i210 lotting when heading into PUGs

[Loony_BoB]

Most PUGs I've been in - in fact, all of them - have been really great with sticking to an agreed set of rules (generally i210 lot only if you have the job at 60, or else only if you are using that job at that moment). I'm interested in whether people would like the idea of either...

1) a restriction that stops people from being able to lot for i210 items if they don't have the job at L60

or...

2) job lock being in place while the lot window is open. Essentially until all loot is divvied out, you can't change jobs. So as soon as a chest is opened, all jobs lock until the loot is handed to a user, and you can only loot for the item if you are on a job that can actually use it.

or...

3) Can only lot for i210 gear for the job you actually entered with. I dislike this one, personally.

EDIT: Oh, and FWIW, I realise option #1 would lock me out of a lot more than it would lock others out of. I only have WAR at 60. I don't mind the idea of someone having all jobs at 60 and lotting for everything because of that, including my job, even if they don't use it often. What I get annoyed at is when someone lots for i210 WAR gear when they don't even have WAR leveled at all.

[Deezee]

Lootmaster can handle these things if you can't trust people with an honor-based need system.

[Loony_BoB]

Lootmaster can handle these things if you can't trust people with an honor-based need system.

You can't do that for Duty Finder, hence my suggestion. ^^

[Nikorayu]

Last I checked, changing job for the loot that is currently being rolled for won't magically make the "need" button light up.

[Loony_BoB]

If so, that's awesome. And if so, tbh, it should really be Need/Greed by default instead of just Greed Only. Personal opinion, obviously.

[AeraLure]

Played around a half dozen PF groups that agreed to greed 150/180 and need-only for your main job - the one you came into the instance with. A happier experience for all and, incidentally, not a one of these groups broke that agreement. All went well.

[Deezee]

You can't do that for Duty Finder, hence my suggestion. ^^

I was under the impression that so long as you had a full 8-man party you could set up Lootmaster for it, though I can't confirm as I didn't bother to look for it when I set up my own 8 man normal mode Diadem run last night using the Ishgard NPC.

I personally wouldn't bother queueing into Diadem with anything less than an 8-man premade because of the nature of how it works, the fact you can't replace ranks if someone bails early, and all the horror stories revolving around different players with different goals/ideas getting matched and refusing to work together.

[Loony_BoB]

Non-premade isn't all bad. I've not had any terrible experiences so far - the worst thing about it is how hard it can be to get credit sometimes, but beyond that I've only had 1-2 people in 7 DF runs go off gathering without asking if it was okay first, and one of them came back shortly after we called for them to. I've heard pretty bad stories about how bad it can be though, you're right. But yeah, my parties have tended to be good fun people so maybe I'm just lucky in that regard.

Played around a half dozen PF groups that agreed to greed 150/180 and need-only for your main job - the one you came into the instance with. A happier experience for all and, incidentally, not a one of these groups broke that agreement. All went well.

Yeah - I tend to find it's accidental more than anything, because all the damned things look alike and people just make a habit of going in and greeding everything. I've done it myself to one of my FC-mates once. ._. Awful feeling. Crafted them a i170 needle to make up for it. D: But it's happened to me a few times, although not often, and they usually take extra care not to do loot again if they do it.

But as you say - if these are the rules that everyone seems happy to abide by, what's the problem with making them the actual rules, so nobody ends up being a dick about it (or, as mentioned, gets lazy and accidentally hits greed on something they don't even want).