Guild Wars 2

So for short introduction to my case i will mention that recently i rerolled from 2h using class to dual-wield using one ( not big importance which one ) and thats what concerns me

I will have to spend twice the amount of any currency to equip my hero with weapons. Why? Following any possible or impossible logic 2h sword should be more expensive than his little brother 1h sword, same goes to any 2h-1h combination.

Its not only hardly fair thou strongly illogical.

You may threat this as complain because i didint post it in suggestion forum since i strongly doubt anet will change something :<

cheers,

2 × 1h weapons should be the price of 1x 2h,simple as that.

Are we talking npc vendors or tp?

GS are the most popular weapon because everyone plays a Guard/Warr/Mesmer and what do they normally always use? I could complain saying how a GS is 390 tokens and yet a 1h dagger is 300 meaning i have to get 600 tokens to get my weps where someone who uses a 2h doesn’t, buy a cheap rare GS and speed run AC if u have 2 toons over +35 u can get the GS in around 2hours

So you want 2h weapons to cost 600 tokens?

(Maybe the extra tokens go into the sigils that automagically come with weapons? Cause with two 1h weapons, you get a sigil for each hand.)

No id rather it cost half of what it costs a 2h or at least have it around 200 and those sigils you get in the weps are complete trash i always throw em out and put some Power per kills in there =)

So in other words, you’d rather that the reward be easier to get. Why is 300 not a reasonable price for a weapon without having to compare it to another weapon?

Two 1h Weapons allow you 2 sigil slots, while one 2h weapon has space for only 1, giving you the potential for synergistic bonuses.

edit: I’m not saying I wouldn’t love to have cheaper exotic 1h weapons, but I feel like there should be a good reason that stands on its own merit as to why something’s price would have to be adjusted.

no id rather the reward be fair to every player

Mechanix.5719:

no id rather the reward be fair to every player

But why is 300 not a fair price?

If 2h weapons were 600, everything would be fair, yes?

Well shouldn’t the price reflect the damage dealt, aka the effect of the weapon? If we go by that their already at a fair price. An exotic sword does like what 800 max, a GS 1100. I mean if were going to make the price of a GS double the sword should the GS do double the damage?

You basing the cost on how many you need instead of what it does.

wow sorry i must be talking to 2h users im sorry my idea to make you put in the same amount of effort as people who dual wield scared you ill put this completely crazy idea away so you never have to be reminded =/

I don’t mean to be antagonistic, Mechanix, and I’m sorry you feel that way. I’m honestly just looking for open debate about this.

If you feel that the cost of a sword or axe or focus is too expensive because the performance of said weapon isn’t met by the effort to acquire it, then I think it would be worthy to discuss it.

However, I think that saying “The price of this is too expensive because other things are cheaper,” isn’t actually a very strong argument.

If I may regale you with a bit of a tale. A parable if you will.

There was a farmer who needed farmhands, so in the morning he went to town and hired a bunch of people for $100 to work until evening. Then, needing more people, he went again in the afternoon with the same offer, $100 to work until evening and got a 2nd group of people.

In the evening, he paid $100 to each person whether they worked from morning until evening, or afternoon until evening. Some of the people who had been there from morning complained. They’d worked longer hours than the people who had been there only from the afternoon onwards.

However, the farmer explained, they accepted the job understanding that $100 was worth it to work from morning to evening. Why did it matter what the farmer paid the other workers?

@DigitalKirin.9714
Thats an interesting if completly irrelivent story.

As for the pricing of weapons. As say a thief there is no option for a 2 handed melee weapon so automaticly a player would need to buy 2 weapons, if that player also favored pistols as her ranged option then thats 4 total weapons that they would need to purchase. Ok, thats not so bad, but then comes along say a warrior who uses 2 handed sword and rifle. thats only 2 weapons they would need to buy. The thief will be paying a lot more for weapons than the warrior and the stats for both the thiefs one handed weapons roughly equals that of the 2 hander. why then is she paying more for her weapons? A small tax for an extra sigil slot is probobly warented but double what a 2 hander costs seems a little excessive.

Found the pricing to be a little odd myself but thems the breaks. Oh well.

Well, here’s the thing. I have explorer staff and 2 explorer daggers(all exotic, crafted etc). The daggers have 924-981 dmg, 64 power/precis and 3 mfind each. The staff has 985-1111 dmg, 124 power/precis, 3% mfind. Regardless of which weapon I have one(2 d/d/ or staff), my power and precision is the same. But the attack stat is 130 higher with the staff(i never quite figured out how off-hand weapon actually affects the overall dmg). From the looks of it, I get +3% mfind and 1 sigil slot extra when using a dagger in exchange for 130 attack. The rest is the same. Now…price…
Staff: 5 globs, 5 claws, 54 wood logs, 30 ori ore
2 daggers: 10 globs, 10 claws, 60 wood logs, 80 ori ore
The dagger set is almost 2 times more expensive than the staff, yet it doesn’t give 2 times the stats….
And, yes, I use staff as primary weapon, but I still think it’s…unfair. Wouldn’t it make more sense to increase price on 2h weapons, give them 2 sigil slots so it doesn’t matter what weapon set you want(at least price-wise). And maybe even the same for legendaries….

I really wouldnt mind 2 sigil slots on my 2h weaps. Worth 600 tokens, imo. +5% more crit chance? Or full energy on swap? Yes please. I’d pay it in a heartbeat.

Orion Magus.5348:

@DigitalKirin.9714
Thats an interesting if completly irrelivent story.

The relevancy is this:

How much effort is one exotic dungeon dagger worth to your thief? How much time are you willing to put into getting him/her that one dagger?

The game devs have said, “This dagger is worth 5 path runs through a dungeon.”

Is this an unreasonable amount of time to put into making your thief better?

The argument that another weapon setup costs less is irrelevant to your thief. The reason is because regardless of how much or little a different weapon costs, it doesn’t affect how much effort you are being told you have to put into your thief to make him/her better.

Tying it all in:
The game devs (the farmer) said you need to run x amount of times (work from blank until evening) to receive your weapon (the $100).
If you had said “5 runs is too much work for a dagger – it’s not fair because there are other exotic daggers that can be had for less effort” (essentially saying $100 isn’t enough money for the work you did) then I feel that is a viable point and then the debate can move to the next stage.
However, people are saying “daggers cost too much because that other guy got his weapon setup for cheaper” (the worker complaining about the other workers who got $100 even though they started in the afternoon).

If the second group of workers never appeared, the first group of workers would have no reason to complain about payment. But the amount of work they did didn’t change. And the amount they got paid didn’t change.

If tomorrow we all woke up and they had ninja patched all dungeon 2h weapons to cost 1000 tokens, would you feel justified in telling me that 1h weapons should cost 500 tokens?

Off topic:
On a broader scale, why should someone else dictate your happiness/satisfaction? Shouldn’t you be in control of it?

edit: By the way, I do want to make expressly clear that I’m discussing this in an effort to provoke thoughtfulness, not anger. I enjoy debate, philosophy, etc. and I am having a good time talking about this. I hope you are too. And with that I bid you a good night.

alcedonia.7831:

I really wouldnt mind 2 sigil slots on my 2h weaps. Worth 600 tokens, imo. +5% more crit chance? Or full energy on swap? Yes please. I’d pay it in a heartbeat.

Then Dual wield your forcing yourself to use the 2h not the game simple if your a guard/warr and you wanna play eaze mode GS then thats your fault.

Main point i was aiming at is that your choice or play style shouldnt cost you more or less compared to other solutions.

For example as an Engi i prefer dual pistols which will cost me double of what Rifle users will pay. I cant see any logic in that.

FLFW.3105:

You may threat this as complain because i didint post it in suggestion forum since i strongly doubt anet will change something :<

cheers,

You got that right ^^

DigitalKirin.9714:

The relevancy is this:

How much effort is one exotic dungeon dagger worth to your thief? How much time are you willing to put into getting him/her that one dagger?

The game devs have said, “This dagger is worth 5 path runs through a dungeon.”

Is this an unreasonable amount of time to put into making your thief better?

The argument that another weapon setup costs less is irrelevant to your thief. The reason is because regardless of how much or little a different weapon costs, it doesn’t affect how much effort you are being told you have to put into your thief to make him/her better.

Tying it all in:
The game devs (the farmer) said you need to run x amount of times (work from blank until evening) to receive your weapon (the $100).
If you had said “5 runs is too much work for a dagger – it’s not fair because there are other exotic daggers that can be had for less effort” (essentially saying $100 isn’t enough money for the work you did) then I feel that is a viable point and then the debate can move to the next stage.
However, people are saying “daggers cost too much because that other guy got his weapon setup for cheaper” (the worker complaining about the other workers who got $100 even though they started in the afternoon).

If the second group of workers never appeared, the first group of workers would have no reason to complain about payment. But the amount of work they did didn’t change. And the amount they got paid didn’t change.

If tomorrow we all woke up and they had ninja patched all dungeon 2h weapons to cost 1000 tokens, would you feel justified in telling me that 1h weapons should cost 500 tokens?

Off topic:
On a broader scale, why should someone else dictate your happiness/satisfaction? Shouldn’t you be in control of it?

edit: By the way, I do want to make expressly clear that I’m discussing this in an effort to provoke thoughtfulness, not anger. I enjoy debate, philosophy, etc. and I am having a good time talking about this. I hope you are too. And with that I bid you a good night.

But that is how “fair” is determined. By comparing your situation to that of others. If your situation is the only situation, you are likely to accept it. Because you don’t know of anything different thus yours is the normal one. Think history. How did the French revolution start? Or the October revolution? The poor decided it wasn’t fair that the rich had an easier life and wanted a change. If you had the chance to go back in time, would you tell those people they shouldn’t compare themselves to others? Then why are you saying it now? What about equal rights movements? Are those also wrong because they are based on one group comparing their situation to that of another group? Or slavery? I\ll even take it down a notch. When you go shopping, do you compare prices? Or do you just buy the first thing you see? Heck, would you buy GW2 from a retailer for $100 if you knew the official site sells it for $50? Or would you say the retailer is expensive and then buy from the site? How does that fit into your logic of not looking at others?

Fact is, our entire lives are based on comparing things and deciding what is fair and what isn’t based on that. You choose your phone plan, food, even place to live based on what “others” have/pay for. It’s how we utilise information. And also how we take control of our satisfaction/happiness. Believing we live in a fair situation is a big part of it.

Mechanix.5719:

alcedonia.7831:

I really wouldnt mind 2 sigil slots on my 2h weaps. Worth 600 tokens, imo. +5% more crit chance? Or full energy on swap? Yes please. I’d pay it in a heartbeat.

Then Dual wield your forcing yourself to use the 2h not the game simple if your a guard/warr and you wanna play eaze mode GS then thats your fault.

actually i don’t use gs. i use hammer because of the boons and the cc it provides. the good aoe damage is great as well. i don’t need extra 5% crit chance. but i think it’s worth it if’s 600 tokens. that’s cheap considering how easily and quickly dungeon tokens can be gotten. it’s an extra 5% crit chance with no loss. i wouldn’t mind that.

the reason why so many guard/war use 2h weapons is because the weapon skills are just better suited in general for the role they wish to play. gs for guardians have a dynamic aoe damage skill with a pretty ok cd. it also has a gap closer with a short cd. and an aoe dot that also pulls opponents towards you. it also has retaliation, which for guardians that focus more on vit/toughness, means that you can still do fair damage.

wars use gs as their go-to weapon because it has good burst damage with 100b that also has aoe, as well as 2 gap closers, and a range attack which cripples. that’s not bad. it’s what most warriors want because of the synergy. charge in, do some burst damage, charge out. if the mob is too chunky and hits too hard for your liking, cripple it with your range attack for breathing space.

but i mean, if you wanna use something different, it’s your perogative. go ahead.

just like if you wanna wear your pants on your head instead of around your waist/hips because it’s too passe and everyone does that, no one will stop you.

but demanding that clothing companies design pants with a large hole at the crotch so you can wear it on your head is kinda silly, imo.

and throw out your elitist ‘ez mode’ nonsense. it got old halfway through you typing it.

we can debate this like adults, and share opinions to develop this opinion into something really worth looking at and considering, or you can ruin your own topic with unwarranted prickliness.

choice is yours.

I think the price should be proportional to the amount of skills a weapon provides. So a 1h sword would cost 60% of a 2h, and a shield would cost 40% of a 2h. Why does the price compared to other items matter? Because one type of item offers a better “deal”, giving you full functionality at a cheaper price. It’d be nice if crafting and all parts of the game reflected this as well. As for two handed weapons and sigils, they don’t need two because they already deal 10% higher damage through better stats.

As for the farmer worker thing, people generally expect equal pay for equal work. Equal work being same quantity and quality, and at the same time/need for said work. The second group being paid the same amount for half the work is a legitimate complaint.

Do you know what’s really unfair?

I have 8 alts (MUST HAZ ALL THE CLASSES!). Do you have any idea how much gold I’ve burned through just getting them into rares when they hit 80? And how much more the two I’ve managed to get into exotics have cost me? And how much time I’m going to spend farmzoring fractals to get them all in shiny pink gear?

cries

It becomes even more illogical if you look at legendaries.. Not only do 2 handed legendaries cost less than 2 1h legendaries, they also look a lot better. Why make 1h legendaries at all?! O_O

It’s not all that hard to get your weapons, such a small thing in your life as a GW2 player.

It’s not gonna be “fair,” because each profession has to deal with their own abilities and tradeoffs.

The only place where the game developers set the price is with currency-bought weapons, and they DID make 2H cost more. Not double, but 130%. Seems fair enough to me.

How about Engi and Ele? Shouldn’t they have to pay double what everyone else does because they don’t weapon-swap?

TWMagimay.9057:

But that is how “fair” is determined. By comparing your situation to that of others. If your situation is the only situation, you are likely to accept it. (snip)

Salient points! I like the thoughtfulness of this argument. I will respond with this:

I think a reasonable amount of equity is important, so long as you balance it with your other values.

To take one of your examples for now, the French peasantry and bourgeoisie rose up against the Nobility for several reasons, but the main factors that fomented resentment and rebellion was the price increase of basic necessities such as bread, leading to widespread starvation. The common frenchman was not afforded their basic human rights. The culprits of this was the Nobility, who selfishly attempted to protect themselves – a basic human reaction as well.

To counterpoint: Nobility still exists in many cultures today. Let’s take England. Why haven’t the common people of England torn down the walls of the Palace and taken Prince Harry out into the street to be hanged? They still live in a monarchy (constitutional monarchy) where just being born to the right person means you get to live in a palace. It’s because people in England are afforded their basic human rights and opportunities – the right to live, protection under a common law, etc.

TWMagimay.9057:

I\ll even take it down a notch.

That’s probably for the best

TWMagimay.9057:

When you go shopping, do you compare prices? Or do you just buy the first thing you see? Heck, would you buy GW2 from a retailer for $100 if you knew the official site sells it for $50? Or would you say the retailer is expensive and then buy from the site? How does that fit into your logic of not looking at others?

I agree that it is important to compare prices! So long as we’re talking about apples to apples and oranges to oranges.

If the exact same exotic dagger could be purchased from a vendor for 10s instead of 300 tokens from a different vendor, then it only makes sense to get it from the 10s vendor because the vast majority of us can agree that the amount of effort to acquire 300 tokens from any dungeon is more difficult than acquiring 10s.

I’ll go on to preempt the next point made about the above statement. If the 10s vendor popped into existence tomorrow, you’d certainly hear a lot of crying on the forums about it. However, at the time, the 300 tokens that those people spent to buy the dagger in the first place was worth it at that time. The existence of this new vendor doesn’t change the value decision those people made at that time.

I’ll throw one more example your way.

Let’s say GW2 costs $60. And let’s say Half Life 3 comes out for $90, but you find yourself enjoying HL3 twice as much as GW2. Should Anet reduce the price of GW2 to $45?
Anet chose the price point of $60 because they felt it was a reasonable amount of money for the game they were producing. People paid that price to play because they felt it was a reasonable amount to pay for a game like this. Some people choose to save their money and not play GW2 and get HL3. Are those people who are potentially having twice as much fun as you with their HL3 going to really upset you because they got more fun for their money?

TWMagimay.9057:

Fact is, our entire lives are based on comparing things and deciding what is fair and what isn’t based on that.

Comparison based strictly on what someone else receives is illogical. You need to consider things such as opportunity cost to yourself, and I’d argue that is more important that what someone else is getting.

Bill Gates owns 3 Porsches. Given this information, are you entitled to 3 Porsches as well because that would be fair?

TWMagimay.9057:

You choose your phone plan, food, even place to live based on what “others” have/pay for. It’s how we utilise information.

Agreed that others affect the pricing of all the various different things we use. However, I base my choices on what I need. If something is worth it, I’ll get it, if it isn’t, I won’t.

TWMagimay.9057:

And also how we take control of our satisfaction/happiness. Believing we live in a fair situation is a big part of it.

I think that belief is the core point of this. If you believe you are satisfied/happy, wouldn’t you be? That is completely under your control.
If you were sitting next to a co-worker, say at a bus stop, and some complete stranger walked up and handed him $100 and you got upset, are you really in control of your emotions?

In the end, I noticed that you never touched on some points.

1. Is 5 dungeon runs for a dagger an unreasonable amount of effort?

2. If they changed the pricing of weapons to be 2h weapons = 1000 tokens, 1h weapons = 500 tokens, wouldn’t you say this is fair by your definition?
Would you be happy paying 500 tokens?

ANet doubles the price of all 2H weapons.

Be careful what you wish for.

Wait till you need to get two legendaries because you use two pistols. But the materials are the same as one 2h legendary for each.

That seems pretty fair to me :P

DigitalKirin.9714:

The relevancy is this:

How much effort is one exotic dungeon dagger worth to your thief? How much time are you willing to put into getting him/her that one dagger?

The game devs have said, “This dagger is worth 5 path runs through a dungeon.”

Is this an unreasonable amount of time to put into making your thief better?

This would make sense if I as a player was making the decision to invest in 2 one handed weapons over 1 two handed weapon as a stylistic preference. In the case of the thief there is no option for a melee two handed weapon so there is no choice. Also, since weapon choice makes up such a large part of the characters play style then certain roles are in essence penalized for choosing to play the way they do. Is this a check because without it more people would gravitate towards a certain play style and thus ANet is attempting to spread out the builds (more dedicated players take on the roles that are more expensive to equip)?

DigitalKirin.9714:

The argument that another weapon setup costs less is irrelevant to your thief. The reason is because regardless of how much or little a different weapon costs, it doesn’t affect how much effort you are being told you have to put into your thief to make him/her better.

What? The difference in weapon cost is directly reflected in how much effort I am being required to put into my thief. Do I buy a short bow or 2 pistols, putting aside the actual usefulness of the weapons in varying scenarios for a second, this tells me I will need almost double the effort to outfit myself with pistols over the short bow.

DigitalKirin.9714:

Tying it all in:
The game devs (the farmer) said you need to run x amount of times (work from blank until evening) to receive your weapon (the $100).
If you had said “5 runs is too much work for a dagger – it’s not fair because there are other exotic daggers that can be had for less effort” (essentially saying $100 isn’t enough money for the work you did) then I feel that is a viable point and then the debate can move to the next stage.
However, people are saying “daggers cost too much because that other guy got his weapon setup for cheaper” (the worker complaining about the other workers who got $100 even though they started in the afternoon).

If the second group of workers never appeared, the first group of workers would have no reason to complain about payment. But the amount of work they did didn’t change. And the amount they got paid didn’t change.

I said this was largely irrelevant because the second group of workers didn’t suddenly appear, they were there the whole time. It would be more like the farmer stated in the morning ok guys $100 dollars to any who come to work for me now until dusk, and I’ll be back to pick up more workers at noon and will be paying them $100 dollars to work from then until dusk. As the worker would you go in the morning or wait until noon to get hired? Same pay half the time.

DigitalKirin.9714:

If tomorrow we all woke up and they had ninja patched all dungeon 2h weapons to cost 1000 tokens, would you feel justified in telling me that 1h weapons should cost 500 tokens?

This would be kitten as I also have characters who use two hander’s. I would prefer 1 handed weapons to be brought down in price slightly. If 2 hander’s got an extra sigil slot I would say drop 1 hander’s to half of what 2 hander’s cost. I prefer changes that work in the players favor not those that negatively affect them.

DigitalKirin.9714:

Off topic:
On a broader scale, why should someone else dictate your happiness/satisfaction? Shouldn’t you be in control of it?

Agreed. My happiness should not be dictated by others. Makes me wonder why people get uppity about having items only for the super rich cause if all the plebs got their dirty hands on that item they would no longer want it… but I’m getting off topic.

Now on the other hand knowing I will HAVE to put in twice as much effort on my character to be on equal(ish) footing to another player in a competitive environment (see WvWvW) that makes me a little sad. Will it stop me from enjoying my badkitten pistols? Absolutely not. However, it will make me go post on the forums.

DigitalKirin.9714:

edit: By the way, I do want to make expressly clear that I’m discussing this in an effort to provoke thoughtfulness, not anger. I enjoy debate, philosophy, etc. and I am having a good time talking about this. I hope you are too. And with that I bid you a good night.

I’m not really angry about your comments, just confused as to why you think that a dual wielding character should be penalized for wielding 2 weapons. Or from the other side why should 2 handed weapon users be rewarded for only using 1 big weapon?

TWMagimay.9057:

… (i never quite figured out how off-hand weapon actually affects the overall dmg). …

All weapons of a type (2h, 1h, offhand) roughly have the same weapon strength on average (there are slight variances)
Dual weilding you get the average weapon strengthof the two weapons.
2h you obvously get the weapons listed weapon strength

Generally speaking 2h weapons have ~10% more weapon strength and +1 on their primary stat over that of dual weilding (on the assumption the two weapons have the same stat combo).

There is a further breakdown however.
Off hand only weapons (shield/torch/horn/focus) have ~10% less weapon strength than a single handed weapon. Bringing the average weapon power down ~15% to that of a 2h weapon (due to the 1h/off-hand strength being averaged).

The advantage of dual weilding is however a second sigil (which of course has its own inherant cost to purcahse/find) and the flexability of having 2 seperate stat bonus sets.

I do think the factor of having to get/pay for 2 legendaries over just one has some influence on people using 2 handers, though I hope that is the minority of cases, either way the greater weapon strength does have an impact.

It was one thing I thought was odd with crafting was a staff uses 9 wood while both a GS uses only 6 metal, same as a normal sword.

Unless I’ve missed it, the only comment about weapon switching was the one about Eles and Engies paying more because they don’t weapon switch. However, that does not mean they don’t have multiple weapons top switch to in their inventory. How fair is the system if you compare a Hammer/GS Guard with a P/P and D/D Thief? Now it’s two weapons versus 4.

But what is it with the one handed infinite light sword on the trade for 900g. Holy kitten that’s the most ridiculous price for an item. Sweet sword though.

Orion Magus.5348:

just confused as to why you think that a dual wielding character should be penalized for wielding 2 weapons. Or from the other side why should 2 handed weapon users be rewarded for only using 1 big weapon?

I’d read this last night and I considered making another point by point response, however, I think most salient points have already been made for both sides. So I’ll simply say that I think the essence of the discussion comes down to this statement above in quotes.

You perceive the price as a punishment, hence your word ‘penalize’.

I perceive things as Opportunity Cost. If something costs more than the effort to get it, I wouldn’t get it. If I can maximize my spending power somewhere, then I would do so wherever I can.

Much earlier in the thread, I’d asked the question, though nobody answered it, “If the price of weapons went to 500 tokens for 1h weapons and 1000 tokens for 2h weapons, wouldn’t this be fair? Would you be happy with it?”

I still do wonder in complete honesty, can people answer this question? What if the cost was 5,000/10,000? Etc. etc.

Pricing should be: 2 handers> 1handers/dual wield> offhand weapons/aquatic because honestly who would pay full price for an aquatic weapon

as a GS wielder I will say have 1h weapons costing half the ammount of 2h weapons sounds fair and logical.

This is GW2. If there’s anything about this game you feel is completely broken or illogical you will be arguing with nothing but fanboys telling you stop whining L2P basically. Stop wasting your breath trying to talk sense to people who have all but abandoned it.

DigitalKirin.9714:

Orion Magus.5348:

just confused as to why you think that a dual wielding character should be penalized for wielding 2 weapons. Or from the other side why should 2 handed weapon users be rewarded for only using 1 big weapon?

I’d read this last night and I considered making another point by point response, however, I think most salient points have already been made for both sides. So I’ll simply say that I think the essence of the discussion comes down to this statement above in quotes.

You perceive the price as a punishment, hence your word ‘penalize’.

I perceive things as Opportunity Cost. If something costs more than the effort to get it, I wouldn’t get it. If I can maximize my spending power somewhere, then I would do so wherever I can.

I don’t “perceive” there to be a larger cost to obtaining 2 one handed weapons over 1 two handed weapon, there is in FACT a difference. I’m not saying it feels harder or that running a dungeon takes me 7 hours so it’s harder for me to get 1 handed weapons. The price listing of them is such that it IS more work to get 2 one handed weapons over 1 two handed weapon.

I also stated it in the reverse and called it a REWARD for using 2 handed weapons. So I ask you good sir to tell me why a 2 handed weapon user should get a reward for choosing to use one large weapon?

DigitalKirin.9714:

Much earlier in the thread, I’d asked the question, though nobody answered it, “If the price of weapons went to 500 tokens for 1h weapons and 1000 tokens for 2h weapons, wouldn’t this be fair? Would you be happy with it?”

I still do wonder in complete honesty, can people answer this question? What if the cost was 5,000/10,000? Etc. etc.

Orion Magus.5348:

This would be kitten as I also have characters who use two hander’s. I would prefer 1 handed weapons to be brought down in price slightly. If 2 hander’s got an extra sigil slot I would say drop 1 hander’s to half of what 2 hander’s cost. I prefer changes that work in the players favor not those that negatively affect them.

^This was in answer to your question.

For a more basic answer; yes, it would be more fair than the current weapon pricing.

@Digital

Please stop using comparison to real life or anything like it. It….just….doesn’t…work.

1. Ghastly axe = 300 tokens
2. Ghastly GS = 390 tokens

To be honest as a warrior, I just don’t see this as fair. It takes 210 more tokens to get a duel wield set. And you know what? GS deals more dmg overall….

And if were going into “value of weapon”, should condition sets be HUGELY discounted then as they are both situational and deal less overall damage than burst skills such as Warrior GS?

Just make the 2hs cost 300 and the 1hs cost 150. They would essentially be the exact same and 2hs would receive a discount.

Orion Magus.5348:

I don’t “perceive” there to be a larger cost to obtaining 2 one handed weapons over 1 two handed weapon, there is in FACT a difference. I’m not saying it feels harder or that running a dungeon takes me 7 hours so it’s harder for me to get 1 handed weapons. The price listing of them is such that it IS more work to get 2 one handed weapons over 1 two handed weapon.

I also stated it in the reverse and called it a REWARD for using 2 handed weapons. So I ask you good sir to tell me why a 2 handed weapon user should get a reward for choosing to use one large weapon?

You misunderstand the meaning of opportunity cost.

Orion Magus.5348:

This would be kitten as I also have characters who use two hander’s. I would prefer 1 handed weapons to be brought down in price slightly. If 2 hander’s got an extra sigil slot I would say drop 1 hander’s to half of what 2 hander’s cost. I prefer changes that work in the players favor not those that negatively affect them.

^This was in answer to your question.

Ah, I wasn’t sure since the answer wasn’t exactly forthright. It also includes the word kitten and I wasn’t sure of the connotation of said kitten. Kitten in the positive or kitten in the negative. Since all curse words are filtered to be kitten.

To be honest, if they chose to make 1h weapons cheaper, I wouldn’t mind because it would mean the buying power of my tokens goes up. However, I think the current level of buying power my tokens have is fine as is. I also have characters that both dual wield as well as 2h weapons.

Orion Magus.5348:

For a more basic answer; yes, it would be more fair than the current weapon pricing.

See, this is where being so dogmatic about wanting things to be “fair” breaks down.

By saying yes, you’re saying, “I’d pay 5,000 tokens for my dagger to make sure that anyone who buys a staff has to pay 10,000 tokens. Because that’s fair to me.”

That sounds vengeful to me.

Dead.7385:

Just make the 2hs cost 300 and the 1hs cost 150. They would essentially be the exact same and 2hs would receive a discount.

My first post question was: Why not 2h weapons as 600?

So again, I ask, what is the justification in taking the 300 token axe and making it 150? Why not take all 2h weapons and make then 600?

The best justification I received for reducing the cost of the 300 token weapon was “because I prefer it”.

Just because we want something to be cheaper doesn’t justify a price drop. A price is set because that’s the price the seller deems it is worth. If the buyer says “that’s not worth it” they are free to pick from any of the sellers competitors a comparable item, or find a substitute item that will satisfy them.

Dead.7385:

Please stop using comparison to real life or anything like it. It….just….doesn’t…work.

TWMagimay was the one who used RL comparisons. (French revolution, October revolution, slavery.)

DigitalKirin.9714:

See, this is where being so dogmatic about wanting things to be “fair” breaks down.

By saying yes, you’re saying, “I’d pay 5,000 tokens for my dagger to make sure that anyone who buys a staff has to pay 10,000 tokens. Because that’s fair to me.”

That sounds vengeful to me.

It would make more sense to look at it as I can pay 1,000 tokens for a sword and shield, OR I could pay 1,000 tokens for a Great sword. Every player has the same option… how is this vengeful?

DigitalKirin.9714:

I perceive things as Opportunity Cost. If something costs more than the effort to get it, I wouldn’t get it. If I can maximize my spending power somewhere, then I would do so wherever I can.

DigitalKirin.9714:

You misunderstand the meaning of opportunity cost.

I didn’t misunderstand what opportunity cost means, it just makes no sense for you to bring it up here since it is never beneficial (from a cost perspective) to buy 2 one handed weapons over 1 two handed weapon. Thus to “maximize your spending power” a player should always buy a two handed weapon. If this was the case why even have one handed weapons in the game… are they a trap?

Taken one step further, should the thief class not be played since players won’t be able to maximize their spending power due to class weapon selection limitations? There is only 1 two handed weapon for the thief so either they buy 2 one handed weapons or don’t weapon swap.

End of the day 2 one handed weapons offer comparable power to 1 two handed weapon so why the pricing disparity?

Orion Magus.5348:

It would make more sense to look at it as I can pay 1,000 tokens for a sword and shield, OR I could pay 1,000 tokens for a Great sword. Every player has the same option… how is this vengeful?

What about 10,000 tokens for a sword+shield or Gswd? If you got 69 tokens per run of a dungeon, that’d be… 145 runs. Would you get dungeon weapons if they required you to do this?

Orion Magus.5348:

I didn’t misunderstand what opportunity cost means, it just makes no sense for you to bring it up here since it is never beneficial (from a cost perspective) to buy 2 one handed weapons over 1 two handed weapon. Thus to “maximize your spending power” a player should always buy a two handed weapon. If this was the case why even have one handed weapons in the game… are they a trap?

Taken one step further, should the thief class not be played since players won’t be able to maximize their spending power due to class weapon selection limitations? There is only 1 two handed weapon for the thief so either they buy 2 one handed weapons or don’t weapon swap.

End of the day 2 one handed weapons offer comparable power to 1 two handed weapon so why the pricing disparity?

When a person creates a character, how often is Cost of weapon the #1 priority behind choosing class, build, traits?

Often, a player starts with something like “I want to play a Thief!” or “I want to play some kind of Support build!” The Desire to play x class or y build then eventually translates into the Value a player places on the weapon that will support such builds. Why do some thieves play p/p builds instead of always using shortbow? The cost is obviously more expensive as you’ve pointed out. Because the value of playing the build they Want to play is worth it.

Value, an attribute a player gives to an object, may sometimes be even linked to a non-monetary function of the object, such as aesthetics or prestige. Have you ever bought a piece of armor just for sheer looks and immediately transmuted it onto an existing piece of armor?
What if someone wanted Pow/Tough/Vit armor from SE, but loved the looks of the Arah dungeon set? Getting the Arah skins will essentially double the token expense but increase their stat performance by 0%. That is “unfair” by your definition (twice the price for the same performance) – once they’ve gotten their first set, should they be allowed to get the Arah skins for free just to transmute?

DigitalKirin.9714:

Salient points! I like the thoughtfulness of this argument. I will respond with this:

I think a reasonable amount of equity is important, so long as you balance it with your other values.

To take one of your examples for now, the French peasantry and bourgeoisie rose up against the Nobility for several reasons, but the main factors that fomented resentment and rebellion was the price increase of basic necessities such as bread, leading to widespread starvation. The common frenchman was not afforded their basic human rights. The culprits of this was the Nobility, who selfishly attempted to protect themselves – a basic human reaction as well.

To counterpoint: Nobility still exists in many cultures today. Let’s take England. Why haven’t the common people of England torn down the walls of the Palace and taken Prince Harry out into the street to be hanged? They still live in a monarchy (constitutional monarchy) where just being born to the right person means you get to live in a palace. It’s because people in England are afforded their basic human rights and opportunities – the right to live, protection under a common law, etc.

Bout your counterpoint…that’s exactly what happened during the October revolution and all the events that followed it.

As for why it’s not happening now…most likely because royalty has little meaning nowadays. But people still revolt against the government(look at recent events in Greece). We have also found a certain amount of fairness in that situation. Ok, I don’t get to live in a palace, which sucks. But I can dress in WWII German uniform and go to a mask-ball without ending on the front page of a newspaper with everybody screaming “bloody murderer” at me. Pretty good trade-off for most people. And the entire reason yellow press even exists: to make us feel better about not living in a palace.

I agree that it is important to compare prices! So long as we’re talking about apples to apples and oranges to oranges.

So, you would buy $20/kilo oranges because you don’t think of comparing them to the $1/kilo apples and buying the apples instead? Let me guess. You are a guy xD

If the exact same exotic dagger could be purchased from a vendor for 10s instead of 300 tokens from a different vendor, then it only makes sense to get it from the 10s vendor because the vast majority of us can agree that the amount of effort to acquire 300 tokens from any dungeon is more difficult than acquiring 10s.

I’ll go on to preempt the next point made about the above statement. If the 10s vendor popped into existence tomorrow, you’d certainly hear a lot of crying on the forums about it. However, at the time, the 300 tokens that those people spent to buy the dagger in the first place was worth it at that time. The existence of this new vendor doesn’t change the value decision those people made at that time.

The thing is, though, in the game weapon sets are pretty much equal. Crafting 1 staff costs pretty much the same as crafting 1 dagger. They both give you 1 sigil slot, yet 1 dagger will only give you 2/3 skills. The dagger is inferior to staff in what it gives, yet costs the same. Getting 2 daggers will bring you pretty much on par with the staff(+1 extra sigil, which I also find unfair), but at double the cost. When it comes to normal weapons, it’s…meh. But when it comes to legendaries, that double the cost thing becomes pretty significant.

I’ll throw one more example your way.

Let’s say GW2 costs $60. And let’s say Half Life 3 comes out for $90, but you find yourself enjoying HL3 twice as much as GW2. Should Anet reduce the price of GW2 to $45?
Anet chose the price point of $60 because they felt it was a reasonable amount of money for the game they were producing. People paid that price to play because they felt it was a reasonable amount to pay for a game like this. Some people choose to save their money and not play GW2 and get HL3. Are those people who are potentially having twice as much fun as you with their HL3 going to really upset you because they got more fun for their money?

Again, already happened. When Tera came out, it was 50-70 bucks. When GW2 came out…Tera went down to 30 and is currently $20. And if you think about it, ANet didn’t just pull that number out of a lucky hat. Pretty much every p2p/b2p game is around 50-70 bucks on release. It’s not like GW2 is 65, x2 game is 250 and x3 game is 5. They don’t just pick a number that sounds right, they compare their game to other games and base their price on that. Because that’s what most people would spend on a game.

DigitalKirin.9714:

Orion Magus.5348:

It would make more sense to look at it as I can pay 1,000 tokens for a sword and shield, OR I could pay 1,000 tokens for a Great sword. Every player has the same option… how is this vengeful?

What about 10,000 tokens for a sword+shield or Gswd? If you got 69 tokens per run of a dungeon, that’d be… 145 runs. Would you get dungeon weapons if they required you to do this?

Unsure what your even doing here. I was not holding up 1000 tokens as an exact measurement of what these items should actualy cost, but using it because it displays that it is the same cost to outfit a character with 5 weapon skills. Replace that 1000 with 10 and it would mean the same thing.

I did this because you seem confused about the fact that having equal pricing for 2 one handed weapons and 1 two handed weapons doesn’t negatively affect other players

DigitalKirin.9714:

When a person creates a character, how often is Cost of weapon the #1 priority behind choosing class, build, traits?

Often, a player starts with something like “I want to play a Thief!” or “I want to play some kind of Support build!” The Desire to play x class or y build then eventually translates into the Value a player places on the weapon that will support such builds. Why do some thieves play p/p builds instead of always using shortbow? The cost is obviously more expensive as you’ve pointed out. Because the value of playing the build they Want to play is worth it.

I believe this makes my point. At character creation and for most of the game up until you start equipping exotics, ascended gear, and legendaries (mystic forge items that take tier 6 mats fall in here as well) the player won’t be aware of the fact that it will cost them so much more to equip their weapons should they play with 2 one handed weapons. A lot of this is because of the drastic price increases at “end game” and short of reducing the price of everything, which would be a shotgun solution to a problem better solved with a sniper rifle, reducing the price of 1 handed weapons makes more sense.

In a vacuum, without taking into account play style, weapon skill selection, and encounter requirements sure I guess you could say, well a player values the look of pistols more so that’s what they buy. It’s not about personally placing more value on the pistol skin, but rather that the game mechanics make it a more viable weapon in certain situations. This circles back to choice. If there was a 2 handed weapon that preformed the same function as a pistol (rifle maybe) available for the thief then the price discrepancy could be a style tax or something and as such be a player choice.

DigitalKirin.9714:

Value, an attribute a player gives to an object, may sometimes be even linked to a non-monetary function of the object, such as aesthetics or prestige. Have you ever bought a piece of armor just for sheer looks and immediately transmuted it onto an existing piece of armor?
What if someone wanted Pow/Tough/Vit armor from SE, but loved the looks of the Arah dungeon set? Getting the Arah skins will essentially double the token expense but increase their stat performance by 0%. That is “unfair” by your definition (twice the price for the same performance) – once they’ve gotten their first set, should they be allowed to get the Arah skins for free just to transmute?

Of course as a player you can buy whatever you want just for the heck of it. You brought up the idea of maximizing your spending power by evaluating opportunity cost and then held that up as what players should do instead of complaining about unfair pricing.

As for attaining skins, it is still the same cost to attain a set of dungeon armor skins if I were to wear light, medium, or heavy armor. Thus it is fair because no matter what armor type I have I am paying the same for the dungeon look.

On the other hand if I wanted to transmute the look of weapons it would cost almost double to do 2 one handed weapons over 1 two handed weapon.

DigitalKirin.9714:

Orion Magus.5348:

just confused as to why you think that a dual wielding character should be penalized for wielding 2 weapons. Or from the other side why should 2 handed weapon users be rewarded for only using 1 big weapon?

I’d read this last night and I considered making another point by point response, however, I think most salient points have already been made for both sides. So I’ll simply say that I think the essence of the discussion comes down to this statement above in quotes.

You perceive the price as a punishment, hence your word ‘penalize’.

I perceive things as Opportunity Cost. If something costs more than the effort to get it, I wouldn’t get it. If I can maximize my spending power somewhere, then I would do so wherever I can.

Much earlier in the thread, I’d asked the question, though nobody answered it, “If the price of weapons went to 500 tokens for 1h weapons and 1000 tokens for 2h weapons, wouldn’t this be fair? Would you be happy with it?”

I still do wonder in complete honesty, can people answer this question? What if the cost was 5,000/10,000? Etc. etc.

You’re kind of rambling here, but yes if 1h cost 5,000 and 2h cost 10,000 it would be fair.

DigitalKirin.9714:

TWMagimay was the one who used RL comparisons. (French revolution, October revolution, slavery.)

DigitalKirin.9714:

If I may regale you with a bit of a tale. A parable if you will.

There was a farmer who needed farmhands, so in the morning he went to town and hired a bunch of people for $100 to work until evening…………..(continued)

Sooo………

Yeah 150 per 1hs / 300 for 1 2hs. That sounds right…

TWMagimay.9057:

Again, already happened. When Tera came out, it was 50-70 bucks. When GW2 came out…Tera went down to 30 and is currently $20. And if you think about it, ANet didn’t just pull that number out of a lucky hat. Pretty much every p2p/b2p game is around 50-70 bucks on release. It’s not like GW2 is 65, x2 game is 250 and x3 game is 5. They don’t just pick a number that sounds right, they compare their game to other games and base their price on that. Because that’s what most people would spend on a game.

I tried Tera. It actually was $10 for 2 copies. Make female characters. Even at level 10, they look amazing and scantily clad. XD The game world is beautiful, too. It’s a decent enough game, just there’s parts that make it feel like 2005 instead of almost 2013. That, and there’s over-sexed character models alongside cartoon creatures and little girls (Elin) makes it feel a bit creepy.

On the topic of weapons pricing – I finally finished up my 3rd 80, and was shocked at TP prices. I hadn’t paid much attention for a while, and had assumed there was at least some truth in the “gloom and doom” of gear prices getting ruined by the big chest drops from the events. NOT! Wow prices have doubled and some!

Fortunately I had enough tokens and whatnot banked to get a full set of armor and a couple dungeon weapons. Pity for new players who’re just getting their first 80 now.

I’ve seen a lot of things in mmo forums, but I think this is the first retelling of a Biblical parable. Kudos.

If you are talking about the TP…prices are subject to as much as the market will bear and still give the consignee a sale. Sorry you think the prices are high…but you aren’t the one gathering, buying and making the weapons. Not to mention leveling the crafter. You aren’t, technically, paying for a Greatsword…you are paying for a service.

If you aren’t talking about the TP, why are you wasting coin buying the trash from npc vendors?