Guild Wars 2

There should be a way to exchange a Carapace Box if you manage to get one from a Lost Bandit Chest and it’s a piece you already have all the skins of. I just bought the last of the boots with 1000 Crests and then I get a box of boots from a chest not 10 minutes later…

If not the ability to trade, at least an option to trade in the box for less than 1000 Crests, so we don’t have to work as much for the pieces we do need. I would settle for 500 Crests.

In the event that you did not know: You can still open the box, select an item, then salvage it for ectos.

0-3 ectos is not worth it. I did know this, hence why I am making this topic.

People asked for account bound skins that are obtained via game play and not hrough the gem store or trading post.

’This is what you get.
Once you got the rewards, they become useless to you.

I think I still have a valid point.

If people could trade in chests that they didn’t need then they would just farm whichever episode gave them the quickest chests. They’d then likely get the chests much faster than had they farmed the crests or gotten it from the primary acquisition method.

People wanted rewards that could not be bought/sold on the TP. People wanted rewards that did not rely on RNG. People wanted rewards that they could work towards. They received all of this with season two with the exception of the chest pieces and the mordrem parts released this episode. What you’re seeing now is exactly the type of system, including the consequences, that people have been saying that they wanted.

Ayrilana.1396:

except

Why does this get to be a minor afterthought?

People did not get “exactly the type of system, including the consequences, that people have been saying that they wanted.”

Dave.2536:

Ayrilana.1396:

except

Why does this get to be a minor afterthought?

People did not get “exactly the type of system, including the consequences, that people have been saying that they wanted.”

What you bolded was supposed to be exception which I corrected.

People did get exactly what they wanted.

• None of the rewards can be sold on the TP.
• All of the rewards, with the exception of those from the current LS, can be bought with tokens allowing players to see a form of progress.

The only RNG is with the current episode’s items which may or may not be changed with the next game update. Players are complaining about getting a glove armor box and not being able to do anything with it other than salvage. This is exactly what would happen in a system where you cannot sell an item on the TP.

You seem to think everyone wanted the same thing, which couldn’t be further from the truth.

• None of the rewards can be sold on the TP.
• All of the rewards, with the exception of those from the current LS, can be bought with tokens allowing players to see a form of progress.

No. People wanted skins outside of the gemstore. Other than that, what they wanted varied wildly.

Some people wanted reduced, minimal, or zero RNG in items.
Some people wanted rewards exclusive to completing content.
Some people wanted (at least did not mind) a token system.
Other people may have wanted something completely different.

You’ve fallen short not only by mis-categorizing players’ wishes, but just by attempting to categorize in the first place.

It’s easy to prove something right when that something is a straw man. Now please try to do it with reality.

EDIT: let me clarify that I am very happy that these LS skins were obtainable outside the gemstore. I was very happy to see some challenge behind the Luminescent skins (completing the LS achievements) and also substantial rewards for finishing the achievements and collections (the ascended armor box and sinister accessories).

That said, some episodes felt much grindier than others, and I do not think this new system, as refreshing as it was, is beyond criticism and improvement.

Dave.2536:

You seem to think everyone wanted the same thing, which couldn’t be further from the truth.

• None of the rewards can be sold on the TP.
• All of the rewards, with the exception of those from the current LS, can be bought with tokens allowing players to see a form of progress.

No. People wanted skins outside of the gemstore. Other than that, what they wanted varied wildly.

Some people wanted reduced, minimal, or zero RNG in items.
Some people wanted rewards exclusive to completing content.
Some people wanted (at least did not mind) a token system.
Other people may have wanted something completely different.

You’ve fallen short not only by mis-categorizing players’ wishes, but just by attempting to categorize in the first place.

It’s easy to prove something right when that something is a straw man. Now please try to do it with reality.

EDIT: let me clarify that I am very happy that these LS skins were obtainable outside the gemstore. I was very happy to see some challenge behind the Luminescent skins (completing the LS achievements) and also substantial rewards for finishing the achievements and collections (the ascended armor box and sinister accessories).

That said, some episodes felt much grindier than others, and I do not think this new system, as refreshing as it was, is beyond criticism and improvement.

Here’s your problem:

People != Everyone

When I said people, I was not referring to everyone. You’re the one that applied “everyone” to my arguments so that you could easily argue against them.

Ayrilana.1396:

Here’s your problem:

People != Everyone

When I said people, I was not referring to everyone. You’re the one that applied “everyone” to my arguments so that you could easily argue against them.

So in other words, your argument is that you have no argument since it is (conveniently?) unclear what “people” you were talking about?

Be careful about how far you backtrack.

Dave.2536:

Ayrilana.1396:

Here’s your problem:

People != Everyone

When I said people, I was not referring to everyone. You’re the one that applied “everyone” to my arguments so that you could easily argue against them.

So in other words, your argument is that you have no argument since it is (conveniently?) unclear what “people” you were talking about?

Be careful about how far you backtrack.

It’s pretty clear what I was saying. Perhaps you should actually read my posts again rather than find words that are ambiguous enough that you can manipulate what their meanings are to further support whatever it is that you’re arguing. There’s no backtracking here. Just trying to clarify the attempt of you manipulating and twisting what I was saying.

Ayrilana.1396:

It’s pretty clear what I was saying.

Yes. “People” is clear. Got it. (lol)

Perhaps you should actually read my posts again rather than find words that are ambiguous enough that you can manipulate what their meanings are to further support whatever it is that you’re arguing.

I tried. I even tried to give you credit for having a mistaken argument rather than an empty one. It was you who corrected me.

On a serious note, perhaps you should be more clear? Without categorization and/or an everyone context to “people asked for xyz”, the statement carries zero value as a point or a counterpoint because it is too vague.

There’s no backtracking here. Just trying to clarify the attempt of you manipulating and twisting what I was saying.

You should follow your own advice about using non-ambiguous words in future posts.

Dave.2536:

Ayrilana.1396:

It’s pretty clear what I was saying.

Yes. “People” is clear. Got it. (lol)

Perhaps you should actually read my posts again rather than find words that are ambiguous enough that you can manipulate what their meanings are to further support whatever it is that you’re arguing.

I tried. I even tried to give you credit for having a mistaken argument rather than an empty one. It was you who corrected me.

On a serious note, perhaps you should be more clear? Without categorization and/or an everyone context to “people asked for xyz”, the statement carries zero value as a point or a counterpoint because it is too vague.

There’s no backtracking here. Just trying to clarify the attempt of you manipulating and twisting what I was saying.

You should follow your own advice about using non-ambiguous words in future posts.

People agree with both Ayrilana and even you. There are so many opinions! Ambiguous words ftw.

In regards to trading Carapace boxes, I personally feel like the current system is good as it is. As mentioned above, people could farm story chapters for easy carapace boxes. One could argue that this would add replay value to the story, but people like me find enough replay value in obtaining the achievements. Idk if there’s a wright or wrong answer, as this whole “issue” is mostly a matter of opinion.

Dave.2536:

Ayrilana.1396:

It’s pretty clear what I was saying.

Yes. “People” is clear. Got it. (lol)

Perhaps you should actually read my posts again rather than find words that are ambiguous enough that you can manipulate what their meanings are to further support whatever it is that you’re arguing.

I tried. I even tried to give you credit for having a mistaken argument rather than an empty one. It was you who corrected me.

On a serious note, perhaps you should be more clear? Without categorization and/or an everyone context to “people asked for xyz”, the statement carries zero value as a point or a counterpoint because it is too vague.

There’s no backtracking here. Just trying to clarify the attempt of you manipulating and twisting what I was saying.

You should follow your own advice about using non-ambiguous words in future posts.

If you read my posts and understood the context, you would have understood that I was not referring to everyone. It’s impossible to lump everyone under what category. I personally see nothing wrong with how we have things now which was reflected in my posts. Clearly since I don’t find anything wrong then there would probably be others that feel the same way. This would mean that not everyone feels the same way.

Instead you argued that I had empty arguments based on the usage of “people” rather than arguing against my arguments. I should not have to spell out every single thing that I say with disclaimers because some individuals prefer to twist and manipulate various meanings of words as their unable to present an argument against the argument itself or they just don’t know any better.

Ayrilana.1396:

Dave.2536:

Ayrilana.1396:

It’s pretty clear what I was saying.

Yes. “People” is clear. Got it. (lol)

Perhaps you should actually read my posts again rather than find words that are ambiguous enough that you can manipulate what their meanings are to further support whatever it is that you’re arguing.

I tried. I even tried to give you credit for having a mistaken argument rather than an empty one. It was you who corrected me.

On a serious note, perhaps you should be more clear? Without categorization and/or an everyone context to “people asked for xyz”, the statement carries zero value as a point or a counterpoint because it is too vague.

There’s no backtracking here. Just trying to clarify the attempt of you manipulating and twisting what I was saying.

You should follow your own advice about using non-ambiguous words in future posts.

If you read my posts and understood the context, you would have understood that I was not referring to everyone. It’s impossible to lump everyone under what category. I personally see nothing wrong with how we have things now which was reflected in my posts. Clearly since I don’t find anything wrong then there would probably be others that feel the same way. This would mean that not everyone feels the same way.

Instead you argued that I had empty arguments based on the usage of “people” rather than arguing against my arguments. I should not have to spell out every single thing that I say with disclaimers because some individuals prefer to twist and manipulate various meanings of words as their unable to present an argument against the argument itself or they just don’t know any better.

lol “Gold Jerry Gold”…. Pot meet kettle Just b/c u haven’t done it in this thread doesn’t mean you haven’t done the same thing in numerous other threads.

It’s widely accepted that the rng reward structure in this game is one of the game’s main flaws. Anet even goes so far as to acknowledge the rewards are in need of work, hence some of the new ways we are able to obtain some.

Essence Snow.3194:

Ayrilana.1396:

Dave.2536:

Ayrilana.1396:

It’s pretty clear what I was saying.

Yes. “People” is clear. Got it. (lol)

Perhaps you should actually read my posts again rather than find words that are ambiguous enough that you can manipulate what their meanings are to further support whatever it is that you’re arguing.

I tried. I even tried to give you credit for having a mistaken argument rather than an empty one. It was you who corrected me.

On a serious note, perhaps you should be more clear? Without categorization and/or an everyone context to “people asked for xyz”, the statement carries zero value as a point or a counterpoint because it is too vague.

There’s no backtracking here. Just trying to clarify the attempt of you manipulating and twisting what I was saying.

You should follow your own advice about using non-ambiguous words in future posts.

If you read my posts and understood the context, you would have understood that I was not referring to everyone. It’s impossible to lump everyone under what category. I personally see nothing wrong with how we have things now which was reflected in my posts. Clearly since I don’t find anything wrong then there would probably be others that feel the same way. This would mean that not everyone feels the same way.

Instead you argued that I had empty arguments based on the usage of “people” rather than arguing against my arguments. I should not have to spell out every single thing that I say with disclaimers because some individuals prefer to twist and manipulate various meanings of words as their unable to present an argument against the argument itself or they just don’t know any better.

lol “Gold Jerry Gold”…. Pot meet kettle Just b/c u haven’t done it in this thread doesn’t mean you haven’t done the same thing in numerous other threads.

It’s widely accepted that the rng reward structure in this game is one of the game’s main flaws. Anet even goes so far as to acknowledge the rewards are in need of work, hence some of the new ways we are able to obtain some.

I haven’t done the same thing in other threads. Thanks. What you see are people who would rather argue over the meaning of a post rather than the argument presented with the post. One of many reasons why I cut back on posting as it’s annoying to have arguments over what I meant rather than over what position I was taking.

Widely accepted? Are you sure? Any sources? Otherwise you’re doing the same thing that the other user accused me of including yourself.

eyeroll

I’ve a grand idea. Take your strawmans and other Debate Club crap back to high school. Picking at the minutiae of someone’s argument and calling the whole a fallacy does not invalidate it. All it does is muddy the thread.

Ayrilana.1396:

Essence Snow.3194:

Ayrilana.1396:

Dave.2536:

Ayrilana.1396:

It’s pretty clear what I was saying.

Yes. “People” is clear. Got it. (lol)

Perhaps you should actually read my posts again rather than find words that are ambiguous enough that you can manipulate what their meanings are to further support whatever it is that you’re arguing.

I tried. I even tried to give you credit for having a mistaken argument rather than an empty one. It was you who corrected me.

On a serious note, perhaps you should be more clear? Without categorization and/or an everyone context to “people asked for xyz”, the statement carries zero value as a point or a counterpoint because it is too vague.

There’s no backtracking here. Just trying to clarify the attempt of you manipulating and twisting what I was saying.

You should follow your own advice about using non-ambiguous words in future posts.

If you read my posts and understood the context, you would have understood that I was not referring to everyone. It’s impossible to lump everyone under what category. I personally see nothing wrong with how we have things now which was reflected in my posts. Clearly since I don’t find anything wrong then there would probably be others that feel the same way. This would mean that not everyone feels the same way.

Instead you argued that I had empty arguments based on the usage of “people” rather than arguing against my arguments. I should not have to spell out every single thing that I say with disclaimers because some individuals prefer to twist and manipulate various meanings of words as their unable to present an argument against the argument itself or they just don’t know any better.

lol “Gold Jerry Gold”…. Pot meet kettle Just b/c u haven’t done it in this thread doesn’t mean you haven’t done the same thing in numerous other threads.

It’s widely accepted that the rng reward structure in this game is one of the game’s main flaws. Anet even goes so far as to acknowledge the rewards are in need of work, hence some of the new ways we are able to obtain some.

I haven’t done the same thing in other threads. Thanks. What you see are people who would rather argue over the meaning of a post rather than the argument presented with the post. One of many reasons why I cut back on posting as it’s annoying to have arguments over what I meant rather than over what position I was taking.

Widely accepted? Are you sure? Any sources? Otherwise you’re doing the same thing that the other user accused me of including yourself.

Here’s one just recently about the very same topic:

DaShi.1368:

DaShi.1368:

I never said easy….

A lot of people equate pleasant as easy.

The reward acknowledgement goes all the way back to 2013 to Colin’s blog post. https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Colin-Johanson-Video-GW2-2013-Preview/first

Ayrilana.1396:

Instead you argued that I had empty arguments based on the usage of “people” rather than arguing against my arguments.

Nope, try again. Your argument basically amounted to “OP doesn’t have the right to criticize these new changes for LS rewards, because some people asked for some things that were somewhat implemented.”

Your “argument” fails for one of the below reasons:

• Your use of “people” somehow includes OP, which would be an overreach because not everyone asked for the things you accused “people” of asking for.
• Your use of “people” did not cover any significant (or clearly established) group of people and has no connection to OP himself, and the rest of your argument against these “people” is a straw man with no relation to this thread.

Sariel V.7024:

eyeroll

I’ve a grand idea. Take your strawmans and other Debate Club crap back to high school. Picking at the minutiae of someone’s argument and calling the whole a fallacy does not invalidate it. All it does is muddy the thread.

Muddies it even more than the fallacies (or ambiguities) themselves and “contributions” like yours?

My sides…

Dave.2536:

Ayrilana.1396:

Instead you argued that I had empty arguments based on the usage of “people” rather than arguing against my arguments.

Nope, try again. Your argument basically amounted to “OP doesn’t have the right to criticize these new changes for LS rewards, because some people asked for some things that were somewhat implemented.”

Your “argument” fails for one of the below reasons:

• Your use of “people” somehow includes OP, which would be an overreach because not everyone asked for the things you accused “people” of asking for.
• Your use of “people” did not cover any significant (or clearly established) group of people and has no connection to OP himself, and the rest of your argument against these “people” is a straw man with no relation to this thread.

Sariel V.7024:

eyeroll

I’ve a grand idea. Take your strawmans and other Debate Club crap back to high school. Picking at the minutiae of someone’s argument and calling the whole a fallacy does not invalidate it. All it does is muddy the thread.

Muddies it even more than the fallacies (or ambiguities) themselves and “contributions” like yours?

My sides…

I’m not going to take part in this discussion with you any further as you continue to argue over the meaning of my posts and make false accusations of what I was stating rather that argue against what my arguments were. Either you are unable to argue against what I stated or you’re trying to troll me. In any case, I’m done. This thread won’t be brought any further off topic on my account beyond this post.

Dave.2536:

Your “argument” fails for one of the below reasons:

• Your use of “people” somehow includes OP, which would be an overreach because not everyone asked for the things you accused “people” of asking for.
• Your use of “people” did not cover any significant (or clearly established) group of people and has no connection to OP himself, and the rest of your argument against these “people” is a straw man with no relation to this thread.

[/quote]

Frankly who cares? I certainly dont. Farming the crests is kitten-easy. Two nights of farming maps from foothold to vinewrath (couple hours each), and I’ve got 2k crests, even after spending close to 500 on keys and shovels. Imagine if someone decided to spend the entire day farming? You dont need to be able to trade in the boxes when it’s easy to get them. And to be honest, the only people who’d want that ability is if they cant play long enough to get other pieces, and can only spend 20-30 minutes chest hunting.

Ayrilana.1396:

I’m not going to take part in this discussion with you any further as you continue to argue over the meaning of my posts and make false accusations of what I was stating rather that argue against what my arguments were. Either you are unable to argue against what I stated or you’re trying to troll me. In any case, I’m done. This thread won’t be brought any further off topic on my account beyond this post.

Good. Farewell. Please go elsewhere with your backtracking.

Aidan Savage.2078:

Frankly who cares? I certainly dont. Farming the crests is kitten-easy. Two nights of farming maps from foothold to vinewrath (couple hours each), and I’ve got 2k crests, even after spending close to 500 on keys and shovels. Imagine if someone decided to spend the entire day farming? You dont need to be able to trade in the boxes when it’s easy to get them. And to be honest, the only people who’d want that ability is if they cant play long enough to get other pieces, and can only spend 20-30 minutes chest hunting.

Tell me more about crest farming for coat boxes. Now if ANet confirmed that they would put the coat boxes at the vendor in two weeks for 1000 crests (when they hopefully introduce extractors for eyes and kidneys), then I personally will have no more criticisms.

Aidan Savage.2078:

Frankly who cares? I certainly dont. Farming the crests is kitten-easy. Two nights of farming maps from foothold to vinewrath (couple hours each), and I’ve got 2k crests, even after spending close to 500 on keys and shovels. Imagine if someone decided to spend the entire day farming? You dont need to be able to trade in the boxes when it’s easy to get them. And to be honest, the only people who’d want that ability is if they cant play long enough to get other pieces, and can only spend 20-30 minutes chest hunting.

So, because you have the time to farm for a couple of hours each night, you think it’s easy. I think there are a lot of people around that have a full job, a family life and not so much free time to farm. For those people it would most certainly be helpful if they could exchange the boxes.

I personally wouldn’t care if I could exchange them for crests or even another type of box. Let’s say I have 3 glove boxes, and need a boot box and a legging box, why shouldn’t I be able to exchange 2 of those glove boxes for a boot and a legging box?

LadyRhonwyn.2501:

Aidan Savage.2078:

Frankly who cares? I certainly dont. Farming the crests is kitten-easy. Two nights of farming maps from foothold to vinewrath (couple hours each), and I’ve got 2k crests, even after spending close to 500 on keys and shovels. Imagine if someone decided to spend the entire day farming? You dont need to be able to trade in the boxes when it’s easy to get them. And to be honest, the only people who’d want that ability is if they cant play long enough to get other pieces, and can only spend 20-30 minutes chest hunting.

So, because you have the time to farm for a couple of hours each night, you think it’s easy. I think there are a lot of people around that have a full job, a family life and not so much free time to farm. For those people it would most certainly be helpful if they could exchange the boxes.

I personally wouldn’t care if I could exchange them for crests or even another type of box. Let’s say I have 3 glove boxes, and need a boot box and a legging box, why shouldn’t I be able to exchange 2 of those glove boxes for a boot and a legging box?

I took the whole weekend to farm the vinewrath and finally on the final nights run got my much needed coat. I still don’t have enough crests to buy everything I need (not to mention anything close to luminescence), so obviouly farming is not as “easy” for some people as others, so I agree if you have an “extra box”, I don’t think it’s too much trouble to be able to trade it for a box that you want.

Dave.2536:

Ayrilana.1396:

I’m not going to take part in this discussion with you any further as you continue to argue over the meaning of my posts and make false accusations of what I was stating rather that argue against what my arguments were. Either you are unable to argue against what I stated or you’re trying to troll me. In any case, I’m done. This thread won’t be brought any further off topic on my account beyond this post.

Good. Farewell. Please go elsewhere with your backtracking.

Aidan Savage.2078:

Frankly who cares? I certainly dont. Farming the crests is kitten-easy. Two nights of farming maps from foothold to vinewrath (couple hours each), and I’ve got 2k crests, even after spending close to 500 on keys and shovels. Imagine if someone decided to spend the entire day farming? You dont need to be able to trade in the boxes when it’s easy to get them. And to be honest, the only people who’d want that ability is if they cant play long enough to get other pieces, and can only spend 20-30 minutes chest hunting.

Tell me more about crest farming for coat boxes. Now if ANet confirmed that they would put the coat boxes at the vendor in two weeks for 1000 crests (when they hopefully introduce extractors for eyes and kidneys), then I personally will have no more criticisms.

I think making the assumption the coat boxes will be added to the crest vendor shortly down the road is a rather safe assumption considering they’ve added, you know, every single other piece over time.