Skip to Content
11-02-2009 @ 3:45PM
I went thru and upranked every one of LilBanshee's responses cuz he/she said exactly what I wanted to say without knowing how to say it.what these detractors just can't get is that overgeared-guildie-friend coming into naxx and rolling for undergeared-guildie-friend isn't lowering the chances of unguilded-clothie of getting an upgrade. if anything, his presence is increasing unguilded-clothie's chances of getting an upgrade, because with more dps/healing there is more likely a chance of success which means more drops, which means more chances to roll.This is a social game. There are rewards to playing with friends. And the more friends you play with the more rewards you're going to reap. If you want to ascribe to sytematic unchanging rules that apply to everyone in equal proportion one hundred percent of the time what you want is an offline game.And lets be honest here, how many of you ran Direbrew and got the same Ram drop you already had when you were hoping for a Kodo. But you rolled anyway cuz if it was gonna go to anyone it might as well go to the guildie who was also in the run. I did. Twice.
11-02-2009 @ 4:54PM
Regardless it is stealing. If I am in a run I always check the gear of guys that roll against me to make sure they need the item. If not then I will raise hell about it. Since I know they are not rolling for themselves. It is not fair or ethical to roll on an item they will not be used by the player who wins the roll. Most pugs should make them enchant it with a low level enchant so it binds to them. This would resolve the issue. People are just too stingy in the game! Cant believe all of the loot whores. It took me months to gear up with nax gear before ulduar. If they want quick loot run toc 5 and heroic toc 5? Take 4 guildies and let the 5th have whatever drops for his toon?
11-02-2009 @ 4:31PM
Xionfire, while I laud your charity and magnanimous nature, you are misunderstanding economics. We aren't talking about all of us being happy and nice to each other, we're talking incentives.There are several of us here who WANT highly geared toons to have at least some limited incentive to run lower content with us/our guildies and friends. We don't want to benefit from 'charity' or 'brotherly kindness'- though we know those are important and wonderful, they aren't a basis for a system, because the economics of the situation indicates that even if there are nice people who do good things, they aren't likely to compare with the normal people who do things because it increases their utility- their wealth, pleasure, safety, happiness, etc.I, personally, want higher geared toons to retain their right to, for example, roll on one mainspec piece of loot (if the loot rules were set up that way) so that the geared toon and his less geared friend will WANT to come to my PuG in order to help his friend- otherwise, the only incentive for him to come is to help his friend get through quickly, or to exercise his sense of goodwill and charity, neither of which I trust to actually get him into my raid.
11-02-2009 @ 5:09PM
UGH. People, PLEASE stop rating comments up and down based on if you disagree/agree with the content. The rating system IS NOT a popularity contest; it's a spam/inappropriateness filter. LilBanshee has had every comment downrated, yet there is no spam, he is not calling anyone names, and is generally presenting a very cogent argument. You may disagree with him, but that is NOT a good reason to downrate him. This isn't grade school where we're picking who's on the Cool Team and who isn't; we are all reasonable adults (okay, maybe that's a stretch) who can disagree with eachother in a mature manner.
11-02-2009 @ 6:47PM
gurgle,I've said it before and I'll say it again: The "Report this Comment" button directly to the right of those "thumbs up" and "thumbs down" buttons is obviously the spam/inappropriateness filter. Logic would tell you, then, that the rating system is not intended for the exact same purpose, but as a measure of how much people like or agree with comments.Perhaps that's why they chose the nearly-universal symbol of liking/agreeing: The thumbs up.
11-02-2009 @ 8:39PM
LilBanshee: I'm disappointed that someone who knows enough about logic to call out fallacies in the positions of others wouldn't be equally able to admit their own mistakes. Your defense of the letter-writer is based on a false premise: the assumption that a highly geared member of a raid can legitimately "need" gear that he/she would not actually personally use on that 'toon. Rolling on gear in a PuG tells the raid that you need that piece as personal equipment, not for any other purpose, be it to sell, d/e, or trade to a guildmate. The easiest way to solve your difficulty, then, is to be up-front with the raid and tell them for what purpose you are attending the raid. I've run Naxx and OS with people who say they're there for everything from achievements to shards to guildie gear to fun, and I don't object to any of those things. I ran a heroic the other day where the tank wanted gold, so we all chipped in a little and he didn't roll on anything, one guy wanted enchanting mats, so he paid whoever won a previously agreed upon price, one guy wanted it because he had the daily quest and hadn't finished it the day before, the healer just wanted badges, and I went because I was bored and I like H Occ. I personally will PuG Naxx because I like raiding and seeing bosses down as a result of my work with a team. (And occasionally because it's easy gold. :-D) But unless you specify otherwise, the default assumption when you join a raid is that you are there for gear that you, personally, will wear. If you are there for another reason, say so, and all (well, most) of your defense immediately becomes valid. Yes, people are selfish, and yes, we can expect highly geared players to have selfish motivation just like everyone else. The thing to which the columnist and the readers object is the presence of hidden motives. If you fail to make clear that you are raiding for something other than loot for your own personal use, you should not be rolling on loot for any reason other than your own personal use. Example: if a raid wants to PuG one of my non-strict 10-man 'toons for TotGC25 with the assumption that they will all be rolling on all gear for the purpose of guild gearing, okay... I get a chance to see and experience content I otherwise wouldn't, and a fair 1:25 shot at any gear I can use. (Probably a 1:25 shot on any gear, since I would specify that if they were all rolling, I would roll on all things too and sell it back at a set price... 50g or so.) But if a raid PuGed me for TotGC25 and didn't tell me that they were all going to roll on all gear for guild gearing, that's called loot ninja, even though I still theoretically have a 1:25 chance at gear... because they didn't make their intentions plain, they are abusing my interest in spending time and consumables for a shot at gear for me to forward their raid, even if they all roll instead of flat taking the gear.I guess I'm struggling to understand how/why people would condone this sort of behavior when all it takes to take you from ninja to legit is a quick announcement in /raid to the tune of "Hey, I'm here to help out Guildie X, so I'll be rolling on gear that's an upgrade for him/her. Y'all cool with that?"
11-03-2009 @ 9:53AM
@XionFyre"I think the fundamental difference in thought process here is that you believe that when you 'help' another person, it entitles you to a reward."No, I believe that all contributing parties should have an equal share in the profits to use as they wish, because that is a fair system of incentives. In other words *everyone* is entitled to a reward for their efforts, not just everyone except those you don't feel deserve anything for their time. With 6 clothies, an equal share is 1/6th. You believe that overgeared players should be denied any share of anything because the specific reasons that they need those items is not 100% in line with the standard conventions. So you dictate that those profits should be redistributed to give 1/4th to each undergeared player. You would adjust things to benefit the people you choose to help while removing all incentives from those you don't don't choose to give their fair share to - helping some people party while giving others the shaft. My approach helps everyone, and just helps one person more because of a voluntary sacrifice made by two others. Nobody gets the shaft, everyone gets at least the 1/6th they were entitled to, and all effort by everyone is duly rewarded rather than just the effort you or anyone else unilaterally chose to reward.
11-03-2009 @ 9:54AM
@Nuka "Either way the outcome is the same, one of the two who require the gear will be wearing the cloth. Why is it that the one who has a friend should get a better chance at that gear?"I've explained in great depth why the strategy these guildies followed hurt nobody and helped everyone. Whats your argument for why that is a bad thing, other than just a knee-jerk reaction to anything that is not the mainstream approach? The other clothies did nothing special, but you feel they are entitled to an increased cut of the gear over what they would normally get in a 6-clothy run. The guilded fellow, however, did do something special: he brought 3 dps to the raid instead of just himself, yet you feel this extra contribution doesn't count for anything and the other clothies should be allowed to mooch the gear off those extra dps toons. This approach would reward people for doing nothing special while preventing any incentives for those who contribute three times as much. That's a whole new definition of 'welfare' epics."What if raids were once a month, is it still fair that the non-guilded person is locked out without an upgrade, because someone unfairly had an increased chance of winning? Just because lockouts are only a week, the principle doesn't change."Frequency is a red-herring argument, it has nothing to do with the issues at hand. It could be a once-ever thing or it could be a daily thing, it doesn't matter. The underlying issues are the same either way."What if the guilded one was significantly lower, was afk'ing mid-boss fights, breaking CC..."The same is equally likely to be true of the non-guilded dps, that is simply not a part of this discussion. Again, a red-herring argument that has nothing to do with the issue at hand and serves only as a distraction from the real questions.
@gurgle&cutaiaI agree with cutaia. People are welcome to downrank me if they disagree - I might feel differently if this was aforum where downranking makes posts disappear. Other times people promote all my comments and downrank detractors. It's all good, you can't please everyone all the time.
11-03-2009 @ 9:55AM
@RandomLogic buff, eh? Alright, first off I made no such premise that highly-geared players require upgrades. That is another strawman fallacy - which you support using the fallacy of slanting. You overemphasized one point, namely the word 'need' to make the entire issue about that one word rather than about any of the myriad reasons why I've demonstrated that this scenario benefits everyone while hurting nobody. People would get the same 1/6th of the cloth loot if it was 3 other clothies, and the run would just be harder.Furthermore, you used an argumentum ad hominem fallacy, attacking me personally as a means of discrediting my argument. You'll notice I am responding in kind. I am perfectly willing to admit my own mistakes when they are actual mistakes rather than mere differences of opinion.
11-03-2009 @ 12:11PM
LilBansheeI was with you until you disagreed with Random's comment. There is indeed nothing wrong with overgeared players using their roll as defined by the preset loot rules to help out a friend or guildmate.However, they must declare openly beforehand that they intend to do so.This is because, like it or not, the culture of most PuGs is such that people assume that main spec loot rolls are only for players that will actually use the item themselves. You can argue that it shouldn't be assumed, but you shouldn't be so arrogant as to say: "my assumptions are how it should work, so I'm right."The man who steals antibiotics for a dying child denied healthcare is still technically stealing. You can argue that the child should never be denied that healthcare, but that doesn't change the law.Random said it better than I did. Re-read his comment without the "you-disagree-with-me-so-must-be-wrong" blinders.
11-03-2009 @ 1:41PM
@Dag"like it or not, the culture of most PuGs is such that people assume that main spec loot rolls are only for players that will actually use the item themselves"That's true. That's the prevailing opinion, and is why the majority of votes in these forums have been against me. What most people do or think, however, is not in question. The issue is whether or not what those guildies did was fair, not whether or not the culture or the majority of people think it is was fair. Citing popular opinion to support a position is, again, a logical fallacy 'argumentum ad populum'"you shouldn't be so arrogant as to say: 'my assumptions are how it should work, so I'm right.'"I'm pretty sure I never made a claim in this thread that I didn't back up with hard numbers and verbose logic. It doesn't improve your persuasive standpoint by claiming I made an unsubstantiated claim that I never made."The man who steals antibiotics for a dying child denied healthcare is still technically stealing. You can argue that the child should never be denied that healthcare, but that doesn't change the law."That was from a different thread, but I'll go with it... Stealing indicates that by some action on the man's part, something that would otherwise have been the property of another is now the property of this man against the other's wishes.In this scenario, however, the loot which is going to the guilded clothy is loot that would never have gone to the other three clothies even if the guildies were not in the raid and three different clothies had come instead. Its the same number of rolls for the same loot, it doesn't affect the non-guilded clothies whatsoever, they get their 1/6th either way. I don't know how many ways I can explain that, nobody is having anything stolen from them.It's like if a father had a collection of 12 equal-value cars, and in his will he said they should be distributed among his six children. Each child is entitled to 2 of them right? Two of the children, however, already have all the cars they need, so they give their 2 cars to their favorite brother, who now has 6. He didn't steal those extra 4 cars, nor did his siblings. They each took only their fair share, and did what they pleased with that share. That's fair. Demanding that the cars be redistributed, 3 cars each to the children that want cars, is not fair. It deprives the two wealthy children of the power to use their inheritance according to their own wishes."you-disagree-with-me-so-must-be-wrong blinders"I hear that insulting people makes your argument more valid.
11-03-2009 @ 4:25PM
"What most people do or think, however, is not in question. The issue is whether or not what those guildies did was fair, not whether or not the culture or the majority of people think it is was fair."If you are playing a game with other people and don't care whether they think your actions are fair, you are going to run into problems. Arguing about whether something is fair in an abstract sense is less important that asking whether the people you are playing with understand and consent to it. If you are acting fairly, there should be no reason to hide what you are doing.The widely held expectation for "Need Before Greed" is that "Need" is used for items that are personal upgrades suited to your main spec. If you want to implement a different standard, that's fine, but it falls on you to communicate that to the group and get agreement for it.If they were clear at the outset and agreed to by the raid leader, then fine. In that case, everyone in the raid makes an informed decision to stay and accept the loot rules. If not, these players are putting other people in the raid at an unfair disadvantage in a couple of ways, compared to if a standard NBG system were in force.First, they are adding in competing rolls that wouldn't be there otherwise. True, they might not be in the raid at all if not to gear up a guildy, and they might be replaced by someone who would roll anyway. But they also might be replaced by someone just running for badges. They might be replaced by a cloth wearer who didn't need the particular item being rolled on. They might be replaced by non-cloth wearers.Second, they were disadvantaging other players that may have wished to engage in the same behaviour: sharing their rolls. The other undergeared cloth-wearer might have guildies of his own along for the ride. Suddenly instead of 3 against one, the roll should be 3 against 3.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.