Guild Wars 2

if someone were to tell me, “I have one question”, I would not expect 4 pages of text. (I know not all of it was part of the question, but it definitely would scare me away if I were asked it)

#TeamGnashblade approves of this post.

While some of us have a firm grasp on how the economy functions, it would be nice if John had more time to answer questions. But fair warning Wanze, there are some who, no matter how much he answers, will still not get it. I’ve discussed this with John in PMs, and I completely understand why he tends to stay out of certain economic debates.

Is everyone who has a question going to post it here? From what I’ve seen on the forum, single questions usually lead to debates. If you have multiple questions with multiple ongoing debates about them then that’s going be one mess of a thread. It would be completely unreadable as the different answers to different questions weave amongst each other.

Astral Projections.7320:

Is everyone who has a question going to post it here? From what I’ve seen on the forum, single questions usually lead to debates. If you have multiple questions with multiple ongoing debates about them then that’s going be one mess of a thread. It would be completely unreadable as the different answers to different questions weave amongst each other.

If it is a good question, yes, you should post it here. Even if your questions boasts negative feedback, i guess its welcome, as long as its well articulated.
There will be posts of course, which just qq but i will try my best to moderate this topic ( i dont have mod abilities but i can report). I opened up a topic about karma tax about 2 weeks ago and I was quite surprised by the constructive feedback i got (positive as well as negative), so i dont know why it shouldnt work in this topic.
My point of view is that JS would like to comment on many topics raised in this forum but he doesnt have the time. Giving him a topic that raises questions and concerns that he can reply to or quote other user´s replies might make his daily life a bit easier.

John Smith – The Tzar of the Bazaar

You should really charge Gems for your economics lessons. I’m more than willing to pay 500 Gems per question answered.

Thank you for engaging us.

Mystic.5934:

if someone were to tell me, “I have one question”, I would not expect 4 pages of text. (I know not all of it was part of the question, but it definitely would scare me away if I were asked it)

Well, i guess it didnt scare John away but you make a valid point. I got similar feedback in PM´s as well so i will edit my OP in order to make this topic more accessible to new players and give it a better structure. For completions sake, i will copy/paste my unedited OP here:
Playing the Trading Post is one of my favourite activities in GW2 and even though I dont have an (virtual) economic background I think I have a good grasp on how the economy in GW2 works. I quite like how efficient it is and how many game mechanics and market forces are implemented to balance it.
I have a question regarding the ratio of tradeable items listed on the trading post for sale and their supply stored in personal storage (collectable tabs, personal/guild banks, bags).
Its quite obvious that most of the supply of nearly every item has a greater supply outside of the TP. Luxury goods like precursors for example might only have a supply of less than 20 on the tp but i have no doubt that there are hundreds, if not thousands of each precursor existing in peoples storage that are not bound and intended for sale.
The same goes for any material or mini that is stored in the collectible tab, the supply outside of the tp has to be far greater than the supply listed for sale.
My question is:
In order to have a balanced economy, are you monitoring that ratio for all/specific items and can it hurt the economy in any way, if this ratio spikes/drops?
Personally, i would guess that once and item (especially crafting mats) has a higher supply on the tp than outside of it (sitting at vendor value) it becomes harder to balance it and use it in future crafting recipes while items that have a short supply on the tp and a high supply out of it, are more prone to sudden price spikes, which also isnt intended.
General agenda:
I created this topic not to get an answer from a Dev specifically but to try to improve conversation between Anet and the player base. For those who dont know me or John:
I am a TP trader and a frequent poster in this sub forum. John Smith is the Head Economist of Guild Wars 2.
In general, we have seen several attempts to improve communication between the player base and Anet, most notably the CDI (Collaborative Development Initiative)
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Collaborative-Development-Master-Sticky/first#post3383068
And the Dolyak Express:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Dolyak-Express-Dev-Q-A-Archives/first#post3496656
Until now, none of the topics discussed in those initiatives concerned the game economy (except the CDI about vertical/horizontal progression).
As a frequent user of this subforum, i see many concerns and questions popping up frequently, which i think is quite normal because new players enter the game on a frequent basis.
Even though people might lable me as a fanboi of John Smith because i generally agree with his opinion and like his posts, i think overall, he has done a great job taking time out of his day replying to posts that have already been answered in the past.
For everybody who is interested in the economy or has a problem with it, I advice you to read Johns post history:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/members/John-Smith-4610/showposts
Take your time and you will find many interesting posts that will give you an official answer to your question/concern.
In general, some questions or concerns come up on a frequent basis, mostly by new players. As far as i know, John´s stance is that he doesnt comment on issues that have been answered rightly by other users. But usually that user doenst know that an answer given by another user represents Anets (John´s) stance, so he wont accept it.
So i created this topic to make communication a bit easier.
If you have a specific question about the economy/TP/rewards, please post it here.
Make it an honest question, dont QQ, and you might get a good and satisfying answer. Keep in mind that people like me, who have a good grasp on the economy, might answer instead of John and give you the right answer. So please dont disregard our replies. Even if you dont believe us, our replies give John Smith the opportunity to just link our answers and verify them without taking too much time out of his day to respond.
Cheers to all, and hail to Evon.

Would it be possible for John to give a general idea, not asking for numbers on specific items, of what the numbers are as far as tradeable items listed on the trade post (which I’ll label as “supply” for simplicity, more in a moment) compared to the amount of items held in the various inventories (the “warehouse stockpile” basically)?

To put it in simpler terms, as my tired brain sees it, of all items in existence that can be sold, how many are actually listed on the tradepost? Percentiles are acceptable if precise numbers cant be given.

There are probably three main types of supply:

• Listed for sale on TP.
• Sitting in guild storage or banks of active players (those that logon at least, say, 1x/month).
• Same, but belonging to inactive players.

We’d also have to distinguish between all the different item types in the game. I’m sure the ratios of those three categories differ depending on whether we are talking about cloth vs leather, fine vs common vs rare mats, BL weapon skins vs other low-drop-rate skins, and so forth.

None of that data would have much meaning outside the context of the shape of their specific markets: I’m sure there are tons of Unidentified Dyes that people are hoarding for just the right time and I doubt that would be of concern. In contrast, the same ratios of silver or gold ore might be unhealthy. (Or perhaps not.)

In short, I don’t think Mr Smith can give us a “general idea” that would be of any value to us, except to create another topic of misunderstanding.

What do you think about all the new recipes creating accountbound (and thus not tradeable) items?

John,

Is the following a reasonable summary of the key factors driving MMO economies and their impacts on in-game markets/prices?
If not, what’s incorrect or missing? (just the key stuff)
(I know real world economies experience many of these factors. The question is whether these are the key ones for MMO economies.)

In MMOs, player rewards create ever increasing supplies of in-game currency.

• MMOs offset this by include in-game currency sinks (e.g. the 15% TP trading tax).
• Players’ expectations that they will get richer the longer they play means:
  • Currency sinks are always set at levels lower than the overall currency supply.
• The currency surplus resulting form this imbalance causes inflation.

IN MMOs, player rewards and crafting systems create ever increasing supply of in-game items.

• MMOs offset this by:
  • Limiting supply of higher value items (e.g. low drop rates for precursors)
  • Making items have limited use (e.g. account/soul bound on equip)
  • Providing mechanisms to remove items from the game (e.g. salvaging items for magic find)
• Player expectations that they will get progressively better gear the longer they play means:
  • Increasing demand for more powerful items
  • Overall, demand for lower level items is significantly lower than for end-game items
  • Mechanisms for removing items are set lower than overall item supply
• Surplus items collapse in value
• Supply constrained items increase in value

Where MMOs include open market systems, the combination of these two aspects results in:

• Ongoing inflation caused by increasing currency supply
• Prices for desirable scarce items increase far faster than overall inflation
• Prices for surplus items collapse
  • (the extent of this may be concealed by the overall inflation of prices)

Question:
Do you care/will do something about the fact game economy is really perceived as broken?
Or if you instead think its well perceived, why don’t you look at every single thread that had the luck to remain for few hours in general section?

There were many threads about how important economy perception is in a videogame.

John Smith.4610:

LordByron.8369:

Question:
Do you care/will do something about the fact game economy is really perceived as broken?
Or if you instead think its well perceived, why don’t you look at every single thread that had the luck to remain for few hours in general section?

There were many threads about how important economy perception is in a videogame.

If by “really perceived” you mean that you mistakenly perceive a fantastic and functioning system as broken, then no… I don’t care.

Is there ever a situation where the economy might be changed (for the worse) due to the majority perceiving a problem and thus hurting Anets bottom line?

Has there been any pressure for this to happen?

Also when will we see new legendary weapons/trinkets

I have three questions:

1) Is precursor crafting something being held back because of technical concerns or because of economic concerns, ie a massive surge in demand for certain types of materials? I know you’re limited in what you can speculate, but I have a theory that the crafting is largely being held back because legendaries and precursors are possibly the biggest driving force of the economy and a change in how they function could cause massive waves. Wanted to know if I was correct in this.

2) When you consider game inflation, do you primarily look at the prices of farmable material and blues/greens or do you take into account super-rare items acquired from drops, rewards or gems? Is the reason you say inflation isn’t a problem simply that the items with crazy high prices are the only things with a price rising so rapidly?

3) Can you give an example of a situation where what seemed a good idea for balancing had ridiculously bad consequences? A true learning experience in GW2, I suppose you could say.

Also thanks for doing this! It’s extremely interesting every time you have something to say.

John Smith.4610:

LordByron.8369:

Question:
Do you care/will do something about the fact game economy is really perceived as broken?
Or if you instead think its well perceived, why don’t you look at every single thread that had the luck to remain for few hours in general section?

There were many threads about how important economy perception is in a videogame.

If by “really perceived” you mean that you mistakenly perceive a fantastic and functioning system as broken, then no… I don’t care.

Now wait, what metrics do you have on players economic satisfaction? Because every single night I play some amount of guild, map, and even WvW chat is taken up by long conversations bemoaning the economy and how they don’t feel the game rewards anything for anyone but those with god-like amounts of dumb luck or nothing else in their lives to spend any of their time on.

I know you probably have the numbers and the know-how to claim and even likely prove that the game is in a good economic state, from an economic perspective; but there is no way you have the numbers to claim that the players think so, from a psychological perspective. Because as someone who plays the game, I can say that not only my but a whole lot of players experience shows there to be a sizable portion of the playerbase’ whose most positive view on the economy are ‘at least they’re not sucking me dry with a monthly fee’.

Hi John,

First and foremost thanks for taking the time to answer these questions!

I too have a question:

How does volatility/stability get manipulated (from your end) through updates such as the Living Story, which itself incurs volatility on certain items through player demand? Or do you let this type of volatility change just run its course to stabilize on its own?

Thanks!

How effecient is the currency exchange, in terms of risk assumed by anet.
essentially, if the currencies were real, would anet be losing money or passing fluctuations in value to the exchangees, remaining mostly untouched, and gaining value/breaking even through the spread.

How does it compare in this respect(this type of effeciency) to a direct exchange system with a tax. (like the TP kinda) from the perspective of anet as a currency exchanger.

what are the advantages and disadvantages of each style over all, from the perpective of a currency exchanger

Conncept.7638:

Now wait, what metrics do you have on players economic satisfaction? Because every single night I play some amount of guild, map, and even WvW chat is taken up by long conversations bemoaning the economy and how they don’t feel the game rewards anything for anyone but those with god-like amounts of dumb luck or nothing else in their lives to spend any of their time on.

I know you probably have the numbers and the know-how to claim and even likely prove that the game is in a good economic state, from an economic perspective; but there is no way you have the numbers to claim that the players think so, from a psychological perspective. Because as someone who plays the game, I can say that not only my but a whole lot of players experience shows there to be a sizable portion of the playerbase’ whose most positive view on the economy are ‘at least they’re not sucking me dry with a monthly fee’.

I would add that players who see (but don’t participate in) such discussions may be left with the impression that the game economy is in much worse shape than it is, as “everyone knows” such things as “the precursor market is dominated by a handful of TP flippers with unimaginable wealth,” “almost all crafting materials are farmed by bots,” and “being in a party gets you more loot because your drops are determined by the average damage of the whole party.”

So even if only a couple of people are discussing a perceived issue in map chat, there could be dozens more thinking, “Hmm, I didn’t know that.”

John Smith.4610:

Conncept.7638:

but there is no way you have the numbers to claim that the players think so, from a psychological perspective.

You’re adorable.

And yes, you have to be more clear in what “numbers” you’re talking about. I doubt there’s a survey conducted to establish a player confidence index; however, if you’re looking for proof that we’re comfortable with the economy, you need only look as far as our spending habits (of which, of course, Mr. Smith has quite a lot of data, I’m sure).

John Smith.4610:

Conncept.7638:

but there is no way you have the numbers to claim that the players think so, from a psychological perspective.

You’re adorable.

Economists have ways to measure how much your parents love you and the scariest part of all… it works.

His conclusions are wrong but his reasons are not. Atleast from a casual customer perspective. You’re right if you say that the economy isn’t flawed. But that doesn’t mean that it’s optimal. Let’s take the precursors as example. The economy is balanced, precursors are in demand, thus they’re expensive. The problem now is that there is a minority of players that are extremely wealthy. The supply of precursors on the TP is smaller than the demand for it from such wealthy players. That’s the reason why they are so astronomical expensive. There are enough players that can afford a precursor for that price, yet there are myriad more players that can’t afford that.

So as conclusion, yes, the economy is balanced. But it’s not fair, it leaves the possibility for a small amount of players to dictate, or atleast influence, the prices for the majority of players and the possibility to gain wealth with only the economy itself as limit.

HHR LostProphet.4801:

John Smith.4610:

Conncept.7638:

but there is no way you have the numbers to claim that the players think so, from a psychological perspective.

You’re adorable.

Economists have ways to measure how much your parents love you and the scariest part of all… it works.

His conclusions are wrong but his reasons are not. Atleast from a casual customer perspective. You’re right if you say that the economy isn’t flawed. But that doesn’t mean that it’s optimal. Let’s take the precursors as example. The economy is balanced, precursors are in demand, thus they’re expensive. The problem now is that there is a minority of players that are extremely wealthy. The supply of precursors on the TP is smaller than the demand for it from such wealthy players. That’s the reason why they are so astronomical expensive. There are enough players that can afford a precursor for that price, yet there are myriad more players that can’t afford that.

So as conclusion, yes, the economy is balanced. But it’s not fair, it leaves the possibility for a small amount of players to dictate the prices for the majority of players and the possibility to gain wealth with only the economy itself as limit.

There are many ways for upward mobility in the this game and even the casual player can farm for their legendary as many have already claimed in various threads. Also, precursor prices have nothing to do with the rich manipulating them. You’re completely forgetting about the velocity of the sales.

John Smith.4610:

3. Halloween 2 candy corn sinks. There was an insane amount of candy corn in the world (10’s of billions) and we underestimated the distribution of those materials and cranked up the sinks too high. This made it very difficult to interact with those sinks at all and it didn’t feel good.

Can we infer from this that a large number of people quit the game between Halloween 1 and Halloween 2, essentially taking those billions of candy corn out of the economy (without literally doing so)? Or something else?

HHR LostProphet.4801:

John Smith.4610:

Conncept.7638:

but there is no way you have the numbers to claim that the players think so, from a psychological perspective.

You’re adorable.

Economists have ways to measure how much your parents love you and the scariest part of all… it works.

His conclusions are wrong but his reasons are not. Atleast from a casual customer perspective. You’re right if you say that the economy isn’t flawed. But that doesn’t mean that it’s optimal. Let’s take the precursors as example. The economy is balanced, precursors are in demand, thus they’re expensive. The problem now is that there is a minority of players that are extremely wealthy. The supply of precursors on the TP is smaller than the minority of such wealthy players. That’s the reason why they are so astronomical expensive. There are enough players that can afford a precursor for that price, yet there are myriad more players that can’t afford that.

So as conclusion, yes, the economy is balanced. But it’s not fair, it leaves the possibility for a small amount of players to dictate the prices for the majority of players and the possibility to gain wealth with only the economy itself as limit.

So for clairification, you are saying that even though the economy is balanced it is unfair because casual players can’t afford a high priced luxury item? Didn’t we have this discussion before? There is no reason a “free market” should be fair. If it was designed to be fair, then everything on the TP would only sell at the vendor price so everyone would have a chance to get it off the TP. And also the “small amount of players dictating the prices” just isn’t true. As JS already explained before, it’s “willingness to buy and willingness to sell” The current prices are what they are because people are willing to pay that much for it. If you are looking to buy such items you don’t have to buy it at that price, you can place a buy order for what you think it is worth. But it’s up to the seller to sell at that price.

Ayrilana.1396:

HHR LostProphet.4801:

John Smith.4610:

Conncept.7638:

but there is no way you have the numbers to claim that the players think so, from a psychological perspective.

You’re adorable.

Economists have ways to measure how much your parents love you and the scariest part of all… it works.

His conclusions are wrong but his reasons are not. Atleast from a casual customer perspective. You’re right if you say that the economy isn’t flawed. But that doesn’t mean that it’s optimal. Let’s take the precursors as example. The economy is balanced, precursors are in demand, thus they’re expensive. The problem now is that there is a minority of players that are extremely wealthy. The supply of precursors on the TP is smaller than the demand for it from such wealthy players. That’s the reason why they are so astronomical expensive. There are enough players that can afford a precursor for that price, yet there are myriad more players that can’t afford that.

So as conclusion, yes, the economy is balanced. But it’s not fair, it leaves the possibility for a small amount of players to dictate the prices for the majority of players and the possibility to gain wealth with only the economy itself as limit.

There are many ways for upward mobility in the this game and even the casual player can farm for their legendary as many have already claimed in various threads. Also, precursor prices have nothing to do with the rich manipulating them. You’re completely forgetting about the velocity of the sales.

I haven’t said they’re manipulating them. I said they’re buying them because they want them. I talked exactly about the velocity of such items: The velocity is too high. Thus the price stabilizes itself at a very high rate, too high for most players to be precise. The problem is not the economy itself but the possiblity to grow extremely wealthy in a short period of time. The reward-values of the various ways to earn gold are disconnected, despite they do require the same amount of time and skill.

John Smith.4610:

Conncept.7638:

but there is no way you have the numbers to claim that the players think so, from a psychological perspective.

You’re adorable.

Economists have ways to measure how much your parents love you and the scariest part of all… it works.

If those are merely tracking how players spend their money, no you don’t. People spend money on things just because they have extra money, they are poor at managing their money, are less dissatisfied with one product than with any of the others available, in support of potential gain rather than current; that list could be expanded ad nauseum.

There is no way to show that a person’s spending habits directly relate to their satisfaction, that is a ridiculously simplified view of human nature, and a logical fallacy lacking any provable correlation. So if you have accurate metrics, without polling (at least any I’ve heard of), how do you get them?

Keep your questions vague, people! This isn’t the place to argue decisions, it’s to learn why decisions are made, albeit in a way that isn’t possible to profit from.

Oh, I have one more. John Smith is a pseudonym, right?

How do you account for the new player entering into the economy (TP) for the first time who is resource constrained and likely unaware how to effectively generate gold?

Is special consideration given to how you build a macro economy based on the age of the consumer in the market (how long they have played)?

How are you evaluating price to resource ratios across different gameplay modes which each generate more/less resources? Do you, for example, worry about the WvW player who collects resources at a lower rate than, if for example, the same time was spent in EOTM?

Are your models more supply or demand driven?
Are you more macro focused or micro customer cluster/segment focused?

LordByron.8369:

Question:
Do you care/will do something about the fact game economy is really perceived as broken…

After seeing one other in-game economy be destroyed in another MMO (I didn’t play WoW, so not them), I don’t think the premise of this is supported.

HHR LostProphet.4801:

……. Let’s take the precursors as example. …….

Seriously….the single largest exception to all economic standards that exists in the game? An example…..?

How about you take a Marksmanship class and ask, “Hey, how about, for example, we start with the 120mm cannon on that M1 tank over there…..”

wwwes.1398:

Oh, I have one more. John Smith is a pseudonym, right?

Ah, skritt… now I don’t have any more questions to John Smith.

So as long as we are asking questions…what about champ trains and event trains “ruining the economy”? I’ve seen this argument as the reason that the champ trains and event trains were nerfed. Apparently, according to some, that they were nerfed because too many people were making too much money, and that was bad for the economy as a whole. Can you shed any light on this? Or were they in fact “increasing inflation” as has been claimed. Thanks!

Edit: I’m not questioning the decisions of Anet in this matter, whether it was right or wrong, but more curious as to whether or not it was economic or gameplay reasons for the change. Just for clarification. Thanks!

John Smith.4610:

ZudetGambeous.9573:

John Smith.4610:

LordByron.8369:

Question:
Do you care/will do something about the fact game economy is really perceived as broken?
Or if you instead think its well perceived, why don’t you look at every single thread that had the luck to remain for few hours in general section?

There were many threads about how important economy perception is in a videogame.

If by “really perceived” you mean that you mistakenly perceive a fantastic and functioning system as broken, then no… I don’t care.

Is there ever a situation where the economy might be changed (for the worse) due to the majority perceiving a problem and thus hurting Anets bottom line?

Has there been any pressure for this to happen?

Also when will we see new legendary weapons/trinkets

When we first released we made a couple of mistakes with some low level crafting components and they were worthless way over-supplied. This made new players feel like gathering and crafting materials were worthless and changed their play patterns. We didn’t feel that was positive; I wouldn’t say it necessarily it affected our bottom line DIRECTLY, but issues like that can effect retention and that affects our bottom line.

And it took FOREVER for the majority of the population to actually catch on that gathering had again become a viable means of making gold. Some of us loved that part
I don’t know what can really be done without overdoing it, but crafting in general still seems to be floundering. There are onesie-twosie items that are actually worth the time investment of gather-craft-sell cycle; but I’d like to see some sort of catalyst to crafting as a mode of play vs. just a supporting feature.

Right now the raw materials are worth more than a finished product that one would ostensibly believes has added value.

Unvetted examples of value add:
Maybe make crafted unnamed rare and below items requiring less than LVL 80 have an additional tiered stat like +1/2/3 XP per kill or +1/2/3% MF (nobody panic – this will not cause the same MF squish issues as when it was a primary stat) or +1/2/3% gold.

Something that makes each piece more valuable than the identical dropped versions, but not so much that they become OP.

To a certain extent, some boni would even be desirable after 80 – 6 pieces of crafted exotic armor with a cumulative bonus of 6% more karma (15 per piece) would be of value to anyone currently using a full set of comparable exotics without it. I’d buy the crafted versions from a player over the Orr Temple armors in a heartbeat… if there was a compelling reason.

pdavis.8031:

So as long as we are asking questions…what about champ trains and event trains “ruining the economy”? I’ve seen this argument as the reason that the champ trains and event trains were nerfed. Apparently, according to some, that they were nerfed because too many people were making too much money, and that was bad for the economy as a whole. Can you shed any light on this? Or were they in fact “increasing inflation” as has been claimed. Thanks!

I’d be interested to hear about champ trains, too, but a slightly different directions. Do you have a hand in sort of attempting to guide the zerg towards events that will help balance the economy or is that primarily something done for the sake of gameplay?

And as for champ bags, are these used as a testing ground for experimentation? Seems an ideal control given that it’s usually the same players every day.

John Smith.4610:

wwwes.1398:

Keep your questions vague, people! This isn’t the place to argue decisions, it’s to learn why decisions are made, albeit in a way that isn’t possible to profit from.

Oh, I have one more. John Smith is a pseudonym, right?

It’s a long story…

I’ve wondered this before, too – I presumed an Adam Smith reference?

pdavis.8031:

So as long as we are asking questions…what about champ trains and event trains “ruining the economy”? I’ve seen this argument as the reason that the champ trains and event trains were nerfed. Apparently, according to some, that they were nerfed because too many people were making too much money, and that was bad for the economy as a whole. Can you shed any light on this? Or were they in fact “increasing inflation” as has been claimed. Thanks!

I gotta think that since they left FGS (and other map-wide concentrations of champs the player community just hasn’t really organized) that it wasn’t a threat to the economy – just bad business to have the toxic immaturity that resulted from the QD train in an area that would primarily be populated with the newest players in game.

With the exception of the occasional kitten (usually on the weekends), FGS’ train is still calmer and more disciplined map chat than QD was on its BEST day. I will farm FGS (not on the train) for tier 6’s and “listen” to map chat – that train is usually only 1) lost/scattered 2) telling jokes or 3) asking if trio is up 90% of the time. A lot better than the spittle-filled soul-crush that QD map chat “sounded” like.

KarateKid.5648:

pdavis.8031:

So as long as we are asking questions…what about champ trains and event trains “ruining the economy”? I’ve seen this argument as the reason that the champ trains and event trains were nerfed. Apparently, according to some, that they were nerfed because too many people were making too much money, and that was bad for the economy as a whole. Can you shed any light on this? Or were they in fact “increasing inflation” as has been claimed. Thanks!

I gotta think that since they left FGS (and other map-wide concentrations of champs the player community just hasn’t really organized) that it wasn’t a threat to the economy – just bad business to have the toxic immaturity that resulted from the QD train in an area that would primarily be populated with the newest players in game.

With the exception of the occasional kitten (usually on the weekends), FGS’ train is still calmer and more disciplined map chat than QD was on its BEST day. I will farm FGS (not on the train) for tier 6’s and “listen” to map chat – that train is usually only 1) lost/scattered 2) telling jokes or 3) asking if trio is up 90% of the time. A lot better than the spittle-filled soul-crush that QD map chat “sounded” like.

I’m thinking the same thing, and have stated such in response to the “too much money” theory that was/is popular. But without any official comment on the matter from anyone about it, it’s just a matter of personal opinion. :P

pdavis.8031:

KarateKid.5648:

pdavis.8031:

So as long as we are asking questions…what about champ trains and event trains “ruining the economy”? I’ve seen this argument as the reason that the champ trains and event trains were nerfed. Apparently, according to some, that they were nerfed because too many people were making too much money, and that was bad for the economy as a whole. Can you shed any light on this? Or were they in fact “increasing inflation” as has been claimed. Thanks!

I gotta think that since they left FGS (and other map-wide concentrations of champs the player community just hasn’t really organized) that it wasn’t a threat to the economy – just bad business to have the toxic immaturity that resulted from the QD train in an area that would primarily be populated with the newest players in game.

With the exception of the occasional kitten (usually on the weekends), FGS’ train is still calmer and more disciplined map chat than QD was on its BEST day. I will farm FGS (not on the train) for tier 6’s and “listen” to map chat – that train is usually only 1) lost/scattered 2) telling jokes or 3) asking if trio is up 90% of the time. A lot better than the spittle-filled soul-crush that QD map chat “sounded” like.

I’m thinking the same thing, and have stated such in response to the “too much money” theory that was/is popular. But without any official comment on the matter from anyone about it, it’s just a matter of personal opinion. :P

Yah – put it to bed once and for all, eh?

KarateKid.5648:

With the exception of the occasional kitten (usually on the weekends), FGS’ train is still calmer and more disciplined map chat than QD was on its BEST day. I will farm FGS (not on the train) for tier 6’s and “listen” to map chat – that train is usually only 1) lost/scattered 2) telling jokes or 3) asking if trio is up 90% of the time. A lot better than the spittle-filled soul-crush that QD map chat “sounded” like.

At the risk of derailing the thread, I agree, another example of awfulness was the first year queen’s pavilion. So many people that were like, “we’re not going to even try to finish the events because we get more from these destroyers”, so they changed it up so that you got the same amount of loot but only if you completed the events, which also had to be done in non-zerg mode.

So if you need a good example of why champ train busting is primarily a gameplay issue to ANet and NOT an economic issue, there it is. Plus champ bags are probably the most overrated items in the game, 90% of the time they give you what you would get from doing two minions. Which, in the time it takes to wait around for and kill that champ, you could farm so so many creatures.

I have no idea if this is true, but I’ve long speculated high-drop-volume event chains like this are specifically and strategically placed to help players at certain points during the leveling process – the fire legion rush in early Ascalon, “defend the skritt flags” thingie in Timberline, the recurring Modnir chain (bags fulla cotton and tier 4’s), and the mess that are Orr rush events as examples.

John Smith.4610:

3. Halloween 2 candy corn sinks. There was an insane amount of candy corn in the world (10’s of billions) and we underestimated the distribution of those materials and cranked up the sinks too high. This made it very difficult to interact with those sinks at all and it didn’t feel good.

I am extremely happy to hear this. Also, this thread is a great read. John Smith really is the most quotable person at ANET, IMO.

Fixing the forum, and also:

John Smith.4610:

wwwes.1398:

Keep your questions vague, people! This isn’t the place to argue decisions, it’s to learn why decisions are made, albeit in a way that isn’t possible to profit from.

Oh, I have one more. John Smith is a pseudonym, right?

It’s a long story…

Confirmed, John is the Doctor.