People who ninja for their companions

We won't know for sure unless they say, but I figure it was a point of familiarity for existing MMO players.

There is; unquestionably, the gear from Flashpoints is typically of superior quality to quest rewards or GTN purchases (save purchases sourced in FP drops).

There's no point in discussing societal norms when they don't exist in this paradigm. We have players from several societies across the world in this game, often on the same server and in the same level bracket. Each society has its norms, codified as laws that are enforced by the threat of undesirable consequence (fiscal/incarceration/death). We have no formal society here, nor formal and ratified rules. As such, an appeal to a societal norm is both a) nonsensical and b) incapable of enforcement.

The problem with your supposition here is that you're assuming a cost to other players is sufficient-enough cause to figure into the equation. Other players experience cost any time they don't get something they want, but someone else does. It needs to go no further. It doesn't matter if there's a greater statistical benefit to a player than a companion, because once you're out of the group, any statistical benefit ceases to reach you period. We cooperate to down bosses, but we're rolling for our own perceived needs when the loot window arises.

There are any number of more optimal solutions, but I think one thing we can both agree on is this: because of companions, NBG in its current iteration is highly suboptimal for distributing loot in this game.

Dont PUG if you dont want to get screwed. There are a thousand guilds out there that will allow you to be as non-social as you want and will be cool to you. Find one and enjoy the game.

LOL....you are like talking to a wall. These forums are skewed. If you think that most people agree with you that comps = players in need, then you need to actually play the game. Do the vast majority disagree with you = yes. Am I wrong = doubtful.

I brought up my beta experience because I have played for a while and I base my argument off of observation. I have no idea what you base your argument on....... Just use some common sense.

I honestly do not understand how some people are so blind to the norm. I suspect you know the reality of the situation and just are trolling (which in case, I bit so shame on me).

I would love to see how you all argue other accepted social norms.
1) Its OK to be rude and loud in public restaurants.
2) Let that little old lady get her own door.
3) There is no law that I cant wear my little speedo on my fat arse at the beach. ;p
....

I am pretty much done with the troll bait thread. Nothing will change your mind. I have yet to run into your type in the game. The group would be disbanded quite quickly if I did.

/wave

Financial analysts should not have to fence words with psychologists, pfagh...

I've been testing FP gear and purples on a number of companions. I'm still recording my findings (and videos) but what I've discovered is that , except for a narrow range of companions, most of the FP gear actually provides minimal benefits over the greens received in gameplay or blues obtained via commendations.

DPS class companions such as Vette seem to gain the most utility to the point that a poorly geared Vette can die to two weak mobs but a well geared Vette can solo champ mobs.

Tank class companions such as Khem Val seem to gain minor bits of survivability but most of what keeps the tank going is their inherent ability. Only top quality orange gear with the latest mods makes much of any impact. Ranged tanks, like T7 and the IA's companion that I never spell correctly, Kalayo or Kai-yo-yo or whatever, are particularly ill suited to upgrades, as it seems to do, well, almost nothing except add a few dozen points of damage here or there.

Healer class companions gain very minor improvements to their healing regardless.

Which is why the argument is unsolvable. I'm still right and you are still wrong, of course. But I have neither logic or arguments to prove it nor appeals to counter your arguments, so my "rightness" is all in my head. Just like everyone elses. You can never convince me I am wrong...which means...nothing, pretty much, since your enjoyment hardly depends on my approval.

Ah, but I'm not going to make the argument that some pug will bother to listen to what I find. I could actually care less about the final result. I'm interested in the Truth.

If companions need this stuff to be effective for some characters, then Needing on it is not only acceptible but is working as intended. If Vette becomes a liability in late game and is passed over for Doc because Vette doesn't get good gear early on and can never shine, that needs to be known.

On the other hand, if upgrading companions out of FP is just wasting everyone's time, including the person bothering to run these FP just to kit out their companion, then I want to know that.

I can't change how people play. I can put facts out there, and let people make their own decisions, but my research won't change that. Neither will arguing in this thread.

Meh. I find your lack of loving your neighbor disturbing.

Some people are naturally altruistic. I regularly pass on gear I can use (and in some cases, use well) because my team mates are so wretchedly geared that I can't help but feel for them. (I am obsessive about the "Inspect Character" on people's gear when I start a FP).

I do not expect others to play that way, nor do I think I have any right to tell people how to play. I don't even reject your utility of self-return argument. But like any good bean-counter, I tend to try to find the bottom line on these things. If the marginal utility to person X is minimal, then yeah, it's true he may still roll on it because once ungrouped it's still an upgrade.

But in another sense, I don't want to compete with group members, I want to help them. I want the game to be fun, and I don't mind giving up something small to let someone else have fun too. Maybe that is merely me (it is certainly only my opinion), but it feels very clinical and icy when put in terms of calculating benefits once you dispose of your group mates.

In order to defeat a logical proposition you have to identify where the argument relies on either a logical fallacy, false data, or insufficient development to conclusion.

Regardless of whether or not their are ramifications, the ugly reality is that 9 times out of 10 when someone needs I am not really bothered by it, and neither is anyone else even looking. It's quite conceivable that patterns like this could go for months without more than a couple of people getting upset.

i will argue that all 3 of your bullets have nothing to do with this topic and or the game. Real life situation if you bring a friend aka a companion and he or she needs something at the store are you going to stop companion from getting that item simply because someone else wants it? yes this analogy doesn't make sense does it? welcome to virtual reality where real world social norms do not apply.

Perfect example of why cross server LFG is a fail and does not need implemented in any game.

Hey Eldren, here's a post I wrote for you that first night, when you were claiming that the idea of passing loot that wasn't designed specifically for your class was socialist.

...

Here's a hypothetical to test the tenets that Eldren claims to live by:

You are walking down the sidewalk and a bread truck is running a promotion, free bread! They are tossing it onto the sidewalk, one loaf per 5 blocks. They toss one directly between you and a what looks to be a very, very poor person. (You have no proof, but theres no reason to think they are not borderline homeless. This is your own estimation). You can reach out and try to grab this bread, and you have a 50% chance to snatch it.

Now, for the sake of the hypothetical, take these as givens, don't poke holes in the situation. There is a thing, you have a perfectly equal right to it as person 2, an equal chance to acquire it if you choose to pursue, except they NEED it more than you. You like bread, you can surely use it. But it provides them more marginal utility. (one last given: it will have no effect on whether or not this person survives.)


What do you do? And please, answer the hypo as given, then feel free to comment as you wish on the merit of the analogy to the current discussion.

Sorry I wasn't sure if that was before or after the roll.

Sooo ... if everyone got a mission reward window after each FP boss is downed with 2-3 random items that boss drops and you can select one, then it wouldn't really matter, because the people that feel it's ok to roll for companions would get an item, and the people who don't agree with it wouldn't care, because they would be getting to pick an item as well.

Or does that make me a socialist, and 'challenge' and 'achievement' are then nullified because your winning a roll does not also mean that someone else lost?