Stop Giving the "Need" Command for Drop Gear in Dungeons to Higher Geared Players!

[Alleo]

Normally I love discussions with people but maybe it would be better to just ignore her? I mean I read through the argument and I just cant understand how this system would benefit anyone..yet even though many people already posted counter arguments, its still a never ending story. Better to just not answer I think?

[ErryK]

stahp

[LalaRu]

I need because I can,
therefore I am.

[Bloody]

I enjoy watching the logic get twisted. I didn't ignore anything: I specifically and clearly stated what my position is, and why, and you, Cordie continue to assume superiority without even admitting your own mistakes. You can claim whatever you want about the comment below the table, but you clearly intended to draw reference between table and "fair chances" under your suggestion (see your comment: "Compare" in said quoted post).

Also, I think you really need to learn how psychological satisfaction works, because it isn't compatible with your model, even though you quaintly added it to your list. Everyone receives some satisfaction from being rewarded for their effort, as a general rule, but the truly satisfying experiences come from being rewarded appropriately with, as the other poster put, monk gear when he runs monk.

@Alleo, I am aware that this is a lost cause for a multitude of reasons, but it is entertaining to see how the logic is used.

Edit: Cordie, what formula did you use for your percentiles, out of curiosity? I would like to compare.

[Saint_Angeles]

Hey I don't care if I'm BiS in every slot on every class I'ma roll Need if I want.

Why? Because I want to. Deal.

[ffchampion]

I am getting sick and tired of finding a piece of gear I need for one of my Job classes and someone with higher lvl gear who clearly doesn't need it anymore goes and hits the "Need" button anyways and snatches it away!

Higher levels geared players should NOT have the ability to do that and needs to be changed where they have to gamble with their luck through the Greed command like everyone else who's Job class doesn't relate to a certain piece of drop gear in a dungeon.

If you want to use a class that you are unable to need on... why don't you play as that class?! that way you can then actually press "need" yourself. in 4 man things its not very common both DPS will be the same class so you should have no problem with Needing

[SendohJin]

My suggestion benefits (i) those that want gear for a class they aren’t playing to the same extent it benefits
(ii) those who want gear for the class they are playing,
(v) those who want gear for desynths,

(ii) is a lie.

those who want gear for the class they are playing has lower odds to get gear under your new system than the existing one, that's not a benefit.

your suggestion is a detriment to group (ii) it's also a detriment to people who desynthesis because their odds decrease when they can't control what types of gear they can need on. i don't need to increase my chances to lot on weaver gear when i do desynthesis for armorer, i play tank/drg so i have better odds at those.

you can't flatten out uneven odds for everyone and claim it's beneficial for everyone. the ones that have higher odds in the existing system are negatively impacted.

[Kosmos992k]

After 8 pages of this bilge and still no real answer to this;

Why shouldn't players who run the content have the same rights of rolling on drops? Those players put in effort too. Sure it's nice if everyone defers to a new player. But enforcing that as a rule seems quite unfair and will certainly reduce the number of players willing to run in DF.

Time to cease the prattle and move on.

[Cordie]

I enjoy watching the logic get twisted. I didn't ignore anything: I specifically and clearly stated what my position is, and why, and you, Cordie continue to assume superiority without even admitting your own mistakes. You can claim whatever you want about the comment below the table, but you clearly intended to draw reference between table and "fair chances" under your suggestion (see your comment: "Compare" in said quoted post).

Where's the logic getting twisted? You see a table, come up with a conclusion after doing some comparisons yourself without even taking into account what you are comparing and for which cases and then you try to attribute your results to me.
If I "clearly intended" to draw reference between table and "fair chances" under my suggestion, then WHERE IS IT?

Also, I think you really need to learn how psychological satisfaction works, because it isn't compatible with your model, even though you quaintly added it to your list. Everyone receives some satisfaction from being rewarded for their effort, as a general rule, but the truly satisfying experiences come from being rewarded appropriately with, as the other poster put, monk gear when he runs monk.

"Hey I picked a job! give me a trophy!". Nice!

Edit: Cordie, what formula did you use for your percentiles, out of curiosity? I would like to compare.

the old way: get the values from one table column, find the minimum and the range (max - min). The k-th percentile is (min + (k/100) * range).

(ii) is a lie.
those who want gear for the class they are playing has lower odds to get gear under your new system than the existing one, that's not a benefit.
your suggestion is a detriment to group (ii) it's also a detriment to people who desynthesis because their odds decrease when they can't control what types of gear they can need on. i don't need to increase my chances to lot on weaver gear when i do desynthesis for armorer, i play tank/drg so i have better odds at those.
you can't flatten out uneven odds for everyone and claim it's beneficial for everyone. the ones that have higher odds in the existing system are negatively impacted.

I didn't base my suggestion on a heavily imbalanced system like the current one, so I wouldn't seek to selectively boost the rewards for 1 or 2 cases of needing gear at the expense of all others!
You have to choose what you want: a biased system like the one we have or a universally fair system like the one I proposed?

I mean I read through the argument and I just cant understand how this system would benefit anyone..yet even though many people already posted counter arguments, its still a never ending story.

I guess you want a biased system, as it is now. I wouldn't be surprised if you thought your needs for gear should be placed ahead of others' too - this is becoming a theme with this approach.

[Serilda]

You have to choose what you want: a biased system like the one we have or a universally fair system like the one I proposed?


I guess you want a biased system, as it is now. I wouldn't be surprised if you thought your needs for gear should be placed ahead of others' too - this is becoming a theme with this approach.

Sign me up for biased too. I want the needs of people who bothered playing a job I didn't want to to come before mine so I don't coast through selfishly needing on things they could actually immediately wear for my desynthesis skill ups. See, there's no actual correlation between selfishness and people happy with the current logical, practical bias other than the one you made.

All people need to do is ask people not to Need. Last time I reply to you as you just ignore the thought that goes into everyone's arguments and spout a load of nonsense to make yourself look like an angel.