Guild Wars 2

So, it seems ArenaNet has made note that this is a requested “feature” (to the extent that Colin promoted this very bonus in an interview)…

However, it seems that it’s a temporary “buff” rather than a permanent guild perk.

Overall, I think it’d best serve the community at this point to reduce waypoint cost.
It’s an unnecessary gold sink and prevents users from doing what they want.

Someone made the point of comparing a CoF path 1 run to doing Jumping Puzzles… Each one might take 10 minutes, but the rewards for CoF are 10x the Jumping Puzzle.

And, when you take the waypoint cost into account… you make hardly anything from doing a Jumping Puzzle.

Wasn’t the game sold on the premise that people should be able to do whatever they want and still be rewarded?

Reduced waypoint cost would also allow players to be more dispersed when playing. As it is, people will probably stay relatively close to towns. (and in Orr, as Orr still has better drops than anywhere else, even after ANet trying to boost drop rates elsewhere.)

There’s no reason for waypoint costs to be in-game. It’s just restrictive gameplay. If you die, you already have repair costs to deal with.

You may say it’s “necessary as a gold-sink” but that’s just ridiculous. No such gold sink existed in GW1 and I never saw near as much inflation there as I have in GW2. In fact, I saw deflation over time. GW2 (with the Mystic Forge/toilet) is entirely built as a huge gold-sink. Having one less wouldn’t hurt it.

If anything, at least give us minimal cost to travel between cities/towns/outposts (or to them). This was a great part of GW1. I could care less about getting to a specific location on a map, if I can easily travel to a town within the map. I’d just start from there.

People already get around the cost to get to Lion’s Arch by going through PvP, anyway.

TL;DR: Reduced waypoint cost won’t damage the economy at all; it should be a permanent guild perk, rather than a temporary buff. It’d just encourage gameplay across Tyria (which is what ArenaNet says they want to do, so that the game doesn’t look like a ghost town).

Minos.5168:

If anything, at least give us minimal cost to travel between cities/towns/outposts (or to them). This was a great part of GW1. I could care less about getting to a specific location on a map, if I can easily travel to a town within the map. I’d just start from there.

A couple ways to travel cheaply:

Use the Pvp lobby to take the asura gate to Lion’s Arch – from there you can take a gate to any of the major cities. Completely free.

Use the Hall of Monuments Portal Zone to go to HoM – that’s free travel then half the price of waypoints to any northern zones. Get the stone from the karma vendor in the smuggler’s cave in LA at no cost.

Use your Order’s portal to take the asura gate to Fort Trinity in Orr. Free.

Hope that helps!

Karizee.8076:

Minos.5168:

If anything, at least give us minimal cost to travel between cities/towns/outposts (or to them). This was a great part of GW1. I could care less about getting to a specific location on a map, if I can easily travel to a town within the map. I’d just start from there.

A couple ways to travel cheaply:

Use the Pvp lobby to take the asura gate to Lion’s Arch – from there you can take a gate to any of the major cities. Completely free.

Use the Hall of Monuments Portal Zone to go to HoM – that’s free travel then half the price of waypoints to any northern zones. Get the stone from the karma vendor in the smuggler’s cave in LA at no cost.

Use your Order’s portal to take the asura gate to Fort Trinity in Orr. Free.

Hope that helps!

Thanks for the advice, I already use the LA trick (as I pointed that out in my post) and the Fort Trinity one.

I’ll be sure to use the HoM thing if I do any travel to the Shiverpeaks.

Can people that haven’t played GW1 get one of those portal stones, though? If not, then that’s another thing against new players.

My point is: These “loopholes” exist… But, we shouldn’t have to bother exploiting them. ArenaNet should just acknowledge that they made a mistake and fix it. (rather than trying to use their mistake as incentive to get players to do the new Guild Missions)

I’m sure they’ll eventually “fix” it somehow, as other MMOs have.

You don’t need a GW1 account to use the HoM stone, it’s there for everyone.

I don’t think of these ways to travel as exploits – -I think they put them in the game explicitly for us to have low-cost travel if we want to save a couple silver.

From my experience, wp cost at low level was inconsequential, started feeling burdensome at mid to level cap, after being 80 for a bit it’s a non-issue again. But I’m cheap, I like to save my silvers

Karizee.8076:

You don’t need a GW1 account to use the HoM stone, it’s there for everyone.

I don’t think of these ways to travel as exploits – -I think they put them in the game explicitly for us to have low-cost travel if we want to save a couple silver.

From my experience, wp cost at low level was inconsequential, started feeling burdensome at mid to level cap, after being 80 for a bit it’s a non-issue again. But I’m cheap, I like to save my silvers

It’s good to know that anyone can use the HoM stone.

And I agree, WP cost at low-levels was insignificant. It was cheaper than you’d make off of a single dynamic event.

The issue is that at level 80, rewards didn’t scale as high as the WP costs did.

There’s plenty of arguments about this game not being rewarding. I feel WP costs (at least in a small part) factor into that.

Heck, ArenaNet had to implement entirely new reward systems and buff loot drops because they admitted the game wasn’t very rewarding initially.

The game needs gold sinks. Waypoint costs IMO are too cheap at the moment.

Vol.5241:

The game needs gold sinks. Waypoint costs IMO are too cheap at the moment.

No, it doesn’t. Gold sinks already seem to out-weigh the rewards IMO.

What the game needs: Rewards that people actually want to get.

Most of the armor sucks. That was the main (and only) gold-sink in GW1.

There was no cost associated with travelling in GW1. It was my favorite part about the game. I could easily go from being in a jungle to being in the desert without any cost involved.

And increasing Waypoint costs would just result in no one using them. At which point, you’d have to wonder why they’re even there.

If anything, they should make a “max cost” so that WP costs don’t go above 2 silver, regardless of how far you are from the WP.

Vol.5241:

The game needs gold sinks. Waypoint costs IMO are too cheap at the moment.

Don’t be an elitist now.
Before you bite my head off, read your post again, it does sound like someone who works hard and expect everyone to do the same as him.

This guild upgrade is a nice perk and a + for some people to consider joining that specific guild.
Would be nice, however, if this kind of boost could be acquired only by a competent guild and not something completely trivial like gain X guild currency by doing Y and Z missions 10 times.

If you do not have the money to Waypoint. then the answer is: “You are not playing the game right, and should quit.”

Nalora.7964:

If you do not have the money to Waypoint. then the answer is: “You are not playing the game right, and should quit.”

You should learn to diversify your posts a little.

Nalora.7964:

If you do not have the money to Waypoint. then the answer is: “You are not playing the game right, and should quit.”

As I posted in reply to your other elitist comment in the other thread, I’m certainly glad this isn’t ArenaNet’s motto.

The point is: I could WP… but It takes away from the money that I could be spending on armor. And the game doesn’t really scale rewards up with WP costs.

They should focus on introducing new desirable armor and weapon skins as gold sinks, rather than WP costs.

Minos.5168:

No, it doesn’t. Gold sinks already seem to out-weigh the rewards IMO.

I find this incredibly hard to believe. You’re seriously netting negative gold whenever you do anything? Because that’s what it means when you say “sinks outweight rewards.”

Lowering WPs won’t necessarily decrease the effectiveness of the sink. The lower cost may encourage more people to use it, hence keeping the overall effectiveness of it as a sink around the same.

Of course we don’t have the data. Only Anet knows, so making a statement like “lowering WP cost WON’T damage the economy” is a pretty big assumption.

PS GW1 also had many gold sinks too. It’ll be silly to have an MMO without gold sinks.

Firegoth.6427:

This guild upgrade is a nice perk and a + for some people to consider joining that specific guild.
Would be nice, however, if this kind of boost could be acquired only by a competent guild and not something completely trivial like gain X guild currency by doing Y and Z missions 10 times.

I’d just like it to be a perk that a competent guild could maintain indefinitely.

I mean, I wouldn’t mind doing a weekly guild mission (or dungeon) to obtain and maintain cheaper waypoints.

It’s just that my guild has an “older” crowd with actual 40+ hr/week jobs. It’d probably be difficult to organize a guild mission EVERY DAY to keep this bonus.

And, thus it would possibly dissuade people from joining smaller guilds if this bonus required some sort of daily mission.

Ursan.7846:

I find this incredibly hard to believe. You’re seriously netting negative gold whenever you do anything? Because that’s what it means when you say “sinks outweight rewards.”

Lowering WPs won’t necessarily decrease the effectiveness of the sink. The lower cost may encourage more people to use it, hence keeping the overall effectiveness of it as a sink around the same.

Of course we don’t have the data. Only Anet knows, so making a statement like “lowering WP cost WON’T damage the economy” is a pretty big assumption.

PS GW1 also had many gold sinks too. It’ll be silly to have an MMO without gold sinks.

GW1’s gold sinks revolved around weapon/armor skins.
It’s a type of gold sink I could justify, because I actually get something out of it.

Meanwhile, throwing money away by travelling just seems redundant.

I use WPs as little as possible and I’d agree with your sentiment that if WP costs were reduced, more people would use them.

I fail to see how WP cost is “vital” to the economy. Especially given that they’re going to give out this “bonus” to guilds willing to complete specific missions.

I don’t care if there’s minimal WP cost. I just think ArenaNet has finally admitted that MAYBE it’s too high.

Perhaps they’re using this “guild bonus” as a trial run before reducing WP costs all around?

Their new motto is “it pays to be in a guild” and if this is the type of thing they’re going to give out… It certainly does. Because it removes the WP gold sink from those individuals.

However, I would like to note: WoW implemented a similar feature with Cataclysm and Guild Perks. Reduced durability loss, decreased repairs, increased gold drops, increased travel speed, etc.

However, they implemented them as permanent perks to obtain… And didn’t implement any new ones with MoP. I feel like that shows they realized it kind of separates established, popular guilds from smaller guilds.

My main complaint is if it’s going to remove a gold sink from those in large guilds, but be difficult for smaller guilds to maintain constantly. (I don’t know any of this yet, but it’s just a fear I have.)

They’ve already introduced the utility infusions to give additional gold drops and MF… And now they’re going to reduce WP costs for those in large guilds?

So much for trying to give new players equal footing with everyone else. (As was one of the stated points, during development of GW2. But we ALL know how far they’ve strayed from their initial goals.)

^I’m not actually disagreeing with you. The second portion of my post was mainly directed at Vol, because it’s very possible lowering WP cost won’t actually impact the overall effectiveness of it as a gold sink.

I personally think WP costs are very tiny compared to the massive gold sink in this room (TP.) But again, I don’t have any data to back up my beliefs, and no one else does except Anet. So such an absolute claim “Removing WP costs won’t damage the economy at all” is a bit of a stretch.

Ursan.7846:

I personally think WP costs are very tiny compared to the massive gold sink in this room (TP.) But again, I don’t have any data to back up my beliefs, and no one else does except Anet. So such an absolute claim “Removing WP costs won’t damage the economy at all” is a bit of a stretch.

True, but I don’t really care if WP costs are “removed”… I don’t mind paying a reasonable cost… I just think they should be re-evaluated. (Which is kind of what ArenaNet is doing with the upcoming guild bonus)