Horde Mage Beerwizzard ninjas Stockade Pauldrons

[Crixx 2]

2 hours ago, Beerwizzard said:

 

You can roll whatever you want if ur grp agreed to it :)

You can even roll whatever you want of ur grp didnt announce a rule for boe.

I mean you can also roll when your grp agreed to Need before greed but then you will most likely land in this thread xD

on retail 'blizzlike' when you dont state anything about lootrules you can masterloot ninja everything you want, without admins getting involved. If you want to be Safe, this is for all the crybabies in this Thread, take preperation and lead the grp yourself, set lootrules and take ML on important Bosses.

[Yojoo 2]

I'm pretty baffled that this is such a long discussion.

In my experience of playing retail from Vanilla through Cataclysm, I can say that the default loot system is this: Need if you're going to equip it, Greed if you're going to sell or otherwise profit monetarily from it, or Pass if you have no interest. I virtually never needed to discuss this ahead of time, it was just known and understood. 

The few times I had people act contrarily to this system, they knew that they were being ninjas. They'd need roll a BoE blue or epic that they had no intention of equipping, ignore the rest of the party, and hearth out immediately. 

Before this thread, I've honestly never seen anything like a mage attempt to justify his logic of need-rolling a plate BoE item over party members that could actually equip it. Beerwizzard, you're quite eloquent in justifying your greed, but at the end of the day, you ARE a ninja. I'm glad I'm not in your faction. 

[Garun 9]

Seriously, you guys are still at this discussion? I am a tank myself and I know it feels horrible to lose those shoulders as they are BiS until Chromag in BwL and BwL isn't even out on Elysium. However, Beer did not ninja since it's clear from the screenshots with everyone but one guy rolling need that you did not set the rules of the group being need before greed on BoE epics. Always make sure to let people know that BoE epics are need before greed, screenshot that you stated that in the group, and if someone still rolls need, screenshot them doing it and then you will have a real reason to call them a ninja-looter. This thread needs to die in a fire seriously.

[Oakenlix 79]

1 hour ago, Yojoo said:

Before this thread, I've honestly never seen anything like a mage attempt to justify his logic of need-rolling a plate BoE item over party members that could actually equip it. Beerwizzard, you're quite eloquent in justifying your greed, but at the end of the day, you ARE a ninja. I'm glad I'm not in your faction. 

So you've read this thread (so I assume) with all the arguing and then you write this and still call him a ninja? 

Beerwizzard was not one bit more greedy than the tank or any other guys who rolled "Need". He needed them just as much. Please do read the thread again.

[Yojoo 2]

24 minutes ago, Oakenlix said:

So you've read this thread (so I assume) with all the arguing and then you write this and still call him a ninja? 

Beerwizzard was not one bit more greedy than the tank or any other guys who rolled "Need". He needed them just as much. Please do read the thread again.

You may subscribe to that logic, but it's at odds with the design of the need/greed loot system as well as the accepted looting practices throughout the history of this game. You are, of course, welcome to act in that manner, but your "victims" are welcome to react accordingly, such as by making threads like these.

Wowwiki's first definition of "Loot ninja" is: A player who, when in a group, rolls "Need" on everything regardless of if he or she can use it.

The site also clarifies the uses of Need vs. Greed: 

Need: Mouse over the picture of the item to see its characteristics, and if you want to take it to use, click the pair-of-dice button to randomly generate a number from 1 to 100. This is a 'need' roll and the item should be an upgrade for you. If it is an upgrade for your offspec (e.g. healing plate for a tanking paladin), it's generally okay to click Need, but only if no one else needs the item for their main spec. Warning: If you 'need' every drop, you will likely be branded a ninja and have trouble finding groups.

Greed: If you want it to sell, send to an alt, etc., click the coin button for a "greed" roll. This will only result in a roll if no one chooses need.

Argue against this common knowledge if you wish, but don't act like yours is the way it's always been. It isn't. 

[Oakenlix 79]

11 minutes ago, Yojoo said:

Argue against this common knowledge if you wish, but don't act like yours is the way it's always been. It isn't. 

I never said that. 

What I said is that it should be ok do roll "Need" on any BoE, because everyone needs a BoE item equally. You may like or dislike it, but the underlined part is true nonetheless, and no one in this thread has proven otherwise.

[The Fapmonsoon 14]

These clowns are still trying to justify their greed on this post? Jesus lol. Don't you retards have a protest to go to or something?

[Oakenlix 79]

1 minute ago, The Fapmonsoon said:

These clowns are still trying to justify their greed on this post? Jesus lol. Don't you retards have a protest to go to or something?

Have you had a bit of a brain, you would realize who the real clowns are. :) 

"Justify their greed", lmao.

[Yojoo 2]

1 minute ago, Oakenlix said:

I never said that. 

What I said is that it should be ok do roll "Need" on any BoE, because everyone needs a BoE item equally. You may like or dislike it, but the underlined part is true nonetheless, and no one in this thread has proven otherwise.

What's your standard of proof?

My personal experience (not proof, of course) is that "Need" is reserved for those that will actually equip the item.

Wowwiki's definition (pretty close to proof) is the same: "Need" is for upgrades. 

We can fruitlessly debate the concept of "need" in terms of video game items all day, but ultimately the best indicator is the way the community as a whole has always handled this. And the community doesn't handle it the way you do. 

[The Fapmonsoon 14]

Yojoo, to them its gold which = a class appropriate upgrade. Its pointless to argue with them, they don't understand common sense.

[The Fapmonsoon 14]

3 minutes ago, Oakenlix said:

Have you had a bit of a brain, you would realize who the real clowns are. :) 

"Justify their greed", lmao.

Its Cool Oak, you have proven the type of scum you are over and over. The fact that common sense seems to not register to you also tells me that you are probably a 13 year old kid who has no idea how things work and needs a safespace when someone disagrees with your greedy ass.

[Oakenlix 79]

5 minutes ago, Yojoo said:

What's your standard of proof?

My personal experience (not proof, of course) is that "Need" is reserved for those that will actually equip the item.

Wowwiki's definition (pretty close to proof) is the same: "Need" is for upgrades. 

The proof of my point of view is very simple. 

On 19.01.2017 at 2:33 AM, Oakenlix said:

A value of BoE item is the same for everyone no matter if you're gonna use it or sell it. To use this item, you can buy it for the same amount another player can sell it. Therefore everyone needs it equally. 

On 20.01.2017 at 2:42 PM, Oakenlix said:

Say Rogue and Warrior loot a BoE two-handed axe and they both roll "need". Warrior can equip it, rogue obviously can't. So if Rogue wins, he can go to AH and sell it for 1 gold, so that's the value of this axe for him. But if Rogue can sell it on AH, obviously Warrior can buy it on AH too, for the same amount (if the market is somewhat healthy). So if Warrior wins, he saves 1 gold he would otherwise spend buying it. So the value of this axe is 1 gold for him too. See that? 1 gold = 1 gold, motherfuckers.

This is based purely on a very simple logic, and it makes perfect sense to me.  

Yet not a single one of people arguing against this point has shown anything that proves otherwise.

[The Fapmonsoon 14]

because arguing a point with a libtard is about the same as arguing with a wall. You didn't need it, you wanted it for greed reasons (coin). Need would mean you need that item (using it not selling it). Again I am bowing out of this because Oak likes to argue his retarded sense of how his greed (want or need for money) outweighs someones need to improve their character directly.

Keep up the good work Oak, I don't think you have had enough players come here in 12 pages to tell you that you are wrong for you to get it through your skull.

[Wizard 2]

After reading through this thread I have yet to see an argument as to why you should greed on the BoE epic other than to "be nice".

Claiming that the mage is greedy is nonsense since if the epic in question would be a Staff of Jordan for example, him and others in the "need" camp would be fine with everyone in the group needing.

[Oakenlix 79]

1 hour ago, The Fapmonsoon said:

because Oak likes to argue his retarded sense of how his greed (want or need for money) outweighs someones need to improve their character directly.

But I never said anything like that, rofl. It seems indeed that you're arguing with a wall, definitely not with me, you idiot. xD

You can try to find any of my posts saying that my need for a BoE outweighs anyone else's need, but you would fail. On the contrary, I always keep saying everyone needs it equally. But you were too busy typing your bullshit to actually read any of my posts, it seems.

1 hour ago, The Fapmonsoon said:

because arguing a point with a libtard is about the same as arguing with a wall. You didn't need it, you wanted it for greed reasons (coin). Need would mean you need that item (using it not selling it).

You are yet again speculating with what the words "Need" and "Greed" should mean, and you pull it out of your ass. If you are saying I don't need gold, then the tank also doesn't need a gear upgrade - why, he can play just fine without it. But then again, you are a hopeless moron, so I don't expect you to ever change your opinion.

 

 

Edited February 3, 2017 by Oakenlix

[Coop 3]

11 hours ago, Oakenlix said:

You are yet again speculating with what the words "Need" and "Greed" should mean, and you pull it out of your ass. If you are saying I don't need gold, then the tank also doesn't need a gear upgrade - why, he can play just fine without it. But then again, you are a hopeless moron, so I don't expect you to ever change your opinion.

 

 

His speculation is backed up by the majority of the player base, was standard practice for the majority in retail, is how reputable websites define it and how the people who made the game eventually developed the system to make it 100% clear. Yet your logic is apparently superior and it's the rest of us that are being stupid.

By your logic, I guess it would be considered a ninja if the BoE in question wasn't available on the AH then? I suppose we should have different loot rules depending on the popularity of the server and the availability of rare items? 

[Oakenlix 79]

16 minutes ago, Coop said:

His speculation is backed up by the majority of the player base, was standard practice for the majority in retail, is how reputable websites define it and how the people who made the game eventually developed the system to make it 100% clear. Yet your logic is apparently superior and it's the rest of us that are being stupid.

Absolutely. Logic is always superior. And yes, some of you are being hilariously stupid.

16 minutes ago, Coop said:

By your logic, I guess it would be considered a ninja if the BoE in question wasn't available on the AH then? I suppose we should have different loot rules depending on the popularity of the server and the availability of rare items? 

Of course. As I said before, the equal BoE value applies when the market is healthy (which it is). If you had a server with 300 players online and half-empty auction house, things would be different. But we're talking about Elysium.

 

[Reltih 6]

12 pages and counting of proof that for some people hurt feelings is always more important than logic and fairness. Amazing.

 

There have been NO arguments based in logic to disprove what Oakenlix has been saying. What amazes me even more is how many people don't even actually read what he's saying and just go for "omg you're a greedy cunt" when he's advocating for everyone rolling need on BoE's and thus everyone having the same chance at it. If you can stop and think for more than 5 seconds and realize that BoE = gold = same value for everyone it's not hard to see that since it has the same value for everyone, everyone should have an equal chance to get it. 

 

"I can equip it and use it thus I need it more"

I can sell it and use the gold and buy another item, thus I need it equally.

 

"AH takes a 5% cut thus it's worth more to me"

I can sell it in a trade and bypass the cut.

 

"You're greedy and selfish!"

No. I'm saying everyone should have an equal chance to get this bag of gold. Isn't it more selfish to say that you deserve gold more than me?

 

"It's always been this way"

So you're incapable of change when presented with a different option that is purely based in logic and is fairer to everyone? 

 

"WoWWiki says so!"

Everything you read on the internet is infallible truth! No but seriously, the person who wrote the page on WoWWiki has this opinion. 

 

"So everyone should roll need on BoPs too! I can vendor it for gold!"

BoPs can't be traded between players and thus they don't have the same value for everyone. BoPs are also the reason you go to the dungeon in the first place. No one goes to a dungeon for the 0.01% chance that a BoE epic would drop. BoE's are merely a monetary bonus.

 

"Greed is for gold and need is for equip! It's a coin!"

This logic applies well to BoPs. With BoEs it's different though, since we've established that BoEs are basically a bag of gold that everyone can use equally. If everyone rolled greed on BoEs you open up for the possibility that someone will ACTUALLY ninja the item. Having everyone need is fairer and just ensures no one is able to get priority on their roll. 

 

"Any nice and decent person would pass it"

If handing out large sums of gold to strangers is your thing feel free to hit me up in-game. Send your gold to Reltih on Elysium alliance.

[Yojoo 2]

On 2/3/2017 at 1:30 PM, Oakenlix said:

The proof of my point of view is very simple. 

This is based purely on a very simple logic, and it makes perfect sense to me.  

Yet not a single one of people arguing against this point has shown anything that proves otherwise.

Your proof being your own logic is pretty flaky, and frankly, it's not logically consistent. 

See, value is relative. It's a basic economic reality (I only took a handful of econ classes in college, so feel free to condemn my use of terminology, but my point should stand). The value of a given item is ABSOLUTELY DIFFERENT between different individuals, regardless of what the posted price for it at the Auction House may be. 

In game example:

Stockade Pauldrons seem to be on the AH for roughly 450g at the moment. For Beerwizzard, they are, in fact, worth LESS than 450g. 450g is going to be the MOST he will ever get, in money, from selling that item. He's losing money every day from AH fees, and time out of the day spent managing auctions or asking around in Trade chat. If he can't move the item over a long span of time, it could become obsolete as new content comes out, slashing its value. 

Meanwhile, for Mokes, the Pauldrons are worth MORE than 450g. They are worth more for ANYBODY wanting to use it. Otherwise, why they hell would they spend their money on it? Any purchase is an investment, and any investment is not worthwhile unless a greater return is expected. Mokes will gain more than 450g worth of an upgrade immediately by using those pauldrons, as would any plate tank for whom they are an upgrade. 

Janky pseudo real-life example:

You and I embark on an adventure for profit. It is understood that anything we find will be given to the individual for whom it is a "need". I'm a family man, and I drive a shitty sedan. You're a bachelor, and you drive an old sports car. We find a sweet minivan. One would reasonably expect that the value of a minivan for me, being the family man, drastically outweighs the value for you. Similarly, if we found a nice car for picking up women, I'd happily give you first dibs. 

BoE items do NOT hold equal value for everybody. It's literally impossible for them to do so, since value is RELATIVE. Logically and traditionally, the value of an upgrade in gear is always the highest value an item can hold for a WoW character. 

[Yojoo 2]

3 hours ago, Reltih said:

 

"WoWWiki says so!"

Everything you read on the internet is infallible truth! No but seriously, the person who wrote the page on WoWWiki has this opinion. 

 

I attempted to address the "equal value" argument in my previous post, feel free to weigh in.

But regarding my WoWWiki point: WoWWiki, as far as I know, was among the most consistent source of WoW info for the twelve years this game has existed. Being a Wiki, it has been open to input from the community that entire time. Yet, when I consulted the history of the page, I found NO mention of debate regarding using Need on items that the individual was not going to equip. I don't understand how you could ignore that as evidence, because it surely seems damning to me. 

[Reltih 6]

10 minutes ago, Yojoo said:

I attempted to address the "equal value" argument in my previous post, feel free to weigh in.

But regarding my WoWWiki point: WoWWiki, as far as I know, was among the most consistent source of WoW info for the twelve years this game has existed. Being a Wiki, it has been open to input from the community that entire time. Yet, when I consulted the history of the page, I found NO mention of debate regarding using Need on items that the individual was not going to equip. I don't understand how you could ignore that as evidence, because it surely seems damning to me. 

WoWWiki is great for factual things and game information. This, however, is a thing purely about opinions.

[Yojoo 2]

1 hour ago, Reltih said:

WoWWiki is great for factual things and game information. This, however, is a thing purely about opinions.

How is this not factual? It's a definition. "Ninja looter" has had a consistent definition for as long as this game has been around, and while WoW was the first MMO I personally played, I imagine that the approximate definition extends even into the history of Everquest and other older MMOs. 

This thread is full of wishy-washy justifications for denying people gear upgrades. Gear upgrades have always been the primary goal of instance runs in WoW, and the Need vs. Greed system as defined by Wowwiki is in service to gear upgrades. 

[Reltih 6]

20 minutes ago, Yojoo said:

How is this not factual? It's a definition. "Ninja looter" has had a consistent definition for as long as this game has been around, and while WoW was the first MMO I personally played, I imagine that the approximate definition extends even into the history of Everquest and other older MMOs. 

This thread is full of wishy-washy justifications for denying people gear upgrades. Gear upgrades have always been the primary goal of instance runs in WoW, and the Need vs. Greed system as defined by Wowwiki is in service to gear upgrades. 

How is it ninjalooting when everyone rolls for the item?

[Yojoo 2]

2 hours ago, Reltih said:

How is it ninjalooting when everyone rolls for the item?

It's pretty clear from the screenshots that the other two players rolled need after Beerwizzard did, with the intent to give it to Mokes if they won. They were trying to prevent a ninja loot situation. Unsuccessfully. 

[Justme 9]

12 pages of discussion and some people still think their views are obviously correct