It is that simple. I did read your post but found most of it irrelvent to what I was arguing and it came off still as you didn’t understand the impact that using leather to make ascended insignias would have. Based on your edit, I don’t think you understand still.
There more to economics than just supply/demand
You’re right! Its called psychology which you’ve made obvious its irrelevant. But let’s picture this for a moment.
Let’s say there are now elonian leather insignia recipes available. The first thing players will do is buy up elonian leather, turn it into insignias and then place them on the TP for jacked up prices. Elonian leather’s price skyrockets kitten well near cloth prices and then hits a plateau where the still high prices hover around eachother.
Until all that happens, the only people to even touch cloth insignias will be TP flippers. And the only people who easily profit from any of this are the TP flippers. This whole idea to increase demand for leather does nothing but benefit TP flippers.
So yeah, it isn’t that simple.
so you are saying player psychology will trump supply and demand.
that happens sometimes, but in this case its unlikely.the velocity of silk and leather is too high, eventually the psychology wont be an issue.
the only possibility that would cause the price stay the same is if more players opted in because it was easier, but if the price stays the same that is unlikely.
over time its gonna come down to the demand shifting lowering the price.
You can’t have supply/demand without human interaction. You can’t have human interaction without psychology. So it is more like “supply/ demand IS psychology”. And since the first people to jump on leather the moment there is a good reason to use it are desperate crafters and TP flippers, what I just described is as close to what will happen as anyone can get.
But my overall point is that it isn’t going to solve OP’s problem since the end result will be leather being close to as expensive as cloth is now.
Incorrect. Leather prices will increase while cloth prices decrease. They’ll eventually balance out somewhere between where leather and cloth prices are now.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
It is that simple. I did read your post but found most of it irrelvent to what I was arguing and it came off still as you didn’t understand the impact that using leather to make ascended insignias would have. Based on your edit, I don’t think you understand still.
There more to economics than just supply/demand
You’re right! Its called psychology which you’ve made obvious its irrelevant. But let’s picture this for a moment.
Let’s say there are now elonian leather insignia recipes available. The first thing players will do is buy up elonian leather, turn it into insignias and then place them on the TP for jacked up prices. Elonian leather’s price skyrockets kitten well near cloth prices and then hits a plateau where the still high prices hover around eachother.
Until all that happens, the only people to even touch cloth insignias will be TP flippers. And the only people who easily profit from any of this are the TP flippers. This whole idea to increase demand for leather does nothing but benefit TP flippers.
So yeah, it isn’t that simple.
So what you’re telling me is that by adding leather to be able to craft insignias, it will not affect the cost of crafting ascended armor as elonian leather will just skyrocket until it hits where damask is now?
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
You’re still not seeing it.
To quickly explain:
The majority of the cost is in the insignia.
Allowing leather to make the insignias reduces the demand for damask.
Reduced demand for damask reduces prices for it and all of it’s materials.Oh i’ve been seeing it and it isn’t that simple. Did you even read my comment?
Damask isn’t made with damask scraps salvaged from ascended armor. It is made with cotton, linen, wool and silk in a market where demand > supply. How do we drop prices? Make supply > demand.
Simply increasing demand in leather isn’t going to change much unless your goal is to make a profit off of leather too.
It is that simple. I did read your post but found most of it irrelvent to what I was arguing and it came off still as you didn’t understand the impact that using leather to make ascended insignias would have. Based on your edit, I don’t think you understand still.
There more to economics than just supply/demand
People should just stop responding to Ayrilana.1396, your all making excellent points but if someone has steadfastly decided they disagree with you, you won’t be able to change there minds.
Goes both ways and I’m assuming they’re excellent points because you agree with them?
If Demand > Supply, Prices rise.
If Supply > Demand, Prices drop.
The only time this doesn’t apply is when markets are purposefully manipulated which happens regularly.
He is trying to increase demand. So the only thing that is going to happen is that the price of leather rises. Doesn’t solve the problem OP pointed out but go ahead and do it anyway.
If I read his post correctly, you’re missing something. If leather could be used for insignias then indeed he’s increasing demand for leather which will cause a price increase in those materials. What you’re forgetting is what impact this will have on cloth materials.
What impact? As steady as this market is, nothing is going to happen to cloth so long as it remains expensive whether its naturally or due to TP flippers. At most it’ll drop a few gold but that’s because simply modifying insignias to take leather or cloth does little impact on demand for cloth. At the same time, it seriously impacts the demand for leather causing the price of elonian leather to skyrocket.
In the end, his idea will end up making two not as expensive but still expensive mats.
What few people understand right now is:
- T2, T3, and T4 mats are in low supply compared to their demand. Their prices are therefore more expensive than others.
- Cloth’s overall T2-4 supply is lower than the supply of leather and metal. Their prices are more expensive than cloth and metal.Secondly, insignias are just one part of ascended armor. There are liners too, and in the tailor’s case, the whole set. Simply increasing demand in something else isn’t going to divert very much demand away from cloth because cloth is always going to have a high demand. Hence his idea is not going to solve OP’s issue.
The only reason why Damask exists is because players make it with scraps. You flood the market with scraps and Damask is going to magically flood the market too and Damask’s price is going to go down. OP’s problem is solved.
You’re still not seeing it.
To quickly explain:
The majority of the cost is in the insignia.
Allowing leather to make the insignias reduces the demand for damask.
Reduced demand for damask reduces prices for it and all of it’s materials.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
If Demand > Supply, Prices rise.
If Supply > Demand, Prices drop.
The only time this doesn’t apply is when markets are purposefully manipulated which happens regularly.
He is trying to increase demand. So the only thing that is going to happen is that the price of leather rises. Doesn’t solve the problem OP pointed out but go ahead and do it anyway.
If I read his post correctly, you’re missing something. If leather could be used for insignias then indeed he’s increasing demand for leather which will cause a price increase in those materials. What you’re forgetting is what impact this will have on cloth materials.
Charging for a service and then not providing it is what separates the SAB situation from the general PVE, WvW, and PvP situations. All of those portions of the game arre available to be played. SAB is not. None of those other portions of the game had an access fee beyond the basic game purchase. Anet did sell access to SAB for a fee above and beyond the cost of the game.
Charging for a service/product and then not providing it is not an ethical business practice. Stating that the product might be provided at some point in the future, maybe, does not change that.
Knowledge of SAB being limited available content with no set release schedule at the introduction of that coin was widely available. Players should have thought first before impulsively buying the coin if they truly have issues about not being able to use it at the moment. Anet is not at fault for players not doing the due diligence to at least think before they open their wallets.
They’ve said that they have plans to bring SAB back. That post on the French forums stated it would be after the expansion which makes sense. My advice to everyone is that’s upset about this is to never buy anything that is only temporarily available.
They have plans to perhaps bring it back.
There is a difference between at that moment and a period of years later. Buying a product that is labeled as providing infinite access if one desires such is not impulsive.
Spin it how you like, the service was charged for but is not being provided.
It was for infinite lives, not access.
Lives are the ability to play/access the content. The word, “continue,” refers to the ability to continue to play.
Some people have no interest in discussing things like reasonable expectations. It is my experience that those people are just not worth engaging with, after a certain point. I mean, I’d personally wonder how long people should be expected to be patient, but if someone seems to think that two years is a reasonable amount of time, it’s just not worth asking.
If there were actual technical problems, which were explained to an extent, and a time-line for correcting them in order to return the paid for service to function were provided, and refunds were offered to those desiring such, I would not have an issue with a protracted wait when dealing with something as complex as an MMO.
But taking away a service after it has been paid for, not providing a timeline for its return, indicating that its only a possibility that it will ever come back (Anet has redefine “absolutely,” and, “will,” as meaning, “perhaps,” or, “might,”), and not offering a refund even after paying customers have been without access to the service for which they have paid for a period of years is unethical.
SAB was temporary content so the service/access to it being removed after a months time was to be expected. SAB was not advertised as permanent content accessible at any time. They are not required to provide a timeline for its return as no release schedule has ever been available and this was widely known when the coin was available in the gem store.
Charging for a service and then not providing it is what separates the SAB situation from the general PVE, WvW, and PvP situations. All of those portions of the game arre available to be played. SAB is not. None of those other portions of the game had an access fee beyond the basic game purchase. Anet did sell access to SAB for a fee above and beyond the cost of the game.
Charging for a service/product and then not providing it is not an ethical business practice. Stating that the product might be provided at some point in the future, maybe, does not change that.
Knowledge of SAB being limited available content with no set release schedule at the introduction of that coin was widely available. Players should have thought first before impulsively buying the coin if they truly have issues about not being able to use it at the moment. Anet is not at fault for players not doing the due diligence to at least think before they open their wallets.
They’ve said that they have plans to bring SAB back. That post on the French forums stated it would be after the expansion which makes sense. My advice to everyone is that’s upset about this is to never buy anything that is only temporarily available.
They have plans to perhaps bring it back.
There is a difference between at that moment and a period of years later. Buying a product that is labeled as providing infinite access if one desires such is not impulsive.
Spin it how you like, the service was charged for but is not being provided.
It was for infinite lives, not access.
Lives are the ability to play/access the content. The word, “continue,” refers to the ability to continue to play.
No. Players had infinite access to the content without need of the coin. The coin was not needed to play SAB. The coin had no bearing on access as all it did was provide more lives. The service was provided only when the content was available. It was available for the duration of World 2 and will be available when we get Worlds 3 and 4.
Charging for a service and then not providing it is what separates the SAB situation from the general PVE, WvW, and PvP situations. All of those portions of the game arre available to be played. SAB is not. None of those other portions of the game had an access fee beyond the basic game purchase. Anet did sell access to SAB for a fee above and beyond the cost of the game.
Charging for a service/product and then not providing it is not an ethical business practice. Stating that the product might be provided at some point in the future, maybe, does not change that.
Knowledge of SAB being limited available content with no set release schedule at the introduction of that coin was widely available. Players should have thought first before impulsively buying the coin if they truly have issues about not being able to use it at the moment. Anet is not at fault for players not doing the due diligence to at least think before they open their wallets.
They’ve said that they have plans to bring SAB back. That post on the French forums stated it would be after the expansion which makes sense. My advice to everyone is that’s upset about this is to never buy anything that is only temporarily available.
They have plans to perhaps bring it back.
There is a difference between at that moment and a period of years later. Buying a product that is labeled as providing infinite access if one desires such is not impulsive.
Spin it how you like, the service was charged for but is not being provided.
It was for infinite lives, not access. It’s impulsive if you don’t consider that it’s for content that has limited availability with no set release schedule before making the purchase.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
I just save the chests on one of my characters in hope that they have some practical use in the future. I don’t do fractals so I don’t have anywhere close to how many daily fractal runners have.
Charging for a service and then not providing it is what separates the SAB situation from the general PVE, WvW, and PvP situations. All of those portions of the game arre available to be played. SAB is not. None of those other portions of the game had an access fee beyond the basic game purchase. Anet did sell access to SAB for a fee above and beyond the cost of the game.
Charging for a service/product and then not providing it is not an ethical business practice. Stating that the product might be provided at some point in the future, maybe, does not change that.
Knowledge of SAB being limited available content with no set release schedule at the introduction of that coin was widely available. Players should have thought first before impulsively buying the coin if they truly have issues about not being able to use it at the moment. Anet is not at fault for players not doing the due diligence to at least think before they open their wallets.
They’ve said that they have plans to bring SAB back. That post on the French forums stated it would be after the expansion which makes sense. My advice to everyone is that’s upset about this is to never buy anything that is only temporarily available.
Could be for the PvP beta test
I thought ho-ho tron was the worst?
If anything, how much mithril and leather you need should be increased to match that of damask. That way it’s fair.
Like 20%? It happens frequently enough to be noticeable.
Is this thread going to get merged or what?
Hopefully. I’d say it’s run it’s course anyway.
i do wonder what exactly they have lied about. They said they will implement precursor crafting and they are with the expansion. They said they will bring back SAB after the expansion and there’s no reason to say that they won’t.
They promised fractal leaderboards, did fractal level reset and never delivered or talked about it since. Oh and don’t forget fractal gear box that drops only at level 51+ with fractal 50 being the cap. And i am sure you can find more if you start digging.
And when they have added fractal 51+, would they still be lying? They haven’t stated that it won’t go higher and the mastery system makes you wonder what they could do with fractals.
The leaderboards I can give as they have not made any statements in regards to its expectancy. But the again, how important is it really compared to the other things people have accused them of lying about?
A company with high standards of ethical business practices would honor your request OP. Good luck, but do not hold your breath here.
No. Companies do not allow refunds whenever and for whatever reasons customers want. SAB is coming back in the future as has been stated by Anet. Currently the team that designed SAB are wrapped up in finishing the expansion. When they’ve finished, this will free them to work on other projects such as SAB.
Not that I actually expect anyone to address this, but anytime the developers don’t follow through with something they’ve said will or will not happen, people are reminded that developers are apparently not supposed to be accountable for what they say. Is this an exception to that mindset?
When have they not followed through with SAB? Have they ever release a schedule? I don’t remember them saying when we’d get world 3. Any dates or timeframes were entirely player created. It wasn’t until relevantly that we saw that post on the other forums that confirmed that the SAB team were currently working on the expansion and would not be able to work on SAB until after the expansion is released. No other dates were given.
I’m saying that anytime developers say anything about the game and people are unhappy when it doesn’t happen, the go-to response is that people are unreasonable for treating statements by developers as a “promise.” But now, suddenly, because they’ve said that SAB will be back, it means it absolutely will be back? You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say, “This is why developers don’t tell the players anything- because players expect them to mean what they say!” in one breath, and then in the next say, “But they said this content will be coming back, so calm down and trust them.”
Where has it been stated that what Anet says shouldn’t be a promise? I’ve seen this mentioned in a few other threads and never understood where it originated.
Here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here …… Shall I go on?
That is an argument you do NOT want to start, Ayrilana, that’s been a bitter complaint against Anet for a while now XD their feedback/promises/lack of info is infamously bad.
How many of that have they said will not return or happen? Precursor crafting got pushed back and then eventually added in with masteries. They also will not give out specific dates, not likely do any of those looking ahead blogs, because people will just accuse them of lying when plans get pushed back or altered.
They were accused of lying about them adding precursor scavenger hunts and now we’re getting them. Did they really lie?
People are saying that they’re lying about bringing SAB back. When they eventually do, would Anet still have been lying?
There’s a difference between them having something on the works as being a goal to eventually implement compared to something finite as “we’ll never release this”. People want more communication and transparency but all that it will lead to is more threads like this and the countless precursor crafting ones since 2014.
i do wonder what exactly they have lied about. They said they will implement precursor crafting and they are with the expansion. They said they will bring back SAB after the expansion and there’s no reason to say that they won’t.
A company with high standards of ethical business practices would honor your request OP. Good luck, but do not hold your breath here.
No. Companies do not allow refunds whenever and for whatever reasons customers want. SAB is coming back in the future as has been stated by Anet. Currently the team that designed SAB are wrapped up in finishing the expansion. When they’ve finished, this will free them to work on other projects such as SAB.
Not that I actually expect anyone to address this, but anytime the developers don’t follow through with something they’ve said will or will not happen, people are reminded that developers are apparently not supposed to be accountable for what they say. Is this an exception to that mindset?
When have they not followed through with SAB? Have they ever release a schedule? I don’t remember them saying when we’d get world 3. Any dates or timeframes were entirely player created. It wasn’t until relevantly that we saw that post on the other forums that confirmed that the SAB team were currently working on the expansion and would not be able to work on SAB until after the expansion is released. No other dates were given.
I’m saying that anytime developers say anything about the game and people are unhappy when it doesn’t happen, the go-to response is that people are unreasonable for treating statements by developers as a “promise.” But now, suddenly, because they’ve said that SAB will be back, it means it absolutely will be back? You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say, “This is why developers don’t tell the players anything- because players expect them to mean what they say!” in one breath, and then in the next say, “But they said this content will be coming back, so calm down and trust them.”
Where has it been stated that what Anet says shouldn’t be a promise? I’ve seen this mentioned in a few other threads and never understood where it originated.
It was an item for content that had limited availability with no set release schedule. It was quite obvious back then. If you chose to ignore that then it’s not really Anet at blame here. They provided an item that gave infinite lives in SAB. Everyone that bought it made use of it during World 2’s release. Anet plans to release the next world in the future so it’ll be used again.
SAB was released two times in less than six months during the first 15 months since the launch of the game. If anything, it was “quite obvious” at the time to expect constant releases, especially after they put an item such as the ICC on the gem store.
And it is useless that you keep repeating that they plan to release the next world in the future. Words are just that, words. Until they become something more than that, they’re completely and utterly useless. Words won’t make that coin work. A release will. Maybe along with the hobosacks’ removal, since us engineers have been waiting for them for more than a year as well. Again, something that they were supposedly looking upon and that never saw the light of a release.
Two instances is not a trend. They also likely started on the expansion early 2014 so the people that did SAB were pulled to focus on that. They said that they will release it so they will. You may not like that their current focus is on the expansion but that’s how it is.
Yeah, we know that’s how it is, that’s why people are complaining :P that’s not a good way for things to be “how they are”. I appreciate your zealous defense for Anet right now, but as you can see a lot of people think they screwed up here with the whole SAB thing. A lot of people. Just go look over there at that forum thread about SAB.
People are just upset because they made an impulsive purchase for that coin without thinking first. They would have realized that Anet had no set release schedule. The content also has only been available for a month at most with no indication that it would ever become permanent. And yes, I did buy a coin.
The team is working on the expansion and they shouldn’t be pulled from that, and delay it, just so they can develop and release the next world of SAB.
A company with high standards of ethical business practices would honor your request OP. Good luck, but do not hold your breath here.
No. Companies do not allow refunds whenever and for whatever reasons customers want. SAB is coming back in the future as has been stated by Anet. Currently the team that designed SAB are wrapped up in finishing the expansion. When they’ve finished, this will free them to work on other projects such as SAB.
Not that I actually expect anyone to address this, but anytime the developers don’t follow through with something they’ve said will or will not happen, people are reminded that developers are apparently not supposed to be accountable for what they say. Is this an exception to that mindset?
When have they not followed through with SAB? Have they ever release a schedule? I don’t remember them saying when we’d get world 3. Any dates or timeframes were entirely player created. It wasn’t until relevantly that we saw that post on the other forums that confirmed that the SAB team were currently working on the expansion and would not be able to work on SAB until after the expansion is released. No other dates were given.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
It was an item for content that had limited availability with no set release schedule. It was quite obvious back then. If you chose to ignore that then it’s not really Anet at blame here. They provided an item that gave infinite lives in SAB. Everyone that bought it made use of it during World 2’s release. Anet plans to release the next world in the future so it’ll be used again.
SAB was released two times in less than six months during the first 15 months since the launch of the game. If anything, it was “quite obvious” at the time to expect constant releases, especially after they put an item such as the ICC on the gem store.
And it is useless that you keep repeating that they plan to release the next world in the future. Words are just that, words. Until they become something more than that, they’re completely and utterly useless. Words won’t make that coin work. A release will. Maybe along with the hobosacks’ removal, since us engineers have been waiting for them for more than a year as well. Again, something that they were supposedly looking upon and that never saw the light of a release.
Two instances is not a trend. They also likely started on the expansion early 2014 so the people that did SAB were pulled to focus on that. They said that they will release it so they will. You may not like that their current focus is on the expansion but that’s how it is.
No. Companies do not allow refunds whenever and for whatever reasons customers want. SAB is coming back in the future as has been stated by Anet. Currently the team that designed SAB are wrapped up in finishing the expansion. When they’ve finished, this will free them to work on other projects such as SAB.
you see it’s a really bad practice to say “you will be able to use our product sometime in the abstract future and that’s why we’re not handing out refunds”. If they said “in a year” people would be like “oh, okay”, however when they say “it’s not a priority”, then I’m sorry, but how long till you release existing content back? 6 years? 8 years?
If they’re not willing to give a date then they should be willing to give a refund.
It was an item for content that had limited availability with no set release schedule. It was quite obvious back then. If you chose to ignore that then it’s not really Anet at blame here. They provided an item that gave infinite lives in SAB. Everyone that bought it made use of it during World 2’s release. Anet plans to release the next world in the future so it’ll be used again.
Obviously it wasn’t “quite obvious” back then or people wouldn’t be complaining about it now. Nor would they be complaining about the lack of SAB in the first place, and they wouldn’t have been surprised that it wasn’t here by April 1st 2015. My question was already answered, it’s a bad answer, but answered nonetheless. The debate now is whether that should remain the answer.
People made an impulsive purchase without thinking things through and are now upset about it. I knew full well that there was no release schedule and that any release would be available for at most a month. They’re focusing on the expansion which is much more important than a side project such as SAB.
No. Companies do not allow refunds whenever and for whatever reasons customers want. SAB is coming back in the future as has been stated by Anet. Currently the team that designed SAB are wrapped up in finishing the expansion. When they’ve finished, this will free them to work on other projects such as SAB.
you see it’s a really bad practice to say “you will be able to use our product sometime in the abstract future and that’s why we’re not handing out refunds”. If they said “in a year” people would be like “oh, okay”, however when they say “it’s not a priority”, then I’m sorry, but how long till you release existing content back? 6 years? 8 years?
If they’re not willing to give a date then they should be willing to give a refund.
It was an item for content that had limited availability with no set release schedule. It was quite obvious back then. If you chose to ignore that then it’s not really Anet at blame here. They provided an item that gave infinite lives in SAB. Everyone that bought it made use of it during World 2’s release. Anet plans to release the next world in the future so it’ll be used again.
Ok , but still we need more trasparency about sab from anet. I don’t want to know the date of release , but at least the season… and the year….
They could provide more transparency if they wished but it’s not required of them.
No. Companies do not allow refunds whenever and for whatever reasons customers want. SAB is coming back in the future as has been stated by Anet. Currently the team that designed SAB are wrapped up in finishing the expansion. When they’ve finished, this will free them to work on other projects such as SAB.
you see it’s a really bad practice to say “you will be able to use our product sometime in the abstract future and that’s why we’re not handing out refunds”. If they said “in a year” people would be like “oh, okay”, however when they say “it’s not a priority”, then I’m sorry, but how long till you release existing content back? 6 years? 8 years?
If they’re not willing to give a date then they should be willing to give a refund.
It was an item for content that had limited availability with no set release schedule. It was quite obvious back then. If you chose to ignore that then it’s not really Anet at blame here. They provided an item that gave infinite lives in SAB. Everyone that bought it made use of it during World 2’s release. Anet plans to release the next world in the future so it’ll be used again.
A company with high standards of ethical business practices would honor your request OP. Good luck, but do not hold your breath here.
No. Companies do not allow refunds whenever and for whatever reasons customers want. SAB is coming back in the future as has been stated by Anet. Currently the team that designed SAB are wrapped up in finishing the expansion. When they’ve finished, this will free them to work on other projects such as SAB.
How do you prove that it’s not that they don’t know what they’re doing?
Well I’m guessing you’re in the US. Why not just buy those prepaid VISA cards and then reload it when it gets low?
I haven’t had any issues with any ports including what the guardians have.
Lol…. Are you actually serious? Sab will eventually come back.
with how it was going till now… That could be like at the end of the game’s lifetime even -.-
The team that worked on SAB are busy working on finishing up the expansion. This is why they have not had enough time to release World 3 despite there being a lull in content at the moment.
Sorry to disappoint you guys but Anet has answered in a french topic about the SAB (https://forum-fr.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/game/Super-adventure-box-3) and we’ll probably not have the SAB back till a long time…
For those who don’t understand french, Anet just tell that “their efforts are concentrated on the first expansion for Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns.”
Pretty much what I thought in another thread why we haven’t seen it yet despite the increased gaps between updates.
I just hope when World 3 is released the TM weapons actually look (deepish) red and not like a pinkish color.
Who said that W3 weapons will be red?
Josh Foreman said so in a thread that must have been removed. The wiki references it.
Yeah the original thread which had a TON of back and forth with Josh has long since been removed. That behavior was seen as a stain on anet’s reputation because it made the complete and utter lack of real communication from every other dev look even worse.
And communication was actually worse then than it is now, if you can believe it.
Fear not, for I’ve found the post informing about the weapon skin colours:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/archive/sab-bts/Finally-dagger-skins/page/2#post2730102
Also, the thread with all the “back and forth” is also still in existence, just moved to the archive:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/archive/sab-bts/Is-it-too-hard-Respect-the-awesome-work/first
Conspiracy theories everywhere… :P
Likely needed to add the archive subdirectory it seems. The threads do appear to be deleted if you forget that everything was sent to the archive.
I noticed something like this a few hours ago. I was by the WP in NE Iron Marches and when I quickly relogged it put me down at the south of the map by that WP.
I just hope when World 3 is released the TM weapons actually look (deepish) red and not like a pinkish color.
Who said that W3 weapons will be red?
Josh Foreman said so in a thread that must have been removed. The wiki references it.
By adding a fourth stat to gear, while one may argue it upsets the balance of things, it could instead create a higher diversity while making the other sets more meaningful. Some could argue it makes things more complicated, but I disagree that this is a bad thing.
No it would not. People would again go for the maximum amount of damage and a new set of Zerker gear would emerge.
The fact that Zerker (assassins) gear is picked as main endgame gear has nothing to do with its stats. It has to due with game mechanics and the ability to avoid, dodge, mitigate most/all damage thrown at the group. Adding more stats does not change this. Hence adding another layer of stats would just convolute things even more and end up in people picking max damage once again.
You pretty much contradicted yourself. It has everything to do with it’s stats. That’s the whole point. Zerker gear means you’re pumping out the most damage, because of it’s stats. If the gear didn’t have the stats to do the most damage, people wouldn’t pick it.
So explaining it in a more simple terms – adding a 4th stat would mean you’d be able to increase the damage of the other sets without ruining their role. As said, by increasing power per toughness and precision per vitality on soilders gear, then it would do a lot more damage, but it would be slow but hard hitting. The same goes with the other sets but I won’t repeat the examples. It would increase the damage to all of them (and as I already said, the mobs health could be adjusted to compensate). Having an extra stat means you can tweak the gear much easier to balance them out to do more equal damage while filling different roles.
They didn’t contradict themselves and you missed their point which has been brought up numerous times in all of these anti-zerker (meta) threads that have been popping up frequently as of late.
Exactly. I was not contradicting myself. I was stating, without going into to much detail, that the reason why zerker gear is dominant now is that it’s the most useful and potent damage stat combination.
You could overpower condition damage and the new meta would again be maximum condition damage making zerker undesired.
A fourth stat would do nothing to change that. It would end in exactly 1 thing:
-> which stat combo is now best for most damage?
-> pick that stat combo
-> new meta with way more convoluted statsThe reason for Zerker meta is multifold, two of the main ones being:
-> defensive stats are not needed for pve (major reason to go all damage)
-> direct damage is superior to condition damage (pick direkt damage over condition damage stats)A fourth stat does not change this. How is this so hard to understand?
People struggle to comprehend this because there are so many different stat combos available, particularly in pve. I mean why put them there if they have no purpose? They must have a purpose!
One can only assume that anet did not understand their own core mechanics when they were developing the game, specifically that stats on gear is not required.
All it really does is confuses people and makes them think that different stat combos have value (which they don’t).
To give players choice in what stat combinations that they want to use. All of these can be used based on the players’ preferences. Not every player has to follow the meta and go with that stat combination that is most optimal. They can go with whatever suits them as they are all viable. They just have to make sure to read the LFG comments to determine there are no player set restrictions for that particular posting. If that doesn’t work, they can create their own LFG.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
By adding a fourth stat to gear, while one may argue it upsets the balance of things, it could instead create a higher diversity while making the other sets more meaningful. Some could argue it makes things more complicated, but I disagree that this is a bad thing.
No it would not. People would again go for the maximum amount of damage and a new set of Zerker gear would emerge.
The fact that Zerker (assassins) gear is picked as main endgame gear has nothing to do with its stats. It has to due with game mechanics and the ability to avoid, dodge, mitigate most/all damage thrown at the group. Adding more stats does not change this. Hence adding another layer of stats would just convolute things even more and end up in people picking max damage once again.
You pretty much contradicted yourself. It has everything to do with it’s stats. That’s the whole point. Zerker gear means you’re pumping out the most damage, because of it’s stats. If the gear didn’t have the stats to do the most damage, people wouldn’t pick it.
So explaining it in a more simple terms – adding a 4th stat would mean you’d be able to increase the damage of the other sets without ruining their role. As said, by increasing power per toughness and precision per vitality on soilders gear, then it would do a lot more damage, but it would be slow but hard hitting. The same goes with the other sets but I won’t repeat the examples. It would increase the damage to all of them (and as I already said, the mobs health could be adjusted to compensate). Having an extra stat means you can tweak the gear much easier to balance them out to do more equal damage while filling different roles.
They didn’t contradict themselves and you missed their point which has been brought up numerous times in all of these anti-zerker (meta) threads that have been popping up frequently as of late.
If that’s the only map then chances are you’ll get stuck there. You can also un-rep your guild and try to guest again.
My problem isn’t with the restrictions people put on their lfg posts, my problem is that zerker is the only restriction, and rightly so, as it is by far the most (and in some peoples opinions, the only) viable build.
Playing as a zerker is fun, I do like it. But the risk for playing as a zerker is not high enough to merit the reward it currently gives.
It’s the most optimal build (technically stat combo), not the only viable one.
I have an easier solution that can be done now without any changes made. If people don’t like the restrictions that other people request in their LFG, create your own LFG. There’s absolutely no reason to essentially nerf a playstyle because you do not like it for feel that it’s not the proper way to play.
or just plan ahead
I never have that much gold at the same time (I love spending my gold all the time xD). Spreading 6720g on the accounts way ahead of time just so I have them ready for the envelopes? You must be kidding me.
This year I only managed to do this by sending each account16g every day, sending the envelopes back, selling them on TP and sending 16g again next day.I dont care if these measures only affect less than 1% of the players. If it affects just 1 legitimate player its a terrible measure.
You only need about 480G plus enough to cover the first day’s TP fees to purchase 16 across your 30 accounts. After that, you can continually sell them each day and make profit which I’m assuming is your goal. You don’t need to keep sending each account gold everyday as you will make more than enough profit to not need gold influxes to that account.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
Or it’s like the data that Anet found and hardly anybody even hits the cap in the first place.
Erm….the guy hes talking about…hit the gold cap, and cannot take items out of his mail. Items mind you, not gold. (Suppose ably)
See what I’ve bolded.
This restriction should have no effect on items sent through mail. If there is, it’s unintended and most likely a bug.
That’s what I thought. So the guy that couldn’t get a dye via mail must either be doing something wrong or it is a bug. If it is a bug I would guess we would see more people posting about it by now.
Or it’s like the data that Anet found and hardly anybody even hits the cap in the first place.
This restriction should have no effect on items sent through mail. If there is, it’s unintended and most likely a bug.
That’s what I thought. So the guy that couldn’t get a dye via mail must either be doing something wrong or it is a bug. If it is a bug I would guess we would see more people posting about it by now.
Or it’s like the data that Anet found and hardly anybody even hits the cap in the first place.
or just plan ahead
Of course devs know how much appreciated a new world would be. They’re even working on it at the moment (see that_shaman’s datamining post), so I’m pretty sure we’ll have it back somewhen this month, maybe on the 14th or 28th.
I guess they plan to surprise us with it, so you won’t see an official announcement before.
Or it’s already in the game and they’ll randomly activate it. They do communicate with him so he doesn’t reveal everything that is datamined.
So let’s say ou’ve received 499G in the mail this week. What happens when you try to receive another 10G? Do you receive all 10G, only 1G, or none of it?
I wonder if combining the named exotic that shares the same skin as a precursor will give you an even higher chance that you might get a precursor.
So for those that have hit the limit already, how many of you did so on purpose so you’d have reason to complain?
Did they ever say that you’d have choices in the outcome for the personal story and expansion? All they’re doing is giving the player some replay-ability with the story. It’s similar to how you had choices in Nightfall but then could go back to experience those “missed” instances.