Guild Wars 2

I’m actually in agreement with Penguin here. Desireable legendaries are extremely expensive. Undesirable ones less so, but still pricey. However, on these undesirable ones, the expense associated with them is to do with the common components (t6 mats etc) that drive up the price of the overall legendaries. And these are driven up by the demand for those desirable legendaries.

If anet buffs torches (because they are unanimously terrible across the 3 classes that can use them), and fixes underwater combat so its good, and consequently adds more quality underwater content then these legendaries and precursers would increase in value as they become more desirable.

The point of this thread as far as I can tell is to point out that the problem isn’t that precursers supply is too low, its that precurser DEMAND is too high. This can be seen by the April feature pack price bump as more people demanded the desirable legendaries. Even these ‘cheap’ precursers got bumped, but not to the same extent (well, in absolute values. In relative values it seems like they went up 2-300% rather than 150%).

Part of me wants to be optimistic that the New Start part of the feature pack will be a fixed underwater system, and invest in these ‘cheap’ precursers. But the realist in me is too pessimistic of UW combat to take the risk.

The point may be pedantic, but it is used to illustrate a larger point. If you want to have a rare item that everyone else wants, you have to offer more money than they do. You can easily get a rare item right now if you opt for a rare item that is less popular.

But the point is not, for most people “ownership of an item of a given rarity.” The vast bulk of players could not care less about that. The point is, "ownership of the item I particularly want, and for most people that has nothing to do with the 90g Pres. Most would rather have a non-Pre Exotic like Endless Light or something than they would Rage.

The point of this thread as far as I can tell is to point out that the problem isn’t that precursers supply is too low, its that precurser DEMAND is too high.

That’s a meaningless distinction though, because supply being too low is always relative to demand. If demand for a given item is higher than other similar items then the supply must be raised accordingly so that the balance between the two is equivalent.

It’s unreasonable for them to try and make Rotgort equally as desirable as Sunrise, but they can easily accept that Sunrise is the more popular, and make the relevant Pres that much more commonly dropped.

Even if twilight is very common, I would still want one. I dont’ care if twlight is not rare.

I think some poster’s assumption is people want twilight only because it is rare.

laokoko.7403:

Even if twilight is very common, I would still want one. I dont’ care if twlight is not rare.

I think some poster’s assumption is people want twilight only because it is rare.

Most people want it because it’s rare. It’s valuable because there is a high demand, and the demand comes from the fact that it is extremely rare. Note that “most people” is not “everyone.” That a tiny minority of players just like the look and don’t care about rarity/bragging rights doesn’t change the fact that the majority do care.

tolunart.2095:

laokoko.7403:

Even if twilight is very common, I would still want one. I dont’ care if twlight is not rare.

I think some poster’s assumption is people want twilight only because it is rare.

Most people want it because it’s rare. It’s valuable because there is a high demand, and the demand comes from the fact that it is extremely rare. Note that “most people” is not “everyone.” That a tiny minority of players just like the look and don’t care about rarity/bragging rights doesn’t change the fact that the majority do care.

actually, this is not true. Twilight and Sunrise are probably the most common legendaries, and they are also the most expensive. This proves that it is not the rarity that makes people want an item.
the least common legendaries would be the underwater ones, because nobody makes them on purpose. And yet their value is incredibly low.

truth is people want legendaries because they are a big hard to do goal, and because they like the effects.

Now, thing to keep in mind is hard to do goal is not directly linked to rarity. You can have something very rare, that is not hard to do at all, like playing the lottery.

The reason people like the big hard to do goal, is because it gives them an objective and purpose. However balancing this, you still want the player to feel like they want more, or to do it again when they win.

Was just reading an article on MTG and they were saying how you should try to design a game where you dont drag it on so much that when they beat it they feel like it went on too long. I would say many of the contents in GW2 have suffered from this.

I’m talking about overall rarity, precursors vs. other exotics that sell for 2g on the TP, not one precursor vs. another. Whether you agree or not, the main reason why players want them is because not many players have them.

As for M:tG it’s a different kind of game, in the beginning some of the popular tournament decks “locked” the game so your opponent cannot do anything and you won when he ran out of cards in 30 or 40 turns. It’s an effective strategy but not very fun, and nowadays there are combo decks that if you draw the right cards and go first, your opponent will never get a turn. Most games fall towards the middle, lasting maybe 5-10 turns.

MMOs are a much different animal. You’re playing a single, continuous narrative instead of a series of games. RNG is the point of M:tG, you draw cards from a randomized deck and every game is a fresh start. MMOs are about developing one or more characters over time.

I think you are mixing in a lot of different things

Rarity effects price
Demand is sometimes effected by rarity, but not as directly as you assume.

The most desired items, are not often the most expensive, or the rarest.

tolunart.2095:

laokoko.7403:

Even if twilight is very common, I would still want one. I dont’ care if twlight is not rare.

I think some poster’s assumption is people want twilight only because it is rare.

Most people want it because it’s rare. It’s valuable because there is a high demand, and the demand comes from the fact that it is extremely rare. Note that “most people” is not “everyone.” That a tiny minority of players just like the look and don’t care about rarity/bragging rights doesn’t change the fact that the majority do care.

That is actually untrue right? Dusk and Dawn are even more common than torch precursor(since so many people mystic forge them), yet they are more expensive.

People want them because they are prestige. Obviously being rare plays a roll on prestige but rarity isn’t the only part to make it prestige.

Most people want it because it’s rare. It’s valuable because there is a high demand, and the demand comes from the fact that it is extremely rare.

I don’t believe that’s true. I believe that some people might want it because it’s rare, but I think most people want it because it’s COOL. Think about it, Twilight is actually one of the MOST common Legendaries out there, since GSes are actively farmed more than other Pres. If it were about rarity then Dusk would be one of the cheapest Pres on the market, and something like Energizer or Howl would be the most expensive.

Whether you agree or not, the main reason why players want them is because not many players have them.

No, the main reason people want them is because they are COOOL. Now they are expensive because the supply does not meet the demand, but the demand is not because the supply is low.

There are multiple uses for the term rarity when used to describe its impact on prices. It could be the rarity of the legendary compared to other legendaries or the rarity of the legendary compared to other weapons such as exotics, rares, and so forth. It’s not a “one or the other” type of situation.

Rarity also is not the only factor in what determines price as well.

Edit: This post was in response to the argument that one person’s usage of rarity was incorrect compared to another’s.

When you look at consumer behaviors, there are multiple reasons why people want certain things. An item can be desirable because:

• It’s rare – Some want it just because it’s hard to get.
• It’s cool looking – Self explanatory.
• It’s expensive – Some want an item simply because it’s worth a lot of money. Valuable items = status.
• It’s profitable – Some want an item because others want it too, and know those people are willing to pay a high price for it. They seek to buy low and sell high.

All the above affect prices because of competition in the market. Prices goes down when Supply outpaces Demand. Prices go up (as we’ve seen) when Demand outpaces Supply.

Back to the issue at hand. People complain not because Precursors are hard to get. Currently, they’re quite easy to get, and very affordable. I could go out and buy dozens of Precursors from the TP right now. So what’s going on here? People complain because they feel Entitled to getting a certain item they really want.

The solution isn’t to make Dusk or Zap easier to get, just to satisfy the Entitled masses. The real solution is to change mindsets of people. Lots of players want an item that’s very rare, so that item will be very valuable. The less these players desire said item, the more affordable it will become.

Back to the issue at hand. People complain not because Precursors are hard to get. Currently, they’re quite easy to get, and very affordable. I could go out and buy dozens of Precursors from the TP right now.

And it’s a post like this one that makes it clear how completely out of touch you are with the average gamer. “Let them eat cake” indeed.

The solution isn’t to make Dusk or Zap easier to get, just to satisfy the Entitled masses. The real solution is to change mindsets of people. Lots of players want an item that’s very rare, so that item will be very valuable. The less these players desire said item, the more affordable it will become.

This is nonsense. “The solution is to rewire people’s brains so that they won’t think that cool things are as cool?” What? No, just make supply meet demand, trying to reduce demand is just a fools errand, and completely impossible without either A: introducing a ton of new weapons that have the same effects as legendaries but are easier to get, or B. nerfing the effects of legendaries so that they become lamer (basically the opposite of the update they made a year or so ago). Neither of those moves seem likely.

it does bother me that it’ll take 2 to 3 times more time to grind a legendary compare to what it used to be a few month the game is out.

The thing is legendary have become an endgame for many people. And once they get their legendary their endgame is gone. I seen many people quit right after they got their legendary.

And over time people are less and less likely to spend real money in GW2. We can only hope Anet will make legendary less painful to acquire. But not likely they will, since having many expensive desirable items help persuade people to spend real money on the gem store.

How is making a rare item more available a real solution? Where is the fairness if Anet decides to make Precursor A drop 50% more than Precursor B, just because people desire Precursor A more?

The real solution is a self adjustment among players. If everyone is so kitten-bent on getting a Dusk, and the drop rates are extremely low, prices will naturally be high. If you stopped caring so much, and discovered that you just want to own a Legendary, there are very cheap Precursors that you can buy right now that won’t break the bank.

A revolution needs to take place to open everyone’s minds. What’s important is that you play this game to have fun! Run around Queensdale and look at the scenery. /sleep in a nice pile of flowers in the field, away from the centaur attacks. /sit by the river and listen to the water flow. You don’t need Precursors/Legendaries to enjoy this game.

you know maybe a trident precursor costing 90 gold is too expensive consider almost no one want it.

I dont’ know where you get the idea some junk need to cost 90 gold.

You don’t need to make everyone compete for the xxx amount of precursor dropped each month. Everyone can be a Jedi, as long as you work for it, not “only 10 people can become a jedi each month” and have 1000 people fight for it.

I won’t personally say making precursor easier is a solution. But I dont’ think your logic is an authority of what it should be.

what I personally felt is if legendary is the endgame for many people, unless Anet keep making more endgame, people’ll get sick of the game anyway.

How is making a rare item more available a real solution? Where is the fairness if Anet decides to make Precursor A drop 50% more than Precursor B, just because people desire Precursor A more?

50% more people get the thing that they want, 0% of people get less of the thig they want, I don’t see how that’s not entirely fair.

The real solution is a self adjustment among players. If everyone is so kitten-bent on getting a Dusk, and the drop rates are extremely low, prices will naturally be high. If you stopped caring so much, and discovered that you just want to own a Legendary, there are very cheap Precursors that you can buy right now that won’t break the bank.

But that’s complete and total nonsense. That’s like saying “if you discovered that you enjoyed bread and water more than steak and lobster, your food bills would go way down!” People are not robots, they want what they want. Positing that the issue would be resolved if players just rewired their brains makes no sense whatsoever.

A revolution needs to take place to open everyone’s minds. What’s important is that you play this game to have fun! Run around Queensdale and look at the scenery. /sleep in a nice pile of flowers in the field, away from the centaur attacks. /sit by the river and listen to the water flow. You don’t need Precursors/Legendaries to enjoy this game.

If all of this is true, then why not just make precursors available to those that want them? If it can’t hurt to not have them, then it can’t hurt to always have them either.

laokoko.7403:

you know maybe a trident precursor costing 90 gold is too expensive consider almost no one want it.

You know maybe a trident precursor costing 90 gold is about right for the number of people who want it and their respective willingness to pay, given the supply.

No one is forcing people to compete for a particular Precursor. They do so on their own free will, which in turn creates such a high Demand, that prices spike to levels they are now.

Anet will most likely continue to make new end-game goals. New LS, new expansions, new items, etc.

Ohoni.6057:

But that’s complete and total nonsense. That’s like saying “if you discovered that you enjoyed bread and water more than steak and lobster, your food bills would go way down!” People are not robots, they want what they want. Positing that the issue would be resolved if players just rewired their brains makes no sense whatsoever.

It’s called “living within your means”. If you can’t afford to eat steak and lobster, eat tuna sandwiches instead. If you can’t afford Dusk, and really want a Legendary, buy Venom instead.

People can want what they want, all they want. But they also have to understand that they can’t get all they want all the time either. I would love to drive a Tesla Model S, but can’t afford it, so I’ll buy a Hyundai Sonata instead.

No one is forcing people to compete for a particular Precursor. They do so on their own free will, which in turn creates such a high Demand, that prices spike to levels they are now.

A fair point. I want a Dawn, so all that needs to change is all you jerks need to stop wanting a Dawn so that I can have one for vendor prices. Problem solved, right Pengy? Come to think of it, I’d like a few thousand gold. it seems like you probably have a few thousand gold lying around Pengy, well now we’ve decided that you shouldn’t want to own gold anymore, so it;s just taking up space for you. You can just send it my way.

This is a lot simpler than I thought it would be.

If you can’t afford Dusk, and really want a Legendary, buy Venom instead.

But that’s my point, most players DO NOT “really want a legendary.” They want A legendary, as in there are specif weapons they want, and plenty that they do not. The only way that Venom would make a suitable substitute for Dusk would be if you could use it to craft a greatsword that streams a star field behind it. Until that’s something in the game, you’re not making any sort of point at all.

People can want what they want, all they want. But they also have to understand that they can’t get all they want all the time either. I would love to drive a Tesla Model S, but can’t afford it, so I’ll buy a Hyundai Sonata instead.

And living within your means is all well and good, but that doesn’t mean that you can’t petition to make things more affordable. The Tesla S costs more than the Sonata because it has a lot of expensive parts. If they sold for the same low price then Tesla would lose money on each sold.

Dusk, on the other hand, contains the exact same quantity of data as Naegling, which sells for much less. It’s only more expensive because ANet CHOSE to give it the “ingredient in Twilight” property and set a drop rate for it well bellow the demand rate. They could always CHOOSE to change either of those things, altering the price to whatever level they saw fit. Obviously until they do, those that cannot afford it will have to do without, but there’s no reaosn why we can’t argue in favor of that sort of change.

Ensign.2189:

laokoko.7403:

you know maybe a trident precursor costing 90 gold is too expensive consider almost no one want it.

You know maybe a trident precursor costing 90 gold is about right for the number of people who want it and their respective willingness to pay, given the supply.

Right but the reason I said that is other people are saying Where is the fairness if Anet decides to make Precursor A drop 50% more than Precursor B, just because people desire Precursor A more?

What’s the big deal if Anet really decide to make every precursor drop more. And actually increase the supply of torch precursor.

Not to mention there already are way more GS precurosr than torch precursor because people mystic forge them.

Well I can see drop rate weighting based on profession percentages. Great Sword is used by four professions while rifle is used by two. Or a deeper data mine based on what weapons are equip by level 80s and periodically adjust the weights accordingly.

Ohoni.6057:

No one is forcing people to compete for a particular Precursor. They do so on their own free will, which in turn creates such a high Demand, that prices spike to levels they are now.

A fair point. I want a Dawn, so all that needs to change is all you jerks need to stop wanting a Dawn so that I can have one for vendor prices. Problem solved, right Pengy? Come to think of it, I’d like a few thousand gold. it seems like you probably have a few thousand gold lying around Pengy, well now we’ve decided that you shouldn’t want to own gold anymore, so it;s just taking up space for you. You can just send it my way.

This is a lot simpler than I thought it would be.

If you can’t afford Dusk, and really want a Legendary, buy Venom instead.

But that’s my point, most players DO NOT “really want a legendary.” They want A legendary, as in there are specif weapons they want, and plenty that they do not. The only way that Venom would make a suitable substitute for Dusk would be if you could use it to craft a greatsword that streams a star field behind it. Until that’s something in the game, you’re not making any sort of point at all.

People can want what they want, all they want. But they also have to understand that they can’t get all they want all the time either. I would love to drive a Tesla Model S, but can’t afford it, so I’ll buy a Hyundai Sonata instead.

And living within your means is all well and good, but that doesn’t mean that you can’t petition to make things more affordable. The Tesla S costs more than the Sonata because it has a lot of expensive parts. If they sold for the same low price then Tesla would lose money on each sold.

Dusk, on the other hand, contains the exact same quantity of data as Naegling, which sells for much less. It’s only more expensive because ANet CHOSE to give it the “ingredient in Twilight” property and set a drop rate for it well bellow the demand rate. They could always CHOOSE to change either of those things, altering the price to whatever level they saw fit. Obviously until they do, those that cannot afford it will have to do without, but there’s no reaosn why we can’t argue in favor of that sort of change.

There’s a difference between arguing for change that betters the game overall, and arguing for change that benefits the few who feel Entitled to a fancy Greatsword.

On a personal level, I didn’t like that Anet would nerf farms. But taking a step back and seeing the impact on the economy if they don’t, I understand why they do. Not all change is for the satisfaction of the players. Some designs are made on purpose, and the rarity of Precursors are one of them. As John once stated, before you come up with solutions, you must first come up with a problem. Not being able to afford Dusk isn’t really a high priority problem to solve.

I’ll ask a more direct question. What’s the big deal if precursor or legendary is made more easier.

Before I would say it’ll take 100+ hours to gain a legendary, now maybe 300+ hours.

I’m not sure what’s the big deal on reducing that 300 hours to 150 hours.

Making a Legendary is the same as it was from day 1. The only difference now is that more players are gaining wealth, so more are now wanting to start their Legendary Weapon quest. Due to this, Demand for all mats required to make Legendary components increased in value.

Think back to the beginning. Anet intended for Legendary Weapons to take almost a year to complete. At the most Casual gamer rate of maybe 1 hour of playing per day, that 300 hours would equal close to a year.

There’s a difference between arguing for change that betters the game overall, and arguing for change that benefits the few who feel Entitled to a fancy Greatsword.

Making more players happy than it makes upset is bettering the game. Making precursors more common would make more people happy than it would upset, it would better the game.

Ohoni.6057:

There’s a difference between arguing for change that betters the game overall, and arguing for change that benefits the few who feel Entitled to a fancy Greatsword.

Making more players happy than it makes upset is bettering the game. Making precursors more common would make more people happy than it would upset, it would better the game.

Or make it so that people have access to every skin in the wardrobe and ascended was free.

Think about the impact that would have on the game.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Making a Legendary is the same as it was from day 1. The only difference now is that more players are gaining wealth, so more are now wanting to start their Legendary Weapon quest. Due to this, Demand for all mats required to make Legendary components increased in value.

Think back to the beginning. Anet intended for Legendary Weapons to take almost a year to complete. At the most Casual gamer rate of maybe 1 hour of playing per day, that 300 hours would equal close to a year.

That’s precisely what I’m trying to say. When World of Warcraft was first released, they make a pvp system where everyone compete for ranking, and the more people compete for it, the harder it is to rank up and get Grand Marshal Gear. If you are on a populated server, it is much harder to get Grand Marshal Gear compare to lesser populated server.

I dont’ see why it should be that way. If more people want an item, there should be ways for them to get it directly. (maybe precursor crafting if they ever implement it).

There are other games with legendary too. But they didn’t say since there are more people that want the item they’ll make it harder to get it.

It’s not a game problem, but rather a self created player one. Because GW2 has an open market where players determine prices of items, key economic theories of Supply and Demand kick in. The more players get larger amounts of Gold, the more of them will be able to afford Legendary crafting. With more of them wanting the same items, the large Demand gets to a very limited Supply. This increases the price of the item naturally. If Player A is willing to buy Item X for 500 Gold, and Player B is willing to pay 700 Gold, I’m selling to the higher offer. But if more competition comes in, and Player C offers 1,000 Gold, I’m selling to him. As people buy and sell items, prices begin to stabilize around an average. This is how markets work.

As most who understand this know, there is no problems with players determining values of goods. Why should Anet come in and say “Hmmmm, that Dusk is too expensive, let’s increase the drop rates for that item, since it’ll make players happy!” Anet has to also consider the health of the economy. John is probably sympathetic to those who long for their very own Dusk. But as the Guardian of the TP, his first love will always be his mistresses, Data and Facts, not his ex-girlfriends Pity and Compassion.

There is nothing wrong with what everyone says. The only question is why does it have to be the way it is now.

I understand what people mean by saying supplying/demand/economy. But other game have legendary too, they just make a very long quest to get it(probably even more fun than the way it is implemented in GW2).

I understand GW2 is after all a cash shop game, so the economy follows closely the way Anet makes money. I just don’t think precursor being expensive have that much to do with ingame economy. It’s probably more to do with, it is better to be expensive so people’ll buy gem.

Or make it so that people have access to every skin in the wardrobe and ascended was free.

Think about the impact that would have on the game.

No, we aren’t really talking about that, I don’t think it would be a good idea. We’re talking about making Precursors a kitteneaper.

Why should Anet come in and say “Hmmmm, that Dusk is too expensive, let’s increase the drop rates for that item, since it’ll make players happy!”

Because it will make players happy, and they are in the business of making players happy. If the economy is running flawlessly but the players are not happy with it then they have seriously screwed up. If the economy is in complete shambles but the players are cool with that, then they’ve done all right. This is an adventure game, not an economic simulator, maintaining the economy is a means, not an end.

John is probably sympathetic to those who long for their very own Dusk. But as the Guardian of the TP, his first love will always be his mistresses, Data and Facts, not his ex-girlfriends Pity and Compassion.

If that’s true, then those above him, who love the players and the game as a whole, should overrule him.

Ohoni.6057:

Because it will make players happy, and they are in the business of making players happy. If the economy is running flawlessly but the players are not happy with it then they have seriously screwed up. If the economy is in complete shambles but the players are cool with that, then they’ve done all right. This is an adventure game, not an economic simulator, maintaining the economy is a means, not an end.

Maintaining the economy is just as important as making players happy. What you want may not be in line with what Anet intends. If you had a majority of the player base all calling for a free deposit of 1,000 Gold to make them happy, should Anet comply?

that venom is quite expensive actually. when i bought mine the price was like 15 gold.

Ohoni.6057:

Or make it so that people have access to every skin in the wardrobe and ascended was free.

Think about the impact that would have on the game.

No, we aren’t really talking about that, I don’t think it would be a good idea. We’re talking about making Precursors a kitteneaper.

Actually, it’s the same thing as what you’re talking about but on the more extreme end of the spectrum that your precursor idea is leaning towards.

You do not realize how important precursors are to the economy and what would happen if they were cheaper. You’d either have all of the other components rise up in price depending on how much cheaper they got or you get to the point that everyone now has the precursor they want to prices in everything plummet.

I still astounds me that the same people post on her wanting precursors to be cheaper or easier to get but completely ignore the impact that this would have. Did you honestly not see what happened when the demand for legendary weapons increased back in April? Do honestly not think that demand for legendary weapons would increase if precursors would be cheaper or easier to get? What impact do you think would happen to all related materials needed to get these?

People can just farm them? We saw how well that went when prices rose over 50% in April. So people will have to farm 2,000 tier six materials including those required for the legendary gifts? Yeah, farming cores and lodestones would be fun. They can just farm tier 5 materials and promote, you say? Promotions require 50 tier 5 components, skill points, and crystalline dust which would also go further up in price due to its other uses.

So let’s assume that each promotion yields 10 tier 6 on average. It doesn’t but I’m going to assume it does. This means you would need to farm 1,250 of each of the tier 5 materials excluding dust. You just went from needing to farm 1,750 (excluding dust) to 8,750. Awesome!

People can just farm gold and buy the materials? Yeah, well they can do the same currently for precursors.

They can just increase the drop rates of all mats to compensate for demand? We go back to the first part of my post where everyone can now quickly get their legendary weapons causing demand to fall. All related prices are low so there’s less incentive to farm because what would you spend your gold on now? Gem store items? Well the exchange rate would quickly increase. Other items? Well gold is now more difficult to farm as a lot of materials now have little value.

Legendary weapons are too much of an integral part of the economy and changes to it could have a devastating impact. They’re better off creating completely new legendary weapons that use separate components and allow players to craft the precursors for those.

Maintaining the economy is just as important as making players happy.

Again, no, IT IS NOT. Maintaining the economy is, at most, a means towards the end of keeping the players happy. Maintaining the economy is only of value so long as it is working towards making players happy. If at any time the market gets in the way of happy players then it is failing, no matter how stable it may be. Maintaining the market is never a goal in and of itself.

If you had a majority of the player base all calling for a free deposit of 1,000 Gold to make them happy, should Anet comply?

You seem to confuse “things players ask for” with “things that would make players happy.” They are not always the same thing, and ANet can make judgement calls as to which is which. If they determine that giving players something they’ve ask for would make them less happy in the long run then they probably shouldn’t do it.

I think you’d understand that simply giving everyone 1000g would not accomplish much, it would throw the economy into massive inflation, and the shifting value of that gold would leave most players little better off than they are today. I think for the same reasons they should not simply hand out precursors for no effort at all. I think that making precursors more available is a different story, however, I think that current supply is too far short of demand, that the existing methods are insufficient, and that making them more available would be good for the long term health of the players.

Actually, it’s the same thing as what you’re talking about but on the more extreme end of the spectrum that your precursor idea is leaning towards.

Reductio ad absurdum, it’s not from Harry Potter, but nor is it helpful.

You do not realize how important precursors are to the economy and what would happen if they were cheaper. You’d either have all of the other components rise up in price depending on how much cheaper they got or you get to the point that everyone now has the precursor they want to prices in everything plummet.

We’ve already discussed this, obviously they would need to make T6 mats equivalently more available as well, this is not hard. If they made pres twice as common, for example, they would need to make T6 drops twice as common, it’s all just shifting some numbers around. The prices would spike for a little bit, then settle, just like with Foxfire, but the end result is that they would return to normal levels. Market tycoons will likely make a decent amount in the meantime so they shouldn’t complain.

ANet controls all the strings. They are perfectly capable, at the drop of a hat, of
A. Increasing the drop rate of any or all materials.
B. Reducing the recipe requirements of any given mats (as they did with Gift of Color)
C. Reducing the ingredients or increasing the output of conversion recipes (ie instead of 2 charged core transmuting up to 1 lodestone, it could be 1:1, or 5:2, or 3:2, or 5:8, or whatever ratio would be determined to be appropriate to an increased demand).

Nobody is suggesting that an increase in precursor availability would have to occur in a vacuum, clearly other changes would be appropriate at the same time.

My guess would be that demand for legendary mats would spike and then fall, so a permanent buff to mats would not be necessary, but maybe just a few months of events in which bags dropped with high mat supplies or something, similar to the was T5-6 cloths dipped during the Escape from LA due to an increase in relevant bags.

Actually, it’s not a fallacy as I was not using it as a complete argument. My point, which I thought I made, was to get you to think of what impact that would have on players if they were able to have everything they wanted right this instant. You could then apply that to what would happen if everyone could get precursors and then their legendaries much quicker. That was the point.

As for the rest of your post, read what I wrote again. I already addressed it knowing you would go this direction.

Edit: Typos and more typos

Actually, it’s not a fallacy as I was not using it as a complete argument. My poit, which I thought I made, was to get you to think of what impact that would have on players if they were able to have everything they wanted right this instant. You sold then apply that to is everyone could get precursors and then their legendaries much quicker. That was the point.

Yes, they could, and that’s a good thing. Plenty of people already have legendaries, the world has not ended. I’m only talking about extending that same courtesy to others.

What percentage of players have all the legendary weapons that they want compared to those that don’t?

What percentage of players have all the legendary weapons that they want compared to those that don’t?

Why would I have access to that data?

Ohoni.6057:

What percentage of players have all the legendary weapons that they want compared to those that don’t?

Why would I have access to that data?

I’m asking that based on the following post of yours:

Ohoni.6057:

Yes, they could, and that’s a good thing. Plenty of people already have legendaries, the world has not ended. I’m only talking about extending that same courtesy to others.

You argued that increasing the availability of legendaries would not have a negative effect based on what you said in the above post. It’d be no different than me taking everyone’s stance on a particular issue on these forums as that of everyone in the game. What you observe through your small sample size is not indicative of the entire player population.

Let’s say only 10% of players have all of the legendary weapons they want. A change is made and now 40% of players get all of the legendary weapons they want. This will have a noticeable impact. So stating that plenty of players already have legendaries and the world has not ended is misleading and misinformed.

You cannot simply shrug off a potential impact based off an observation over a small sample size or even if it’s just a hunch.

You argued that increasing the availability of legendaries would not have a negative effect based on what you said in the above post. It’d be no different than me taking everyone’s stance on a particular issue on these forums as that of everyone in the game. What you observe through your small sample size is not indicative of the entire player population.

I didn’t say anything about the total number of players with all the legendaries though. I just said that plenty of people have at least one legendary, because anywhere I go I see at least a handful of them around. I can’t be that lucky that I’m constantly running into a super tiny minority. And yet these people have their legendaries, and they keep playing, so the idea that players who receive their legendaries will vanish is total nonsense. There might have been a few such people near launch, but those were the alpha achiever types that blitz through everything and those guys are gone, people who are still here today are clearly not that sort of player (or they would have gotten their legendary and left already).

Let’s say only 10% of players have all of the legendary weapons they want. A change is made and now 40% of players get all of the legendary weapons they want. This will have a noticeable impact.

Yes, the game will have 30% more happy players. Ideally we could bump that up even higher.

You cannot simply shrug off a potential impact based off an observation over a small sample size or even if it’s just a hunch.

Exactly.

I never said players would vanish after getting all of their legendary weapons that they wanted. Getting a legendary weapon is one aspect of the “end game” and not the only thing keeping players playing.

Again, you’re basing it on observations. Saying that you’ve seen plenty of players that have their legendary weapons so that must mean that making changes to how players can easily get precursors won’t have a negative impact on the economy is wrong. It’s your reasoning that im arguing against here.

Your next statement it that the game will have 30% more happier players if my example played out to be true. You then said things would be even better if it went higher than that. The highest would obviously be 100%. The first part of your post stated that you made no comment about the total number of players but you just now did.

If everyone has their legendaries, what do you think would happen to the prices of everything involved in crafting one? Players may be happy that they finally got the legendaries they want but the effects of that could cost them in a way they they did not expect and make them even unhappier.

Again, you’re basing it on observations. Saying that you’ve seen plenty of players that have their legendary weapons so that must mean that making changes to how players can easily get precursors won’t have a negative impact on the economy is wrong. It’s your reasoning that im arguing against here.

You’re not arguing against it, you’re arguing that it might be flawed, which is certainly possible, but you’ve presented no evidence that it is flawed, so you’re basically just arguing in circles.

Your next statement it that the game will have 30% more happier players if my example played out to be true. You then said things would be even better if it went higher than that. The highest would obviously be 100%. The first part of your post stated that you made no comment about the total number of players but you just now did.

Yes, in a completely different context.

If everyone has their legendaries, what do you think would happen to the prices of everything involved in crafting one? Players may be happy that they finally got the legendaries they want but the effects of that could cost them in a way they they did not expect and make them even unhappier.

Probably go down, which is why I suggested that the increase in T6 mat supply should probably be designed to be short term. There are almost no items that are exclusively related to Legendary construction though, every T6 mat has uses in constructing other items, and they keep adding them. They would continue to have a reasonable value with or without legendaries, although it would stand to reason that they would be valued lower than they are today.

Players may be happy that they finally got the legendaries they want but the effects of that could cost them in a way they they did not expect and make them even unhappier.

Maybe, but you haven’t represented any case for why that would be the case. If you’re arguing that people would be sad that the price of T6 mats would go down, I can’t imagine why that would be the case.

Ashadow.6874:

thehipone.6812:

Tree.3916:

thehipone.6812:

Does it make sense (i.e. is it fun?) that a player’s progress towards that goal can be blocked or even erased because timmy plays 8 hours a day or has mom’s credit card?

Is that how you think it works? When Timmy logs in to play or uses mom’s credit card the game removes the gold from your inventory?

Or is your position that people who acquire gold faster than you are able to buy things faster than you is somehow a problem that requires fixing?

Understanding fail.

My point was that the gap never closes. You farmed 500g since the beginning of May. You started 1000g away from buying your pre. Meanwhile, timmy and his buddies have ground out 1500g and bid up the prices. You are still 1000g away from getting there = you made no progress.

^ Cleary not following the math which proves otherwise.

0g of 1000g = 0% on the way to said Precursor.
500g of 1500g = 33% on the way to said Precursor.

Clear and very well defined progress.

Only works if the price is stable….they aren’t. By the time X person gets to 1500g there’s nothing to say that the precursor won’t now cost 3000g. Given the history of a lot of precursors acting like they have a stable price and aren’t pretty much always on an increase in price is kind of just being stupid, don’t be stupid.

Ohoni.6057:

You’re not arguing against it, you’re arguing that it might be flawed, which is certainly possible, but you’ve presented no evidence that it is flawed, so you’re basically just arguing in circles.

Oh no. I can tell you right now that I’m against it. If you read by previous posts in this thread, you would see my reasoning., One of them may have been directed at you.

Ohoni.6057:

Ayrilana

Your next statement it that the game will have 30% more happier players if my example played out to be true. You then said things would be even better if it went higher than that. The highest would obviously be 100%. The first part of your post stated that you made no comment about the total number of players but you just now did.

Yes, in a completely different context.

Nope. Not Really. It’s referring to the same subject or point of mine.

Ohoni.6057:

Probably go down, which is why I suggested that the increase in T6 mat supply should probably be designed to be short term. There are almost no items that are exclusively related to Legendary construction though, every T6 mat has uses in constructing other items, and they keep adding them. They would continue to have a reasonable value with or without legendaries, although it would stand to reason that they would be valued lower than they are today.

Addressed in a previous post.

Ohoni.6057:

Maybe, but you haven’t represented any case for why that would be the case. If you’re arguing that people would be sad that the price of T6 mats would go down, I can’t imagine why that would be the case.

Addressed in a previous post.

Oh no. I can tell you right now that I’m against it. If you read by previous posts in this thread, you would see my reasoning., One of them may have been directed at you.

No, you’re saying that you’re against it, you aren’t presenting an argument that backs up that position.

Beyond that, I have no idea what you were trying to say, so I’ll just take that as a forfeit.

Ohoni.6057:

Oh no. I can tell you right now that I’m against it. If you read by previous posts in this thread, you would see my reasoning., One of them may have been directed at you.

No, you’re saying that you’re against it, you aren’t presenting an argument that backs up that position.

Beyond that, I have no idea what you were trying to say, so I’ll just take that as a forfeit.

I did. Read previous posts in the thread.

I read them the first time through and they didn’t make your case. They aren’t worth re-reading.

Ayrilana.1396:

Again, you’re basing it on observations. Saying that you’ve seen plenty of players that have their legendary weapons so that must mean that making changes to how players can easily get precursors won’t have a negative impact on the economy is wrong. It’s your reasoning that im arguing against here.

Do you really think there is that many thing to do with the in game economy?

The only reason our economy is the way it is now because GW2 is a cash shop game with gem->gold exchange system. And Anet is trying monetize from it.

GW2 economy is similar to any other korean pay 2 win games, except GW2 dont ‘sell power but skins. (which is a good thing for people who don’t care about skins, they don’t have to worry about being milked by Anet).

Smooth Penguin.5294:

It’s called “living within your means”. If you can’t afford to eat steak and lobster, eat tuna sandwiches instead. If you can’t afford Dusk, and really want a Legendary, buy Venom instead.

People can want what they want, all they want. But they also have to understand that they can’t get all they want all the time either. I would love to drive a Tesla Model S, but can’t afford it, so I’ll buy a Hyundai Sonata instead.

Unlike real world items, the supply of precursors is artificially scarce.

Suppose the government could conjure an infinite number of Tesla Model S at little to no cost. Ignore IP ownership and such because similar concepts don’t exist for precursors. People petition the state to make it easier to get a Tesla Model S. Do you think those people are entirely unjustified?

Suppose there’s a government monopoly on clothing production. The government clothing company also happens to have a magic clothing duplicator, able to create a copy of any type of clothing at very low cost. Is it wrong for people to complain about the prices of clothing? I think this example is closer to the situation than your steak/lobster or luxury car examples.

You try to make the point that people are arguing against market forces, but they are really arguing against"state policy".

Extending the car analogy, would it not be good if Teslas were affordable to all people? I think the premise of exclusivity is flawed to begin with.

Why can’t people appreciate something on its own merits? Throw away the useless social metadata (how many other people own my item? Am I ‘special’?).

If you buy a Tesla only because you want to impress other people, to draw envy, I think you buy it for bad reasons.

If you buy a Tesla for its design and features, you buy one for good reasons.