who want to stop other people from lotting to have a system change. Maybe it would be better for leaders to say who cant lot or leaders to have the right to pass it from others. Ive seen examples where people argue over who has what rights and as you have all said you all signed up to the linkshell leaders rules so the linkshell leaders should have the rights to do what they want people will just leave if its a bad shell. I would like to see the quartermaster applied but dont see how it can work with ex rare gear.

---

If you are in a linkshell that you don't like the lot distribution policies (only certain people get drops, everyone else gets scraps from the tables, and good luck being one of the "certain person" category) then don't join that shell, or if you are in that shell, leave.

Ninja lotters only happen when somebody outside of the linkshell lots on an item that the linkshell won (relic armor used to be a main "ninja lot" item, but not anymore). That or a pick-up group YOYD (your orb, your drop) policy ends up that somebody got XXuber time that wasn't from their "orb".

Your example of Walk-of-Echos is a poor one, because loot distribution is not limited to one group of people (like oldstyle dynamis) but everyone in the "zone" and since anyone can enter that zone up to a limit without a need for an item to trade (like Einherjar) anyone can cast a lot on anything. That is probably why most linkshells don't do WoE (that and the rewards suck mainly).

The lotting system is not flawed, except for WoE. Now most shells (on Asura at least) have a policy of "Pass items or get kicked out of the party within 2 minutes" which is probably the best. It would allow people who have certain items prevented from being stolen from other members (outside of the linkshell mainly, because most, if not all linkshell members are honorable).

What you are asking is a complication of the code and acceptance of cultural viewpoints in the distribution of shared items. Real life does not work like this game, you can't kill a tiger and expect a tiger fang and tiger hide to fall down from the tiger's body. You can expect an arrest warrent on your happy butt for killing an endangered species though, unless you did so in self-defense (good luck proving that one).

Oh yeah, and don't expect tigers to pop out from the ground after you kill them either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valaris

not 100% on how WOE treasure system is but if its like every other area in the game where only the people in the party can lot whats in the treasure pool then i woulda have had that person agree to the terms if they did not you boot them and if they agree and then ninja loot call gm (it doesnt matter what one you call) they will handle the situation if they find in the chat log that person agreed to the terms.

---

Its zone wide lotting. Coins are open to anyone in the zone no matter if thier party killed the mob or not. So you can enter the zone as long as there is more then 50% of the time remaining for the group that entered.

No. We dont need it done through the system because its way to much work to even make something like that possible.

They system was made very basic so then people can make their own rules as they see fit. This isnt just done this way in FFXI this is done on a lot of mmos.

I would redesign the lotting system so it could be as flexible as possible.

I'd introduce a simple base system, Like "Cast lot" or "Pass". This allows two simple options. Then I'd allow the community to use their intelligence, courtesy, understanding, and abilities to make regulations/rules/agreements between themselves to govern which drop goes where in a fair manner.

Like DKP, Attendance Based, or Job Based.

This way every play could work and build off the base idea of the lotting system in a way they find fair. This would also make it to where players who don't agree with 1 set of rules could still make their own set of rules based on the base Lotting System.

That way everyone is happy because they can either join another group with pre-determined agreeance on lotting, or simply solo/make their own group to determine lotting.

So a simple base lotting system, where players could build off of using "player made" agreements for distributing loot fairly.

First off Thank you Korpg for reviving this post cuz I really wanted to ask Katz something.

@ Katz. Are you on the list of BG warnings?

Second: If I got this job for sitting in a chair and making sure no one press this read button on the wall, and then pressed the button because no physical barrier of any type kept me from pressing it, then I would be fired, and that would follow me around in my work history. If you don't like LS rules then don't join the shell, find one or make one the way you want it to be.

Third: Personally I would love to have Party/Alliance leader to be able to manually select who gets what, it would make it so much easier to deal with afkers.

Fourth: Their is nothing cultural about making peoples names known who hav edone bad. Wanted posters have been posted for thousands of years, and not just for criminals, generic rulebreakers who may know valuable info to. To say its wrong to post someones name on a shame list is cultural is wrong, after all in ancient egyt if you steal fruit you lose your hand, if you speak ill of those in charge you lose your tongue, and this isn't the only example every culture has their own means of dealing with miscreants and online its best to just post the offenders name. BTW if you go to a place and pay by check and its bounces for any reason your name and photo gets posted at all cashiers stations as a don't accept checks from this person list. If you get caught stealing your name and photo gets posted and you can no longer be served at that store. No matter how minor the offense their is always repercussions for your negative actions.

Finally if you don't think its fair then don't agree, sure you won't be allowed to do the run with those people but aleast you won't have to put up with their stupid rules, this is called freedom of choice, you have the choice to accept the rules or not go with that group.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by katz

LALALALA still ignores the original question asked in the op and wonders why it was closed.
Is it that people believe the lotting system need to be overhauled so that Leaders have to right to assign "winnings" to people? If you could change the lotting rules how would you do it?

This is the highlighted paragraph that specifically was ignored by everyone who answered about linkshell rules. Still waiting for answers instead of what linkshells do with their rules.

---

What about "events" that there is no set linkshell to determine who gets what? Like Pick-up Groups for BCNM/KSNM/ISNM/KCNM/WoE/Dynamis/Abyssea? Are you suggesting that the leader of that group decides on who gets what drops? Think that is fair?

<Leader> Ok, so you BLM who used his orb, I determined that you get the 2 Pearls and the 1 Black Pearl while I get the Kraken Club and the 3 Oxbloods. If you don't like that, too bad cause SE made it possible for me to decide who gets what.

Sounds fair, right?

That is basically what you are asking.

Also, lets assume the following: 3 man BCNM60 Up in Arms. Myself and a shellmate with another person in the group from outside our shell. Under your system I determine who gets what because of the group, 2 people are in the shell and from the group, I am the sackholder, so I'm technically the leader, no matter who actually has the leader spot. So I'll pick the most expensive/useful item for myself, without regardless of who's orb it was that was used. Sure, we could have agreed on your orb/your drop but leaders of shells get to determine under your system.

See the flaws?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by katz

LALALALA still ignores the original question asked in the op and wonders why it was closed.
Is it that people believe the lotting system need to be overhauled so that Leaders have to right to assign "winnings" to people? If you could change the lotting rules how would you do it?

This is the highlighted paragraph that specifically was ignored by everyone who answered about linkshell rules. Still waiting for answers instead of what linkshells do with their rules.

---

Maybe we ignored it because no one cares except you. We're all fine with how lotting works. We don't need the system to do the work for us. You're the one who has a problem with it, except you push that problem onto us so that we're the ones with the problem and not you in your eyes. Everyone will never agree with everyone on anything, since the beginning of time until the day time stops rolling. Just how it is. If you want to free lot everything that's great. I hope you free lot until the cows come home. But don't expect the rest of us to bend our rules long enough for you to free lot all 4 Empyrean seals that just dropped of a NM in a pick up group so your #5 job that you play once a month can be pimped.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Karbuncle

I would redesign the lotting system so it could be as flexible as possible.

I'd introduce a simple base system, Like "Cast lot" or "Pass". This allows two simple options. Then I'd allow the community to use their intelligence, courtesy, understanding, and abilities to make regulations/rules/agreements between themselves to govern which drop goes where in a fair manner.

Like DKP, Attendance Based, or Job Based.

This way every play could work and build off the base idea of the lotting system in a way they find fair. This would also make it to where players who don't agree with 1 set of rules could still make their own set of rules based on the base Lotting System.

That way everyone is happy because they can either join another group with pre-determined agreeance on lotting, or simply solo/make their own group to determine lotting.

So a simple base lotting system, where players could build off of using "player made" agreements for distributing loot fairly.

---

No thanks karb you're just trying to make it 10 times more complex than it already is. Oh wait.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Korpg

Also, lets assume the following: 3 man BCNM60 Up in Arms. Myself and a shellmate with another person in the group from outside our shell. Under your system I determine who gets what because of the group, 2 people are in the shell and from the group, I am the sackholder, so I'm technically the leader, no matter who actually has the leader spot. So I'll pick the most expensive/useful item for myself, without regardless of who's orb it was that was used. Sure, we could have agreed on your orb/your drop but leaders of shells get to determine under your system.

See the flaws?

---

I understand what you're saying but this example is awful and incredibly obtuse. Introducing an option for a leader to distribute drops would do a whole lot of nothing to the way loot is distributed. In any group, be it linkshell group, pug or what have you, there is an agreed upon standard to which loot is distributed. Just because someone has the ability to hand out drops doesn't change that they are bound socially to abide by the rules they agreed upon when forming the group.

Your argument says that someone agrees to a YOYD bcnm run, then simply because the option exists for them to give themselves the loot, they will ignore the previous agreement and take the KC another member won. I fail to see how this is the distribution methods fault. It's the player for being selfish. You're blaming vidya games for columbine here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagel

I understand what you're saying but this example is awful and incredibly obtuse. Introducing an option for a leader to distribute drops would do a whole lot of nothing to the way loot is distributed. In any group, be it linkshell group, pug or what have you, there is an agreed upon standard to which loot is distributed. Just because someone has the ability to hand out drops doesn't change that they are bound socially to abide by the rules they agreed upon when forming the group.

Your argument says that someone agrees to a YOYD bcnm run, then simply because the option exists for them to give themselves the loot, they will ignore the previous agreement and take the KC another member won. I fail to see how this is the distribution methods fault. It's the player for being selfish. You're blaming vidya games for columbine here.

---

But you are saying that this won't happen? It may be obtuse, but it is plausible, and creates a new breed of stealing.

Why create an additional option for stealing items? This option will abolish pickup groups when it starts to become abusive, and it will be abused because there are people out there who like to abuse things like this constantly! If they didn't, they wouldn't have stolen other's items in the first place!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Korpg

But you are saying that this won't happen? It may be obtuse, but it is plausible, and creates a new breed of stealing.

Why create an additional option for stealing items? This option will abolish pickup groups when it starts to become abusive, and it will be abused because there are people out there who like to abuse things like this constantly! If they didn't, they wouldn't have stolen other's items in the first place!

---

Of course it will happen. It's happening now. Nothing would change if you gave a group this option of loot distribution. Everyone's fear that this would completely ruin everything ffxi is unfounded.

That being said, nothing really needs to change as this system wouldn't truly change anything.

Edit: If you really wanted to exact some change for the good, let r/e items be traded by players in the group that got the kill for a short time after loot drops. This would out those "omg guys i totally meant to hit pass >< sry *grin*" as jerks. It would also help in those instances where "guys i got dc" "oh my item dropped and fell to the floor before i could log back in?" "afk /headdesking".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagel

Of course it will happen. It's happening now. Nothing would change if you gave a group this option of loot distribution. Everyone's fear that this would completely ruin everything ffxi is unfounded.

That being said, nothing really needs to change as this system wouldn't truly change anything.

Edit: If you really wanted to exact some change for the good, let r/e items be traded by players in the group that got the kill for a short time after loot drops. This would out those "omg guys i totally meant to hit pass >< sry *grin*" as jerks. It would also help in those instances where "guys i got dc" "oh my item dropped and fell to the floor before i could log back in?" "afk /headdesking".

---

I'm not suggesting this. katz is, not me. Please don't get offended, I am not defending this at all.

I'm just pointing out the obvious flaws in the argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Korpg

I'm not suggesting this. katz is, not me. Please don't get offended, I am not defending this at all.

I'm just pointing out the obvious flaws in the argument.

---

Yeah I understand, it's just that the same flaws are present in the current system, so really adopting this system would be trading an apple for an apple. It's been used in other MMO's like WoW and they have the same problems there that are present in FFXI's current system. Though I would say it is abused more there, but mainly due to the anonymity present in that game.

I really would like to see the change mentioned in my edit. What do you guys think about this? I understand that it would open up other potential abuses such as friends secretly trading loot after an event is over in order to game a linkshells loot system. This would however help in preventing people losing items because they d/c at the wrong time, and make ninjas think twice as they would quickly be asked to trade the item.

I don't think the coding would work for your suggestion to work, but it is a great idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Korpg

I don't think the coding would work for your suggestion to work, but it is a great idea.

---

Probably not, I know even less about coding than I do about loot distribution systems. I do seem to remember something about being able to trade salvage pieces after they were distributed to party members. That may be the booze talking though.

You make it sound like everyone always lots everything in the pool.

Its because we can trust people that we DON"T need an extra system--we determine how we want to handle loot with a system we design and agree is fair or acceptable, and then abide by that system, passing when we are asked to pass and lotting when we are allowed to lot on items we want. People who violate that trust are the exception.

Wouldn't you like to know beforehand that that person you just invited to your bcnm group is known to disband and open the chest before he does it to you? Or that the leader of the shout linkshell you're thinking about joining is on his 7th bought character due to the others getting banned for massive amounts of rmt, blatant 3rd party tool abuse, and harrassment, and has been the ls bank--don't worry, we split all the money monthly--and then rmt'd all the money on his past 8 linkshells?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by katz

no one likes people who breaks the rules and likes to name and shame them.

---

Don't break the rules you agree to? Not that tough.

Sorry, hate to interrupt, but what does "it's my thundercloud" tag on the bottom mean?

And who added it?

Yes, I did.

Think you did it wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Korpg

<Leader> Ok, so you BLM who used his orb, I determined that you get the 2 Pearls and the 1 Black Pearl while I get the Kraken Club and the 3 Oxbloods. If you don't like that, too bad cause SE made it possible for me to decide who gets what.

Sounds fair, right?

That is basically what you are asking.

---

That's kinda what's already possible. Everyone is wholly dependent on the party/alliance leader to not kick everyone and score all the drops themselves. The only difference would be whether you trust your LS leader more than the party/alliance leader. It would allow a new kind of stealing, but disable the old kind of stealing, you just put your trust in a different person.

Personally I wouldn't see anything wrong with it. Pretty much all LS I've known have the leader call the shots on who should lot what, so I don't see the difference really. However, it's not really needed either, definitely not enough to make this kinda fuss about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

That's kinda what's already possible. Everyone is wholly dependent on the party/alliance leader to not kick everyone and score all the drops themselves. The only difference would be whether you trust your LS leader more than the party/alliance leader. It would allow a new kind of stealing, but disable the old kind of stealing, you just put your trust in a different person.

Personally I wouldn't see anything wrong with it. Pretty much all LS I've known have the leader call the shots on who should lot what, so I don't see the difference really. However, it's not really needed either, definitely not enough to make this kinda fuss about it.

---

katz's system would put all drops on the leader's hands for distribution. At least with the system in place the "thief" would have to lot on it first/quartermaster it to himself, with his system, all control automatically goes to the leader before distribution. More room for "error" in this case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by katz

Katz system is too personal. My system is allow everyone to use the existing feature and free lot everything. Its for the whinning populations that like to name and shame I asked what was a better system.

---

But your system and the "katz" system is exactly the same. Even the name.

As long as there are going to be thieves and ninjalotters, there will be the "name and shame" part of any system.

Take out the stealing, and nobody is going to call others a thief. Simple as that.

On a personal note: Are you one who stolen stuff from others? You seem so adamantly against this current system, is it because you are on the "name and shame" list?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagel

Yes, I did.

---

Weird, why would anyone want that?

I get what you are saying, but isn't it a little too blatant? You should have said "its my kraken club" for it to make more sense, but then again, you were being sarcastic.

When I did KSNM, BSNM always asked for party lead before poping my orb leader didn't like it they had to find another member, even did this with LS KS99 runs.Its been said in this thread and the closed one, just don't lot till everyone passes or gets kick/d2.

Hey Katz, there's no rule against making a thread about one you closed.

Point illustrated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by katz

I didnt want to make this personal but to be honest you dont seem to see the difference between a) 1 person getting all the stuff and giving it out and b) Katz telling everyone you can lot everything that drops and its your good fortune you won it and hard cheese if you dont.

---

What I stated as a bad idea was what you stated as number 1. How fair can one person be when it comes to honestly distributing stuff? How honest are people when it comes to admiting what dropped?

When something rare has dropped to the one person, would they announce "Rare item dropped, here is who gets it?" Something like Defending Ring or any of the MNK BB items? Would you announce an item you really want for somebody else to get it?

Now don't get me wrong that I'm saying there are no honest people out there. But there are also pickup groups, and there are more pickup groups than there are trustworthy people.

What I am saying is that your system is just another method of people to get their stuff stolen.

Ravenmore: that still doesn't stop someone from dropping party and opening the chest before someone else in the group can. Doing so gives the chest opener all the drops. There was someone on my server who was "named and shamed" for repeatedly doing this.

[stupid]Since the game mechanics allow this, it is obviously perfectly acceptable behavior, and we should have expected it from everyone we meet. In fact, it is simply miraculous that every BCNM doesn't have everyone dropping group and racing to be the first to open the chest. After all, we should never trust anyone to honor what they agreed to, and should never warn anyone about people who break agreements, because agreements are artificial and against the TOS.[/stupid]

I'm just happy I found a LS that is very friendly, you never need to ask for an item because half the members will say "Hey, you need that item for this and that lot on it".

Few weeks ago, me and 2 others received the Quake scroll from a drop, we sat there and said, OK, what should we do with it. We decided even split 200K each person (sells 600K on Bahamut), I ended up paying them both off and kept the scroll.

.. To stay on topic, if you join a party, follow social etiquette. I D2 anyone that doesn't follow it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khiinroye

Ravenmore: that still doesn't stop someone from dropping party and opening the chest before someone else in the group can. Doing so gives the chest opener all the drops. There was someone on my server who was "named and shamed" for repeatedly doing this.

[stupid]Since the game mechanics allow this, it is obviously perfectly acceptable behavior, and we should have expected it from everyone we meet. In fact, it is simply miraculous that every BCNM doesn't have everyone dropping group and racing to be the first to open the chest. After all, we should never trust anyone to honor what they agreed to, and should never warn anyone about people who break agreements, because agreements are artificial and against the TOS.[/stupid]

---

Yes its not perfect but he also has no idea if doing that will pay off were a well timed NIN lot at the last sec could. Buts what better is now Katz is back tracking and he does use players agreeing before hand so its the same thing as LS rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by katz

Korgp not being funny but you need to learn to read. My point system used a) and b). Not 1 and 2

Really really want to understand how you believe a free lot system is going to have a ninja lot.

---

We have a free lot system in place now. When you agree to a "your orb, your drop" BCNM run and something good drops from your orb, and somebody takes that good item away from you, even though you have all agreed that it is "your orb, your drop" that is stealing (aka ninja lot). Quartermaster can take care of this, but not everyone uses quartermaster, or the leader of the group "forgets" to quartermaster the person who pop'd the orb and/or takes it off and places it on himself. You think that has never happened before? Think it isn't happening now?

Also, option "a" is the same as option "number 1." Even I would have thought you could see the similarities.

Explain your system then. And stop backtracking to try to make yourself look good.

Alright, this would be out there and will never be implemented. But it here it is..

If you're killing crawlers in an area, you can select treasure and select manage options. You can see the items the mob drops and you can rate how much you want it and if you need it. That way when items drop and if the party already agreed that Person A gets X items while person B gets Z items, they just drop in place.

While I'm in parties I'm constantly selected pass on items that I just don't want. Insect Wings and what not, people that want them should need to cast for every drop but it'll be nice if those who really want them can sorta get the system to play them favorites for that item.

You should also be able to see what people are looking for, so you can see if someone is just wanting to claim everything.

Also, if it's a quested item, it should already be designated to go to the people that have the quest flagged and need it vs the people that don't have it flagged or the people that already completed it and just want to get it to sell.

I am getting very annoyed with people who keep saying this and that about me. All I did was ask what was a better lotting system since there were so many people who complain about people stealing from them but they all seem quite happy to just talk about bad people and make accusations about me without any grounds of any lotting systems I have in place. Stop attacking people opinions and decide what your own opinions are about a subject and then write your own experiences not what you think about other peoples.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rafien

Alright, this would be out there and will never be implemented. But it here it is..

If you're killing crawlers in an area, you can select treasure and select manage options. You can see the items the mob drops and you can rate how much you want it and if you need it. That way when items drop and if the party already agreed that Person A gets X items while person B gets Z items, they just drop in place.

While I'm in parties I'm constantly selected pass on items that I just don't want. Insect Wings and what not, people that want them should need to cast for every drop but it'll be nice if those who really want them can sorta get the system to play them favorites for that item.

You should also be able to see what people are looking for, so you can see if someone is just wanting to claim everything.

Also, if it's a quested item, it should already be designated to go to the people that have the quest flagged and need it vs the people that don't have it flagged or the people that already completed it and just want to get it to sell.

---

Two problems with this:

1) Apkallu Eggs. Sells for 100k a stack. Lets all get together to Abyssea - Mis and kill Apkallus. I need to lot on eggs for cooking. Later sells 7 stacks of Eggs for 700k. Whereas 6 people could have gotten 100k each from all that.

2) Some Genkis (especially the 80/85 cap Genkis) require KS and KCs. Having the quest flagged at 76 (or 80) and having all KS/KCs drop to the person who has the quest flagged will really hurt those who actually want those. Since KCNMs and KSNM99s are really popular now, that one person is going to hog up all the KS/KCs in a party/alliance. Think that is fair?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by katz

I am getting very annoyed with people who keep saying this and that about me. All I did was ask what was a better lotting system since there were so many people who complain about people stealing from them but they all seem quite happy to just talk about bad people and make accusations about me without any grounds of any lotting systems I have in place. Stop attacking people opinions and decide what your own opinions are about a subject and then write your own experiences not what you think about other peoples.

---

What is your lotting system? Explain it in detail. Nobody is accusing you of anything at the moment. Nor is anyone attacking you at the moment. Nor is anyone saying anything bad to you at the moment.

As for my own experiences, yes, I have had things stolen from me. You know what, I got over it. I told everyone I knew about those types of people. Those people who stole things from my linkshell were kicked within seconds of stealing that item. It also helped me realize a few simple things to prevent such things from happening again.

Just because you are playing all innocent and saying that everyone is an angel and nobody would steal anything because loot pools are free lot to everyone doesn't mean that agreed on item distributions and somebody deciding that that agreement wasn't good enough for them isn't the same as stealing. Read about contractual agreements. They exist, even orally. And Square-Enix honors such agreements between players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by katz

Your orb your drop is not a free lot system. Your orb your drop is an example where Quartermastering should be applied. The person who has the orb sould be made leader and everything given to him. In the case that was quoted as what if they drop party and then open the chest. I would suggest the first time this happend then it would be the last time they were invited.

---

Quartermastering only works if you are the leader of the party. If you are not the leader, you are placing a lot of trust on the leader. Most people ask for leadership than quartermaster because of leaders taking off QM right before the chest is opening and/or putting QM on themselves. That has happened.

As for the drop and take chest method, what do you think the "name and shame" is supposed to be for? Think about it. If you don't invite said person again, what is keeping him from doing it to somebody else? Being silent is just two steps below of doing the same thing yourself. Not letting the public know about those types of people just creates those types of people into scamming others. And when they scammed enough people, they jump servers, change their names, and do it all over again. People have done that. See: Futchy.

Katz you said you agree to split high gil items before the run how is this any different then a LS having set of rules so they don't have to go over it every single NM. If you joined the LS you are agreeing to the rules of the LS. So lotting out of turn will result in a) getting kick out the LS if it was a rare/ex item b) giving up the item up if it was tradable. and still run the risk of getting kick. Do it enough and geuss were you end up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by katz

Katz system is too personal. My system is allow everyone to use the existing feature and free lot everything. Its for the whinning populations that like to name and shame I asked what was a better system.

---

Let's say a group of you get together and farm a bunch of popsets for Chloris for +2 items, as well as Empyrean items. Then, a member you just recently invited decides to show up when you've decided to go pop all the popsets you've farmed. You don't need the person's help, but you let them come anyway. You kill all the Chloris pops and the new members decides to lot on every single item that he possibly can. Then, he does the same thing over-and-over and eventually leaves your linkshell once he has everything he needs/doesn't need. What would you do to prevent this situation?

Simple, when he casts lot on multiple items D2 him or boot him from the LS and party immediately.