Say NO to the New Possession (Claiming) Structure Being Developed!!!

[Kiralai]

Honestly, I think the post is easily misread. What it looks like (to me, anyway) is that Matsui is talking about two different types of situations, split thus:

Situation 1: We’re making adjustments so we can drop the claiming system. This means others not in party can attack the same monster and RMT like players can try to take over so making it the party with the first attacker can only get the loot.

Situation 2: For contents with alliance we’re thinking of a system where the loot is evenly distributed or changing amount of loot depending on amount of damage given.

Unless you think of them as two separate systems they are completely contradictory. I don't know what is meant by "contents with alliance" but I don't think it has anything to do with what was said prior to that (about open world claiming and sharing the battle). Why would he make a point of describing that they understand that RMT could take advantage of a "shared battle" system ("RMT like players can try to take over") and then offering a solution ("so making it the party with the first attacker can only get the loot"), only to jump right into saying that the team that does the most damage gets the loot (meaning it would be RMT susceptible and the claiming player would be irrelevant, complete opposite of the original point being made)? "The party that claims first gets the loot, except they don't." I just don't think that was what the message was supposed to express.

Note, for clarity: When I say two situations I don't mean that I think they are debating which of the two to implement. What I mean to say is that I think they are referring to open world claiming (with potential outside help) and alliance content as two separate entities that would both be in the game.