People who ninja for their companions

[souloferdrick]

Strawman argument (and this is for all that replied to this). They acknowledged a problem caused by companions/mods/appearance (which is all the last sentence you quoted is.. an acknowledgement of the problem) and then went on to state how they could fix it. Also acknowledged that such a fix would make it to were need rolls would prioritize PCs over companions. How is it so difficult for you guys to read what they wrote and get that they absolutely agree that PC's > Companions? No matter what the specifics of the new system are, the fact remains that Bioware stated it would incorporate PC > all else need rolls.

 

Well, its all really just one big joke. BW knows that implementing a new modified roll system won't really fix anything, theyre just going to do it to appease the vocal majority. There certainly isn't any logic behind it, never has been, especially when you throw in the fact that they saddle you with 5 gear dependent companions with little in the way of gearing them post level 50 unless youre a masochist.

 

Any one with any kind of time invested in any MMO knows that the implementation of any kind of loot system, be it by developers or by your guild leader, doesn't eliminate the source of the problem, which is greedy, entitled miscreants. Those are the people lobbying for doing things their way and their way only: no loot to companions.

 

Never has a loot system made people behave better or stop a ninja who wants to screw you. You may deter him or her every once in a while but you aren't changing or fixing anything.

[Phrexxia]

I think I speak for many when I say this...stop acting like a child. I roll the same quests/op/flashpoint yada yada, and roll for items. Sometimes I get the loot sometimes I dont. I give/trade/buy/sell...In the end, I get what I want. Dont get mad, there is more loot. If you are an adult, act like it. No one needs ****. Have a nice day. : )

[Setanian]

I don't understand this. Genuinely, I don't understand.

 

He does understand... But to admit he does is to lose his entire argument. And he can't be seen to lose.

[DizzyStrife]

They did a better job of explaining their position, honestly.

 

No actually they didn't in the first 20 or so pages that I read.

 

 

 

You posted because you wanted to argue with people while standing on a soap-box demanding they accept your word as gospel truth.

 

Welcome to the forums, enjoy your stay.

 

Oh so now you assume to know me and my intentions.

 

self·ish   [sel-fish]

adjective

devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.

 

Quoted from dictionary.com

 

greed·y   [gree-dee]

adjective, greed·i·er, greed·i·est.

excessively or inordinately desirous of wealth, profit, etc.;

 

Also quoted from dictionary.com

 

Now you tell me how the definitions of those words are any different from how I stated it? I don't expect people to accept my words as gospel truth. But guess what, what I said IS the TRUE definition of those words.

 

I posted to try too bring some clarity on the subject too some people. That THIS is why people are saying if you need for you companion over another player character, WHY they consider you being selfish and greedy. I wasn't posting to argue BECAUSE I even STATED that it was not MY VIEW ON THE SUBJECT. I really hope that is clear enough for you.

[Setanian]

Well, its all really just one big joke. BW knows that implementing a new modified roll system won't really fix anything, theyre just going to do it to appease the vocal majority. There certainly isn't any logic behind it, never has been, especially when you throw in the fact that they saddle you with 5 gear dependent companions with little in the way of gearing them post level 50 unless youre a masochist.

 

Any one with any kind of time invested in any MMO knows that the implementation of any kind of loot system, be it by developers or by your guild leader, doesn't eliminate the source of the problem, which is greedy, entitled miscreants. Those are the people lobbying for doing things their way and their way only: no loot to companions.

 

Never has a loot system made people behave better or stop a ninja who wants to screw you. You may deter him or her every once in a while but you aren't changing or fixing anything.

 

I'm pretty sure BW has left this, the longest, biggest running thread going for good reason.

 

From it they'll look at the real arguments and the real replies. They dump all the fluff and make a decision based on what they feel is the fairest compromise.

 

As I said earlier, this is not just about loot. It is about their whole game going forward. What they decide may set precedents for all other games to follow. Getting it wrong, will not be nice.

[terminova]

Secondly Massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) is a genre of role-playing video games in which a very large number of players interact with one another within a virtual game world. Quoted from Wikipedia.

 

A Single-player video game is a video game where input from only one player is expected throughout the course of the gaming session. "Single-player game" usually implies a game that can only be played by one person. Also qouted from Wikipedia.

 

Play Star Wars™: The Old Republic™ and be the

hero of your own Star Wars™ saga in a story-driven

massively-multiplayer online game from BioWare and LucasArts. Quoted from the SWTOR website.

 

You tell me which definition this game falls under.

 

Since you need help....I mean, you did ask, after all.

 

Thirdly, the fact that they will use it too help other players, maybe even you, in future group situations, where as your companion won't, is not besides the point. Taking something that is ONLY for your solo play is seen as greedy and selfish by most people. Taking something that is used in that current as well as future FP's OP's or PvP by the player character which helps EVERYONE involved, is not.

 

People used the same reasoning in WoW to try and keep others from rolling on gear for the other specs they used for years.

 

AGAIN, I have never said I agree with this point of view. I am just trying to clarify the thinking of the people that say it is selfish or greedy. BUT it seems that everyone who quotes my posts seems too think that I am defending this point of view when I am not.

 

If you don't agree with it, don't try to explain or clarify it. The people who espouse it are perfectly capable of doing so themselves.

[Setanian]

No actually they didn't in the first 20 or so pages that I read.

 

 

 

 

 

Oh so now you assume to know me and my intentions.

 

self·ish   [sel-fish]

adjective

devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.

 

Quoted from dictionary.com

 

greed·y   [gree-dee]

adjective, greed·i·er, greed·i·est.

excessively or inordinately desirous of wealth, profit, etc.;

 

Also quoted from dictionary.com

 

Now you tell me how the definitions of those words are any different from how I stated it? I don't expect people to accept my words as gospel truth. But guess what, what I said IS the TRUE definition of those words.

 

I posted to try too bring some clarity on the subject too some people. That THIS is why people are saying if you need for you companion over another player character, WHY they consider you being selfish and greedy. I wasn't posting to argue BECAUSE I even STATED that it was not MY VIEW ON THE SUBJECT. I really hope that is clear enough for you.

 

But.. them claiming it is greedy is not equal to fact. They have been disproved many times.

[DizzyStrife]

If you're simply explaining why other people think I'm greedy that's fine. I know.

 

They think I'm greedy because I will not allow them to force me to hand over loot they wrongly think they are entitled to.

 

We've just hd one other poster say he'll throw his toys out of the pram if he loses need vs need.

 

I mean really...

 

Lol yeah I saw that. It's ridiculous. It's stupid too get angry over some pixels. And I am gladly that finally someone understands what my original post was about. It seems other people just don't get that. Thank you.

[Revenaught]

First, Yes you did acknowledge that, but you still argued it when no argument was needed. You really can't argue that premise because what i stated is exactly why people see it as greedy and selfish. I mean come on.

 

So your saying I have no right to disagree with what those people are saying and trying to force down my throat because you just said is so clearly and eloquently? Really? I guess I'll just sit down and shut up then since no argument is needed after you have decreed how it should be.

 

Secondly Massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) is a genre of role-playing video games in which a very large number of players interact with one another within a virtual game world. Quoted from Wikipedia.

 

A Single-player video game is a video game where input from only one player is expected throughout the course of the gaming session. "Single-player game" usually implies a game that can only be played by one person. Also qouted from Wikipedia.

 

Play Star Wars™: The Old Republic™ and be the

hero of your own Star Wars™ saga in a story-driven

massively-multiplayer online game from BioWare and LucasArts. Qouted from the SWTOR website.

 

You tell me which definition this game falls under.

 

Oh this game is definitely a MMO but that has nothing to do with the fact that a large majority of it is playable solo.

 

Thirdly, the fact that they will use it too help other players, maybe even you, in future group situations, where as your companion won't, is not besides the point. Taking something that is ONLY for your solo play is seen as greedy and selfish by most people. Taking something that is used in that current as well as future FP's OP's or PvP by the player character which helps EVERYONE involved, is not.

 

It is entirely besides the point. They, and you since you are arguing this so stridently, are trying to tell me that I may not roll on something I helped achieve because I might use it in Solo content. The fact that if it goes to them they will also use it in solo content proves their hypocrisy. Just because they also use it in group content has no bearing on the fact that they will also use it in solo content just like they are saying I am not allowed to do. Only if the loot in question clearly states on it that it is only usable in group content with a full group of players will they be reasonable to ask that it only be used on player avatars.

 

AGAIN, I have never said I agree with this point of view. I am just trying to clarify the thinking of the people that say it is selfish or greedy. BUT it seems that everyone who qoutes my posts seems too think that I am defending this point of view when I am not.

 

You may claim that you have never said you agree with this point of view but you are arguing very strongly against those who don't automatically fall in line with it. I begin to wonder just how much you do agree with it.

[souloferdrick]

I'm pretty sure BW has left this, the longest, biggest running thread going for good reason.

 

From it they'll look at the real arguments and the real replies. They dump all the fluff and make a decision based on what they feel is the fairest compromise.

 

As I said earlier, this is not just about loot. It is about their whole game going forward. What they decide may set precedents for all other games to follow. Getting it wrong, will not be nice.

 

Based on what Ive seen, Im not going to string myself out on the hope that they will impact future titles when all they can seem to do is borrow ideas from other firms. And all the added robustness of WoW's roll system didn't eliminate ninja's or dbags, it just empowered them because what a change of that nature does: it takes the power equally divided amongst everyone and gives it to a target group who then exploits it for themselves.

 

The sensible and rational thing to do would be to leave it alone and leave the responsibility of finding groups that appeal to your special needs to the individual.

[DizzyStrife]

I've said in many previous posts that this is the predominant way we play. And when it's just us two or three, we roll need for companions. However, we do occasionally pug. And when we pug, we roll greed for companions, just because we don't want to risk any drama.

 

I don't, however, agree that this is the most fair method. I don't agree that it's universally true that - just because your gameplay style doesn't require companions but mine does, that you should have priority over me if we're both in the same pug. I abide by that rule, don't get me wrong, and I accept it.

 

But I don't understand how you think I don't have a right to that loot and I don't understand how I'm being selfish for asking that we just get an even roll for it. You're against a fair roll for it. You think you are entitled to the loot, even though it'll help me and my grouping as much as yours.

 

And I especially don't understand why you're suggesting I don't have a right to give my opinion about it. I've said in at least a dozen posts that I pug occasionally, but mostly play with three specific people. Why does that mean I can't speak up with my opinion?

 

I don't know how to quote two people at once, but i am going to qoute in here what Setanian (sorry if i misspelled your name) said after a couple back and forths.

 

If you're simply explaining why other people think I'm greedy that's fine. I know.

 

They think I'm greedy because I will not allow them to force me to hand over loot they wrongly think they are entitled to.

 

We've just hd one other poster say he'll throw his toys out of the pram if he loses need vs need.

 

I mean really...[/QOUTE]

 

Does that help? I NEVER said those were MY beliefs. I was simply trying to explain WHY other people were saying you were greedy or selfish for rolling need for you companion over another player character. That is also why I was saying I don't know why you were quoting me because I was not saying this is the way it should be or that you don't have a right too an opinion. I was SIMPLY trying to give a clearer definition of WHY others were saying that people that do that are greedy or selfish. I thought I made that clear in my original post when I clearly stated that was my intention. I have a feeling people only read the first part and didn't even bother with the rest of it.

[terminova]

No actually they didn't in the first 20 or so pages that I read.

 

I've followed this for awhile, they've done a really good job explaining their position.

 

Oh so now you assume to know me and my intentions.

 

Well, you haven't really proven me wrong by not continuing to argue something that isn't your view.

[Setanian]

Based on what Ive seen, Im not going to string myself out on the hope that they will impact future titles when all they can seem to do is borrow ideas from other firms. And all the added robustness of WoW's roll system didn't eliminate ninja's or dbags, it just empowered them because what a change of that nature does: it takes the power equally divided amongst everyone and gives it to a target group who then exploits it for themselves.

 

The sensible and rational thing to do would be to leave it alone and leave the responsibility of finding groups that appeal to your special needs to the individual.

 

Don't know what you're talking about now mate. I've never seen one Ninja loot on ToR.

 

Know why? You cannot Ninja on ToR. The only loot you can get on ToR is via a roll of the dice.

 

Is that maybe why some people are fighting that we should just pass the loot to them?

[ConanArthurLager]

In the end people have to communicate about how to distribute loot. Not solely on the forum (since not everyone reads the forums), but in-game.

 

Ideally this could happen before doing a quest/flashpoint. So people have the option to reform the group if it's obvious that they cannot agree on loot distribution. At this point there is no loot drama yet. Everything is good and everyone goes their own ways.

 

Of course people can forget to settle this beforehand. In this case it can be considered good etiquette to communicate before simply pressing greed|need|pass (yes you can even pass, it's the tiny little X in the window that had popped up). A simple question (e.g. "Do you mind if I take this item for my companion/my other toon?") would already suffice.

 

The point is if loot drama happens it's already too late. People are going to (A) remember a toon or (B) the guild and maybe © blacklist the toon or the whole guild. And this will have an impact on group activities (flashpoints and raids) later on.

[DizzyStrife]

I wouldn't say 'leet'... That's a such a kiddy term to use.

 

I'd use a term oh say, hardcore.

 

I have my reasons for using the word leet in that situation.

[souloferdrick]

Don't know what you're talking about now mate. I've never seen one Ninja loot on ToR.

 

Know why? You cannot Ninja on ToR. The only loot you can get on ToR is via a roll of the dice.

 

Is that maybe why some people are fighting that we should just pass the loot to them?

 

I'm not going to play the semantics game with the word ninja. Whether its technically capable in the game or not, you know what Im getting at (or maybe not but its not my fault if this is the case).

 

The point, again, is that nothing good comes from implementing things like this no matter how sound the theory looks on paper because theory and practice are miles freakin' apart in this area.

 

The same arguments here were made for things like Master Looter or DKP. We need ML so some scrub/ninja doesn't walk off in my duds but what ends up happening is the ninja's just become the master looters and laugh in your faces for outright lobbying and begging for the tool they just scammed you with.

[Galbatorrix]

I primarily group with my wife and my best friend. Between the three of us, we usually duo or trio. We do FPs and Heroics. We play slowly and alt often.

 

Companions are absolutely vital to the survival of our group, so when we play together, we roll need on companions.

 

On the occasions that we pug, we roll greed on companions because we don't want drama and we respect that in-game, the majority doesn't necessarily agree with our view.

 

However, my personal opinion is that rolling Need on companions is the more fair way. Companions are a major part of my gameplay and my regular group depends on my companions gear greatly. If I don't have a geared companion, they suffer for it. I think (just my opinion) that my "need" for a dropped item is just as valid as your "need" for the dropped item.

 

However, if you and I were to pug together, I would only roll greed on that item. I basically give the item to your PC, even though we have a different opinion on it. I do that out of respect for the majority and out of respect for you. You, however, don't say, 'Hey, if you think that companion is really important, you should roll need too, and have a fair chance at it. We'll just let the roll decide."

 

I give it to you. That's what I do and how I play. I don't give you a chance to get it. I give it to you flat out.

 

You don't think I deserve to even have a chance for that gear, even though I participated in the kill.

 

Now, just because I happen to have a different opinion on the matter, you stand by your statement that I'm greedy?

 

I don't understand this. Genuinely, I don't understand.

 

 

 

Sounds to me that you only need for companions when in a premade group with like minded people. So, I don't understand why you'd associate yourself with my statement anyway.

 

 

Look, my biggest issue here is that I really am trying to be fair and decent with the way I loot. I draw a line and it allows everyone to win the loot that is best used by their PCs. Which again, helps them in all aspects of the game, not just while soloing. In turn, I expect the same respect. Some people in this thread making statements like...

 

"I'll need on what ever I want and you can't question it! Also, I don't have to ask permission before the run either!"

 

... leaves people like me out to dry. I end up losing class loot and companion loot to people like this because I ALWAYS pass on other peoples class loot when they hit "need". Even if I need it for a companion, I still hit pass in an attempt to be decent. Obviously I'm hoping that that same person will be decent back and my in my experience in this game, they normally are. There are exceptions, but that's what /ignore is for.

 

 

If you want to roll need on companions, fine. State it before the run so everyone get's a "fair" roll instead of just the people that play by your philosophy.

[Revenaught]

Don't know what you're talking about now mate. I've never seen one Ninja loot on ToR.

 

Know why? You cannot Ninja on ToR. The only loot you can get on ToR is via a roll of the dice.

 

Is that maybe why some people are fighting that we should just pass the loot to them?

 

Actually I have to disagree with ya there. I have had someone in game come up and take the loot from an open world chest while I was fighting the mob defending it. I belive that is the true original reason the term ninjalooter started being used for.

 

But in regards to the Flashpoints and Operation loot most of this is about no it can't happen.

[Revenaught]

Sounds to me that you only need for companions when in a premade group with like minded people. So, I don't understand why you'd associate yourself with my statement anyway.

 

 

Look, my biggest issue here is that I really am trying to be fair and decent with the way I loot. I draw a line and it allows everyone to win the loot that is best used by their PCs. Which again, helps them in all aspects of the game, not just while soloing. In turn, I expect the same respect. Some people in this thread making statements like...

 

"I'll need on what ever I want and you can't question it! Also, I don't have to ask permission before the run either!"

 

... leaves people like me out to dry. I end up losing class loot and companion loot to people like this because I ALWAYS pass on other peoples class loot when they hit "need". Even if I need it for a companion, I still hit pass in an attempt to be decent. Obviously I'm hoping that that same person will be decent back and my in my experience in this game, they normally are. There are exceptions, but that's what /ignore is for.

 

 

If you want to roll need on companions, fine. State it before the run so everyone get's a "fair" roll instead of just the people that play by your philosophy.

 

Why do they have to state their preferences? Not to say it's not polite to do so. But why only them? Why don't you state your preferences before the run starts and save yourself so much potential grief?

[Setanian]

In every game there is flow of struggle for supremacy.

 

In this thread we have seen it on 2 sides;

 

The anti-companion campaigners and

the pro-companion campaigners.

 

The flow or struggle has been one of reaching a point where one side has made a clear distinction as to effect the outcome of the loot.

 

This struggle has been fought with good debate, questions and answers and indeed a fair share of pure troll posts.

 

2 things in the main have come tonight.

 

1. The NBG campaigners when faced with arguments of fact and fairness will post anything (usually with embedded insults) to attempt to negate the facts put before them.

 

2. The pro-campaigners, have stuck to facts and fairness. (Ok, I got an infraction for calling someone stupid) but hey.. (gimme some leeway here Mr. Mod)

 

All along the pro camp have faced the continued insult of the 'ninja'

 

Now, let's loot at that term.

 

A ninja is a person who takes some loot to which they were not entitled.

 

Loot entitlement comes at the point at which you have won a roll and can there-fore be called the winner of that loot.

 

Back to the debate;

 

The anti camp have claimed that they should have entitlement to loot (the type of loot is irrelevant as both camps have companions and need to gear them, both camps have player characters that they need to gear)

 

Now, claiming an entitlement to something that you have not yet won, and then claiming that the winner should have given the loot to you is, by definition, claiming an entitlement to loot you have not won.

 

So, Mr Devs, and indeed BW at a large, I ask you;

 

Before you go changing something that will fall over to the next MMOs, please look at this, and make your own determinations as who here are the actual ninja looters.

 

Remember what we said about 'entitlement'...

Edited February 24, 2012 by Setanian

[Vecke]

If you're simply explaining why other people think I'm greedy that's fine. I know.

 

They think I'm greedy because I will not allow them to force me to hand over loot they wrongly think they are entitled to.

 

We've just hd one other poster say he'll throw his toys out of the pram if he loses need vs need.

 

I mean really...[/QOUTE]

 

Does that help? I NEVER said those were MY beliefs. I was simply trying to explain WHY other people were saying you were greedy or selfish for rolling need for you companion over another player character. That is also why I was saying I don't know why you were quoting me because I was not saying this is the way it should be or that you don't have a right too an opinion. I was SIMPLY trying to give a clearer definition of WHY others were saying that people that do that are greedy or selfish. I thought I made that clear in my original post when I clearly stated that was my intention. I have a feeling people only read the first part and didn't even bother with the rest of it.

 

I did read it all, and with all due respect, my first reply wasn't to you at all. It was to the point you made. I said it was simply untrue. I didn't care if you believed it or not. I was just saying that the point was actually untrue. I wasn't debating you. I was debating the point.

 

Then you replied saying that YOU believed it was true.

 

NO it is not untrue. IF you wanna talk about heroics or low level FP's or FP's that you out level, sure there you would be right, But are you honestly going too tell me that you are going to run an at level FP with a companion over a player character? And even then, an under geared player character is better than a geared companion unless you know some people that can actually micromanage themselves AND their companion better than another player character. I don't see that happening very often. Then we get into PvP and OPs where companions are not an option at all.

.

 

Those were your opinions, or at least it sure looked like it to me. You didn't say, "Other people think that's not untrue." You said, "NO it is not untrue." When I gave a counter-opinion to that, you then said you don't even know why I'm debating this. I explained why I'm debating it (because I do pug occasionally).

 

I really don't see how I did anything wrong here by debating these points.

 

That said, if you're saying now that it's not your opinion, then we don't have to continue on it and can chuck it off to a miscommunication.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Vecke

[terminova]

Sounds to me that you only need for companions when in a premade group with like minded people. So, I don't understand why you'd associate yourself with my statement anyway.

 

Look, my biggest issue here is that I really am trying to be fair and decent with the way I loot. I draw a line and it allows everyone to win the loot that is best used by their PCs. Which again, helps them in all aspects of the game, not just while soloing. In turn, I expect the same respect. Some people in this thread making statements like...

 

"I'll need on what ever I want and you can't question it! Also, I don't have to ask permission before the run either!"

 

... leaves people like me out to dry. I end up losing class loot and companion loot to people like this because I ALWAYS pass on other peoples class loot when they hit "need". Even if I need it for a companion, I still hit pass in an attempt to be decent. Obviously I'm hoping that that same person will be decent back and my in my experience in this game, they normally are. There are exceptions, but that's what /ignore is for.

 

 

If you want to roll need on companions, fine. State it before the run so everyone get's a "fair" roll instead of just the people that play by your philosophy.

 

This is your problem in a nutshell: you expect people to do something, you want them to do something without even bothering to ask them. If you do not ask them, how can you expect them to do something or not do something?

[Setanian]

Actually I have to disagree with ya there. I have had someone in game come up and take the loot from an open world chest while I was fighting the mob defending it. I belive that is the true original reason the term ninjalooter started being used for.

 

But in regards to the Flashpoints and Operation loot most of this is about no it can't happen.

 

I see your point and yes, I know the feeling. But no, Ninja is taking something you are not entitled to take.

 

An open world chest is 'open' and therefore open to anyone. I know how ya feel, had it done to me many times, but that's a side issue.

[DizzyStrife]

But I need to gear my companion to get to the next level Fps/OPs/PvP. At which point I will be able to help you and others.

 

You dis-allowing me to gear my companion is not helping 'everyone' (note how I didn't need to shout) and is selfish.

 

tut tut..

 

You're argument is flawed to the extreme.

 

Emphasizing != Shouting

 

tut tut...

 

I thought we cleared up what I was aiming for in this discussion in a previous post and that I was not dis-allowing you too gear your companion. Have you lost track of your own posts? And if anyone's argument is flawed, it is yours. I've not once had any problem lvling up to do the next FP, OP or PvP because my companion doesn't have FP gear. I get plenty of upgraded gear during solo play too keep my companion well geared without taking it from another character player. Don't know why some others seem to have a problem doing that themselves.

 

I'm the type that will never roll need over another player character for my companion because I choose not too. Not because I think it's wrong or because others think it's wrong. It's just a personal choice of my own. Now if everyone rolls greed, I will then ask if they mind if i take it for my companion. If they don't mind, then I need it. If someone does mind, then I greed it. I show common courtesy when grouping with others. But that is just my personal choice.

 

Clear enough?

[ArtMonster]

I just "eeny meeny miney mo..."

 

and the result is the button I click.

 

.