Loot Ninjas

[Ratajack]

no, you don't. much like all you can eat buffet, you don't get to take the food home with you. you get only what you can eat yourself, while at the buffet.

 

of course you technically could, but doing so, taking that last piece of something another person wants, knowing full well that you won't be eating it yourself? makes you a jerk and it should come at no surprise, when other people start avoiding your when it comes to going to get dinner.

 

just because you COULD do something, doesn't mean you should.

 

Again, if you want to tell someone they cannot take something they helped to pay for, feel free to pick up the tab yourself, and you can determine exactly who gets what portion of the meal. Until that time, as long as you are relying on others to help foot the bill, then you have no right to determine what each member of the party is entitled to take/eat. You do have the option not eat with that person again, if you so choose, of course.

 

Feel free to solo that boss and you can make the decision on who gets the drop, otherwise trying to tell someone they can or cannot roll need is something you have no right to do. You have the option to add that person to your ignore list, if you choose, of course.

[Ratajack]

Ratajack, you need to accept that you are wrong and have a skewed view of reality. The system need before greed is put in place because it is the most fair we could come up with.

It is the social norm, not conforming to the social norm makes you an ******e, I don't have to hold the door for the little old lady, my time is probably more important than hers, but if I don't I am an ******e. that is the truth of it, accept it or don't but you are wrong.

 

Sorry, but my values not only take social convention into account, but go beyond social convention. I will not only hold the door for the little old lady, but also for the man who cut me off to get into the parking lot. I could justify not holding the door for the man who cut me off by saying that he is a jerk, but that does not make me right to let the door close in his face.

 

It may take a little understanding and compassion to be able to see things from a perspective different from your own, but it is often well worth that effort. The fact that most people find it hard to be rude to someone who takes that time to see things from their perspective is just a bonus. It's much easier to be mad at the person who cuts us off on the road than it is to be mad at the person who lets us in that line of traffic.

[Spatology]

Sorry, but my values not only take social convention into account, but go beyond social convention. I will not only hold the door for the little old lady, but also for the man who cut me off to get into the parking lot. I could justify not holding the door for the man who cut me off by saying that he is a jerk, but that does not make me right to let the door close in his face.

 

It may take a little understanding and compassion to be able to see things from a perspective different from your own, but it is often well worth that effort. The fact that most people find it hard to be rude to someone who takes that time to see things from their perspective is just a bonus. It's much easier to be mad at the person who cuts us off on the road than it is to be mad at the person who lets us in that line of traffic.

 

or you repeatedly slam the door in everyone's face, i guess its a matter of perception....

[Ratajack]

Why should people get a fair shot if I solo these instances in my spare time? Sure, it's their que turn, but that doesn't mean they are entitled to or deserve anything besides the comms they gat as a reward from bioware.

 

Were you soloing that boss when that particular piece of gear dropped? If not, then the people who helped down the boss are entitled to a fair shot at any loot he drops. If you were solo'ing the instance, then there would be no one to roll against.

[Ratajack]

or you repeatedly slam the door in everyone's face, i guess its a matter of perception....

 

How does holding the door for people translate into slamming it in their faces from any perspective?

[Andryah]

Ratajack, you need to accept that you are wrong and have a skewed view of reality. The system need before greed is put in place because it is the most fair we could come up with.

It is the social norm, not conforming to the social norm makes you an ******e, I don't have to hold the door for the little old lady, my time is probably more important than hers, but if I don't I am an ******e. that is the truth of it, accept it or don't but you are wrong.

 

I disagree.

 

Ratajack makes valid and relevant points. You just don't like his point of view..but that does not invalidate it.

 

AND the system need/greed is in place to allow players who choose to work a two tier rolling system. It's a modern standard in MMOs. Players with actual need (regardless of your particular definition of "need") can roll need if they choose to. They can also roll greed, or not roll at all, if they choose to.

 

This constant bickering over need loot rolls in MMOs today is pointless in the context of the original post, where it was ninja this and ninja that on LOW LEVEL FPs and Heroics. Which is the epitomy of petty IMO.

 

As for loot rules for end game OPs.. as far as I am concerned that is determined by leader of the OP for any given OP, and is also pointless bickering over virtual pixels.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Andryah

[Spatology]

You are entitled to roll however you want. Im also entitled to vote kick you from the group. To each his own i suppose?

[AidanLightwalker]

Ever played in lavel 30 with a companion still wearing level 1 gear ?

Or don't you play with Companions at all ? (THis sounds very much to me like that.)

 

HOW you write it, it is very wrong what you mean.

 

What I WOULD agree to is - nowadays - that in FPs & in OPS one shouldn't get items for companions.

 

By the way, "my" Risha wears now gear from the Mandalorean Raiders.

Because I went through it solo.

And when I solo it, no-one can dictate me what to do.

 

 

 

Coruscant's World Boss sometimes drops droid parts.

 

You do play a droid, don't you ?

 

I'm sorry but this is the worst example I have ever seen. If you are a level 30 and your companions (which is not possible BTW) are still in level 1 gear, what are you doing? Playing while you sleep? There are NUMEROUS quest rewards that are aimed at your companions that are green quality. In fact, you find so much green gear while questing you should have no problem gearing them in at least greens. If you are just vendoring everything, that's your problem. To steal gear from a person who is there doing the work is not acceptable.

 

 

Here's an idea, if you want to role for your companion, then why don't you just drop the group and run the flashpoints with your companion then. Then you can keep all the loot!

[AidanLightwalker]

See the highlighted part? That is the reason they deserve a fair and equal chance.

 

The reason for the main spec>off spec/companion vs character is simply to try to justify denying another player an equal chance at loot they helped produce. Someone wants some shiny new virtual pixels and can't handle the fact that someone else may win them, despite the fact that the "someone else" contributed to that shiny existing in the first place.

 

 

You are so wrong. They contributed to the downing of the CONTENT, the loot afterwards is RANDOM. Its like this, if we all buy powerball tickets, we contribute to the jackpot winnings. The winner is actually random. Your logic applies that everyone should get to take a piece of the pie simply because they helped down the content. That's what comms are for. The random loot at the end is not a part of entitlement. Your companion WASNT EVEN THERE! Why should they get my loot? Hell if I did 2k dps the entire fight and you did 1k I technically contributed even more than you and you want to give what should have been mine to your damn companion who WASNT EVEN THERE??!

[RasHelio]

How does holding the door for people translate into slamming it in their faces from any perspective?

 

would you mind listing your server and character names for everyone so we can add you to our "friends" lists?

[wairuakaha]

They should make it so you can only roll need if it's for your class. Aka a consular won't be able to roll need on a knight's gear. It 's not perfect but it would at least help hinder loot ninjas.

 

The best thing you can do is call them out on rolling need on a green drop, if they still do, boot them prior to the boss to save yourself any trouble.

 

I SECOND THIS IDEA!

 

Last week on Dalborra I went through a low lev FP with an alt and much to my disbelief which was shared by others in the group this idiot called Bill-Savage or some such kept rolling need on everything. Unfortunately the group leader wasnt clued in enough to boot the @rsehole before the final boss. The fault is ours for not kicking him/her out when we could have.

 

In the year and a half Ive been playing this game through 10 characters, this is the first time Id encountered something like this. I wonder if this is the kinda @rsewipes the game attracts when it went F2P. There was clearly a totally different class of gameplay during the first 6-8 months of this game. In light of what we tend to see these days, the class of gameplay displayed by those stuffing around at the low levels seems to be showing something else less desirable. Lesson learned - boot the ****head out within two unnecessary 'Need' roles. No 'buts', no 'ifs'!

 

[Jeweledleah]

Again, if you want to tell someone they cannot take something they helped to pay for, feel free to pick up the tab yourself, and you can determine exactly who gets what portion of the meal. Until that time, as long as you are relying on others to help foot the bill, then you have no right to determine what each member of the party is entitled to take/eat. You do have the option not eat with that person again, if you so choose, of course.

 

Feel free to solo that boss and you can make the decision on who gets the drop, otherwise trying to tell someone they can or cannot roll need is something you have no right to do. You have the option to add that person to your ignore list, if you choose, of course.

 

again, can doesn't mean should. and yes, I do excersize that option as do plenty of other people.

 

as for that example with slamming the door, you could slam the door in other people's faces. you are physically capable of it and its not like its illegal, unless you are specifically trying to hit them.. you could also cut off people for parking spots, do everything veeeeery sloooooowly at the cashiers knowing that there are people behind you in line waiting for their turn, rearrange items on store shelves, and do any other number of things for your own amusement. it doesn't change the fact that its jerk behavior.

 

all these things, they go both ways and what you are advocating is rolling over to the selfish and the bullies. you are telling me that I cannot decide if someone's need is better than someone else's. and yet you are defending that exact behavior - someone deciding that their need for companion gear is better than someone else's need for personal upgrade. you are essentially defending the right of someone to slam a door in that ladies face and you are telling us that they should still be respected for it and allowed to keep slamming doors in old lady faces. solely because they contributed to opening that door.

 

yes its all pixels. but there's a reason why people create laws and rules. because anarchy is not fun. cutthroat everyone for themselves and to hell with everyone else world is not fun.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Jeweledleah

[AidanLightwalker]

again, can doesn't mean should. and yes, I do excersize that option as do plenty of other people.

 

as for that example with slamming the door, you could slam the door in other people's faces. you are physically capable of it and its not like its illegal, unless you are specifically trying to hit them.. you could also cut off people for parking spots, do everything veeeeery sloooooowly at the cashiers knowing that there are people behind you in line waiting for their turn, rearrange items on store shelves, and do any other number of things for your own amusement. it doesn't change the fact that its jerk behavior.

 

all these things, they go both ways and what you are advocating is rolling over to the selfish and the bullies. you are telling me that I cannot decide if someone's need is better than someone else's. and yet you are defending that exact behavior - someone deciding that their need for companion gear is better than someone else's need for personal upgrade. you are essentially defending the right of someone to slam a door in that ladies face and you are telling us that they should still be respected for it and allowed to keep slamming doors in old lady faces. solely because they contributed to opening that door.

 

yes its all pixels. but there's a reason why people create laws and rules. because anarchy is not fun. cutthroat everyone for themselves and to hell with everyone else world is not fun.

 

QTE!!

 

 

technically, I always need credits, should I role need on everything just so I can sell it? Can I?

[Ratajack]

You are so wrong. They contributed to the downing of the CONTENT, the loot afterwards is RANDOM. Its like this, if we all buy powerball tickets, we contribute to the jackpot winnings. The winner is actually random. Your logic applies that everyone should get to take a piece of the pie simply because they helped down the content. That's what comms are for. The random loot at the end is not a part of entitlement. Your companion WASNT EVEN THERE! Why should they get my loot? Hell if I did 2k dps the entire fight and you did 1k I technically contributed even more than you and you want to give what should have been mine to your damn companion who WASNT EVEN THERE??!

 

Was the PLAYER there? Did you solo that boss? It's not the companion rolling for that drop, it's the PLAYER. You are not denying the companion a fair chance at that drop, you are denying the PLAYER a fair chance at that drop. If you want to say the character contributed, then as I said before, the next time you're in a boss fight, don't hit a single button and then tell me how much your character contributed.

 

You say the player contributed to the downing of the content, but the loot is random? Would that loot even exist if the player had not contributed to the downing of the content? If not, then the player contributed to production of the loot.

 

If I do more DPS than the tank, does that entitle me to more a chance at the loot? Maybe I did less damage than the other DPS in our group, but I used my interrupts at the appropriate times thus making the tank's job and the healer's job easier, while the other DPS was so focused on DPS'ing that he never moved out of the bad stuff, making the healer's job more difficult. Which of us contributed more to the boss going down? There are too many factors to say who contributed more to a given fight, and so I say that all present contributed to the kill and the loot dropping.

[RasHelio]

Was the PLAYER there? Did you solo that boss? It's not the companion rolling for that drop, it's the PLAYER. You are not denying the companion a fair chance at that drop, you are denying the PLAYER a fair chance at that drop. If you want to say the character contributed, then as I said before, the next time you're in a boss fight, don't hit a single button and then tell me how much your character contributed.

 

You say the player contributed to the downing of the content, but the loot is random? Would that loot even exist if the player had not contributed to the downing of the content? If not, then the player contributed to production of the loot.

 

If I do more DPS than the tank, does that entitle me to more a chance at the loot? Maybe I did less damage than the other DPS in our group, but I used my interrupts at the appropriate times thus making the tank's job and the healer's job easier, while the other DPS was so focused on DPS'ing that he never moved out of the bad stuff, making the healer's job more difficult. Which of us contributed more to the boss going down? There are too many factors to say who contributed more to a given fight, and so I say that all present contributed to the kill and the loot dropping.

 

It wasn't the legacy that picked up all the datacrons it was the PLAYER!

[Ratajack]

again, can doesn't mean should. and yes, I do excersize that option as do plenty of other people.

 

as for that example with slamming the door, you could slam the door in other people's faces. you are physically capable of it and its not like its illegal, unless you are specifically trying to hit them.. you could also cut off people for parking spots, do everything veeeeery sloooooowly at the cashiers knowing that there are people behind you in line waiting for their turn, rearrange items on store shelves, and do any other number of things for your own amusement. it doesn't change the fact that its jerk behavior.

 

all these things, they go both ways and what you are advocating is rolling over to the selfish and the bullies. you are telling me that I cannot decide if someone's need is better than someone else's. and yet you are defending that exact behavior - someone deciding that their need for companion gear is better than someone else's need for personal upgrade. you are essentially defending the right of someone to slam a door in that ladies face and you are telling us that they should still be respected for it and allowed to keep slamming doors in old lady faces. solely because they contributed to opening that door.

 

yes its all pixels. but there's a reason why people create laws and rules. because anarchy is not fun. cutthroat everyone for themselves and to hell with everyone else world is not fun.

 

I'm sorry you feel that not denying others a chance to profit from their efforts is "rolling over to the selfish and the bullies".

 

I guess my neighbor's next paycheck should go to you then. After all, you may feel that your need is greater than his and if I tell you that he earned it, that would be rolling over to the selfish and the bullies.

 

That's an outrageous comparison, you say? I don't think so. The player you wish to deny a fair chance at the loot earned that chance by virtue of contributing to the kill. Ergo, you are attempting to deny another person of something that they earned. Every player who contributed to the kill earned a CHANCE at the loot, not a guarantee of getting it, but a CHANCE to win it.

[Ratajack]

It wasn't the legacy that picked up all the datacrons it was the PLAYER!

 

Way off topic, but true. But just as one character finding a BIS chest piece does not automatically give the equivalent BIS chest piece to every other character in a legacy, finding a datacron on one character should not give that stat bonus to the other characters in the legacy.

[AidanLightwalker]

Was the PLAYER there? Did you solo that boss? It's not the companion rolling for that drop, it's the PLAYER. You are not denying the companion a fair chance at that drop, you are denying the PLAYER a fair chance at that drop. If you want to say the character contributed, then as I said before, the next time you're in a boss fight, don't hit a single button and then tell me how much your character contributed.

 

You say the player contributed to the downing of the content, but the loot is random? Would that loot even exist if the player had not contributed to the downing of the content? If not, then the player contributed to production of the loot.

 

If I do more DPS than the tank, does that entitle me to more a chance at the loot? Maybe I did less damage than the other DPS in our group, but I used my interrupts at the appropriate times thus making the tank's job and the healer's job easier, while the other DPS was so focused on DPS'ing that he never moved out of the bad stuff, making the healer's job more difficult. Which of us contributed more to the boss going down? There are too many factors to say who contributed more to a given fight, and so I say that all present contributed to the kill and the loot dropping.

 

Well I have 4 alts and 20 companions so I need everything. I guess I should just start telling the groups I'm in that I'm rolling for 24 then. And since its expensive having all these companions and alts, I need it all for vendor trash to make credits with too. Society dictats what is acceptable behavior and this does not follow under that. Look, I get it. You want to be the turn the other check guy. You justify the behavior with they are there, they have equal rights to get. We all know this is not what society deems as proper. I on other other hand, do not feel this way. I believe the nice guys finish last and I'm not about to let someone walk on me. I will be with the rest of the group vote kicking them out.

Edited May 28, 2013 by AidanLightwalker

[Jeweledleah]

I'm sorry you feel that not denying others a chance to profit from their efforts is "rolling over to the selfish and the bullies".

 

I guess my neighbor's next paycheck should go to you then. After all, you may feel that your need is greater than his and if I tell you that he earned it, that would be rolling over to the selfish and the bullies.

 

That's an outrageous comparison, you say? I don't think so. The player you wish to deny a fair chance at the loot earned that chance by virtue of contributing to the kill. Ergo, you are attempting to deny another person of something that they earned. Every player who contributed to the kill earned a CHANCE at the loot, not a guarantee of getting it, but a CHANCE to win it.

 

apples and oranges doesn't even come close to describing how wrong your comparison is.

 

YOU are the one defending the right of someone else to take the neighbours next paycheck, because they worked at the same office or something inane like that. you are defending the "right" of a vegan to take that piece of meat they won't be eating, because they want to give it to their dog, or their friend, even though neither the dog nor the friend made any contribution to acquisition of said meat. you are defending the "right" of a person who bought into the lottery but didn't guess the winning number, grabbing that ticket anyways, because after all - they contributed to the size of the lottery pool, didn't they?

 

I just... I have ran out of ways to show you that your reasoning brings anarchy, that your reasoning benefits no one, but those willing to always, ALWAYS put themselves above others. your reasoning creates an environment that is toxic, that discourages people other then jerks from pugging. your reasoning is why we cannot have nice things, and why that other game ended up implementing loot bags, because strangers cannot be trusted to be fair and work as a team on their own, without someone else making decisions for them.

[DoctorBeckett]

Grab a high level bud and run the FP, with the understanding that the buddy doesn't get any of the low level gear. Or if you're able, run the FP by yourself with a companion.

[Ratajack]

apples and oranges doesn't even come close to describing how wrong your comparison is.

 

YOU are the one defending the right of someone else to take the neighbours next paycheck, because they worked at the same office or something inane like that. you are defending the "right" of a vegan to take that piece of meat they won't be eating, because they want to give it to their dog, or their friend, even though neither the dog nor the friend made any contribution to acquisition of said meat. you are defending the "right" of a person who bought into the lottery but didn't guess the winning number, grabbing that ticket anyways, because after all - they contributed to the size of the lottery pool, didn't they?

 

I just... I have ran out of ways to show you that your reasoning brings anarchy, that your reasoning benefits no one, but those willing to always, ALWAYS put themselves above others. your reasoning creates an environment that is toxic, that discourages people other then jerks from pugging. your reasoning is why we cannot have nice things, and why that other game ended up implementing loot bags, because strangers cannot be trusted to be fair and work as a team on their own, without someone else making decisions for them.

 

You continue to ignore the fact that without the vegan's contribution, there would be no meat in the first place in your attempts to justify denying the vegan the chance to benefit from his efforts in producing that meat. You are saying "he has no right to the meat despite the fact that he helped to produce it" and the vegan is saying "we all helped to produce the meat, so we all deserve and equal chance to receive it." I personally find the former much more selfish than the latter.

[lordspyder]

You continue to ignore the fact that without the vegan's contribution, there would be no meat in the first place in your attempts to justify denying the vegan the chance to benefit from his efforts in producing that meat. You are saying "he has no right to the meat despite the fact that he helped to produce it" and the vegan is saying "we all helped to produce the meat, so we all deserve and equal chance to receive it." I personally find the former much more selfish than the latter.

 

I am just stunned by your refusal to see the logic here... I am just totally take aback, I just don't know what to say other than I sincerely hope I never play with you. You are not the type of person I wish to associate with.

[BrianDavion]

I actually think Bioware should have stuck with gear bags, because yes you do "need" almost everything that drops in a low level fp. You can't just "run them again to get it" because you rapidly outlevel the content. So if you have a tank companion, you "need" to gear him up too and at low levels you rely on your companions a ton.

 

people shouldn't need for a companion when a actual player needs to gear. it's bad form

[Jeweledleah]

You continue to ignore the fact that without the vegan's contribution, there would be no meat in the first place in your attempts to justify denying the vegan the chance to benefit from his efforts in producing that meat. You are saying "he has no right to the meat despite the fact that he helped to produce it" and the vegan is saying "we all helped to produce the meat, so we all deserve and equal chance to receive it." I personally find the former much more selfish than the latter.

 

vegan doesn't eat meat. they have no personal use for it. vegan would get much better use out of, you know, vegetables. but sure, let's waste meat on a vegan because perfect equality is more important than looking long term into I don't know - vegan helping get meat, and then get help to get his vegetables later (or maybe even vegan getting their vegetables earlier, but now wanting share of the meat to, just because)

 

your inability to look beyond simplistic - we all hit boss, that means we all get equal chance at loot, regardless of what that loot actually is sad really

[Darthmoriquendi]

Same problem with the questing ninjas. Have noticed this has been happening quite frequently lately to the point they follow you around. Is it just a lot of noobs that have no experience at gaming ettiquette or old timers that just don't give a rats a** and think it is funny to be rude and inconsiderate. Even worse is when it's the same faction or your own guild mate that does it to you. In all honesty I have never experienced so many greedy, selfish and hostile people in an mmo like I have this one. It's like all the rules have been thrown out the window and they just don't care. Sometimes people don't think and realize hey that is a real person on the other end of that toon. Would you do that to them in RL? Seems like the MMO in game community has really changed over the years or maybe I am just getting old.