ferroz Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Not possible if the other players are holding out. People don't always click NEED on everything (in fact, they don't) until it really matters. Then it's too late. Or, did you not realize that?So, you're saying tat they don't need on everything, and instead just need on the stuff that they really want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferroz Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) You are staunchly defending the right to need for companions, yet you attempt to trivialize someone else's definition of need. In other words, you are contradicting yourself.No, he points out a contradictory argumentthen disagrees with the label that's being applied.then makes a snide comment about someone being upset due to their sense of entitlement. nowhere in that does he trivialize someone else's definition of need. so there's nothing contradictory. Edited February 23, 2012 by ferroz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setanian Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 What exactly does that add to the point I made? I'm pretty sure you stated we had no choice in the matter. I just proved you wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhughthom Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I'm pretty sure you stated we had no choice in the matter. I just proved you wrong. How does "we all rolled random" prove you had a choice in how to roll? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharee Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 This statement makes 0 sense; an upgrade for a companion is a human player's upgrade. This seems to be an important point many do not understand. Saying "you did not roll for your character, you rolled for someone else!" is wrong. A player's companion is not "someone else". The "companion" abilities are in fact player abilities. The only difference is visual fluff, in that the ability does not appear to fire from the main toon but from the pet following it. That's just pretty graphics Saying the companion's ability is not mine just because it appears to come from my companion is like saying the smuggler "XS freighter fly-by" is not a smuggler's ability because it is the XS freighter that is dropping the AOE bomb and not the smuggler. That's just nonsense. They are all your - the player's - abilities. The only difference is the visual fluff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irusan Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 No, he points out a contradictory argumentthen disagrees with the label that's being applied.then makes a snide comment about someone being upset due to their sense of entitlement. nowhere in that does he trivialize someone else's definition of need. so there's nothing contradictory. So his sense of entitlement is valid and important. The other parties is not. Seems kinda contradictory to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setanian Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 How does "we all rolled random" prove you had a choice in how to roll? We had a choice to do what we wished.. Roll or pass or sell. All the buttons do now is give you the same choice with an extra one which is 'greed' which you will if you neither 'need' the item but can still do with it to sell it. The need button is there so you can state your claim as a 'need' on that item and thereby have a higher chance of winning it than those rolling greed. What you want to do is force others to not roll 'need' so it increases your chances even more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhughthom Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) Ah, okay, I misinterpreted when you said "we didn't have a button." I thought you meant there was no choice at all. Edited February 23, 2012 by johnhughthom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laokoon Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) to say that in your vast experience as an mmo gamer, you've never seen any variation on this "community driven rule" leads me to believe that you aren't as experienced as you lead on. i'm not saying "community driven rules" don't exist, but i do know for a fact that they vary from game to game, server to server, and even guild to guild. i also know they change over time, and what once may have been considered fair game may now be considered ninja, and vice versa. no, you don't speak for the "overwhelming majority". if you did, posts like this wouldn't be showing up in forums. this argument will rage on until the developers do something. like i said, wow solved this problem years ago. but i wouldn't expect the developers of this game to even know about that. "need" in an mmo is a subjective term. it always has been. that's because there is absolutely nothing that anyone "needs" in an mmo. the only arguments that can be made are as to whether your desire for an object in question is more potent and more philosophically valid than someone else's. bearing that fundamental truth in mind, the argument should not be between people of differing opinions in the forum, but between the gamers and the developers. because the developers are the ones to blame for every single incident of ninja'ing that has ever occured, for the simple reason they they are the enablers. they make it possible. so take your argument to them. and i suggest sending them a typed up copy of your universal rules of looting to make sure they fix it the way you want it fixed. I'd like to ask a fairly simply question: Why are you being so rude to Vecke? He hasn't attacked you or your point of view, at least in his previous two posts. He has been very level headed and pleasant, yet you choose to be rude to him and his statements. Why? You have seemingly chosen to take an antagonist approach to a discussion with a person who simply wants to have a civil discussion. Please note that my above statements have made no judgements about you or your view points. The only thing I have done is express the opinion that you are being rude. That may be offensive to you and you may disagree, but I am fairly certain that if you looked at your own statements a little more objectively, you would see they are rude. If you don't think so, take them to a third party (as I am in this conversation between you two) and ask them if your statements and tone are rude or not. Try taking them to your mother (yeah, hackneyed, but presumably this is a person who helped for your impression of rude versus civil) and see what she thinks. Would you feel appropriate making those statements and arguments in a work place environment? If not, they are probably inappropriate because they are rude. Just take a breath, and have a civil discussion. There is no need to get angry unless someone is actually attacking your character or your believes unfairly. Edited February 23, 2012 by Laokoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vecke Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I came into this thread thinking there was a basic universal acceptance of NBG rules. While that may have been my personal experience in past MMOs I've played, I'm really thinking that in TOR, it's not the case at all. So far, I've seen people say that if you roll need on your companion, you're a "jerk", "dbag", "greedy little piggy", and "grade A ******", among other things. No gray area in those statements. These people are saying that action makes you a jerk. Period. I've also seen it stated that a person rolled Pass on an item, then felt slighted when - after he rolled pass - another person then asked in the group if he could roll need for a companion. So let's say there's a new player that has decided TOR is going to be his first MMO. He's leveling along with his companion and groups up for the first time since getting the companion. A piece of equipment drops that his companion needs. Here are some rules this person needs to know: Even though his companion needs the item, rolling need is improper because his player character is the only one that warrants a need roll. So even though his companion needs it, the proper roll is greed. Okay. After that, there's an item that he doesn't need, but wants to sell it for credits. Other players want it for their companion. This is an item he wants for money, so he rolls greed. Then the other player that wanted it for their companion gets mad because he should have rolled pass on it, because greed was appropriate for the person whose companion needed it, and pass was appropriate for the person that just wanted it for money. Now, even if this new player decided he wanted to be prepared so he not only bought the game and read the manual, but even went out and bought the Strategy guide... None of those things would have even hinted to him that in some cases, you roll greed when you need and pass when you want it for greed. I'm starting to discover that "universally accepted" community loot rules are just a mess to someone that isn't experienced with pugging (and even then it's not always clear). I've really been swayed on this debate to think the best option is to follow two rules: 1. Always speak up at the onset of the group. 2. If you don't (for whatever reason) speak up at the creation/joining of the group, just assume everyone will roll need for their companions. No matter what your personal opinion is, I don't see how those two rules wouldn't just solve everything, and would be (IMO) the best rule for the community in regards to loot drama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midichlorian Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Greedy people do greedy things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vecke Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) I'd like to ask a fairly simply question: Why are you being so rude to Vecke? He hasn't attacked you or your point of view, at least in his previous two posts. He has been very level headed pleasant, yet you choose to be rude to him and his statements. Why? You have seemingly chosen to take an antagonist approach to a discussion with a person who simply wants to have a civil discussion. Please note that my above statements have made no judgements about you or your view points. The only thing I have done is express the opinion that you are being rude. That may be offensive to you and you may disagree, but I am fairly certain that if you looked at your own statements a little more objectively, you would see they are rude. If you don't think so, take them to a third party (as I am in this conversation between you two) and ask them if your statements and tone are rude or not. Try taking them to your mother (yeah, hackneyed, but presumably this is a person who helped for your impression of rude versus civil) and see what she thinks. Would you feel appropriate making those statements and arguments in a work place environment? If not, they are probably inappropriate because they are rude. Just take a breath, and have a civil discussion. There is no need to get angry unless someone is actually attacking your character or your believes unfairly. I really appreciate that post. Thanks. A long time ago, I've learned that someone's approach to debate on the forums isn't a real indication of their overall personality, so it never really bothers me. Later, I discovered that this person just "debates hard". I don't agree with his techniques or approach, but when I filtered through the emotion on it, I saw he made some good points. Edit: I've also learned a long time ago that my tendency to make really long speeches often gives people the impression I'm an insufferable know-it-all. While I'm not, I can see how it would come across that way. Edited February 23, 2012 by Vecke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setanian Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Ah, okay, I misinterpreted when you said "we didn't have a button." I thought you meant there was no choice at all. There were no buttons, there you deciding to type '/random' or pass. Or you deciding to sell the item to someone else in the group. In saying that; Wow primarily brought the idea of class related items to the genre (there were some before). This and the fact that WoW brought a much younger audience tot he genre, realized a new emerging problem. And that was, that the etiquette shown before in other games, primarily populated by an older generation, was fast becoming untenable. The main impetus of NBG came from WoW. It had a much larger audience, which was larger than the combined audiences of previous MMOs. So the NBG system which had been around and used by some, suddenly became the norm. The NBG system is a worthwhile system if, and only if, everyone complies or conforms with it. If the equilibrium is ever populated and so broken by just one player not conforming/agreeing etc, the whole system falls apart. But, the NBG system also has its faults. It's major fault has been that people who do agree to it, force their usage of it upon others who might not agree. Neither party is correct. Neither party is wrong. You just have to play with those who agree to the same principles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhughthom Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I think it's easy to say you should speak up when you join a group, but a lot of people don't want to be the person to bring it up, thinking it would appear that they are trying to impose their loot preferences on the others, or that they are only interested in grouping for the loot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setanian Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Greedy people do greedy things. Now explain the 'greed' bit please.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
universeman Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 The need button is there so you can state your claim as a 'need' on that item and thereby have a higher chance of winning it than those rolling greed. What you want to do is force others to not roll 'need' so it increases your chances even more. The issue here is that the NEED button *FORCES* anyone who hasn't also clicked NEED to PASS and completely eliminates their "chances" of getting the item. This makes the GREED button useless and completely eliminates the usefulness of the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vecke Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I think it's easy to say you should speak up when you join a group, but a lot of people don't want to be the person to bring it up, thinking it would appear that they are trying to impose their loot preferences on the others, or that they are only interested in grouping for the loot. I can respect that, even though I disagree with the approach. My point is, if you're not willing to speak up, you should be prepared for the loot to go in a way you disagree with. If you're fine with that, then there's no problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharee Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I wish they would just rename the buttons to "want to use this in some way" and "want to sell this for profit". That would settle the debate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laokoon Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) I really appreciate that post. Thanks. A long time ago, I've learned that someone's approach to debate on the forums isn't a real indication of their overall personality, so it never really bothers me. Later, I discovered that this person just "debates hard". I don't agree with his techniques or approach, but when I filtered through the emotion on it, I saw he made some good points. Edit: I've also learned a long time ago that my tendency to make really long speeches often gives people the impression I'm an insufferable know-it-all. While I'm not, I can see how it would come across that way. You're welcome. Check out the first link in my sig, I think you will enjoy it. I think more people need to be level headed and rational in their discussions. Edited February 23, 2012 by Laokoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setanian Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) The issue here is that the NEED button *FORCES* anyone who hasn't also clicked NEED to PASS and completely eliminates their "chances" of getting the item. This makes the GREED button useless and completely eliminates the usefulness of the system. I don't agree with that. When you get tot he loot stage you have 3 choices. Need, greed, pass. You and only you, decides which button to press. At that point everything is fair. Now comes the debatable topics. a) Is rolling need when you intend to put the item on a companion valid? A: Yes it is. You have a valid need for that item, and you are entitled to roll how you wish. b) Does the Healer have a right before rolling to the healer loot? A: No they do not. They have no right to the gear until they win it. c) If in b above, you 'need'ed for you companion, are you a ninja. A: No you are not. You have a valid roll and a valid need. d) Is waiting until the others have rolled, and then roll need to guarantee the item valid. A: Valid yes, but morally wrong. e) Is the person 'pass'ing on items fairer than the person rolling 'need' A: No. Each have a fair choice, each makes it themselves. f) Is NBG fairer than everyone 'need'ing. A: Absolutely not. It just ensures that one class will get loot. Edited February 23, 2012 by Setanian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malpracticex Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Greedy people do greedy things. they sure do!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhughthom Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I can respect that, even though I disagree with the approach. My point is, if you're not willing to speak up, you should be prepared for the loot to go in a way you disagree with. If you're fine with that, then there's no problem. I can only go by my experience in the game so far, which is my first mmo. In pretty much every group I've been in people have only needed for items their class can use. I have only had somebody need for an item not suited to their class once, and even that was a one off in a group I did three or four quests with. With that experience behind me, I naturally assumed that only needing for items your character can use is the norm, and I don't really see the need to specify rules before grouping, especially considering the point I made earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setanian Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 they sure do!! I agree, greedy people try to force other into rolling how they want so they can get more loot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
universeman Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I wish they would just rename the buttons to "want to use this in some way" and "want to sell this for profit". That would settle the debate Actually, it's more like: 1) Gimme a chance 2) Let the other players decide if I have a chance 3) Don't want Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharee Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) You're welcome. Check out the first link in my sig, I think you will enjoy it. There is a problem with that chart in your sig In the first step, you announce you refuse to discuss if the other person cannot envision changing their mind. But what about yours? Lets assume that you are wrong, and the other person is right, and knows beyond all doubt that he is right. Following the flowchart, you will never give him a chance to change your mind, because you will refuse to even discuss the matter. That's a very dogmatic approach to what should be a rational discussion Sorry for the offtopic, but couldn't resist Edited February 23, 2012 by Sharee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts