People who ninja for their companions

[Mr_Crueak]

Exactly.

 

yes exactly, his 99% number is 100% made up

[ferroz]

1) Is there measurable benefit from equipping a companion with Blue/Purple/Orange gear? Is this benefit high enough that it's "worth" the cost to players you have grouped with? While this can be derailed by people saying "I have the right to need on whatever I want", that isn't the point. A piece of gear that gives your companion a 1% increase and gives a PC tank a 10% is better given to the tank.

That's the same argument as "it's a bigger upgrade for me so you should pass" ... which isn't a reasonable expectation in a pug.

 

Ex: A piece of loot drops. It's 10 more cunning than what one gunslinger is wearing and 1 more cunning than the other. It's an upgrade to both, but a bigger upgrade to the first. Expecting a pug to pass on it is not reasonable.

 

2) Given that some people apparently view their companion as a part of their character, what needs to be done to alleviate the issue? Stop FP/OP gear from being used on companions and instead give companions better gear in missions? Move directly to a roll/pass system , or a "each person gets a piece of loot" or "Eldren is given a Champ Bag every time Eldren's character stubs it's toe" or whatever works.

The correct way to alleviate the issue is to spell out loot rules in chat before you do anything, and then abide by it.

[Tahana]

your attempt to cover up your own greed by trying to spin other people's behavior as ninjalooting is absurd. It's not ninjalooting unless the group decides to limit the rolls in some particular way and someone violates that.

 

Absolutely no greed involved. I have run several FP's where absolutely nothing dropped for my class. Upgrades dropped for other classes though, and they were upgrades for a real person.. Not a companion. If no real person needs it, but all means put it on a companion. Also I'm very upfront about my expectations in a pug group. People needing for companions get booted. Period. No exceptions.

[ferroz]

Absolutely no greed involved.

Yes there is. You want something, someone else took it, you are angry. There's nothing actually involved in the situation but that: it's purely about trying to cover up your personal greediness.

 

It sounds like you're even trying to cover it up from yourself. You should really be more honest with yourself. You'll be happier in the long run...

Edited January 17, 2012 by ferroz

[DNA_Cowboy]

Easy solution to this: add a Need for Companion button to loot rolls. Need > Need for Companion > Greed/RE. Problem solved.

 

It would be great, as far as I'm concerned.

[Mr_Crueak]

Also I'm very upfront about my expectations in a pug group. People needing for companions get booted. Period. No exceptions.

 

That is the way it should be, it should be stated what the expectations are when forming the group. People that don't want to abide can leave or be kicked.

 

The problem is when people have expectations that they were never upfront about and still expect some unwritten rule to be followed.

[Setanian]

Absolutely no greed involved. I have run several FP's where absolutely nothing dropped for my class. Upgrades dropped for other classes though, and they were upgrades for a real person.. Not a companion. If no real person needs it, but all means put it on a companion. Also I'm very upfront about my expectations in a pug group. People needing for companions get booted. Period. No exceptions.

 

So if they don't play to the same rules as you, they're gone? One assumes you inform them of your rule base before they actually *help* you.

 

People seem to forget that as much as they are help the other members, the other members are helping them.

[Tahana]

Yes there is. You want something, someone else took it, you are angry. There's nothing actually involved in the situation but that: it's purely about trying to cover up your personal greediness.

 

lmao.. you're so funny, you should be a comedian. typical when the person with the deviant behavior tries to make someone who runs with community accepted mores to be the bad guy.

 

you will find your definition is in the minority, and not the community expectation.

[LogicalPremise]

That's the same argument as "it's a bigger upgrade for me so you should pass" ... which isn't a reasonable expectation in a pug.

 

Ex: A piece of loot drops. It's 10 more cunning than what one gunslinger is wearing and 1 more cunning than the other. It's an upgrade to both, but a bigger upgrade to the first. Expecting a pug to pass on it is not reasonable.

 

The correct way to alleviate the issue is to spell out loot rules in chat before you do anything, and then abide by it.

 

I'm hardly interested in PUG behavior. No amount of rules, beforehand or not, and no explanation, is going to alter the fact that if you pug eventually some less-than-upstanding person will hit need and then go vendor the item simply because they can.

 

What I disagree with, and want to prove or disprove, is this ridiculous notion that people are entitled to need for companions because if they don't their companion will be too weak to help out in solo play.

 

Arguments that "I can need if I want" or "it's up to the roll" or "rules" or whatever are not germane to what I'm looking at. In the example you gave, both persons can use the item, but only one has a "need" for it. Both will probably roll need on it, but that's hardly the point.

[Tahana]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tahana

Absolutely no greed involved. I have run several FP's where absolutely nothing dropped for my class. Upgrades dropped for other classes though, and they were upgrades for a real person.. Not a companion. If no real person needs it, but all means put it on a companion. Also I'm very upfront about my expectations in a pug group. People needing for companions get booted. Period. No exceptions.

So if they don't play to the same rules as you, they're gone? One assumes you inform them of your rule base before they actually *help* you.

 

People seem to forget that as much as they are help the other members, the other members are helping them. .

 

What part didn't you understand.. I underlined it for you.

[Eldren]

We have to presume there is a reasoning behind BW's use of a Need/Greed/Pass system over a Roll/Pass system.

We won't know for sure unless they say, but I figure it was a point of familiarity for existing MMO players.

 

We have to presume (although I am working on this) that there is a level of measurable benefit derived from FP / OP gear vs. gear available on the GTN or Commendations.

There is; unquestionably, the gear from Flashpoints is typically of superior quality to quest rewards or GTN purchases (save purchases sourced in FP drops).

 

There is no point arguing this topic on societal norms with those who reject such norms. Nor is it worth discussing the consequences. Those who disdain such things have demonstrated their personality far more effectively than any argument can. Whether or not you choose to group with such people is up to you.

There's no point in discussing societal norms when they don't exist in this paradigm. We have players from several societies across the world in this game, often on the same server and in the same level bracket. Each society has its norms, codified as laws that are enforced by the threat of undesirable consequence (fiscal/incarceration/death). We have no formal society here, nor formal and ratified rules. As such, an appeal to a societal norm is both a) nonsensical and b) incapable of enforcement.

 

The only points that can be discussed in a logical, rational manner (hopefully one removed from this bizarre concept that opinions on either side of the argument are facts) are

 

1) Is there measurable benefit from equipping a companion with Blue/Purple/Orange gear? Is this benefit high enough that it's "worth" the cost to players you have grouped with? While this can be derailed by people saying "I have the right to need on whatever I want", that isn't the point. A piece of gear that gives your companion a 1% increase and gives a PC tank a 10% is better given to the tank.

The problem with your supposition here is that you're assuming a cost to other players is sufficient-enough cause to figure into the equation. Other players experience cost any time they don't get something they want, but someone else does. It needs to go no further. It doesn't matter if there's a greater statistical benefit to a player than a companion, because once you're out of the group, any statistical benefit ceases to reach you period. We cooperate to down bosses, but we're rolling for our own perceived needs when the loot window arises.

 

2) Given that some people apparently view their companion as a part of their character, what needs to be done to alleviate the issue? Stop FP/OP gear from being used on companions and instead give companions better gear in missions? Move directly to a roll/pass system , or a "each person gets a piece of loot" or "Eldren is given a Champ Bag every time Eldren's character stubs it's toe" or whatever works.

 

Bashing each other over the propriety of it is pointless. I will never accept it, and others will never cease defending it.

 

There are any number of more optimal solutions, but I think one thing we can both agree on is this: because of companions, NBG in its current iteration is highly suboptimal for distributing loot in this game.

[Zixxer]

Dont PUG if you dont want to get screwed. There are a thousand guilds out there that will allow you to be as non-social as you want and will be cool to you. Find one and enjoy the game.

[Zhothon]

Ahhh, here we go. We're getting into the "I've been here longer than you, sonny!" argument. Are you so certain I haven't been involved in beta just as long? Whether I have or haven't, it isn't germane to this discussion, as the game's iterated so much since even the last weekend test that I have to wonder why you've brought it up at all, save perhaps not having an actual rebuttal to my point.

 

Where do you get your percentage of how many players accept a given position? References, please. Otherwise, I'd recommend you cease performing a rectal extraction of statistics.

 

I'm in an extreme minority? You must have access to some pretty phenomenal and objective statistics! Nah, you're a player just like me. Your attempted ad populum argument smells like it came from a dirty place.

 

And you finally attempt to retreat to a moralist position, casting aspersions on the perspective of anyone who doesn't agree with you. Poor debate tactics, which sort of injures your ability to have your position seriously considered as a possible option for purposes of changing someone's mind. In short, you've got no support you didn't already have.

 

Care to try again?

LOL....you are like talking to a wall. These forums are skewed. If you think that most people agree with you that comps = players in need, then you need to actually play the game. Do the vast majority disagree with you = yes. Am I wrong = doubtful.

 

I brought up my beta experience because I have played for a while and I base my argument off of observation. I have no idea what you base your argument on....... Just use some common sense.

 

I honestly do not understand how some people are so blind to the norm. I suspect you know the reality of the situation and just are trolling (which in case, I bit so shame on me).

 

I would love to see how you all argue other accepted social norms.

1) Its OK to be rude and loud in public restaurants.

2) Let that little old lady get her own door.

3) There is no law that I cant wear my little speedo on my fat arse at the beach. ;p

....

 

I am pretty much done with the troll bait thread. Nothing will change your mind. I have yet to run into your type in the game. The group would be disbanded quite quickly if I did.

 

/wave

[LogicalPremise]

Financial analysts should not have to fence words with psychologists, pfagh...

 

There is; unquestionably, the gear from Flashpoints is typically of superior quality to quest rewards or GTN purchases (save purchases sourced in FP drops).

 

I've been testing FP gear and purples on a number of companions. I'm still recording my findings (and videos) but what I've discovered is that , except for a narrow range of companions, most of the FP gear actually provides minimal benefits over the greens received in gameplay or blues obtained via commendations.

 

DPS class companions such as Vette seem to gain the most utility to the point that a poorly geared Vette can die to two weak mobs but a well geared Vette can solo champ mobs.

 

Tank class companions such as Khem Val seem to gain minor bits of survivability but most of what keeps the tank going is their inherent ability. Only top quality orange gear with the latest mods makes much of any impact. Ranged tanks, like T7 and the IA's companion that I never spell correctly, Kalayo or Kai-yo-yo or whatever, are particularly ill suited to upgrades, as it seems to do, well, almost nothing except add a few dozen points of damage here or there.

 

Healer class companions gain very minor improvements to their healing regardless.

 

As such, an appeal to a societal norm is both a) nonsensical and b) incapable of enforcement.

 

Which is why the argument is unsolvable. I'm still right and you are still wrong, of course. But I have neither logic or arguments to prove it nor appeals to counter your arguments, so my "rightness" is all in my head. Just like everyone elses. You can never convince me I am wrong...which means...nothing, pretty much, since your enjoyment hardly depends on my approval.

 

The problem with your supposition here is that you're assuming a cost to other players is sufficient-enough cause to figure into the equation. Other players experience cost any time they don't get something they want, but someone else does.

 

Ah, but I'm not going to make the argument that some pug will bother to listen to what I find. I could actually care less about the final result. I'm interested in the Truth.

 

If companions need this stuff to be effective for some characters, then Needing on it is not only acceptible but is working as intended. If Vette becomes a liability in late game and is passed over for Doc because Vette doesn't get good gear early on and can never shine, that needs to be known.

 

On the other hand, if upgrading companions out of FP is just wasting everyone's time, including the person bothering to run these FP just to kit out their companion, then I want to know that.

 

I can't change how people play. I can put facts out there, and let people make their own decisions, but my research won't change that. Neither will arguing in this thread.

 

It needs to go no further. It doesn't matter if there's a greater statistical benefit to a player than a companion, because once you're out of the group, any statistical benefit ceases to reach you period. We cooperate to down bosses, but we're rolling for our own perceived needs when the loot window arises.

 

Meh. I find your lack of loving your neighbor disturbing.

 

Some people are naturally altruistic. I regularly pass on gear I can use (and in some cases, use well) because my team mates are so wretchedly geared that I can't help but feel for them. (I am obsessive about the "Inspect Character" on people's gear when I start a FP).

 

I do not expect others to play that way, nor do I think I have any right to tell people how to play. I don't even reject your utility of self-return argument. But like any good bean-counter, I tend to try to find the bottom line on these things. If the marginal utility to person X is minimal, then yeah, it's true he may still roll on it because once ungrouped it's still an upgrade.

 

But in another sense, I don't want to compete with group members, I want to help them. I want the game to be fun, and I don't mind giving up something small to let someone else have fun too. Maybe that is merely me (it is certainly only my opinion), but it feels very clinical and icy when put in terms of calculating benefits once you dispose of your group mates.

[LogicalPremise]

LOL....you are like talking to a wall. These forums are skewed. If you think that most people agree with you that comps = players in need, then you need to actually play the game. Do the vast majority disagree with you = yes. Am I wrong = doubtful.

 

In order to defeat a logical proposition you have to identify where the argument relies on either a logical fallacy, false data, or insufficient development to conclusion.

 

Regardless of whether or not their are ramifications, the ugly reality is that 9 times out of 10 when someone needs I am not really bothered by it, and neither is anyone else even looking. It's quite conceivable that patterns like this could go for months without more than a couple of people getting upset.

[Mr_Crueak]

I would love to see how you all argue other accepted social norms.

1) Its OK to be rude and loud in public restaurants.

2) Let that little old lady get her own door.

3) There is no law that I cant wear my little speedo on my fat arse at the beach. ;p

 

i will argue that all 3 of your bullets have nothing to do with this topic and or the game. Real life situation if you bring a friend aka a companion and he or she needs something at the store are you going to stop companion from getting that item simply because someone else wants it? yes this analogy doesn't make sense does it? welcome to virtual reality where real world social norms do not apply.

[Zezel]

On Tarris group of 16 level 32-37 take down ancient one world boss.

 

3 agents in group. A nice purple protype drops clearly meant for agents. All roll need.

 

A sith assasin also rolls need and wins, saying he needed it for his companion.

 

 

***

 

Perfect example of why cross server LFG is a fail and does not need implemented in any game.

[JediMasterShake]

Hey Eldren, here's a post I wrote for you that first night, when you were claiming that the idea of passing loot that wasn't designed specifically for your class was socialist.

 

...

 

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.

[Setanian]

What part didn't you understand.. I underlined it for you.

 

Sorry I wasn't sure if that was before or after the roll.

[notebene]

Sooo ... if everyone got a mission reward window after each FP boss is downed with 2-3 random items that boss drops and you can select one, then it wouldn't really matter, because the people that feel it's ok to roll for companions would get an item, and the people who don't agree with it wouldn't care, because they would be getting to pick an item as well.

 

Or does that make me a socialist, and 'challenge' and 'achievement' are then nullified because your winning a roll does not also mean that someone else lost?

[HexHammer]

This is the same old story abou the Pally and the Druid who went on a needing spree! It needs to stop, BW has to make a change for how we need and greed, preferably implement a "need for companion".

[Setanian]

Hey Eldren, here's a post I wrote for you that first night, when you were claiming that the idea of passing loot that wasn't designed specifically for your class was socialist.

 

...

 

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.

 

Can I play?

 

I grab the bread. The fact that it no effect on whether the other person survives, means they don't need it any more than I.

 

Merit of the analogy? None. This was a real life scenario. What we're debating in the thread is for a game.

[ferroz]

We won't know for sure unless they say, but I figure it was a point of familiarity for existing MMO players..

Is there a tooltip when you put your mouse over need or greed?

 

what about the tutorial thingy about looting?

Edited January 17, 2012 by ferroz

[Setanian]

This is the same old story abou the Pally and the Druid who went on a needing spree! It needs to stop, BW has to make a change for how we need and greed, preferably implement a "need for companion".

 

Or.. Remove 'need' altogether. The problem with the 'need' option is some players feel it gives a divine right, which they do not have.

 

Removing 'need' fixes all eventualities.

[LogicalPremise]

This is the same old story abou the Pally and the Druid who went on a needing spree! It needs to stop, BW has to make a change for how we need and greed, preferably implement a "need for companion".

 

I wasn't aware I was playing WoW. Oh wait. I'm not.

 

Again: unless you make need where it binds gear to the PC character only, Need for Companion does nothing. And there is zero indication Bioware is going to respond to this -- it hasn't even CLOSED any of the threads touching on this issue despite being full of flames.