Guild Wars 2

Raf.1078:

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?

The pricing that’s under control of the game designers is what’s relevant.

This includes vendor weapons which really aren’t trash, not sure why you’d say that. I can see that not all of ’em have the stats you might prefer, but they work great.

The contentious pricing issue is that, for example, an ascalonian greatsword is 390 tokens, whereas an ascalonian scepter is 300 tokens. Similar for other options, invaders. And the reqs for crafting aren’t scaled for 2h over 1h (the diff is 1 ori bar or ancient plank for a part)

BLTP prices are whatever the market collectively decides.

Raf.1078:

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?

Obviously i was talking about Karma and Tokens.

FLFW.3105:

Raf.1078:

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?

Obviously i was talking about Karma and Tokens.

Its not that obvious. Nowhere in your original post did you state that. Maybe I missed something in the thread though as I didn’t read all of it.

Orion Magus.5348:

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

This is essentially what all of the debate boils down to. If you only care about 2h weapons costing twice as much as 1h weapons without considering their intrinsic worth, then I don’t see how you can consider yourself logical.

I’d like to give a brief redux of the posts leading up to here as well as my final thoughts.

FLFW: Pricing on two 1h weapons is twice as expensive as buying one 2h weapon.
DigitalKirin: So you want to increase the price of 2h weapons to 600?
Mechanix: No, the price of 1h weapons should be dropped to half of the price of 2h weapons.
DigitalKirin: Why not 300/600?
TWMagimay: Fairness is determined when you compare your situation to everyone elses situation. If everything’s equal, everything’s fair.
DigitalKirin: If you base your decisions only on what someone else pays and don’t consider what that item is worth to you, I don’t think you’re being logical.
Orion Magus: People who choose to buy two 1h weapons are being penalized compared to people buying one 2h weapon.
DigitalKirin: Okay, but people are still buying two 1h weapons for their setups. Perhaps even with the increased cost over 1h weapons, buying the weapons is still worth it to them.
Orion Magus: The fact of the matter is that there is a price difference. Fairness dictates that 2h weapons cost double the price of 1h weapons.
DigitalKirin: But is 5000 tokens a fair price for a 1h weapon? You’d be okay with paying 5,000 tokens so long as anyone who buys a 2h weapon has to pay 10,000?
Orion Magus: Yes.

I find it interesting that people were so caught up in the issue of equity, they never noticed that I never denied equity. My first posts basically said, “Why not 300/600?” To this end, Orion Magus and I agree that 300/600 is a good price.

People initially wanted cheaper, but their only reason for cheaper was “because it’s fair.” But “fairness” in this case is merely an excuse to hide behind so that people could complain about 1h weapons being too expensive. “Fairness” as the definition others have given it so far means that 300/600 is fair, just as 5,000/10,000 is also fair.

What is strange to me is that people were so caught up with the issue of equity (everything has to be absolutely fair) that some people were willing to give up the value of intrinsic worth(how much time are you willing to spend to obtain this item?).

Final note:

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

I’m so glad you enjoyed, Amos. I did have to stretch the intention of said Biblical parable a good bit, but I really enjoyed the overall results.

Overall, I hope people learned a good bit about themselves through this. What are you willing to give up so that things will be fair?

TWMagimay had mentioned briefly the Bolshevik Revolution, however, I figured talking about Communism would have been too easy of a target. >_> Plus, someone had already complained about RL topics being introduced into the debate.

First off DigitalKirin.9714 in your above post you meant to quote Ahlen.7591 Not me.

Secondly a lot of what you broke the conversation down to is very skewed and I would advise anyone newly coming into this thread to read the whole thing not just your cliff notes version.

I find it interesting that people were so caught up in the issue of equity, they never noticed that I never denied equity. My first posts basically said, “Why not 300/600?” To this end, Orion Magus and I agree that 300/600 is a good price.

Shenanigans (as far as denying equality). That’s really all there is to say since you have been disputing equality (going to assume you misspelled there) the entire thread.

I did agree that 300/600 would be fair, I also implied that 150/300 would be fair. The ratio is more important for this discussion than actual numbers.

People initially wanted cheaper, but their only reason for cheaper was “because it’s fair.” But “fairness” in this case is merely an excuse to hide behind so that people could complain about 1h weapons being too expensive. “Fairness” as the definition others have given it so far means that 300/600 is fair, just as 5,000/10,000 is also fair.

Wondering if we are talking about the same thing. Given that there are already in place set costs for 1 handed and 2 handed weapons it would be logical to assume that one of these price points is in fact the intended cost and the other is an oversight when talking about fair pricing. To that end either 1 handed weapons should be brought down or 2 handed weapons should be brought up.

The stated comments that 1 handed weapon prices should be brought down is because that this would overall have a more positive reaction from the player base. I’m basing this conclusion off of the different reactions that happen when perceived buffs and nerfs happen in the game. This wasn’t a whine because I wanted an all out price cut because I am greedy and wanted a discount. Rather a suggested solution that would (imo) have a positive effect on the community.

Your repeated use of high token values ex. 5,000/10,000 when talking about dungeon weapons was correct in the ratio but the inflated numbers themselves served no purpose to the discussion.

Orion Magus.5348:

First off DigitalKirin.9714 in your above post you meant to quote Ahlen.7591 Not me.

Ah, my most sincere apologies.

Orion Magus.5348:

Secondly a lot of what you broke the conversation down to is very skewed and I would advise anyone newly coming into this thread to read the whole thing not just your cliff notes version.

Sounds good, I think it is a good read, but then again, I’m weird like that.

Orion Magus.5348:

Shenanigans (as far as denying equality). That’s really all there is to say since you have been disputing equality (going to assume you misspelled there) the entire thread.

I did agree that 300/600 would be fair, I also implied that 150/300 would be fair. The ratio is more important for this discussion than actual numbers.

I meant equity. I didn’t misspell the word.

The ratio is only part of the discussion. The root of contention lay when I asked why people preferred the lower number. The reason was because of the ratio, however, that fails to be an adequate reason. If ratio is the only concern, then 5,000/10,000 is just as good as 150/300.

By saying ratio is the only thing that is important when demanding a lower price, such as 200/390(this was mentioned early on) or 150/300, people are merely trying to obfuscate their true intentions.

Orion Magus.5348:

The stated comments that 1 handed weapon prices should be brought down is because that this would overall have a more positive reaction from the player base.

A completely valid reason to put forth, and – I might mention – the first one that actually talks about the value of the weapons as opposed to just saying that the ratio is the only reason as to why the price should be brought down.

(Funny enough, you’ll find that someone will always have a reason to complain about change. If 150/300 were to be implemented, you’d have people demanding a refund of tokens. People are funny like that sometimes.)

Orion Magus.5348:

This wasn’t a whine because I wanted an all out price cut because I am greedy and wanted a discount. Rather a suggested solution that would (imo) have a positive effect on the community.

I don’t believe you are the type of person to whine about something like this, however, I feel that the reason the first post happened here in the first place was because of someone’s desire to gripe.

Orion Magus.5348:

Your repeated use of high token values ex. 5,000/10,000 when talking about dungeon weapons was correct in the ratio but the inflated numbers themselves served no purpose to the discussion.

It does serve a purpose. You agree that the numbers are inflated. It shows that despite the ratio being “fair” by the definition given by others so far, the amount is something that actually Isn’t fair because the value of a dagger isn’t 5,000 tokens, nor is a staff worth 10,000 tokens.

The question I ask is: What is the most reasonable amount you should have to pay for a dagger, and why? 5,000 is “inflated” as you said. Which price is more valid, 150 or 300?

Just because people want to pay less, does that mean that it should sell for less?

I am confused, are people arguing or agreeing?

and this issue may be better summed up by saying “weapon sets” should cost around the same, not “weapons”

The only people that would argue against this are those that are getting a good deal right now (ie only needing one weapon for a full weaponset)

TP is different to vendors, that is obviously determined by players demand/supply.

Quaz.4931:

I am confused, are people arguing or agreeing?

It’s a bit of a splitting hairs kind of thing. I disagree with people using ratio as the only metric.

I think that understanding the worth of a weapon is an incredibly important factor that up until now people have been failing to comprehend.

People are saying that equality is the only factor that should go into determining the price of 1h and 2h weapons.

What I saw on the dungeon vendor:
390 tokens for a 2h
300 tokens for a main-hand 1h
210 tokens for an off-hand.

I think this is a workable set of ratios. Cuz you get 2 sigils, and more flexibility with 1hers.

The recipes, on the other hand… taking 5 ectos whether it’s 2h main-h or off-h… That’s where there’s no parity.

Wow the trolling in this thread amazes me…

Is it that hard to grasp simple logic? It’s unfair that 2 one handers cost more than a zweihander. But this is the new and improved ANet we’re talking about so silly things like this existing in the game don’t surprise me one bit.

Nor do I really care, but like I said, simple logic.

DigitalKirin.9714:

Final note:

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

I’m so glad you enjoyed, Amos. I did have to stretch the intention of said Biblical parable a good bit, but I really enjoyed the overall results.

It sounds like we both know the original story and it’s intention – and I don’t think you stretched it much at all. I think it applies very well here.