Deflation of gold
Gem prices are dictated by players. We buy more Gems with gold, the cost goes up. We buy less, they go down. They either released or put things people wanted on sale non stop for a month. Why would they change it if we’re the ones raising it?
I don’t think that word means what you think it means…
Also maybe try reading up on the exchange, it is known how it works and why the price behaves why it does.
Either you don’t know what the word fluctuate means or you meant another word. Obviously it does fluctuate. If it didn’t it would be a perfectly straight line.
Th gem store is a cash shop. The intent is that people will pay real money for the items they want. ANet was nice enough to provide a mechanism to allow you to do spend in game currency. However, that mechanism requires that someone else want to turn their cash into gold. The market will settle on a price where some people use gems for gold and others use gold to get gems.
Currently, more people want gems than gold. So the price is going to rise.
Look at it this way. Would you pay a dollar for 7.5 gold? If not then don’t be surprised that other people won’t either.
Anything I post is just the opinion of a very vocal minority of 1.
firstly, gold <—> prices is just one of ten thousands of indicators of inflation. and it’s not because there is more gold in the game. It’s because there isn’t a faucet for it.
when people buy gems with gold, the price goes up
when people buy gold with gems, the price goes down
the vast majority of gem purchases with $$ go directly to the gem store (let’s say 90% do for the sake of argument)
the vast majority of people that buy gems with gold spend it at the gem store (probably around 99.99%)
so 99.99% of players increase the gold → gem price, and 10% of players that decrease it. It doesn’t take a 5th grader to realize the price will only increase with that kind of ratio.
That’s what all the ‘you can buy gold with gems’ ads they are running are trying to do – make more people that convert gems to gold to decrease that price.
Don’t worry – at some point the amount of gold they offer for gems will be tempting enough to shift that to 50/50 and the price will stabilize. This probably won’t happen until around 50g → 100 gems.
Alternatively, they could increase how much gold you get for gems so it doesn’t appear to be such a ripoff. It shouldn’t be too close to how much gold it costs to buy gems, but even just 10% difference would see a huge shift in the percent of people that sell gems for gold.
GW2Profits - a collection of gold-producing tools
Mystic’s Gold Profiting Guide
Forge & more JSON recipes
Mystic’s Gold Profiting Guide
Forge & more JSON recipes
The current exchange rate is better for many new players:
- Veterans spent US$60 to play the game during headstart.
- New players can spend the same amount, with $20 going to gems and the rest to pay for the game.
- That $20 gets you 1,600 gems, worth over 150 gold.
The exchange rate is only terrible for people like me who don’t want to spend any real world money on the game.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Don’t forget the major point : the fact that gems will only keep raising in price is only dependent of Arena Net initial choice of putting a finite number of gems in the gem pools. That’s why it will (until the game collapses) ony raise. It could have been done differently.
Why do you think that there is a finite amount of gems?
Don’t forget the major point : the fact that gems will only keep raising in price is only dependent of Arena Net initial choice of putting a finite number of gems in the gem pools. That’s why it will (until the game collapses) ony raise. It could have been done differently.
The exchange rates do not only rise. When you exchange gems for gold, the gems you sold go into the exchange reserve, causing the gold – gems rate to go down. That rate has risen many times during demand spikes when new items are added to the gem shop or old items return, then went back down after, as players stopped buying so many gems with gold.
Both gold and gems in the exchange are finite amounts. If it were otherwise, it wouldn’t be an exchange, they would have just set up a system where you can buy gems for gold at whatever rate Anet wanted to offer. Which is a terrible idea because it would either be so high a price that no one wanted to grind so much for a few gems or it would be so cheap that players wouldn’t bother spending real money on gems when they can get them so easily through playing the game.
Gold is basically infinite (it’s constantly created on killing mobs, completing dungeons, etc.) and Gems are basically infinite (you can always buy Gem cards) with fiat money.
I find it quite amusing how people complain about the blog posts where they tell you that you can exchange gems for gold, and at the same time people complain about the high gold→gem rate.
Gold is basically infinite (it’s constantly created on killing mobs, completing dungeons, etc.) and Gems are basically infinite (you can always buy Gem cards) with fiat money.
I find it quite amusing how people complain about the blog posts where they tell you that you can exchange gems for gold, and at the same time people complain about the high gold->gem rate.
Gold is infinite : correct
Gems (bought with real moneys) are infinite : correct
Gems (bought with gold) are infinite : false assumption. They are finite. It’s a different “pool” of gems betweens the one bought with real money and the ones bought ingame with gold, and that one has as stated a finite number (very big at the beginning of the game, but still the same number since).
That’s why in the long run gems (bought with gold) will only raise in price.
You claim something we don’t know anything about. Have you ever seen the gem pool running out? We don’t know how its implemented. Maybe it’s just an exponential function and the pool will never be empty, just more expensive.
You claim something we don’t know anything about. Have you ever seen the gem pool running out? We don’t know how its implemented. Maybe it’s just an exponential function and the pool will never be empty, just more expensive.
We do know, the devs told us.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/members/John-Smith-4610/showposts
Not going to find the exact post, but if you read through his posts you’ll find it. It was over a year ago I think so I’d start with the earlier posts.
gems are for all intents and purposes infinite. JS describes it as finite because it makes math easier. anyways, the price is related to how many gems are left in the reservoir. So until the price increases exponentially, we aren’t running out anytime soon. by ‘exponentially’, I mean you buy 1 gem with 100g and the price goes up to 200g.
GW2Profits - a collection of gold-producing tools
Mystic’s Gold Profiting Guide
Forge & more JSON recipes
Mystic’s Gold Profiting Guide
Forge & more JSON recipes
And if the price DOES get that crazy, either something is SERIOUSLY wrong with the gold faucets in the game, or players are even more super-stingy beasts than I anticipated.
You claim something we don’t know anything about. Have you ever seen the gem pool running out? We don’t know how its implemented. Maybe it’s just an exponential function and the pool will never be empty, just more expensive.
We do know, the devs told us.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/members/John-Smith-4610/showposts
Not going to find the exact post, but if you read through his posts you’ll find it. It was over a year ago I think so I’d start with the earlier posts.
This is the only post I could find where he talks about gems and gold. It doesn’t really relate exactly to the question of how many gems in the pool. It does seem to imply there is a limited amount of each.
Who sets Gem prices? source
John Smith
“There seems to be some confusion:
The currency exchange has a supply of Gems and Gold.
If players are converting Gold to Gems, then the Amount of Gold player will receive for their gems goes up.
If players are converting Gems to Gold, then the amount of Gems players receive for Gold goes up.
The exchange rate changes based on the scarcity of each supply. You cannot inflate it, it’s an exchange rate. As players purchase in one direction, it entices purchases in the other direction.”
gems are for all intents and purposes infinite. JS describes it as finite because it makes math easier. anyways, the price is related to how many gems are left in the reservoir. So until the price increases exponentially, we aren’t running out anytime soon. by ‘exponentially’, I mean you buy 1 gem with 100g and the price goes up to 200g.
So you don’t consider the conversion rate increasing roughly 4x in 12 months, 2x in the last 8 months or 25% in the last month as portent of an ever quicker escalation in price? So you think Gem to Gold conversion will step up before it hits 45g per 100 gems at Christmas?
We are heroes. This is what we do!
RIP City of Heroes
RIP City of Heroes
The pool of gems in the exchange is finite (as is the pool of gold), but this is not a closed system. Players purchasing gems with gold subtract gems from the gem pool but add gold to the gold pool, and likewise, players converting gems to gold subtract from the gold pool and add to the gem pool.
So yes, the gem pool is finite, but it can shrink or grow depending on what transactions are occurring.
In the day 1, You could buy 387 gem with 1 gold.
[VcY] Velocity – Gargamell
gems are for all intents and purposes infinite. JS describes it as finite because it makes math easier. anyways, the price is related to how many gems are left in the reservoir. So until the price increases exponentially, we aren’t running out anytime soon. by ‘exponentially’, I mean you buy 1 gem with 100g and the price goes up to 200g.
So you don’t consider the conversion rate increasing roughly 4x in 12 months, 2x in the last 8 months or 25% in the last month as portent of an ever quicker escalation in price? So you think Gem to Gold conversion will step up before it hits 45g per 100 gems at Christmas?
http://www.gw2spidy.com/gem
then zoom to ‘all’
it’s a fairly linear line. yes, it is increasing, but not that much in the grand scheme. a finite amount of gems means it would have an vertical asymptote at some point, because if there are no gems left, then the last gem would be for infinite gold. just before that asymptote, the rate of increase would blow your mind, even compared to the current rate of increase.
As to why the price is increasing: people are willing to gladly pay these prices, that’s why the price is increasing. If the price were too expensive, then people wouldn’t be paying them and the price would decrease. once it gets to truly unreasonable amounts, then people will stop buying gems and the price will plateau.
GW2Profits - a collection of gold-producing tools
Mystic’s Gold Profiting Guide
Forge & more JSON recipes
Mystic’s Gold Profiting Guide
Forge & more JSON recipes
You mean to say the “inflation” of gold. There is too much gold in the economy.
The reason for the poor gem to gold ratio is simple.
Gems are far more valuable than gold. Arena.net has not put in any good gold sinks and they keep making new content being sold for gems.
The only way to make good gold sinks is to create new content that is sold for gold instead of gems. Unfortunately for us this doesn’t help gem sales. But in the long term it causes people to get bored of the game.
However they may have discovered that older players yield less revenue and decided to rely on new players who haven’t played everything so they don’t need to focus on player retention so 100% of their development efforts can be focused on the gem store.
The price of precursors suggests that there are items that people want that require a lot of gold.
It’s just that it’s not worth it for people to exchange their gems for gold.
Tell me, without thinking about the reverse transaction, how much gold would you like to get for a dollar?
Anything I post is just the opinion of a very vocal minority of 1.
(edited by TooBz.3065)
The price of precursors suggests that there are items that people want that require a lot of gold.
It’s just that it’s not worth it for people to exchange their gems for gold.
Tell me, without thinking about the reverse transaction, how much gold would you like to get for a dollar?
This is the wrong way to think about it.
If the price of a precursor is sky high, that doesn’t mean that gold is worth a lot.
In our case it only means that it is too easy to farm for and there’s nothing else people want to spend it on. There’s a lack of gold sinks and too many gem sinks.
http://www.gw2spidy.com/gem
then zoom to ‘all’
it’s a fairly linear line. yes, it is increasing, but not that much in the grand scheme. a finite amount of gems means it would have an vertical asymptote at some point, because if there are no gems left, then the last gem would be for infinite gold. just before that asymptote, the rate of increase would blow your mind, even compared to the current rate of increase.As to why the price is increasing: people are willing to gladly pay these prices, that’s why the price is increasing. If the price were too expensive, then people wouldn’t be paying them and the price would decrease. once it gets to truly unreasonable amounts, then people will stop buying gems and the price will plateau.
You don’t seem to understand that while there is a specific amount of gold/gems in the exchange, that number goes up and down as transactions occur. When someone trades gems for gold, those gems are held within the exchange for future use, just like what happens to (most of) the gold that is used to buy gems. It is this always-changing ratio of gems to gold that sets the exchange rate.
There will never be a time when “the last gem” is sold because long before then the gold-for-gems rate will be much higher than it is now, creating opportunities for players to buy Cultural Tier 3 armor for pennies, for example, by buying $10 worth of gems and exchanging them for thousands of gold.
And like the gold that is rewarded for killing a boss or running a dungeon, gems bought with real money do not come from the exchange, they are created when the code from the gem card or online purchase is used. There are millions of gem cards already in existence, the game will not run out of gems.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
The price of precursors suggests that there are items that people want that require a lot of gold.
It’s just that it’s not worth it for people to exchange their gems for gold.
Tell me, without thinking about the reverse transaction, how much gold would you like to get for a dollar?
This is the wrong way to think about it.
If the price of a precursor is sky high, that doesn’t mean that gold is worth a lot.
In our case it only means that it is too easy to farm for and there’s nothing else people want to spend it on. There’s a lack of gold sinks and too many gem sinks.
I think I misunderstood your argument. Mostly because when I think of a “gold sink” I think of the taxes that are imposed on playing. For example, waypoint costs, BLTP fees, etc… I think the last thing we need is more of these. If I, for example, couldn’t afford to port around without selling gems for gold I’d probably quitthe game.
Personally, I avoid the optional gold sinks in the game. For example, I wanted the T3 cultural armor for a long time, but now that I have the gold, I’m holding on to it for the precursor.
Bottom line, I think that precursors being so expensive messes everything else up. I don’t spend money on the available gold sinks because I’m saving for the precursor. I don’t buy gold with gems because I’m not spending $100 dollars on a virtual item.
So I have no reason to buy gold. If most people feel like me, the price of gold is going to continue to rise.
Anything I post is just the opinion of a very vocal minority of 1.
I think I misunderstood your argument. Mostly because when I think of a “gold sink” I think of the taxes that are imposed on playing. For example, waypoint costs, BLTP fees, etc… I think the last thing we need is more of these. If I, for example, couldn’t afford to port around without selling gems for gold I’d probably quitthe game.
Personally, I avoid the optional gold sinks in the game. For example, I wanted the T3 cultural armor for a long time, but now that I have the gold, I’m holding on to it for the precursor.
Bottom line, I think that precursors being so expensive messes everything else up. I don’t spend money on the available gold sinks because I’m saving for the precursor. I don’t buy gold with gems because I’m not spending $100 dollars on a virtual item.
So I have no reason to buy gold. If most people feel like me, the price of gold is going to continue to rise.
You say that you think of gold sinks as taxes on game play, then go on to describe gold sinks as precursors and cultural armor?
Both are gold sinks. Luxury/prestige items are as much a gold sink as waypoint fees. Crafting is a gold sink, you have to buy supplies like coal, thread, flour etc. from vendors to craft most items.
Precursors are a gold sink, most of the items thrown into the forge are crafted weapons (see above) and/or were bought from the TP (15% tax gold sink) and precursors are also sold on the TP themselves (15% tax gold sink).
Is this the complaint of the week? Because last week it was “everything in this game requires gold, there should be rewards given out for skill, not just the ability to push 1 and collect your reward.”
Now there’s nothing to buy with gold, everything is about gems?
Not surprising that’s their is two (or more) camps of thought on the game’s economy. Ever been in a room of economists?
We are heroes. This is what we do!
RIP City of Heroes
RIP City of Heroes
Not surprising that’s their is two (or more) camps of thought on the game’s economy. Ever been in a room of economists?
I’m sure it would be a helluva party… it’s hard to keep track of who’s arguing for which side, though, it seems like some names come up more than once in opposing arguments.
You mean to say the “inflation” of gold. There is too much gold in the economy.
The reason for the poor gem to gold ratio is simple.
Gems are far more valuable than gold. Arena.net has not put in any good gold sinks and they keep making new content being sold for gems.
The only way to make good gold sinks is to create new content that is sold for gold instead of gems. Unfortunately for us this doesn’t help gem sales. But in the long term it causes people to get bored of the game.
However they may have discovered that older players yield less revenue and decided to rely on new players who haven’t played everything so they don’t need to focus on player retention so 100% of their development efforts can be focused on the gem store.
gem exchange is the 2nd biggest gold sink in the game. I bet the TP tax edges it out by a few orders of magnitude, but the gem exchange is definitely a few orders of magnitude above the next-highest (Icy Runestones, perhaps? WP fees? Salvage Kits? Not sure what #3 is)
You don’t seem to understand that while there is a specific amount of gold/gems in the exchange, that number goes up and down as transactions occur. When someone trades gems for gold, those gems are held within the exchange for future use, just like what happens to (most of) the gold that is used to buy gems. It is this always-changing ratio of gems to gold that sets the exchange rate.
There will never be a time when “the last gem” is sold because long before then the gold-for-gems rate will be much higher than it is now, creating opportunities for players to buy Cultural Tier 3 armor for pennies, for example, by buying $10 worth of gems and exchanging them for thousands of gold.
And like the gold that is rewarded for killing a boss or running a dungeon, gems bought with real money do not come from the exchange, they are created when the code from the gem card or online purchase is used. There are millions of gem cards already in existence, the game will not run out of gems.
I see you understand how we are no where near the end of the gem supply and how the gem supply is, for all intents and purposes, infinite. That it’s not going to run out in the foreseeable future. Not sure why you think we disagree.
GW2Profits - a collection of gold-producing tools
Mystic’s Gold Profiting Guide
Forge & more JSON recipes
Mystic’s Gold Profiting Guide
Forge & more JSON recipes
I see you understand how we are no where near the end of the gem supply and how the gem supply is, for all intents and purposes, infinite. That it’s not going to run out in the foreseeable future. Not sure why you think we disagree.
Gems bought with cash are not the same as gems exchanged for gold. One is created on demand, the other is not. You seem to be under the impression they are the same.
But don’t they fundamentally come from the same source? Gems on the gem exchange were initially created when a player bought them with cash, and then sold them on the exchange. I can see your distinction, but it seems to be just a matter of how you’re looking at it.
Here’s your quote
As a quick aside. Gems in the currency exchange are finite. You may buy gems with real money to your hearts content, but if you don’t put any of them gems into the currency exchange the currency exchange’s stock of gems never changes.
Think of it this way. The government can print as much money as they want, that doesn’t mean your bank account has access to that money. The currency exchange does not have access to gem creation. It has a limited stock that players add and subtract from.
But don’t they fundamentally come from the same source? Gems on the gem exchange were initially created when a player bought them with cash, and then sold them on the exchange. I can see your distinction, but it seems to be just a matter of how you’re looking at it.
The exchange was initially seeded with a huge amount of gems, according to JS. Since then gems are created when cash is paid, whether or not they are then destroyed in the Gem Shop or sold to the exchange for gold.
We are heroes. This is what we do!
RIP City of Heroes
RIP City of Heroes
You are under no obligation to reveal that information John Smith, ignore these guys :P
I’d much rather talk about the economics of Guild Wars 2.
-How do you feel about controlling inflation? Do you think the gold sinks we have in the game are sufficient enough to keep the value of gold steady overtime?
Inflation is a really tricky topic. One important thing to understand about inflation (the EVE guys have done a great job explaining this) is that it isn’t a change in the quantity of money available, it’s a change in prices (not individual prices). It’s easy to double the money supply and not inflate the economy.
I won’t speak to our specific strategies, but there are a couple of different ways to go. An interesting strategy that not many people think about is allowing the economy to inflate a bit, then pulling the money back out in a cycle ( many countries do this, but not on purpose :P ) There are specific benefits to this, that only occur as benefits in games.
The price of precursors suggests that there are items that people want that require a lot of gold.
It’s just that it’s not worth it for people to exchange their gems for gold.
Tell me, without thinking about the reverse transaction, how much gold would you like to get for a dollar?
This is the wrong way to think about it.
If the price of a precursor is sky high, that doesn’t mean that gold is worth a lot.
In our case it only means that it is too easy to farm for and there’s nothing else people want to spend it on. There’s a lack of gold sinks and too many gem sinks.
I think I misunderstood your argument. Mostly because when I think of a “gold sink” I think of the taxes that are imposed on playing. For example, waypoint costs, BLTP fees, etc… I think the last thing we need is more of these. If I, for example, couldn’t afford to port around without selling gems for gold I’d probably quitthe game.
Personally, I avoid the optional gold sinks in the game. For example, I wanted the T3 cultural armor for a long time, but now that I have the gold, I’m holding on to it for the precursor.
Bottom line, I think that precursors being so expensive messes everything else up. I don’t spend money on the available gold sinks because I’m saving for the precursor. I don’t buy gold with gems because I’m not spending $100 dollars on a virtual item.
So I have no reason to buy gold. If most people feel like me, the price of gold is going to continue to rise.
That is because you don’t value anything else bought with gold other than a precursor.
The other gold sinks in the game are worthless compared to a precursor so that leaves you with precursors or gem store items.
The price of precursors suggests that there are items that people want that require a lot of gold.
It’s just that it’s not worth it for people to exchange their gems for gold.
Tell me, without thinking about the reverse transaction, how much gold would you like to get for a dollar?
This is the wrong way to think about it.
If the price of a precursor is sky high, that doesn’t mean that gold is worth a lot.
In our case it only means that it is too easy to farm for and there’s nothing else people want to spend it on. There’s a lack of gold sinks and too many gem sinks.
I think I misunderstood your argument. Mostly because when I think of a “gold sink” I think of the taxes that are imposed on playing. For example, waypoint costs, BLTP fees, etc… I think the last thing we need is more of these. If I, for example, couldn’t afford to port around without selling gems for gold I’d probably quitthe game.
Personally, I avoid the optional gold sinks in the game. For example, I wanted the T3 cultural armor for a long time, but now that I have the gold, I’m holding on to it for the precursor.
Bottom line, I think that precursors being so expensive messes everything else up. I don’t spend money on the available gold sinks because I’m saving for the precursor. I don’t buy gold with gems because I’m not spending $100 dollars on a virtual item.
So I have no reason to buy gold. If most people feel like me, the price of gold is going to continue to rise.
That is because you don’t value anything else bought with gold other than a precursor.
The other gold sinks in the game are worthless compared to a precursor so that leaves you with precursors or gem store items.
yeah, essentially the game isnt providing a lot you can do with gold other than work towards a legendary. It is the driving force behind the whole economy. The value of gems continues to grow however, with more convenience, more unlocks, and more gear.
so yeah basically the only things people think are worth a large amount of gold, are gems, and things related to legendaries.
yeah, essentially the game isnt providing a lot you can do with gold other than work towards a legendary. It is the driving force behind the whole economy. The value of gems continues to grow however, with more convenience, more unlocks, and more gear.
so yeah basically the only things people think are worth a large amount of gold, are gems, and things related to legendaries.
I spend most of my money levelling and equipping alts. So far Anet refuses to make gear obsolete, forcing players to essentially start over every six months or so when the level cap is raised and BiS level X gear becomes “less than basic level X+1” gear.
Games like WoW have raised planned obsolescence to an art form. It’s like every year as the new car models are released, the previous year’s cars were designed to self destruct, so you either buy a new car every year or walk.
Since the exotic gear you bought 13 months ago is still just as good now as it was then, if you only have one character there isn’t a lot left to spend money on. But I don’t think this is a bad thing.
yeah, essentially the game isnt providing a lot you can do with gold other than work towards a legendary. It is the driving force behind the whole economy. The value of gems continues to grow however, with more convenience, more unlocks, and more gear.
so yeah basically the only things people think are worth a large amount of gold, are gems, and things related to legendaries.I spend most of my money levelling and equipping alts. So far Anet refuses to make gear obsolete, forcing players to essentially start over every six months or so when the level cap is raised and BiS level X gear becomes “less than basic level X+1” gear.
Games like WoW have raised planned obsolescence to an art form. It’s like every year as the new car models are released, the previous year’s cars were designed to self destruct, so you either buy a new car every year or walk.
Since the exotic gear you bought 13 months ago is still just as good now as it was then, if you only have one character there isn’t a lot left to spend money on. But I don’t think this is a bad thing.
I dont know if its bad or not really. But probably they should have more diverse things that people want to aim for. if there were 3 other things people wanted aside from legendaries and gold, theoretically all of them would probably be cheaper due to people having to choose.
perhaps its time for housing, guild halls, hmm what else, perhaps Politics?
yeah, essentially the game isnt providing a lot you can do with gold other than work towards a legendary. It is the driving force behind the whole economy. The value of gems continues to grow however, with more convenience, more unlocks, and more gear.
so yeah basically the only things people think are worth a large amount of gold, are gems, and things related to legendaries.I spend most of my money levelling and equipping alts. So far Anet refuses to make gear obsolete, forcing players to essentially start over every six months or so when the level cap is raised and BiS level X gear becomes “less than basic level X+1” gear.
Games like WoW have raised planned obsolescence to an art form. It’s like every year as the new car models are released, the previous year’s cars were designed to self destruct, so you either buy a new car every year or walk.
Since the exotic gear you bought 13 months ago is still just as good now as it was then, if you only have one character there isn’t a lot left to spend money on. But I don’t think this is a bad thing.
I dont know if its bad or not really. But probably they should have more diverse things that people want to aim for. if there were 3 other things people wanted aside from legendaries and gold, theoretically all of them would probably be cheaper due to people having to choose.
perhaps its time for housing, guild halls, hmm what else, perhaps Politics?
Housing is always a spectacular gold sink. People will spend obscene amounts of money to get cool things for their house. The problem is that housing tends to pull people out of the world and into instances, which Anet has been reluctant to do so far.
One thing we are currently lacking is expensive armor. Weapons have a kitten ton of cool skins and effects, but armor is relatively limited in scope and cost. I think if there was a wider range of cool armor at more expensive price points people would focus on that over legendary weapons.
If only they would release ascended armor. I’m sure that would be pretty expensive as players would need multiple sets most likely. Light armor would also likely be the most expensive since cloth is not as plentiful and is used for all three professions.