Loendar Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 (edited) No it's fair because everyone has an equal ability to roll on an item. You don't have to roll on it, but in all fairness you have the ability to do so. If it's restricted it is no longer fair, as it is restricted to only a few people. It's restricted because you don't want me to roll for it to sell for cash. Restrictions by the admission of this group are unfair. Just because you decide to impose different restrictions on it than I do doesn't make you way inherently more fair. Admittedly, I don't know you specifically or your feelings on cash rolls - so maybe you are just ducky with them. But most here seem to find that as their only point of contention and that throws their comments of 'fair' out the window. Edited January 31, 2012 by Loendar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavaras Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Gear in this game is like candy, stop crying over it and run it again. Its not the end of the world.. It sucks yes but so does the gear itemization in SWTOR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ikinai Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 (edited) ^ what he said It's restricted because you don't want me to roll for it to sell for cash. Restrictions by the admission of this group are unfair. Just because you decide to impose different restrictions on it than I do doesn't make you way inherently more fair. I couldn't care less what you did with it. Win and throw it out of your inventory, sell it, put it on your companion. You won it fair and square. How is that restricting and unfair? Please explain. Edited January 31, 2012 by ikinai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loendar Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I couldn't care less what you did with it. Win and throw it out of your inventory, sell it, put it on your companion. You won it fair and square. How is that restricting and unfair? Please explain. Then you are the exception and we have no point of contention. You and I are on the same page (if I were fully on that page in reality). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StonySpider Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 So the main problem as I see it is that things get muddled when you add in the concepts like companions and orange gear that you can either need for looks or the mods. My suggestion is splitting the need button. If you had a Need for Looks and a Need for Mods button, the people who just want to take the mods of their current armour and put it in the item can roll for the chance to do that, and the people who want the mods as an upgrade can roll to do that as well. Two seperate rolls would take place, however you can roll on both, if you want. This solves the problem of people needing for appearance, because the person who still wants the stats has a chance of getting them, and vice versa. This would even alleviate the problem of people just needing every damn thing they want because they can, because the chances of someone getting something actually useful to them rises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loendar Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 So the main problem as I see it is that things get muddled when you add in the concepts like companions and orange gear that you can either need for looks or the mods. My suggestion is splitting the need button. If you had a Need for Looks and a Need for Mods button, the people who just want to take the mods of their current armour and put it in the item can roll for the chance to do that, and the people who want the mods as an upgrade can roll to do that as well. Two seperate rolls would take place, however you can roll on both, if you want. This solves the problem of people needing for appearance, because the person who still wants the stats has a chance of getting them, and vice versa. This would even alleviate the problem of people just needing every damn thing they want because they can, because the chances of someone getting something actually useful to them rises. This suggestion has been made and I don't find it objectionable BUT a lot of people do. They see any restrictions placed on their need roll, rightly earned, to be an affront to their personal playstyle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ikinai Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Then you are the exception and we have no point of contention. You and I are on the same page (if I were fully on that page in reality). Reality is over-rated. Now, if they would just let me wear jedi robes on a sith and marauder armor on my smuggler I'd be peachy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utio Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Four men go into a car showroom to find there's a competion to win a Ferrari. Two of the men already have one, one man has a porsche, the other has a reliant Robin, which is ready for the scrapheap. Clearly one of the four is in more need of the car. All have an equal chance to win. One of the Ferrari owners wants it for his wife, the other wants to sell it to get some capital. The Porsche owner wants it for his kid. The reliant Robin owner wants it cos he needs a car. Remember, the rules of the competition are that they all put the same effort in to win, and all have an equal chance. The Porsche owner wins, fairly. Would you consider it fair or unfair for him to keep the car, or should he give it to the reliant owner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loendar Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Four men go into a car showroom to find there's a competion to win a Ferrari. Two of the men already have one, one man has a porsche, the other has a reliant Robin, which is ready for the scrapheap. Clearly one of the four is in more need of the car. All have an equal chance to win. One of the Ferrari owners wants it for his wife, the other wants to sell it to get some capital. The Porsche owner wants it for his kid. The reliant Robin owner wants it cos he needs a car. Remember, the rules of the competition are that they all put the same effort in to win, and all have an equal chance. The Porsche owner wins, fairly. Would you consider it fair or unfair for him to keep the car, or should he give it to the reliant owner? It's not a bad analogy though in this example they are approaching the entire thing from a standpoint of competition with one another and not cooperation, as would be required in a group that has rewards. In a group setting where they are all working for, arguably, the greater good - then that would be the one with the most need. In your example they are specifically at odds with one another so it isn't really the same, but it IS close. In what you posit above I don't think anyone would argue that it should go to someone other than the 'winner' but the problem is skewed towards just the 'rolling is fair' portion of this debate and not the 'greater good working together' one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzrknight Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 This is an eternal argument and everyday i come to say the same. Kick/leave and ignore the person/whole group. Dont lose time talking ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loendar Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 This is an eternal argument and everyday i come to say the same. Kick/leave and ignore the person/whole group. Dont lose time talking ... It isn't likely to change - and without this topic there will just be another starting over on the same thing. Ignoring the problem is certainly the easiest option but not always the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzrknight Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 It isn't likely to change - and without this topic there will just be another starting over on the same thing. Ignoring the problem is certainly the easiest option but not always the best. Fact is , since this is an MMO , a virtual world , the only control you will ever get is if BW add a restriction to the drops , like you can only need on your class loot. Like i said , for now the only solution is ignore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loendar Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Fact is , since this is an MMO , a virtual world , the only control you will ever get is if BW add a restriction to the drops , like you can only need on your class loot. Like i said , for now the only solution is ignore. And BW would be prompted to address the issue how, exactly, with everyone that is annoyed by it simply ignoring it? I'm not saying it has any chance of getting changed - I don't know. I do know that ignoring something will guarantee that it doesn't change however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzrknight Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 And BW would be prompted to address the issue how, exactly, with everyone that is annoyed by it simply ignoring it? I'm not saying it has any chance of getting changed - I don't know. I do know that ignoring something will guarantee that it doesn't change however. Since i get a rate of +- 1 x 1 i dont think it will change. Even more cause this game is a copy of WoW where being a ninja is usual , im happy we dont get cross server just because i would not even be able to ignore people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asacledhae Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Another solution would've been a round-robin looting system.. That would allow drops to be equally distributed to the team.. When an Elite/Champion goes down however, everyone on the team should get an item if something drops besides creds.. Correct me if i'm wrong, but creds are already shared between the teammates.. The item however, should be class restricted and stand alone, so each player could get his own.. No rolls, everyone's happy.. What would be better than a Champion enemy dropping a purple item, allowing everyone on the team to get it's own class-restricted version? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creed_Buhallin Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Because if heavy armour drops with lots of strength, then the "item" (defined as the physical appearance and all the mods, because when you win a need roll you get both, you can't pick and choose) then the item, as programmed by Bioware into the loot table of the boss, is intended for a Juggernaut DPS, however, if there are none in the party then it's fair game for anyone that has the slightest use of it. What makes it intended for a Juggernaut DPS? The fact that it has a lot of strength and is in a heavy armor housing? If that's the case, why allow the mods to be removed at all, or why not restrict them to being only put back in the same type of armor? A lot of those proposing more restrictive need options claim intent on Bioware's part, but there's really nothing to back that up. IMHO, Bioware created a system with an incredible amount of flexibility - I can take enhancements out of a lightsaber and put it in a blaster, or a piece of armor. None of this is class restricted. I'm not sure how you can honestly look at that system and believe they intended it to be strongly class-limited. There's nothing in the implementation of the system that suggests it, and I've seen no comments from Bioware that suggest it. Quite the opposite, in fact - they present the custom equipment item as one that's intended to allow people to strip mods out of other items to add to the look they like. Maybe there should be expanded buttons. Like need for appearance/companion/mods that defers to the need roll but is above the greed roll. button in addition to need and greed. Or would everyone just end up pressing need because they might not get the item. This would be great, if everyone agreed with your priorities. Of course, if everyone agreed with those priorities then we wouldn't need the buttons, would we? This is not the last game you played. It is a system with a huge amount of flexibility where people can get use out of all kinds of things. If you want to say that one character deserves an item even though the end result for both of them will be exactly the same, that's your choice. But it would be really nice if people could at least TRY and wrap their brains around the increased possibility in this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ispanolfw Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Four men go into a car showroom to find there's a competion to win a Ferrari. Two of the men already have one, one man has a porsche, the other has a reliant Robin, which is ready for the scrapheap. Clearly one of the four is in more need of the car. All have an equal chance to win. One of the Ferrari owners wants it for his wife, the other wants to sell it to get some capital. The Porsche owner wants it for his kid. The reliant Robin owner wants it cos he needs a car. Remember, the rules of the competition are that they all put the same effort in to win, and all have an equal chance. The Porsche owner wins, fairly. Would you consider it fair or unfair for him to keep the car, or should he give it to the reliant owner? And him winning it is fair. However after that it's up to him to decide what to do with it. I wouldn't even use the word fair for it. I personally might have given it to the guy, but that's my opinion on it, not everyone agrees. I know some richer people who have the attitude that you just don't work hard enough to have the money to buy a new car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keihryon Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 (edited) Okay, this is an interesting concept, and one that I don't believe anyone has explicitly presented (or at least that I've seen). Because now we're getting into the idea of "Who can use it more". What if it's an improvement for all the Marauder's stats, but only a few points of Endurance for the Juggernaut? And as presented, both the Juggernaut and Marauder would pull the mods to put it in their current items, so both would use it equally - why, under your "use it completely" does that fall to the Marauder? Do you really do this in every PUG you're in when an item drops that multiple people can use? Do you analyze the stats, ask people which stat they need more of (because even if it's only +3 END, maybe that's what I really need right now) or whether they're building Crit or Power? All while that little bar is ticking down? I'll admit I don't PUG a lot (yeah, I know, shocking that narcissists like me have guilds) but none of them I've been in have ever done this. There's an item multiple people can use, I don't inspect someone's stats and then berate them because it's a +2 increase for them when it would be a +7 increase for me. Do you actually do that? No I don't, I check the appearance of the item, if it doesn't look better than the orange gear I have, I roll greed...regardless of the stats. Because i know that within 1 or 2 levels I will be replacing all those mods anyway, with a much more significant increase than 2 or 3 points. How do you know that Jugg wasn't looking for that particular orange piece for his appearance? Mods are ridiculously easy to come by..so much so that it makes little sense to be a d!ck over an item that you can't wear at all when someone in your group can..and most likely went to that FP for the armor itself and not so much the mods. And I haven't had to lay ground rules for loot before hand. Most people that I have grouped with, even in PUGs still use the common courtesy method of loot...least the ones I've been in have. Edited January 31, 2012 by Keihryon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areto Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 (edited) At first I was with you about rolling on oranges designed for other classes. But now I'm pretty sure the look is worth more than the stats if the mods can be ripped out. It's easy to get the mods somewhere else, and since you are leveling in a few levels better ones will become available but that particular look might never been seen again (unlikely but still..) so if a jedi wants a cool agent style top and an agent wants a cool agent style top they may as well both roll need if one or the other of them is going to anyway. Edited January 31, 2012 by areto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keihryon Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Which is the whole point, you can't simply ignore them because they don't fit into your system. Because orange items do exist, and they do drop. So they have to be accounted for, and the system used in other games can not account for them. SWTOR has a enough stuff that's different about it, that the old systems simply do not work here, when you try to cut/paste them in. Orange Items should just drop stat-less then..stuff is only appearance items anyway. And the armoring, mods, and enhancements should drop separately. Problem solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrOrionQuest Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 It simply doesn't matter what you want to roll need on, if your server frowns upon rolling need for companion gear, or rolling need just to strip out the mods, you will soon find yourself on many /ignore lists. Keep doing it and you find yourself with very limited options as to who you group with, entire guilds will have you on ignore, your end game will by then be almost essentially gone. With no way to transfer out, or a way to get a name change, you either abide by the rules set by your server, whether you like them or not, or suffer the consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ispanolfw Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 It simply doesn't matter what you want to roll need on, if your server frowns upon rolling need for companion gear, or rolling need just to strip out the mods, you will soon find yourself on many /ignore lists. Keep doing it and you find yourself with very limited options as to who you group with, entire guilds will have you on ignore, your end game will by then be almost essentially gone. With no way to transfer out, or a way to get a name change, you either abide by the rules set by your server, whether you like them or not, or suffer the consequences. I'll be honest. In my 8+ years of playing MMOs i've seen this threat leveled at some people, but i've never actually seen it cause them any issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrOrionQuest Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I've seen it happen, usually only a handful of people get treated like this, the rest fall in line. Back in Vanilla WoW, server forums kept a ninja list, which was updated frequently, word gets around pretty fast if you're an infamous ninja, and back then since you couldn't transfer out or pay for a name change (like we have it here), people would usually re-make their entire account and start playing by the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crica Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 (edited) I've seen it happen, usually only a handful of people get treated like this, the rest fall in line. Back in Vanilla WoW, server forums kept a ninja list, which was updated frequently, word gets around pretty fast if you're an infamous ninja, and back then since you couldn't transfer out or pay for a name change (like we have it here), people would usually re-make their entire account and start playing by the rules. There are plenty of ppl (on both factions) who enjoy running group content together under the game's default loot system on the servers I play - The Harbinger and The Jek-Jek Tar. If anyone is unable to find players to run group content with under the game's default loot system on the server they are currently on, feel free to join the servers we are on and play with us. Edited January 31, 2012 by crica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ispanolfw Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I've seen it happen, usually only a handful of people get treated like this, the rest fall in line. Back in Vanilla WoW, server forums kept a ninja list, which was updated frequently, word gets around pretty fast if you're an infamous ninja, and back then since you couldn't transfer out or pay for a name change (like we have it here), people would usually re-make their entire account and start playing by the rules. And it's not like it never happens. The problem is that some people classify what a ninja is VERY broadly. I know people who would call ninja for rolling on something you'd use right there and then. I've seen people call Ninja when someone roll need on an item they can use, is actually an upgrade, but someone else wanted it and feels that it was more optimal for their class. You can see where i'm going with this and differing opinions, even if rules are discussed before hand. I'm fine that if rules are stated before hand and someone seems to hit need on everything, and I mean everything regardless of what it is, feel free to do something. But see, that's my opinion. And that's my opinion. My opinion is also to use the word "ninja" lightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts