Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago
Should be better if instead of class divide by guild rank. Sometimes the RL
makes the
mistake to give some item to a member instead to a raider (raider > member >
trial).
It's just an idea, but if you think it's useless ok.
Keep the good work
Original comment by j.xavie...@gmail.com
on 20 Apr 2008 at 2:38
If that's the case you should educate your master looter ;) This feature would
be
great for token-drops aswell
Original comment by Oistein....@gmail.com
on 30 Jun 2008 at 11:04
This should be weaved in the bid helper (see bug 43).
Original comment by evlogimenos
on 23 Sep 2008 at 10:55
Won't this be a bit of a nightmare with the new generic gear that covers a lot
of
classes coming out in Wrath of the Lich King? Would be useful for gear marked as
class only, like tokens etc., but other than that its down the the Master
Looter and
the people who want the loot to know if its any good for their class.
Original comment by dingochavezz@gmail.com
on 26 Oct 2008 at 10:24
"Eligible Classes" would have to mean "Can equip item" - anything else is loot
policy that shouldn't be in a
DKP mod.
It's fine not to show daggers to paladins, they can't use them. But you do want
to show DPS mail, in case the
ret pally has a piece of rubbish in that slot and loot policy doesn't require
him to pass to hunters (or maybe
they have better).
Also doesn't work for BoEs. Perhaps people can buy them for their alts using
EPGP. You'd have to show BoEs to
everyone.
Original comment by rmlane@gmail.com
on 16 Nov 2008 at 10:57
Mark all as New without owner.
Original comment by evlogimenos
on 8 Jan 2009 at 11:03
Seems superfluous -- members should know which items they can equip already. Or
do i
miss the point? :P
Original comment by j...@instancia.net
on 27 Jan 2009 at 2:57
Original comment by evlogimenos
on 26 Feb 2009 at 12:29
This is going to be superseeded by lootmaster. Support for it is already
implemented in LibItemUtils. All we need
is the lootmaster implementation and ui now.
Original comment by evlogimenos
on 2 Apr 2009 at 9:52
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
evlogimenos
on 21 Nov 2006 at 9:20