So It's against the rules to need for another job?....

[DishSoap]

If tank and drg need on it, then it depends on who win. But there was no DRG in the party.

The point
----------
Your head

[Niwashi]

It's still the fair thing to do since everyone there participated. That and it helps even out the RNG a bit. I mean, you could get only tank drops the whole run and the tank would just take everything. Where if he greeded, everyone would have a CHANCE at something.

Actually, no, it doesn't even out the RNG. It's as likely for the tank to win all the RNG rolls if everyone greeds as it is for only tank gear to drop. It just changes when the randomness comes into play, whether it's in determining which pieces drop, or in determining who gets them.

So long as everyone is following the same standard, overall gear distribution should be fairly balanced. Either each player has certain items they can Need on and a random chance of those dropping, or else everyone using Greed with a random chance of winning the roll against each other on each piece.

The times you end up with uneven distribution are when different players are playing by different rules. If some are skipping the Need option and just Greeding everything, while others are Needing what they can and Greeding the rest, then you'll get an unfair distribution. But that unfair distribution can't be blamed on one particular side. Both are equally at fault for not coordinating with each other what they're doing. (Unless, of course, they did coordinate a plan and one side broke it. That's the only case when there's someone to blame for unequal distribution.)

When playing with a random group, you have to accept that, despite whether it's your preferred distribution plan or not, the default plan the group as a whole has is the one established by the game itself. The game software has already established a rule that (baring a few special cases like Unique items you already have) you can Need on anything appropriate to your current class/job, and can Greed on anything else. So if you care about equal distribution, then that's the rule you should be following in all random groups. To follow any other rule, you should have a PF party with loot rules in the PF description.

If someone is rolling need for this reason I will leave

Now that I'm curious about, specifically the "for this reason" part. When someone else in a group rolls on something, how in the world do you decide what their reasons are? It's possible they might want to trade it in for seals, but it's also possible that they may want it for an alt class or cosmetic. Maybe they've been farming this instance over and over for weeks just trying to get this specific item because it's the final piece they need to complete their outfit. It might even be the only reason they're currently playing the job that can Need on it (which would make the suggestion that they shouldn't Need on it rather inane).

Now I actually agree with you when it comes to rolling Need to sell or turn in for seals. But I'd never just assume that's the case when somebody rolls on something. It sounds like that's likely what happened with the OP. He actually did need the gear as gear, not for seals or gil. But the rest of the group acted like he was being greedy to take his loot.

[Shori]

As with many whove posted here have said: if they wanted tank loot then they should have tanked. Couldnt be clearer.
However, I'd advise OP to take the image down as its a form of naming and shaming. I (we) are on your side but dont want you getting a telling off from the mods.

[Wobble]

As with many whove posted here have said: if they wanted tank loot then they should have tanked. Couldnt be clearer.
However, I'd advise OP to take the image down as its a form of naming and shaming. I (we) are on your side but dont want you getting a telling off from the mods.

That is my name showing, I blotted theirs out

[ispano]

Now that I'm curious about, specifically the "for this reason" part. When someone else in a group rolls on something, how in the world do you decide what their reasons are? It's possible they might want to trade it in for seals, but it's also possible that they may want it for an alt class or cosmetic. Maybe they've been farming this instance over and over for weeks just trying to get this specific item because it's the final piece they need to complete their outfit. It might even be the only reason they're currently playing the job that can Need on it (which would make the suggestion that they shouldn't Need on it rather inane).

Now I actually agree with you when it comes to rolling Need to sell or turn in for seals. But I'd never just assume that's the case when somebody rolls on something. It sounds like that's likely what happened with the OP. He actually did need the gear as gear, not for seals or gil. But the rest of the group acted like he was being greedy to take his loot.

It depends on what they're rolling for. Usually when you SEE them with that piece as glamour, ie you know they've already gotten it. Now in this particular case they might have turned in the old one or desynthed it, but that could be on purpose too. But when it comes down to accessories and especially belts. You can't glamour belts at all. So if theirs is better already, it's a pretty clear indicator, and with acc, it's almost always a clear indicator due to them being good for GSM desynth.

Basically only if it's almost guaranteed do I ditch. I don't roll on things in low level dungeons in the first place, so someone needing an item for an alt class has no purpose, since it would use the same thing as they are currently using, meaning they are needing for the current class/job as well.

[Lamentations]

I do not do duty finder outside of FC these days at all, I know these people and we all know what someone needs or discuss it on the run.

There is "no" official standard mechanic that says you have to pass on gear because you didn't "come on that role", so you either have a knight in shining armor for a heart, or you don't, without the difference none of us would "know" the difference, I simply refuse to associate with the latter.

It's life, for better or worse, real people play MMO's, in that respect it is "real life".

If I was doing pugs at all I would just pass on everything, because I have no patience for people who apply rules of any kind to a system that was designed with close to none.

Hunts is another glaring example, while I think it is laughable SE may have assumed players would approach hunts in a mature matter, I think they knew better, or should have.

Some might blame this on SE, however reacting like infants is after all finally in the players ballcourt, Se is not responsible for people being immature idiots.

If my FC ever drops to the point where my DF isn't 100% within those ranks ill just bug out and find another game.

Expecting gamers to act reasonably under the current loot/roll system is sheer fantasy in a game with a 13 year old entry age, many people less than 30 these days are real character train wrecks.

Seeing its mine loots! in chat would just make me drop automatically and blist whoever made the noise.

[MeiUshu]

Ispano, I have a question for you and I mean this in the nicest possible way, you always in almost all your post, come out as if only you mattered ? is there a particular reason why you actually act that way considering anything that may actually put a challenge on you is treated as a problem and must be removed ? it really bugs me.

As for this topic, whether said person has arleady the gear for glamour or not, shouldnt really bother anyone, if someone want something and is not breaking any rules, and by having that little button lit up is by definition not breaking any rules, then that person can press the motives are solely his or hers, what does it matter to you what another does with what is at his or her disposition? People tend to interfere in what is not theirs to interfere. You didnt get it ? tough luck, you choose to pass and someone that has already the gear go it ? so what ?

Seriously, self entitlement is really destroying this game in many ways

Mei

[ispano]

That's what you're missing. I'm not asking the person to give their rolls up for me. I'm not even asking them to do anything really. I will never hit need for something I plan to desynth or turn in for seals. Never. I will also never tell someone else they have to roll that way, but I also don't have to play with said person.

As for posts in that other thread, you keep thinking about the one person, ignoring the three others there. That's how it works, if the one is holding back the three, they do not belong. You also think when I say holding back, I make that decision instantly without asking the person or offering advice. You assume I just boot and be on my way. No, I always ask or urge the person to perform, give advice or whatnot. But many times, they do not care, do not listen or do not take it. I personally leave at that point, I've only ever initiated a kick ONCE. But that doesn't mean we should be REQUIRED to let that person stay and hold the group back.

[MeiUshu]

ah then whta you say or how you say tend to lead to believe that you infact want others to go abotu the way you do...kind of weird and still a way of being self entitled...thanks for clarifying

Mei

[BobbinT]

That's what you're missing. I'm not asking the person to give their rolls up for me. I'm not even asking them to do anything really. I will never hit need for something I plan to desynth or turn in for seals. Never. I will also never tell someone else they have to roll that way, but I also don't have to play with said person.

As for posts in that other thread, you keep thinking about the one person, ignoring the three others there. That's how it works, if the one is holding back the three, they do not belong. You also think when I say holding back, I make that decision instantly without asking the person or offering advice. You assume I just boot and be on my way. No, I always ask or urge the person to perform, give advice or whatnot. But many times, they do not care, do not listen or do not take it. I personally leave at that point, I've only ever initiated a kick ONCE. But that doesn't mean we should be REQUIRED to let that person stay and hold the group back.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipocrite

lol