Guild Wars 2

Bigsexy.8302:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-On3Ya0_4Y

this is gold…

That is hilarious.

Dyes and the downed state are too much for a new player but sending them to Frost Gorge at level 3 is fine.

Are they trolling or just wearing a tag they paid for ?

I suppose, if you dont think that they should be allowed to use something they paid for, you could offer to pay them back for their expenditure in return for them taking down their tags.

I just want a toggle that allows me to not see commander tags.

I would dearly love the option to toggle the visibility of others’ Commander tags off for myself. I don’t want to take anything away from those who have invested in one of these things, but really would prefer to not have to see the Skittle clusters currently in game.

adormtil.1605:

^Why is GW2 forum so low in population?

Could be that a lot of people are out enjoying the game instead of coming here. There is enough negativity here (and I fully admit to being part of it all too often) that those who are fans of the game and disinclined to get into heated arguments about it just stay away.

Could be that, in my experience, customers in general are more likely to complain when they dislike an aspect of a product than they are to praise an aspect they like.

Could be that even many of those who have concerns or complaints do not see enough official response on these forums to feel that it is worth their time to post.

Could be that some people are more inclined to use outside avenues (such as Reddit, Facebook, etc) for their feedback/discussion. Afterall Anet makes a point of using these outside avenues. This pretty much guarantees some degree of splintering the discussion population.

Could be that forums seem to always be a very tiny percentage of active players. Can you imagine if there had been over four hundred thousand posters during the period when the concurrent user numbers were supposedly that high ? Would the forums really have been useful at all if topics and pages were blurring by ?

Personally I do not consider the GW2 official forum population to be low.

Mystic.5934:

John Smith.4610:

I do not consider it insider trading once the information is released to the public in any form.

Technically true. But it misses the point. Sure, it may not be called ‘insider trading’ at that point, but it is a messed up situation.
If I work for a company and know something big will go down tomorrow, and I post it on facebook, then all my friends who see that post first buy the stock, then all their friends who see their repost buy the stock, etc.

That would be illegal and could be considered insider trading.

munkiman.3068:

This is true for any item sold ever, in RL markets. If the Times posted an article claiming your favorite item, one you buy all the time, is seeing a shortage and the price will likely go up, wouldn’t you just go out and buy up stock in that item to save you money down the road if you can?

Is that information about shortage of the item being provided by the company that produces the item based on their inside knowledge of the item and the market it impacts ?

Is the information being provided to a private blogger (or selct few such) who is a participant in the market being affected ?

Or is your example one of a reputable news organization disseminating the information, likely based on their own investigation or the investigations of associated news organizations, to the public at large ?

You reference buying up stock in an item facing a shortage in order to save money down the road. This thread references price jumps based on what is being called insider trading (but which may be only very effective speculation).

Minigrump.4961:

Seems like it is to me. People put effort in to find out the information and what is needed for this patch. People complain about how they use this information to get the items beforehand and make a profit off it. That is the heart of this, the profit/cost of the items. Pretty sure if it was only karma items being needed for collections then people would not care how early they got the information.

And the information was given to members of the guild wars 2 community for the sole reason that they spread that information and get publicity for it. So I don’t see how its insiders information unless WP, dulfy and Mattvisual are making huge profits off of the information they were given

The information was provided to players who participate in the market. Those players then get to decide how, when, where to share it. That is a bit off.

Going to another player for a piece of information that has not been released to the public at large is not, “working harder,” any more than me telling you inside information about my employer so that you could profit from a very likely increase in our stock trading rate next month would represent you working harder than someone to whom the information was not provided.

To clarify, as mentioned previously, I am not saying that insider trading actually occurred. I am merely responding to Mr Smith’s comment that providing market affecting information to a small number of participants in that same market does not qualify as disclosure to the public at large.

munkiman.3068:

Ashen.2907:

John Smith.4610:

I’ve actually commented on this more than once, but recently:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/I-have-a-question-about-the-economy/page/12#post4376858

I do not consider it insider trading once the information is released to the public in any form.

Releasing the information to privately operated information dissemination clearinghouses who have the option to control release to the public is not a release to the public at large. This is particularly the case in situations where the very individuals to whom the information was provided were in a position of conflict of interest because they are participants in the market for which they were provided early access to market influencing information.

I do not think that providing an individual, or a few individuals, early access to market information constitutes a release to the public. If it did then it would be acceptable for me to provide you with information regarding my publicly traded employer in order for you to profit from it because telling you would constitute public disclosure.

Would you consider it insider trading, in a real world sense, to give inside information to an individual, a member of the public, who had the option to profit from the information himself, or provide it to others of his choice, before making the information available to the public at large ?

Are you assuming those that got a hands-on preview are the ones that blew up the prices on some of that stuff? I’m pretty sure Johns response covered that, that is not the case, and that it’s been handled before and will likely be handled again.

People watched publicly released information, available to anyone and not tucked away in a safe or behind greasing palms. This isn’t exactly a new thing they did either, it was completely the case last feature pack and sometimes just reading the dat notes that_shaman posts would give people a slightly more educated risk at a certain market.

I am not making assumptions.

I am saying that providing early access to market affecting information to participants in that market in the hope that they will take care of public dissemination for you, particularly when a neutral information distribution system is in place, is not a good option for public release.

Minigrump.4961:

Oh my god he worked more and put more effort in than I did, and got paid more than me for it, that is so unfair and my boss should compensate me for it. This is how most people on this thread sound like to me.

Not at all the concern at hand.

Piecekeeper.4361:

C’mon, they did the best they could with giving the info to the most prolific and watched guide and video makers.

Honestly curious, did they release the information on any official site at the same time ?

Releasing the information to individual players, participants in the affected market, who might then choose to subsequently spread the word, does not constitute providing it to everyone.

John Smith.4610:

I’ve actually commented on this more than once, but recently:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/I-have-a-question-about-the-economy/page/12#post4376858

I do not consider it insider trading once the information is released to the public in any form.

Releasing the information to privately operated information dissemination clearinghouses who have the option to control release to the public is not a release to the public at large. This is particularly the case in situations where the very individuals to whom the information was provided were in a position of conflict of interest because they are participants in the market for which they were provided early access to market influencing information.

I do not think that providing an individual, or a few individuals, early access to market information constitutes a release to the public. If it did then it would be acceptable for me to provide you with information regarding my publicly traded employer in order for you to profit from it because telling you would constitute public disclosure.

Would you consider it insider trading, in a real world sense, to give inside information to an individual, a member of the public, who had the option to profit from the information himself, or provide it to others of his choice, before making the information available to the public at large ?

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

Ashen.2907:

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

Most of the top players on there share their account info with family to maximize their play time

That is a pretty interesting accusation, I’d love to see your source if you don’t mind..

several players directly that I know with excess of 23k AP…

ans no before you ask I am not going to out them for a TOS violation…

Do those, “several,” constitute more than half of all high end AP players ?

Curious to see how things play out but not particularly excited witht he possible exception of the Ranger changes. The Ranger changes are a nice start. If this is not the first step, but rather the end point, then no.

Essence Snow.3194:

I would imagine it wouldn’t matter if they were QA or not. If they saw an issue it would be prudent of them to notify someone

Who says that they haven’t done so ? Knowing abut an issue does not mean that it is instantly fixed.

And really, who says that they need to ? I mean after all everyone of those issues may have been reported a thousand times before an Anet employee ever sees it during their play time.

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

Most of the top players on there share their account info with family to maximize their play time

That is a pretty interesting accusation, I’d love to see your source if you don’t mind..

Exxcalibur.6203:

The problem with boys is the pfffffft pfffffffft wet noodle sound and graphics.

Yeah, darn them boys and their wet noodles. : )

Maybe they grew up.

GOSU.9574:

In GW1 the differences were more than cosmetic. Just sayin’.

I did enjoy that aspect, as well as the high ground advantage.

Vorch.2985:

As a 50/50 Gwamm…no, I love GW2 more as well.

People just tend to look back at gw1 with rose tinted goggles.

Or they liked GW1 more. Some people will enjoy GW2 more, some will enjoy GW1 more. Doesn’t mean they don’t enjoy the other as well.

Vorch.2985:

“Skill captures were fun!”…said no one in GW1. Cost 1k per skill cap and you had to pretty much vanquish a section of the map to get to a particular boss. Oh, and sometimes, said boss may not even show up. They fixed this with elite tomes so you could simply unlock the skill by essentially paying for it…because no one liked it.

Bosses were a chance to spawn in Prophecies, but were set spawns in the other two campaigns. You may not have enjoyed hunting Elite skills, and there is no shame in not liking a specific aspect of a game, but others did.

Vorch.2985:

“You have more build diversity!!”…that hardly anyone used. I know for a fact that the VAST majority of people used builds straight from the pvx wiki.

No, actually you do not. You have an opinion to that effect.

Vorch.2985:

The most mind blowing thing about the skill system is that a ranger could not have a pet.

Mine did. My guild-mates did. My alliance members did. PUGs with whom I played did. People against whom I played in PvP did.

Vorch.2985:

I’ll afk in 9 rings (yes, there is an event where you afk), but that’s about it.

Not sure that a single casino style game qualifies as an “event” but the same is possible in roulette. “Let it ride.”

Danikat.8537:

If I’ve understood correctly the OP is asking for the entire model for numerous longbows to be re-done.

It appears that he is merely asking that the names be switched. No model changes, just moving some text.

Windsagio.1340:

Ashen.2907:

Astralporing.1957:

Yes, it’s called GW2 achievement points leaderboard.
Even after 2 years, still only 10% players have over 4k ap (a year ago 10% cutout was around 3600 ap, by the way) – that tells us a lot about how active the majority is.

That seems more an indication that the majority of GW2 players don’t like doing dailies/monthlies, and low difficulty grind related activities than that they don’t like difficult content.

Given that Anet’s behavior seems to correspond to people not liking/doing that ‘hard’ content, what reasoning do you ascribe to their actions?

Seems to me that Anet has been introducing more ‘hard’ content since release. They have actively worked to make existing content more difficult in some cases. Their behavior seems to indicate that they have reason to believe that the theory that people do not like doing harder content is incorrect.

Astralporing.1957:

Yes, it’s called GW2 achievement points leaderboard.
Even after 2 years, still only 10% players have over 4k ap (a year ago 10% cutout was around 3600 ap, by the way) – that tells us a lot about how active the majority is.

That seems more an indication that the majority of GW2 players don’t like doing dailies/monthlies, and low difficulty grind related activities than that they don’t like difficult content.

Vayne.8563:

ZudetGambeous.9573:

Vayne.8563:

Zardul.3952:

in 2015 , without any changes for Gw2. the profits will decline further.

you cannot expect people to stay interested when Change is not occurring at a certain level of interest to players time invested in the game.

Anet really need to think about Expansions and Real NEW content that holds up.

MAYBE… Public BETA tests could better help this game improve and thus improve Profits.

They had a public test of EoTM and look where that got them.

The most popular and populated map in the game?

That the WvW people absolutely cant’ stand and rail against. They created it and tested it with WvWer’s and no one saw what it would become.

WvWers will say they’ve got no content since launch. I say, what about an entire map. They all just laugh.

EotM is not really serving the function it was made to serve.

Because it was not properly tested perhaps. If, as you say, it was tested primarily by invited WvWers then the test was flawed from the beginning. Relying on those least inclined to break something, because they are most inclined to use it as intended rather than as could be exploited, means that you are not likely to find the content’s breaking points.

This is a basic concept and is not exclusive to MMO design. I admire Anet for attempting to provide content for various play styles but they made a couple of huge mistakes with EoTM:

1) they neglected to consider the element of, “how can this be exploited by players for personal gain.” This is a particularly egregious lapse of judgement because the breaking point that emerged was one that has existed in game in one form or another since shortly after launch.

2) It would appear, if Vayne is correct, that they selected testers with a bias, one that should have been obvious, that reduced the chance that they would find the map’s breaking point(s). Note that, from what people seem to be saying, it is not serious wvwers who are negatively impacting the map so that it does not serve them as supposedly intended.

ozmaniandevil.6805:

I didnt realize you are REQUIRED to party with other players to do anything in GW1. I’m not happy about that.

You aren’t.

NPC henchmen or heroes can be used to create a party without any other players involved.

You accumulate points in your Hall of Monuments by completing GW1 achievements. One of those achievements is just linking your GW1 and 2 accounts. This gives 3 points.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Hall_of_Monuments

As you can see in that chart:
At one point you get the Heritage Footwear
At two points you also get the Heritage Legwear
At three points you also get the Heritage Torso wear

and so on.

Here is a guide to Hall of Monuments point acquisition.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guide_to_earning_Hall_of_Monuments_rewards

Zenith.7301:

You mean this game isn’t p2w with precursors doubling in price from when I left at 600g now to 1200-1400g? lol

How can that be considered pay to win if the people asking 1200-1400g for a precursor are other players ?

Inflation is the new definition of pay to win ?

Also, how can acquisition of cosmetic items which provide no stat advantage over less expensive options be considered pay to win ?

As a heads up you will have three GW2 armor unlocks just for linking the GW1 and GW2 accounts.

Welcome to the game. It has a lot of wonderful things going for it. Remember, if you remain on these forums, that even the naysayers are people who found enough merit in GW2 to hang around for years.

CETheLucid.3964:

Ashen.2907:

GW1
If you don’t have an elite skill yet in GW1 you can just slot a non-elite skill and have a full array of skills. Admittedly under most circumstances this will be less optimal than having an elite that suits your build, but it is better than having nothing at all.

That you had to first unlock with coin, capture, or in the case of PvP both.

Further after you purchased so many skills from a trainer, the game hard caps you at a platinum per skill.

Getting the full collection of your classes skills, across the multiple campaigns and multiple trainers (not all trainers had the same selection) would often be a fairly time consuming effort that would require you going out half-kittened most of the time and/or a very costly endeavor.

And since you can secondary every class in the game… I sure hope you’re not a completionist. You paid very much for that build variety, in multiple ways.

Ashen.2907:

GW2
If you don’t have a trait yet in GW2 you just do without until you can get one. Your build is not only sub-optimal, it is partially empty.

As it was in GW1. Ergo, the comparison. In GW2 you’re given an option, a real option as opposed to a faux option that existed in GW1.

I imagine they must have introduced tomes as there was a demand for the option to skip the exploring and discovering aspect.

As it is now.

Some people like to explore and earn their skills, and some people just want it ASAP gib now now now.

GW1 through a very convoluted system offered a kind of faux option to skip elite hunting for veteran players.

Whereas GW2 is much more honest and straight forward with this dilemma in that regard. Go earn it in the game or pay for it.

Both player types are sated with no weird convoluted system that was GW1. GW2 get’s it right here. Get’s it right on a lot of things compared to GW1.

Ashen.2907:

Only in the broadest strokes can one accurately paint them as, “the same.” It would be like saying that because they both can involve sitting at a computer, looking at the screen, and entering commands through keyboard and mouse, doing your taxes is exactly the same as playing GW2.

You’re as free to feel that way as I am free to laugh at the blatant hypocrisy of folks who say “Elite hunting in GW1 was great fun” out of one side of their mouths and say “Trait hunting in GW2 sucks” out of the other.

We disagree, however. In that regard your definition of fun and my definition of fun are vastly different.

I have not commented on my definition of fun. I, for example, do not have a problem with the trait unlock system. Well, perhaps it could use some tweaking but no system is perfect.

What I am saying is that achieving 100% completion in a zone is not the same as killing a single boss. There is no hypocrisy in saying that one enjoys killing a boss for a skill but not having to complete an entire zone, participate in PvP, etc to do so. Is it hypocrisy for me to say, for example, that I enjoy killing mobs for rewards but not doing jumping puzzles ?

Elite skills are just that, Elite. Advanced. They are not the same as a basic Trait in GW2. As much as I do not have the antipathy for the trait unlock system that some do I do think that if Anet wanted to capture the essence of Elite hunting in GW1 they might have been better off restricting the trait unlock system to master/grandmaster traits.

chemiclord.3978:

Ashen.2907:

Vayne.8563:

Loboling.5293:

I had originally assumed

They never said or implied anything like this.

Of course not. It wouldn’t be an assumption if they had said it : )

Well, I think Vayne is being a little bit cautious considering how players have run with assumptions in the past and then used that “self-hype” as something to yell at Arena.net about when the reality didn’t quite match what players had conjured in their heads.

My apologies. My post was meant to be taken as a joke. He is quite correct.

At times a word will be appropriated to fulfill a purpose as a technical or context specific term. That appears to be what you are seeing here. Within the context of the meta or elite play environment anything less than optimal is, apparently, considered non-viable.

Technically they are correct (in at least one sense). Viable means capable of succeeding. If the goal is to produce the best possible results only the most optimal build is viable. Anything else would not be, “capable of succeeding,” at that task or achieving that goal.

Pandaman.4758:

Ashen.2907:

It would be like saying that because they both can involve sitting at a computer, looking at the screen, and entering commands through keyboard and mouse, doing your taxes is exactly the same as playing GW2.

And complaining. Don’t forget we complain as much about game design as we do about tax codes.

Well duh : )

laokoko.7403:

Windsagio.1340:

Vix.6730:

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

So, what exactly do you wish to see? It would probably be helpful if players gave the Devs something more specific than ‘non-gear-treadmill end-game content’.

Raids. Dungeons. Post-80 continents. Unlockable secondary professions post-80 after questing. Unlockable skills post-80 through questing. Or we can just call it an expansion.

Aka, learnable content and vertical progression, not skillbased content and horizontal progression.

It’s a funny comment. People usually get better with more experience. Most skill based content do get easier because the player get more skilled.

I like to know what skill based content GW2 current have which isn’t learnable.

My thought as well.

A skill is a learned ability. By definition something that is skill based is learned.

Vayne.8563:

Loboling.5293:

I had originally assumed

They never said or implied anything like this.

Of course not. It wouldn’t be an assumption if they had said it : )

Congrats OP, and kudos to his benefactor.

I find Anet’s business model for GW2 to be the best I have yet encountered in an MMO. Any time I take a moment to consider it I am impressed anew.

Stephane Lo Presti.7258:

Hi Maxwell,

The big issue for us to add Season 1 to the Story Journal is that Season 1 was not built the same way that Season 2 was. I can’t really share details but this means that we can’t simply retrofit the story steps into the Story Journal and we’re going to need to rework Season 1 into a format that fits the Story Journal. As we’ve said, we really want all players to be able to experience as much of the Living World as possible at one point, but I don’t have more details to give you, including a possible timeline.

Thanks for sharing your perspective!

Thank you for this.

Esplen.3940:

Now you can go ahead and argue that your guild does in fact do everything, but that’s not true.

If you can say this with that kind of certainty you should be able to tell us what our guilds do.

What does my guild do ?
What did my GW1 guild do ?

AngelDiscarnate.5489:

I agree with Artemis, I’d like to see an alliance system come to Guild Wars 2.
It was one of the better community creators from Guild Wars.
And it gives smaller guilds, like mine, a chance at actually doing something in the world.

Agreed.

My guild was part of a 900+ member alliance which made for some very interesting times.

Some differences between trait hunting in GW2 and elite skill hunting in GW1:

GW1
If you don’t have an elite skill yet in GW1 you can just slot a non-elite skill and have a full array of skills. Admittedly under most circumstances this will be less optimal than having an elite that suits your build, but it is better than having nothing at all.

To get an elite skill in GW1 you go out and kill a named boss who possesses the skill in order to use a signet to, “capture,” it from him.

GW2
If you don’t have a trait yet in GW2 you just do without until you can get one. Your build is not only sub-optimal, it is partially empty.

In GW2 unlocking a trait might require 100% completion of an entire zone or participation in a form of PvP. In either case the trait will likely be completely unrelated to the content required to unlock it.

I completely agree that GW1 had its flaws but Elite hunting is only marginally similar, if that, to trait unlocking. Only in the broadest strokes can one accurately paint them as, “the same.” It would be like saying that because they both can involve sitting at a computer, looking at the screen, and entering commands through keyboard and mouse, doing your taxes is exactly the same as playing GW2.

Zaxares.5419:

No, it’s far better to just protect people from their own failings

That part is sad.

Not bad at all OP. Very nice actually.

Ayakaru.6583:

When you go to a forum remember 2 things:

1. People who like the game only visit the forum for information or share it. People who enjoy the game won’t bother much with it.

2. Most of the complainers are people who have gotten a little too comfortable in the ‘give’ society. They paid for a game, and a game they got. Everything that came after the release were free extras. People think they are entitled to this free stuff and think they have the right to complain about it.

EDIT:
What this forum mostly needs is someone who teaches the common complainer the difference between a complaint and critisism.
The first being; saying you don’t like something
The second being; saying WHY you don’t like something, or HOW something could be better/more liked

Sadly, this forum is oversupplied with the first

1) Anet owns these forums and has given its users the right to complain (so long as the complaints do not violate the forum rules of course)and so those people who, “think they have the right…” are correct.

2) Nothing in game is free, as an, “extra,” or otherwise. When access to something is gated by a required purchase it is not, “free.” Now, to clarify, I think that Anet’s business model is very generous. Demands are not justified, praise, suggestions, requests, criticism, and even complaints are.

Zaxares.5419:

How can you be sure that the items you are underselling are actually going to a player in need though? More than likely, it’s just being bought up by a flipper who’s going to turn right around and resell it for an even bigger profit than normal.

I am very careful. Have been for years.

Zaxares.5419:

If you want to be charitable, I think that spontaneous charity like giving the item away to someone who expresses admiration for it is much better.

I disagree. Helping someone to earn something they like, even if they end up paying only a fraction of full market value, is much better in my opinion. If we were talking about food, warm clothing in the winter, etc I would agree with you. For a luxury item within a luxury (the game itself) I do not.

Zaxares.5419:

Of course the biggest reason why the TP is here to stay is because of its role as a gold sink. It cannot be overstated just how important this function is; runaway MMO inflation is a terrible, terrible thing. It’s the kind of disaster that can destroy games entirely. It preventing scams is only a secondary benefit.

I agree that the TP is a gold sink (as stated in my previous post). I don’t particularly care for it because I find player to player trading to be part of the social aspect of the genre, but I am not particularly upset by it either.

The TP does not prevent scams from occuring. It does make it possible for Anet to disavow any responsibility for scams that do occur. I expect that it does reduce the number of scams though.

Zaxares.5419:

That assumes an equal distribution among the 8 professions though, which we know is hardly the case.

I’m actually inclined to think that overall, the economy won’t see any real difference in the number and quantity of armor drops. But each character is more likely to see drops that suit his/her profession, meaning that it would be easier for a specific player to farm the cloth (or other mats) they need.

Yeah, it was just an example to show why assumptions about how supply will be affected might be inadvisable.

The thing is, what mats does my ranger, for example, need? I do not need any leather for him. Leather is of less market value than cloth. Leather will have to rise in value to equal cloth (or cloth drop to the value of leather) for me to not see a net reduction in income needed to pursue other in game goals. How likely is it that supply of cloth will increase so dramatically, or supply of leather decrease so dramatically, (or demand change appropriately) that prices for those two will equalize ?

People have commented on the TP being scamless. I would not be surprised to find that the TP fees add up to more than all in game currency lost to scammers combined in GW1. Spreading the loss out so that everyone playing the game (well technically only those who use the TP, but isnt that likely to be pretty much everyone eventually ?) is affected to a lesser degree in an effort to prevent a few people who don’t pay attention from losing more seems like a poor trade to me.

I don’t think that it is a matter of preventing scams. “We are going to tax Joe, John, Jack, and everyone else because Sam is an idiot,” in a game just seems like a poor idea to me. I would like to think more highly of Anet than that.

I believe that the reality is more a matter of having another nearly universal gold sink in game.

The convenience of the TP is nice, but in other games I frequently undersell items in order to help newer players (or at least those without large stockpiles of in game currency) get something nice without it being a handout. In GW2 that is not really a viable option.

Obtena.7952:

Ashen.2907:

Obtena.7952:

How much you earn farming is not relevant. What is relevant is how much extra cloth is introduced into the game due to this change.

Light armors have a small advantage for increased cloth salvage from armors. Any increase in income is a short term advantage until the market equalizes because of increased volume of cloth. Prices will adjust as volume increases. Increased volumes don’t tend to make mats hold their values.

Honest question here, upon what do you base your assumption that the volume of cloth will increase overall if the majority of classes in the game are having their drop tables weighted against cloth ?

Disclaimer: I do not think that the situation is as kittenome claim and hope that the drop rate adjustments across classes will find some degree of balance over time (though I really do not see it as being likely that getting more leather will do me much good over time).

My assumption is that currently, armor of every type has equal chance to drop; so if you get a armor drop, that’s a 1/3 chance to get cloth armor.

At WORST, if Anet changes so that EVERY armor drop corresponds to a players armor class, then cloth armor ‘chance’ to drop will increase from 1/3 to 3/8, because there are 3 of 8 classes of light armor type.

Now, of course that assumes everyone farms at equal rates and that there are equal numbers of farmers across all professions. That’s not true but I can’t incorporate that into my assumption, so the best assumption is equality on those factors.

Now, add into that the fact that some fraction of cloth ALSO drops from bags and salvaging rags and it’s quite easy to see (for some people) that the impact of this change is VERY small.

Hmm,

Just using some hypothetical numbers (based on an assumption of equal distribution across classes now):

If there are 100 cloth drops
37.5 would go to light armor wearers
37.5 to medium
25 to heavy armor wearers

If light armor wearers have their drop rate for cloth increased by 10% while others have their drop rate for cloth reduced by 10% (I chose 10% only for ease of use in an example) then the numbers are:

41.25 for light armor wearers
33.75 for medium armor wearers
22.5 for heavy armor wearers

this results in a total of 97.5 cloth drops, a 2.5% reduction of the baseline.

I am not claiming that the adjustment to drop rates for cloth will be handled this way, merely that assuming that the supply of cloth will go up when drop rates are decreased for the majority of classes might be off.

Obtena.7952:

How much you earn farming is not relevant. What is relevant is how much extra cloth is introduced into the game due to this change.

Light armors have a small advantage for increased cloth salvage from armors. Any increase in income is a short term advantage until the market equalizes because of increased volume of cloth. Prices will adjust as volume increases. Increased volumes don’t tend to make mats hold their values.

Honest question here, upon what do you base your assumption that the volume of cloth will increase overall if the majority of classes in the game are having their drop tables weighted against cloth ?

Disclaimer: I do not think that the situation is as kittenome claim and hope that the drop rate adjustments across classes will find some degree of balance over time (though I really do not see it as being likely that getting more leather will do me much good over time).

I personally do feel that the game has gone downhill over time and is continuing to do so. Others will disagree and you may very well find that the very things that lead to my opinion of decreasing merit are elements that you enjoy. It would probably be a good idea for you to invest some time in the game to decide for yourself.

Invictus.1503:

The only way it takes up bank space is if you want to both use the minis AND sell them later. And the only way it takes up significant space is if you want to do this with a lot of different minis at once. Because if you just want to use the mini, they don’t take up ANY inventory space or bank space, they go into the GUI. On the other hand, if you want to sell them, they also don’t take up space because they are in the Trading Post.

So, if I’m getting your frustration correctly, you will be inconvenienced because you have to choose whether or not to use the mini yourself or sell it as you can no longer do both, is that right? If so, keep in mind this is exactly how armor and weapons work in the game once you hit green quality or better (except the mini doesn’t take up any inventory space when you decide to bind it to your account and they remain account rather than soul bound).

^ This is essentially a rewording of what I said previously. The new system removes utility that existed previously and infringes upon my bank storage while providing me with zero benefit to offset the loss.

Again, I am glad for those who will see a net improvement. I just think that it is unfortunate that Anet could not provide a game improvement to some without taking something away from others.

Invictus.1503:

Ashen.2907:

While I am glad that others will benefit from the minipet changes they are a negative for me. Pretty significantly so actually. It really is too bad that Anet cannot add something for those who wish it without destroying something that others prefer.

Please help me understand, what negative impact does it have?
1) If you have the mini, then you still have it (and in fact can choose to keep it out at all times, or leave it alone).
2) It removes the need to take up inventory space and click on it each map.
3) The pets can be used on multiple toons
4) If you already have an achievement for them, it isn’t like you are losing the achievement so no loss there
5) If you get a new mini, and only want to use it for a short time, then sell it then you can. You just keep it as an item in your inventory (like now) and don’t unlock it. Then when you get tired of it, you sell it.

So, please explain what I’m missing. We both read the same article (I’m assuming you read it of course). How does this have any negative impact?

This system takes away bank space for minipets. I gain no benefit from any of the of elements mentioned.

1) correct.
2) irrelevant (to me) again I am glad that others will benefit.
3) see #2
4) see #2
5) having to decide between taking up inventory space and general bank space is a negative compared to now (for me).