Endgame LS Rules / Points

[Daveman]

It can be summed up like this, fewer Members getting screwed:

good /point system > good point system > bad point system > bad /point system

That's all there is to it.

Summing up something involving so many ifs in such a manner is ridiculous.

The only thing you accurately summarized there was that good > bad.

Actually he's saying that while a good /point system is better than a good point system, a shitty point system is better than a shitty /point system. And it's really easy to have a shitty /point system, while it shouldn't be incredibly hard to make at least a decent point system.

So ideal is a good /point system, if that's not gonna happen, go with points.

[Geneyus]

We have a point system with job priority. Everyone else either forgot to bid or assumed they weren't winning when I won mine. I bid all in trial and was the only person who bid that day. Besides the initial shock there has been no drama over it. Next time you are winning e body, ridill, a body, or d ring and pass it, then you can call me greedy. I did nothing wrong and did not abuse any system.

Cry more.

Edit: You forgot to add how people like me only play this game for themselves and do nothing but horde items. People like you create people like Map who will never level his war sub because it pisses you off. Judge all you want but I'm out of mage jobs to level now and damn is war looking good next. Good thing I have a Ridill to ding into.

[Saraphym]

We have a point system with job priority. Everyone else either forgot to bid or assumed they weren't winning when I won mine. I bid all in trial and was the only person who bid that day. Besides the initial shock there has been no drama over it. Next time you are winning e body, ridill, a body, or d ring and pass it, then you can call me greedy. I did nothing wrong and did not abuse any system.

Cry more.

Edit: You forgot to add how people like me only play this game for themselves and do nothing but horde items. People like you create people like Map who will never level his war sub because it pisses you off. Judge all you want but I'm out of mage jobs to level now and damn is war looking good next. Good thing I have a Ridill to ding into.

lvl it for great justice, everyone will be a lot happier.

lol @ forgetting to bid. "hay y r we here agen? sum sw0rd or sumthn? i dun remebr."

[Seraphim]

We use a system based on attendence and requests. And in order to request it, you have to be able to use it.
Each even has a number of items you can request from it
Can request 2 items from sky, 2 from HNM, 1 from sea, and a job set from dynamis, so on.
He who requests first, gets first, Just goes on down the line of people. Only requirement of getting the item is you must have attended for a certain amount of events prior (30% in the past month maybe? 50%? I can't remember.) I don't think we've really had any drama over a drop in... hell I can't really remember the last time we had drama over an item.

[Geneyus]

@Sara

The person who forgot to bid was in BD not planning on coming I believe.

We have ridill priority to war/drks and the only war/drk main there has Apoc and Ragnarok and said he didn't even want me to pass to him. The only person I would have considered passing to is a pld main with war lvled but he asked me right as it sorted. That's woulda been quite the awkward decision wouldn't it! Everyone else is like a 4th or 5th job war and it was like our 14th in the shell anyways.

P.s. My war isn't 37 anymore

[Ryogo]

The purpose of a point system is to make sure that everyone gets items, but the truth is, there are players who shouldn't get items ever. Some players join my linkshell and they tell me that in thier last linkshell the leaders got everything. Maybe they did, but maybe this player is wrong. Some people don't understand that if you want to run a linkshell, the game doesn't stay at the computer when you log off. I trust myself and my sacks to pick who is lotting items.

[Khalil]

No one point system is perfect, the best you can do is.. use a bit of common sense and try to create one that will satisfy most people's needs. A good way, is to look at which LS's are successful, and which ones are not, then take note of each LS's point system and try to connect the dots. It's also important to keep in mind, your own LS members opinions on what is a good system or not. If everyone can agree in the beginning when a system is being established, it's much easier to progress as a linkshell.

This has almost no bearing to the members you have. If you have great members, they will most likely always show up. If you have shitty members, I doubt /point systems or point systems will help them.

My LS does well with a point system but a neighboring LS does just as well with a /point system, so what's your argument now?

[Drunkenmonk]

bahamut mask to a person w/o v2 access over someone with access, yes points system.
is this wrong or am i just an asshole? plz halp

[Geneyus]

@Drunkenmonk

I agree that getting items when you don't have access is retarded, but Bv2 is pretty easy nowadays and as long as members are motivated enough to do ENMs you should get a chance pretty quickly!

[Evelyn]

bahamut mask to a person w/o v2 access over someone with access, yes points system.
is this wrong or am i just an asshole? plz halp

If you have to ask whether you're an asshole or not, then you're an asshole.

ANYWAY.

If you're using a point system, and people lot items, those items need to decrease the player's point value. Otherwise it will allow long-standing members and such to be able to get priority lots on everything. Depleting point systems just end up with fewer loot whores (though you'll still have that one guy who has craploads of points, he'll just have to work harder)

In terms of LS bank issues that people are talking about, ours has a bank that gets all gil drops. Gil in the bank is used to fund LS events like Dynamis, einherjar, etc, and also gives out a weekly gilsplit directly based on each player's attendance, not on the cost of the items we got over the week. We also allow the bank to have a decent buffer so he's not red-lining every week. all 5 of the officers have access to it. And theres a nice bank transaction thread thats kept up by the treasurer. I think the only time someone ran off with the bank was when the player wanted his character back, and we just transferred everything from one account to another. Never had drama yet with it, we've been a shell... 4 years I think.

[Tricen]

Some things are just common sense.... If you don't have access to it, then uhhh... Wtf are you getting it for.

[Saraphym]

No one point system is perfect, the best you can do is.. use a bit of common sense and try to create one that will satisfy most people's needs. A good way, is to look at which LS's are successful, and which ones are not, then take note of each LS's point system and try to connect the dots. It's also important to keep in mind, your own LS members opinions on what is a good system or not. If everyone can agree in the beginning when a system is being established, it's much easier to progress as a linkshell.

My LS does well with a point system but a neighboring LS does just as well with a /point system, so what's your argument now?

very simple, To each their own.
Besides I was not making an "argument" either way, but a suggestion. Taking it at face value without applying common sense is retarded. If your ls members are shitty you're gonna have a problem no matter what system you choose, this is obvious to say the least. Btw, I was not saying "find a good LS and copy their methods to the exact". If you read clearly I plainly stated "take notes" from observing successful linkshells, and connect the dots so to speak. Therefore a starting LS may look at your LS and this neighboring LS and find which they seem to identify more, if given both are equally successful. Then they could either model after one, or take a mix from both and create their own. What's wrong with that?

[Grey Jorildyn]

bahamut mask to a person w/o v2 access over someone with access, yes points system.
is this wrong or am i just an asshole? plz halp

People without Bv2 access should be filtered out by recruitment, obviously. This kind of thing goes beyond the point system and touches upon your leniency to give people a pearl that are not motivated enough to get access to fights like this.

[Khalil]

very simple, To each their own.
Besides I was not making an "argument" either way, but a suggestion. Taking it at face value without applying common sense is retarded. If your ls members are shitty you're gonna have a problem no matter what system you choose, this is obvious to say the least. Btw, I was not saying "find a good LS and copy their methods to the exact". If you read clearly I plainly stated "take notes" from observing successful linkshells, and connect the dots so to speak. Therefore a starting LS may look at your LS and this neighboring LS and find which they seem to identify more, if given both are equally successful. Then they could either model after one, or take a mix from both and create their own. What's wrong with that?

Your initial argument made it seem as if you favor /point systems because of members being motived. That's what I had in mind when I was replying to your post.

[palonious]

The purpose of a point system is to make sure that everyone gets items, but the truth is, there are players who shouldn't get items ever. Some players join my linkshell and they tell me that in thier last linkshell the leaders got everything. Maybe they did, but maybe this player is wrong. Some people don't understand that if you want to run a linkshell, the game doesn't stay at the computer when you log off. I trust myself and my sacks to pick who is lotting items.

The purpose of a point system is not to make sure that everyone gets items, but to make sure that 1.) items are allocated fairly among those that contribute to the linkshell's success and 2.) members determine their own rewards for their time-invested. By definition, no system can be perfect; a simple two-points/hour model still ignores relative intensity of each job, each event, and each circumstance. Considering the potential pitfalls from a "divine choice" and "point" system, I *personally* opt for the former. That said, considering the relatively low stakes involved in a video game's loot-distribution, I think both work effectively - at least as effectively as its operating administration.

It can be summed up like this, fewer Members getting screwed:

good /point system > good point system > bad point system > bad /point system

That's all there is to it.

Summing up something involving so many ifs in such a manner is ridiculous.

The only thing you accurately summarized there was that good > bad.

Actually he's saying that while a good /point system is better than a good point system, a shitty point system is better than a shitty /point system. And it's really easy to have a shitty /point system, while it shouldn't be incredibly hard to make at least a decent point system.

So ideal is a good /point system, if that's not gonna happen, go with points.

Actually, he's summarizing the stupidity of making a universal claim on a subjective topic with absolutely no evidence. Define "screwed", elaborate on "fewer members". Then, maybe, we'll make some headway. Otherwise, let's create discourse on why blue is absolutely better than green.

[Eggroll]

Tell me if this is a bad points system for sky.

Genbu Suzy Seiryu Byakko drops 10pt each.
Points do not decrease.
Must have a job 70+ that can use the item.
Someone with 10 pts can lot against people with 201827 pts. (On their third sky run even, or second. Points are totaled at the end of every run. So as long as you get 10 pts+ on your first run, you can lot the next run.)

Kirin drops are based on point priority. IE: Someone has 100 pts and someone else has 101 pts, the person with 101 will get the item.

Basically as I see it...
4 Gods: Freelot pretty much as long as you have a job 70+ and 10 pts.
Kirin: Actual waiting in line for items.

Back in my first HNM ls we had a system similar to this, resulted in a 70 rng getting haidate over me and another linkshell member, when we were both 75 ninjas

[Yutuyu]

Well, lets see...

Good /point system:

The leader gets to know everyone in the linkshell, what their goals are, and how much effort they put into the shell. Items are then distributed based on how badly someone wants something, how much work they've put into it, and how useful said item is for their job.

Good point system:

Items are distributed purely based on operational definitions of contribution through some bidding or otherwise value system. Some minor job priorities may exist.

Bad point system:

Items are distributed through the above way, however leaders have poorly defined rules, exploit loopholes, or they manipulate the point structure towards their own end.

Bad /point system:

Items are distributed on personal whims of the leaders.



It's pretty obvious what the worst and best systems are. Good /point systems take into consideration many things that good point systems cannot. Good point systems are maintained fairly and impartially, however are forced to ignore many dimensions of the equation. Bad point systems pretty much use the point system as an excuse and a front for what they *really* are (a bad /point system), but at least if you're observant you can tell they're screwing you over by their fudged documents. And finally bad /point systems require no accountability at all, the leaders of those shells distribute items to their friends and people who they like without considering impartially how much someone truly deserves it.

In short, in a /point system your leaders have more rope to hang you by. In a point system it's harder for them to screw you over because there's more accountability. That's what my inequality referred to.

[palonious]

The leader gets to know everyone in the linkshell, what their goals are, and how much effort they put into the shell. Items are then distributed based on how badly someone wants something, how much work they've put into it, and how useful said item is for their job.

While wonderfully romanticized, your definition makes good leadership synonymous with omniscient leadership. You're defining a perfected ideal, not the above average, or "good", implementation of a /point-system. It would be better to standardize the "best-possible" realistic implementation of a /point-system.

Under that definition, I suspect that the categories from which a leader would draw would be similar to the categories evaluated statistically in an adjusted point-system. As long as acknowledging its inability to factor in subjective judgment, an adjusted point-system can be perfectly implemented because its management is not by the very object it excludes, but by a priori logarithm; perfectly implemented despite its imperfect structure. Considering that only the small, nuanced details are the only factors it cannot track, those small nuanced details would be the only factors that would separate it from the perfected ideal (described above, and already qualified as an impossible expectation) much less from the "best-possible", realistic /point-system. Even comparing perfection, the difference is so miniscule that it's inconsequential: What would a point-system exclude? How badly someone says one wants something, tenure, being a “nice” guy—Are those really relevant if another member has invested more time into the linkshell?

In the ideal, of course an all-knowing, independent arbiter would be the best option. But in implementation, the "best-possible" /points, and the "perfectly implemented" (although structurally imperfect) point-system will consider the same factors: best-use, attendance, recent drops, and reward-preference.

I'd also argue that the point-system is by far more transparent, but that's just personal preference I guess.

[Naygor]

We have a point system with job priority. Everyone else either forgot to bid or assumed they weren't winning when I won mine. I bid all in trial and was the only person who bid that day. Besides the initial shock there has been no drama over it. Next time you are winning e body, ridill, a body, or d ring and pass it, then you can call me greedy. I did nothing wrong and did not abuse any system.

Cry more.

Edit: You forgot to add how people like me only play this game for themselves and do nothing but horde items. People like you create people like Map who will never level his war sub because it pisses you off. Judge all you want but I'm out of mage jobs to level now and damn is war looking good next. Good thing I have a Ridill to ding into.

Congrats, except you've still shown why pure point systems are stupid and are a jerk for bidding any points on it in the first place.

[Zarath]

Personally, I like point systems for the sheer unbaised look on how hard people have worked, but personally, data is well just data. I will, if applicable, take it upon myself to assign specific drops to specific people if it's well deserved, I find the back bone of a good point system while having the possibility of stepping over the rules, makes for a good overall system.

This is due to the fact of me being burned badly by a pure points system in the past =/

Of course though my own personal opinion doesn't sway 100% reason, I co-lead my LS with two others and we handle most if not all, internal and external problems.