Guild Wars 2

Once you hit 80 your probably selling or salvaging 99% of your drops. When they change this code so that “leveling” characters get appropriate drops (if I read things correctly) do they also mean folks at level 80? When I play a warrior, does this mean I now have a much lower probability to collect cloth (drops being about the only way to get it?). Basically wondering whether I just got hosed on one of the few common greens and blues that are worth getting because they can sell for a pittance and are pretty hard to get any other way??? Please tell me my horrible suspicion is wrong on this one.

you can try reading the other forum post. I think the dev reply in that.

I think he says something like yes it’ll affect lvl80, but it isn’t very noticable.

There’s a dev post that confirms it will effect level 80’s, but that we won’t notice anything different. Make of that what you will.

Here’s the dev saying it will affect level 80s: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Please-No-Profession-Loot/page/6#post4343796

And here’s a longer post where he goes into a little more detail about the drops: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Please-No-Profession-Loot/page/5#post4343055

Hmmm this begs the question…. Since cloth is already the hardest to get commodity, are there more players who play light classes compared to the combined total of mediums and heavy (and factor in actual play time). I highly suspect the answer is no… in fact most people doing the most play that generates drops are actually the sum of the other two groups rather than lights. At which point, haven’t they just made cloth even more rare?

This seems so obvious I must have missed something.

… I suppose the could simply uber crank the amout of cloth that lights recieve to make up for the disparity, but that would seem to be a rather unfair way to restore the total amount of cloth produced.

shion.2084:

Hmmm this begs the question…. Since cloth is already the hardest to get commodity, are there more players who play light classes compared to the combined total of mediums and heavy (and factor in actual play time). I highly suspect the answer is no… in fact most people doing the most play that generates drops are actually the sum of the other two groups rather than lights. At which point, haven’t they just made cloth even more rare?

This seems so obvious I must have missed something.

If I had to guess there is probably more guardians and warriors than most other classes.

I really hope this doesn’t make high end mineral prices drop (again) and cloth prices all go up. That seems counter productive to even anet.

Yeah, so basically, the information we have on it means nothing. It will affect level 80s, but it supposedly won’t be noticeable. So what’s the point of it? I guess that’s for them to know and us to find out after hours of testing drop rates.

Which you can bet will happen within a week of release.

Yeah, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me… the rates are intended to result in more useable drops for a given character, but somehow won’t result in less silk if you’re playing a heavy or medium class? I don’t know enough about maths to know what sort of algorithms could feasibly produce a result like that, but it still smells fishy.

Hey, maybe if we’re lucky they’ll make up for it by adjusting the amount of silk required to craft spools of silk weaving thread down to 50 instead of 100.

Alex.3907:

Yeah, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me… the rates are intended to result in more useable drops for a given character, but somehow won’t result in less silk if you’re playing a heavy or medium class? I don’t know enough about maths to know what sort of algorithms could feasibly produce a result like that, but it still smells fishy.

Hey, maybe if we’re lucky they’ll make up for it by adjusting the amount of silk required to craft spools of silk weaving thread down to 50 instead of 100.

Or the amount of silk scraps required to craft a silk ribbon down to 2 from 3. Which seems a little more reasonable. A middle ground, if you will.