Setanian Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 This is the bottom line regardless of stance on the topic. The only "bad guys" are the ones who agree to loot one way and then alter that to suit their needs when the situation presents itself. I think *everyone* agrees on that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
souloferdrick Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Taking gear for your companions when the rest of the group votes the idea down is obviously "not intended" by the developers Not a single person has argued that this (^) was what the they had in mind. Only that everyone should communicate and make sure theyre on the same page. And yea, anyone doing that covertly is a jerk. But there will always be jerks no matter what you do. The defense is centered around why even considering giving an FP drop to a companion is a blight on humanity and must be destroyed with a certain inquisitorial firmness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larce_Apollo Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Agree on a term of looting/loot beofre you do anythign with a group, if someone violates it, kick them and black list them. About the only thing you can do, regardless of one's "morals" of the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferroz Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Why do you always resort to ad-hominen attacks?it' what he does best. Some, yes...many others have explained clearly why they have the stance they have in a reasonable and non attacking way.As I've said several times, I have yet to see an explanation of why it's a "jerk move", in several 1000+ post threads. And yes, of course I won't because it would be just as much of a waste of time as the initial presentation to you.Like I implied before: that's a cop out. Seriously, if you can't sum up some of the reasons in under a minute, I don't see why I should believe that they exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galbatorrix Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Had player A made their feelings known at the start, player B may not have rolled need on 4th item? Player A's way doesn't upset anyone. Player B's way does. I thought the post was pretty clear on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saurakk Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 I think *everyone* agrees on that lol I wouldn't say everyone but most... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setanian Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 This is a beautiful example that highlights EXACTLY what happens and why Player As get upset. It's having the courtesy not returned. And here's another beautiful example.. Boss 1: Healer Woot! Healer gear NEED healer wins drop Boss 2: Healer Wow healer gear NEED healer wins drop Boss 3: Healer sorry guys gotta go Homework to do ! grp disbands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferroz Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Not a single person has argued that this (^) was what the they had in mind. To be fair, there were one or 2 very obvious trolls in some of the earlier threads that said that, but I haven't seen any of them chime in recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vecke Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Ive seen this repeated over and over again for some 300 plus pages now and not a single one of those thousands of posts have ever bothered to explained why? Why? That's not a mistake or something the authors are simply glossing over. There is no way to logically defend yourself with this position without exposing yourselves as complete hypocrites (again, since you are arguing for the same thing; the ability to do what you want with loot) and thus, no reason to be taken seriously at all. Whats stopping you from playing with people who agree with you right now? Nothing. You're not a victim so why pretend? I think I can explain why. Just know, I'm not defending the position. I just think I know why. Because, in their own experience in other MMOs, they've found that the conventional wisdom is "If your character participated in the fight, he gets a roll." That community etiquette helped prevent people from rolling for alts. Was that actually the conventional wisdom? I don't know. I certainly thought so, because that was the basic rule in the overwhelming majority of the pugs I participated in during my time with various other MMOs. I'm the first to admit, though, that my experience is anecdotal. Maybe it isn't the conventional wisdom, even though it's what I almost always experienced. Maybe it was just a trick of odds for me. But it's clear these folks believe it is the conventional wisdom. Now, they take that conventional wisdom and are translating it to this game and applying it to companions. The problem is, companions don't equate to alts. It's a new paradigm. It's a new construct, and I don't think they're taking that into account. They're placing a companion in the same loot category as an alt, and they think they're adhering to conventional rules of etiquette by doing so. But the fact is, there are no conventional rules of etiquette for companions because they're a new element. These folks believe this very strongly, and I don't think they are being hypocrites. I do, however, think they're refusing to see that this is a new element and there isn't a "conventional wisdom" just yet. Maybe I'm wrong there too, but that's what I'm seeing from this thread. When I first came to this debate, I actually was sort of on their side when it comes to pugs and companions. Several people here have altered my opinion though. I think I was making some incorrect assumptions about what is "generally accepted" in the community. Of course none of this changes the fact that the one absolute cure for this issue is to simply speak up at the creation of the group if it's important to you. Don't assume everyone else agrees with you. Just ask. That truly solves the problem. After that, if someone says they'll do one thing and then does another, it's no longer about philosophical approaches. It's about lying, which is much easier to judge the right and wrong on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThiborF Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Sorry, 9 times out of 10, player A's going to be upset over this. Player A's actions will never upset player B. Why should player A be the one to speak up before the run? If it means so much to you that you can see yourself being upset by the potential outcome AND choose not to voice your opinion beforehand, you're equally as liable for that outcome. If you can't or are unwilling to communicate then you're setting yourself up for potential issues in any relationship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darne Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Heh, it's funny you characterize me without even knowing me or how I play. I do dailies solo, because it's faster and quicker. The vast majority of my time is spent exactly as you describe. I don't know where the LFG vs general chat thing came from though. Because it's awful I don't want to hijack the thread as we have a good dialogue going, but I remember in other games where the LFG function was actually good and used by players. As a healer or tank, within seconds of throwing up that LFG, I'd get whispers saying "want to join for some X?" I just don't think rolling need for companions is legitimate behavior knowing another player could use it. Unless the community sits down and decides on how to deal with these situations, I'll always pass or greed on something I don't want or truly need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darne Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 And here's another beautiful example.. Boss 1: Healer Woot! Healer gear NEED healer wins drop Boss 2: Healer Wow healer gear NEED healer wins drop Boss 3: Healer sorry guys gotta go Homework to do ! grp disbands. that example implies a companion healer is as good as a human player. 9/10 that's no where near the case. even a beginner who's SWTOR is his first mmo, can do better than mako. In that case, mostly likely (depending on what you're doing) your group would have to start over and find a new HUMAN healer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vydor_HC Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) Because it's awful I don't want to hijack the thread as we have a good dialogue going, but I remember in other games where the LFG function was actually good and used by players. As a healer or tank, within seconds of throwing up that LFG, I'd get whispers saying "want to join for some X?" I just don't think rolling need for companions is legitimate behavior knowing another player could use it. Unless the community sits down and decides on how to deal with these situations, I'll always pass or greed on something I don't want or truly need. -nods- I understand what you're saying. I will go with a majority opinion in a group just to be social, even if its a rule I don't agree with. Generally the groups I run with, there isn't much debate going on about rolling need for a companion, if the player needs it, they need it. But I respect that others have issue with it and I can live with that. I don't get emotional about gear though, it doesn't matter much to me, I just like to discuss things on these boards and try to do it with logical arguments. I fail miserably more often than not. Edited February 22, 2012 by Vydor_HC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferroz Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 I just don't think rolling need for companions is legitimate behavior knowing another player could use it. Why? How is this different than "I just don't think rolling need is legitimate behavior knowing another player could use it. " I don't see a difference. Unless the community sits down and decides on how to deal with these situations, I'll always pass or greed on something I don't want or truly need.Likewise; but my definition of need isn't the same as your definition of need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setanian Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Player A's way doesn't upset anyone. Player B's way does. I thought the post was pretty clear on that. Well lets look at why he is upset? Because he felt he was playing one way and the other player was playing his way. When it came to the crunch loot for player A, he expected to be handed the gear by default. But, he wasn't and was forced to use the most fairest thing int he world. A coin toss. And he lost. I know exactly where you are coming from. And it has already been made very clear by all, that once loot rules are stablished, breaking that agreement is just plain bad form. But what you're now doing is insisting that players inform others if they intend to roll for companions. What I'm saying is, hang on.. Why doesn't everyone just tell everyone else. THis placing the onus on one player is just silly. You want to make all the rules yourself. and if anyone dares disagree with you, you let fly with the ad-hominen attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThiborF Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 -nods- Exactly right, and the players should be the ones to deal with it. Leave the looting system as open as it can be, give players more choice and let the community handle offenders as needed. I see that as the best approach. Actually my ideal dev-implemented loot system would cover that. I would like to see a set number of loot option buttons in a priority order with BLANK labels that the group leader then populates. And when people join the group they are presented a pop-up that if they click "Accept" then they're in the group and if they click "Decline" removes them from the group. This way the group leader is responsible for setting the precedent every time. I would advocate for a mechanism that stores one or more "presets" so that you can create them once and save them and not have to type them in every time. This would allow you to have a PuG set, Guild set, FP set, OP set, etc. It still would not rule out a person rolling counter to it BUT, it would make it clear (as clear as the group leader creates their button labels) what the loot rolling rules for the group are AND that everyone in the part clicked "Accept" to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galbatorrix Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 And here's another beautiful example.. Boss 1: Healer Woot! Healer gear NEED healer wins drop Boss 2: Healer Wow healer gear NEED healer wins drop Boss 3: Healer sorry guys gotta go Homework to do ! grp disbands. Just pull out your companion healer. I mean, they're just as good as having Humans in your group, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saurakk Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Seriously, if you can't sum up some of the reasons in under a minute, I don't see why I should believe that they exist. Waste of time but will post it again why main's should take priority over anyone's companions. You can play your main w/o companions. You cannot play your companion w/o your main. You can play your main w/ any companion you have. You cannot play one of your companions w/ any other companion you have. The main's are constant. Companions are situational and variable. You like to claim your main has 6 wrist slots, and 6 chest slots, etc. Myself and others do not agree with that viewpoint. Again, presented reasoning other than I told you so in a logical format. Pretty much fact. Does not mean you have to interpret those facts the same way, but there is a valid line of reasoning presented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setanian Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 that example implies a companion healer is as good as a human player. 9/10 that's no where near the case. even a beginner who's SWTOR is his first mmo, can do better than mako. In that case, mostly likely (depending on what you're doing) your group would have to start over and find a new HUMAN healer. No it's implying I've seen that happen so many times. Win the gear they need/want and leave the group. But by god if you break their NBG rules you're the bad one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferroz Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) that example implies a companion healer is as good as a human player.A healer companion is better than a human player that isn't present, having logged off... But that's not what he's saying at all. He's not making a comparison about the usefulness of human vs companion healers in any way.... 9/10 that's no where near the case. even a beginner who's SWTOR is his first mmo, can do better than mako.As I recall: companions are excellent at clearing the dot in Taral V; better than several human healers I've seen. Edited February 22, 2012 by ferroz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferroz Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Waste of time but will post it again why main's should take priority over anyone's companions. You can play your main w/o companions. You cannot play your companion w/o your main. You can play your main w/ any companion you have. You cannot play one of your companions w/ any other companion you have. The main's are constant. Companions are situational and variable. You like to claim your main has 6 wrist slots, and 6 chest slots, etc. Myself and others do not agree with that viewpoint. Again, presented reasoning other than I told you so in a logical format. Pretty much fact. Does not mean you have to interpret those facts the same way, but there is a valid line of reasoning presented.How does this, in any way, making hitting need for a companion a jerk move? It does not support that position at all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vecke Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Why? How is this different than "I just don't think rolling need is legitimate behavior knowing another player could use it. " I don't see a difference. Likewise; but my definition of need isn't the same as your definition of need. Because they think the companion is less important to the game or the group than a PC is. Not saying it's right, and I'm not saying they have the right to say you're wrong, but that's why. They do see a difference. I'm not defending them, just answering why. I see a lot of folks saying they don't understand why. I think it's pretty clear. They think a companion holds less value than the PC. To ask why is no different than asking why you see them as part of your character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darne Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 -nods- I understand what you're saying. I will go with a majority opinion in a group just to be social, even if its a rule I don't agree with. Generally the groups I run with, there isn't much debate going on about rolling need for a companion, if the player needs it, they need it. But I respect that others have issue with it and I can live with that. I don't get emotional about gear though, it doesn't matter much to me, I just like to discuss things on these boards and try to do it with logical arguments. I fail miserably more often than not. Haha, it's all good. It's always refreshing to find someone that doesn't "L2P" or "QQ more" come backs when trying to talk things out. I don't get upset if it's greens, or even blues. I know those are a dime a dozen, but those oranges and purples I feel like a human can use better. And I'll answer that below. Why? How is this different than "I just don't think rolling need is legitimate behavior knowing another player could use it. " I don't see a difference. Likewise; but my definition of need isn't the same as your definition of need. Your definition of player is also different too I think. Your companion is part of your "player" for you, if I understand you correctly. I don't think he is. We can sum it up to the gear usage. Most people I don't think run dailies by themselves with their companions at lvl 50. Most people do PvP or HM FPs/OPs dailies. That requires their character. Not their companion. While your companion is off on his diplomacy mission with that full rakata gear you have on him, 5 other players out there are running FPs/OPs minus one of those pieces. It's about gear usage. Human players put it to better use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saurakk Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 How does this, in any way, making hitting need for a companion a jerk move? It does not support that position at all... Where did I say it was a jerk move? It is simply reasoning why rolling need for companions over someone's main is frowned upon by many. If you cannot see the reasoning in that then there is not much to say, but as I said...you have had valid reasons justifying why people disagree with hitting NEED for a companion over a main. Its all opinions anyway but I am highlighting for you why people take stance they do. I have not input any name calling or personality profiling into my post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terminova Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 I'm trying to make a point that, as the group leader, I have to make decisions. And I'm going to act on those decisions. When any semblance of a working LFG tool comes online, you won't have any leg to stand on when posturing that someone else that was randomly grouped with you should do as you say when it comes to loot. I'm being quite serious. There are. And there are threads about those. Neither of us actually knows if BioWare even considers this a real problem. What I'm gathering from the solutions you have failed to actually outline, is a system only slightly harder to abuse. Bioware is currently working on the NBG system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts