Guild Wars 2

phys.7689:

Essentially assume all these values are the same for now. Now, should every playstyle with have the same earning potential?

You are asking not only a pointless hypothetical question, but one I have already answered. Unless two systems are exactly the same in every single aspect, then there is no reason why they should be forced to have the same potential gold gain rewards.

You also dodged my question. Now do you think two utterly different systems (like A and B in my example) should have the same potential gold gain reward (point 5.)?

I want to be able to progress towards endgame goals at a decent pace playing the non tp game. making money isnt my goal.

Define “decent pace”, your idea of “decent” or “reasonable” might be completely and utterly different to mine, as mine might be utterly different to the next guys. I can get luxury endgame items via pve at a “decent pace” as far as I am concerned.

Again I would add in a token/reward/endgame skin system for high skilled players (not the average joe, top level players), like the legendary rewards for major pvp tournaments. If you win a major tourny, or can solo dungeons, or top a GvG WvW table etc, then there you go, choose item x, you can keep it or sell it, up to you. Or choose item y, only available to people who have achieved certain things and account bound, so you know everyone who has it has done the thing needed to get it.

Borghal.1635:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

If I want to spend 10 hours in Keg Brawl rather than farm Orr, I should not be entitled to the same rewards. If you want to make money, you do things that generate money.

Why should you not?

It’s been explained why.

Borghal.1635:

Fenrir.3609:

Now you suggest that system A should give the same “potential” return in terms of gold gain (point 5.) as B, really?

Sure, because we are not in a competitive game as a whole. In PvE, you shouldn’t have to compete with others, that’s what PvP is for.

The competitive/risk element of B is the problem, really.

Competing directly with other players should be a choice.

1. Whether the game is competitive as a whole makes no difference to the demonstration of two disparate systems I presented. Now if you look at the two systems in the example I gave and thought “yep, they should both give the same potential gold gain!”, then, well, wow.

2. The active competitive/risk element of system B is not the issue, the issue is certain people taking part in system A thinking they have the god given right to the potential gold gain people in system B might realise, without wanting to touch the mechanics needed to unclock said potential gold gain.

3. You do have a choice to compete with other players or not. You might not have much of a choice in terms of using the TP, but simply using it to buy and sell goods you need is not the same as trying to compete in, make gold purely from and take on the risk of the TP. So yes, you have all the choice in the world. As per point 2, the issue is those players taking on zero competition and zero risk et al, seem to think they somehow deserve any potential gold gain upside that those who do take on said competition and risk might possibly achieve.

Let’s get this straight so I fully understand your position. You think that every system should offer the same potential gold reward regardless as to the fact that the mechanics, merits and factors involved might be utterly different?

phys.7689:

I said potential, not actual. One would assume that actual would be based on demand, and skill etc. But you have answered enough.

It appears we disagree fundamentally. While i dont think every player should earn the same thing, i think that one should aim for similar earning potentials in a best case scenario when done well. The logical reason i can see to award players differently is when they specifically want to incentivize certain behaviours that better that benefit the game.

but since we disagree on that point, we dont have much common ground to come to an understanding.

If you think systems should have the same “potential” rewards regardless as to the fact that their mechanics are different then yes, it is clear that we don’t share common ground as that idea makes zero sense to me.

The “logical” reason for differences in potential rewards cross system is due to the inherent difference between the systems structures. The differences in potential rewards within the systems then boils down to player driven factors.

Take the example below, (note it is a hypothetical example and not an comprehensive outline of the differences between pve and the market model):

SYSTEM A –
1. Zero risk.
2. Zero capital needed.
3. Non competitive/non zero sum.
4. Grants secondary rewards.
5. Can earn gold from it.

SYSTEM B -
1. High risk.
2. Large capital needed.
3. Competitive/zero sum.
4. Grants no secondary rewards.
5. Can earn gold from it.

Now you suggest that system A should give the same “potential” return in terms of gold gain (point 5.) as B, really?

phys.7689:

I perfectly understand the difference, let me break this down into simple series of questions, so people dont misunderstand me.

Assuming the macro economy is not an issue, or assuming that two playstyles use the same type of structure, say for example both are reward reallocation

Do you agree that both playstyles should have the same earning potential(when played well or properly)?

No, I would not say that two systems both being “reward reallocation” centric should mean that they both give the same earning potential.

But if two systems were identical in every single aspect, then there would ofc be a case to be made for equal earning potential across the systems. Still, even then there would be a disparity in earning potential between groups within said system.

phys.7689:

<snip>

People have explained why there can be a difference in potential “gain” between the two systems about nine thousand times in this thread and others like it thus far, so I am unsure why you seem to be asking the same question thirty odd pages into the thread.

Do you really have to ask why “rewards” might not the same between two systems with such massively different underlying core mechanics? I’d have said the reasons are obvious.

The differences and reasons why extend far, far beyond the scope of just “because one is a gold sink”.

phys.7689:

i already told you why its bad.
earning at different rates creates different rewards per effort

And we have pointed out countless times why a) it is not bad and b) going on “effort” alone is a terrible metric.

I know the game, i just dont think its a good mechanic that me being able to focus on numbers, data, mathematics, should make me win at the game.

It doesn’t, unless you think being able to play dress up a bit faster than someone who is not actually in competition with you is “winning the game”. Which would be a bit of an odd viewpoint to take.

most people have not come anywhere close to 10 gold per hour overall sir

I do and can via pve. Others can as well, they obviously choose not to so it’s their problem really. You will note “most” “normal” people flipping the TP also do not come close to 10G per hour.

Regardless, expecting to “balance” two systems with fundamentally different mechanics in order to solve a “problem” which has not been proven to exist is a bit of a daft idea all said.

But I would add in tokens for current skins/items as well as for new, unlock/no trade only items for those players who demonstrate “skill”. i.e. those who can solo dungeons or set record times (or add in “elite mode” dungeons/paths). For those that win spvp tournaments and for those that dominate the GvG side of WvW.

phys.7689:

at level 1total money you may profit on green wood flipping/crafting- lets say 2 copper per click
untill you start operating at amounts in the 250 size, so 250×2copper per click
at level 2total money you may profit on iron speculation lets say 12 copper per click
250 size now 250×12 copper per click
eventually you break into higher value markets, like rare stat distribution items,
they sell for like 10 gold, and buy orders are for like 4-6 gold. profiting like 5 gold per click.
Eventually you get up to legendary and precursor levels, where you are either crafting your own for profit, or acting as the middleman for people who cant front 5% gold and wait long periods for a return

suffice to say, its not limited via clicks, its most limited via knowledge available capital, and supply/competitors

Go put 1000G into the market now and tell us all how many orders you have filled, listed and sold for profit in the next hour.

People are not just “clicking” and dropping massive margin returns on AUM instantly.

phys.7689:

<snip>

You can make more than enough via:

“Skill” in terms of dungeons.
“Farming” in terms of open word farming.
“Merchanting” in terms of the TP.
Or via a combination of the above.

The options are there, some people are simply refusing to use them and then crying about how they don’t have enough gold for extreme value vanity items which are not actually needed.

Now “merchanting” can indeed make you more, but there are quite obvious reasons as to why that is the case (as has been pointed out time and again). But the other options still allow for potentially massive returns (again, as has been pointed out time and again).

Borghal.1635:

I would love to get a few pointers on how to make that much, if you can… or perhaps just redirect me so that we don’t spam the thread. Really. Dungeons are unstable due to PUGs and even if you run within 30 minutes it’s hardly gonna be more than 4g an hour bonus gold included.
Open world bosses spawn every 15 minutes now and I usually end up with one or two rares worth 60s total and a bunch of 1-5s trash. So again that’s close to 4g an hour…
Oh and I have only 64% MF despite basically salvaging everything blue and green since hitting 80… :- /

If you can’t do dungeons effectively (and by that I mean speed run or solo sell them) and have poor MF then you are going to be limited in terms of gains, still 6-7g+ an hour via open world pve is more than viable.

As for “pointers”:
Work out which mobs drop T5/T6 (or other in demand craft mats/bags).
Find a location which contains said mobs in high density and with a decent respawn rate.
Find several locations which suit the criteria above.
Farm and hop between them to avoid or otherwise limit DR hits as much as possible.
Profit.

I can pull in 60+ T5 and 12+ T6 per hour. When you factor in upgrading the T5 to T6 via the MF, from T6 alone I can gain over 7G an hour. Again that is without factoring in any other drops.

Now in the last 10 minutes whilst waiting for some orders to fill I got 17 T5 and 3 T6 as well as other drops (crud drops this time around in fairness, all greens or worse).

Regardless, even at the 4G an hour rate you mentioned, that is more than enough to do what I initially said. Either set aside a few hours to make the money you want for that shiny skin you want, or set a small portion of each hour aside for it. If you do that, you get your skin. The trouble is instead people don’t bother and just qq.

CptAurellian.9537:

It’s quite a challenge to stay contructive after tens of thousands of more or less equally stupid threads on the very same nonsensical topic.

Indeed.

Not this rubbish again…

Borghal.1635:

Fenrir.3609:

I’m all for giving engdame items out for skilled play btw, i’m 100% behind doing that. But again, it would be out of reach of the average/casual player unless they dedicated their ig time to improving/doing what they needed to do.

It already IS out of reach of casual players. If you play max one hour per day or so, how long before you get… say 300g for a Dreamthistle skin? I have 310 hours over 240 days so in average I would say I am a casual. Yet in all that time I have amassed less than half of the required funds by playing causally i.e. experienced all of the game’s content in equal measure.

If getting a skin is so important to you, why don’t you spend a bit of your play time making gold?

I can make 7-8g+ an hour from pve (others can make a lot more). Now it would take me 38 hours to get that skin. Leaving me 272 hours to play whatever the heck I wanted with the skin I wanted.

Or I would set aside 10 minutes of my hour to grab an additional gold or two, then spend the rest of my 50 minutes doing what I wanted. Again I would have the skin and loads of free play time.

Or I would set up some TP orders and do what I wanted to do for the hour, again I would have the skin and loads of free play time.

Now adding in a skill based option does this: You don’t have to farm, or flip or otherwise step away at any point from the activities you like and you can still get the skin so long as you are within the top bracket of players doing said activity. And i’m all for that.

phys.7689:

a better game design, that rewards people for doing things that accentuate the games strengths. Feel cool and rewarded when you achieve a goal, while doing the interesting things the game has to offer.

As long as the TP merchant playstyle is the dominant(by a large margin) one for progressing towards endgame goals, all of the rest of the game, which is the vast majority of it, will be less rewarding in comparison.

You are rewarded for doing non TP activities and you can gain luxury endgame items via non TP activities.

I’m all for giving engdame items out for skilled play btw, i’m 100% behind doing that. But again, it would be out of reach of the average/casual player unless they dedicated their ig time to improving/doing what they needed to do. Which let’s face it, most won’t do because it is easier to come on the forums and qq about the supposed mean old “zerkers”, “elitists”, “TP barons” etc.

Essence Snow.3194:

Yep only 5 of us….lol There’s at least 5 new threads every day in the general section and a few here.

I find it rather hypocritical that you say you don’t need proof and then demand that others have it. (both are wrong btw)

JS only said that individuals are not effectively controlling markets. He never said anything about there not being a wealth gap or anything specific about player metrics. This is why he was mistaken when asking for proof. It is an impossible condition. That is something I that is obvious. He was wrong to ask for it as are you.

Yes actually it is the same few people complaining all the time and yes the onus is on those bemoaning the current system to provide proof to back up their claims.

Canakun.8031:

(infact GS war isnt even viable anymore, GS ranger is better than GS warrior imo).

The old 30/25 GS, Axe+mace meta is more than viable, in fact for certain situations (soloing dungeons, running with non elite level groups) it is often a better option than the current max dps axe build.

@ The thread in general and the idea that people would ping zerk gear and then use something else. Just, why? You have the gear, use it. If you can’t use it and you need the crutch of more “tanky” gear, then don’t try and join zerk ping groups in the first place.

hunter steele.7836:

It simply if this should replace zerker or not.

For pve, no, zerk is still the best.

Gene Archer.8560:

More or less. The idea is to get an idea of what can be earned with limited time to play through each activity. It’s what I was working on, but I then stopped, and then before I could get back into it, the Feature Pack happened and changed a good deal. I have to look at the World Boss schedule and figure those things out, among others.

If you are looking for maximum potential earnings via pve (which I assume you are) then you would be wasting your time looking at world bosses and/or champ trains as they have never been “optimal” in terms of returns.

Selling dungeons.
Speed running dungeons.
T6 orientated farming.

Are the top earners that I am aware of and could all return more than trains and world bosses (although ofc I am not stating that there are not other methods that are better, I am just not aware of them).

Prior to the patch from open world pve (ignoring dungeons for now) you could pull in 8-12G+ per hour, with little effort, zero risk and zero investment capital needed (outside of having a level 80).

Now, since the feature patch, I will say I have noticed a decrease in returns, though given the fact that my sample size since the patch is tiny, that could be (and more than likely is) down to just pure bad luck/RNG.

Dusty Moon.4382:

Sure they will – I have a build using Carrion armor and Knight’s trinkets and it is bloody amazing compared to the same build using Zerker everything and more survivable too.

People just need to experiment now. Stop going and using the same cookie cutter builds posted on the internet.

If you feel you have a build which is better than the current meta build for whatever content you are doing, feel free to post evidence outlining exactly why.

Perhaps you have, after all metas do evolve, but forgive me if I’m not instantly convinced.

Btw, not everyone using a meta build is blindly following them without a shred of understanding as to why said build is optimal and why they should use it.

Already thinking outside the box!!

Well perhaps not really, the mention of “healing the zerg” somewhat points to wvw zerging or at the very least open world pve zerging and not instanced pve, i.e. somewhere that a) zerk is already not the meta and b) clerics is hardly unknown.

Only been in AC since the change using the same old 30/25 zerk/scholar solo warr build and it seemed easier/faster than before due to the lower level scaling changes.

Dusty Moon.4382:

Spiuk.8421:

More like RIP every single build but zerker.

Nope – sorry – actually TRY another build. Other builds are more viable now and that is the most important thing.

They were always “viable” they were just never optimal and amazingly enough after this change, they still will not be optimal and still will not be wanted in groups trying to be optimal.

If anything non zerk users will have less chance of getting in optimized groups because it will not be as easy to carry people using sub optimal builds and gear.

Gene Archer.8560:

Thanks for the info guys.

Not sure where to even take my argument at this point. The nature of these changes suggests (to me at least) both less gold -and- less items being brought into the game.

Just please bear with me for this one post as I try to get the snark and bitterness out of my system by proclaiming: But hey, all the TP flippers still get to make all their gold all the time. Clearly Guild Wars 2 was meant to actually be Market Wars 2!

Are you trying to ascertain how much can be made via pve in order to start to identify the potential disparity?

Essence Snow.3194:

If you can demonstrate that no problem exists (hasn’t happened yet) and show that a solution isn’t an improvement over the current system (hasn’t happened yet) then go ahead.

See why that’s not valid?

It has been pointed out why that flip (pardon the pun) doesn’t work.

The onus is on the people who proclaim there is an issue to present evidence of it, not on those who are happy with the current system.

Seriously at this point there is just no excuse for those who are proposing change to not be presenting evidence of these supposed issues or spending their time in this thread asking JS and others who may be privy to it for specific metrics and outlining how it will help further their case.

Simply stating “there is an issue and we need to do something about it” over the course of twenty odd pages without backing it up at all is a bit pointless, especially when the guy “in charge” has stated as such pages and pages ago.

Note, I’m not saying you specifically are doing as such.

Ohoni.6057:

Do you post anything over than “feed me evidence!”?

I apologise for expecting people to have some actual facts to back up their arguments when asking for major system changes.

You will find I only mention “muh evidence” to the posters who repeatedly keep insinuating there are issues/disparities et al as though it is gospel, whilst repeatedly failing to provide any evidence to back up their claims, or to even bother to state what evidence they would like to support their claims.

Other pro change posters have at least confirmed they need data from JS to back their case up and have even gone so far as to say that even with said data, it would still be hard to prove and issue exists. I.e. they move the debate along in a progressive manner.

“I think there is an issue, whilst I have tried to get data to point to it myself (outlines his methods) I need, x, y, z data and I will use it (explains exactly how) to point to there being issues with the economy. From this we will see that x, y, x changes need to be made for the good of the game”. Is, as has been pointed out, the best way to progress the debate.

I think is more you didn t read…

Please tell me that is a joke.

LordByron.8369:

And then we have this joke of economy that is both unfair, unbalanced and poorly managed….

And yet you are utterly unable to demonstrate that the economy is unfair, unbalanced or poorly managed.

There have been several suggestions put forth to limit the amount of profit players could take off the TP, without significantly impacting it’s legitimate use to facilitate commerce between players.

And each and every time it has been pointed out that you have not given a credible case as to why that should be done. Perhaps when you give us some evidence that it is needed, or respond to JS and outline exactly what metrics you would need in order to prove your hypothesis and how you would go about doing as such, then the debate would get somewhere.

munkiman.3068:

2 years is far too long for what i would consider an above average player.

And yet it took me less than two months of pve to earn the gold to buy Dusk and make Twilight and I know plenty of players with multiple legendaries bought via gold derived from pve.

Perhaps if your wife had focussed on maximising her gold gain from pve (there are guides on this forum and all over the web as to how to do that) then she would have made several legendaries in that two year time span.

It’s a valid point, even with statistics then the issue is rather complicated.

Which is why JS and others have asked people to outline exactly what statistics they would want (in detail) and how they would use them (in detail).

At least debating about what stats/metrics would be useful and how they would be useful pushes the debate into more constructive grounds (well probably not but one can hope). The current cycle of “it’s broken!” to be answered by “you have no proof!” is getting us nowhere.

Ohoni.6057:

You keep demanding “evidence” of nothing anybody is trying to prove. What do you hope to accomplish by repeating “there’s no evidence!” over and over? You could as well keep shouting “There’s no tacos!” for all the good it accomplishes.

Please tell me you are joking.

When you claim that a system needs changing because of x, y, z, then the onus is on you to present evidence which points to that being the case.

At this point in time, not only does the anti TP crowd have no evidence, they don’t even seem to know what evidence they need or what they would do with it if they had it.

A good approach would be:

“Hey guys, I have a theory about an issue with the TP and the economy in general. Whilst I have tried to collate evidence in the game myself to back this up (goes on to explain exactly how they had gone about doing this), I need some specific information to see if I am indeed correct. Could you and/or JS give me x, y and z data? I will then use this data in (explains exactly how) such a way as to verify if my case is true or not. Thanks!”

The way we see the anti TP case presented in this thread:

“The disparity is to large and the systems need changing. I have no proof of it but there you go. I am now going to spam the exact same argument over and over again as though it is gospel”.

Sixteen pages and still no evidence.

I mean the people bemoaning the disparity don’t even seem to know how much you can earn via pve, let alone from the TP…

I’m sorry but stating “disparity is making the game unfair!” is not a credible argument, regardless as to how many times you keep on repeating it. By page fifty we won’t all of a sudden turn around and say "wow actually “muh disparity” is a really good argument, let’s nerf the TP guys!".

Outline the evidence (oh wait you have none), present exactly what stats you expect from JS and exactly how you would use them to present a case. Then perhaps the debate can move on.

Wanze.8410:

Fenrir.3609:

Wanze.8410:

Apparantly all the good arguements and suggestions are sent to JS via PM.

I suddenly feel sorry for the guy.

For John Smith or the other guy?

Primarily for JS for having to deal with an inbox full of “good” arguments and suggestions from the people who seem to be saving all their terrible ones for us to read.

Wanze.8410:

Apparantly all the good arguements and suggestions are sent to JS via PM.

I suddenly feel sorry for the guy.

phys.7689:

There is a problem.

No there isn’t, unless you mean the “problem” of people coming on here asking for nerfs without a single shred of evidence to show that those nerfs are warranted.

“For the good of the game!” isn’t a credible argument, at all. Moreover the onus is on those asking for nerfs to provide proof.

munkiman.3068:

The problem: The earning potential for flipping goods on the TP is higher than any other activity. Anyone that takes some time to investigate it can see it for themselves.

People here have brought up the question, if that’s the case, why doesn’t everyone else do it? The same reason people don’t run dungeons or champ farm or PvP/WvW or any other activity they don’t care about.

“People can make more money via the TP!” Isn’t an argument that has any merit, it certainly does not prove the current system is flawed.

If only the anti TP crowd had “taken the time to investigate”, then maybe we wouldn’t have threads like this stuffed with anecdotes and hyperbole.

Moreoever it is perfectly reasonable that those people who can’t or otherwise won’t attempt to maximise their gold gain potentially earn less than those that do.

Gene Archer.8560:

Events pay out currently somewhere in the area of 1s 80c – 2s max at level 80 I want to say (I can’t find the info on the wiki for some reason but I know it’s there)

This means to reach one gold through nothing but events, you have to run somewhere in the ballpark of 50 – 100 events to reach 1 gold. While the enemies can drop loot, loot is never guaranteed to drop during an event. Events can take anywhere from 2 minutes to 10 minutes each to complete depending on numbers, length of event, if it’s a chain of events, difficulty, etc. Let’s say 3-5 minutes per event with 2s being rewarded each time without DR ever becoming an issue for sake of some kind of ballpark.

So, to make 1 gold, 50 events are required. That is anywhere from 2.5 hours to 4 hours to make 1 gold on events alone.

If you have 2 hours to play in a given day, you will make 1 gold that day for 2 hours of your time +/- any incurred waypoint fees and if RNG graced you with decent drops, or nothing but junk trophy items, which are worth copper at best.

Except that is not really the reality of the situation. It has been pointed out how much you can make from pve including from events. Now either you missed what has been posted numerous times or you are ignoring it and being disingenuous.

Gene Archer.8560:

Fenrir.3609:

And it has been pointed out why that notion is a bad one.

Yeah, just bit ago, by you, on this page.

Fenrir.3609:

“Effort” and risk rewards more than “effort”.

Agreed. So now the question is: How do we quantify risk? What is the risk for each activity in the game and how does one decide what is more of a risk than the other.

-snipped the rest cause it’s the same general idea, also the part that didn’t apply to me-

“Effort” is hard to quantify, risk, skill and competition are not. I’d say it is fairly obvious that someone risking 5% of 1000g worth of transactions is risking more than some guy who might possibly face 3s worth or armour repairs.

Regardless, the point is that saying that “equal effort should give equal rewards” is inherently incorrect.

If I am repeating myself, I apologise, it is Friday and perhaps the last glass of wine is hitting home!

Gene Archer.8560:

The argument I’ve been making is that equivalent effort should result in equivalent reward. That’s all I’ve been saying. That’s all I’ve said this entire time.

And it has been pointed out why that notion is a bad one. “Effort” is but one factor within a sea of factors which should and does go to impact upon potential reward.

“Effort” and risk rewards more than “effort”.
“Effort” and competition, rewards more than “effort”.
“Effort” and a whole host of other facts and variabes, goes to impact upon potential rewards.

Gene Archer.8560:

The Meat Wagon.7194:

Why should equivilent effort result in equivilent results?

Because that’s what fairness is?

No, that is what insanity is when speaking purely about gold/cash rewards.

I keep seeing this “effort” argument wheeled out, it is utter nonsense.

Potential reward is down to more than effort alone, it is down to multiple factors inculding skill, competition, risk, the inherent underlying systems, secondary variables and a whole host of other factors.

A low skilled, badly built player might put just as much “effort” into running dungeons as meta build, speed run groups do. They get less rewards (i’ve done 3-5+ dungeons in the time they’ve done 1) because for all their effort, they are not doing it well. Skill, knowledge and effort rewards more than effort alone.

A person playing a zero risk, zero competition game might put just as much as “effort” into it as someone playing a high risk, high competition game. Amazingly enough it is usually the case and totally right, that the latter has a higher potential reward ceiling. Risk and effort rewards more than effort alone.

A person pvping in hotjoins might be putting as much “effort” into it as someone taking part in a top level cash tourny, who gets the biggest reward again? Competition and effort rewards more than effort alone.

A person using 1g seed capital might put just as much “effort” into their trading as someone using “1000g”, amazingly enough they don’t have the same potential risk, nor upside. Capital, risk and effort rewards more than effort alone.

A person exploring might put just as much effort into it as someone who is dedicated farming. Because the latter is going all out to maximise gold return and the former isn’t, amazingly enough in terms of monetary rewards, the latter gains more. Effort 100% focused on making gold, makes more gold than effort alone.

Those supposedly making massive amounts of gold via the TP are taking part in a zero sum competitive game (pver’s are not), they have a medium to high amount of risk (pvers have low to zero), they lock up large amounts of seed capital (pvers lock up zero), they gain zero secondary bonuses (pvers gain AP, SP, karma, XP, tokens, badges, laurels and the chance for pre drops).

Why don’t pve and the TP give exactly the same reward potential? Because whilst people can put the same amount of “effort” into each, both have completely and utterly different underlying mechanics, risk profiles and the like. Amazingly enough, in this 12 page thread, not one, not one single person, has managed to prove that said potential disparity in rewards is harmful for the game or damaging the economy. They haven’t even managed to give any evidence whatsoever which even points to the size of this supposed earthshattering disparity.

As for luxury items, it has been pointed out, repeatedly, how they can be obtained by non TP players. My first legendary, my first craft skill to 500, my first full set of ascended armor, all came from gold generated via pve, gold generated in a very short time frame.

munkiman.3068:

Some sort of regulation should be in place to slow down the earning potential of a flip. Perhaps a cool-down on when you can resell an item back into the TP after buying up stock?

It has been pointed out numerous times that there is zero evidence to suggest that any additonal regulation is needed, even the guy in charge of the economy states as much. It has been 11 pages (and previous “anti TP” threads in the past are of a smiliar size) and still not one shred of evidence has actually been presented which points to there being an issue. To continue to suggest that it is “out of whack” and needs altering when there is not one iota of evidence which points to that being the case is a bit odd. That expensive items exist is certainly not evidence.

You cited ascended armor, 500 crafting and legendaries earlier. All of those can be obtained through gold earned via non TP methods as has been demonstrated multiple times now earlier in this thread and others like it.

If people are unwilling to maximise their gold making potential, whether it is within the remit of pve, the TP or a combination of both, then rare/luxury items which are in both high demand and short supply will always be out of reach of those player within the context of a short time span. Flipping or no flipping.

Btw should we try that little experiment of removing the TP for a while, what would infact happen would be: The rich would still have access to luxury items faster than the poor, the luxury items would still be out of reach (within a short span of time) of the poor and moreover, everyone would be far worse off.

“We don’t know how much people are earning via the TP or how many of them are doing it, we don’t even know how much you can earn from pve and we have zero proof as to the current economic model hurting the game at all, but Shiller said inequality is bad, so um, nerf the TP!!!”.

Good argument.

Ohoni.6057:

I call bull on that.

There are guides showing how to do it on these very forums, outlining both expected return, breaking down where that return comes from and giving general advice…

FSG/Arah Champ train = 5-6G+ per hour.
Cross server Arah event farming = 7-10G+ per hour.
Speed clearing dungeons = 20-25G + per rotation.
Selling dungeons = 15-20G+ per hour.

Those are averages without factoring in high value lucky drops.

Let’s assume a low average of 6G per hour and 4 hours a day (plenty of hardcore farmers/dungeon runners earn more and spend more time per day than that).

24G per day.
168G per week.
1008G in 6 weeks.

Without factoring in lucky high value drops. At the same time they are also gaining additional benefits like AP’s, SP’s, Karma, Dungeon Tokens and Laurels. Oh and in the remit of extremely low to zero risk mechanics.

If you have a stable group and/or are a skilled player, the dungeon options earn significantly more than that. If you run are willing to go cross server and use the API, then you can earn signficantly more than that.

Personally just from the FGS champ train, I cleared enough to buy Dusk @900 within the space of 6 weeks of farming.

So yes, it is more than possible and yes, there are pve players who have multiple legendaries and a massive amount of gold.

LordByron.8369:

Lol no….
Unless you exploit no dungeon can net the same as TP…..
Not even the Golden age of Cof1 could and it was nerfed…..

Wonder why TP is immune to any profit balance…

The only thing that could come close is exploiting dungeon paths….but its obviously ban worthy.

What exactly was going through your mind when you thought that was a good answer? You can use as many “….” as you like, you failed to address ANY of the points or questions raised and since when is “10-100x” “the same”?

If you started to use evidence instead of hyperbole and simply stating “muh balance!!!!”, then perhaps you wouldn’t have to backtrack/sidestep so much after your posts had been pulled apart.

LordByron.8369:

Fenrir.3609:

10-100x eh? So you are now going to demonstrate to us all exactly how you make 10,000 – 100,000G in 4-6 weeks? I mean it is easy and there is zero risk. Because it is more than possible to clear 1,000G in that amount of time via pve. And I don’t mean one off events, I mean consistently, week after week, month after month.

So let’s see this trading master plan.

Show me how to make 1000G without the TP in the same time….
Then i ll link you one of the many videos showing what you asked.

Anyway John Smith is ignoring the main problem:
The unbalance in rewards goes etremely against the game philosophy.

We need BALANCE.
A TP trader should earn the same as a dungeon runner as a champ farmer as a www player or a pvp etc

FGS/Arah Champs.
Karka.
Arah meta event server hop farm.
Speed clear dungeons.
Sell dungeon paths.

There are guides for each and every aspect of that on these very forums which list exactly what you can expect to make per hour, per week. I know they are pretty accurate as I’ve done them myself and cleared that amount (bought Dusk with it) within that time frame and have run with people who make more.

Wait, let me guess, you are going to link the rare greatsword craft video….

No I asked you to tell use how you make up to 100,000G in that amount of time consistently via the TP. So go on, let’s see this masterstroke trading plan.

You keep yelling about balance and yet still, you have neither proven how large the disparity is, how it is harmful or why it needs balancing.

Moreoever you have failed to demonstrate why a zero risk, zero competitive gold pump activity which also provides tokens, AP’s, SP’s, karma, XP and the chance for pres and other high end drops, as well as letting you make constant and consistent returns as and when you want whilst having a blast doing combat content, should offer exactly the same return potential as a higher risk, gold sink, zero sum activity which returns nothing but gold.

LordByron.8369:

And i ll reverse the question

If this system is so fair…how comes is ban worthy in many other games?

Making gold from the market/trading is ban worthy in other games? I’ve played mmos since pre Tram UO and have never seen anyone banned for making IG currency through trading activities such as flipping, speculation or trying to corner a market.

Having played EVE threads like this one do crack me up a bit.

10-100x eh? So you are now going to demonstrate to us all exactly how you make 10,000 – 100,000G in 4-6 weeks? I mean it is easy and there is zero risk. Because it is more than possible to clear 1,000G in that amount of time via pve. And I don’t mean one off events, I mean consistently, week after week, month after month.

So let’s see this trading master plan.

Ohoni.6057:

I gather someone who finds a good farm spot and doesn’t tell anyone is exploiting? I gather someone who works out a really good pvp build but doesn’t tell anyone is exploiting?

. . .

Yeah, in many cases they are. I remember back near launch when a bunch of players found a good farming spot in Brisban Wildlands where they could just wail on constantly spawning monsters. I believe a lot of them were banned. When you find an exploit that’s too good to be true, you report it and move on.

…

People get banned because they are exploiting game mechanics, not because they are keeping their farming spot secret. The act of keeping your farming spot secret for as long as possible is not exploiting.

Those people who flip the TP are playing the game within the intended rule set, they are not exploiting. The fact that they don’t go about telling everyone exactly what item they are currently flipping is not exploiting, at all. Thinking otherwise is borderline insanity quite frankly.

the discussion on the table involves those players that maybe buy up a dozen items at a low price, which they have no personal need for, and then throw them back up at a higher price, pocketing the difference.

It’s called the bid/ask spread and there is absolutely nothing at all wrong with it.

if there are none of these players with multiple legendaries or thousands of gold, and all the people who claim to be in this class are liars, but I doubt that’s the case.

That people have multiple legendaries and thousands of gold does nothing to back up your argument…. I have already explained to you that there are players with multiple legendaries and thousands of gold derived from non TP methods. Moreover should the top TP players have lots of gold does not prove AT ALL that the current market/economy is broken, harmful or otherwise need changing.

Ohoni.6057:

But just selling what you have on the market is a far different thing than to have some corner of the market that makes you money, but that you can’t tell anyone about because if several people were doing the exact same thing then you wouldn’t be able to make money on it anymore. As I said, in any other context that would be considered an exploit, it is only due to ANEt’s largess they they choose to not consider it such.

You said the market only makes gold for/benefits the few. Which is ofc is incorrect.

Btw, no, finding a profitable niche and then keeping it quiet in order to continue to profit from it is not exploiting or remotely close to exploiting. I gather someone who finds a good farm spot and doesn’t tell anyone is exploiting? I gather someone who works out a really good pvp build but doesn’t tell anyone is exploiting?

Stop being daft.

Not as much, not nearly as easily for those that can get a handle on it.

Awww. If someone can’t handle it, er tough? If someone can’t speed run/solo dungeons, cba to farm ever, or can’t work out how to make gold from meta events then they don’t deserve to make as much gold as those that can.

It doesn’t matter that there are alternatives if those alternatives are not competitively balanced.

As I mentioned before, you really shouldn’t keep mentioning “balance” when you are unable to present any evidence as to the disparity in the systems, or the harm they are supposedly doing.

Those alternatives btw, can and do earn massive amounts of gold, as has been pointed out time after time after time again. People can and do make masses of gold from pve, they can and do buy (multiple legendaries) and have gold coming out of their ears. Moreover they are doing as such making constant and consistent gains with zero risk and all the whilst getting other stuff like SP’s, AP, Tokens, badges, Karma and xp.

Again, if a Warrior could do ten times the damage of any other class, it wouldn’t matter if the damage the other classes could do was at least good enough to get through any of the content, it would still be unbalanced that the Warrior was dealing ten times the damage.

I’ve seen you use the this warrior analogy before, it’s awful and doesn’t fit the supposed scenario at all.

A warrior doing a dungeon and another class doing a dungeon are beholden to exactly the same mechanics and risks and return exactly the same rewards. If then a warrior was doing a bazzilion times more damage then there would be a case for a balance issue. However you will note that “playing” pve and “playing” the TP/economy are not beholden to exactly the same mechanics, risk or reward profile. Hence your analogy is bunk.

If every time you entered a dungeon you had to stump up 400g, 15% of which you can lose. If the dungeon was zero sum and saw you competing for rewards against other players. If the dungeons reward was erratic in value and not instant in return. If the dungeon didn’t also grant you XP, Karma, Tokens, SP’s and the chance for lucky additional high value drops. If the dungeon was a gold sink and not a pump. Then you might start to have a point, given none of that is the case, alas, you don’t.

Ohoni.6057:

Which is kind of my point. A market that makes you money only if you’re one of only few people benefiting from it is as close to an exploit as ANet currently allows.

Anyone selling anything on the market, makes money and LOTS of players are benefiting from it. As for comparing it to an exploit, well that is just a patently wrong.

And that’s my point. Some people can’t learn to fish. You can try to teach them, but they just won’t get it. And if fishing is the only industry in town that is worth anything, that represents a problem.

If some people can’t learn, tough. Before you jump on that let’s look at the most important part you seem to keep getting wrong. Fishing is not the only industry in town. You can make massive amounts of gold via non TP methods.

I have no tools available to me with which to collect better evidence, but I see what seems like a problem from my end. If those with the analytical tools available can prove to me that there are in fact no players with multiple legendaries or thousands of gold in assets, then fair enough, I stand corrected, but until I see such evidence, I can only work with what I believe to be the case.

Again, you have zero proof. When making wild claims over and over again (as you are doing), then it’s best to have some shred of evidence. You have none.

You say you see what seems like a problem from your end, and yet I don’t see it. If you log in and hear about some dude “got like 10kG and 5 legendaries” and you think, “oh I don’t”, that is not the basis to come on the forums and scream for nerfs.

I see and know plenty of people with legendaries and, shock horror, multiple legendaries from non TP methods. I know plenty of people with thousands of gold who don’t “play” the TP. I myself have cleared 1k gold in around six weeks of nothing but pve. Within that arbitrary two hour window you came up with earlier in the thread, I can average three times what you claim to make whilst also gaining SP’s, AP’s, Karma, T6 and high value lucky drops, all from pve.

This isn’t about “punishing” anyone, it’s about bringing the game’s economy back into balance.

You need to stop talking about balance, given you continually fail to demonstrate what the disparity is, how large it is, how it is impacting upon the game and why systems with totally and utterly different underlying core mechanics need to observe the same potential rewward structure.

So yes, it is ALL about “punishing” people because of some hyberbolic notion that the nasty old 1% are making it impossibru for the poor old pve player to get by.

Schizo.1375:

DarkSpirit.7046:

Schizo.1375:

Let’s try to avoid emotional hyperbole.

Still haven’t proven why rich people deserve to be punished?

No there hasn’t been any reason for this but your comments are only moving this conversation further away from an academic discussion and more towards an emotional one where all reason is thrown out the window on both sides and no one wins.

Academic discussion? Thanks for the laughs.

Obtena.7952:

I’m still back on page 2 when we were told we should hate on the Rich people and tax the hell out of them. Why does someone being rich in-game affect me negatively? I can think of many reasons we NEED rich people. Seems there is a misconception that the rich people that play the TP are evil and greedy …. I love them because they are a good contrast to the poor, greedy people that price stuff too high. Rich people give me deals … that’s why they have money.

People hate them due to stories of multiple legendaries and anecdotes apparently.

Anyway, off to make an Asura with a monocle called John Galt to stand at the TP and annoy the proletariat.

Ohoni.6057:

Most of the raw data is unavailable to the average player so I’m not sure how you expect anyone to be able to comply with this. All we have to work on is anecdotal evidence, stories of people who have multiple Legendaries and/or have sold off multiple Legendaries, and that talk of having made thousands of gold. ANet has the data, if they know this to not be the case then they can say so. I don’t expect them to implement any policies if their own data does not back up what we believe to be the case.

So you are asking for nerfs and/or major economic/market changes from a position of zero evidence. Moreover, you are doing it over and over and over again. Do you not see that as somewhat odd?

“Stories of..” people who have multiple legendaries or thousands of gold is not really the basis for a solid argument you realise right?

Btw I’m not being funny, but I have zero issue getting gold from non TP methods in this game, even if you apply the arbitrary two hour limit you mentioned earlier in the thread.

As for the “go play something else” argument…….without negatively impacting the rest of the game that everyone else wants to play.

You have zero evidence that it is negatively impacting upon the rest of the game and no, “go play something else” is never a valid argument to use against people who are making use of intended systems.