People who ninja for their companions

[fakerepublican]

Thanks to companions I can need everything and then sell it to vendor, and not have to explain to people that my need for credits is equal to their need for gear. This is a game, if you can use something whether it's for equipping or selling or just because you like the icon, need that sucker. If someone doesn't like it, tough. They had the opportunity to click need just like you.

[JediMasterShake]

Here's a hypothetical to test the tenets that eldren claims to live by:

 

You are walking down the sidewalk and a bread truck is running a promotion, free bread! They are tossing it onto the sidewalk, one loaf per 5 blocks. They toss one directly between you and a what looks to be a very, very poor person. (You have no proof, but theres no reason to think they are not borderline homeless. This is your own estimation). You can reach out and try to grab this bread, and you have a 50% chance to snatch it.

 

Now, for the sake of the hypothetical, take these as givens, don't poke holes in the situation. There is a thing, you have a perfectly equal right to it as person 2, an equal chance to acquire it if you choose to pursue, except they NEED it more than you. You like bread, you can surely use it. But it provides them more marginal utility. (one last given: it will have no effect on whether or not this person survives.)

 

 

What do you do? And please, answer the hypo as given, then feel free to comment as you wish on the merit of the analogy to the current discussion.

Edited January 14, 2012 by JediMasterShake

[bheta]

I need credits, so can i need on all the BoE stuff.

 

That's the same logic of people who roll need on companion stuff while players who need it are present.

[fakerepublican]

I need credits, so can i need on all the BoE stuff.

 

That's the same logic of people who roll need on companion stuff while players who need it are present.

 

I don't know. Are you capable of moving your mouse and clicking a button? If so, I think you can in fact need the BoE stuff. I don't see why you couldn't, anyway.

[KeatoHarrolo]

Don't forget about alts as well. A companion is barely a step away from an alt.

 

Pressing Need automatically bounds the item to you so you can't even mail that item to your alt if you pressed need.

[Flaashheart]

While the current need/greed system is unfortunately as faulty as it is, for the sake of your sanity just accept that everything you step into a PuG you are going to be rolling a 25% shot on all loot that drops.

 

The world is filled with selfish greedy people, no community can change that.

[Dozed_monkey]

Here's a hypothetical to test the tenets that eldren claims to live by:

 

You are walking down the sidewalk and a bread truck is running a promotion, free bread! They are tossing it onto the sidewalk, one loaf per 5 blocks. They toss one directly between you and a what looks to be a very, very poor person. (You have no proof, but theres no reason to think they are not borderline homeless. This is your own estimation). You can reach out and try to grab this bread, and you have a 50% chance to snatch it.

 

Now, for the sake of the hypothetical, take these as givens, don't poke holes in the situation. There is a thing, you have a perfectly equal right to it as person 2, an equal chance to acquire it if you choose to pursue, except they NEED it more than you. You like bread, you can surely use it. But it provides them more marginal utility.

 

 

What do you do? And please, answer the hypo as given, then feel free to comment as you wish on the merit of the analogy to the current discussion.

 

Well that really depends on the emotional position the individual stands on. But what you will classicly get with Star Wars is amateur philosophers who've skimmed a bit of Nietzsche and evolutionary psychology coming along and trying to compose a valid sith philosophy. As well as that you will have to wade through many rationalized attempts to defend their belief that it will not come back round to bite them on the arse, which is ironic since they are essentially boasting about how wickedly clever they are in front of the very public they are abusing. Arrogance always was Anakins downfall.

[bheta]

The number of people actualy defending this is amazing, makes me hate the avrg pugger a lot more and shows I can't trust the general community.

 

 

Needing for your companion when there is somone in the group who can use it on their charicter is ninja'ing. I don't care what crap deffinition you come up with for ninja'ing. Following some of the deffinitions given if somone rolls need on some loot that somone else could use and then vendors it he really didnt ninja it because hes using the money he got from it.

 

 

Needing for your companion when other players can use it for their PC is ninja'ing. Period.

 

you have no idea, i have joined 4 different heroic quest w/ people. they started the quest. so after help them, they bail before i am done. so then i have to reset the instance and find more peeps.

 

4 times this has happened to me.

[Dozed_monkey]

you have no idea, i have joined 4 different heroic quest w/ people. they started the quest. so after help them, they bail before i am done. so then i have to reset the instance and find more peeps.

 

4 times this has happened to me.

 

If only they could make a positive/negative voting system that would work, so we could publicly flag a player as scum.... Too much room for abuse and general misuse though.

[Hzakalwe]

Need rolling on loot for companions can be dealt with by BW altering the group loot system. There is nothing to stop them preventing a need roll for BoP gear your character can't wear.

 

People would still win loot for companions with a greed roll, just not as often.

 

The sooner such a system is in place the better.

[Alcarinn]

This is considered ninja by me since companion helped 0 for the boss kill and sicne deserves 0 for the roll.

 

no extension need roll is only for yourself not your friendly companions..... companion is another player basically. ruled by PC

[massassi_]

They need to reduce the number of companion equipment slots, and make them all companion-specific. The way it works now is just going to continue to kill any ability for people to trust others, and thus any desire to play with strangers.

 

In addition to a lack of quest mechanic diversity, fractured zone 'instances', missions bonuses and bonus series' (which are not bonuses at all), this is one of the primary issues that will kill this game if not fixed quickly.

 

They need to redesign companion itemization and do it right now.

[Damodar_Thade]

Easy solution would be if BW added roll for companion-option, that would allways come after main character rolls. At the same time they should do so that if you roll for yourself, you couldn't actually give it to your companion after that.

 

What if i roll for myself then i find somthing nicer and want to give the original item to my companion instead of selling to a vendor?

 

In short no and no imo.

 

Current loot system works everyone clicks and it goes out to whomever, if you find a loot hog dont group with them again, i've saw SW select need for BH items and i dont cry about it this stuff happens in mmos some ppl are cool some are not.

[Errathe]

I am slightly troubled by a self-proclaimed community that holds that denying another participating player's right to roll on an item is less selfish than simply allowing everyone the right to roll as they wish. To impose your own set of ethics on to another is just - and even more - selfish as simply needing on every item you helped to obtain.

 

That is why there needs to be simply 'Want/Pass'. With a level of purity and simplicity comes clarity. And while it wouldn't entirely remove the arguments, I am certain it would lessen them to such a degree that we would not be seeing multitudes of threads such as this one.

 

Equally troubling, to me personally, is how so many people become so emotional over such things as pixelated lightsabers.. Whatever floats one's proverbial boat, I guess.

 

 

On another note, I would just like to thank Eldren for some amazingly well-written, logical, and ethical posts, equally devoid of an overbundance of emotion.

 

Is there a fanclub I can join?

[Setanian]

It's called probability. If everyone took Eldren's line of thinking, it would essentially weaken group combat effectiveness, due to a loss overall of gear going to players, as they'd be going to companions.

 

First off I agree whole-heartedly with Eldran.

 

Your claim is false. Someone in the group wins something unless by some amazing chance, the boss drop nothing. So, someone won something. If that person decides to put it on their companion, that's their right. It is and never was your right to dictate to any player, never mind the community as a whole, what they do with the item they win.

 

The problem here I see is that people make claims based on their assumption that all others should follow suit in their agreement. In some, the people feel they have the right to dictate to others. They don't, never could, and never will.

 

People are trying to force me to play their way. I am then threatened by not agreeing to them , that I will be blacklisted by them and never ever be able to play again. What's happening here is a bully boy tactic. But, if the tactic is negated by facts and proper discussion and questions, and those people are unable to answer meaningfully, they throw the toys out of the pram and use insults.

 

Sweeping statement like "Need is for players" is fine for WoW but not for here. We were given companion that use gear just as any other player does. In that regard, the companion in my opinion is an extension of my player character and gets all the benefits that entitles them to.

 

As for the 'need' option. If I help you kill something that you could not have killed without me, we are both entitled to get a share of the loot. If the loot comprises only 1 item, then we randomly roll on it to see who wins. You and I are both entitled to have a roll on that item. Just because you need it more, does not mean anything. Just because you claim on behalf of the rest of the world that I should roll greed does not mean anything. If I helped, I am entitled to roll how-ever I wish.

 

What annoys people here that people like me will blatantly say that I don't care about what you think I should do or what the world thinks I should do. If I helped I am entitled to roll. What I decide to do with that roll is my business, not anyone else's.

 

Throwing out the old fallback of "Ninja, I'll name you and shame you" means nothing to me. What you are trying to establish is a monopoly on items suited to the player character and not the companions. I don't subscribe to that, and you have no facts to prove any majority.

 

Finally, there's a huge difference between I need that item and I'd like that item. You do not need that item. It would be beneficial to you sure, but you could get it elsewhere or at another time.

[Setanian]

This is considered ninja by me since companion helped 0 for the boss kill and sicne deserves 0 for the roll.

 

no extension need roll is only for yourself not your friendly companions..... companion is another player basically. ruled by PC

 

As stated before, you are entitled to your considerations, I am entitled to roll whatever I wish, if I helped you. You have no right to begrudge me that right.

[Setanian]

While the current need/greed system is unfortunately as faulty as it is, for the sake of your sanity just accept that everything you step into a PuG you are going to be rolling a 25% shot on all loot that drops.

 

The world is filled with selfish greedy people, no community can change that.

 

Why should you get more than a possible 25% share? And you call us greedy?

[Setanian]

If only they could make a positive/negative voting system that would work, so we could publicly flag a player as scum.... Too much room for abuse and general misuse though.

 

When you were in school was there some public voting system that allowed you to vote other school goers as 'scum'?

 

Is there some public place on your street that allows you to vote other neighbors as 'scum'?

 

Why do you feel you have the right to have an ability to vote others as 'scum' on an online community?

 

it is worrying that people actually ask for this kind of thing.

[Errathe]

When you were in school was there some public voting system that allowed you to vote other school goers as 'scum'?

 

Is there some public place on your street that allows you to vote other neighbors as 'scum'?

 

Why do you feel you have the right to have an ability to vote others as 'scum' on an online community?

 

it is worrying that people actually ask for this kind of thing.

 

Yeah.. I think it's safe to say that most, if not all, of us who subscribe to the belief that everyone has a right to roll, want nothing more than for all of us to have the innate, un-bullied right to roll on any item they helped to obtain. We treat all our fellow players equally, and refuse to dictate how they play.

 

I don't know about you, but that's not how I define selfish behaviour.

 

And yet, the majority of the 'other camp' seem to believe that they should be able to dictate who gets what, and failing any real arguments, simply resort to calling 'us' selfish, scum, and that 'we' should be named and shamed for treating people equally?

 

Seems rather strange to me. Am I the only one who sees a problem here?

[VizMagc]

Yeah.. I think it's safe to say that most, if not all, of us who subscribe to the belief that everyone has a right to roll, want nothing more than for all of us to have the innate, un-bullied right to roll on any item they helped to obtain. We treat all our fellow players equally, and refuse to dictate how they play.

 

I don't know about you, but that's not how I define selfish behaviour.

 

And yet, the majority of the 'other camp' seem to believe that they should be able to dictate who gets what, and failing any real arguments, simply resort to calling 'us' selfish, scum, and that 'we' should be named and shamed for treating people equally?

 

Seems rather strange to me. Am I the only one who sees a problem here?

 

You're not arguing on the behalf of others, you're arguing that you should get to play however you want even if it upsets everyone else. You're not being altruistic or noble by claiming that you treat everyone equally and do not care how they play, you're just being apathetic. It's an entirely self-interested argument, some might say it's even 'selfish'!

If everyone cared about the thoughts and feelings of other players then there wouldn't be a problem.

[Setanian]

You're not arguing on the behalf of others, you're arguing that you should get to play however you want even if it upsets everyone else. You're not being altruistic or noble by claiming that you treat everyone equally and do not care how they play, you're just being apathetic. It's an entirely self-interested argument, some might say it's even 'selfish'!

If everyone cared about the thoughts and feelings of other players then there wouldn't be a problem.

 

Your whole argument is also self-interested, which some might call selfish. If I am in your group of 4 and we win, I am entitled to 25% of the chance of winning the loot. And that's what we get. That you can choose between need/greed has nothing to do with it. What I choose to roll is my business not yours.

 

It that in some way grieves you, well that's your business. I am not playing everyone else's game, therefore they get to choose how they wish to play and how they wish to roll. There is nothing unfair about it.

[Rimr]

Its been quite a while since ive played any need/greed working games but i quickly got reminded yesterday.

 

I should have read the signs of cause. Someone randomly sends me a party request? And is 3 lvl lower than me? No wonder i ended up later looking in my inventory and of the 12-14 gear drops during the last hour .. i had none.

 

Lesson learned. And i can only be thankfull i learned it at this low a level where it dosnt really matters.

 

Clearly needs to be fixed somehow along with the party system (cant leave a party without logging of, etc)

Edited January 14, 2012 by Rimr

[Acererak]

I agree that people should roll greed if their only intention is to sell the item. But this whole argument of "I need it more" is just invalid. If somebody will use an item, even on his companion, he has a right to roll for it. You cant deny him that just because you can squeeze a bit more efficiency out of the item then he can. What if I prove I am a better player than you, should you give all your items to me because I can use them more efficiently than you can?

 

The problem is that people have a mindset of thinking that everything they see belongs to them, and when someone else gets the item, they consider that person a thief. The items that drop don't belong to you. Anyone who helped kill the monster can take their fair chance at getting them. If the item belonged to you then other players wouldn't be allowed to roll at all.

 

The argument is actually moot as its not a matter of opinion. The game already has strict rules for ownership of an item. If he was allowed to roll on that item then, according to the game and the game developers, he has a right to that item.

[VizMagc]

Your whole argument is also self-interested, which some might call selfish. If I am in your group of 4 and we win, I am entitled to 25% of the chance of winning the loot. And that's what we get. That you can choose between need/greed has nothing to do with it. What I choose to roll is my business not yours.

 

It that in some way grieves you, well that's your business. I am not playing everyone else's game, therefore they get to choose how they wish to play and how they wish to roll. There is nothing unfair about it.

 

As you said, if in some way that grieves me, that's my business. That's the crux of your argument. You simply don't care how others react to your behavior, you don't even consider it! That's what makes it selfish. Why shy away from the word if you're embracing the concept?

[Setanian]

As you said, if in some way that grieves me, that's my business. That's the crux of your argument. You simply don't care how others react to your behavior, you don't even consider it! That's what makes it selfish. Why shy away from the word if you're embracing the concept?

 

as should you. You are trying (unsuccessfully) to deny me my rights.