Q:
Prices, gems and the value of gold.
Well for starters, Anet stated that they estimated only 5% of players to ever achieve a legendary weapon. This is a design choice, it is meant to be that hard.
The “play casual and get everything you want” dosn’t apply to legendaries. It applies to gear in general. Getting the best gear in the game doesn’t take more than 1-2 hours of play per day, and because of that hardcore players won’t have an advantage over casusal players in that way. Ascended gear somewhat killed this principle, but that was the general idea. You can’t expect everything to be served to you on a silver platter. There must be something that rewards hardcore players, else you will lose them sooner or later.
Regarding the gold, I feel you contradict yourself. You say the value is low and the prices are high. If the value is low, the prices aren’t high. Besides, inflation happens in every game, and you profit from it just as much as it costs you. Everytime you sell something, you earn more due to inflation, and everytime you sell something you pay more due to it. It nullifies each other in the long run.
The gem prices reflect this inflation. The less the value of gold is, the more people are willing to pay for gems. If you can’t afford to buy gems with gold, the solution is simple. Pay for them with cash. This is how it was intended from the beginning. The gold -> gems conversion is just a very nice act from Anet’s side to allow us to get gemstore items without real life money. It was never intended to be the main source of gems. Be glad that we have this feature, it’s more than most other Microtransaction based games offer.
The one thing I’d like to say would be great to fix the gold/gem ratio issue, a set value that does not fluctuate. ie: 2.5g = 100gems, 100gems = 2.5g. Set it in stone. As for legendaries, they are supposed to be harder. They are also supposed to be the best of the best, thus you have the special appearances and ability to set your own stats. But if you want a somewhat cheaper solution to legendaries we have ascended gear. It costs less to craft but stats are set based and the appearances aren’t as flashy.
But overall, as stated, yes the value of gold is a bit underwhelming at this time. I believe it to be mostly linked to the failed system of gold:gem conversion which, as I mentioned, needs a set ratio.
Well for starters, Anet stated that they estimated only 5% of players to ever achieve a legendary weapon. This is a design choice, it is meant to be that hard.
I bet more then 5% of ACTIVE players who sign in atleast once a week have atleast 1 legendary. I am not one since I have just returned to the game, but with Anet saying theyre going to be adding precurser crafting/scavenger hunt, more and more people are going to be getting them. Also with the quote of yours which I mentioned earlier, Anet also thought that players would never achieve exotics for a very long time, and now were having ascended introduced because they got that wrong.
“Regarding the gold, I feel you contradict yourself. You say the value is low and the prices are high. If the value is low, the prices aren’t high.”
I don’t contradict myself becuase if the value of gold is getting low so you will need more gold to buy something.. I didn’t say the value of items is getting low..
And about that :
“Besides, inflation happens in every game, and you profit from it just as much as it costs you. Everytime you sell something, you earn more due to inflation, and everytime you sell something you pay more due to it.”
But you forget that a big part of the money you make from dungeons and champions farm and the gold amount you get from it remains the same..
But you forget that a big part of the money you make from dungeons and champions farm and the gold amount you get from it remains the same..
Yeah, that’s a fair point. But both of these are relatively new ways of gaining gold. Dungeons were hardly worth doing when you got 26s at most from them ( except farming CoF until your keyboard breakes), and champs were mostly ignored. So these are actually examples of Anet adding new ways to make gold more accessible as a currency, and a bad example for how you get less gold due to inflation.
I would also discourage you from using more than one period after your arguments. You asked for opinions, I gave them to you. Using “…” is disrespectful and signals that you think of my points as stupid and idiotic. Nobody can stop you from thinking that, but you don’t have to show me what you think.
Accept my apology.. This isn’t what I meant at all.. I used “..” only to relate to what you wrote so you will understand.. I really dont think your thoughts are idiotic or what so ever.. I think just the opposite of it.. you are saying reasonable and smart argumentation..
I am sorry you understood it like that but that wasn’t on purpose and ofc wasn’t my intentions.