Today there was a clarification regarding loot trading.
Blizzard Entertainment
Update 4/13/19
We saw some confusion about a specific part of this post so we want to be clear that Customer Service will NOT be transferring items in WoW Classic and the system that we outlined will be in the players’ hands. If we were to go down the road of developing a policy on item trading, we believe it would end up allowing the exact same kind of abuse that we are trying to minimize with the 2-hour trade window system which we outlined in the original post.
Ninja looting does have consequences in the community and those who do it will have trouble getting invited to group. In other words: your reputation will matter. Remember to play nice, play fair folks!
–
Original Post:
At BlizzCon 2018, we talked about how we plan to keep loot trading in World of Warcraft Classic. We added loot trading in Wrath of the Lich King to solve a common problem: a player could accidentally loot an item meant for another player or give it to the wrong person using Master Loot. They would then have to contact Blizzard to get the item moved to the intended recipient, which might take days. We wanted to keep loot trading in WoW Classic because the end result is the same – the correct person gets the item – and it’ll save everyone time.
But we heard your concerns about the potential for abuse of the loot trading system in parties of five. It’s possible that abusive play could take the form of a group of four players colluding to deny loot to a stranger who joined their party as a pick-up. Raid groups, being much larger, come with more understanding on the part of solo players that loot distribution can depend on the whims of the many players and raid leaders who know each other.
Taking that into consideration, we’ve decided that the two-hour loot trading system in WoW Classic will only apply to soulbound gear that drops in raids. Soulbound loot that drops in five-person content will not be tradeable at any time. What we hope to do is to strike a balance between saving players time and minimizing the potential for abuse of the system. We think this approach better addresses the concerns we’ve heard from players on the subject.
by Kaivax
Yeh, Blizz have made it pretty clear that Classic WoW will have minimal staff maintaining day to day issues.
Lvl 60
Lvl 35
I think that is good decision. Just leave it to the community. I really like this approach. Feels like EVE.
I find the "maintaining personal reputation" excuse a bit silly. Its obvious then just don't wanna hire GMs.
I'm still wondering what will the right-click reporting work like. This matter hasn't been addressed yet.
I think the whole maintaining a reputation is a little difficult with some people simply faking issues for their own various agendas. I remember a few people having their server lives ruined simply because they wouldn't leave farming spots for one of the more progressed raiding guilds, which then spread various false stories about *ninjaing* and other such to punish them.
But that is out of Blizzard's hands.
I do ultimately think that no loot trading in 5mans to avoid abuse and 2 hour loot trading in raids to avoid stupid mistakes (definitely saw enough of them happen back in the days) is the best middle ground.
I think that the "reputation" grind of your own character among the rest of the server population is a great thing. Yes, it can be manipulated by toxic individuals spreading lies. But that is just life in general, and its unfortunate.
For the most part, being a good player and a decent person will keep you from getting blacklisted via forums, reddit, discord, and many other various means of information sharing that we have now compared to back in the day.
Council Chairman
US-Horde
Blaumeux
Im curious how long this minimal staffing approach will last. I'm a biased source but I'm guessing classic is going to be a non-trivial amount of revenue.
Yeah as much as we bitched about ninjas, the drama that resulted from them was a source of endless entertainment. The cost is high enough that only a minority of players would be willing to engage in that kind of behavior.
