People who ninja for their companions

[Setanian]

It's people like you who ruin the game for so many others, and why the NEED/GREED system doesn't work. You got burned in the past because you were like us, trying to use it as it was meant to be used. Now, you're one of them, burning the rest of us and trying to legitimize your opinion based on selfishness.

 

Hey, to each his own. I just wish BW would do something about the system. Because, the way people get frustrated in game about this stuff really ruins the camaraderie.

 

Let's break this dan shall we? (I have already read your last reply)

 

I wrote my first program in '79, and have been online pretty much since the early days of BBSs and fidonet.

 

I've played many, many, MMOs but predominantly 9 yrs on EQ. I then moved to WoW (jaded from raiding).

 

On wow, was the first place where this NBG thing was the 'norm'. So, I played along. Many times I saw it being abused, but as I am a care-bear now, it didn't really bother me as I had 6 accounts and could get pretty much anything I wanted outside of Raid Gear.

 

Different Games, different times.

 

Back to ToR. I was L14 and helped some chap do an instance and he asked could he need on a lightsaber. I said yes,a nd we finished up.

 

I was barely back in coruscant or whatever it's called and I saw him selling it on /1

 

So back to your wild claims.

 

How can you possibly state as fact that I am ruining the game for others?

 

Because I believe there is no-one trust-worthy on the internet? It is my belief that trusting anyone on the internet after some 30 yrs or so online is a huge mistake.

 

So.. Don't dare come peddling your 'it's all your fault' type melodramatics to me. I really don't care what you think, or anyone else here to be honest. I judge people by their posts and the sincerity shown in them.

 

People using 'ninja' and all that garbage get relegated to the garbage bin for me. If someone wants to debate the problem fine. But if they're here to sling insults and debate the person, then we're in a whole new ball-game.

 

But don't let me stop you. But ask yourself this; Will you get more respect from proper debate or from childish name-calling?

[lineschmidt]

Let's break this dan shall we? (I have already read your last reply)

 

I wrote my first program in '79, and have been online pretty much since the early days of BBSs and fidonet.

 

I've played many, many, MMOs but predominantly 9 yrs on EQ. I then moved to WoW (jaded from raiding).

 

On wow, was the first place where this NBG thing was the 'norm'. So, I played along. Many times I saw it being abused, but as I am a care-bear now, it didn't really bother me as I had 6 accounts and could get pretty much anything I wanted outside of Raid Gear.

 

Different Games, different times.

 

Back to ToR. I was L14 and helped some chap do an instance and he asked could he need on a lightsaber. I said yes,a nd we finished up.

 

I was barely back in coruscant or whatever it's called and I saw him selling it on /1

 

So back to your wild claims.

 

How can you possibly state as fact that I am ruining the game for others?

 

Because I believe there is no-one trust-worthy on the internet? It is my belief that trusting anyone on the internet after some 30 yrs or so online is a huge mistake.

 

So.. Don't dare come peddling your 'it's all your fault' type melodramatics to me. I really don't care what you think, or anyone else here to be honest. I judge people by their posts and the sincerity shown in them.

 

People using 'ninja' and all that garbage get relegated to the garbage bin for me. If someone wants to debate the problem fine. But if they're here to sling insults and debate the person, then we're in a whole new ball-game.

 

But don't let me stop you. But ask yourself this; Will you get more respect from proper debate or from childish name-calling?

For someone who doesn't care about other peoples opinions you certainly rant on and on lol:cool:

 

Oh and flawed logic is flawed

Someone stole from me so now i'm entitled to steal from someone else. Makes perfect sense:rolleyes:

Edited February 21, 2012 by lineschmidt

[Saurakk]

For someone who doesn't care about other peoples opinions you certainly rant on and on lol:cool:

 

Oh and flawed logic is flawed

Someone stole from me so now i'm entitled to steal from someone else. Makes perfect sense:rolleyes:

 

I am not a fan of his stance on looting but I think calling him a thief is a bit much.

 

He seems to be up front about his stance. IF he is upfront about in game...it is "our" choice to group with him or not.

 

NOW, if he says in group chat before hand that he only NEEDS on his main and then backtracks and NEEDS on a companion, THEN you can call him names.

 

Right now all we have are different philosophies on how loot should be disbursed.

[Kantoro]

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.

 

Can I get your ingame name, so I can put you on ignore and never, ever play with you?

 

Thanks,

 

~Signed, not a selfish player.

[Irusan]

You're getting defensive over it because you realize you're wrong. I have no intention of calling you a troll. But, you're obviously trying to stir up trouble here by justifying things that clearly come from being selfish. Hey, no offense intended. Just calling it as I see it. And most of the people posting here seem to see it as well.

 

 

Yes, we do see it and have been seeing it for days on end.

[universeman]

So.. Don't dare come peddling your 'it's all your fault' type melodramatics to me. I really don't care what you think, or anyone else here to be honest. I judge people by their posts and the sincerity shown in them.

 

People using 'ninja' and all that garbage get relegated to the garbage bin for me. If someone wants to debate the problem fine. But if they're here to sling insults and debate the person, then we're in a whole new ball-game.

 

But don't let me stop you. But ask yourself this; Will you get more respect from proper debate or from childish name-calling?

 

Did I call you a name? Ninja is a simple word used to describe the actions you are taking in game. If you see it as "name calling", then I guess I am. 50 darkside points!

 

You don't care what I/we think is the problem here. The NEED/GREED system is designed to require people to consider the rest of the players in the group. If you are not caring what others think, then you are not abiding by the system, which is why it needs to change.

 

No offense, but I really don't care about your past, or what made you into the person you are today. It doesn't give you any more/less merit over anyone else in this thread. The only thing we are discussing here is how the system should be used.

 

And the majority of people seem to agree that the system is being abused by a minority who don't care what others think.

[lineschmidt]

I am not a fan of his stance on looting but I think calling him a thief is a bit much.

 

He seems to be up front about his stance. IF he is upfront about in game...it is "our" choice to group with him or not.

 

NOW, if he says in group chat before hand that he only NEEDS on his main and then backtracks and NEEDS on a companion, THEN you can call him names.

 

Right now all we have are different philosophies on how loot should be disbursed.

I disagree

 

If i tell you upfront that i'm gonna rob you i'm still a thief. Sure i can avoid grouping with him in this case but his intend is very clear

 

If the general consensus is you roll need for upgrades for your character and greed anything else and someone disagrees but doesn't say anything i'd still call him a thief or a ninja

 

Maybe it's a tad disrespectful but to be honest his stance and behavior warrants very little respect from me

Edited February 21, 2012 by lineschmidt

[Setanian]

I am not a fan of his stance on looting but I think calling him a thief is a bit much.

 

He seems to be up front about his stance. IF he is upfront about in game...it is "our" choice to group with him or not.

 

NOW, if he says in group chat before hand that he only NEEDS on his main and then backtracks and NEEDS on a companion, THEN you can call him names.

 

Right now all we have are different philosophies on how loot should be disbursed.

 

Firstly, thank you.

 

Secondly, I have never, ever, rolled need for my companion.

 

So now you're asking what am I doing here bible thumping about needing for companions..

 

The truth is, if someone wants to 'need' for their companions, I don't mind. I keep coming back to, if they helped me get to the loot in the first place, they have as much right to any loot as I have.

 

So, if they 'need' it for whatever reason, then they are entitled to it.

 

If how-ever, we agree at the start of the group that there should be no rolling need for companions, then I expect, everyone to honour the agreement. If they don't, there really is nothing I can do about it.

[Setanian]

Did I call you a name? Ninja is a simple word used to describe the actions you are taking in game. If you see it as "name calling", then I guess I am. 50 darkside points!

 

Ninja is a person who steals something they were not entitled to have. It is also an insult as is it a derogatory term.

 

You don't care what I/we think is the problem here. The NEED/GREED system is designed to require people to consider the rest of the players in the group. If you are not caring what others think, then you are not abiding by the system, which is why it needs to change.

 

And if others are not abiding by that system, why should I? Also, if you advocated a little more leniency rather than insisting I do what you want, I might be more amenable. As it is, I see no reason to pamper you.

 

No offense, but I really don't care about your past, or what made you into the person you are today. It doesn't give you any more/less merit over anyone else in this thread. The only thing we are discussing here is how the system should be used.

 

Likewise, you don't have any more/merit either.

 

And the majority of people seem to agree that the system is being abused by a minority who don't care what others think.

 

That is an opinion without any factual evidence to support it. If you want me to take that as fact I'd like you to provide a count of the foes and againsts from this thread and the previous (6 i think) roll-over of this thread.

 

Finally, bear this in mind.

 

All along I have advocated nothing but fairness. I have stated quite categorically many times, each player gets an equal chance to roll the dice.

 

Why do you insist I that I should forgo my chance at loot so you can have a better chance at it.

 

And, Answer me this question:

 

What is unfair in everyone rolling roll/pass with no other options? (i.e.: remove the 'need' button)

[Irusan]

Firstly, thank you.

 

Secondly, I have never, ever, rolled need for my companion.

 

So now you're asking what am I doing here bible thumping about needing for companions..

 

The truth is, if someone wants to 'need' for their companions, I don't mind. I keep coming back to, if they helped me get to the loot in the first place, they have as much right to any loot as I have.

 

So, if they 'need' it for whatever reason, then they are entitled to it.

 

If how-ever, we agree at the start of the group that there should be no rolling need for companions, then I expect, everyone to honour the agreement. If they don't, there really is nothing I can do about it.

 

One mans bible thumping is another mans trolling.

[Vecke]

I think most people reasonably agree that if you are concerned about this issue, speaking up at the formation of the group will solve the problem. If someone agrees to a group's rules at the start, then breaks those rules later, they're in the wrong. Not for rolling need, but for lying to their group. I think everyone agrees with this.

 

Most people, however, don't do that. And the people that do it aren't bad players because of their stance on companions... they're bad players because they lied to their group. That's different altogether.

 

I personally think the pro-need group (not the extremists, but the people that genuinely think it's a valid roll) have some good points. The truth is, companions are different in this game. They aren't just pets and they aren't alts. They are a fundamental part of your character. You can equip them, and more importantly, equipment bound to you works on them. Gearing that companion will help you significantly when grouping up with just 1 or 2 other people. It can be helpful in group settings. It's also fair for them to think that Bioware doesn't consider this a big deal, since BW's only reaction has been a single post from one person that inferred (but didn't promise) a change might come, and strongly recommended the players work it out for themselves.

 

On the other hand, the pro-greed side makes some valid points. Conventional wisdom in MMOs has always been that need is for the player character and nothing more. Anybody that says it isn't is truly being dishonest. That was the norm for as long as NBG has been around. Sure, there are always people that break it, but those people aren't justification to break it yourself. It's also a reasonable argument to say that - since everyone has multiple companions with multiple stats - rolling for a companion equates to the end of NBG altogether because 1. you can't verify if the person is being honest and 2. the odds of actual player characters getting the item is dramatically lowered. It's also a fair argument that most (not all, but most) players will gear their player character before they'd gear their companion, which shows that player characters are considered more important. Lastly, it's perfectly reasonable for them to assume Bioware agrees. While not proof, there was a post from a Bioware employee that strongly inferred that they are in the greed camp, for whatever reason. While not proof, the inference is clear.

 

After some thought, I personally think that companions should only get a need roll if that particular companion participated in the group content. I think that's a fair compromise and fits with the traditional concept of NBG.

 

That said, however, I think my opinion is unrealistic. I think the realistic option is to speak up when you join/form a group, but if no clear rule is set, the assumption should be that people are rolling need for their companions. Why should we assume that? Because the need camp can have it their way without saying a word. The greed camp quite literally can't. The fact is, companions in this game have subtly changed the paradigm, so there isn't a "conventional wisdom." To assume so is basically just setting yourself up for missing out on the gear.

 

TL;DR: No matter who's right or who's wrong or who should be the one to speak up, if you want to make sure you have a fair shot at the gear, speak up at the formation of the group. If you don't, there's really not a fair justification for getting mad later because (IMO) there's not a universal consensus on the importance of a companion. So yeah... just speak up.

 

This is, I think, the longest post I've ever written.

[ferroz]

On the other hand, the pro-greed side makes some valid points. Conventional wisdom in MMOs has always been that need is for the player character and nothing more.

Anything the player character can wear or use (EQ had a number of clickies that fell into this category, wow has pets and mounts). companions are part of my player character.

 

1. you can't verify if the person is being honest and

The same is true for people who claim need for any other reason.

 

in particular, I remember one guy repeatedly claiming need in Bastion of thunder (in some of the groups that actually did NBG), on the plate bracer mold. Somehow, he kept managing to lose them instead of actually making himself the bracers...

 

2. the odds of actual player characters getting the item is dramatically lowered.

No, the chance of an actual player character getting the item is 100%, either way. Edited February 21, 2012 by ferroz

[universeman]

What is unfair in everyone rolling roll/pass with no other options? (i.e.: remove the 'need' button)

 

I'd love to see this. But, then it's not much different than taking it out altogether. Just give 1 random person a drop. And I'm fine with that, too lol. If they want to keep the NEED/GREED system in, it needs to be modified to account for the differences in opinions that some people have on how it should work.

[ferroz]

Did I call you a name? Ninja is a simple word used to describe the actions you are taking in game.

No, it's a derogatory term that doesn't actually apply to this game*, since it's not possible to loot something that hasn't been awarded to you.

 

*without turning the NBG system off or fiddling with the threshold, if the latter is an option

 

 

You don't care what I/we think is the problem here. The NEED/GREED system is designed to require people to consider the rest of the players in the group. If you are not caring what others think, then you are not abiding by the system, which is why it needs to change.

you should be able to loot what you want, for the reasons that you want it.

 

You just aren't entitled to dictate those reasons to anyone else.

 

so, unless you think you are entitled to dictate to other people what they are allowed to want, I care what you think.

Edited February 21, 2012 by ferroz

[drosalion]

That's a bad idea...

 

Everyone gets at least one companion that wears the same gear as them, so if they did that I couldn't give my companion my hand-me-downs.

 

sith marauders have no companions they can give hand-me-downs

[Vecke]

Anything the player character can wear or use (EQ had a number of clickies that fell into this category, wow has pets and mounts). companions are part of my player character.

 

The same is true for people who claim need for any other reason.

 

in particular, I remember one guy repeatedly claiming need in Bastion of thunder (in some of the groups that actually did NBG), on the plate bracer mold. Somehow, he kept managing to lose them instead of actually making himself the bracers...

 

No, the chance of an actual player character getting the item is 100%, either way.

 

Companions aren't part of the player character. The player character is the character you created at the start of the game. Companions are companions to the player character. They're something new. I'm not talking about their importance, but they - quite literally - are not the player character. How important they are TO the player character is what's up for debate.

 

Maybe we're operating under a different definition of player character here, but companions and your character are - literally - two different things. How integrated they are into the value of your character is different, but to say they ARE your character simply isn't true. Corso Riggs is not my main character. He's a companion to that main character.

 

To say he's an absolutely integral part of my main's progression is perfectly valid. But to say he IS that character simply isn't true.

Edited February 21, 2012 by Vecke

[ferroz]

Companions aren't part of the player character.

Certainly they are.

 

I have 6 wrist slots. 2 of them need light armor with willpower, 2 of them heavy with aim, 2 of them medium cunning.

[Galbatorrix]

Let's break this dan shall we? (I have already read your last reply)

 

I wrote my first program in '79, and have been online pretty much since the early days of BBSs and fidonet.

 

I've played many, many, MMOs but predominantly 9 yrs on EQ. I then moved to WoW (jaded from raiding).

 

On wow, was the first place where this NBG thing was the 'norm'. So, I played along. Many times I saw it being abused, but as I am a care-bear now, it didn't really bother me as I had 6 accounts and could get pretty much anything I wanted outside of Raid Gear.

 

Different Games, different times.

 

Back to ToR. I was L14 and helped some chap do an instance and he asked could he need on a lightsaber. I said yes,a nd we finished up.

 

I was barely back in coruscant or whatever it's called and I saw him selling it on /1

 

So back to your wild claims.

 

How can you possibly state as fact that I am ruining the game for others?

 

Because I believe there is no-one trust-worthy on the internet? It is my belief that trusting anyone on the internet after some 30 yrs or so online is a huge mistake.

 

So.. Don't dare come peddling your 'it's all your fault' type melodramatics to me. I really don't care what you think, or anyone else here to be honest. I judge people by their posts and the sincerity shown in them.

 

People using 'ninja' and all that garbage get relegated to the garbage bin for me. If someone wants to debate the problem fine. But if they're here to sling insults and debate the person, then we're in a whole new ball-game.

 

But don't let me stop you. But ask yourself this; Will you get more respect from proper debate or from childish name-calling?

 

 

 

EVERYONE who's ever played in a NBG game has been burned by it... countless times. Heck, in WOW's new Raid finder tool, it's almost impossible to win anything because everyone needs everything they can just because the button's lit up. And that same mind set started to pour over into the dungeon finding tool as well after a while making it happen there very frequently as well (it happened in the tool before the raid finder, but not as much). With that said, that doesn't mean I'm personally going to ruin someone else's time by doing it myself. I just ignore the people who do it and move on. Either way, from your earlier post, it doesn't look like you typically do it either, so I really don't have anything else to argue with you about.

Edited February 21, 2012 by Galbatorrix

[moldbreaker]

Exactly why I don't pug and I'm not regretting it whatsoever. Because of the greedy and selfish players out there who can justify rolling need for anything (alts, companions, RP) I will never pug because BW gives me zero incentive to do so.

[jontyld]

So, you care more bout stacking the deck in your favor than being fair; that's an awfully selfish stance.

 

 

No, there's nothing dishonest about about expecting to be able to roll need for loot that you'll use where you've participated in the kill.

 

Just to play the fair game with you for a bit.. Being able to roll need on anything is already unfair to certain classes. Bounty hunters only have companions with aim and cunning. Sith warriors. Bounty hunters have a 50% chance of having an item drop they have a need on, while sith warriors have a 100% chance. I think its fair that each person only roll on their own characters primary stat, giving each member a 25% chance of loot dropping.

 

Which is right? Neither because "fair" is an idealist concept that is fairly subjective and essentially impossible in the real world. Its a stupid argument.

[Galbatorrix]

Exactly why I don't pug and I'm not regretting it whatsoever. Because of the greedy and selfish players out there who can justify rolling need for anything (alts, companions, RP) I will never pug because BW gives me zero incentive to do so.

 

 

 

Pugging in game is actually not that bad. Most people I've pugged with need for their PCs only. I'm sure I'll eventually run into someone needing on everything, but it really hasn't happened yet.

[universeman]

so, unless you think you are entitled to dictate to other people what they are allowed to want, I care what you think.

 

Well, if you care what I think, they you'd see that a minority are taking advantage of a majority who are trying to use the system in a polite/respectful way (so we all have equal access to loot).

 

If you think everyone already has equal access by being able to click NEED every time, then the system needs to be changed to make that viewpoint clear. It obviously wasn't intended to be NEED every time unless you wanted to pass.

[ferroz]

Just to play the fair game with you for a bit.. Being able to roll need on anything is already unfair to certain classes.

No, it's certainly fair to be allowed to roll on anything.

 

it's unbiased in any way, totally impartial. That's kind of the definition of fair.

 

Bounty hunters only have companions with aim and cunning. Sith warriors. Bounty hunters have a 50% chance of having an item drop they have a need on, while sith warriors have a 100% chance. I think its fair that each person only roll on their own characters primary stat, giving each member a 25% chance of loot dropping.

This isn't "able to roll need on anything" ... this is "able to roll need on certain items based on the criteria that you didn't actually mention anywhere"

 

For any given item, your chance to win it is exactly the same as anyone else that also wants it and chooses to roll.

[Galbatorrix]

Just to play the fair game with you for a bit.. Being able to roll need on anything is already unfair to certain classes. Bounty hunters only have companions with aim and cunning. Sith warriors. Bounty hunters have a 50% chance of having an item drop they have a need on, while sith warriors have a 100% chance. I think its fair that each person only roll on their own characters primary stat, giving each member a 25% chance of loot dropping.

 

Which is right? Neither because "fair" is an idealist concept that is fairly subjective and essentially impossible in the real world. Its a stupid argument.

 

 

Excellent point. Saying that it's more fair because "everyone gets a roll" isn't fair at all because troopers, for instance, will never be rolling on anything but AIM unless they're rolling for credits.

[universeman]

Just to play the fair game with you for a bit.. Being able to roll need on anything is already unfair to certain classes. Bounty hunters only have companions with aim and cunning. Sith warriors. Bounty hunters have a 50% chance of having an item drop they have a need on, while sith warriors have a 100% chance. I think its fair that each person only roll on their own characters primary stat, giving each member a 25% chance of loot dropping.

 

This is a good point and why I feel using companions as an excuse to roll NEED is a selfish gesture. It really should be a roll per player and only for the character you're actually sitting behind.