Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

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

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

Creed_Buhallin's Avatar


Creed_Buhallin
01.30.2012 , 01:32 PM | #961
Quote: Originally Posted by face_hindu View Post
Sampled from the two largest current threads on the issue.

Anybody have a problem with the data, or if I misrepresented your position, please let me know.
You really don't know anything about statistical methods, do you?

face_hindu's Avatar


face_hindu
01.30.2012 , 01:32 PM | #962
Quote: Originally Posted by ispanolfw View Post
Or in other words you, or the OP, or whomever
Actually, the majority. Not "whomever". You are arguing the status quo. gl, k, bye.
On March 20th, 2006, Moniker said:
We make sword stone for keeper and pull they do it and excalibur come out. have no make stone to for sword we make sword box for sword to put sword in for sword.

Anarchy Online Bulletin Board

face_hindu's Avatar


face_hindu
01.30.2012 , 01:33 PM | #963
Quote: Originally Posted by Creed_Buhallin View Post
You really don't know anything about statistical methods, do you?
Do you take issue with my sample size, or my methodology, or what?
On March 20th, 2006, Moniker said:
We make sword stone for keeper and pull they do it and excalibur come out. have no make stone to for sword we make sword box for sword to put sword in for sword.

Anarchy Online Bulletin Board

subrosian's Avatar


subrosian
01.30.2012 , 01:33 PM | #964
People given the option to anonymously hurt people for their own gain will come up with all kinds of justifications for their behavior. This is why automated dungeons tools are bad - they make the issue even worse by allowing people to dehumanize the people around them even further.


Frankly, the best players in the game (myself included) will only run with each other, precisely because "you people" will ninja our loot, get carried and whine that "Kaliyo would look good in that" when we give the purple tanking drop to an actual tank.
subrosian
<Epitome>
epitomeraiding.com

face_hindu's Avatar


face_hindu
01.30.2012 , 01:34 PM | #965
Quote: Originally Posted by subrosian View Post
People given the option to anonymously hurt people for their own gain will come up with all kinds of justifications for their behavior. This is why automated dungeons tools are bad - they make the issue even worse by allowing people to dehumanize the people around them even further.


Frankly, the best players in the game (myself included) will only run with each other, precisely because "you people" will ninja our loot, get carried and whine that "Kaliyo would look good in that" when we give the purple tanking drop to an actual tank.
Add 1 to the Plus side.
On March 20th, 2006, Moniker said:
We make sword stone for keeper and pull they do it and excalibur come out. have no make stone to for sword we make sword box for sword to put sword in for sword.

Anarchy Online Bulletin Board

Loendar's Avatar


Loendar
01.30.2012 , 01:34 PM | #966
Quote: Originally Posted by Setanian View Post
Again! This is more supposition, used in some to cast discredit. If you kept up with my posts, I have always advocated deciding at the time of roll whether to need/greed/pass.

That in no way takes away from, it is my choice to choose how I roll. What you want is for me, to roll-over and agree that your way is best. It is not.

Further, you keep using obscenities to in some cast more discredit. 'loot whoring'.. Now while I don't really care how bad you are at debating, I would ask, that your restrict yourself to facts and not suppositions. And while you're at it, keep it clean. You have absolutely ni justification for using such words.
I apologize that you don't like the concept of 'loot whore' - but rolling on /almost/ everything simply because you can is pretty much a textbook definition. You don't feel it applies to you clearly, but your statements would indicate otherwise. Maybe not a full on one as you seem to have some capacity for self-restraint if your postings are to be believed.

As for the usage of the word Hell in this context. You'll need to grow a thicker skin if you feel that it goes to the definition of obsecenity in this context.

Xabana's Avatar


Xabana
01.30.2012 , 01:35 PM | #967
Quote: Originally Posted by ispanolfw View Post
Or in other words you, or the OP, or whomever, wants a system that prioritizes what the majority may feel is more important during loot rolls. In this case stats for your particular class. But that's the thing, that minority that DOESN'T agree on what you choose as priority also has the same stake, they pay the same as you for the privilege to play.

So again, unless BioWare decides to side with you and change the system, the players really have no right to force something out of the bounds of the current system on those who disagree. Same applies the other way, we cannot force you to roll with the system as is. But your view differs from the system, you want it changed, you be vocal before the run.
No, if you look at my comment, I included "arguing for" and "should" in my statements. I am not saying that anyone is forced to play a certain way. On that note, I DO disagree with the original title of this thread - "no, you may not roll" literally is incorrect. We're talking about how people "should" play - or, if that feels too imperative, we're trying to come up with a model of the best way that people can play.

ferroz's Avatar


ferroz
01.30.2012 , 01:36 PM | #968
Quote: Originally Posted by face_hindu View Post
TOTAL SAMPLE: 504

FOR ENFORCED VALUATION ON ITEMS: 387
Spoiler


AGAINST ENFORCED VALUATION ON ITEMS: 117
Spoiler


Sampled from the two largest current threads on the issue.

Anybody have a problem with the data, or if I misrepresented your position, please let me know.
Your labels are backwards, at least from my perspective. It's pretty standard of people who argue your position to do that though; it's part of the standard package where you pretend you have some kind of moral high ground.


If you want to actually have accurate labels, you'd want something like
"For enforced valuation of items" and "against enforced valuation of items"

and the groups would be mostly the same

Xabana's Avatar


Xabana
01.30.2012 , 01:36 PM | #969
Quote: Originally Posted by face_hindu View Post
Add 1 to the Plus side.
Make that +2.

Eldren's Avatar


Eldren
01.30.2012 , 01:36 PM | #970
Quote: Originally Posted by subrosian View Post
People given the option to anonymously hurt people for their own gain will come up with all kinds of justifications for their behavior. This is why automated dungeons tools are bad - they make the issue even worse by allowing people to dehumanize the people around them even further.


Frankly, the best players in the game (myself included) will only run with each other, precisely because "you people" will ninja our loot, get carried and whine that "Kaliyo would look good in that" when we give the purple tanking drop to an actual tank.
Well, if you're giving" the loot, that must mean you've got it on Master Looter. Unless I know you already, I won't run in a PUG with Master Looter on, because I don't trust other players (who likewise don't know me) to have my best interests (as defined by my own motivations) at heart. I have no issues with Master Looter in guild runs or groups of friends, but with 4/7/15 other people who I don't know? I'm not giving control over loot distribution to any of those people.
<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.