Greedy Goblin

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Ninja!

Got a whisper from a lvl1. He wrote because his main was a victim of one of our guildmembers being a ninja (beware, terrible lolspeak)

When I clearly did not support his agenda, he did not give up:


These screenshots represent perfectly the "social leech" behavior. While antisocials can also be leeches, they are conscious about being one. I mean when I take something from someone, I am aware that we are in a competitive situation, I'm also aware that the social norms are on his side, I just choose to break them. Social leeches are completely oblivious of their leeching behavior, even when it's obvious to everyone else. This guy needed on a healer BoE as DD and was outraged that the tank did the same. He did not care that Blizzard has many times declared that the LFD loot rules are implemented in the system, so if you can roll need, then you can roll need.

His thought process is simple: I "need" it, so I'm entitled to it and everyone else who wants it is bad. Please note that none of his actions were aimed to somehow reclaim the item. He went out of his way to "punish an evildoer". He truly believes that his need makes a right that must be acknowledged and enforced by everyone else.

The reason why a social leech must be faced, why "lets give them welfare so they don't riot" doesn't work is that they believe that they deserve what they got. They don't consider us good people who help them, they consider us bad ones for simply having something, who must be forced to give him what he is due. He can't be reasoned as this is not a conscious thought, it's a feeling: "I need it, so I deserve it".

One day we have to say no to them in real life. But we can and shall do it now in the game. BoEs are liquid, they are equal to gold as they can be bought and sold by anyone. Everyone has the same usage for them. Declare that everyone greeds on BoE, and don't roll until others roll. If any of them roll need, roll need too.

He "needs" it, so what, he can buy one in the AH. By getting it for free, you simply save him its price as he don't have to buy it. Why should we reward being undergeared with gold?

44 comments:

Lyxi said...

You're a bit late on this, Gevlon. prior to this change, I've argued my lungs out on the R&D forums to not go ahead with this change (BoP on need) and just disable the 'need' button for everyone.

To no avail. There were a few people who understood me, but the vast majority thinks this is a good move. Bitterness aside, I have stated that if anyone 'needs' an BoE in a dungeon from now on, I shall 'need' it too. I've been called everything from 'selfish' to less flattering names.

Eh. This battle is lost, so now all that remains is to abuse this new change and flood the forums with tears. Blizzard didn't want a 'market' solution and opted for an interventionist approach, let them reap the reward in tickets and whines.

Yaggle said...

This guy obviously never played Everquest, where anybody can loot another group's kill after a short timer runs out. To me, there is no such thing as a ninja in Wow. Blizzard's game is made so well that I don't even think there is any need for any GMs at all.
Way too many crybabies.

nightgerbil said...

Oh that makes sense. I wondered about the banter on guild chat. I was to afraid to ask though. Cant say I agree with everything you say though as sometimes people really are taking the piss. Still I recall your "bad mana" lesson(and the responses when I treid to help them). Try to help these scum, get burned. Since I started reading you I stopped giving to gold beggers and that has to be the biggest quailty of life des. ever for me. More then Blizz ever did for any class. Incidently did you ever listen to ryan carlin of "warcraftpodlounge"? I think you might like it.

Espoire said...

"This guy needed on a healer BoE as DD and was outraged that the tank did the same."

...well, technically, "healer" gear is identical to "perfectly-itemized hit gear for Shadow priests".

See: http://www.wowhead.com/spell=47577

That said, BoEs are gold, and I feel that even the social norm of "everyone roll greed" is silly. Why make the default course of action one in which you can be "stolen from"? For that reason, my default choice is roll need unless someone talked about it ahead of time.

Ðesolate said...

Again the "secondneed"-ninja-QQ. Blizzards GMs and Support-Staff already stated out that the system is working as intended. It is ment to be this way, so you can join with your manspecc at better performance and gear, to keep LFD running.

Even here at http://www.wowwiki.com/Loot_ninja is no word of needing for second spec. This guy is performing namecalling and is completely wrong.

But nothing new at the M&S-front.

chewy said...

I wonder how the Blizzard GMs deal with these reports ? He's clearly an imbecile but he's also a paying customer. I can imagine it's somewhat soul destroying having to be polite and reasoned with these idiots. No matter what happens they aren't going to get the outcome they want and they will blame the GM.

I suspect the attrition rate amongst GMs is very high.

Zazkadin said...

BOE loot ethics are funny: you are right that everyone in the group should have the same right to the drop, as anyone who claims he needs it, should explain first why he hadn't bought the item from the AH already.

If you roll need on a BOP item, my loss is a 20% chance on a shard, which is a negligible loss. But if you roll need on a BOE item, especially if its a (troll) epic, my potential loss can be many hundreds or thousands of gold.

The ethic that one shall always roll greed on BOE items that one does not intend to use is strengthened by Blizzard's changes to disallow rolling need on items that one cannot or should not use (warrior cannot roll need on cloth) and the upcoming 4.2 change to turn BOE items into BOP when won by needing.

That being said, the MotD is a hypocrit and I am slightly disappointed you did not confront him with that, just to see how he would try to talk his way out of that.

Azuriel said...

Patch Note in 4.2 going Live today:

-If a player wins a Need roll under the Need Before Greed system on a Bind on Equip item, the item will become Soulbound to that player. The item will remain unbound if won via a Greed roll.

For what it is worth, while it is Blizzard's prerogative to decide what loot systems to force everyone to use, the informal "MS > OS" rule is the only one that passes the Categorical Imperative test. The Imperative basically asks "If everyone did what you are about to do, would the action still have value?" If everyone lied, would lying have any function? No. Ergo, immoral. If everyone press Need, would pressing Need have any function? No. Ergo, immoral.

I get that you are suggesting a quasi-morality here (everyone gets equal Greed rolls, unless someone presses Need, at which point you should press Need too), and obviously I don't agree with all of the conclusions Kant comes to (telling axe-murderer exactly where your hiding friends are at), but I did want to mention that this "leech" is following a quantifiable moral code. Now whether that is simply because it was convenient at the time or if he's gaming the system, etc, we probably have no way of telling.

Lei said...

There is no BoE offhand in ZG, there is only BoP (Lost bag of whammies). That guy said BoE in whisper, but he said BoP on trade. His mistake, yes.
Is this a recent story? I mean the druid from your guild had a ZG last boss kill 6 days ago. But the druid has the offhand in his loot history in May (1 month ago)
The priest you linked has the first ZG boss kill 3 day ago. So even if the priest is a leecher, why would the druid roll need on a BoP loot that he already got 1 month ago? Just to screw with others? Or for the 12 gold vendor price?

Anonymous said...

"BoEs are liquid, they are equal to gold as they can be bought and sold by anyone. "

Blizz are changing this so that needing on a BoE will cause it to be soulbound. Can't remember if it is in 4.2 or not, but in any case this argument will not be valid soon.

In other way, I do think that the basic courtsey of MS>OS should apply in pugs... but it doesn't, Blizzard says there is no such rule so *shrug*. Not like the dungeon gear matters for a long time anyways - in early Cata it did for a while, but not any more.

Azzur said...

The social leech... precisely why greece is in such strife now. They believe that they are not responsible for the debt and wants the govt to continue to borrow more money to sustain their welfare state lifestyle. The only problem is... no one is going to lend anymore money to them.

There was a documentary/movie titled debtocracy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debtocracy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKpxPo-lInk

This was funded by a lot of people. In summary, they blame everyone but themselves for getting into this mess.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the statement. Fortunately 4.2 solves the problem completly:

"If a player wins a Need roll under the Need Before Greed system on a Bind on Equip item, the item will become Soulbound to that player. The item will remain unbound if won via a Greed roll."

Anonymous said...

Comparisons between a place where ppl don't have to eat, don't need a place to sleep, can teleport/logoff to avoid any adversity and life as we know it ( RL ) should be taken lightly... Someone with too much time on his hands and wellfare don't really mix.

Steel said...

Ok, I can see your point. It's true that BoEs are BoE, and the loot rules are what Blizzard made them. Still I make it a point of honor not to need against a mainspec upgrade, boe or not. You understand the concept of honor, do you? Like that guy in the 5th element said, "honor has killed millions of people but hasn't saved a single one"... ok, bad example. But still. I'm actually glad that blizzard is implementing BoE bind on Need in the next patch. Actually did somthing right for a change.

Ihodael of Darnassus said...

"This guy needed on a healer BoE as DD and was outraged that the tank did the same"

This was the first reason why I took the time to wait until everyone had rolled: the healer (which was mostly in blues and this was an epic) and the two other dd's rolled greed. The priest (as a dd) rolled need without any kind of warning or anything. Then got upset when I rolled need. Unlucky for him: I won.

Did not know that Gevlon had to put up with so much nonsense over this.

Two other facts that I would like to put out on this one:
1. I did won the BoE and I did give it to the healer. This guy was the healer http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/character/draenor/Madffox/simple. You can see that he gets the Heartbound Tome epic one day ago (that was the said HC run). If you check my own armory you will see I have no such win in my entire playing history
2. He got kicked by the other LFG member. I didn't even got to vote. I was actually explaining to him why I had needed the item to give it to the healer when the rest of the group decided to kick him for being rude in party chat

I guess now I must wait for my guild kick or my Blizzard ban for being naughty.

Anonymous said...

The far better way to handle BoE's is just to need on them, no matter what. If everyone does it this way, noone can ninja them. Most Tradepugs I've seen are raid-rolling BoEs, so it is in fact widely accepted behaviour.

Some people however will never understand that,..

Anonymous said...

In 4.2 this guy will get what he wants, sadly. As a BoE will now become bound to your character if you click need. And thus making non-need people less inclined to need it. Or in the case of this shining example of M&S, more likely.

Anonymous said...

Isn't there a change in the upcoming patch that makes BoE's that you need roll on soulbound? About time.

Anonymous said...

That's a perfect example, for sure. Even ignoring the fact that he stands corrected in /2 about the trade of the item within two hours. Truly a M&S.

Anonymous said...

My response is always as follows to these situations:
"If you wanted it, you would already have it."

Often followed by a link to opportunity cost on Wikipedia.

Draturg (from Magtheridon project) said...

hy do you consider offspec and mainspec to be of similar priority? I would be angry as well if some feral druid needed on a caster item while a caster also needed it (need as in the roll), not because I am social, but because it would prevent utilization and gear progress where the improvement is the greatest. This is similar to the argument you used when arguing for ninjaing epics from lolarthasDK some time ago: The enchant from the shard will benefit yourself more than the +10 stam and strength it will contribute to a clueless player.

As for the "victim" assuming that items cannot be traded cross-realm, well, he is kind of stupid for not knowing that after playing for a while, and whereas your anti-social arguments in this post may be valid, the cause behind this conflict is not necessarily social.

Anonymous said...

You should put a bit more effort into understanding the concept of 'main spec priority', and the difference between what is legal, and what is ethical.

If I did not understand the issue correctly, and the item in question was a healer offhand, being offspec for both a dps and a tank, then of course his accusations are not grounded.

Cecht said...

While I agree with you that this person was a lol-speaking idiot, and that your guild member is in no way a ninja, the off-hand he is refering to is also usable by shadow priests (or balance druids), since spirit becomes hit to them.

He was trying to say, "I needed it for my main spec, your guildie needed it for his off-spec, therefore, I should have gotten it, since I need it more."

This is typical social behavior, and utterly absurd. Everyone has as much right to everything that dropped as everyone else in the group. Need does not factor into who deserves what. Did your druid put in as much (or more since he was tanking) effort as the priest? Then he has the same claim to the item as the priest.

Notice that the socials response was: "He should have queued as a healer or balance druid if he wanted to roll on it." This is equally absurd. There is a massive tank shortage, so your guildie did the smart thing, and filled a need in the market. If he had queued as something else, this priest would have been waiting longer in the queue and bitched about how there were no tanks. And then he bitches that the tank actually wants and wins something?

Anonymous said...

There is only one offhand dropping in Zul'Gurub (http://www.wowhead.com/item=69632) and it is BoP.
However, it is perfectly legit both for healer and DPS specs of hybrid classed (shadow priest/elemental/moonkin) due to spirit -> hit conversion.

Current LFD loot system prevents Needing an item by classes that can't use it. Plate tanks can't need this offhand, but bears can since they can respec to tree/moonkin and use it.

Anonymous said...

"Declare that everyone greeds on BoE, and don't roll until others roll. If any of them roll need, roll need too."

You realize this leads to everyone waiting until the last second and then hitting need?

A 359 BoE dropping in a 346/353 zone is a valid "need" item if it is an upgrade. Unless you're killing Halfus/Ascendant Council, you'll be using a 346 off-hand. I've killed Heroic Halfus a dozen times and have killed Heroic Nefarian...and I'm still using the 359 Halfus off-hand. Sometimes RNG loot sucks.

Perhaps more importantly, Blizzard agrees with what I'm saying and disagrees with you about needing on BoEs, which is why they're making rolling "need" on a BoE bind the BoE to you immediately, specifically so you cannot sell it on the AH for gold if you hit "need." Aka, if you actually want to use it you'll hit need, if you want to sell it you'll hit greed.

Dancingblade said...

"Aka, if you actually want to use it you'll hit need, if you want to sell it you'll hit greed."

Or...

If gold means nothing to you and receiving vendor price is worth pissing off a group of random strangers - you'll hit need.

This is going to be an EPIC change...

Pickles Johnson said...

The only true ninja is the Raid Leader Master Looter, who kicks the entire raid only to loot the drake mount, gold and all the other goodies for himself infront of every, then ride off into the sunset.

It doesn't happen often, but usually it is by people who know they are changing realms or something.

On the topic though, There is no loot that is yours until it is in your bag.

Anonymous said...

"That said, BoEs are gold, and I feel that even the social norm of "everyone roll greed" is silly. Why make the default course of action one in which you can be "stolen from"?"

Only partially solved in 4.2. Needing on a BoE will make the item Soulbound rendering it BoP. This still allows for grieving from a single person who can need and then vendor or DE the BoE item.

Abolishing need, forcing a social consensus in the group by letting people voluntarily trade or pass on item works much better. But LFD is not social, at all.

In the Troll HC I did not find it a big issue regarding the BoE since they were not worth that much. The BoE world drops abuse was bigger (especially by hybrids) because people needed whenever they could on the those expensive BoE items. Some classes are not able to press need. If plate drops, a clothie cannot need on it no matter if it is BoE or BoP. So "everyone press need" works on a maelstrom crystal or a mount, but not on a BoE gear item. This is fixed in 4.2. Not following MS > OS also allows a hybrid to gear up faster at the expense of the non-hybrid since they don't have an OS. That isn't fair, and isn't fixed. I say however: hate the system, not the player.

"I wonder how the Blizzard GMs deal with these reports ? He's clearly an imbecile but he's also a paying customer."

The same way any customer support deals with such an issue having to tell the customer they won't get what they want: being polite, yet firm. If necessary, repeat what has been said, and then say the decision is final and further discussion is unnecessary.

Heartbound Tome http://www.wowhead.com/item=67149/heartbound-tome is perfect for a priest! It has int, spi (= hit for shadow), and mastery. While mastery is not great for shadow, it used to be, and it will be boosted again in 4.2. For disc and holy, mastery is good, and can in this case optionally be reforged to haste (haste is generally better for holy, and shadow, but not disc who stack mastery). A shadow priest, boomkin, or ele shaman who stacks hit instead of spi is a dumbass since Blizzard designed it in such way that spi gives back mana as well as giving hit. If you follow MS > OS the shadow priest has as much right to this item as a druid or priest healer. If you do not follow MS > OS then everyone who can need on it has right to have it, and Idoheal won the item. He is then free to use the item as seeing fit including giving it to a random person.

Although the worth of ilvl 359 gear has greatly decreased since 4.2 is coming we can also see that said healer never equipped the OH: http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/character/draenor/Madffox/achievement#92:a5372 shows that he does not have Cataclysmically Epic in weapon. If he equipped the OH, he'd have this achievement. I know this 100% sure since I had this achievement while having an ilvl 346 weapon and an ilvl 359 OH.

I've even had specimen who disagreed that they freely DE items. They believed that only they were entitled to enchanting materials because they were enchanter. Anyone else did not need such materials anyway...

Anonymous said...

"The only true ninja is the Raid Leader Master Looter, who kicks the entire raid only to loot the drake mount, gold and all the other goodies for himself infront of every, then ride off into the sunset."

No, it is not a necessarily ninja.

There are 3 options:

1) You don't have a ML, you use Need Before Greed on mounts. Don't like the looting system? Don't join that PuG!
2) You do have ML, and no loot rules were stated in /ra at start. Something is given to someone. You have no right to complain.
3) You do have ML, loot rules were stated were stated in /ra at start. A) The legendary is reserved B) nothing else is mentioned. The mount is not mentioned. If the legendary drops, the ML has to give it to the person it is reserved to. If the mount drops and it is not rolled according to the loot rules, that ML can and will receive an infraction on their account. Most likely, their account will be banned lifetime.

Don't believe me? Go look up the post on the WoW forums. It is there. Search for ninja loot and you will find exactly what I wrote here, and also you will find that anyone who can press need in LFD is not ninjaing anything.

Ihodael of Darnassus said...

One letter was cut off my last link:
http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/character/draenor/Madffox/simple

And for those replying that there is no BoE healer offhand. There is. It is the one won shown in the armoury link above (like I said, I won it and gave it to the healer).

Most likely very very low change of drop... but it dropped: http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/item/67149.

As for "Ihodael is a ninja" argument: I rest very much at peace I was not a ninja. I needed to avoid that the dd would ninja it from the healer. It worked... and ofc as Gevlon puts it leech dd got upset.

Would it all over again (well until tomorrow... then it would be kind of useless unless we can trade the soulbound item to someone else too).

Bristal said...

There's a part of Illodael's story that I don't get:

"...I took the time to wait until everyone had rolled: the healer (which was mostly in blues and this was an epic) and the two other dd's rolled greed."

The healer in blues rolled greed? Then you tried to "help" by taking it from a player who KNEW that he needed it?

How is that not M&S welfare? And coming from PuG member no less.

Illodael basically took it upon himself to intervene and redistribute resources based on social feelings.

I'm thinking the healer was the true M&S in this scenario. And attempting to boost him was what created the drama.

Anonymous said...

"As for "Ihodael is a ninja" argument: I rest very much at peace I was not a ninja. I needed to avoid that the dd would ninja it from the healer."

It's as good for the DD as it is for the healer. Is the DD a worthless sack of garbage in this case? Yes. Does that suddenly mean he's therefore a ninja? No. Just an incompetent and idiotic player who needed on an item that would be a legitimate upgrade.

If you want to claim you personally think the DD didn't deserve the item and therefore you were an ass to him to prevent the off-hand from going to a moron, that's your choice. But the DD wasn't ninjaing it, you were.

------------------------

"If gold means nothing to you and receiving vendor price is worth pissing off a group of random strangers - you'll hit need."

This can already happen. However, hitting need on an item that will sell for 5k+ gold (meaning you average 1000g by rolling greed) to get a guaranteed 150g or to piss off a random person doesn't seem very goblinish, does it? That's anti-social, not asocial.

Ihodael of Darnassus said...

@Anonymous that said "If he equipped the OH, he'd have this achievement."

I checked that also... that made me feel a bit dumb... should have just kept it and sold it since it seems that was what he did anyway.

Ihodael of Darnassus said...

@Anonymous that posted "If you want to claim you personally think the DD didn't deserve the item and therefore you were an ass to him to prevent the off-hand from going to a moron, that's your choice. But the DD wasn't ninjaing it, you were."

I have to disagree about the ninja argument. It was as much an upgrade to him as it was to me (for my healing spec) or for our healer. You believe that waiting for others to roll greed and then rolling need on a BoE without saying a word on it is fair behaviour vs. the other group players? If so then I did nothing worst than him. If you don't consider it fair... then I just got lucky and cut his ruse short. I'm pretty sure that if he had WON the roll... he wouldn't be complaining nor asking the healer if the healer wanted it - and as much as the BoE might be BiS for the spriest it was a clear upgrade for the druid wearing a blue.

And like someone else already stated... if he REALLY wanted the BoE for himself (e.g., "I'm a hardcore raider for whom this BoE is BiS and I need the 0.5% performance improvement")... he would have bought already by placing some work on it - the drop chance is so low that working for gold and paying 10k gold for it is better than running instance in the hope it will drop.

Anonymous said...

Why don't they just label the loot? When plate with INT drops everyone knows which class its for. Only allow a need roll for the class it was meant for. Then allow disenchant/sell rolls if they pass.

Inno said...

As an enchanter I see merit in rolling need on all items that I'm eligible for as I can de them all. If nobody else rolled need I'm guaranteed a 100% chance to win the shard...

Ngita said...

I have always thought it was acceptable for everybody to roll need on boe's. But are'nt you a bit late with this post, it is after all 4.2 now.

But having said that I would love to see all items needed under need/greed and lfd be made unable to be disenchanted or vendored. If they want to use it fine. If they are needing because it the last boss and 5g in the hand is > 20% chance of a crystal then tough luck.

But after losing the same PARRY item twice in a row to kitty druids I stopped pug tanking again. One guild run a week is enough.

Lothildin said...

The new change that makes boe to bop changes nothing if the guy needing it for profit is an Enchanter.
He will still be able to DE it and AH it. So...why even bother?

Anonymous said...

@Ihodael: In this case, with a shadowpriest DD, the need roll was legitimate, as spirit->hit.
I'd argue, unfortunately, that whether or not the healer rolled need, both the healer and the shadowpriest were rolling legitimate need and that you breached an implicit social contract even if you aren't a ninja.
The contract is:
All pugging people have equal chances to get x random gear following a boss kill. (eg, with 5 platewearers, and 4 friends, the tank and healer shouldn't roll need on everything to redistribute to a given dps friend.) Many pugging people make this assumption, and it is reasonable, so being upset when it is violated is reasonable. (mind you, I'd just react by needing tank and healer gear on my paladin...)

Now, these implicit contracts are annoying sometimes. But the one I listed is not much more annoying than:
Pugging people shall read the boss strategies before showing up.

Of course, given the shadowpriest's level of lolspeak, I'm inclined to give you a pass.

Anonymous said...

>> If he equipped the OH, he'd have this achievement. I know this 100% sure since I had this achievement while having an ilvl 346 weapon and an ilvl 359 OH.

It doesn't. You need to equip a 359 weapon, not an offhand for the slot to count for cataclysmically epic.

Krytus said...

Aren't we back at the Prisoner's dilema? You usually don't "ninja" offspec loot with the hope that you can keep the gear that you truly need.

Anonymous said...

Somebody wrote about Greek people not wanting to pay their debts...I'm not trying to defend them, but I don't believe they have 100% control over their politicians who took all that debt.

And 2nd, what about the banks who lent all that money to Greece? If you lent $2000 to a homeless bum at 15% interest, is it realistic to expect getting paid back at all?

Malcolm Nix said...

I totally agree with the last post and I would like to add that I don't really get why the phrase "lets give them welfare so they don't riot" is in the originale text. Don't think it has anything to do with looting behaviour in WoW.
And the Greeks? Well, don't forget the people who lent them too much money are also the people who audited their accounts and the same people who have a large influence on the IMF regarding the conditions for additional loans, in this case massive privatisations, and the same people who can now buy the governement agencies that are begin privatised. They're making money three times in a row and the average Greek sees his future dissolve. I don't see a clear link with a BoE healer item.

Dzonatan said...

I believe this is more of a staged troll who simply seeks a spotlight in your blog Gevlon... yeah some people are like that. But if this is serious then I think he (and his kin) needs to learn one painful truth about the world.

"Absolutism ended in medival"

His "reasons" and his "justice" or his "needs". Sorry but thats just one side of the medal and it will be only one side of the medal for people who are "relative". Why? because its possible to be so. The very concept of "relativism" negates "absolutism" on sight.

To put it simply "I think otherwise".

Its pretty painful that this kind of entitled naive absolutism is even tolerated.