No, You May Not Roll on Items for Another Class and Strip Out the Mods

STAR WARS: The Old Republic
No, You May Not Roll on Items for Another Class and Strip Out the Mods

Page 99 of 136 « First < 49 89 97 98 99 100 101 109 > Last »

Eldren

01.27.2012 , 01:20 PM \| #981
@ Creed_Buhallin: That's the thing, bro: we aren't going to convince our opposition of anything. We're all throwing digital ***** at the wall here, and hoping we come out less messy than someone else. Everyone's going to continue doing, in the game, what they've always been doing, or are inclined to do in the future. This said, it's why I acknowledge that it's fun to argue here, but no one's changing the way anyone else plays the game. That the moralist arguments are so thunderous and furious is amusing to me, all the more so because they don't contain anything objectively compelling, only entreaties by one perspective to have everyone else acknowledge the primacy of their perspective.
<character name> of the <name> legacy, of <guild name>, a <type> guild on <server> Referral link. Get a frack-ton of unlocks & help me out too! Click me for goodies.

Galbatorrix

01.27.2012 , 01:24 PM \| #982
Quote: Originally Posted by ispanolfw No, you WANT them to change it ASAP. There is no NEED for them to change it to suit YOUR opinions. Now if they DO decide to change it, so be it, they make that choice. But saying they NEED to just proves the point of you wanting to push your opinion on others. Nope, they NEED to because people can't be decent with the current system. I'm sorry, but I'd rather have a fun time and a good group rather than loot drama because someone in the group thought they deserved everything that dropped. - I've NEVER seen anyone complain about someone rolling need on their main attributes. - I've NEVER seen anyone complain to someone who asks "Since no one else needed this, can I roll need on this for my companion?". In fact, most of the time, people are overly polite and say things like "Of course man! Thanks for asking first". With that sad, I've seen many groups fall apart completely due to someone needing blindly for companions/off spec (in WOW), needing for aesthetics or just needing because "the need button was lit up, so I clicked it". You can have your loot drama. I'll keep playing my way to avoid it rather than take the chance that I'll cause it.

Valcutio

01.27.2012 , 01:27 PM \| #983
This is why I always form groups if I decide to use a pug. Somebody that would pull something like that would get booted from the group and blacklisted.
~~~~Snowstorm~~~~ -Mask of Nihilus Server- ~~~~~~~~~~~*~ "I'm a good guy, I just do bad things." - Valcutio

Eldren

01.27.2012 , 01:27 PM \| #984
Quote: Originally Posted by Galbatorrix Nope, they NEED to because people can't be decent with the current system. I'm sorry, but I'd rather have a fun time and a good group rather than loot drama because someone in the group thought they deserved everything that dropped. - I've NEVER seen anyone complain about someone rolling need on their main attributes. - I've NEVER seen anyone complain to someone who asks "Since no one else needed this, can I roll need on this for my companion?". I fact, msot of the time, people are overly polite and say things like "Of course man! Thanks for asking first". With that sad, I've seen many groups fall apart completely due to someone needing blindly for companions/off spec (in WOW), needing for aesthetics or just needing because "the need button was lit up, so I clicked it". You can have your loot drama. I'll keep playing my way to avoid it rather than take the chance that I ll cause it. It isn't an issue of decency, since you have no objective measuring stick by which to determine such. You only have subjective views on what constitutes "decency" to begin with. The loot, and the system for distributing it, is amoral. There's no point in ascribing moral significance to it since you don't have consensus on foundational concepts to begin with. Four people go in, four people down a boss, four people have a chance to roll on an item. If they roll Greed, they're accepting that someone might roll Need, and if they're unhappy with that, they can choose to improve their own chances of getting the item by rolling Need as well. By choosing "Greed", they're saying, "I'm fine if someone else gets this." If they aren't, in fact, going to be fine with that, they can likewise choose the top-priority loot roll. Attempting to ascribe priority above and beyond the in-game system is pointless, ineffective without unanimity, and largely an affectation of those who want to improve their own chances of getting something, all the while putting up a facade of "concern for the community's well-being". I don't think it's remotely close to something so altruistic.
<character name> of the <name> legacy, of <guild name>, a <type> guild on <server> Referral link. Get a frack-ton of unlocks & help me out too! Click me for goodies.

ispanolfw

01.27.2012 , 01:28 PM \| #985
Quote: Originally Posted by Galbatorrix Nope, they NEED to because people can't be decent with the current system. I'm sorry, but I'd rather have a fun time and a good group rather than loot drama because someone in the group thought they deserved everything that dropped. - I've NEVER seen anyone complain about someone rolling need on their main attributes. - I've NEVER seen anyone complain to someone who asks "Since no one else needed this, can I roll need on this for my companion?". I fact, msot of the time, people are overly polite and say things like "Of course man! Thanks for asking first". With that sad, I've seen many groups fall apart completely due to someone needing blindly for companions/off spec (in WOW), needing for aesthetics or just needing because "the need button was lit up, so I clicked it". You can have your loot drama. I'll keep playing my way to avoid it rather than take the chance that I ll cause it. Still want, not need. Implying Need is saying it HAS to change, yet you only provide reasons for WANTING it to change. For example, if there was a bug that caused certain classes to not win items if they had the highest roll, that would be a needed change. Wanting something changed because you dislike or disagree with it is not a needed change. Wanted change sure, and if BW agrees, then so be it. But no matter what you say, or how you wish to rationalize it, it's not a NEEDED change. Drama arises because everyone has a different view on how things "should" work, and then one of them takes issue with someone doing it differently from that. I treat loot a certain way, and if someone else does not, so what? I roll, they roll, they win, more power to them. I lost that roll fair and square.

ferroz

01.27.2012 , 01:29 PM \| #986
Quote: Originally Posted by havok_bloodcraft Does everyone see how category one is to the effect of this thing makes me immediately better at what I am already doing. and category 2 is I want thing. No, lots of people see the truth: that both categories are actually the same, things that you want, for whatever reasons that you want them. Quote: and as for op and agent jacket I would drop group on spot and flame this individual at the start of every day as a ninja looter on fleet and whatever world I was on so everyone knew this person did this kind of stuff and they never got a group again. Personally, I suspect that you'll get yourself on more ignore lists than they will.
I love Penny arcade

VanorDM

01.27.2012 , 01:32 PM \| #987
Quote: Originally Posted by Galbatorrix Nope, they NEED to because people can't be decent with the current system. But what if the current system is how they want it to work? Quote: I'm sorry, but I'd rather have a fun time and a good group rather than loot drama because someone in the group thought they deserved everything that dropped. I would too, which is why if I actually had some interest in the loot that might drop, I would make sure and make my desires known. The best thing to do, is to take a few moments before the group starts and make sure everyone knows what the loot rules will be. If after that people break the agreed upon rules then that's one thing. But if no one says "Don't roll need for companion gear" then you can not really blame someone for doing so, because they had no real reason to assume this was against the rules.

Creed_Buhallin

01.27.2012 , 01:32 PM \| #988
Quote: Originally Posted by Galbatorrix You can have your loot drama. I'll keep playing my way to avoid it rather than take the chance that I'll cause it. This is deeply ironic coming from the guy who's [EDIT: on the side of people who have] threatened to drop groups, blacklist people, and intentionally sabotage groups over someone daring to roll need on something that you don't think they deserve to need. Guess what else doesn't create loot drama? Respecting someone else's opinion on their character, and what's enough of an improvement to justify a "need" roll. Edited for clarity - I wasn't going to bother going to back to see if Galbatorrix had specifically made those claims.

ferroz

01.27.2012 , 01:37 PM \| #989
Quote: Originally Posted by DarthKhaos Misquote much? No, I just checked. The text he had in quotes is indeed the text that was written. So he didn't misquote at all, let alone much. Quote: I can see you are one of those who will do whatever you want because you believe it is your god given right. That's fine and it is mine to leave and let you find a new Tank or Healer. Enjoy. Oh, I see what you're doing. You couldn't come up with a valid response, so you lied about him misquoting you and then added some insults. That doesn't really have the same sort of weight as a real argument.
I love Penny arcade

Galbatorrix

01.27.2012 , 01:46 PM \| #990
Quote: Originally Posted by Eldren It isn't an issue of decency, since you have no objective measuring stick by which to determine such. You only have subjective views on what constitutes "decency" to begin with. The loot, and the system for distributing it, is amoral. There's no point in ascribing moral significance to it since you don't have consensus on foundational concepts to begin with. Four people go in, four people down a boss, four people have a chance to roll on an item. If they roll Greed, they're accepting that someone might roll Need, and if they're unhappy with that, they can choose to improve their own chances of getting the item by rolling Need as well. By choosing "Greed", they're saying, "I'm fine if someone else gets this." If they aren't, in fact, going to be fine with that, they can likewise choose the top-priority loot roll. Attempting to ascribe priority above and beyond the in-game system is pointless, ineffective without unanimity, and largely an affectation of those who want to improve their own chances of getting something, all the while putting up a facade of "concern for the community's well-being". I don't think it's remotely close to something so altruistic. What I don't get, honestly, is how you can't get the concept that a piece of gear with stats for a smuggler should go to the smuggler. You're acting as if every loot drop in the game is universal and everyone can equally use everything. Each FP has specific loot for each class. A lot of times, it is even named appropriately. How can you fault the IA for being upset because he lost the "Operative's Jacket" to the Marauder? Bioware created that loot for the IA class. Sure, you can roll need on that item too if you're a Marauder (and everything else that drops too for that matter), but how can you do so and feel good about it? This is not the way Bioware intended loot to work. Otherwise, they wouldn't have force fed you proper stat priority and also tried to appropriately name the drops to help people figure out who should get what. With that said, they will eventually fix it if it becomes a problem. It hasn't been for me so fat, but then again, I'm sure I've never groups with any of the people in this thread who seem to think it the norm.

Page 99 of 136 « First < 49 89 97 98 99 100 101 109 > Last »

Closed Thread

STAR WARS: The Old Republic

LucasArts, the LucasArts logo, STAR WARS and related properties are trademarks in the United States and/or in other countries of Lucasfilm Ltd. and/or its affiliates. © 2011-2012 Lucasfilm Entertainment Company Ltd. or Lucasfilm Ltd. All rights reserved. BioWare and the BioWare logo are trademarks of EA International (Studio and Publishing) Ltd. EA and the EA logo are trademarks of Electronic Arts Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

You are about to leave this website...

This page is not meant to keep you from following the link you've clicked on. It is just a warning that you are about to leave this website. To go to this page, click the link below.

If you do not wish to follow this link, simply
close this message.

The statements and opinions expressed on these websites are solely those of their respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views, nor are they endorsed by Bioware, LucasArts, and its licensors do not guarantee the accuracy of, and are in no way responsible for any content on these websites.

Close Continue