Not Account Wide. Not even character wide. My suggestions is to allow us to unlock runes and sigils per slot. This ensures that runes and sigils continue to have value since you still have to get a bunch of them. It also ensures that the recovery tool continues to have some, though less, value, because rather than getting six of an expensive rune you could get one and five recovery tools to unlock it across your set. Or apply it, recover it, then sell it again.
But once you have it unlocked if something happens, or you want to try something else, you don’t have to worry about it because you can quickly and easily swap back.
I feel like this is the fairest system to maintain something of the status quo, while also bringing the wardrobe functionality finally up in line with how transmutation used to work.
Also, since it would be unlocked to the slot specifically, the only way to unlock the rune or sigil would be to apply it to the slot.
Here’s my suggestion in the last one of these threads:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Runes-and-Sigils/first#post4882713
For this suggestion to work, the following must happen:
1. Crafting Recipes for all Runes/Sigils would need to be introduced.
2. All Crafting Recipes would need to be redone so that the material requirement are many TIMES higher (we’re talking full stacks of refined materials and multiple tens of rare crafting materials).
3. Only Runes/Sigils created after the change would unlock the Rune/Sigil for your account. Runes/Sigils that are available now would still be able to be socketed and used, but would not unlock the Rune/Sigil for your account.
4. Runes/Sigils would unlock for each SLOT (so you will need 6 runes to unlock it for all armor slots and 2 Sigils to unlock it for first and second Sigils).
5. Activating an unlocked Rune/Sigil will REPLACE the existing Rune/Sigil (meaning if you bought an old Rune off the TP and were using it, then used an unlocked Rune over it you would have to buy the Rune again if you wanted to go back to it).
1) No they wouldn’t, why would that have to be?
2) Again, no, what does this have to do with this in any way?
3) I was very clear, this isn’t about account unlocking. It is literally the first thing I said. Try reading, even the tiniest amount before spamming a canned response why not?
4) This is specifically my suggestion. I read the last suggestion asking to unlock them for ascended, said this is stupid, and posted this in what I think is a more reasonable suggestion, and because I don’t want it to just be one in a glut of useless responses. I rather it be one in a glut of useless suggestions.
5) No again to this, because there is no reason to have old and new. That’s just silly. It also ensures that this would never happen because it is always all or nothing on this type of implementation.
1. Because in order to make the Rune/Sigils unlockable, they must become much more expensive. In order to do this, the version that unlocks it for your slot/account/character/whatever arbitrary thing you think is unique but isn’t would need to be crafted.
2. See 1.
3. Any kind of unlocking is the same. The specific version of permanent unlocking from the previous thread is irrelevant.
4. This is the part where I basically recommended the same thing you are, slot based unlocking in order to maintain a high value for runes/sigils.
5. You cannot allow the existing runes/sigils to unlock, that would break the economy.
1. Because in order to make the Rune/Sigils unlockable, they must become much more expensive. In order to do this, the version that unlocks it for your slot/account/character/whatever arbitrary thing you think is unique but isn’t would need to be crafted.
2. See 1.
3. Any kind of unlocking is the same. The specific version of permanent unlocking from the previous thread is irrelevant.
4. This is the part where I basically recommended the same thing you are, slot based unlocking in order to maintain a high value for runes/sigils.
5. You cannot allow the existing runes/sigils to unlock, that would break the economy.
1. The price of runes/sigils is based on the demand. The demand would go up thus the prices would go up. Problem solved.
2. See 1
3. If it unlocks per slot not account/character price/demand would stay higher. (plus there would be no getting the sigil/runes back once unlocked on weapon) thus demand supply lower/demand higher.
4. I agree
5. I don’t understand how that would break the economy. Prices change a bit? Don’t they anyways when something new comes out? No point at all in dividing new from old.
How would it break the economy? How would anything at all change. This would not be account wide, so the ones that exist would still have to be used regardless. They can’t just be unlocked by virtue of existing. So anything you have applied would be unlocked to the slot it was applied to, on the character that had it, and nothing more.
They don’t need to be more expensive and they certainly don’t need to be craftable, that would actually lower their value because they could all be potentially mass produced.
It isn’t irrelevant. For the most part once a person is likely to buy a single set of runes or sigils, for a character at most twice. Once for exotics, and once for ascended. So the most this would do would be to make it once. It would also allow them to return to the state before wardrobe where it was reasonable to apply runes to sub exotic gear then transmute them into the level 80 equipment.
This is the most reasonable situation that I can think of to just return things to the way they were. It won’t break the economy, it will simply allow people to upgrade their gear more often without having to worry about what is applied into it.
Anyone who understand the system isn’t buying runes until 80, even though they’re level 60 and could be applied much earlier. The reason being that the current system punishes you for doing that by forcing you to either recover the runes or buy new ones. People aren’t doing that when it’s easily to simply not use runes until you can put them into something worth having.
This could actually stimulate the economy because people would be more willing to purchase more than a single rune set for their armor since they would know that once it’s unlocked they won’t lose it. Letting them mix and match or apply as needed. People, again, don’t buy multiple sets, since they know in the current system it would overwrite the old one, unless they have multiple sets of armor.
Your complaints and argument really aren’t reasonable.
1. The price of runes/sigils is based on the demand. The demand would go up thus the prices would go up. Problem solved.
I’m confused, why would this make demand go up? I understand you would need to buy the rune ONCE to try something new, then you could switch back for free… Wouldn’t that make the demand on the rune you already have go down?
Anyone who understand the system isn’t buying runes until 80, even though they’re level 60 and could be applied much earlier. The reason being that the current system punishes you for doing that by forcing you to either recover the runes or buy new ones. People aren’t doing that when it’s easily to simply not use runes until you can put them into something worth having.
Can’t people still use BL salvage kits to get their runes back (as long as it’s not karma or wvwvw gear)?
I don’t really see this “Stimulating” the economy, most people want to use the best rune set for their class/build. Those that do like trying different things pay a bit more to experiment and play around. With this idea, many that currently don’t try new runes still won’t, and many that do, will continue they just won’t have to re-buy runes they already have. Which would reduce demand.
(edited by Miku.6297)
Most people have 2 good sigils on a weapon and 1 good rune set. Making more options viable without loosing the first one would make the demand go up. As they can buy more rune/sigils sets even if it is for only 1 time. Its better then not buying at all because of the steep changing price.
1. Because in order to make the Rune/Sigils unlockable, they must become much more expensive. In order to do this, the version that unlocks it for your slot/account/character/whatever arbitrary thing you think is unique but isn’t would need to be crafted.
2. See 1.
3. Any kind of unlocking is the same. The specific version of permanent unlocking from the previous thread is irrelevant.
4. This is the part where I basically recommended the same thing you are, slot based unlocking in order to maintain a high value for runes/sigils.
5. You cannot allow the existing runes/sigils to unlock, that would break the economy.1. The price of runes/sigils is based on the demand. The demand would go up thus the prices would go up. Problem solved.
2. See 1
3. If it unlocks per slot not account/character price/demand would stay higher. (plus there would be no getting the sigil/runes back once unlocked on weapon) thus demand supply lower/demand higher.
4. I agree
5. I don’t understand how that would break the economy. Prices change a bit? Don’t they anyways when something new comes out? No point at all in dividing new from old.
Initial demand would spike, followed by a permanent END of demand as the unlocks were completed. We’ve already got a glut of low demand Runes/Sigils occupying a large swath of the market, as we progress, that would become 0 demand (even for the currently demanded runes/sigils), but would not limit supply leading to a huge oversupply of items with 0 function (and thus 0 value).
When they made dyes account bound, they modified the main way people acquire dye (basically removing your ability to ever get one unless you are trying to get one). They would need to either do something like I posted about above (creating a new type of Rune/Sigil that is crafted and which unlocks it for the slot/character/account/whatever), or remove runes/sigils from the vast majority of dropped gear in order to limit future supply.
Any time you have a permanent system, demand will approach 0 with time. To combat that, you have to limit supply sources to only those where generating the item is intentional. Having any kind of ambient faucet for runes/sigils would render them valueless in no time.
1. The price of runes/sigils is based on the demand. The demand would go up thus the prices would go up. Problem solved.
I’m confused, why would this make demand go up? I understand you would need to buy the rune ONCE to try something new, then you could switch back for free… Wouldn’t that make the demand on the rune you already have go down?
Anyone who understand the system isn’t buying runes until 80, even though they’re level 60 and could be applied much earlier. The reason being that the current system punishes you for doing that by forcing you to either recover the runes or buy new ones. People aren’t doing that when it’s easily to simply not use runes until you can put them into something worth having.
Can’t people still use BL salvage kits to get their runes back (as long as it’s not karma or wvwvw gear)?
This is a tough one to decide, and would come up to how ANet wanted to play it. One way to do it would be to say that if it was already in the gear before it became soulbound that you could salvage it out. Another would be to say that once it’s unlocked the only way to pull it out is with the recovery tool, but still only if it was physically applied to that item, not applied through wardrobe.
Either seem reasonable to me, it just might be easier to implement the second one.
(edited by Kal Spiro.9745)
Most people have 2 good sigils on a weapon and 1 good rune set. Making more options viable without loosing the first one would make the demand go up. As they can buy more rune/sigils sets even if it is for only 1 time. Its better then not buying at all because of the steep changing price.
Many still wouldn’t buy, do to it not being the “meta” Those that do buy to try different things would no longer need to re-bu them thus removing their demand from the market. As it stands now either option is purely speculation on what players would do.
For what it’s worth I would love being able to switch my runes/sigils on the fly. I just think it would negativly impact the value of some runes/sigils.
Initial demand would spike, followed by a permanent END of demand as the unlocks were completed. We’ve already got a glut of low demand Runes/Sigils occupying a large swath of the market, as we progress, that would become 0 demand (even for the currently demanded runes/sigils), but would not limit supply leading to a huge oversupply of items with 0 function (and thus 0 value).
This is already the state of things, though. Once you have your sets you’re done. There is no reason to buy more.
Since this has not actually impacted demand, because people keep making new characters and need to get the runes and sigils all over again, which they would still need to do in this system.
This is also how it was when we have transmutations, and it hasn’t changed significantly, short of inflation in general. So, status quo.
When you say “per slot”, do you mean:
A. You unlock the rune for, say, the head slot on character X. And then that rune is accessible for any armour piece that character X has in his head slot; or
B. You unlock the rune for character X’s Zojja’s Masque. It will continue to be accessible on that piece of gear, but if X changes to an Ahamid’s Masque, it would need to be unlocked again for that.
I definitely support B, if that is your suggestion.
When you say “per slot”, do you mean:
A. You unlock the rune for, say, the head slot on character X. And then that rune is accessible for any armour piece that character X has in his head slot; or
B. You unlock the rune for character X’s Zojja’s Masque. It will continue to be accessible on that piece of gear, but if X changes to an Ahamid’s Masque, it would need to be unlocked again for that.I definitely support B.
No, definitely A. The idea is to provide a reasonable translation to how transmutation worked before wardrobes without destroying the economy.
One disagrees, one agrees, but I don’t think this suggestion would destroy anything, and would be more akin to quality of life.
A would be a huge quality of life improvement, but would definitely hurt the market… Getting unlimited uses of the rune for every armor set you have or ever get would be a QoL improvement, mainly because you wouldn’t ever need to buy the rune for that char again…
When you say “per slot”, do you mean:
A. You unlock the rune for, say, the head slot on character X. And then that rune is accessible for any armour piece that character X has in his head slot; or
B. You unlock the rune for character X’s Zojja’s Masque. It will continue to be accessible on that piece of gear, but if X changes to an Ahamid’s Masque, it would need to be unlocked again for that.I definitely support B.
No, definitely A. The idea is to provide a reasonable translation to how transmutation worked before wardrobes without destroying the economy.
One disagrees, one agrees, but I don’t think this suggestion would destroy anything, and would be more akin to quality of life.
Ah. Well then. My B suggestion would provide a lot of convenience to anyone who likes to change around the runes/sigils on builds, but without having to destroy anything or have multiple gear sets with stats. But would not create a situation where players can unlock everything and then they’re done forever, like in A. It would also probably be more stable, creating a modest and continuing increase in demand.
A would obviously be a lot more convenient to everyone, though would encourage people to buy a lot of stuff they’ll never use.
JS already said the the superior rune/sigil market has to be greatly overhauled (because of the glut of cheap unused runes/sigils) before they make any significant changes to it.
So unless you provide an alternative sink for unwanted runes/sigils, your suggestion wont be implemented.
When you say “per slot”, do you mean:
A. You unlock the rune for, say, the head slot on character X. And then that rune is accessible for any armour piece that character X has in his head slot; or
B. You unlock the rune for character X’s Zojja’s Masque. It will continue to be accessible on that piece of gear, but if X changes to an Ahamid’s Masque, it would need to be unlocked again for that.I definitely support B.
No, definitely A. The idea is to provide a reasonable translation to how transmutation worked before wardrobes without destroying the economy.
One disagrees, one agrees, but I don’t think this suggestion would destroy anything, and would be more akin to quality of life.
Ah. Well then. My B suggestion would provide a lot of convenience to anyone who likes to change around the runes/sigils on builds, but without having to destroy anything or have multiple gear sets with stats. But would not create a situation where players can unlock everything and then they’re done forever, like in A. It would also probably be more stable, creating a modest and continuing increase in demand.
A would obviously be a lot more convenient to everyone, though would encourage people to buy a lot of stuff they’ll never use.
That’s true, I wasn’t even thinking about the completionist angle. They come on here complaining all the time, so it’s almost guaranteed they’d be going nuts buying every rune set there is just so they can have them all unlocked on all their gear.
This concept of unlocking everything and be done forever really doesn’t make sense to me. Who is not already doing that, but with only a single set per armor? Who, also, is carrying around multiple armor sets with same runes in them? Wouldn’t you be using a different set of runes if you have armor designed to emphasis different stats? I know that’s what I do, such that having the first rune available to the second set does me no good because it’s not for that set.
JS already said the the superior rune/sigil market has to be greatly overhauled (because of the glut of cheap unused runes/sigils) before they make any significant changes to it.
So unless you provide an alternative sink for unwanted runes/sigils, your suggestion wont be implemented.
Let them be salvaged for rare mats?
JS already said the the superior rune/sigil market has to be greatly overhauled (because of the glut of cheap unused runes/sigils) before they make any significant changes to it.
So unless you provide an alternative sink for unwanted runes/sigils, your suggestion wont be implemented.
That seems more like work for the balance team and content designers than the economist…
JS already said the the superior rune/sigil market has to be greatly overhauled (because of the glut of cheap unused runes/sigils) before they make any significant changes to it.
So unless you provide an alternative sink for unwanted runes/sigils, your suggestion wont be implemented.
That seems more like work for the balance team and content designers than the economist…
I wouldnt know what the balance team has to work on, if stats of runes and sigils stay the same but their sinks are being greatly altered.
Not Account Wide. Not even character wide. My suggestions is to allow us to unlock runes and sigils per slot. This ensures that runes and sigils continue to have value since you still have to get a bunch of them. It also ensures that the recovery tool continues to have some, though less, value, because rather than getting six of an expensive rune you could get one and five recovery tools to unlock it across your set. Or apply it, recover it, then sell it again.
But once you have it unlocked if something happens, or you want to try something else, you don’t have to worry about it because you can quickly and easily swap back.
I feel like this is the fairest system to maintain something of the status quo, while also bringing the wardrobe functionality finally up in line with how transmutation used to work.
Also, since it would be unlocked to the slot specifically, the only way to unlock the rune or sigil would be to apply it to the slot.
gear stats, and sigil/runes should be unlock based, in some way shape or form. But i doubt it will ever happen.
Most people have 2 good sigils on a weapon and 1 good rune set. Making more options viable without loosing the first one would make the demand go up. As they can buy more rune/sigils sets even if it is for only 1 time. Its better then not buying at all because of the steep changing price.
Many still wouldn’t buy, do to it not being the “meta” Those that do buy to try different things would no longer need to re-bu them thus removing their demand from the market. As it stands now either option is purely speculation on what players would do.
For what it’s worth I would love being able to switch my runes/sigils on the fly. I just think it would negativly impact the value of some runes/sigils.
Good point. At some point the demand from the market would disapear I agree.
But my figuring was for example: I have a zerker ascended greatsword with sigil might/force. Those 2 sigils are useful in most situations, but I would want to swap them depending on my character. But I’m never going to replace a sigil because as soon as I did I loose the 5g+ I put into buying the sigil.
So at this stage I am out of the market, completely unless an amazing sigil comes out (very unlikely). Where as if unlocking was implemented I would at least be in the market enough to buy 1 of each of the other ones. (which is 1 of each one more then I would buy now). Because at the end of the day I will be out of the market 1 way or another.
Hopefully that makes sense =)
I think solution A from the above suggestions is too big a change, but I do like solution B. It offers convenience without widereaching changes and stimulates the market a bit since smany people will buy situational runes at least once (maybe even multiple times for different items). All it takes is changing the rune slot into a list of runes that were previously used on the item, from which you pick one to use.
Not affiliated with ArenaNet or NCSOFT. No support is provided.
All assets, page layout, visual style belong to ArenaNet and are used solely to replicate the original design and preserve the original look and feel.
Contact /u/e-scrape-artist on reddit if you encounter a bug.