Guild Wars 2

Schizo.1375:

Bunda.2691:

Schizo.1375:

Essence Snow.3194:

I’ll leave this here because obviously it is needed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_inequality

We know what economic inequality is. We are aware that there is a huge gap between the wealthiest players who play the TP and the average player. But we aren’t cartoon scrouge mcducks who go swimming in their money and get kicks out of watching the average player struggle to pay for what he needs as we bleed their money dry from their pockets. Every time someone comes into this forum to ask advice on how to make money, the same people you are insulting are giving advice on how to do so intelligently and safely. And no matter how many times you shout these slurs or economic inequality to make yourself feel like you have the moral high ground, you still haven’t provided any valid ways to reduce this gap. So go stand on your mountain of good intentions but stop yelling down at us how we are hurting people when that is all you have suggested.

Here’s the difference: This is a game, and wealth inequality has very few of the negative externalities of wealth inequality in the real world. It’s not like players with lots of gold can lobby John Smith to get him to alter fees. It’s not like rich players can monopolize markets in the long run (I think). It’s not like wealth players can regulate out the competition.

I would argue that the existence of super-rich players has a slight inflationary effect on the highest-priced luxury items (e.g. permanant hair contracts, etc.). But besides that, they don’t really have that much of an impact on everyone else. Real world wealth, on the other hand, is a completely different story.

That’s my point. We are in agreement.

Sorry, replied to the wrong comment! Silly upper class dolt that I am.

Schizo.1375:

Essence Snow.3194:

I’ll leave this here because obviously it is needed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_inequality

We know what economic inequality is. We are aware that there is a huge gap between the wealthiest players who play the TP and the average player. But we aren’t cartoon scrouge mcducks who go swimming in their money and get kicks out of watching the average player struggle to pay for what he needs as we bleed their money dry from their pockets. Every time someone comes into this forum to ask advice on how to make money, the same people you are insulting are giving advice on how to do so intelligently and safely. And no matter how many times you shout these slurs or economic inequality to make yourself feel like you have the moral high ground, you still haven’t provided any valid ways to reduce this gap. So go stand on your mountain of good intentions but stop yelling down at us how we are hurting people when that is all you have suggested.

You must not have read posts dating back to the beginning of the game. This is not a new subject. Many suggestions have been given which were immediately met with throws of condescension. That is a reoccurring theme here.

I am merely reverberating that which has been broadcasted. Welcome to the discussion btw.

1. “MUH BALANCE!!!”: If you are going to complain about disparity and ask for balance, then you need to outline exactly what the disparity is, give evidence, figures and facts. Then go on to explain how this is harming the games economy and playerbase. You also need to present evidence as to why two systems with totally different underlying core mechanics need to be “balanced”.

Most of the raw data is unavailable to the average player so I’m not sure how you expect anyone to be able to comply with this. All we have to work on is anecdotal evidence, stories of people who have multiple Legendaries and/or have sold off multiple Legendaries, and that talk of having made thousands of gold. ANet has the data, if they know this to not be the case then they can say so. I don’t expect them to implement any policies if their own data does not back up what we believe to be the case.

3. “GO PLAY ANOTHER GAME!”: lol. Perhaps take your own advice and go and find a game with no market?

First, I like the market, I just think it could be improved. Having no market at all would be far worse than what we’ve got, but I think they could tweak the market to have the best of both worlds. As for the “go play something else” argument, I think it’s far more applicable to market players, since the market is only this very limited element of the game. 99% of the content in the game is of no relevance to the marketplace, the graphics, the mobs, AI, quests, etc. is completely irrelevant. It stands to reason that there could be a game that contains only the market elements, and market players could play that, without negatively impacting the rest of the game that everyone else wants to play. Basically, it should be easier to have access to “GW2’s marketplace without GW2” than to get “GW2 without GW2’s markets.”

My feedback was actually meant positively. Nothing wrong with making 2 walls of text, expressing his opinion and replying to other posts in the same post. It would just be easier to see, in which part he replies to me and not someone else. I dont see the point to leave out the name, if you reply to someone.

I don’t reply to people, I reply to ideas. Replying to people just makes it personal and divisive. I just pull out positions I disagree with and give my response, who made that position I was responding to doesn’t really matter. If all you care about is your own comments and what people have to say about them then there are blogs for that, but if you want to discuss the topic at hand, then it shouldn’t matter who says what, only what was said.

Getting gold through the normal game can be hard for the average player. This is on purpose so that people buy gems to convert to gold and this how Anet makes their money so that the game remains free.

I have never heard this philosophy from anyone at ANet, and reject the premise. I do not believe that cash-to-gold is a significant part of ANet’s business model. My assertion, until I hear otherwise from them, is that the majority of their income that doesn’t come from box sales comes from people buying gems to purchase gemstore exclusive merchandise. Having players with excessive amounts of gold actually hurts this model, as they can easily talk about converting their gold into gems to buy bank tabs and Finishers, rather than buying more gems with cash. Having lots of players with more gold would not hurt this model, as the gold>gem conversion rate would adapt accordingly.

ArenaNet does not implement DR to break up groups of players. That is quite honestly the single most ridiculous thing I’ve ever read on these forums. The whole POINT of an MMO is to form groups of players!

I never said that they did. I have no idea where you got that idea but you’re arguing with yourself.

Reducing the number of transactions will mean three things:
1. The general playerbase will get less gold for the items they sell.
2. The general playerbase will pay more gold for the items they buy.
3. Farming will be significantly nerfed so that the general playerbase will be unable to generate as much income.

1 and 2 are both true, but also mutually exclusive. By that I mean, both will happen, but they cannot happen simultaneously. Sometimes people would get less gold than they do now, but in those cases, the other party would be paying less. Sometimes people would pay more than they currently do, but in those cases the other party would be making more. Over the long run, both situations would balance out to a wash. The only time in which the initial seller and the eventual buyer would BOTH be paying more and making less is in the CURRENT system, in which the TP-middleman pays the seller the minimum and sells it to the customer for the maximum, pocketing the difference.

As for 3, there’s absolutely no reason why farming would be reduced, the player demand for goods would remain the same, so there’s no reason the player supply would be different. Traders do not create supply or demand, they just move the deckchairs around. Every item that currently gets added to the economy or removed from the economy would still get added and removed, it just wouldn’t be juggled around once or more in between.

Who has gold is irrelevant. 100% irrelevant.

That can be your premise if you like, but I disagree, just as I’m sure that if one class was otherwise equal to all others, but on top of that could also deal ten times the damage of any other class, “who does the DPS is irrelevant” would not be a very satisfying response. “Let them eat cake” has never been a particularly popular policy.

The tp wouldn’t make people rich, if players didn’t opt to sell to highest buyer. Enabling the buyer to resell for a profit. The, I want my money now and don’t want to wait attitude from sellers is what makes traders rich. That and speculation.

Put the blame where it belongs. On the players, not the trading post.

There’s no way for the average player to control the behavior of other players, that is in the hands of the people designing the systems. If ANet could do a better job of informing and educating the average player, letting them know how easy it would be for them to get a better deal on their transactions, then that might be sufficient, but just saying “blame the players” doesn’t resolve anything. The players are playing the system they have been given.

The programming complications that would arise from this idea would be a nightmare as well. Imagine two of every item in the game….a trade-able one and an Account Bound one. Would the two items be able to stack together? What would happen to crafting? What would happen to the Mystic Forge?

This would not be a problem. It already exists in the game in the form of “Bind on Equip” items that become soulbound or accountbound on use but are fully tradeable until then. These also exist in “two forms,” the unbound and the bound forms. Presumably bound goods would not stack with unbound goods, and bound goods could be used in the mystic forge, as they currently can, although if this were a problem there are also goods that cannot be forged, so they have that switch to pull if they choose. As near as I can tell this shouldn’t require them to build tools that they don’t already have in play for some aspects of the game.

Remove the Trading Post: Players that want to buy and sell items now do so through a Vendor. All prices are set by ArenaNet.

I don’t think I’ve actually heard this offered as a serious suggestion, it mostly seems to be offered as a strawman by people who don’t want any change at all. Removing the marketplace entirely would be a disaster. The closest I could see in moving anywhere near this philosophy would be to have a sort of “curated marketplace,” which would be like vendors, only they buy anything for prices comparable to what the TP currently offers, and would sell all the items they buy from the players at comparable prices, so that it would be largely indistinguishable from the TP, only with more oversight and stability, and no profit potential for resellers. I don’t think this should be necessary though, and seems more hassle than it’d be worth to implement at this point.

Ohoni.6057:

I never said that they did. I have no idea where you got that idea but you’re arguing with yourself.

You listed player concentration as a reason for diminishing returns under the premise that ArenaNet wants to coerce activity diversification.

Ohoni.6057:

1 and 2 are both true, but also mutually exclusive. By that I mean, both will happen, but they cannot happen simultaneously. Sometimes people would get less gold than they do now, but in those cases, the other party would be paying less. Sometimes people would pay more than they currently do, but in those cases the other party would be making more. Over the long run, both situations would balance out to a wash. The only time in which the initial seller and the eventual buyer would BOTH be paying more and making less is in the CURRENT system, in which the TP-middleman pays the seller the minimum and sells it to the customer for the maximum, pocketing the difference.

As for 3, there’s absolutely no reason why farming would be reduced, the player demand for goods would remain the same, so there’s no reason the player supply would be different. Traders do not create supply or demand, they just move the deckchairs around. Every item that currently gets added to the economy or removed from the economy would still get added and removed, it just wouldn’t be juggled around once or more in between.

The items that the general playerbase wants to sell will bring in less money while the items that the general playerbase wants to buy will cost more. It won’t be the same items, true, but the negative impacts will hit the general playerbase, not the “rich”.

And yes, farming will be nerfed. I should have been more specific as I meant gold farming. Without the deflationary power of the Trading Post, gold creation will need to be nearly stopped to prevent rampant inflation from occurring.

That can be your premise if you like, but I disagree, just as I’m sure that if one class was otherwise equal to all others, but on top of that could also deal ten times the damage of any other class, “who does the DPS is irrelevant” would not be a very satisfying response. “Let them eat cake” has never been a particularly popular policy.

You’re conflating two separate arguments and using an apples to oranges comparison here.

Who has wealth is 100% irrelevant. It is also a separate argument from how wealth is generated (the conflation).

Second, doing damage would be more akin to farming gold, not getting it from the Trading Post. If you wanted your analogy to work, you’d need to phrase it like this:
There are 3 classes that do damage and 1 class that supports his team with healing and buffs. No matter which path they choose, the goal for each is to kill the boss. It’s totally unfair that the class that supports the team with healing and buffs but generates no DPS can out heal and out buff the DPS classes.

Every time someone comes into this forum to ask advice on how to make money, the same people you are insulting are giving advice on how to do so intelligently and safely.

Not really. I’ve never heard anyone who gives direct advice. It’s always vague stuff, like “look at this market in general.” It’s never “buy X amount of this stuff, and then sell it under these conditions.” Basically, advice is given, but only so long as it doesn’t hurt the advice-giver’s own profits because it avoids the specific market he actually profits from while they remain profitable, and in a form that is difficult to understand for people who aren’t good at economics. I feel I have a good idea of how markets worked months ago that were profitable, but I don’t have a good grasp on what is profitable right now, or what will be in the future, both of which are essential for actually making money myself. If working the TP were someone everyone could do effectively, then nobody would profit enough to bother with it, which is kind of the problem. A well balanced system would work equally well no matter how many people are involved.

When your character requires housing, food, and healthcare or else it will permanently die, you can raise economic inequality as a legitimate concern in a video game.

So are you asserting that if there were a real life society in which minimal housing, nutrition, and healthcare were all assured, regardless of income level, then income inequality would be a non-issue?

You listed player concentration as a reason for diminishing returns under the premise that ArenaNet wants to coerce activity diversification.

Yes, but I never suggested that they wanted to break up groups, just that they wanted players to be doing a diverse variety of activities, whether solo, grouped, or in zergs. If all players are doing is CoF path 1, for example, they seem to not like that, so they might nerf that path or buff the other ones to spread players to other aspects of the game. If has nothing to do with “breaking up groups.”

Ohoni.6057:

So are you asserting that if there were a real life society in which minimal housing, nutrition, and healthcare were all assured, regardless of income level, then income inequality would be a non-issue?

I actually assert that income inequality is a non-issue now, but all the unproven vices of the concept are tied to those problems which is why they must be present before that issue can be raised.

Ohoni.6057:

Yes, but I never suggested that they wanted to break up groups, just that they wanted players to be doing a diverse variety of activities, whether solo, grouped, or in zergs. If all players are doing is CoF path 1, for example, they seem to not like that, so they might nerf that path or buff the other ones to spread players to other aspects of the game. If has nothing to do with “breaking up groups.”

Well, then perhaps I read more into your point than you intended. I don’t believe that ArenaNet intends to hit specific “diversity” targets with regard to how many players attend specific types of content. Their history of changes suggests that they target areas that generate a lot of coin out of thin air for minimal effort.

mtpelion.4562:

Ohoni.6057:

So are you asserting that if there were a real life society in which minimal housing, nutrition, and healthcare were all assured, regardless of income level, then income inequality would be a non-issue?

I actually assert that income inequality is a non-issue now, but all the unproven vices of the concept are tied to those problems which is why they must be present before that issue can be raised.

No, the strategy nowadays is to raise an issue with farthest-extreme anecdotal evidence of an actual problem.

Ohoni.6057:

Not really. I’ve never heard anyone who gives direct advice. It’s always vague stuff, like “look at this market in general.” It’s never “buy X amount of this stuff, and then sell it under these conditions.” Basically, advice is given, but only so long as it doesn’t hurt the advice-giver’s own profits because it avoids the specific market he actually profits from while they remain profitable, and in a form that is difficult to understand for people who aren’t good at economics. I feel I have a good idea of how markets worked months ago that were profitable, but I don’t have a good grasp on what is profitable right now, or what will be in the future, both of which are essential for actually making money myself. If working the TP were someone everyone could do effectively, then nobody would profit enough to bother with it, which is kind of the problem. A well balanced system would work equally well no matter how many people are involved.

These players that give “vague advice” do so for two reasons.

The first, you’ve already touched on. Why would any sane player that makes money on the Trading Post directly give out exactly how they’re doing it? All that would do is completely destroy the market they’re playing in.

The second reason comes down to the old adage: “Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime.” Those players giving vague advice are attempting to help you develop the skills necessary to continue playing the Trading Post on a daily basis. Learning the ideas behind what to look for and, more importantly, HOW to look for it. I’m sure you can find several threads within this forum that give specific advise on exactly what to buy, but you’ll have to dig deeper than the front page to find them. The reason is that those specific markets are no longer profitable because the player “gave it up”. They told the populace exactly what to do and exactly how do it…..now it’s no longer profitable.

Ohoni.6057:

Every time someone comes into this forum to ask advice on how to make money, the same people you are insulting are giving advice on how to do so intelligently and safely.

Not really. I’ve never heard anyone who gives direct advice. It’s always vague stuff, like “look at this market in general.” It’s never “buy X amount of this stuff, and then sell it under these conditions.”

Advice like this has been given on a few occasions, and it always has the same effect. This is not a private conversation between two players, or guild chat, any particular thread is read by dozens if not hundreds or thousands of players every day.

So when someone says “gold-plated quaggan hats are selling like hotcakes with a 200% profit margin!” dozens of new players get involved with selling the items and within hours they are competing with each other and raising bids to buy them first, lowering prices to sell them first, and the profit margin disappears.

So giving out specific advice of that nature is useless – within hours, any specific item or profitable niche market you announce on the forums will be gone. General advice is the only way to be helpful. Such as:

“Flipping” is a purely mathematical exercise in which you look for items that sell for at least approximately 20% higher than you can buy them for, buy as many as you can and sell them before others find them and the price crashes.

Crafting is profitable if you can identify the items that are in demand and sell them for more than the cost of the materials you use to make them. Be careful not to make too much or you could end up with dozens of items that won’t sell for a profit because the demand has gone away.

Investing involves obtaining rare or limited-release items such as BLTC weapon skins and holding on to them for a period of time until the demand is much greater than the supply and you can sell them for a huge profit. This is the easiest way to get involved with the TP, because you can get many of these items just by playing the game. But it’s also the least rewarding, because as time goes by more players realize this and start stockpiling items against future demand. Then they get tired of waiting and put the stuff out there to sell at whatever they can get for it, and the demand never rises to the point where you can make as much as you would for older, more rare items.

There isn’t much beyond this that can be taught to someone, you need to experience it yourself to develop a sense of what sells, how quickly and what has the most potential to make a profit.

Charismatic Harm.9683:

Those ideas are the ones that I see suggested most often, but is not an “all inclusive” list of ideas. Many of the ideas come from an individual perspective and little thought is given to how the suggested change would affect the game as a whole. Everyone plays the game differently and has a different opinion of how the game should be structured. Because of this, players tend to make suggestions that they feel would benefit them.

This is how the forums in general go, from “nerf the classes that beat me in PvP” to complaints about loot, challenging content etc. So while I can flood the forums with “suggestions” that are essentially demands to make the game more beneficial to tolunart, the devs have to consider how their changes affect the game as a whole and everyone who plays. Changes that lead to a poorer gaming experience for the majority of players simply are not going to be implemented unless absolutely necessary.

We are fortunate the JS can recognize which suggestions about the TP would harm the game as a whole, and also that he is willing to go on record saying so. Most devs just ignore these complaints rather than explaining why they are bad ideas.

I think the individuals who keep reposting the same invalidated arguments do so mostly for the attention it generates. Responding to them with the same explanations over and over will only encourage them to keep reposting their arguments. They are not concerned about the health of the game, only the health of their game.

Ohoni.6057:

Most of the raw data is unavailable to the average player so I’m not sure how you expect anyone to be able to comply with this. All we have to work on is anecdotal evidence, stories of people who have multiple Legendaries and/or have sold off multiple Legendaries, and that talk of having made thousands of gold. ANet has the data, if they know this to not be the case then they can say so. I don’t expect them to implement any policies if their own data does not back up what we believe to be the case.

So you are asking for nerfs and/or major economic/market changes from a position of zero evidence. Moreover, you are doing it over and over and over again. Do you not see that as somewhat odd?

“Stories of..” people who have multiple legendaries or thousands of gold is not really the basis for a solid argument you realise right?

Btw I’m not being funny, but I have zero issue getting gold from non TP methods in this game, even if you apply the arbitrary two hour limit you mentioned earlier in the thread.

As for the “go play something else” argument…….without negatively impacting the rest of the game that everyone else wants to play.

You have zero evidence that it is negatively impacting upon the rest of the game and no, “go play something else” is never a valid argument to use against people who are making use of intended systems.

I’m still back on page 2 when we were told we should hate on the Rich people and tax the hell out of them. Why does someone being rich in-game affect me negatively? I can think of many reasons we NEED rich people. Seems there is a misconception that the rich people that play the TP are evil and greedy …. I love them because they are a good contrast to the poor, greedy people that price stuff too high. Rich people give me deals … that’s why they have money.

Obtena.7952:

I’m still back on page 2 when we were told we should hate on the Rich people and tax the hell out of them. Why does someone being rich in-game affect me negatively? I can think of many reasons we NEED rich people. Seems there is a misconception that the rich people that play the TP are evil and greedy …. I love them because they are a good contrast to the poor, greedy people that price stuff too high. Rich people give me deals … that’s why they have money.

People hate them due to stories of multiple legendaries and anecdotes apparently.

Anyway, off to make an Asura with a monocle called John Galt to stand at the TP and annoy the proletariat.

I love how ya’ll over exaggerate what you think the other side’s stance is and continually try to use that exaggerated stance to belittle the other side. It’s just so effective!

I’ll refer you to Shiller. I believe you can draw enough correlations to respond.

I thought you would be, I am sry. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics last year and has been considered one of the most influential Economist in the world.

That aside maybe taking a look at it via a socioeconomical perspective may help.

I can understand hating stingy people and people who cheats. But I can’t understand the hate for rich people since I personally know many poor people who cheat and exploit the sympathy of others around them. Rich or poor, there are good and bad people among them.

This must be the american culture. If you are richer and more successful than I am, you must have cheated.

DarkSpirit.7046:

I can understand hating stingy people and people who cheats. But I can’t understand the hate for rich people since I personally know many poor people who cheat and exploit the sympathy of others around them. Rich or poor, there are good and bad people among them.

This must be the american culture. If you are richer and more successful than I am, you must have cheated.

Let’s try to avoid emotional hyperbole.

Schizo.1375:

Let’s try to avoid emotional hyperbole.

Still haven’t proven why rich people deserve to be punished?

Again I have no idea why “punished” keeps being brought up. It is simply an alignment of methodology for the greater good of the economy and the sociological impact of such. It’s not meant to “punish” anyone nor would it.

DarkSpirit.7046:

Schizo.1375:

Let’s try to avoid emotional hyperbole.

Still haven’t proven why rich people deserve to be punished?

No there hasn’t been any reason for this but your comments are only moving this conversation further away from an academic discussion and more towards an emotional one where all reason is thrown out the window on both sides and no one wins.

Essence Snow.3194:

Again I have no idea why “punished” keeps being brought up. It is simply an alignment of methodology for the greater good of the economy and the sociological impact of such. It’s not meant to “punish” anyone nor would it.

It still is a punishment to the rich, no matter how you embellish it. Therefore, it will not be a fair suggestion.

DarkSpirit.7046:

Essence Snow.3194:

Again I have no idea why “punished” keeps being brought up. It is simply an alignment of methodology for the greater good of the economy and the sociological impact of such. It’s not meant to “punish” anyone nor would it.

It still is a punishment to the rich, no matter how you embellish it.

I’m on your side, I’m not embellishing anything. I’m just saying maybe we should all calm down and stick to proving how they are wrong in a constructive way instead of making broad emotional statements.

Edit: Think of it this way, we can’t stoop to their level or the communists win. How about that?

John Smith.4610:

This is not an acceptable comment and we will not spend time disparaging each others culture on this forum.

I do think it’s fair to say though that in many countries there is some unrest with the level of political power being wielded by smaller groups (note I’m making 0 value judgement on the concept itself, but it’s fair to say the idea exists) and this idea can sometimes be extended to an argument of wealth disparity. That unrest may be being projected into this environment, but I still see no evidence of that being an issue in GW2.

Precisely, if the richer players in GW2 have done nothing wrong, I don’t see why they should be punished. They worked hard for their gold and deserve to keep them.

Schizo.1375:

DarkSpirit.7046:

Schizo.1375:

Let’s try to avoid emotional hyperbole.

Still haven’t proven why rich people deserve to be punished?

No there hasn’t been any reason for this but your comments are only moving this conversation further away from an academic discussion and more towards an emotional one where all reason is thrown out the window on both sides and no one wins.

Academic discussion? Thanks for the laughs.

DarkSpirit.7046:

John Smith.4610:

This is not an acceptable comment and we will not spend time disparaging each others culture on this forum.

I do think it’s fair to say though that in many countries there is some unrest with the level of political power being wielded by smaller groups (note I’m making 0 value judgement on the concept itself, but it’s fair to say the idea exists) and this idea can sometimes be extended to an argument of wealth disparity. That unrest may be being projected into this environment, but I still see no evidence of that being an issue in GW2.

Precisely, if the richer players in GW2 have done nothing wrong, I don’t see why they should be punished. They worked hard for their gold and deserve to keep them.

Well, let’s not go that far. Work is a bit relative, after all.

People could say that the rich can afford to pay more, thus the current norm where it’s acceptable to “punish” the rich. Since 98% of the population isn’t rich, they own the majority, thus the reason why more people than not, will back higher taxes. But when you consider “taxes”, that’s usually to benefit the community as a whole. So if the upper 2% were hit by higher taxes, that money would be used to pave roads, build schools, etc.

This same idea cannot be brought to the game. People still have the mindset that punishing or taxing the rich is one way to balance society. But it can’t apply to GW2 where the taxes are mainly a sink that eliminates wealth, rather than spread it. Any attempt to increase taxes on the upper echelon of players with vast wealth, is simply punishment. It doesn’t bring any sort of “balance to the force”, so to speak.

If a targeted Gold Sink is implemented to reduce the wealth of the top 2% of players, you create a system that says “the harder you work, the more we’ll take”. This creates imbalance, since now the 2% needs to work extra hard to earn wealth that the other 98% could get with less effort. As an example, say everyone is capable of earning 1 Gold per hour minimum. If you’re rich, then suddenly you’re throttled back to 50 Silver per hour due to taxes or a targeted Gold Sink. Sure you could say that a rich player is smart enough to make up the difference. But the point is, you’re now creating rules were all players aren’t treated equally.

In this economy, each and every player has the capability to be “rich”. So instead of trying to balance out the efforts of the 2% making lots of money, perhaps people should be more focused on why the other 98% isn’t putting in the same effort.

I think the yardstick for the people who are calling for changes to the trade system is basically this: “It’s too hard for me to get what I want.” And usually by this they are referring to high-end cosmetic/luxury goods like Precursors, Legendaries or rare skins.

As those familiar with me will know, I honestly wouldn’t have a problem with every player carting around a Legendary. It makes zero difference to my gameplay experience or my satisfaction with my gear what someone else is using. But I appreciate that there is a large body of players who like to feel “special”, and having rare gear that others do not is crucial to their gaming experience. That is why, even though I personally would support having these rare skins become easier to obtain, I understand why it would probably never happen.

The one point of contention that I feel the “anti-TP” crowd has validity is this:

Is it considered a negative factor if the high-end luxury goods become so expensive that TP activities become the only way to acquire these goods in a reasonable amount of time that players would consider to still be enjoyable? That would basically lock players into only one path of acquisition for luxury goods, which I feel would be bad for the game’s direction. Players should have multiple avenues to achieve what they want, rather than forcing them to use the most “efficient” method if it is not an activity they enjoy.

The thing is that changing the TP is only one possible solution to addressing the original complaint (and not the best one, in my opinion). I feel that the TP works well in what it does and doesn’t need changing. Instead, I’d adjust the supply so that these high-end goods never reach the point where they feel out of reach except to the super-rich, but without completely devaluing them either. A good example is the change to the Black Lion Weapons; since the introduction of the permanent vendor, most weapons have stabilised around the 100 – 150g mark, which I feel is an acceptable range for luxury cosmetic items without it being too excessively expensive. Likewise, recurring sales of exclusive items like the Flame & Frost dyes, or brief re-runs of things like the Jetpack help inject new supply into the economy and allow newer players the chance to obtain old items, but not to the point where the items become totally worthless.

And honestly, after seeing what ANet did with those two above examples? I think they’re well aware of this and know what they’re doing.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

People could say that the rich can afford to pay more, thus the current norm where it’s acceptable to “punish” the rich. Since 98% of the population isn’t rich, they own the majority, thus the reason why more people than not, will back higher taxes. But when you consider “taxes”, that’s usually to benefit the community as a whole. So if the upper 2% were hit by higher taxes, that money would be used to pave roads, build schools, etc.

This same idea cannot be brought to the game. People still have the mindset that punishing or taxing the rich is one way to balance society. But it can’t apply to GW2 where the taxes are mainly a sink that eliminates wealth, rather than spread it. Any attempt to increase taxes on the upper echelon of players with vast wealth, is simply punishment. It doesn’t bring any sort of “balance to the force”, so to speak.

If a targeted Gold Sink is implemented to reduce the wealth of the top 2% of players, you create a system that says “the harder you work, the more we’ll take”. This creates imbalance, since now the 2% needs to work extra hard to earn wealth that the other 98% could get with less effort. As an example, say everyone is capable of earning 1 Gold per hour minimum. If you’re rich, then suddenly you’re throttled back to 50 Silver per hour due to taxes or a targeted Gold Sink. Sure you could say that a rich player is smart enough to make up the difference. But the point is, you’re now creating rules were all players aren’t treated equally.

In this economy, each and every player has the capability to be “rich”. So instead of trying to balance out the efforts of the 2% making lots of money, perhaps people should be more focused on why the other 98% isn’t putting in the same effort.

Lets use your example.

Hypothetically if the distribution of wealth is such to were a few have an amount substantial enough to concentrate wealth beyond a progressive tax rate. Then they would continue to earn more based on their capital investments and increased activity.

This means that at the least two things would happen:
1) More gold would be sunk out of the economy.
2) There would still be the ability for playing the tp to be the top method of coin acquisition would remain as the process becomes cyclical.

The coin sunk might not be able to pave roads or build schools, but the increased sink could allow for increased rewards for the masses which would eventually find their ways back to the tp players. Thus the masses have increase satisfaction for playing the game…..ie….productivity and the tp players get to recoup increased taxes via a market which now has more inputs…ie activity.

In terms of equality. Every ig method of acquiring coin is relatively on par except playing the tp. Bringing it more inline with other methods (not making it equal, but just toning it down a bit) would be the fair thing. Again not suggesting a crazy all or nothing nerf, just an adjustment (which btw would still allow playing the tp to be the best method of acquiring coin). Remember all other methods of acquiring coin do not have the same capacity to do so as playing the tp. There are actual limits to all other ig methods. This means as the amount goes up not only does it become harder for the non tp player to earn such rewards, it becomes impossible via ig means.

GW2 is notorious for poor rewards. Why wouldn’t we want to take measures to improve that? Historically, continued unbound wealth divergence has never turned out well. Why would we be any different?

@Zaxaras
Unfortunately there is the advantage for Anet to keep some of these items like legendaries nearly out of reach. It convinces people to buy gems to convert into gold to buy or craft these sorts of things. Im sure if Anet could limit the amount of gold obtained through TP profits without wrecking the economy they would.

Essence Snow.3194:

The coin sunk might not be able to pave roads or build schools, but the increased sink could allow for increased rewards for the masses which would eventually find their ways back to the tp players. Thus the masses have increase satisfaction for playing the game…..ie….productivity and the tp players get to recoup increased taxes via a market which now has more inputs…ie activity.

1. You still have not proven how taking more gold away from richer players would eventually find their way back to the tp players.

2. I don’t see the purpose of taking gold from players who have worked hard to accumulate their gold into other players who don’t bother accumulating gold in the first place. Should lazy players, who don’t bother, be somehow rewarded for being lazy?

3. Why would there be increased satisfaction overall? What is the message you are sending? Don’t be too rich or you would be punished? Or are you just being sadistic when other people who have worked harder than you have, to accumulate all that gold, are brought down?

Maybe its time for a Moderator to close this thread.

Bunda.2691:

Well, let’s not go that far. Work is a bit relative, after all.

Speak for yourself, I worked hard for all my gold!

Essence Snow.3194:

Lets use your example.

Hypothetically if the distribution of wealth is such to were a few have an amount substantial enough to concentrate wealth beyond a progressive tax rate. Then they would continue to earn more based on their capital investments and increased activity.

This means that at the least two things would happen:
1) More gold would be sunk out of the economy.
2) There would still be the ability for playing the tp to be the top method of coin acquisition would remain as the process becomes cyclical.

The coin sunk might not be able to pave roads or build schools, but the increased sink could allow for increased rewards for the masses which would eventually find their ways back to the tp players. Thus the masses have increase satisfaction for playing the game…..ie….productivity and the tp players get to recoup increased taxes via a market which now has more inputs…ie activity.

In terms of equality. Every ig method of acquiring coin is relatively on par except playing the tp. Bringing it more inline with other methods (not making it equal, but just toning it down a bit) would be the fair thing. Again not suggesting a crazy all or nothing nerf, just an adjustment (which btw would still allow playing the tp to be the best method of acquiring coin). Remember all other methods of acquiring coin do not have the same capacity to do so as playing the tp. There are actual limits to all other ig methods. This means as the amount goes up not only does it become harder for the non tp player to earn such rewards, it becomes impossible via ig means.

GW2 is notorious for poor rewards. Why wouldn’t we want to take measures to improve that? Historically, continued unbound wealth divergence has never turned out well. Why would we be any different?

You must remember that considering all methods of acquiring coin, only the TP way doesn’t actually create it. Part of the purpose of the TP is to eliminate coin from the game. So you can’t aim to bring making money on the TP to be on par with everything else, because the inherent purposes are completely different.

Farming monsters creates coin.
Map completions creates coin.
Guild Missions creates coin.
Daily/Monthly metas creates coin.
Event completions creates coin.
Dungeon completions creates coin.
WvW ranking up creates coin.
Trading Post move coins between players, and eliminates 15% of them from the game.

John Smith.4610:

I do think it’s fair to say though that in many countries there is some unrest with the level of political power being wielded by smaller groups (note I’m making 0 value judgement on the concept itself, but it’s fair to say the idea exists) and this idea can sometimes be extended to an argument of wealth disparity. That unrest may be being projected into this environment, but I still see no evidence of that being an issue in GW2.

Really? Then your reluctance to publish a second distribution of wealth chart like the one released near launch makes no sense .

I think the main thing keeping the vast gulf between rich and average denizens of Tyria from boiling over into widespread fury is the systematically enforced ignorance of how bad it’s gotten.

If you really think it’s not a big deal, them more info is good, right? Post a current chart and get a real feel for whether it matters to people.

I must admit, I would LOVE to see an updated distribution of wealth chart for the GW2 player base.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Farming monsters creates coin.
Map completions creates coin.
Guild Missions creates coin.
Daily/Monthly metas creates coin.
Event completions creates coin.
Dungeon completions creates coin.
WvW ranking up creates coin.
Trading Post move coins between players, and eliminates 15% of them from the game.

Farming monsters creates coin as a function constrained by time.
Map completions creates coin as a function constrained by time.
Guild Missions creates coin as a function constrained by time.
Daily/Monthly metas creates coin as a function constrained by time.
Event completions creates coin as a function constrained by time.
Dungeon completions creates coin as a function constrained by time.
WvW ranking up creates coin as a function constrained by time.
Trading Post concentrates coin as a function constrained by how much coin you already have.

People’s emotional involvement with the economy isn’t based on the inflow and outflow of coin across the entire system — it can’t, they are individuals, not demigods floating above and looking down dispassionately. And they are frustrated specifically because people who are not earning coin end up having most of it.

As a theoretical construct, its brilliant. As a social system with voluntary participation, it leaves something to be desired, or maybe it just carries a bad taste because it so successfully mirrors a real world environment many of us are seeking relief from in our leisure time by playing of all things a game that doesn’t have a fixed subscription fee.

Seriously, how does a game that’s major selling point is not requiring any more money than you choose to give maintain this pose of ignorance that its players might be annoyed at fat cats being rewarded in their fantasy world as much or maybe even more than they are in the real world?

DarkSpirit.7046:

Precisely, if the richer players in GW2 have done nothing wrong, I don’t see why they should be punished. They worked hard for their gold and deserve to keep them.

Now that’s american culture!

The first, you’ve already touched on. Why would any sane player that makes money on the Trading Post directly give out exactly how they’re doing it? All that would do is completely destroy the market they’re playing in.

Which is kind of my point. A market that makes you money only if you’re one of only few people benefiting from it is as close to an exploit as ANet currently allows.

The second reason comes down to the old adage: “Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime.” Those players giving vague advice are attempting to help you develop the skills necessary to continue playing the Trading Post on a daily basis.

And that’s my point. Some people can’t learn to fish. You can try to teach them, but they just won’t get it. And if fishing is the only industry in town that is worth anything, that represents a problem.

So when someone says “gold-plated quaggan hats are selling like hotcakes with a 200% profit margin!” dozens of new players get involved with selling the items and within hours they are competing with each other and raising bids to buy them first, lowering prices to sell them first, and the profit margin disappears.

And I understand that this happens, and see it as a symptom of the problem itself. You’re basically describing the cancerous impact of TP farming as if it were a feature rather than a bug. The players that learn of this market first and continue to exploit it until other players come along to “ruin” it are no better than players that find some mob that just showers loot and continue to farm it until the devs discover it and “ruin” it by patching it out. If you find something that generates ridiculous profits, you have to report it.

So you are asking for nerfs and/or major economic/market changes from a position of zero evidence. Moreover, you are doing it over and over and over again. Do you not see that as somewhat odd?

“Stories of..” people who have multiple legendaries or thousands of gold is not really the basis for a solid argument you realise right?

I have no tools available to me with which to collect better evidence, but I see what seems like a problem from my end. If those with the analytical tools available can prove to me that there are in fact no players with multiple legendaries or thousands of gold in assets, then fair enough, I stand corrected, but until I see such evidence, I can only work with what I believe to be the case.

It’s possible I’ve missed it and I apologize if that’s true, but I haven’t seen any evidence or even a correct hypothesis that a group of the rich can negatively effect your gameplay experience. I think a clear set of ideas would help me understand and respond to the issue.

P.S. Don’t say luxury goods or I will refer you to the first rule of the tautology club.

I’m not exactly sure I understand your question, but what I think it means is “in a game where the purpose is to have fun, what problems can the rich cause, and ‘they make the game less fun for me’ cannot be a valid response?”

I’m sorry, it’s like asking “what color is the sky, but you aren’t allowed to answer in any shade of blue.” People who have a lot more money to spend make the game less fun, relatively speaking, for other players, by having casual access to all the pretty things that other players actually have to work for, devaluing any achievements they are capable of, and making the game a less rewarding experience for them.

Just as having one class that it supremely and untouchably stronger than any other class in the game might make players who would prefer to play other classes feel undervalued, having an economic playstyle in the game that is supremely and untouchably stronger than any other way of earning money in the game makes the other ingame activities seem undervalued to me.

You may not agree with that interpretation, but just understand that it is what I feel as a player of the game.

Still haven’t proven why rich people deserve to be punished?

This isn’t about “punishing” anyone, it’s about bringing the game’s economy back into balance.

It still is a punishment to the rich, no matter how you embellish it. Therefore, it will not be a fair suggestion.

If if Warriors were hitting for ten times the damage of any other class, and they put in a patch that reduced them back into balance with the other classes, you would view that only as a “punishment” to warriors?

Continued. . .

Precisely, if the richer players in GW2 have done nothing wrong, I don’t see why they should be punished. They worked hard for their gold and deserve to keep them.

But plenty of other players have put plenty of effort into their gold as well, and have just received a lot less of it because not all methods of earning gold are even remotely in balance. If the people you cite as having “earned it” did earn that gold, then don’t the other players who put in just as much time and effort into other game activities deserve to have the same amount of gold?

This same idea cannot be brought to the game. People still have the mindset that punishing or taxing the rich is one way to balance society. But it can’t apply to GW2 where the taxes are mainly a sink that eliminates wealth, rather than spread it. Any attempt to increase taxes on the upper echelon of players with vast wealth, is simply punishment. It doesn’t bring any sort of “balance to the force”, so to speak.

That isn’t true. What you call “eliminating wealth” serves a healthy function, it reduces inflation. Money enters the economy via loot, and leaves via gold sinks like a tax. If all you did was dump money into the economy without pulling it back out at some point, then everyone would have thousands of gold and even basic materials would cost several gold per unit. You need to “eliminate wealth” as you put it, at some place in the game.

If you are going to suck money out from someplace, then doesn’t it make sense to take it from those who have the most of it, and need it the least? Players that can’t even afford a single legendary certainly need their money more than those who have several already, for example. If you take 10g from someone who only has 50G, then you’ve taken a huge bit out of his personal wealth. If you take 10g from someone who has 1000g, then you’ve barely taken a dent out of his wealth.

If a targeted Gold Sink is implemented to reduce the wealth of the top 2% of players, you create a system that says “the harder you work, the more we’ll take”. This creates imbalance, since now the 2% needs to work extra hard to earn wealth that the other 98% could get with less effort. As an example, say everyone is capable of earning 1 Gold per hour minimum. If you’re rich, then suddenly you’re throttled back to 50 Silver per hour due to taxes or a targeted Gold Sink. Sure you could say that a rich player is smart enough to make up the difference. But the point is, you’re now creating rules were all players aren’t treated equally.

Why is that a problem? Plenty of games do this with XP, for example, making it much harder to go from level 50 to 51 than from level 10 to 11. If you are rich, then you are already rich. Being slightly richer is a much smaller deal to you than it would be to someone who is not yet rich at all. Yeah, maybe it would take more effort to go from 1000g to 1010g than it would take to go from 100g to 110g, but you’d still be 900g ahead of that guy, and if and when he catches up to you, he’d be subject to those same penalties.

Insanely, the system actually works the opposite of this right now, as the more money you have, the more profits you can make. I mean, try taking 10g onto the TP and turn it into 20g within a reasonable amount of time, I’m sure it’s doable, but it’d take a lot of work. Instead, take 100g onto the TP and try turning it into 110g, I’m sure you could accomplish that much faster and easier. The more you have, the easier it is to get more, which is pretty ridiculous if you think about it, that’d be like a game where it takes weeks to hit level 2, days to get from level 9 to 10, hours to get from 20-21, but by the time you hit level 60 you’re knocking out a level every five minutes or less and they just keep getting exponentially faster infinitely until you hit level one billion (or the level counter hits a stack overflow).
Continued. . .

As those familiar with me will know, I honestly wouldn’t have a problem with every player carting around a Legendary. It makes zero difference to my gameplay experience or my satisfaction with my gear what someone else is using. But I appreciate that there is a large body of players who like to feel “special”, and having rare gear that others do not is crucial to their gaming experience. That is why, even though I personally would support having these rare skins become easier to obtain, I understand why it would probably never happen.

I feel the same. I want what I want, I do not mind if other people have it, except when I can’t have it too. I do not need to feel “special” by having things nobody else has. That said though, for those players that do want to feel “special” by having luxury goods, the TP farmers devalue that whole prospect, because they don’t have to do anything special to earn those rewards, they just need to have a lot of money to throw at the problem. It’s essentially the same as buying a diploma or a trophy, it makes actually earning one less “special.”

And honestly, after seeing what ANet did with those two above examples? I think they’re well aware of this and know what they’re doing.

And yet precursors routinely float at 5-10 times that much.

Unfortunately there is the advantage for Anet to keep some of these items like legendaries nearly out of reach. It convinces people to buy gems to convert into gold to buy or craft these sorts of things. Im sure if Anet could limit the amount of gold obtained through TP profits without wrecking the economy they would.

Again, I reject the theory that cash-to-gold is a major part of ANet’s profit model, and even if it were, the system would be self-policing since you can only do so by selling gems to other players, so if there weren’t already plenty of people converting gold into gems, then you wouldn’t be able to get any reasonable returns on gems into gold, and it would cost thousands of dollars in gems to buy a Legendary that way.

1. You still have not proven how taking more gold away from richer players would eventually find their way back to the tp players.

Gold sink. ANet cannot add more gold into the world without some plan to remove it. Likewise, ANet would not want to suck money out of the world too fast without some plan to replace it. If they were to suck money out of the top of the economy, from those who could afford to lose it the most, that would give them the freedom to pump money back into the economy through basic activities without causing inflation.

2. I don’t see the purpose of taking gold from players who have worked hard to accumulate their gold into other players who don’t bother accumulating gold in the first place. Should lazy players, who don’t bother, be somehow rewarded for being lazy?

You are making an error that many Republicans do in the real world, in equating “success” with “effort.” Those who “have” are not necessarily hard working, and those who “lack” are not necessarily “lazy.” There are plenty of very hard working players in this game who do not have anywhere near the highest amount of gold earned, and I have no doubt that there are plenty of people with relatively large amounts of assets in the game that have not put in nearly as much time and effort as the majority of players who have less than they do.

Some wealthy people I’m sure put in a lot of time, and plenty of people with very little did little to deserve more, but there is no reason to believe that the wealthy did any more, on average, to earn their wealth than those at the bottom.

3. Why would there be increased satisfaction overall? What is the message you are sending? Don’t be too rich or you would be punished? Or are you just being sadistic when other people who have worked harder than you have, to accumulate all that gold, are brought down?

Again, it’s not punishment. Forget the persecution complex, it does you no good.

You must remember that considering all methods of acquiring coin, only the TP way doesn’t actually create it. Part of the purpose of the TP is to eliminate coin from the game. So you can’t aim to bring making money on the TP to be on par with everything else, because the inherent purposes are completely different.

Just because the TP doesn’t create currency does not mean that there’s no good reason to limit the amount of currency that the TP distributes to individual players. You’re raising a particularly hollow argument here that has been refuted many times already.

@Ohoni: wall of text with over speculation without substantiating proofs

I like your round-about stretchy arguments and I especially like the part where people who are rich are evil and people who are poor are saints. Nice try….I guess only you would have known the hearts of every rich and poor GW2 players in the world. You failed to realize that not everyone who is poor is hard working and not everyone who is rich is lazy.

As long as there is one hard-working rich GW2 player and one lazy poor GW2 player, it would not be right to punish the hard-working rich player so as to reward the lazy poor player. You would have to convince us that no such situation exists or you would be suggesting an injustice.

DarkSpirit.7046:

@Ohoni: wall of text with over speculation without substantiating proofs

I like your round-about stretchy arguments

I think that there is indeed a problem on this forum but avoiding civil discussions goes in the interests of people wanting to preserve this status.

You can t dismiss everything with:
“You are wrong”
You should try at least to explain in detail….

To answer you:
Its not that rich are evil …

Yet as in other parts of the game, players with an unfair advantage, wants to preserve it…
Its not that other players cares if those players has advantage until said advantage starts hindering their game.

Infact i see a strong relation between certain profession community and TP community.
Answers are the same, behavior is identical.

As we all said its all about RISK/REWARDS…
TP lacks risk…..you said “oh wait but we are doing the community a favour”
NO you are not doing any favour.
You are devaluating gold for any demanded items more than it should.
In the meantime you fail to keep a live market for less demanded item.

Quite the same of a broken inflated economy.

Also morally speaking, you are forcing a financial PvP over players not interested.

There are so many reasons why current market should be changed asap….

I hope to not receive the usual reply….

P.S. and the answer: “taxes would be payed by consumers” imho is really lazy…
There is something that change raising taxes….its infact RISK.
More risk, less easy speculation, more fair market.

Ohoni.6057:

But plenty of other players have put plenty of effort into their gold as well, and have just received a lot less of it because not all methods of earning gold are even remotely in balance. If the people you cite as having “earned it” did earn that gold, then don’t the other players who put in just as much time and effort into other game activities deserve to have the same amount of gold?

Absolutely not.

You make a choice where to spend your time in game. Do you think a “Rich” person got that way from only playing 30 minutes a day? No; they’ve devoted hundreds, if not thousands of hours buying, selling, crafting, farming, and building their bankrolls.

To use your argument, does a player deserve to be at the top of the PvP leaderboard, even though they never PvP, but have played for hundreds of hours doing other things? It takes hundreds of hours and lots of skill & practice to be at the top, does it not? (I honestly don’t know, I don’t PvP). Maybe to make it “Fair”, we should limit the Top 10 PvPers every week by maxing their damage to 50% of normal, since they’re obviously so good at what they do and spend so much time doing it, that other players never even have a chance at the Top 10. That’s fair, right?

(See how silly that sounds?)

Some players only like to PvE, some only like to PvP, some like to decorate Player-Owned housing (in games that have that), some players like to be “Merchants”. I’ve seen all types throughout the years, from UO to EQ to AC to WoW (and many of its derivatives). Players that only play merchant-type characters will always tend to be wealthy, because that’s what they do.

(Full disclosure – I’m not a TP’er. It’s way too much work for the limited time I have available, and that’s not “fun” for me anyway. But I don’t begrudge those that do enjoy it, the same as I don’t begrudge a PvPer for reaching the top of the Leaderboards, or someone who spends hundreds of hours earning Achivements to be at the top of their respective leaderboard).