Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

People who ninja for their companions

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion
People who ninja for their companions

Setanian's Avatar


Setanian
02.21.2012 , 11:03 AM | #891
Quote: Originally Posted by Vecke View Post
I'm still undecided on where I stand on this issue, but this kind of sounds like you're arguing against need before greed in general, not just about companions.
Pretty much. NBG has always been a fallacy. In theory, if everyone abided by it, it'd work. But not everyone abides by it, so it is defunct.

Add to all that Bioware gas us companions which are inextricably linked to our main character and you have a situation whereby we need to gear the com anions for them to be of any use.

This has led to the 'I need it for my companion' which I agree with, while others try to dictate that companions are alts or not worthy in some way, because, it means there are more players rolling need rather than greed.

By doing that, the people who feel they have a right to loot before they actually won it, feel they are now being 'robbed' or to use their words, 'ninjas'.

The best overall solution is to simply remove the 'need' button and have a roll/pass system which is 100% fair to everyone.

No-one has yet explained why such a system is unfair.
What is that baseball bat in your signature? Oh! It's a lightsaber! How cute is that !

Vecke's Avatar


Vecke
02.21.2012 , 11:06 AM | #892
Quote: Originally Posted by Setanian View Post
Where has anyone at any managerial level of BioWare said such a thing? Please provide a link?
Nobody at a managerial level has said anything like that. But a bioware spokesperson did give an inference that it's how they felt.

"We will probably limit the 'need' button to only people who match the primary class the gear is meant for."

I accept that this isn't proof of anything and I accept that it's no guarantee of anything. But he did say "we", not "I". And there is a clear inference that the "we" he's speaking of believes that need should be reserved for your character, not your companion.

And sure, you can say that he's not management, and you can say that he might not be speaking for the company, but truly, that's debate-tactics. In reality, he is inferring that bioware thinks need should be for your character.

The people using this as 'set-in-stone' proof that there's a rule are over-stating. I admit that. But this person, who is speaking for Bioware ("we"), did give that inference. To say otherwise (IMO) is simply trying to win a debate. It's not a fact, I admit. But it's a very strong inference.
"I know."

Setanian's Avatar


Setanian
02.21.2012 , 11:07 AM | #893
Quote: Originally Posted by Vecke View Post
Nobody at a managerial level has said anything like that. But a bioware spokesperson did give an inference that it's how they felt.

"We will probably limit the 'need' button to only people who match the primary class the gear is meant for."

I accept that this isn't proof of anything and I accept that it's no guarantee of anything. But he did say "we", not "I". And there is a clear inference that the "we" he's speaking of believes that need should be reserved for your character, not your companion.

And sure, you can say that he's not management, and you can say that he might not be speaking for the company, but truly, that's debate-tactics. In reality, he is inferring that bioware thinks need should be for your character.

The people using this as 'set-in-stone' proof that there's a rule are over-stating. I admit that. But this person, who is speaking for Bioware ("we"), did give that inference. To say otherwise (IMO) is simply trying to win a debate. It's not a fact, I admit. But it's a very strong inference.
I accept inference.. I don't accept it as fact Which others are trying to imply.
What is that baseball bat in your signature? Oh! It's a lightsaber! How cute is that !

Vecke's Avatar


Vecke
02.21.2012 , 11:12 AM | #894
Quote: Originally Posted by Setanian View Post
I accept inference.. I don't accept it as fact Which others are trying to imply.
I agree there. It's definitely not a fact.
"I know."

Vecke's Avatar


Vecke
02.21.2012 , 11:18 AM | #895
Quote: Originally Posted by Setanian View Post
Pretty much. NBG has always been a fallacy. In theory, if everyone abided by it, it'd work. But not everyone abides by it, so it is defunct.

Add to all that Bioware gas us companions which are inextricably linked to our main character and you have a situation whereby we need to gear the com anions for them to be of any use.

This has led to the 'I need it for my companion' which I agree with, while others try to dictate that companions are alts or not worthy in some way, because, it means there are more players rolling need rather than greed.

By doing that, the people who feel they have a right to loot before they actually won it, feel they are now being 'robbed' or to use their words, 'ninjas'.

The best overall solution is to simply remove the 'need' button and have a roll/pass system which is 100% fair to everyone.

No-one has yet explained why such a system is unfair.
I do agree with you that this game has slightly altered the paradigm in regards to NBG. A companion isn't an alt and it isn't a pet. It is far more integrated into the character.
"I know."

Vlaxitov's Avatar


Vlaxitov
02.21.2012 , 11:22 AM | #896
Quote: Originally Posted by Forcebacka
Not really, majority of players dont do blacklisting, if i get blacklisted by few angry nerds, so be it but so far me rolling need on anything i can use havent effected on my abilitty to find groups very fast. Also have to add that no one has left the group cause of that so i guess forum posters doesnt mirror the average player ingame.
Just keep rolling like that at lvl 50 and see what happens. There are several lvl 50s on the server I play who have been branded and are now stuck running all their dungeons with fresh 50s if they get to run them at all and raiding is out of the question for them. Thats just my server though. Your server might have alot less "angry nerds" but this is a star wars mmo so I doubt it.

ferroz's Avatar


ferroz
02.21.2012 , 11:29 AM | #897
Quote: Originally Posted by Vecke View Post
Nobody at a managerial level has said anything like that. But a bioware spokesperson did give an inference that it's how they felt.

"We will probably limit the 'need' button to only people who match the primary class the gear is meant for."

I accept that this isn't proof of anything and I accept that it's no guarantee of anything. But he did say "we", not "I". And there is a clear inference that the "we" he's speaking of believes that need should be reserved for your character, not your companion.
He's not talking about the "why" only the "what"

You can speculate that the why is because they think that needing for companions is bad.

or you can speculate that the why is because they think that needing for companions causes them more work on the forums and in CSR tickets than the alternative, so they're doing what any developers do: they add whatever will make things easier on them. (this is driven by laziness, one of the three virtues of a programmer)

ferroz's Avatar


ferroz
02.21.2012 , 11:32 AM | #898
Quote: Originally Posted by Treazun View Post
1. If we all roll need for gear our companions needs, we will be rolling need on just about every piece of gear in the game. (Ridiculous)
the only thing ridiculous about it is the fact that people keep parroting it when it's not true.

Quote:
2. Was your companion out when the item dropped? If you were in a group, probably not. So why do you think you should take gear for a companion that doesn't help the group out. This would be like rolling need for an alt.
I was out. I roll for something I want, just like the other people who want it.

Quote:
3. How would you feel if a shiny new light saber dropped you know would help your character out greatly, and JoeBob wins it for his companion he only uses to do Dailies on Ilum with.
I'm fine with that.


Quote:
The fact is that items do far more good for a player than they do for a companion, especially at 50 where your companion isn't something you use very often.
No, at 50 I use my companions quite a bit.

Quote:
If you think every piece of gear in the game should be yours for the taking, clearly you are just a selfish person.
Strawman argument, along with an ad hominem fallacy.

You just needed one more for the fallacy hat trick. To bad.

universeman's Avatar


universeman
02.21.2012 , 11:36 AM | #899
The bottom line is that people have different ideas of what things mean. Those who think it's ok to take for their companions are out there for themselves. Because they are ok with taking advantage of those who want to be more polite about even distribution.

Simple as that.

BW REALLY needs to take this system out. It only helps the selfish minority, and hurts everyone else.

Setanian's Avatar


Setanian
02.21.2012 , 11:43 AM | #900
Quote: Originally Posted by universeman View Post
The bottom line is that people have different ideas of what things mean. Those who think it's ok to take for their companions are out there for themselves.
Well I'm not doing the group run to gear you up. I'm sorry, that may sound harsh, but when I do a run, I usually do it to get gear for me and my companions.

There are times I'll do a run specifically to get gear for another player, but, typically, people do these runs for gear for themselves, not you.


Quote: Originally Posted by universeman View Post
Because they are ok with taking advantage of those who want to be more polite about even distribution.
If you decide to roll pass/greed, and I roll need, how am I taking advantage? It was your decision to roll greed/pass, not mine. There is no taking advantage of anything.

Quote: Originally Posted by universeman View Post
Simple as that.
Surely just an opinion?

Quote: Originally Posted by universeman View Post
BW REALLY needs to take this system out. It only helps the selfish minority, and hurts everyone else.
I agree, the ones who want us to not roll and just hand over the gear they believe they are entitled to, are being very selfish.
What is that baseball bat in your signature? Oh! It's a lightsaber! How cute is that !