All Greed on Alliance loot

[BillyKaplan]

how about to add a requirement to the greed button, like have the job for the gear at least only 5 level lower than the gear (have to be lv 65 to get lv 70 gear) or all you can do is pass.

We used to have a similar restriction! It was called 'the Need button', and if you leveled your job, you could run this content on it and actually get the item!
Furthermore, while this is the intended and main purpose, battle classes using this gear is not the only usage these pieces of gear have. Alliance raids are a very nice way to level up desynth if you have WVR, LTW or ARM and this restriction will hurt crafters who do not have certain battle classes badly. I can't even say it would be better to remove this restriction once the raid is not current-content, because then you're hurting people trying to gear up alts or even their mains after hiatus.

[TristanBlane]

I ran it as my BRD to get some gear and saw the top drop. Rolled greed on it and got a 24. Others rolled on it, and i lost it to someone else. It was an upgrade for me. so, screw that This greed this is utter bull

[Tridus]

Of course the feature will need to be programmed. Since everything is stored on server (inventory and class data), client will have a function that checks the flag for given character and a function for turning the flag on. That's very little resource. That's why flags are used everywhere possible. They are the least resource intensive means.

You say that, but SE gave us the glamour dresser instead of a glamour log, because sometimes they love the more complicated solution. But anyway...

Um...Sure, you could make it like that. But why?! Instead of making it part of every item, just make it check the flag as part of the drop. Item drops, check the flag. Whatever item that is. Will also help people like me that don't remember whether we already have that minion or orchestrion roll.

It's not a property of the item at all. It's a property of the *character*. Each character has to know if they've already won need on each item. So the only way to do this in an expandable way (because they'll be adding more raids with more items it applies to) is that every character has a value with X number of bits, and each bit corresponds to one item.

When a given item drops, you check each character who could need it to see if they're allowed to. That has to happen on both server and client.

And?! Eight bits is still just eight bits. And you know...again...it's all server-side (well...between the main server and the instance server). The only information between the server and the player is "You can/can't choose Need." and "I choose Need/Greed/Pass.".

It's not eight bits, unless there will only be eight items covered by this system. You do realize you need a flag for every item that it applies to, right?

Not really. If a player won by "Need" just flip the flag. That's, again, very little information. Yes, it's additional information, but small one and done between servers.

Depending on what back end data storage they're using, they likely can't write a single bit in an update. It's not a huge update, but it's an update that has to go out to persistent storage. Those aren't free, and no highly scaleable software developer wants to add more of them than is absolutely needed.

Again, that's just a 1 or 0. You can need or you can't need. The client does the rest.

With how SE currently handles communication in the game, it would send the entire collection over to the player and then need to keep it in sync. So it's more than that. It doesn't have to be, but that's true of a lot of things in this game right now.

Like everything. And you can say only for yourself. You cannot say how few or many players would prefer the system as I suggested it. And compared to some of the other stuff that players ask for (like making gender-locked glamour unisex) a flag is a very basic function don't purely with a limited amount of text. The workload is nowhere near the same.

Making gear unisex has absolutely no server impact whatsoever. It's strictly client side. They're not comparable at all. You are aware of how often "server limitations" come up as a problem, yes? Because it doesn't sound like it.

Adding more server load with an overcomplicated solution to a problem that only exists because SE created it isn't helping anyone. This was just a bad change and reverting it is the far simpler answer.

You also seem to be forgetting something very important in what you said. Checking whether you can Need an item based on class is actually...checking flags. Yeah. It needs to check whether you can need it as well. And it needs to do that for every class that can equip the item. Obviously, towards all players. And then, once players roll, it needs to deal with the Need/Greed priority. A necessity that does not exist if everyone rolls greed for whatever reason.

Checking if you can need something right now is based on your current job and the jobs that can use the item, which are already known values and are necessary to be in memory already. You're adding another one that isn't necessary and otherwise has no real use outside of this one roulette.

Sure, there is no turning the flag on upon winning, since the flag is changed based on players changing of class (which cannot happen in instance). But that's just about the only real difference in how the two checks work.

No, one is a check of "does your current job intersect the job list", and the other is "does your character state show that you've already won this item before." They're not the same thing. They're both straightforward checks, but one is using data that is already loaded for other reasons, and one is a new thing created just for this.

I won't respond to the rest of your post because it shows your conservative nature. You seem to assume that things cannot be made better and every change is for the worse, unless you asked for it, so there really is no point in discussing it, seeing as I believe in that everything can be made better.

I'm a professional software developer. We tend to like simple solutions over complicated ones, because needless complexity means more resources, more cost, and more things to break in the future. This problem has a very simple solution: the one that literally every other roulette in the game already uses successfully.

You sound like someone who has never had to implement something like this and then deal with the consequences five years later.

[Remedi]

@Tridus complexity for no reason is what SE does best /s

[Souljacker]

@Tridus complexity for no reason is what SE does best /s

Someone needs to install python on every one of their computers and then put in a windows task\cron job to run import this every 5 seconds

[Lunafreya]

Hey SE if you're reading this please get RID of all greed. I shouldnt be losing pieces that drop for me to OTHER CLASSES that roll on the piece when they dont need it.

[Remedi]

They should avoid triying to enforce something to fix community issues, especially is fixes makes life worse for everyone

[Remus]

They should avoid triying to enforce something to fix community issues, especially is fixes makes life worse for everyone

At this point I wouldn't really call it a fix...

[Bourne_Endeavor]

I rather see the systems co-exist much like they do in Extreme Trials. Your weapon dropped? Hurray! Need that sucker! It didn't? 10 runs and you still get it. It's hard enough to get the piece you want to even drop, and as we all know, even under the old system, non-tanks weren't guaranteed solo Need privileges. Healers had it worse by being guaranteed a rolling rival. The tokens would still make life easier for everyone.
The biggest coding challenge would be to make the purchase from the vendor count for the weekly lockout thing but that's adding logic that runs on-demand while the flag it changes already exists in the system. I'm not worried about getting around hiding the token in your chocobag or what not, they can just make those Key-items with expiration dates like Khloe's journal or wedding invitations.

Meant to comment on this earlier, however my ideal scenario would be a system as followed"

- You accept a quest each week ala Crystal Tower/Proto-Ultima which necessitates 5/10 runs
- Upon completing the required amount, you are rewarded with a token which can be exchanged to a separate NPC for a piece of your choosing
- If, however, you obtained something during Ridorana, this NPC is flagged as "completed"

This eliminates weeks where you'll be unlucky enough to spam 24 mans and get nothing you want. Unfortunately, they want us to spam it like that despite it being precisely what kills people's enjoyment.

[Kytelian]

I finally ran the content yesterday evening. The greed-only system is, in fact, a piece of garbage. One of my friends was on BRD (mains BRD, wanted the chest piece when it dropped) exclaimed that he rolled a greed 1 on a piece of gear he could use on his main. Luckily for him, the party we were in was preformed so there were no problems with him getting the chest piece. As I said from the outset and as many people have said, this system is not a solution. It only causes more problems.