Selecting need for loot

[AsheraII]

Well, I really don't care whether people roll for their companion or not. Seriously. Yes, I've missed out on some nice pieces by others needing on it. But just as often, I simply passed the roll for things for my own class anyway, because I already crafted way better mods for a shell that I actually liked. When I roll need, especially in leveling content, it's ENTIRELY cosmetic.

 

I've actually had a trooper freak out once in Black Talon for rolling need on the trooper chestpiece AND winning it.

Never mind that he was already wearing that very same chestpiece anyway.

It was heavy, it had aim, so he somehow felt entitled to it.

 

Why I needed on it? Well, it was heavy, it had aim, it looked pretty nice, so it was perfect for Corso.

 

But overall, a crafter can make the same and way better stuff than those items from flashpoints. The only thing unique about them is their shell. they're the only part that really matters. Especially during the leveling content, only noobs look at the stats, since they're oblivious to the simple fact that those stats are available litteraly everywhere. They'd actually be slacking if their character DIDN'T have those stats on their gear already.

[nateslice]

My character is more important than your companion, just as your character is more important than my companion.

 

I don't consider my companion at all when it comes time to Need or Greed on loot. I'd appreciate it if you'd extend the same consideration to me and pass on stuff your companion could use.

 

You have two tank companions, two DPS companions, and a healer companion. If companions were intended to be considered for Need/Greed/Pass, then there'd be no need whatsoever for Greed, because everyone would Need everything. After all, no matter what drops, one of your companions can use it if you can't.

[Firemedicjedi]

Companions have no place in group content. Your companion didn't help earn that gear, so why should they get that gear piece over a player in the group that actually contributed to the fight? That seems pretty selfish to me. Companions are easy enough to gear outside of FPs, and the gear earned in flashpoints is meant for the characters in the group, not their companions. In case this doesn't make sense, consider this - FPs are based on teamwork, so why should your companion who is not a member of the team, get a need roll on loot equal to that of a group member? Food for thought.

[Ratajack]

I'm still wondering if you're trolling. I know this is annoying to hear if you aren't, but I've been reading your posts and have no idea how someone can come to the conclusions you've arrived at.

 

Look, players A, B and C aren't denying player D the loot at all - they're asking for equal chances for everyone. Why is player D more entitled to the loot than the other players? Because they "choose" not to need? "For charity" presumably (going by the example in one of your other posts)?

 

Where does this mindset that you're defending lead? When are people supposed to select greed then? When they're feeling generous? This would lead to most people always rolling need. I know I would. Why select greed if they guy needing the item might just sell it anyway? Fair enough, but then why do we have this system at all? Why not give everyone equal chances to begin with?

 

How are players A,B and C asking for equal chances for everyone when they won't let, or don't want, player D to roll? How is denying, or attempting to deny, player D a chance to roll asking for equal chances for everyone?

 

As for my mindset, I've explained before, I generally roll need for my character only, but that is my choice. I do not expect everyone to do so. I will not ever tell a player they cannot, or should not, roll need if they helped produce the item in question. I've watched items my character can equip go to other players for their companions, and congratulated them on their roll. It's not the end of the world or my gaming, and at the end of the day, I have made more friends and have more people with whom to group than I ever thought possible.

 

How does refusing to disallow a player a chance to roll for loot he helped produce equate to an entitled attitude?

[nateslice]

Well, I for one will not do the random flashpoint group thing if I can't expect people to pass on stuff I need because they have a companion who could use it. If companions are considered, then everyone can roll Need on everything, and I have no interest in running a flashpoint with strangers if I never have better than a 25% chance to get anything I need.

 

So, those of you who roll Need on everything can have fun without the help of my tank and my healer. As a wise young man by the name of Eric Cartmann once said, "Screw you, hippies; I'm going home".

[Firemedicjedi]

How are players A,B and C asking for equal chances for everyone when they won't let, or don't want, player D to roll? How is denying, or attempting to deny, player D a chance to roll asking for equal chances for everyone?

 

As for my mindset, I've explained before, I generally roll need for my character only, but that is my choice. I do not expect everyone to do so. I will not ever tell a player they cannot, or should not, roll need if they helped produce the item in question. I've watched items my character can equip go to other players for their companions, and congratulated them on their roll. It's not the end of the world or my gaming, and at the end of the day, I have made more friends and have more people with whom to group than I ever thought possible.

 

How does refusing to disallow a player a chance to roll for loot he helped produce equate to an entitled attitude?

It seems to me that you think A,B, and C don't want player D to roll at all which isn't the case. They don't want him to roll need on loot for him AND his companion, when based on social conventions and common courtesy, the other players are only rolling for their current character. They aren't denying player D loot for his own character, but they are requesting that players take priority over companions (playing by the community standard of looting).

[XuShaBi]

OP, why not ask yourself the question why do you think you are entitled to others accepting your behaviour of ignoring convention agreed by other players? What makes you so special that your entitlement mentality argues that others should forgo their rights and tolerate your nonsense?

 

If we allow rolling need for companions, in pugs, then we might as well remove greed option in pugs. There is no way I can tell if you are lying or not about needing for a companion in an op. However, if you are needing for your own character then a quick inspection of your gear can verify your claim. Given how greedy players can be in pugs, I really don't expect people telling truth when they can lie and get loots off easily. Hence, the social convention is quite important.

[LeeTone]

By the OP's logic I should be able to 'need' on everything because I 'need' the credits that I can sell the item to a vendor for. Where do you draw the line on what someone 'needs' and what they don't?

 

As a courtesy you should have at least asked the group on loot rules rather than making assumptions.

[Samy_Merchi]

By the OP's logic I should be able to 'need' on everything because I 'need' the credits that I can sell the item to a vendor for. Where do you draw the line on what someone 'needs' and what they don't?

I think a fairly simple line of distinction is, are you going to use it or sell it.

[Jeweledleah]

as companions are not participating in group content, even if they could use the loot, the common courtesy is to give priority to actual players - seeing as their actual participation is what determines how well group content goes. personally I ask before rolling need on a piece for companion, usually after seeing what the rest of the group chose. I've never been told no. but I also don't ask (and don't roll), if actual player needs it.

 

if someone rolls for their companion without asking and wins over person who needed an upgrade? I'll shrug and put them on ignore at the end of the run. I'm pretty casual when it comes to loot, but I don't like playing with inconsiderate people.

[Samy_Merchi]

as companions are not participating in group content

Sometimes they are. What then? Edited March 18, 2013 by Samy_Merchi

[Jeweledleah]

Sometimes they are. What then?

 

they don't in random flashpoints on any difficulty.

 

if you are making a group manually and zoning from the normal entrance? you can create and discuss any loot rules you want.

 

but we're talking about group finder pugs. there are NO companions in group finder pugs. the only exception being if someone from your group leaves, and you decide to finish a flashpoint without finding a new person, but even then - communication was involved in that decision so communication can be involved in companion rolls as well.

[Samy_Merchi]

but we're talking about group finder pugs.

Oh, you brought that in. Wasn't anywhere in the op. Okay, under your sub-topic of group finder flashpoints with four players, I agree on leaving companions out of the rolls.

[Saraku]

Then you ahve had better luck with the LFG tool than I have. In the groups I've been put in, more often than not at least one player(usually the tank) wants all gear with his main stat one it, but also insists on a chance to roll on gear for his companion, or in the case of BOE's roll need to sell on the AH or for an alt.

 

hmmm now i'm starting to wonder if you are a troll because that sounds a little bit like hyperbole to prove a point. maybe its not down to luck but sensitivity and a naturally defensive attitude? This stuff happens all the time as this thread proves that opinions differ on the subject.

 

and with anything that isnt written down into the laws of the game/country/state whatever it is open to interpretation for good or ill and people will ALWAYS exploit that. especially in a faceless mmo. just look at the 2nd amendment and in fact US law in general for examples on "interpretation"

 

right to bear arms means 'defend my family by having a handgun under my pillow' to some people and 'i own three tanks and 14 automatic rifles for when the chinese invade" to others.

 

if your in a group that does this, ignore the players involved and move on or you will age very quickly because there is nothing more frustrating than raging at injustice based on societal/communal courtesy in a birtual environment with no recourse.

 

unless you hack their account, find their address, ring on their doorbell and kick them in the balls. but who has time to do that?

[Jonrobbie]

OP, why not ask yourself the question why do you think you are entitled to others accepting your behaviour of ignoring convention agreed by other players? What makes you so special that your entitlement mentality argues that others should forgo their rights and tolerate your nonsense?

 

If we allow rolling need for companions, in pugs, then we might as well remove greed option in pugs. There is no way I can tell if you are lying or not about needing for a companion in an op. However, if you are needing for your own character then a quick inspection of your gear can verify your claim. Given how greedy players can be in pugs, I really don't expect people telling truth when they can lie and get loots off easily. Hence, the social convention is quite important.

 

This convention that you speak of, is there somewhere that I can read this convention of etiquette that is expected of players or are we all to assume that every person who plays SWTOR are seasoned mmo players who are well versed and familiar with unwritten rules of social convention? And who decided upon these conventions? Was it the developers or gamers?

I never stated that others should forgo their rights. Far from it. What im stating is that I find it immature that others would tell me that I have to forgo that right. If anything Im more than happy for others in my group to roll on it, let the dice fall where it may, if they win it, good for them, if i win it, sweet.

Is not allowing each person roll for it if they so choose to do the fair and equal thing to do rather than saying you cant roll on this or this or this because of some unwritten rule that shall be enforced?

The difference between me and them and seemingly some posters in this forum is that there are some that are more entitled than others based on some unwritten rule that was probably put in place in the forums of some WoW forums.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Jonrobbie

[Jonrobbie]

By the OP's logic I should be able to 'need' on everything because I 'need' the credits that I can sell the item to a vendor for. Where do you draw the line on what someone 'needs' and what they don't?

 

As a courtesy you should have at least asked the group on loot rules rather than making assumptions.

 

And the same should go for those players who go into flashpoints with random groups expecting every one of them to be familiar with these unwritten rules

[Exastify]

And the same should go for those players who go into flashpoints with random groups expecting every one of them to be familiar with these unwritten rules

 

You should have learned after the first flashpoint that rolling need for companions = bad.

 

If you continue to do it, you're being a dick. You know it's not the convention and you continue to do so.

[Jonrobbie]

You should have learned after the first flashpoint that rolling need for companions = bad.

 

If you continue to do it, you're being a dick. You know it's not the convention and you continue to do so.

 

But why? Why is it bad? Who says? gamers? developers? Why is rolling for my companion bad? Is it not an extension of my game play experience? Are companions not critical to my success when playing solo?

This so called convention that is spoken of seems to me to be like this

4 people climb a mountain, find gold and 3 of those 4 say they want it to buy a house

the 4th person says he or she wants to use it to buy a car

the other 3 decide that it is an unwritten rule you cant use gold to buy a car, only a house so only 3 of those 4 can have the gold even though the 4th worked exactly the same as the other 3 to find it

Why are the other 3 MORE ENTITLED than the 4th one? Because their reason is different?

They all have a need and a reason for it only 3 of them decide they have the right to it-that to me IS a sense of false entitlement

[AshlaBoga]

But why? Why is it bad? Who says? gamers? developers? Why is rolling for my companion bad? Is it not an extension of my game play experience? Are companions not critical to my success when playing solo?

This so called convention that is spoken of seems to me to be like this

4 people climb a mountain, find gold and 3 of those 4 say they want it to buy a house

the 4th person says he or she wants to use it to buy a car

the other 3 decide that it is an unwritten rule you cant use gold to buy a car, only a house so only 3 of those 4 can have the gold even though the 4th worked exactly the same as the other 3 to find it

Why are the other 3 MORE ENTITLED than the 4th one? Because their reason is different?

They all have a need and a reason for it only 3 of them decide they have the right to it-that to me IS a sense of false entitlement

 

Better example:

 

4 people work together to hunt and kill an animal. There is only enough meat to feed one person. 3 of them would use it to feed themselves, for they are hungry. The 4th would use it to feed his pet. He gives the meat to his pet and all 4 are hungry as a result. And the 3 are angered.

 

Summary: It's not that your needs are less important, it's that your companion is an NPC. And npcs are less important than real people.

[Exastify]

But why? Why is it bad? Who says? gamers? developers? Why is rolling for my companion bad? Is it not an extension of my game play experience? Are companions not critical to my success when playing solo?

This so called convention that is spoken of seems to me to be like this

4 people climb a mountain, find gold and 3 of those 4 say they want it to buy a house

the 4th person says he or she wants to use it to buy a car

the other 3 decide that it is an unwritten rule you cant use gold to buy a car, only a house so only 3 of those 4 can have the gold even though the 4th worked exactly the same as the other 3 to find it

Why are the other 3 MORE ENTITLED than the 4th one? Because their reason is different?

They all have a need and a reason for it only 3 of them decide they have the right to it-that to me IS a sense of false entitlement

 

It's a convention. Most people consider it nice to do x and not do y. You are going against the convention.

 

It also makes sense. Your companions are not vital to your gameplay, companions are not at the same level as players. A piece of gear for a companion is effectively worse on them than on a player character.

 

If you want to gear your companion, just roll greed on everything else, sell what you get, and buy gear for your companion. Everyone's happy.

[Jeweledleah]

wait a minute, wait a minute. so your opinion is mature and people who disagree with you are childish and entitled?

 

ok then.

 

people have explained to you already why its not a good thing to do, for multiple reasons. you simply refuse to listen. don't be surprised when your flashpoint queues start taking longer and longer to pop then.

[Jonrobbie]

wait a minute, wait a minute. so your opinion is mature and people who disagree with you are childish and entitled?

 

ok then.

 

people have explained to you already why its not a good thing to do, for multiple reasons. you simply refuse to listen. don't be surprised when your flashpoint queues start taking longer and longer to pop then.

 

No, my ability to refrain from telling other gamers in the flashpoint that they dont have the right to the gear that drops but i do is what makes me mature. Not reacting to that situation of them winning a roll by voting them kicked for some unwritten rule of convention. Thats what makes me more mature in my view, being able to just shrug and say good on them and move on without resorting to pathetic name calling and vote kicking

[BaronV]

To the OP - need is for YOUR character not your companions. If you want it for your companions at least have the courtesy to ask your group mates if you can have it for your comp.

 

You seem to think that your companion (and by extension you) are more important than the other players.

 

And quite frankly your arrogant defense of your actions means you deserve to be booted. Depending on how you reacted to that in game id have added you to /ignore and even named and shamed you on fleet general as a ninja (but i only name and shame for people who ninja on EVERYTHING in a raid of FP or WB or something similar)

[BaronV]

I've lost count of the number of players I've been grouped with via the LFD tool who tout those "unwritten rules" when it comes to gear their character can use, but who also want to roll need for their companions. Seems to me that a lot of the players want to have their cake and eat it, too.

 

im guessing they asked the group first? Nothing wrong with wanting the cake and eating it too if the rest of the group confirms they are okay with it.

[Jonrobbie]

To the OP - need is for YOUR character not your companions. If you want it for your companions at least have the courtesy to ask your group mates if you can have it for your comp.

 

You seem to think that your companion (and by extension you) are more important than the other players.

 

And quite frankly your arrogant defense of your actions means you deserve to be booted. Depending on how you reacted to that in game id have added you to /ignore and even named and shamed you on fleet general as a ninja (but i only name and shame for people who ninja on EVERYTHING in a raid of FP or WB or something similar)

 

 

You believe that i think i am more important than other players? How does believing EVERYONE should have equal opportunity to play as they so choose for their long term gain make me believe im more important? Why should believing i am not beholden to other gamers for some unwritten law make me arrogant? I would not enforce restrictions on to other gamers as to what they can or can not do to benefit themselves, so how does that make me arrogant?

 

Each to their own i guess

Edited March 18, 2013 by Jonrobbie