People who ninja for their companions

[J-Sheridan]

The constant crying about people looting what they 'shouldnt' get has been going on from game to game and BW managed to generate a massive source of it via the Companion system.

 

Lets introduce a Companion Need System - This is the most stupid suggestion I have heard that keeps getting put forward.

Everyone gets companions that can use various equipment thus Companion Need would become the default Greed option.

 

Result: Need / Companion Need

Difference between Need / Greed - None

 

Thank you for accomplishing nothing with this suggestion.

 

 

Lets make item rolls class specific - Except companions are a CRUCIAL PART OF THE CLASS SYSTEM. Everyone is a pet class and everyone uses companions for a large part of the game.

Thus people need to outfit those companions and thus will need access to the,

 

You cannot have class specific gear because Companions would be screwed resulting in harder times gearing them AND the additional burden of reworking every item in the game to apply those stats.

 

I'm sorry that your feeling emotional angst because someone ELSE got the item you wanted and felt entitled to but tough luck, try again.

 

 

If someone wants to roll on an item regardless of why they want it. They have equal right to do so. Thats how the system is set up, that is how the system is meant to work, that is how your meant to use it.

 

The 'social rules' are not recognised by the game, are not practical in the game and require the group leaders to show some initiative and enforce them yourself.

 

Result:

Team with people you know

Make sure the group understand the loot rules

 

If you cant handle that then I suggest the Round Robin loot set. That way what you get is completely random otherwise grow up, suck it up and learn to play the game rather than whine about virtual items.

[SnoggyMack]

established by who? THe forum? Lolololol.

 

By the very definition of the term. Ninja looting takes place by people stealing an item. Not rolling on it.

 

It's not ninja looting taking place in the OP. It's sour grapes. It's like trying to say Alex Smith Ninja'd the Saints today. They didn't. The Saints just lost. The Agent in the OP just lost. Flat out lost. Like the Saints.

Edited January 15, 2012 by SnoggyMack

[djdee]

The most simple solution for this, which can be implemented right now, is:

 

Establish before taking on content, that ppl should ask "can I need for my comp pls?" if they intend to need for their companion. If the majority of the group says yes, its official he/she can need. If theres a draw between yes and no, he/she can't need. This goes doubly so for PUGs.

 

Example of establishing the rule:

 

"Please only need for companions if u asked first, come roll time, and the majority says yes"

 

Couple examples on votes:

 

One guy says "go ahead". Others say nothing. He/she can need.

One guy says "sure", another says "nope I rly need". He/she can't need.

Two guys say "nope", one guy says "idc". He she can't need.

 

If you are the person who asks, to be sure wait a few seconds, before pressing NEED so anyone has the chance to say "no".

 

That's how I have done it up to this point and I have never gotten any complaints either as rule giver, or as the person who asks.

[Darkulous]

The most simple solution for this,

 

Never play with that player again. Those people will find themselves out of Guilds and alone in end-game playing that way. I say let them dig their own grave. I've had this happen to me twice so far and I've kept their name in memory.

 

The fact that this sort thing happens rarely is proof that it's garbage gameplay.

[SnoggyMack]

Never play with that player again. Those people will find themselves out of Guilds and alone in end-game playing that way. I say let them dig their own grave. I've had this happen to me twice so far and I've kept their name in memory.

 

The fact that this sort thing happens rarely is proof that it's garbage gameplay.

 

The threat just doesn't carry any weight. Nobody's blacklisting people all that much even though these threads are legion.

 

Nobody's blacklisting healers that do it. Nobody's blacklisting crafters that are mod stripping purples. Nobody's even caring enough to blacklist assassins that do it either.

[JayceJa]

until you hit 50, your companions ARE JUST AS IMPORTANT TO YOU AS YOUR OWN EQUIPEMENT

 

sure, at 50 when your doing operations and such it's different since companions are used much less than groups, but doing flashpoints/world bosses/heroics till 50 a companion is just as important as your own gear

 

there has to be some limits though, taking every gear cause one of your companions could use it is also a dick move, but taking gear for the companion you have with you all/most of the time is perfectly legitimate

[Darkulous]

The threat just doesn't carry any weight. Nobody's blacklisting people all that much even though these threads are legion.

 

Nobody's blacklisting healers that do it. Nobody's blacklisting crafters that are mod stripping purples. Nobody's even caring enough to blacklist assassins that do it either.

 

Again, put your Toons where your mouth is. Provide us your toon names and what servers they're on and let's see if your "nobodies" blacklist you. It's easy....

 

Ladies and Gentlemen! My main's name is DOOM on the server Shii-Cho. I do not roll need for my companion if your Main is needing too. Fear me not!

[Shillen]

A companion is NOT an alt. Anyone with a lick of sense understands this.

 

You're right, the alt would make better use of the item than your companion will.

[Darkulous]

until you hit 50, your companions ARE JUST AS IMPORTANT TO YOU AS YOUR OWN EQUIPEMENT

 

 

Sure, I agree, but your companions gear is not more important than another players MAIN. People play their MAIN 100% of the time. No companion is played 100% of the time thus not as important as a MAIN. Simple math really states the levels of importance.

[SnoggyMack]

People play their MAIN 100% of the time.

 

Nah, there's lots of people who play alts quite a bit.

[SnoggyMack]

Ladies and Gentlemen! My main's name is DOOM on the server Shii-Cho. I do not roll need for my companion if your Main is needing too. Fear me not!

 

Level, class and a brief overview of your gear would also help. Especially since we don't have damage meters yet to know if you're really up to snuff to group with.

[Ranid]

I think the only time a need role for a companion is warranted is if the companion is out as a group member in the flashpoint or whatever.

 

If no companion is out then it is need - greed party members only.

 

 

PS. I want to need for all my alts too. /sarcasm off.

[Tauhid]

This sounds like the kind of thing that should be worked out beforehand. Otherwise, if there are no expectations then there should be no surprises.

[Rheinland]

Was the companion there for the kill. If yes its fair. It would be like rolling need for an Alt. Its just being a d-bag.

[Starwaster]

It's not a ninja if he can use it including the companion. Companions are part of the game so you might want to just get used to that fact. I know I won't hesitate even for a second to need on a item for my companions.

 

QFT

 

My companion is part of my character anyway. If I'm having to go solo a companion is there filling the void that another player should fulfill. If more people were wiling to group I might not feel the need to 'need'.

[Shillen]

Was the companion there for the kill. If yes its fair. It would be like rolling need for an Alt. Its just being a d-bag.

 

Fair but not considerate. No one is saying it's unfair. They're saying you're being selfish rolling on it because someone else can make better use of it than you can.

[Idunhavaname]

It's not ninjaing. The guy is just a douche.

[Sparckus]

Was the companion there for the kill. If yes its fair. It would be like rolling need for an Alt. Its just being a d-bag.

 

I had my companion tank for a FP today, we cleared it (just), I still wouldn't dream of rolling need for it even though it was there.

[icroyal]

Rolling for your companion is just wrong. Roll Need for you only.

[SnoggyMack]

I had my companion tank for a FP today, we cleared it (just), I still wouldn't dream of rolling need for it even though it was there.

 

Why are you allowing your companion to take up a group slot that a player could inhabit? That's kind of selfish man.

 

[Sparckus]

Why are you allowing your companion to take up a group slot that a player could inhabit? That's kind of selfish man.

 

 

I know, terrible. I need to get my companion told he's a bit of an impatient bastard. I said to him were waiting for a real tank. 30 mins later he said no wai and literally dragged us all into the instance. What a ****.

Edited January 15, 2012 by Sparckus

[itekazzawrrlic]

Great, so you're just another troll who won't put his money where his mouth is. Who'da thunk it?

 

I've already figured out that players > companions when running heroic content in this game. Apparently, you still need to learn this.

 

Because it was such an asinine statement to begin with.

 

If you need to be shown the usefulness of companions, then, quite frankly, you're not playing the game to it's full potential.

 

I solo heroics on a daily basis. How? Because of my Companion.

 

the responder is right, if you can't figure it out, it's waste of time explaining it cause it's self evident to begin with.

 

/rant

[itekazzawrrlic]

But seriously, it's selfish. Think on it long and hard. Ayn rand would agree. Im done.

 

Wll at least you're right about one thing.... You're done.

[Eldren]

In an ideal world, BioWare would add a "companion loot box" to all bosses' loot tables. This loot box would be intelligent like the current quest reward system is: it takes a snapshot of your class at the time you open it, and then gives you an upgrade for one of your companions. It might not be a companion you regularly use. Slot it up on that companion anyway, and go about your business. Either way, that becomes something that the system just automatically rolls for every player in the party, and assigns to the player who got the highest roll, much like loot distribution in normal-mode Operations.

 

In the same vein, all gear dropping from bosses has a class requirement. Do you see that Sith Marauder rolling Need on that item that clearly says "Requires Bounty Hunter"? They can't equip it, it binds on pickup, so they can't give it to a BH guildmate or alt, they're obviously intending to vendor it. While I personally think that Needing an item so you can vendor it is perfectly valid (you did, of course, assist in downing the boss, so you've an equal right to the others in your party to stake a claim to the boss' loot), it seems to cause an undue degree of upset to the forum-goers, and one could make a reasonable assumption that a certain percentage of the players who never bother using the forums would likewise be upset.

 

Something drops from a trash mob in a Flashpoint? Fair game. Roll Need on it if you want it.

 

But we don't have a sensible system like this in place, and I imagine it would take a lot of man-hours of programming to alter the existing loot tables to include these flags. To me, I'd rather BioWare, at this stage at least, put in the effort to fix the bugs in the game and to give us new content than spend limited development resources retrofitting existing assets.

 

What we have is a system that's 100% impartial, but in the eyes of some, extraordinarily suboptimal. It's a system that doesn't analyze your class, it doesn't analyze your talent point allocation, it just says "You were in this boss fight, this boss died, now this boss' loot is available for you to roll on."

 

To me, nothing could be more impartial. It removes all emotional considerations and just flat-out says "You were there, you have a shot at the gear if you want to take it." This apparently isn't enough for some, who try to argue everything from an emotionalistic social altruism perspective to a perceived priority of role to a perceived priority of player over companion. The problem with those perspectives is simple, however: they aren't perspectives the game takes into account. As a result, anyone who simply ignores those perspectives is still working "as intended" as far as the game's mechanics go.

 

It took World of Warcraft 7 years to retrofit their gear system so that items were provided with role links that kicked in a bonus on the RNG, insuring that even if the DPS rolled 100 on a tank item and the tank rolled 1, the tank would still get the item because of the role bonus.

 

The problem is the system they use doesn't take into account what your actual role might be, it only takes into account the role you chose when going into their group finding tool. They still haven't implemented a smart system that will actually take a snapshot of your class and talent allocation to determine what your actual role is.

 

This game is already one step ahead on that: quest rewards that contain companion-specific options only give you rewards usable by one of your class' companions. I'm not going to see something for Khem Val on my Marauder, just like my Inquisitor friend won't see a lightsaber for Jaesa Willsaam on her quest reward choices.

 

As it currently stands, the system doesn't care what your role is, the system doesn't care if you're going to give a piece you won to a companion or not. It cares that you were there, that you were in a group that downed a boss, and that you're staking a claim to a piece (or more) of the loot that dropped.

 

Attempts to convince someone to do something other than what the loot distribution system blatantly says is their right is solely weighted on social convention, which has varying degrees of importance to different people. Therein lies the contention: you have people who believe one way upset that someone who believed differently took an action they didn't approve of, and they want official support to make it so that their way becomes the only possible way.

 

One group of the two main camps on companions getting loot may eventually find BioWare agrees with them, I have no way of knowing. But until (if) that happens, we have the system we have, and each person should behave as their conscience dictates.

 

Their conscience isn't open to debate from other players. They shouldn't worry about the dire consequences other players predict in this and similar threads in an attempt to deter the behavior. They should deal with the objective reality: the actual consequences, if any, for their actions, i.e., the consequences (if any) they personally experienced.

[Synalon]

Was the companion there for the kill. If yes its fair. It would be like rolling need for an Alt. Its just being a d-bag.

 

Companions don't work on world bosses so even if hes out hes perma stunned for the whole fight