Morridan Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Do you play with your companion 100% of the time like your main character? NO. So nobody should roll need for a character that isn't out 100% of the time against a character that is. It's that simple. I play my character with my companion out for more time than you play your toon at all, does this mean my companion should get the gear over you because of time in use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morridan Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Because my preference doesn't cause loot drama, while needing for your companions does. Wrong.... You assuming that your way of looting is right is what causes the drama, not the fact that others roll need for their companions. You could be in a group with 3 people that firmly believe that their companions = group PCs and even as the minority, cause loot drama when you start to complain that YOUR loot rules are more accurate than the loot rules of the other 3 party members. Causing drama isn't exclusive to those who roll need for companions, but is more exclusive to those who whine and threaten people because they think its wrong to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjmc Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Causing drama isn't exclusive to those who roll need for companionsI suspect that people that roll need for companions tend not to get too upset about how other people roll, and therefore do not instigate loot drama very often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morridan Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I suspect that people that roll need for companions tend not to get too upset about how other people roll, and therefore do not instigate loot drama very often. Exactly.... Every one of these threads which generally devolve into argument, was created by someone who thinks their unwritten loot rule is right, while those who don't share that loot rule are wrong... You will never see someone who feels companions = PCs start a thread to complain about losing loot to a companion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grecanis Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I suspect that people that roll need for companions tend not to get too upset about how other people roll, and therefore do not instigate loot drama very often. Of course they don't care ..that's how they justify thier more liberal definition of need. It doesn't occur to them that the actual act of rolling need on a companion was the instigator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vecke Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) At this point, I don't care about the individual opinions on whether companions warrant a need roll. Both sides (when you remove the extremists and trolls) make some good cases for their respective opinions. I just think it's unreasonable to suggest it's safe to assume everybody in the group is going to roll one way or the other. Even if the majority agree on it, you don't know the personal gaming experience of each person in the group. You don't know how often they've pugged or duo'd, or grouped with a guild that uses a specific rule. I think anything that isn't indicated by the game itself should be clarified at the creation of the group, and if you don't do that, you have no right to get upset if someone rolls in a way you disagree with... if the way they roll is within the scope of what the game itself suggests. Not what the game allows (it allows people to roll need on everything), but what it actually suggests. So what does the game suggest, right now? It suggests that rolling need on a companion is the appropriate action. Loot drops. Your companion can use the loot. Your PC can't. You get a pop-up for the loot that has three choices: Pass. That doesn't apply because you don't want to pass. Greed. This actually has a credit (money) sign beside the word, suggesting you should hit that only if you want the item for money. You don't want to sell the item for money. Need. Your companion needs this gear. It's the only option that even comes close. Through the process of elimination, this is the only option the game gives you that is appropriate to this situation. If you remove any unwritten rules or standards, the game itself only gives one option that's applicable, and that option is need. The game itself suggests (not just allows, but suggests) that you roll need for companions. To expect someone to automatically know that - in this case - you roll greed even though you don't want to sell it and even though your companion needs it is an unreasonable expectation. And if you want to bring Bioware's stance on this into things, they seem to agree with me. They have actually stated it's not as clear in this game as it is in others. They also said they will probably add a "need for companion" button later, which will clear it up. Great. I look forward to that. But in the meantime, even BW agrees that the game mechanics make this issue confusing and that you should clarify it at the formation of the group. That is the developer's answer. People sometimes leave that first part out when they quote them on this issue. Again, I'm not arguing against PC > Companion. I'm arguing against going into a group, assuming everyone agrees with you, then kicking people that roll need - even if you did not specify it at the onset of the group. I just don't understand how people can act like this is common sense when the game itself suggests - right now - that rolling need for companions is the appropriate action. Edited February 25, 2012 by Vecke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vecke Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Just FYI, I made a rule after my last comment. If nobody replies within 15 minutes, it means I win the thread. So if you reply now... no matter what that reply is... you're just being a sore loser. The time limit has expired and I won the thread. Thank you. Also, this isn't some allegory about rolling for companions. I'm just saying I won the thread. That is all. Good day, sirs and madams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zunayson Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I play my character with my companion out for more time than you play your toon at all, does this mean my companion should get the gear over you because of time in use? I think he was referring to effectiveness. Just because your companion is out for slightly more than he is, he probably does more tanking/damage/healing than your companion (Unless he's just THAT bad, which I highly doubt). In any case, as he does more healing or whatever than your companion, YES it will benefit society as a whole. +1 cunning for him affects HIM more than +1 cunning for your companion affects YOU. think of it like this: Role need on it even though you can't equip it. It helps you 0%, but will help him more. He should get it. Why not now? Think of it this way: A companion can do 1/3 the damage, healing, and tanking. This means that 3 seconds of companion damage for YOU that benefits YOU is equal to 1 second of HIS damage that HE does that benefits HIM. So your companion has to be out more than 3 times than he is out for your companion to do more damage/healing/tanking than him. If that's the case, then yes that's what he is referring to. Once again; the reason a warrior won't roll need on intellect gear is because (not only because he can't use it) it benefits the warrior LESS than it benefits the Mage or what have you. Although it also happens that a warrior won't use it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zunayson Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Wrong.... You assuming that your way of looting is right is what causes the drama, not the fact that others roll need for their companions. You could be in a group with 3 people that firmly believe that their companions = group PCs and even as the minority, cause loot drama when you start to complain that YOUR loot rules are more accurate than the loot rules of the other 3 party members. Causing drama isn't exclusive to those who roll need for companions, but is more exclusive to those who whine and threaten people because they think its wrong to. It's a double ended sword, right? People and society do what is accepted as a majority. Yes, some people find it acceptable to go out naked. Most people don't. That's why you don't see people naked all the time in public. Yes, some people may get offended at the fact that he was clothed. **** analogy, but you get the point... hopefully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastigar Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 On Tarris group of 16 level 32-37 take down ancient one world boss. 3 agents in group. A nice purple protype drops clearly meant for agents. All roll need. A sith assasin also rolls need and wins, saying he needed it for his companion. *** Haha! Son of a *****! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmdatcs Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) From this week's Q&A: Frung: Have you considered adding a "companion" loot roll option? Damion Schubert: We've discussed it and have a design for it - when we do this, we will make it so you can only roll 'need' on items that your advanced class is meant to use in one of its specs. I do not currently have an ETA on this feature. Although this doesn't stop people that use companions with the same primary stat as their character, the devs will be putting an end to most occurrences of this selfish practice eventually (hopefully soon). And the fact that they are ending it, shows that they do not consider a companion upgrade a "need" situation. Edited February 26, 2012 by Notannos content, no warning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terminova Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) From this week's Q&A: Frung: Have you considered adding a "companion" loot roll option? Damion Schubert: We've discussed it and have a design for it - when we do this, we will make it so you can only roll 'need' on items that your advanced class is meant to use in one of its specs. I do not currently have an ETA on this feature. Although this doesn't stop people that use companions with the same primary stat as their character, the devs will be putting an end to most occurrences of this selfish practice eventually (hopefully soon). And the fact that they are ending it, shows that they do not consider a companion upgrade a "need" situation. Opinion not supported by anything but a feeling of entitlement to loot. Right now there is no other option to get gear that drops while grouped for a companion without competing with people who don't even want the item without rolling need. That's all there is too it. You can believe on faith that it's selfish and "douchy" when it's simply a logical conclusion of the loot system we currently have. I would not doubt that if there was currently a button just for companions this would not be an issue, but there is not one, and it is. The game is tuned for having an active companion for soloing and it is in each persons best interest to gear both their primary companion in good gear just as they do their character. Seriously, any of you who think companions are not that important, level 1-50 without one without being 2-3 levels over the content and without any assistance from anyone else while not running space missions over and over and over. Edited February 26, 2012 by Notannos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vecke Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Although this doesn't stop people that use companions with the same primary stat as their character, the devs will be putting an end to most occurrences of this selfish, douchy practice eventually (hopefully soon). And the fact that they are ending it, shows that they do not consider a companion upgrade a "need" situation. I'm glad they're implementing something to make it more clear within the in-game mechanics. This is something I've said would be a good from the start. However, in my opinion, your attitude in this post is far more destructive to the gaming community than the act of rolling need for a companion ever was. I'm not talking about you personally. I'm sure your position is coming from a good place, and I'm sure you're a very respectful and fun person to play with in-game. But the attitude of your post is disrespectful, closed-minded, and downright mean to anybody that might have a different view on companions' importance... not to mention people that might be new and doing exactly what the current game designs suggests they do. To demonize anybody that sees this differently is wrong. Many of the people defending a Need roll in this thread have made it clear that they are incredibly generous players. Not one person in this thread is saying, "I think I should get to roll Need on my companions, but you don't get to." They all know that it means their own PC will lose to companions. It's not a jerk move. It's a different perspective, and to insult, blacklist, and demonize these people for a difference of opinion is far more detrimental to the community than rolling need. If a group lays down a policy at the beginning of a group and someone agrees to it, then does the opposite... that person is a jerk. But that's because they're a liar, not because they have a different philosophical approach. When you remove any unwritten rules that require experience in pugging to know, the current system advocates rolling need. Demonizing someone that roll need when it was not covered at the beginning of the group is wrong. I happen to think the devs agree with me that it's not so clear-cut. "Need vs. greed isn't as simple in our game because of companions, as well as Orange Gear and mod extraction." Please explain what that dev means by this quote. I'm glad they're going to try to remove the confusion... but make no mistake, that's all they're doing. They're fixing a system that they've admitted is confusing. That's all. If I'm misunderstanding your point or reading into what you're saying, I apologize in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparckus Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) Opinion not supported by anything but a feeling of entitlement to loot. Right now there is no other option to get gear that drops while grouped for a companion without competing with people who don't even want the item without rolling need. That's all there is too it. You can believe on faith that it's selfish and "douchy" when it's simply a logical conclusion of the loot system we currently have. I would not doubt that if there was currently a button just for companions this would not be an issue, but there is not one, and it is. The game is tuned for having an active companion for soloing and it is in each persons best interest to gear both their primary companion in good gear just as they do their character. Seriously, any of you who think companions are not that important, level 1-50 without one without being 2-3 levels over the content and without any assistance from anyone else while not running space missions over and over and over. They are not important enough to screw over live players. Greens are fine for them 1-50 they don't NEED blue/orange/purple gear that other players can use. Seriously can't wait for the new system to come, too many selfish people. Edited February 26, 2012 by Sparckus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terminova Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 They are not important enough to screw over live players. Greens are fine for them 1-50 they don't NEED blue/orange gear that other players can use. Seriously can't wait for the new system to come, too many selfish people. Says the person who wants to lock gear down just for themselves... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coriolan_Martius Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Why would "need" for a pet be justified in this end-game? We can only use them for dailies ... which are so easy that you could do most without said pet. Furthermore, you can buy greens and get tons of blues if you do end game for 1 or 2 week. Heck I have all my pets with orange + purple mods or blues after 3 weeks at end game. To deny another player a hard to get drop in a FP so that you can "waste" it on a pet is indefensible. I always "pass" on anything I don't need because I want to make friends not hoard loot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparckus Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) Says the person who wants to lock gear down just for themselves... Not for me, for other players that can make good use of the items rather than someones NPC pet. The devs disagree with your viewpoint, which is why they are implementing what they have announced. Edited February 26, 2012 by Sparckus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terminova Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) Not for me, for other players that can make good use of the items rather than someones NPC pet. The devs disagree with your viewpoint, which is why they are implementing what they have announced. You don't even know my viewpoint. Why would "need" for a pet be justified in this end-game? We can only use them for dailies ... which are so easy that you could do most without said pet. Furthermore, you can buy greens and get tons of blues if you do end game for 1 or 2 week. Heck I have all my pets with orange + purple mods or blues after 3 weeks at end game. To deny another player a hard to get drop in a FP so that you can "waste" it on a pet is indefensible. I always "pass" on anything I don't need because I want to make friends not hoard loot. I don't have a pet, I have a companion. Pets don't use gear, companions do. Edited February 26, 2012 by terminova Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vecke Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Why would "need" for a pet be justified in this end-game? We can only use them for dailies ... which are so easy that you could do most without said pet. Furthermore, you can buy greens and get tons of blues if you do end game for 1 or 2 week. Heck I have all my pets with orange + purple mods or blues after 3 weeks at end game. To deny another player a hard to get drop in a FP so that you can "waste" it on a pet is indefensible. I always "pass" on anything I don't need because I want to make friends not hoard loot. One side is quite literally saying, "Oh, I see your companion needs that as well as my PC. Go ahead and roll need on it and we'll let the roll decide." The other side is saying, "Oh, I see your companion needs that as well as my PC. You have to roll greed so I'm guaranteed to get this loot." How can you possibly claim the first side is trying to hoard loot. It's different perspectives on the value of a companion and demonizing those people is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparckus Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 You don't even know my viewpoint. You support rolling need for a companion? That is specifically what I was referring to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terminova Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 You support rolling need for a companion? That is specifically what I was referring to. Then you have no clue as to what my viewpoint is. Especially when you claim the devs disagree with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparckus Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Then you have no clue as to what my viewpoint is. Especially when you claim the devs disagree with it. So you are against rolling need for companions? Which one is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coriolan_Martius Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) Please point out where I demonize them ... I said the position can't be defended! I stand by my argument. On the one hand a player needs a drop for himself ... and on the other a player is taking to decorate his or her pet for the purposes of dailies. "How can you possibly claim the first side is trying to hoard loot. It's different perspectives on the value of a companion and demonizing those people is wrong." Edited February 26, 2012 by Coriolan_Martius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparckus Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Please point out where I demonize them ... I said the position can't be defended! I stand by my argument. On the one hand a player needs a drop for himself ... and on the other a player is taking to decorate his or her pet for the purposes of dailies. "How can you possibly claim the first side is trying to hoard loot. It's different perspectives on the value of a companion and demonizing those people is wrong." Trying to extrapolate the argument to meet their own ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terminova Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 So you are against rolling need for companions? Which one is it? You haven't been reading the threads I've been posting in on the issue, and I'm not really in the mood to explain something that is really complicated to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts