Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

PuG Behavior in Flashpoints and Kicking


jediharrsion's Avatar


jediharrsion
10.22.2012 , 07:55 PM | #71
Quote: Originally Posted by ATAMIANM View Post
Last night I was in a PuG doing HM Boarding Party. No words were exchanged by anyone as the FP started, and we defeated the first boss easily. Everyone was greeding on items, including me When we defeated the second boss, a mod dropped that I needed on, after everyone had greeded. (it was a good mod for my comp). Almost immediately a vote kick came up on me where I was called a ninja. I responded to give me a break, and the initiator said "why should I? Do you have a comp I don't know about?" After a ridiculous question like that I was like fine, I'll quit the group and he responded back fine with all of us and they kicked me. (I actually had transported back to fleet at that point). I put everyone in the PuG on ignore.

So my question is, without anyone defining "rules" up front in a PuG, was I out of line? I suppose I could have asked if anyone minded if I needed on it, but can't think of anything else I could have done.
I guess it would depend on the situation. i have done alot of op's and HM FP's lately in the begining i decided to go along with this "unwriten rule" but after acouple days of grinding op's and fp's and having nothing to show for i could care less about this senceless rule if i come across something i need and want (That fits my Class) you can bet your bottom dollor that i'll take it by "needing" for it. IMO i don't think you were in the wrong you want something to show for your troubles.

LadyTributary's Avatar


LadyTributary
10.23.2012 , 01:42 PM | #72
I don't think there's any reason not to Need on something you actually need.

I generally don't have a problem if you need on something for a companion if you ask first.

There's a huge difference between a marauder needing on some cunning gear after he asks if it's okay to grab it for Vette and him competing with a sniper for an upgrade the sniper will actually equip then and there. Maybe the juggernaut wants it for his Vette but rolled greed as a courtesy to the sniper. When people ask first, it puts the whole party on the same standing when it comes to needing for companions.

Also, if you're a marauder and you silently need on agent gear, and then, when called upon it in chat, spew expletives at us, we're going to vote-kick you. It's not that we want the gear so much as an equitable distribution of vendor trash. I'm happy to help you gear yourself up. Beyond that, you're on your own.

Lord_Balf's Avatar


Lord_Balf
10.23.2012 , 07:07 PM | #73
geezes the amount of useless crap in this thread


they all greeded, u needed cause u would use it end of story.
if they wanted it they have the option to need.
crying over blue flashpoint mods is beyond dumb. and besides does anyone ever use more than 1-2 of their companions? gearing up all 6 and qqing about it is just retarded.

luckily im a tank. if u ninja everything i just laugh maybe kick ya
when i get dps that say "hurry up" "spacebar faster" or "if we dont kill this Hm li boss thistime im leaving" ill just boot them now
but over gear.........................

SgtKlavier's Avatar


SgtKlavier
10.23.2012 , 10:01 PM | #74
Quote:
they all greeded, u needed cause u would use it end of story.
if they wanted it they have the option to need.
You cannot treat fair gear distribution as a two case system (need/greed), whereby needing means you have "use" for the item. Utility of the item has a range of values that include direct improvement to main spec (highest), improvement to off-spec, improvement to companion gear, reverse engineering, and even improvement to alt gear via legacy item transfer. Thus, players have developed the social custom of clicking need only in the case of main spec improvement because it has the highest priority. All other levels of utility should be discussed, which is really not a hard thing to do as most people will let you need on something for a companion.

Kyanzes's Avatar


Kyanzes
10.24.2012 , 03:39 AM | #75
Quote: Originally Posted by ATAMIANM View Post
Last night I was in a PuG doing HM Boarding Party. No words were exchanged by anyone as the FP started, and we defeated the first boss easily. Everyone was greeding on items, including me When we defeated the second boss, a mod dropped that I needed on, after everyone had greeded. (it was a good mod for my comp). Almost immediately a vote kick came up on me where I was called a ninja. I responded to give me a break, and the initiator said "why should I? Do you have a comp I don't know about?" After a ridiculous question like that I was like fine, I'll quit the group and he responded back fine with all of us and they kicked me. (I actually had transported back to fleet at that point). I put everyone in the PuG on ignore.

So my question is, without anyone defining "rules" up front in a PuG, was I out of line? I suppose I could have asked if anyone minded if I needed on it, but can't think of anything else I could have done.
When you are kicked it's not obvious that everyone voted against you. I got accused several times, told that now I was on ignore after someone got kicked. Not everyone has to vote for kick for you to get kicked.

Radzkie's Avatar


Radzkie
10.24.2012 , 04:57 AM | #76
Quote: Originally Posted by Totaltrash View Post

The new addition that allows people to trade items actually complements my idea very nicely:
Let's say my sniper wins the roll for a lightsaber and the marauder in my group wants to have it.
Since we now can trade, I can sell the saber to him and we both are rewarded for killing the boss.

I still suggest that we all only use "need" and let the random generator decide for groupfinder teams.
It's as fair as it can be with the current loot system.
No matter how you spin it, that system is selfish. lol. If you get matched with a team of selfish people, all the power to you. Need to your little hearts content. But you're most likely not going to get that perfect match.

Why do you think you're entitled to a reward for every downed boss anyway? If you *REALLY* think you should have one, how about just being happy for someone else getting an upgrade? That should be enough of a reward. It is for me anyway. I even enjoy seeing random PuGs rejoice when they get an upgrade. I put myself in their shoes and remember all the times that I got my own.

Totaltrash's Avatar


Totaltrash
10.24.2012 , 07:12 AM | #77
Quote: Originally Posted by Siorac View Post
It is objectively equal but NOT FAIR. Not by a long way. Yes, you are entitled to roll for it in the sense you mean it: the game mechanics allow it so you might as well. However, common decency and fairness might just stop you from rolling need on something you have no use for but would represent an upgrade for someone else.

Your proposed system reeks of the "winner takes it all, every man for himself, the strongest rules" mentality. Let's just fight for everything and those who have absolutely no shame about anything should come out on top. You say you want to eliminate loot drama but to me it seems you just want to punish polite and well-behaving players for the sake of those who want everything for themselves and have no regard for others at all.

With your system, loot drama would go like this: everyone rolls need. The Marauder who did not win the lightsaber would ask the Sniper why did he not pass on it? At that point, the Sniper might prove to be a decent chap and just give the utterly useless thing to the Mara - or, going by your warped version of entitlement, would just tell him to eff off. It would create a nice atmosphere, I'm sure. Unless you mean that everyone should know they always roll need on everything - which would mean adhering to an unwritten rule, an implied contract. Something you seem to be desperately against. Of course, after passing a few times, people would learn that only extreme selfishness gives them any chance in your system so they'd probably adapt after a while, turning them from decent guys with a sense of fairness into "I want everything for ME ME ME" loot ninjas.

Your suggestion would make some sense if you simply eliminated the option to pass as well. No need to roll, the random generator will decide everything. Would anyone play that game in 2012? No but that's none of your concern, you're ENTITLED to come up with stupid ideas. The current system is fine, most people are actually FAIR when it comes to using it and it should not be changed for selfish players with entitlement issues like yourself.
Yes, yes - nice long rant in support of social contract. And thanks for the insults too.

Your "social contract" system:
Player X runs 10 ops and gets nothing because nothing dropped that he was "allowed" to roll on.
Player Y runs 5 ops and is fully geared because everything dropped and only he was "allowed" to need on it.

My "random generator" system:
Player X runs 10 ops and gets at least some items he can trade/sell or use for his companions
Player Y gets the same chances as Player X.

Your system awards the lucky.
My system awards those who are persistent and work hard.

My system is equal AND fair, your's belongs in kindergarten.

Gloomycakes's Avatar


Gloomycakes
10.24.2012 , 07:49 AM | #78
Quote: Originally Posted by Totaltrash View Post
Yes, yes - nice long rant in support of social contract. And thanks for the insults too.

Your "social contract" system:
Player X runs 10 ops and gets nothing because nothing dropped that he was "allowed" to roll on.
Player Y runs 5 ops and is fully geared because everything dropped and only he was "allowed" to need on it.

My "random generator" system:
Player X runs 10 ops and gets at least some items he can trade/sell or use for his companions
Player Y gets the same chances as Player X.

Your system awards the lucky.
My system awards those who are persistent and work hard.

My system is equal AND fair, your's belongs in kindergarten.
Aren't we forgetting 1 minor thing. Most things that drop in ops/fp are BoP, so you can't sell it and be honest, are dailies really 'that' hard your companion deserves it more than say someone who's still busy gearing up?

and example:
Spoiler


Your system would mean that I'd first need to get lucky enough for a class-piece to drop and then lucky enough to win a roll between 4 other people? Who might have no further need for it?

Almost everyone is able to communicate... If you want a piece for a companion or the mods for an alt, simply ask if it's ok if you need it. If everyone greeded it, I'm sure they don't mind, but it doesn't take long to type "mind if I greed for companion/alt?"

Khevar's Avatar


Khevar
10.24.2012 , 09:54 AM | #79
Quote: Originally Posted by Totaltrash View Post
Yes, yes - nice long rant in support of social contract. And thanks for the insults too.

Your "social contract" system:
Player X runs 10 ops and gets nothing because nothing dropped that he was "allowed" to roll on.
Player Y runs 5 ops and is fully geared because everything dropped and only he was "allowed" to need on it.

My "random generator" system:
Player X runs 10 ops and gets at least some items he can trade/sell or use for his companions
Player Y gets the same chances as Player X.

Your system awards the lucky.
My system awards those who are persistent and work hard.

My system is equal AND fair, your's belongs in kindergarten.
And yet, for some strange reason, my 4 level 50s have had no problems getting gear by ONLY needing when it's a direct main spec upgrade, and greeding/passing on everything else.

Now lets look at this another way. Why would you want to win a Columi token that was not for your class when someone else could use it? And if that Columi MH finally dropped in lost island for your Consular, why should you roll against a Commando who not only can't use it, but doesn't have a companion that can?

And considering you get commendations for the daily and weekly, you still can gear up even if you didn't get that piece you wanted in a drop.

If everyone only needed then all involved would get more credits, sure. But if everyone only needs on class upgrades, they'll get geared faster, because they're not in competition with people that don't actually need it.

mikebevo's Avatar


mikebevo
10.24.2012 , 11:28 AM | #80
Quote: Originally Posted by Totaltrash View Post
Yes, yes - nice long rant in support of social contract. And thanks for the insults too.

Your "social contract" system:
Player X runs 10 ops and gets nothing because nothing dropped that he was "allowed" to roll on.
Player Y runs 5 ops and is fully geared because everything dropped and only he was "allowed" to need on it.

My "random generator" system:
Player X runs 10 ops and gets at least some items he can trade/sell or use for his companions
Player Y gets the same chances as Player X.

Your system awards the lucky.
My system awards those who are persistent and work hard.

My system is equal AND fair, your's belongs in kindergarten.
I disagree because you are not allowing that both X and Y can be the same person. My smuggler was fully Rakata geared after running 1 HMFP, SM EV , SM KP, HM EV and HF KP. My Shadow skipped columi, but still took until I was doing SM EC and NIM KP before I got her geared to about the same level. Is one fair or unfair? No, it is the luck of the draw and what falls, but if you continue to go on raids with a pretty regular group and are not a jerk about needing gear, you will get the gear even if you end up with an almost entirely Jedi Consular group doing NIM KP just so you will have a chance at the mainhand. As to my smuggler I have gone on many, many SM and HM ops with her since getting geared for no other reason than to get others geared. She is BIS campaign level and she will still do SM EV if it will get someone else gear. Which does mean people will pass to allow me to get two offhands in a row in HM EC so I have skill barrels without me ever asking them to.

I can't see people doing stuff like that with your system.