Guild Wars 2

Bubi.7942:

Sigh.

Finally more champ bags and dragonite. Haven’t opened big chest yet in the middle of the pac-man labyrinth, but I’m guessing a champ bag, 2 blues a green?

Hey at least Arena Net are getting more data for their “how much dragonite can we give to players before they get really really annoyed by it” experiment.

Gaile Gray.6029:

Gulesave.5073:

Gaile was not asking whether the promise of more LW is sufficient to sate our desires for intel, just whether it counts.

Yes, this is correct. When I see comments like “there’s nothing new to do” or “we need fresh content” it just occurred to me to ask if you’re taking LW into account, if you see that as new content and pretty significant chunks of it, at that. (Admittedly, it may not be what you personally have requested, but if the statement is “there’s nothing new” that doesn’t seem quite right.)

Thanks everyone for not barking at me when I asked the question. Again, the question was not “is it enough?” I really was pointing to it to ask for your impressions of the concept and the execution as continuing, new content in an ever-changing world.

It certainly counts, but any additional content counts so I’m not sure it’s a terribly useful question to ask.

It doesn’t really feel like an ever-changing world but this is probably impossible to achieve so it’s difficult to complain about it. In reality, it feels like a couple of zones tacked onto the outskirts of the world and a periodical smashing of a handful of locations but there are other threads out there discussing whether there are more interesting things you could do with this concept.

The new content has felt underwhelming – another poster listed the differences between 2013 and 2014 features and it’s striking, maybe this is why last years living story didn’t get many complaints – there were loads of other new things to go with it. Now all we’ve really got is the living story and it’s pretty brief and there’s only so much you can do in a single zone.

As an aside, it’s cool as hell that you’re engaging in this conversation with players. It’s really appreciated, even if it changes nothing the fact that you want to explore why some people feel this way means a lot.

Is there some huge practical reason why they can’t make these outfits out of multiple pieces rather than all in one? Sometimes they do it, sometimes they don’t. I’d love to use elements from this outfit alongside other gear but I’m afraid to buy it since I have the feeling this is impossible.

Yeah, also getting this playing solo. Audio seems to keep playing but it’s a completely black screen and quitting the game seems to be the only way to get out of it. Just after you encounter the thrasher near the beginning of the instance.

Jandopo.2107:

Gaile Gray.6029:

Alerno — Taking what you have (and everyone else has) put on the table I do wonder something. I want to ask, and hope nobody will bite my head off here.

You mention wanting to know there will be more to the game. The new and continuing episodes of the Living World count towards that, right? The fact that players know there’s a team working on new content and features, and that there are releases on a regular basis? I fully understand that may not fulfill every desire, but it does show a continuing commitment to “new stuff” for us players, wouldn’t you agree?

Sorry, but no, I disagree.

This season of LS may be good, but it’s just story, a side-dish. The main course for me is WvW, sPvP, dungeons and World Bosses.
A well-developed Living Story is a good idea, but it doesn’t add anything new gameplay wise.
New events and mobs? Only in the new area.
Anything else? No. Just story (which, I repeat, is good but very far from enough).

Thank you for listening to our opinions.

Agreed, I mean just look at how short the living story content is. Each update is about 2 hours long, if that. You get a new zone each season and like 8 hours of story content, two seasons a year so that’s two zones and 16 hours of content in a whole year.

Look at another game, to use an obvious example, look at WoW. They get an entire expansion every two years with vast quantities of content, quests, zones, monsters, items, increased level cap. They get multiple entire dungeons each with more content and gameplay in each one than any of our living world seasons have. Not only that, but in the time between expansions they still get a few content patches on top!

In the same period of time, we get 4 living story seasons with maybe 32 hours of story content and 4 zones. Maybe 10 new mobs and a few reskins.

I am really not convinced that the drip feeding of living world story content anywhere near makes up for the lack of expansions the game has.

Sure, your team is probably smaller and the game makes less money which goes some way to explaining things, but I really don’t want less content more frequently. I’d be happy to see no living world for 2 years followed by an expansion.

Play the trading post, let everyone else do farming for you.

Double post because after two years they’ve still not fixed the bloody off by one bug in thread pagination.

Hahaha, well it was good while it lasted.

This was pretty obviously coming, Anet had turned that zone into one where you simply run around and press F to get champion bags – easily 100+ per hour.

Anyone know how hard this nerf is?

The sale fee doesn’t specifically target either side of the transaction. The seller pays X more, and the buyer receives X less. The tax affects both sides.

The listing fee is the only one that affects a single side, and this is only to discourage use of the TP as an infinite bank.

Zoxea.9564:

Magnosian.8750:

All these boosters have existed since the launch of the game.. you’re a bit late in complaining.

Easy spam 500 hours boost pay to win for 300gems have existed since the release? I did not know, thank you to you.

Lol what are you on about, do you know how much candy corn you would need to spam into that thing to get 500 hours of one specific boost? Unless there’s some infinite source of candy corn out there, that stuff is 70s a stack and you’ll be luck to get an hour of anything besides exp.

The best part about this thread is the people expressing surprise that an item that gives WvW exp boosts is usable in WvW. Great stuff.

I’m really glad this discussion is being had. Blowing things up really isn’t the sort of “dramatic world changes” people want to see. The creation of something new and interesting, or scary, or beautiful is far far more interesting to be a part of. Anticipation of the result and having something wonderful and new in the world.

I’m sure it’s more work to produce, so you can always resort to smashing something up for some of the living world events, but it really would be nice to be part of building something new some time.

Just imagining what it would be like to have been involved in the construction of parts of divinity’s reach, discovering and defeating villains trying to thwart your attempts, all resulting in something beautiful rather than a city in ruins.

Gilgalas.7860:

Posts like this are so utterly useless. You don’t have any idea of the data they are looking at and that govern such changes. I am sure many players actually enjoyed the change, but these players are not the ones who come ranting here.

I’m not saying that there wasn’t any data that gave someone the bright idea to implement this – I’m saying that it was an flawed in an extremely obvious way that any basic user testing should have been able to pick up. Why didn’t it pick up that the UI update was so flawed?

I’m perfectly happy with the scenario where someone gets an idea based on some data that they think is great but in reality it sucks. I’m also happy with the idea that a developer would get told to implement this bad idea and do it assuming that the person telling them to do it knows what they’re talking about. I do that all the time.

There seems to be a theme, though, of some updates being waved through without anyone who actively uses the system (or perhaps even plays the game) reviewing it. I cannot believe that anyone who actively uses the gem exchange would have given this their support.

It’s good to see that Anet have backtracked on this ridiculous change, but it really shouldn’t take a 37 page long rage thread to fix something like this. ArenaNet are a professional development company, it’s very disturbing that something so obviously flawed could get through to their release build without anyone even batting an eyelid.

Any player of this game would tell you that the update had big problems. Why is their quality assurance department not able to spot such obvious problems?

Either no QA on this was done at all, or their QA department is extremely inadequate. I don’t know which scenario is scarier.

ipan.4356:

Anet have revealed themselves to be the villains people like me warned you about.

I’m going back to single player games and mario kart until Star Citizen releases.

You know it’s bad when someone implies Star Citizen is less money grabbing than your game.

I don’t believe this is an attempt to swindle players out of money – it really doesn’t look like that if you look at the experience of someone giving Anet money for gold right now.

Say I want to buy 800 gems and exchange it to gold, here is the process:

• Buy 800 gems for real money
• Click 100 G
• Click 1G
• Click 1G
• Click 1G
• Click 1G
• Click 1G
• Click 1G
• Click 1G
• Feel sad about the few left over gems that you can’t turn into gold

It’s not exactly streamlined.

You can’t argue that they’ve made this interface bad because it encourages people to pay real money for gold when the experience for them is far far worse under the new UI as well. It’s clearly a case of incompetence and not malice. What ever they were trying to achieve with the new UI, they completely failed and it’s a massive indictment of their QA process that they managed to go live with something this bad.

lordkrall.7241:

Blude.6812:

And BTW sure is funny that no DEV has added a comment, I guess they knew that this would not go over well.

You are aware that the devs are working with developing the game rather than commenting on forums right?

Developing things like hugely restrictive gem conversion interfaces that nobody wants. I think we would all be happy if they took a break from doing that to read the forums and perhaps invest development resources into frequently requested features instead of things like this.

The whole thing reeks of too much tunnel vision developing a game they don’t play and not enough listening to the needs of those who play it. I don’t want them spending time working on the game instead of reading the forums if this is the result!

Pretty much my only complaint about the old system is that the exchange worked the wrong way round. Nobody wanted to type in the gold value they want to turn into gems – they wanted to type in the number of gems they want to buy and get told how much it would cost.

Maybe this is what they were trying to fix when they screwed this up? Like I gigantic failure to understand the problem resulted in this being implemented as a solution?

How on earth does something like this get past QA? You just remove a whole bunch of features from the game because some people are confused by it? You don’t make it an optional “advanced” screen or make them better explained, but remove them?

The most insane thing about this is that it actively discourages people from using the gem store. You can’t even write it off as ArenaNet being greedy or something.

Putting new items up for 200 gems on the same day you remove the ability to obtain 200 gems really is the icing on the cake. Joined up thinking, really gotta hand it to you.

TheGrimm.5624:

Chalky.8540:

TheGrimm.5624:

Some of the above hit the point. There is no penalty to re-list a buy but there is on a sell, that seems off. Sellers have to pay a penalty effectively for making a bad call, why shouldn’t people placing buy orders do the same.

1 copper raising is only a problem because of the fees – putting in more fees would make the problem worse, so I don’t know why you are suggesting that.

As for the asymmetry, sellers pay a penalty for trying to get a higher price than the best buy order – that’s the tradeoff, an up front fee and a risk, or an instant sale at a lower price. If you don’t want an up front fee, sell instantly. If you think “no but I want more money” then that will cost you. That’s how markets work.

Maybe I missed something in the original post, but I thought the issue was one upping on buys. There is not penalty on a buyer putting in a buy, seeing someone put a higher bid in, cancelling their bid and upping it again by 1 copper, versus putting in a buy that is something reasonably higher. If buyers were hit with the listing fee on buy orders versus sellers than I think there would be less of this one copper upping on buy orders since there would be a price to pay every time you stop and re-list. Granted the more leap frogging buyers do the more the seller will make, but that’s not the same thing as the TP fines for a seller to do the same action.

Side note, not talking about seller here, instant cash or not. Seller pays the fees on buy instant or if they list it, they are just locked into the price they put out there unless they want to re-pay a new listing fee. Either way, good hunting.

There’s no issue with 1 copper raising on buy orders because you can just re-raise for free. If you’re too lazy to re-raise then the person doing more work than you has an advantage, which is entirely fair.

OP can say “I don’t want to work hard, I just want to sit back and have rewards come to me – this doesn’t seem to work, plz fix!” – it doesn’t make it a reasonable position to take.

The issue with sell order undercutting is understandably frustrating since it costs the seller money to change their price to compete – they’re not just being lazy. Choosing to sell via a sell listing rather than instantly is, however, a concious choice to get more money at the cost of time. Part of that time cost is the result of people being able to undercut you.

Bots are the only real issue when it comes to buy order undercutting. Obviously, if you’re playing fair and someone else is cheating in order to get an advantage, that’s not fair at all. If they’re doing it so much it’s impossible for you to compete then it’s a massive problem.

I do believe that Anet are taking steps to resolve issues with TP bots though, so seems to deal with the only major issue raised by the thread. Everything else is people wanting to have rules in place to ensure they get more rewards for less effort by removing competition. This is obviously flawed, since their own bids are also someone else’s competition, and so fourth. They think they’ll end up making money more easily, but instead they’ll end up in a queue 1000 identical bids at an extremely low price.

People only care about what happens after they make their bid – they don’t stop to think that the existence of 1c undercutting are the reason the price is so good in the first place.

TheGrimm.5624:

Some of the above hit the point. There is no penalty to re-list a buy but there is on a sell, that seems off. Sellers have to pay a penalty effectively for making a bad call, why shouldn’t people placing buy orders do the same.

1 copper raising is only a problem because of the fees – putting in more fees would make the problem worse, so I don’t know why you are suggesting that.

As for the asymmetry, sellers pay a penalty for trying to get a higher price than the best buy order – that’s the tradeoff, an up front fee and a risk, or an instant sale at a lower price. If you don’t want an up front fee, sell instantly. If you think “no but I want more money” then that will cost you. That’s how markets work.

Wanze.8410:

eekzie.5640:

Behellagh.1468:

The TP is driven buy sellers since they have the power whom to sell their loot to. Buyers have to fight among themselves in an attempt to have the highest bid to attract a seller. You want that frenzy for bids because the sellers have the power, which is why you charge the sellers and not the buyers.

Problem works both ways.

List an item for 1000 gold. Someone lists it for 1 copper cheaper.

Pretty much we have a system where it’s normal to cut it line, instead of making a new offer/bid that is notably different.

% difference in offer would work, say 5%, with a maximum of 10 gold and a minimum of 1 copper.

Biggest issue on the market right now, in my opinion, is that the listing fee has to be paid each time you list the same item. If I want to lower my price, I have to relist it. And that’s costly.

IF you made a notably lower listing than 1000g in the first place, the chance of you getting undercut is lower as well.

This is an extremely good point – if your price is low enough most people won’t undercut you. When you choose to post a price near to the going rate, you are choosing to make more profit at the risk of getting rapidly undercut. You take the hit and post a much lower price, you’ll get a quicker sale.

You can’t have everything your own way, maximising profile and getting an instant sale ahead of all your competitors.

I would agree that the second method makes the most sense – it would seem like an unfortunate solution to give a minority of players worse rewards in order to ensure that another minority get better ones.

I think in general people like the concept of a super lucky minority. Sure, it’s not them today, but maybe tomorrow it will be them! It’s that sort of RNG element that keeps people playing.

The second suggestion seems superior since it deals with the downside of the super unlucky players without crushing the dream of every player to be one of the super lucky

The thing about speculation markets is that there’s not much point in having a bot. You think something is going to go up in price? You buy loads of it. Bots really only help when you need to make lots of rapid adjustments in price to out-bid others which is generally the case in over populated flipping markets. Speculation only works if nobody else has realised the profit to be made yet, so if you’re having to compete with loads of other people, there’s probably no money to be made anyway.

If it’s flipping, it’s pretty trivial to bot which is why botting is/was probably so prolific.

edit beaten! ^^

This list is probably useful to you:

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Trading_post#List_of_Black_Lion_Trading_Posts

The ones in the shiverpeaks are normally deserted

Kruhljak.2705:

The EG mode does, at least, double the number of possible results (evidenced by searching for “recipe” in both modes) when searching for items to buy from the TP.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t extend the depth to which your transactions lists are searched. Apparently, Evon is not as concerned with his own trades as he is with buying more stuff to lose track of.

Yeah, this is a huge pain – I’m doing so much trading at the moment that the transaction list only goes back 7 horus even in Gnashblade mode.

You’ll always sell to the highest buy order, but previously if you entered a value lower than the highest buy order it would only charge you a fee on the low value. This was recently patched, so if you put in a low value you will sell your item for that price and the buyer will get refunded the difference.

Happened to me yesterday with an exotic weapon, someone sold it to me for vendor price and I got refunded my buy order. I assume it was someone who didn’t realise the bug had been patched

That’s what happened in this case – if you look in the delivery box, he has been refunded his buy order for that bag, less 48c he paid for it.

Behellagh.1468:

Gnashblade mode doesn’t change the limits on the TP, just the number visible on the page.

Sorry, this is correct. Perhaps I misunderstood the opening post, but I believe he is talking about not being able to search for more than a certain number of items. Gnashblade does seem to resolve this – or at the very least, if I search for “Recipe” with Gnashblade enabled I can see every item from 3c to 394g.

Gold sinks are good for the health of the economy – people only get upset about it if they only focus on the effect the sinks have on themselves, rather than the effect they have on everyone.

Sure, if these fees weren’t in place, you’d get 15% more gold – however, so would everyone else. Everyone would have 15% more gold, which means everyone would be willing to spend 15% more on items, so everything would be 15% more expensive. So what would you personally gain from this fee being gone? Nothing, you’d still be able to buy exactly what you can buy now.

You would lose the long term benifits of reduced inflation, however, which has a far bigger effect than you would imagine.

Type “I am Evon Gnashblade” (without quotes) into the search box to change the mode of the TP to the one that’s actually usable.

Presumably this isn’t the default mode because showing you every single item in one view increases load on the server – I guess nobody thought that not automatically performing a search every time I add a new filter criteria would achieve the same thing.

It feels like before you get it the first time you can sell about 20, but after that you get it really regularly. Must be some sort of cooldown based on how long you waited since the last sell order.

Hi there,

I’m probably considered to be a power user of the trading post which is why I encounter this problem, but is there any chance the throttle on the speed at which sell orders can be placed could be reduced? I place all my sell orders by hand via the interface and if I ever try to place more than about 20 I start encountering this error.

I’m currently trying to list over 200 items and I know this probably makes me unusual but I’m starting to go a little bit insane with all these “hey there, slow down!” errors.

I assume it’s some sort of anti-botting measure and I don’t think it used to be there on the old trading post, but there’s got to be a less intrusive way to stop bots. This is certainly affecting at least some legit traders on the market.

Anyone agree?

Wanze.8410:

Exactly, it makes no difference. The whole auction house discussion started because someone said that 1c increments dont happen in auction houses either, so they shouldnt happen on the tp as well.

Ah, thanks, sorry for the confusion – I completely agree in that case!

Nike.2631:

Easy enough – use time since last sale to scale the bidding increment.

Item has sold in the last 5 minute: 1c increment
Item has sold in the last 2 hours: 1% increment
Item has sold in the last 24 hours: 2% increment
Item has not sold in the last 24 hours: 5% increment.

As Wanze implies, this system probably doesn’t make sense in reality. What sort of items do you think would fit into anything besides the first two options? Maybe precursors and legendaries? I don’t think these items have a particularly big problem with 1c undercutting.

Wanze.8410:

Do you want the differences in terminology or the mayor differences between the tp and auction houses in other mmos?

Really just the reason why it makes 1 copper raising better/worse – I understand that it’s not actually an auction house but it seems close as makes no difference when it comes to buy orders and 1 copper raising.

Do auction houses in other games prevent 1 copper raising? Surely that only makes sense in the context of a specific seller specifying the bidding criteria?

Wanze.8410:

The TP is NOT an auction house. You just want it to be an auction house.

Can you elaborate on the reasons you believe it is not an auction house?

The most obvious reason to me is that you’re not bidding on a specific item and the highest bidder isn’t the only person who will get their item – however, this doesn’t appear to be a particularly important distinction.

When you place a buy order, you are making a bid. Something does not need to be a literal auction house in order for it to involve bidding for something. The concept of bidding is simply the process of offering something in the hope that it is accepted. That’s precisely how buy orders work, you’re offering to pay X and hoping that someone accepts X. If you are undercut, you have been outbid.

Also, as an aside – although I have huge sympathy for people who have their sell orders undercut by one copper because they’ll feel the bite of listing fees if they have to re-list, it blows my mind that anyone would complain about 1 copper undercutting in buy orders. Just re-list it for heaven’s sake, if you’re not competing against a bot there’s nothing for you to complain about. It’s the tiniest bit of effort (exactly the same effort that the other party made to outbid you, in fact) and the idea that Anet should change the entire trading post system to save you from the few seconds it would take is so weird.

Mystic.5934:

Botting may be an issue, but what you observed could easily be explained by the all the bad changes implemented in TP v2. Personally, I didn’t even use the TP for like 4 days after it because I couldn’t work with it – it’s not as usable. It would be like walking through air all your life, then you wake up and air is as thick as water – you’re not going to be as inclined to go run chores or go out for a morning jog, etc. same thing: TP wasn’t as easy to use, so people didn’t use it.

You might be right, but what ever happened just happened again today. I have real trouble explaining this any way besides bot bans.

Since Anet are reading the thread – if it is bot banning, I applaud your efforts.

linuxotaku.4731:

I disagree that undercutting by larger increments (e.g. 10s on items which are >= 10g) would cause the market to crash — if you believe (as I do) that the equilibrium is largely set by supply and demand, then a larger bid increment would mean faster convergence to equilibrium … and would more often result in sellers batching together (i.e. sellers being willing to wait in line of the price has reached equilibrium — with 1c increments, there’s no incentive to wait in line for moderate ticket items even if you think the price is at equilibrium).

But as I said, I’m unconvinced that it’s possible to make a substantial improvement which doesn’t also suck in terms of UI or complexity.

Crash is perhaps too dramatic a word, but do you really think people will wait in a line of 20 other sellers to sell their item rather than undercutting if they can’t undercut by 1c? It could be months before your item sells or if anyone undercuts everyone will line up behind that new price and your item may never sell. How is a smooth 1c undercutting curve worse than a stepped 10s series of undercuts?

I understand the frustration of people who get undercut – it’s annoying to not get your money, I get that. It happens to me hundreds of times a week. It would, however, be far more frustrating to have the choice of devaluing the item or standing in a potentially infinite line of sellers. It works both ways, you can get 1c undercut, and you can undercut others by 1c. You win some, you lose some, and in that way it balances out. It’s a market, that’s how markets work.

People should be careful not to let a few frustrating undercuts cause them to lose sight of that. You want your thing to sell first, they want their thing to sell first – you can’t make everyone happy in that scenario. Tunnel vision on the precise amount it’s costing them to get one over on you achieves very little.

One copper undercutting isn’t an issue, although botting may well be.

Did anyone else experience the extremely strange behaviour at the trading post when the new version of the trading post came in? For some reason for the first week or two, it was as if a huge chunk of bidders and sellers disappeared from the market. They soon returned, but the only explanation I can personally think of is that they were bots that took a while to catch up with the new TP.

If the above is true, TP botting should be fairly simple for them to detect (all the people who were sending old-style TP requests after the update!). Botting is what people should focus on, humans undercutting by 1 copper is not a problem and it’s better that they do that than cause the price to crash by undercutting by 10s every single time.

The button at the bottom of the filter should be “apply filter” not “reset filter”. It’s really unintuitive at the moment and it seems pretty insane that I am force to send 4 or 5 useless requests to the TP server when I configure a filter instead of just setting everything up and clicking a button to apply it.

Ziiinxy.5201:

Recently in new update they added a new trading post. I do think its great, but its more laggy and when I buy mats or items it takes forever to get them. When I sell items i dont get any gold back. The Old trading post will give you the items instantly, and i would enjoy it after. Sometimes when i want or need items i look at the trade post, Error. I cant see anything most of the time, and some of my friends can never seen it. I enjoyed the last trading we had, it was much easier to get the stuff we want. I want the old trade post back! Please ANet…

Nobody seems to have mentioned this but it looks like the OP is failing to understand the difference between buy orders and sell orders.

If you want your item instantly, you need to choose from the list on the right. These are people who are willing to sell you the item right now so you don’t have to wait. The other list is if you want to pay less and wait a while to get your item.

If you want to sell your item instantly, you have to choose from the list on the left. These are people who want to buy your item right now. Again, the other list is if you want to put your item up for sale and wait a while for someone to buy it.

It’s not totally clear if this is what you’re complaining about, but it seems possible.

Jessica Boettiger.2563:

Basically removing the achievement requirement during a tournament is an experimental step we took to reduce the incentive for achievement grinding. We want people to play WvW, and not focus too heavily on satisfying achievement requirements.

If we find that players prefer having numerous things to check off a list, then we would certainly take that feedback into account and consider it for future tournaments.

Perhaps the achievements should require people to actually play WvW then instead of spending 10 mins in eotm? This is a pretty extreme response.

I tried that but I get a message saying “Max. results reached. Refine the filters to narrow the results”. In the case of exotic level 80 weapons, I can’t see anything that costs more than 3 gold when sorting by price.

edit – Never mind, someone just showed me how to fix this <3

With the previous trading post, I would regularly search for all exotic weapons, skip to the price range I was interested in and browse through them looking for good deals.

With the new trading post, there appears to be a limit on how many results are returned from a search and apparently no way to refine your searches by price. Does this mean it’s now impossible to skip to a certain price bracket or see items at all above a certain price?

I suppose I could do multiple searches, filtering by class or weapon type or something but that is rather tedious. A price filter would seem so much more sensible – or at least let us jump to a certain section in the results. All the trading post websites have had this sort of functionality for ages, I don’t understand how the new trading post design is still lacking in these sorts of features.

Why can’t we see the buy price in the search results screen?

Also, this wasn’t covered in the article but please please please tell me the default buy price is not the vendor price any more. Of all the default values to choose, I have no idea why you would default to the one value nobody ever wants to sell something at. Fingers crossed for an easy way to issue buy orders without typing the full price every single time – ie, defaulting to the highest current buy order or even better, highest+1c.

That’s probably too much to ask

So if I understand this correctly, this is a proposal to stop mass PvP happening in a mass PvP format?

Mindless blobs die extremely quickly when they come up against an organised group with smaller numbers already. I don’t think it should be anyone’s objective to put in arbitrary restrictions to ensure that an unskilled large group dies to an unskilled small group.

Unskilled groups should die and stack discipline is one of the organisational skills that makes that happen.

Imagine that the tornado and FGS nerf are already in place – unintended functionality is gone.

If anet let you put a 4th utility skill in your elite slot, with a 150 second cooldown, would you consider it?

I think I might. I’m struggling to think of an elite skill I’d want to take to WvW once these changes hit, and the idea of having an additional utility seems very attractive.

Interested in what other people think. The fact that I’m considering this has really brought home to me how bad elementalist elite skills are – they’re meant to be powerful one shot skills, but in reality most of them are dead weight, I’d probably pick a crippled utility skill over most of them.

Spyritdragon.6048:

I’d definitely appreciate coming out of a siege golem with a full bar of health instead of being downed.

Well, yeah, it’s nice I guess – but tell me the last time you saw a golem die and said “oh my god does that mean the guy inside is downed? This is a disaster!”

Nobody cares that the guy inside the golem gets downed when it dies – the golem died! That’s the big deal. Someone getting a lootbag and a guy having to click respawn afterwards isn’t even something worth thinking about.

You’re probably just about to die anyway even if you pop out with full health – if your team can’t defend a golem at that location they’re probably not going to be able to defend some random dude either.

A far better buff for golems would be a mobility improvement or a defensive skill to make it last longer if it gets caught in combat.

Even something like fall damage immunity would be great.

Or how about golem pilot priority? Maybe it would be a contentious issue, but the ability to kick a clueless newbie out of a golem before he runs it off a cliff or into a zerg would be very welcome.

If you think of how useful some of the other masteries are, like extra gate damage or bubbles to stop incoming damage… saving the pilot after the golem dies seems pretty weak.

Teckos.1305:

Chalky.8540:

If Anet don’t want people to karma train EotM then they should make it so it’s not so poorly designed for PvP.

They’re the developers, they created this problem by giving everyone a map where the only rewarding activity is karma training. The idea that they’d ban people for trying to optimise their time in this game mode is madness – fix it, ignore it, whatever – anyone who’s looking for mass PvP is playing real WvW.

FIFY.

Fair point

I’m hoping for:

• Giving us something to do with our infinite stacks of bloody ascended crafting materials
• Trading interface enhancements (buy orders values in the list! search for backpieces! search by price! intelligent initial values for buy/sell prices rather than npc prices!)

Interested to see what WvW changes are in store for us, but I have the feeling it’ll be the stuff revealed on ZAM and that’s it. Multicolour commander tags and golem mastery with one of the most useless top tier mastery rewards I’ve ever seen.

If Anet don’t want people to karma train EotM then they should make it so it’s not so poorly designed for PvP.

They’re the developers, they created this problem by giving everyone a map where the only fun activity is karma training. The idea that they’d ban people for trying to optimise their time in this game mode is madness – fix it, ignore it, whatever – anyone who’s looking for mass PvP is playing real WvW.

Same, tabs seem to all be missing on the TP

edit I fixed this by running GW2 with the “-repair” switch.

eithinan.9841:

Chalky.8540:

eithinan.9841:

Chalky.8540:

There’s really nothing wrong with 1c undercutting and I’m always FAR more irritated by people undercutting by large amounts than I am by small amounts.
Anyone trying to decide between undercutting me by 1c or 20s, please choose 1c, for the love of god.

in high velocity markets a large price drop like that will usually mean a corresponding spike in price is coming and your listing will be bought up

Yeah, I’m not saying it won’t be bought up, the issue is the price instability that this causes and the negative impact it has on inexperienced buyers. It happens to me multiple times a day every day and you either just wait it out or relist and take a bit of a hit for the sake of liquidity, but people doing this sort of undercutting for any reason besides genuine error have a very poor understanding of what effect it has.

I think they know exactly what they are doing. They are saying to you “get out of my market” and they hope the effect is you find another.

I’m not too sure what you mean. How is someone listing a single item for significantly under the current price going convince anyone from leaving that corner of the market?

I mean… half the time that this happens, most of the sellers probably don’t even notice because someone buys the underpriced item and the only differences is that the guy who listed it lost 50s or whatever. If they do notice, and have actually picked this market to sell in for profit, they’ll obviously realise that it’s just one item that’s underpriced. They might even buy it to flip themselves.

If someone actually thinks this is what they’re doing then it’s even weirder than I thought.