"Need Plus" for 5-mans - Blue Tracker

#1 - Oct. 16, 2012, 9:10 p.m.

Suggestion for Blizzard:
Implement "Need Plus" rolling system used in Raid Finder, for 5-mans also please.

The vast majority of the player base would label a plate dps needing on a plate tank item, as a ninja even though Blizzard's looting rules explanation
https://eu.battle.net/support/en/article/loot-settings
says that it perfectly legal to do so and is not breaking any rules.

How would you feel if you grind heroics over and over to get that low droprate item and some other player needs on it too even though hes role for the dungeon says otherwise but still the system allows them to roll cause they share gear proficiency?

I would like to hear some ideas from other decent players. Ninjas don't even bother posting here.

Taepsilum

Community

#32 - Oct. 17, 2012, 3:09 p.m.

In general, developers are always open to changes as long as they lead to better gameplay.
Having said that, I can tell you that there have been some recent discussions going on about the dungeon looting system.
So there’s at least a chance that they might re-evaluate its implementation and consider other options. As soon as we have more concrete information on the subject we’ll make sure to let everyone know.

Taepsilum

Community

#63 - Oct. 18, 2012, 12:41 p.m.

17/10/2012 16:31Posted by Arathemis
And while we're on topic for loot, in Scholomance there is a rare spawn mob sometimes, with the new system of not seeing who is needing or greeding, you kind of are forced to press need, while others may have pressed greed. Or when you ask ''Are we needing or greeding on that rare/fun item?'' and you get the answer of ''We're greeding'', and out of all faith you press greed, only to find out the rest pressed need.

This is a common misconception of how the loot system is currently working.

The system still allows you to see everyone else’s rolls, if you can’t see them please type /loot or click on [Loot] in the chat window when an item drops.

It’s not your fault if you didn’t know about this; we realize that we probably made this functionality unintentionally a bit too hidden.