Guild Wars 2

Relentless.5678:

Except that in GW2 you have an option for which “penalty/punishment/expense/execution” you prefer. Old EQ had only one option for getting together.

True but either way you are discouraging people from playing together when they happen to not be in the same area and you discourage people from going to help lowbies. Choosing your poison does little to remove the barrier.

aeonZgamer.5307:

Craven.5468:

Tying travel costs to player level is very unusual and illogical. Others have posted the idea(s) that cost should be zone specific, free when standing at a point and traveling to another one (thus only costing when out roaming) and overall lower.

These are all good suggestions in my opinion.

So then I think we’re all approaching the same sentiment
Travel changes needed

1. If I’m right under a Waypoint and I want to go to another one in the same zone then much like the Asura Gates I should be able to pop over for Free or reduced costs, Otherwise if I’m out roaming about and need to get back quick to either sit somewhere safe for a bit and craft or chat or do whatever I darn well want then yes Per Zone Per Distance costs should apply
2. Remove the stupid Player X level pays X amount to travel and instead implement Per Zone Per Distance Costs

I could certainly agree with this approach. Maybe even add that the jump to the region’s major city is free if you are standing on another waypoint (anywhere). Once there, Asuran portals are readily available.

aeonZgamer.5307:

Craven.5468:

Tying travel costs to player level is very unusual and illogical. Others have posted the idea(s) that cost should be zone specific, free when standing at a point and traveling to another one (thus only costing when out roaming) and overall lower.

These are all good suggestions in my opinion.

So then I think we’re all approaching the same sentiment
Travel changes needed

1. If I’m right under a Waypoint and I want to go to another one in the same zone then much like the Asura Gates I should be able to pop over for Free or reduced costs, Otherwise if I’m out roaming about and need to get back quick to either sit somewhere safe for a bit and craft or chat or do whatever I darn well want then yes Per Zone Per Distance costs should apply
2. Remove the stupid Player X level pays X amount to travel and instead implement Per Zone Per Distance Costs

Yea this would be nice, and if we could squeeze in the 100% zone completion discount in there too that would be a cool perk for doing exploration.

In thinking about the problem a bit more I think the best solution would be, as many have suggested, to scale the cost based on the location of the waypoint. By basing the cost on where you are going to rather than where you are coming from it would make traveling to lowbie zones reasonable while still making the trip back a bit pricey. You wouldn’t want the trip from Queensdale to Orr to cost less than a trip across Orr.

Even with this I would still suggest that the cost of traveling in the higher level zones should be scaled back a bit. It shouldn’t cost more than half of what you make from completing a heart to travel across the zone you find that heart in.

I will firmly stand and say that I believe travel TO Lions Arch from anywhere should be free once it’s unlocked on the map. It’s supposed to be the hub city. It’s got everything a player wants, and asura gates to the different regions. From there it’s a few minutes of running to the Priory/Vigil/Whispers gates to go to Fort Trinity. Granted the Whispers gate is much closer than the other two.

TL;DR – WP to LA should be free from anywhere. Period.

Okay so right now as it stands first off ANet they’re only a luxury if it doesn’t seem like a part of the game world. The WPs look like most of the architecture of an Asuran city so in MY Mind and maybe others I’m sure they’ll agree if they see it the same way
These Asurans not ONLY made the Gate system but also the WP Systems
On to the mechanics

1. WP to WP Travel Per Zone Per Distance, Free in Racial area to Race Capital city
2. Discount (up to you) for 100% Zone completion when using WP System

I also like the zone completion discount idea. Even if that was the only impact to the cost, it would be a really nice perk for those who explore (which itself is inherently travel).

How about a reduced cost from WP to WP? So if you’ve taken the time to get OVER to a wp, then traveling to another is cheaper.

And really travel to all cities should be free, since it is now, there’s just more effort involved than simply porting there.

I think WP costs should be toned down. I’ll even take selective toning down for WPs that are close to an active event that you want to go to.

I agree wholeheartedly that the way point costs should scale with the rewards in the zone. And possibly with one free portal if you have’t used one recently.

I can defiantly see how absolutely free travel would just lead to “Scouts” calling out DE location and everyone swamping it, and never running about.

However in addition to the “anti-social” or at the least less social impact of high traveling cost, it penalizes players who have limited amounts of play time. I for example play GW with my wife. We have 4 kids so our playtime is very limited (after they go to bed). We usually don’t log in at the exact same time as she likes to sit down, check FB and other things after the kid go to sleep. When I log in I have to weight, is it worth hopping over to this zone to play, because she is going to log in soon and I’ll need to go somewhere else. So I end up standing around for 15-20 of my precious little play time, or just running into a zone I have already done to get my daily kills/de’s etc.

Another possible solution to help with the social aspect of the high cost is make it so that the WP nearest someone you are partied with is free.

That way there is NO cost to group with other people.

I still feel WP is and should be a luxury; and yes there are situations where the cost is excessive or prohibitive to grouping/helping-out.
That said; I would hope that ANet is at least looking into possible modification of the current pricing structure. Travel to LA should be free from anywhere. The rest of the issues are troublesome and have no easy solution without making other things in-game and the gem store useless and redundant. Best we could hope for now, sans an official statement, is to keep some ideas flowing. And NO, suggesting free travel always is not a solution this game needs.

Something does seem pretty off with how the waypoints scale in price. When I read about Guild Wars 2 they mentioned travel and way points to increase the “fun” factor and cited things in other games like having to travel real time to get to where your friends are at (via a griffon or whatever) as a timesink that ruins “fun”. Unfortunatly with the way the pricing scales we now have people using a 3 loading screen “fast travel” to a home city and a long jog to get where we want to go.

Seems like they are torn between what they initially set this up for and a fear of letting the economy get really out of control. The good part is this is a very fixable thing for them with a couple of database tweaks.

Relentless.5678:

I still feel WP is and should be a luxury; and yes there are situations where the cost is excessive or prohibitive to grouping/helping-out.
That said; I would hope that ANet is at least looking into possible modification of the current pricing structure. Travel to LA should be free from anywhere. The rest of the issues are troublesome and have no easy solution without making other things in-game and the gem store useless and redundant. Best we could hope for now, sans an official statement, is to keep some ideas flowing. And NO, suggesting free travel always is not a solution this game needs.

If travel to LA is free, then travel to all major cities might as well be free.

Another thing to add, if you die there should NOT be a cost to get to the nearest waypoint as that is your only way of resurrecting with no other players around.

Katie Feathermoore.5031:

Relentless.5678:

I still feel WP is and should be a luxury; and yes there are situations where the cost is excessive or prohibitive to grouping/helping-out.
That said; I would hope that ANet is at least looking into possible modification of the current pricing structure. Travel to LA should be free from anywhere. The rest of the issues are troublesome and have no easy solution without making other things in-game and the gem store useless and redundant. Best we could hope for now, sans an official statement, is to keep some ideas flowing. And NO, suggesting free travel always is not a solution this game needs.

If travel to LA is free, then travel to all major cities might as well be free.

Then they might as well remove the asura gates. It’s a slippery slope to tread. I only bring up LA because travel to LA is currently free from anywhere and it still makes me think twice about doing it because the return trip will not be. From LA I can take a gate to any of the starting cities and run out to help the lowbies, or just run over to where it will cost me less to WP back to whence I came.

Posting my agreement that waypoint costs should scale with zone not level, and that travel to Lion’s Arch should be free in order to remove the constant stream of people using WvW/HotM as a quick travel route.

I don’t believe associating the cost with zone level is the right solution. Why should a level 80 (that earns more gold/mats) revisiting a lower leveled zone to obtain 100% completion be able to move from way point to way point at a reduced zone cost?

This will motivate min/max players to grind mobs to 80 so that they can travel around for 100% completion afterwards without fear of fast travel costs.

I share the frustration but do see the importance of fast travel costs. Perhaps they could introduce a purchasable one time use “summoning stone” for a party member. This would ease the frustration and burden for those that want to group with lower leveled friends while maintaining the curve associated with leveling.

Summoning stones are a neat idea. Gem store/Artificing craftable would be cool.

Ok so a craftable Summons stone seems intriguing
How about we reduce costs on the WPs if you’ve already taken the time to 100% explore the zone?

I agree 100% w/ the following, posted by OP (edit):

“Edit: In light of points brought up in the discussion so far here are my suggestions:
- Scale WP costs based on zone level rather than character level
- City WPs should be free to travel to from anywhere.
That would keep zerging under control but reduce a lot of the stress caused by the current system.”

Lack of ANet response makes me sad.

aeonZgamer.5307:

How about we reduce costs on the WPs if you’ve already taken the time to 100% explore the zone?

Why are you insisting on a discount for reuse?

If the issue truly is about being penalized for grouping with low level friends, this solution is to far reaching. I think many are getting on the bandwagon disguising monetary motivations under the veil of grouping with lower levels.

An 80 should have to weigh the risk/rewards for fast travel just like a level 1. I am starting to think, many have been spoiled with the “innovation” of flying mounts.

The Nexon™ Cash Shop™ is here for all your gold-buying needs. Trade gems™ for gold, if you are having difficulty.

You want your Guild Wars™2™ Legendary weapon!?

Then you’d better get saving up hundreds of gold!

SevenWhite.4367:

I agree 100% w/ the following, posted by OP (edit):

“Edit: In light of points brought up in the discussion so far here are my suggestions:
- Scale WP costs based on zone level rather than character level
- City WPs should be free to travel to from anywhere.
That would keep zerging under control but reduce a lot of the stress caused by the current system.”

I agree with this. Being lvl 40, the costs of traveling start weighing heavily on me. Especially since I’m the explorer type, and some of my friends are lowbies, so I hop between zones a lot. You know its bad when you are constantly calculating what you need to harvest/kill/do just to cover the traveling costs.

I hope we get an official response on this soon.

To be honest, I dont quite understand this complaint. I do give it legitimacy nonetheless..

I have yet to run into this issue. I use waypoints quite liberally. The only time I look at cost is if its something that will take me a short time to run to, then Ill just walk.

The trait books pretty much cost me the amount I had total on the character, and seemed pretty perfectly planned. Those have been the only factor which caused negative impact on my wallet in a significant way.

I am not sure what I am doing differently! I only recently started using the trading post to sell items. (On a different note, this is made very easy by looking at the TP sell page before liquidating my current inventory. Some items are a good profit, the rest I just vendor). I havent sold ANY collectible item, they are all banked. I frequently bought random equipment on the TP. I only used karma to buy the underwater breathers, so everything else has been bought with money. I am constantly exploring, and using WP to get to events announced in chat. I have never, at any point, had to think about how to equalize the cost. Seems like I am playing a different game?

I am not posting to minimize the issue, I am quite curious about how others are experiencing it though.

edit: I also think the benefits of such a system will only be seen further down the line, if they are seen at all. The cost of waypoint usage will become increasingly minimal as wealth grows naturally with the age of the game. It also seems to be a percentage of possible reward within the level range, though I dont care enough to figure out if its consistent.

@TurtleofPower: lack of Anet response makes me happy (as it perhaps means they won’t give in to the vocal minority QQing about every little inconvenience.
The travel costs are fine. If they made them free, it would make the game into a lobby game. It’s working (well) as designed… the cost is meant to encourage you to take part in the world by roaming, rather than zipping around instantly.

This could blow up in their faces soon. At the higher levels, waypoint travel costs too much. I have seen a lot of threads on this.

I love ArenaNet and they are very intelligent with what they do. I really hope they get in front of this before they lose customers.

nlgray.5846:

I don’t believe associating the cost with zone level is the right solution. Why should a level 80 (that earns more gold/mats) revisiting a lower leveled zone to obtain 100% completion be able to move from way point to way point at a reduced zone cost?

This will motivate min/max players to grind mobs to 80 so that they can travel around for 100% completion afterwards without fear of fast travel costs.

I share the frustration but do see the importance of fast travel costs. Perhaps they could introduce a purchasable one time use “summoning stone” for a party member. This would ease the frustration and burden for those that want to group with lower leveled friends while maintaining the curve associated with leveling.

I find that absolutely absurd because grinding mobs is the least efficient way to level. In fact, exploring zones and completing the content you find is the best way to level.

The highest I have seen a Waypoint was 4s. That’s nearly nothing, that’s 2 Dynamic Events, 2-4 mobs w/ Omnomberry Bar on, 5 blues vendored, 8 whites vendored or 1 1/2 greens vendored.

“This could blow up in their faces soon”

Really? How? If anyone quits over a Waypoint cost, I’m fairly sure no one wants them around anyway.

Waypoints shouldn’t cost anything.

In fact, they should find a creative way to implement potential rewards for using them like being a delivery person to an NPC at the other end.

This is the only “unavoidable” gold sink in this game if you think about it, and it’s the one that’s tied to the most important issues in gaming: personal time and sociability.

It is a poor system for an MMO and needs to be completely rethought at best. At worst it should be a trivial cost cost that through massive numbers of “transaction” helps to balance the economy. It should not be a cost leader of the entire system because rapid travel for sociability is a cornerstone of the genre unless there is some reward for the time spent. And forcing me through 5 events “on my way” to the one I actually want to participate in is a very poor substitute.

WoW got this horribly wrong also and had to patch it together with the dungeon finder. I hope ANet rethinks this.

Gopher.4562:

The highest I have seen a Waypoint was 4s. That’s nearly nothing, that’s 2 Dynamic Events, 2-4 mobs w/ Omnomberry Bar on, 5 blues vendored, 8 whites vendored or 1 1/2 greens vendored.

It’s still limiting. What if I don’t plan on doing any farming for the next few hours? There shouldn’t be costs to doing social stuff that are high enough to remind me that I should be farming.

I shouldn’t ever have to ask myself if it’s worth it to go help out or hang out with somebody in another zone.

OP, you do know you can travel thru the Mists for free to Lions Arch, and then to any major city from there?

You shouldn’t have to hit a waypoint very often. It’s pretty easy to earn enough to cover your WP travel.

Derpinator.2894:

Waypoints shouldn’t cost anything.

In fact, they should find a creative way to implement potential rewards for using them like being a delivery person to an NPC at the other end.

That’s actually a pretty good idea. There’s no reason to not have quests in GW2. Imagine being able to go questing over large areas in GW2. Having to discover things for the order of whipers. Like daily or weekly quests. Or have to deal with large incursions in to main hubs on behalf of the Vigil, or translate large libraries of books for the Priory, etc.

Hawken.7932:

@TurtleofPower: lack of Anet response makes me happy (as it perhaps means they won’t give in to the vocal minority QQing about every little inconvenience.
The travel costs are fine. If they made them free, it would make the game into a lobby game. It’s working (well) as designed… the cost is meant to encourage you to take part in the world by roaming, rather than zipping around instantly.

It’s not a “little inconvenience”, it’s my real life minutes spent doing something I don’t want to do in a game.

So you’re almost correct. It doesn’t “encourage you to take part in the world by roaming”, it punishes you for not wanting to do that at that moment, or having some reason not to at that moment like my guildies want to run Dungeon X which is halfway across this expanding world; you know, how it gets much, much larger as you level and open new areas.

Punishing me for not wanting or having the time to run… That’s a bad philosophy.

Let me skip it if I want to and reward me well if I don’t skip it.

But let’s be honest, if the “reward” for just roaming around was worth it, no one would use the waypoints.

So put another way: the fact that people use waypoints means that the “stuff” between them isn’t worth running through all the time.

That’s the designer’s problem. Not the community’s. And we shouldn’t have to pay to skip something we don’t find interesting enough to slow us down at that moment.

Derpinator.2894:

Waypoints shouldn’t cost anything.

Not having waypoint costs would kill the game world. Sorry but as much as i think the current price is too much, I also think it is necessary (the idea that is).

Skyrim and Oblivion both had “free” travel, and I found the games to be….boring that way. Its more fun to roam.

I still want to be “forced” to go trough the world from time to time – but I don’t want to be punished every time I want to get something done fast.

Well, if you don’t plan on farming then you don’t need to spend money on waypoints because you don;t have to move or go anywhere. The waypoints in town, while you are in town are absolutely free. You are welcome to mingle and socialize with your friends there.

Now, when you step out to the PvE world, where things start dropping money and events give you money and you start earning items, yes; of course you’re going to have to pay to teleport around.

You have the option of hoofing it, if you don’t want to waypoint. You are in NO way tied to the 100% optional waypoints that the game conveniently offers for us.

Khristophoros.7194:

I find that absolutely absurd because grinding mobs is the least efficient way to level. In fact, exploring zones and completing the content you find is the best way to level.

You may think it’s absurd but experience tells me otherwise. All the players that hit cap through crafting disagree with you regarding best way to level.

nlgray.5846:

Khristophoros.7194:

I find that absolutely absurd because grinding mobs is the least efficient way to level. In fact, exploring zones and completing the content you find is the best way to level.

You may think it’s absurd but experience tells me otherwise. All the players that hit cap through crafting disagree with you regarding best way to level.

Crafting costs tons of coin unless you go out and find your own mats. Personally, even though I go around gathering everything I see and killing everything I run into, I still find that crafting eats up more money than anything else. I’m ok with that but I want to make it clear that it’s not as simple as “just craft to 80”.

nachdenki.2637:

It is absolutely right that gold can be taken out of the game in other ways, for example by reducing gold drop. But what was gained then? You end up with the same amount of gold as before… . Additionally, gold is dropped in many many ways (items, events, mobs, dungeons, …). So if mobs don’t drop gold, people will get money by farming events and so on. That’s why money sinks exist so everyone has to lose gold regardless of what he does all day long..

When you reduce the rate at which gold is dropped, you reduce the inflation rate. Here’s the situation, if you remove WP cost, and don’t create another gold-sink, the inflation rate will go up. Prices will rise at a faster rate than if there was less money in the economy. The root of the issue is that, as long as players play, gold/resources are added to the economy thereby devaluing all existing gold/resources. SO, reducing the amount of resources going into the game via rewards/drops/gathering by an equivalent amount to how much is going out of the game by WP travel would mean that it would have no impact on inflation.

Let’s not also forget that devaluing gold devalues gems which is a revenue stream for ANet. Which leads to another way to get money out of the game economy, let players sell gems for cash…. but we all know how that worked out for D3.

Enoch.1058:

nachdenki.2637:

It is absolutely right that gold can be taken out of the game in other ways, for example by reducing gold drop. But what was gained then? You end up with the same amount of gold as before… . Additionally, gold is dropped in many many ways (items, events, mobs, dungeons, …). So if mobs don’t drop gold, people will get money by farming events and so on. That’s why money sinks exist so everyone has to lose gold regardless of what he does all day long..

When you reduce the rate at which gold is dropped, you reduce the inflation rate. Here’s the situation, if you remove WP cost, and don’t create another gold-sink, the inflation rate will go up. Prices will rise at a faster rate than if there was less money in the economy. The root of the issue is that, as long as players play, gold/resources are added to the economy thereby devaluing all existing gold/resources. SO, reducing the amount of resources going into the game via rewards/drops/gathering by an equivalent amount to how much is going out of the game by WP travel would mean that it would have no impact on inflation.

Let’s not also forget that devaluing gold devalues gems which is a revenue stream for ANet. Which leads to another way to get money out of the game economy, let players sell gems for cash…. but we all know how that worked out for D3.

Personally I don’t think the inflation is such a big deal. From my experience with D3 I think game economies can handle a lot more than what people say. The economy inflated so much that it seemed impossible for the average player to stand a chance in the market.

What actually happened was everybody could participate in the economy because they could find drops of value and sell them into the inflated economy. That was a very extreme case of inflation.

The key difference between game economies and real economies is that every player is capable of finding high value items and selling them into the market. In real life we have people trapped doing low value jobs and no way to move up.

Also, I don’t see GW2 getting nearly as inflated as D3 unless ANet really slacks off like Blizzard did. Also, the game itself is designed much better to mitigate the kinds of stuff that leads to inflation in the first place.

Sousuke.7268:

Derpinator.2894:

Waypoints shouldn’t cost anything.

Not having waypoint costs would kill the game world. Sorry but as much as i think the current price is too much, I also think it is necessary (the idea that is).

Skyrim and Oblivion both had “free” travel, and I found the games to be….boring that way. Its more fun to roam.

I still want to be “forced” to go trough the world from time to time – but I don’t want to be punished every time I want to get something done fast.

I disagree that it would destroy the game world. In fact, in the rest of my post, I said that not only is free a good beginning, but PAID waypoint usage is ideal. Find other ways to leech gold out of the economy; just not this way. It’s terrible design (at least at the current price points) from a psychological standpoint.

Games are about rewards. Doing things that feel good and fun. Having to make a real-life economic decision inside a game is not fun.

Here’s the logic:

My friends (or just I, all alone) want to run Dungeon X or Event X. It’s in zone Y.

That’s at least 5s round trip to go help them, or 20 minutes of running/zoning etc. Sigh. Which is more important. The half hour I spend either way (to make up the silver later by killing things or the 20 minutes each way I spend traveling back and forth by foot) or spending the time with my friends."

This means that no matter what I choose, I’m paying a price in real life terms for an activity specifically designed to SKIP doing something I don’t have time or desire to at that moment: walk.

I agree. It’s way more fun to roam most of the time. And I do. I’m an explorer at heart and I love it. But when I want to use a waypoint, there is always, ALWAYS a reason for me to skip the content in between: I don’t have time to roam.

And whether that reason is good enough for you, the developers or anyone else is irrelevant to the cost associated with paying with my real life hours to skip something I don’t want to do because it’s unpleasurable.

Derpinator.2894:

Sousuke.7268:

Derpinator.2894:

Waypoints shouldn’t cost anything.

Not having waypoint costs would kill the game world. Sorry but as much as i think the current price is too much, I also think it is necessary (the idea that is).

Skyrim and Oblivion both had “free” travel, and I found the games to be….boring that way. Its more fun to roam.

I still want to be “forced” to go trough the world from time to time – but I don’t want to be punished every time I want to get something done fast.

I disagree that it would destroy the game world. In fact, in the rest of my post, I said that not only is free a good beginning, but PAID waypoint usage is ideal. Find other ways to leech gold out of the economy; just not this way. It’s terrible design (at least at the current price points) from a psychological standpoint.

Games are about rewards. Doing things that feel good and fun. Having to make a real-life economic decision inside a game is not fun.

Here’s the logic:

My friends (or just I, all alone) want to run Dungeon X or Event X. It’s in zone Y.

That’s at least 5s round trip to go help them, or 20 minutes of running/zoning etc. Sigh. Which is more important. The half hour I spend either way (to make up the silver later by killing things or the 20 minutes each way I spend traveling back and forth by foot) or spending the time with my friends."

This means that no matter what I choose, I’m paying a price in real life terms for an activity specifically designed to SKIP doing something I don’t have time or desire to at that moment: walk.

I agree. It’s way more fun to roam most of the time. And I do. I’m an explorer at heart and I love it. But when I want to use a waypoint, there is always, ALWAYS a reason for me to skip the content in between: I don’t have time to roam.

And whether that reason is good enough for you, the developers or anyone else is irrelevant to the cost associated with paying with my real life hours to skip something I don’t want to do because it’s unpleasurable.

Thank you.

It’s not really about how much it impacts overall wealth gain for a player. It’s about the psychological and social effects.

Katie Feathermoore.5031:

Your right, I forgot teleporting around the map to focus on doing the things we want while spending a minimum amount of time wasting time running was a convenience we payed for in GW1. Oh wait. It wasn’t.

That’s because in the original they pioneered some amazing ideas like “Hey, travel should be free so players can do what they want when they want to.” Sad to see that these ideas have now been lost.

If the cost is truly insignificant, then why not just remove it and rely on the bigger gold sinks like legendary weapons?

QFT, especially since in several of the reviews i read for GW2 this very same point of removing the tedium of travel was given as a major plus.

Also like how every person in history who responds to a complaint with the argument that it isn’t a big deal, or isn’t significant fail to see how that is just as valid a counterpoint like you pointed out. If it isn’t a big deal, then stop it.

Khristophoros.7194:

Thank you.

It’s not really about how much it impacts overall wealth gain for a player. It’s about the psychological and social effects.

Given that a subjective reaction to something which is still allowing for wealth acquisition is completely under the individuals control, I have trouble understanding this.

Regardless, would you mind expanding on what these psychological and social effects are? I simply do not experience them in my gameplay nor do the people I play with, which is why this topic makes me so curious. I do have some issues with the game (I truly hate Orr), but I find waypoint cost to be effective in its purpose. I also suspect it will become a moot point after a month of growing our wallets. Though, as I said, I havent even thought about it until I visited the forums.

Khristophoros.7194:

The key difference between game economies and real economies is that every player is capable of finding high value items and selling them into the market. In real life we have people trapped doing low value jobs and no way to move up.

Not really, the biggest difference is most MMOs do not control they volume of currency circulating in the economy. We lack a federal reserve, NPC vendor have any unlimited supply of currency.

Back to the point, no one has provided a reason why an 80 should not have to weigh the risk/rewards for fast travel just like a level 1, as stated in my previous post.

If you constantly use way points, you should be broke, it’s working as intended. The real issue is people should not be punished for grouping with lower level friends.

nlgray:

If you constantly use way points, you should be broke, it’s working as intended.

I dont know, I constantly use waypoints and still find myself accruing wealth. The only thought I have is that they are being used by others drastically more than I am. Either that, or it is as suggested; that it is some sort of perceived psychological smack in the face. That one is all on the user though.

I look forward to seeing the longterm results of the economy control GW2 has implemented though. Whether it is effective or not remains to be seen.

Tuluum.9638:

Khristophoros.7194:

Thank you.

It’s not really about how much it impacts overall wealth gain for a player. It’s about the psychological and social effects.

Given that a subjective reaction to something which is still allowing for wealth acquisition is completely under the individuals control, I have trouble understanding this.

Regardless, would you mind expanding on what these psychological and social effects are? I simply do not experience them in my gameplay nor do the people I play with, which is why this topic makes me so curious. I do have some issues with the game (I truly hate Orr), but I find waypoint cost to be effective in its purpose. I also suspect it will become a moot point after a month of growing our wallets. Though, as I said, I havent even thought about it until I visited the forums.

It’s been said many times in this thread. The costs are high enough to make many players think twice before they go do something social in another zone, go help a friend, or go back to finish fully completing a low level zone.

The costs are high enough to limit how often players will choose to do those things. That has been seriously bothering me ever since I hit level 60 or so.