Selecting need for loot

[Elyssandra]

I think you need to go back and read my posts again. I was proposing that people hitting need in cases where they want something will lead to more efficient loot distribution. Unfortunately some people could not get past the fact that need is written on the label, so I suggested that they pretend that there were no labels at all. Or if you wish, pink/blue or random hieroglyphics.

 

I think you need to go back and read this post - it's 50 pages of people explaining

1. the majority consensus of how loot rolls work,
   
2. the thinking behind said rules and
   
3. that we frown upon people such as OP who hit the need button when it's not an upgrade for the character they are playing without asking the group beforehand.
   

 

Playing according to loot rules that have been arrived at by majority consensus actually leads to more efficient loot distribution as well as less conflict, you may be surprised to hear.

 

If you feel that you actually DO understand and are merely proposing a new more efficient way - please feel free to explain said new way in more words than "if you want it press need" which doesn't address what want encompasses in a fair way to everyone and what the button labelled "greed" as well as the pass button do in your new system.

[river_of_Gem]

I haven't heard one "need for companions" player state they have the balls to ask if the group is ok with it before clicking need. This seems more like the type of thing someone does and hopes no one cares or notices but if caught they try to justify it after the fact.

 

If you want to need for companions, say up front and let others need for their companions too.

 

I am very again the "Need for companion" but i have asked the group to roll NEED for companion twice because the gear look very good on my comp. First time i was denied since the dps in the group need it, and the other i was allowed to.

 

But i do agree that all ppl that defend the "Need for companion" bravely in this thread do not want/dare to ask for it in the group since crying in forum is alway easier

[Lostpenguins]

But your argument of "the player already lost the roll when the piece of loot with another player's stats on it dropped" then becomes invalid. There cannot be a "first roll" to lose if the loot is not based on group composition. The marauder cannot win the "first roll" if the loot is not generated based on group composition, but in a totally random manner based on the boss's loot table. Therefore the only roll that matters is the need/greed roll and that is the one in which "social convention" denies or takes away from a player the option to roll need for a companion.

What? Yes, the marauder can. Because he had the same chance of getting something for him as the merc did. Since root drops are RNG that's a "roll" before you loot is identified. You seem to think that the boss always drops the same piece of loot. If that were the case, the there wouldn't be equal chance, but because the boss might drop something as equally useful for a marauder as it is for a merc, there's your equal chance.

 

I'm sort of flabbergasted you can't seem to comprehend that. It seems so logically simple.

[Elyssandra]

That's because it's broken right now and hasn't been fixed. It's either that or they only do that sort of loot system for tokens like Rakata drops and not some random orange/purple drop from bosses.

 

Loot drops were completely random - I remember running EV where loot that was unusable by anyone in the group kept dropping. People started protesting so EAWare 'fixed' loot rolls to only take into account the classes that were present.

However, if I remember correctly, they only went back and fixed the ops and flashpoint loot, not throughout the game. I ay be wrong though.

[Lostpenguins]

The motivation is not to compensate me for my time and effort. I get gear, but only inasmuch as it directly benefits the group.

Instead of a scenario like: "Oh, you helped out so you get some loot",

we have the following: "Oh look, this specific piece of gear that will increase your DPS has dropped. This is what you can have regardless of whether or not it's what you actually wanted."

 

The whole thing is framed in specifics of gear and stats. I'd like a system that recognizes an individual's contributions and allows them to make their own judgements about what they'd like their compensation to be. If I value some sweet looking orange body piece for a companion over a marginal upgrade piece for my character, I should be able to make that judgement call without being scorned for it. The system in place as it is right now would consistently deny me access to that until literally no one else wanted it, rather than just letting the people who actually want the item to take a shot at it.

 

I concede the point regarding freeing up commendations for further kitting out yourself and companions. Gearing in one place frees up resources to gear up elsewhere. It's some consolation I suppose.

But you seem to fail to see that a gear piece that can be used all the time by a main is of higher priority than a gear piece that can be used sometimes. That's where I stop the comparison. I don't care if it only makes a toon play 1% better and yet a companion would play 100% better if he got it. The fact is that the "100%" only happens some odd percent of the time which varies on how often the companion is used.

 

And that's why I don't consider a companion your toon: because you can't take the companion everywhere. Therefore the companion is not on the same playing field as a person's actual toon. It's somewhere above "greed", but definitely below "need". There should be a different role system in place for this exact argument, but I think BW thinks most situations are handled just fine via group communication so it's not rampant enough to warrant a change (in as much as there are other higher priorities).

[Lostpenguins]

Loot drops were completely random - I remember running EV where loot that was unusable by anyone in the group kept dropping. People started protesting so EAWare 'fixed' loot rolls to only take into account the classes that were present.

However, if I remember correctly, they only went back and fixed the ops and flashpoint loot, not throughout the game. I ay be wrong though.

You're probably right, which is why I still say that if there's 10 items, and only 2 are useful to the 2 players, then it's still equal chance which Ratajack somehow completely misses.

[RLWalker]

If you feel that you actually DO understand and are merely proposing a new more efficient way - please feel free to explain said new way in more words than "if you want it press need" which doesn't address what want encompasses in a fair way to everyone and what the button labelled "greed" as well as the pass button do in your new system.

 

Thanks for asking!

 

Need = I want it (any reason!)

Greed = I want to sell it/I don't care

Pass = I don't want crud in my inventory

 

At this point anyone can lodge an appeal, although people who greeded or passed shouldn't have any objections. This eliminates the common scenario where all the people roll greed/pass and then one person says "oh do you mind if I take..." which ends up wasting time. It also gives people a chance to get loot for odd reasons without slowing down the group. "Oh man, that would look fantastic on Kaliyo". "Dude I need that for my RP set... err /ooc". I am willing to bet that quite a few people have lost a greed roll and stayed silent because they did not want to slow down the run even though they knew that the item was going to be vendored.

[river_of_Gem]

Thanks for asking!

 

Need = I want it (any reason!)

Greed = I want to sell it/I don't care

Pass = I don't want crud in my inventory

 

 

So "sell it" is not any reason ?

 

And all reason is equal to each other

[cidbahamut]

But you seem to fail to see that a gear piece that can be used all the time by a main is of higher priority than a gear piece that can be used sometimes.

I totally understand that. I just don't agree with boiling the whole thing down into a simple math equation. From a purely mathematical standpoint, yes gearing a character provides superior results than gearing a companion, especially as it pertains to the experience of other players.

 

But here's the thing, I as an individual don't necessarily place the same weight on it. I may decide I value a cool looking shell for my companion far more than I value that blue belt that gives me +2 to my main stat. I want to be able to make that judgement call and say "I would prefer to have the shell in lieu of the belt".

 

That's where I stop the comparison. I don't care if it only makes a toon play 1% better and yet a companion would play 100% better if he got it. The fact is that the "100%" only happens some odd percent of the time which varies on how often the companion is used.

 

And that's why I don't consider a companion your toon: because you can't take the companion everywhere. Therefore the companion is not on the same playing field as a person's actual toon.

 

And again, the system as we currently have it sees my contributions only in the context of the collective and rewards them only in the context of the collective.

 

I'm still undecided on whether or not additional buttons would help to resolve the issue, but I agree that for the time being communication is the optimum workaround.

[Duco]

It is very simple. You keep repeating actions that are not desireable for anyone if everyone did them, and people will apply pressure on you to change your ways, when you are hurting others with your choices, ruining their game.

 

That's just the way it is, and until you stop doing actions that are bad for karma, you will not stop being told to change your ways by people who have already realized it is bad for all to do so.

[Elyssandra]

You're probably right, which is why I still say that if there's 10 items, and only 2 are useful to the 2 players, then it's still equal chance which Ratajack somehow completely misses.

 

Yes you're right. It's faintly possible that Ratajack has a lack of knowledge of what a loot drop looks like from a coding perspective.

It's more probable though that he's missing it because he wants to, so he can just argue for the sake of it.

 

There's a tonne of explanations & logic in this thread - far more articulate than I could be, explaining it all and he is is sticking to his position

"I defend everyone's right to press any button that they so damn choose to press and then...

I will insulate them from the social consequences of said action to the best of my ability.

 

I consider someone being ostracized for contravening social conventions in a game on the same level as discriminating racially and denying someone access to proper healthcare, self determination, the right to vote, equal wages and education.

 

Therefore I will defend said persons till my last breath.

 

One day all you fools will be making a statue for me as a pioneer of the ninja looters' civil rights movement.

In the meantime though, until we reach such enlightened times, I will refuse to divulge my toon names and the server I play on."

 

I don't know what to say to such erm logic shall we say, so I brought out the popcorn

[Lostpenguins]

I totally understand that. I just don't agree with boiling the whole thing down into a simple math equation. From a purely mathematical standpoint, yes gearing a character provides superior results than gearing a companion, especially as it pertains to the experience of other players.

 

But here's the thing, I as an individual don't necessarily place the same weight on it. I may decide I value a cool looking shell for my companion far more than I value that blue belt that gives me +2 to my main stat. I want to be able to make that judgement call and say "I would prefer to have the shell in lieu of the belt".

Yeah, but cosmetics, once again, take a back seat to stats as stats are math, and math is true. Cosmetics are subjective, and therefore not right or wrong. So objective > subjective.

 

And again, the system as we currently have it sees my contributions only in the context of the collective and rewards them only in the context of the collective.

Well, you got the loot in a collective yet you want to dismiss the collective mindset when it comes to what you want. That seems sort of selfish. A group works together to achieve goals that would be harder or impossible to achieve w/out each other, but you don't want to adhere to a mutually beneficial standard of etiquette when it comes to reward distribution in a group. You'd rather it be a ffa on the loot even though the effort to obtain it was group effort. Edited March 20, 2013 by Lostpenguins

[Elyssandra]

So "sell it" is not any reason ?

 

And all reason is equal to each other

 

Thank you for sparing me the effort

[RLWalker]

So "sell it" is not any reason ?

 

And all reason is equal to each other

 

In my mind I have a clear vision of what is need - but I do not force that on other people. So yes, all reasons are equal. It's a good thing items are no longer bound right away. It gives a chance to fix it.

[shadowrouge]

Thanks for asking!

 

Need = I want it (any reason!)

Greed = I want to sell it/I don't care

Pass = I don't want crud in my inventory

 

At this point anyone can lodge an appeal, although people who greeded or passed shouldn't have any objections. This eliminates the common scenario where all the people roll greed/pass and then one person says "oh do you mind if I take..." which ends up wasting time. It also gives people a chance to get loot for odd reasons without slowing down the group. "Oh man, that would look fantastic on Kaliyo". "Dude I need that for my RP set... err /ooc". I am willing to bet that quite a few people have lost a greed roll and stayed silent because they did not want to slow down the run even though they knew that the item was going to be vendored.

 

With this a a guideline may was well just have the system auto roll for every drop. Cause I want is I want. wither it

is to sell it or want ever. I want credits to get them I can sell drops, thus I want it. Crud in the inventory is not an issue for those that tote along a legacy repair droid. fills up, pull him out empty and you got lots of room to sell after the FP.

[Khevar]

I totally understand that. I just don't agree with boiling the whole thing down into a simple math equation. From a purely mathematical standpoint, yes gearing a character provides superior results than gearing a companion, especially as it pertains to the experience of other players.

 

...

I like to look at it this way.

 

If we're 2-manning or 3-manning a flashpoint and the other player has a companion out, then the companion contributed to the flashpoint, and is entitled to a "Need" roll for a companion gear upgrade (via the player by proxy).

 

If the companion isn't there, any gear upgrade wouldn't have benefited the run, so any gear upgrade for the companion would be "Greed"

[cidbahamut]

Yeah, but cosmetics, once again, take a back seat to stats as stats are math, and math is true. Cosmetics are subjective, and therefore not right or wrong. So objective > subjective.

Ok, but what about situations where multiple people want cosmetic items? For example, there's an orange Bounty Hunter body in Black Talon FP. It looks really sweet. Now let's imagine that a BH and an Imperial Agent are both doing a Black Talon run. The body piece drops and its stats appear to be downgrades both for the BH and for the IA's companion Kaliyo. Who's allowed to roll Need on it? The bounty hunter according to the current system. It doesn't matter that the item is a downgrade for everyone who can equip it because it can be modded for the rest of the game, but because it matches the main stat for the BH he gets to roll Need on it while the IA has to sigh exasperatedly and queue up for another run and hope it drops again and there isn't a BH in the next run waiting to scoop it up again.

Even though both players would be able to make equal use of the item, one of them would get chewed out for rolling Need while the other is simply expected to roll Need.

 

The system has flaws.

 

Well, you got the loot in a collective yet you want to dismiss the collective mindset when it comes to what you want. That seems sort of selfish. A group works together to achieve goals that would be harder or impossible to achieve w/out each other, but you don't want to adhere to a mutually beneficial standard of etiquette when it comes to reward distribution in a group. You'd rather it be a ffa on the loot even though the effort to obtain it was group effort.

Not really, I just want to be given some say in what my reward is rather than being told what my reward is. I get that the system we have now is designed to encourage optimization, but surely you can understand the basic principle of where I'm coming from? Sometimes it's ok to want what isn't best for you. It's why we sometimes eat ice cream even though we know broccoli is better for us.

[Lostpenguins]

I like to look at it this way.

 

If we're 2-manning or 3-manning a flashpoint and the other player has a companion out, then the companion contributed to the flashpoint, and is entitled to a "Need" roll for a companion gear upgrade (via the player by proxy).

 

If the companion isn't there, any gear upgrade wouldn't have benefited the run, so any gear upgrade for the companion would be "Greed"

I can sort of agree with this, but I'm just going to say this: this system would favor those who have the best geared comps with the most presence.

 

If we need to fill a dps spot, why wouldn't I get to take my Jaesa Williams with a ilvl 63 hilt, BH gear, and 700 presence over your scrub Vette wearing greens and your 300'ish presence?

[RLWalker]

With this a a guideline may was well just have the system auto roll for every drop. Cause I want is I want. wither it

is to sell it or want ever. I want credits to get them I can sell drops, thus I want it. Crud in the inventory is not an issue for those that tote along a legacy repair droid. fills up, pull him out empty and you got lots of room to sell after the FP.

 

The vast majority of people are honest and will not do such a thing. And yes, auto roll is also a good suggestion. Unfortunately this has already been eliminated from the game in the one place where it was most useful (story mode ops). Funny thing is it's the same system as WoW LFR, Diablo 3, GW2 and no one has a problem with it because they hide what other people win. This reinforces my belief that greed is the root of this problem - hide what other people win and suddenly the problem goes away! Magic!

 

Edit: Just to be clear I am not advocating such a system everywhere - only in automatically created groups.

Edited March 20, 2013 by RLWalker

[Lostpenguins]

Ok, but what about situations where multiple people want cosmetic items? For example, there's an orange Bounty Hunter body in Black Talon FP. It looks really sweet. Now let's imagine that a BH and an Imperial Agent are both doing a Black Talon run. The body piece drops and its stats appear to be downgrades both for the BH and for the IA's companion Kaliyo. Who's allowed to roll Need on it? The bounty hunter according to the current system. It doesn't matter that the item is a downgrade for everyone who can equip it because it can be modded for the rest of the game, but because it matches the main stat for the BH he gets to roll Need on it while the IA has to sigh exasperatedly and queue up for another run and hope it drops again and there isn't a BH in the next run waiting to scoop it up again.

Even though both players would be able to make equal use of the item, one of them would get chewed out for rolling Need while the other is simply expected to roll Need.

 

The system has flaws.

The system has flaws in as much that it can only predict math and not something subjective like cosmetics. And you're arguing a very small, small point as I rarely see anyone fighting over a loot drop because of it's aesthetic appeal. It's even more limited in "level ups" because certain classes can't wear certain things. Like a Merc and a Agent wouldn't fight so muuh over gear as the Merc wears Heavy and the Agent wears Medium. If either one or both are fighting over armor that is weaker than what they can wear, then I'm not even sure what to say about people who will gimp their stats to "look cool".

 

Not really, I just want to be given some say in what my reward is rather than being told what my reward is. I get that the system we have now is designed to encourage optimization, but surely you can understand the basic principle of where I'm coming from? Sometimes it's ok to want what isn't best for you. It's why we sometimes eat ice cream even though we know broccoli is better for us.

1) I understand it fine. It's that you want to put a higher priority on your own agenda than group agenda, but expect the group to be okay with this thinking. I don't see how you can rationally think that.

 

2) Bad analogy is bad. It's more like you want a person to understand that you're taking their piece of the pie away because you're going to give it to your friend who wasn't even there to help get the pie.

Edited March 20, 2013 by Lostpenguins

[AsheraII]

With this a a guideline may was well just have the system auto roll for every drop. Cause I want is I want. wither it

is to sell it or want ever. I want credits to get them I can sell drops, thus I want it. Crud in the inventory is not an issue for those that tote along a legacy repair droid. fills up, pull him out empty and you got lots of room to sell after the FP.

Ideally, there indeed wouldn't be any player interaction regarding loot distribution. Simply give the same piece to everybody. The BOP Flashpoint loot isn't really that valuable to roll need for vendoring anyway. And I've never met anyone in game who kept all his or her companions geared, so simply giving everybody who's present the exact same item would definitely solve that problem as well, and make playing with other companions more worthwhile. Since an undergeared companion simply IS a POS.

 

Still, I only roll need for the cosmetics anyway, whether it's for myself or a companion, doesn't matter to me.. I'm not one of those slackers who needs gear from leveling flashpoints for the stats. I can make way better myself, and generally am already wearing way better than what those flashpoints would provide me.

 

So I end up rolling need on maybe 5% of all the loot, simply because I like how it looks, and plan to use it either myself or on a companion. The other 95% is PASS. I don't even bother to greed on it, it's soo not worth it.

 

Got a problem with my smuggler getting that heavy aim gear? Too bad, if you needed it for the stats then I was probably already carrying you, so stop the complaints. Be glad that you may end up with something for one of your undergeared companions instead.

[cidbahamut]

The system has flaws in as much that it can only predict math and not something subjective like cosmetics. And you're arguing a very small, small point as I rarely see anyone fighting over a loot drop because of it's aesthetic appeal. It's even more limited in "level ups" because certain classes can't wear certain things. Like a Merc and a Agent wouldn't fight so muuh over gear as the Merc wears Heavy and the Agent wears Medium. If either one or both are fighting over armor that is weaker than what they can wear, then I'm not even sure what to say about people who will gimp their stats to "look cool".

 

 

1) I understand it fine. It's that you want to put a higher priority on your own agenda than group agenda, but expect the group to be okay with this thinking. I don't see how you can rationally think that.

 

2) Bad analogy is bad. It's more like you want a person to understand that you're taking their piece of the pie away because you're going to give it to your friend who wasn't even there to help get the pie.

I think this is the part where we agree to disagree.

 

Thanks for making our discussion more than just a screaming match.

[RLWalker]

Ideally, there indeed wouldn't be any player interaction regarding loot distribution. Simply give the same piece to everybody. The BOP Flashpoint loot isn't really that valuable to roll need for vendoring anyway. And I've never met anyone in game who kept all his or her companions geared, so simply giving everybody who's present the exact same item would definitely solve that problem as well, and make playing with other companions more worthwhile. Since an undergeared companion simply IS a POS.

 

Still, I only roll need for the cosmetics anyway, whether it's for myself or a companion, doesn't matter to me.. I'm not one of those slackers who needs gear from leveling flashpoints for the stats. I can make way better myself, and generally am already wearing way better than what those flashpoints would provide me.

 

So I end up rolling need on maybe 5% of all the loot, simply because I like how it looks, and plan to use it either myself or on a companion. The other 95% is PASS. I don't even bother to greed on it, it's soo not worth it.

 

Got a problem with my smuggler getting that heavy aim gear? Too bad, if you needed it for the stats then I was probably already carrying you, so stop the complaints. Be glad that you may end up with something for one of your undergeared companions instead.

 

Another great suggestion. I only see people complaining about loot in group finder, and that is exclusively for leveling and story. I don't think it matters if everyone gets a copy of the loot. It does in HM/NM ops though, don't want gear flooding to invalidate progress.

[Elyssandra]

Ok, but what about situations where multiple people want cosmetic items?...

In this case what is to stop the IA from simply being communicative (gasp terrible concept I know) and saying hey can I also need on that piece?

You're also assuming the BH is going to roll need - maybe he greeds or passes because he doesn't think it's as sweet as the IA thinks it is.

I have never yet been told no when I asked "can I need for off spec?" and if I was told no it wouldn't mean that it's terribly unfair either - it means someone else in the group has an actual need for it above my cosmetic or off spec reasons. I then have to find some other means of getting that piece.

 

People are free to say no. If the IA really wants that piece he has multiple ways to get it including:

1. He can pug again hoping he wins the roll.
   
2. He can form a group with friends or guildmates to help him get the piece
   
3. He can form a group e.g. "GLF more for Hammer Station - I want the hammer station pants" and thus pug with the pre agreed idea that he gets the particular piece if it drops. This is how my trooper got her hammer station pants because I liked how it looked on her.
   

 

 

Not really, I just want to be given some say in what my reward is rather than being told what my reward is....

 

How far are you going with this? Are you going to put a cunning hat on your head because you don't like being told by Bioware that your trooper needs aim instead?

[Khevar]

I can sort of agree with this, but I'm just going to say this: this system would favor those who have the best geared comps with the most presence.

 

If we need to fill a dps spot, why wouldn't I get to take my Jaesa Williams with a ilvl 63 hilt, BH gear, and 700 presence over your scrub Vette wearing greens and your 300'ish presence?

Of course, this works in reverse, too.

 

If you pull out your super companion, then it isn't going to need any gear.

 

Remember, there's always Greed. If no player toon currently in the flashpoint can get a direct gear upgrade the loot drop, then it would be a Greed roll.

 

And as some of the other posters mentioned, there's always the option of saying, "Hey, can I have this for xxx reason?"

Edited March 20, 2013 by Khevar