Guild Wars 2

Wanze.8410:

I think one of the biggest problems, if item-for-item trade would be implemented, is that it will result in a less efficient economy.

Generally, there are 2 kinds of supply, supply that is listed on the tp for trade and supply in peoples possession. In general, the more of the overall supply is listed on the tp, the more stable the price will be. If there is less supply listed on the tp, prices are more prone to price spikes, for example.

If a decent amount of trading gets done over direct trade between players, the high velocity of the market will also suffer, which is one of the biggest reasons why prices find equilibrium as fast as they do now.

I just dont see how a minor convenience feature for some players would warrant unbalancing the economy.

Evidence?

FF14 and SW:TOR have (or had, last I played SW:TOR) stable economies despite having a player-to-player trading feature.

Do you have evidence that that will happen rather than an assertion that it will despite other games being able to support both?

Olba.5376:

In Guild Wars 2, you can get low level items by going to a low level area and killing things. I have been in games where your drop rate of a lower level item approaches zero as your level gets higher.

I was kind enough to give examples. What are yours?

You’re arguing about the semantics of a coin sink, I am arguing about the effectiveness of specific coin sinks.

No, I’m trying to keep it in the context of my question. To reiterate, if coin sinks are so important, why are they being removed, regardless of effectiveness? Even if only 100G a month is removed through repairs, that’s still 100G not floating around.

Personally, I bought all of the new GM traits on all of my characters on the day they were released without even looking at what their effects were.

That’s you. I now request your evidence that a large amount of people who didn’t already have the traits have the extra money and skill points to simply buy them all, specifically enough to make it “worth” having.

I am saying that the security measures you put in are irrelevant because there will be people who ignore them.

Irrelevant to what?

Trading item-for-item directly can result in someone getting less value for their item.

Can. Except everyone has access to the TP to check the price of the items in question, making it, again, simply a matter of carelessness.

In fact, simple fix to satisfy your complaint of potential shadiness in this regard: Since everyone has access to the TP anyways, have an additional section on the trade UI that shows the current highest buy price and current lowest sell price for the item(s) offered in the trade window. That way, there are undeniable figures put right in front of the person’s face to make sure they know relative values.

Amazing what 10 seconds of thought can come up with.

The example about trading an item for gold was something that a lot of people who ask for player-to-player trading are making: they want to give a “deal” to someone they don’t quite trust, such as a member of their faction.

Which doesn’t have anything to do with what I said, and in fact in this very thread, I said that they could even remove gold from the item-for-item trade system expressly so that people who want to trade for gold cannot skip the tax. I would ask that if you’re going to try to refute my points, you stick to my points, not arguments made by other people.

The reason I am using the word “item-for-item” rather than “player-to-player” is because the former can be implemented without the latter. Also, item-for-item trading is at least a bit more arguable than player-to-player trading.

Which is why I’ve been advocating item-for-item, and have, in fact, made mention that it’d be fine, in my opinion, to not include gold in the trades at all. I also made mention that they could add another section to the TP UI which is specifically for items only, so if someone wants to trade Dawn for Dusk, they can put their Dawn up on the listing asking specifically for Dusk. Then anyone who wants Dawn can look it up in that UI and see what people are offering. This has the added benefit of what I said earlier to debunk your “shadiness” assertion, because in that same UI, you could easily integrate a “price-check” function to show the current TP prices to make sure they’re not asking for a Dusk while trading the value equivalent of 5 Tiny Fangs, and people can easily see the price difference between Dawn and Dusk to decide if a 300G difference is worth a direct trade.

So you don’t care about what the expert with all the tools and knowledge says because he’s getting paid for his expertise?

Correct. Let me put it this way.

If you were debating buying a car but weren’t sure if it was a good buy, whose advice would you seek? A dealer whose job it is to sell you that car and will obviously be saying whatever it takes, factual or not, to make that car look good to you, or people who have actually owned that car?

He works for them. He gets paid by them. To trust that he has the liberty to enumerate any and all flaws with the system is naive. Even if the system was inherently flawed, he is unlikely to have the liberty to say it is, since that would be counter-productive to their marketing. Plenty of people complain about the writing of the lore and story, but do you think the writers will say “Yeah, we’re really just phoning it in now”?

So no, I do not care what someone who is paid to defend their system has to say about it when I’m asking the players, the people actually affected by the system, to defend it, and to not simply fallaciously parrot his information.

BrotherBelial.3094:

Sorin.4310:

BrotherBelial.3094:

Lodius.5392:

Here is a screenshot of all the WPs across the maps that are not working / blinking / contested, etc.

http://i.imgur.com/RC34Noy.jpg

Think about it… The story line mentioned the place where “ley lines” intersect was considered very important. Notice the epicenter (if you will) is located between Lions Arch and Kessex hills empty zone.

I think this is where the end of this living story will take us…

YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST! … your thoughts?

Or it could be that tegue don’t have/use way points so this it’s just what we can see. If we had a full picture(of the dominion)we might have a better idea of what’s going on.

The tengu have closed off their walls to everyone else, and nothing in the lore suggests that a tall wall would stop people from being able to WP to something past it (example: can WP into DR), together which suggests to me that the tengu simply don’t have WPs.

That’s not what I’m saying. Your inability to read is staggering. I already said they may not use waypoints……

Here’s what I read.

You suggest that they don’t have or use waypoints.
The person says that the Tengu closed off their walls to keep people out, the purpose of which would be defeated if they had waypoints, because people could just WP past the walls, suggesting that they don’t have waypoints.
You then say that that’s not what you said.

Whose inability to read is staggering?

Lord Kuru.3685:

Becka Williams.4978:

Belinda’s death didn’t do it for you?

That was only tragedy for the weak minded who didn’t instantly realize upon her introduction that her purpose was to die “tragically.”

You’re suggesting that when you saw her in the bar, your immediate thought was “Yep, she’s dead”?

Olba.5376:

The reason it should be taxed is because the most common reason for asking for item-to-item trading is because someone doesn’t want to pay the listing fee for an expensive item, such as as a precursor.

Which they shouldn’t have to do to trade an item for an item.

It’s not that it would destroy the whole economy, it’s that it would remove a lot of items from the taxable items pool. If you think that item-for-item trading would not result in most expensive items being removed from the TP entirely and replaced by trade spam, you’re a pretty big dreamer.

I’m kind of getting the feeling you don’t understand what “item-for-item” means.

And my experience is that GW2 has one of the healthiest economies I have seen in an online game. Good things are still affordable, while luxuries are expensive but not at a gold cap price.

Funny, because most MMOs I’ve played have better economies for the same amount of time they’ve been out. GW2 suffers from scaling loot. You can’t get some materials consistently past a certain leveling point, resulting in artificially increased rarity. See my cloth example. Games like FF14 and SW:TOR, though? You can get the same materials no matter how far you are, and SW:TOR probably has the best economy I’ve seen so far, simply because you can get low level materials not only as easily as you can get high end ones, but, in fact, easier with higher gathering professions. It keeps a good supply coming into the game which keeps low level materials low enough that people can afford them for use, but not so low that they’re worthless.

• Repair costs were a minor coin sink to begin with, so removing that doesn’t really change much.

Irrelevant. They’re still removing something that, according to most people here, was part of something really important.

For most people, the costs for unlocking all traits is going to be much, much more than they would have ever spent on retraiting, thus making it an effective coin sink.

Except not necessarily, because people can also unlock them for free.

• Switching your crafting profession wasn’t exactly a major coin sink either.

Again, being “major” is irrelevant. It’s a part of a whole.

Security in trading? The games that I have played have had the systems that you think are secure (double confirmation, dialogue boxes listing item names) and I have seen people getting scammed fairly often.

And? That doesn’t mean it’s not secure, it means people don’t use the security. That’s their fault. Are you saying that having a lock on a car is not security because people leave their cars unlocked?

• Avoiding TP fees on expensive items such as precursors or Legendaries

Which isn’t shady when it’s item-for-item. You shouldn’t have to pay a fee to give one item to another person and receive another item in return.

• Trading a higher valued item for a lower valued item (such as precursor-for-precursor trading)

How is this shady? If I’m willing to trade a Dusk for enough Bolts of Damask to craft a couple ascended armour sets, on whose part is that shady?

• Selling an item at a lower price to a person who you don’t trust enough to do mail trading with

Firstly, again, how is this shady? And secondly, this proves to me that you don’t understand what “item-for-item” trading is, because you’re saying “lower price” and “selling”. Item-for-item trades are not selling. They’re trading one item for another item (or items). For example, 5 Bolts of Damask for 12 Deldrimor Steel.

Also, I clearly don’t care what John Smith said. I’m asking for justification from the players, not from the people responsible for the system who will, of course, argue that their system works. They wouldn’t use the system if they thought it was bad (I hope).

SpeedFiend.4521:

Retraiting/repairs/additional crafting is a drop in the bucket compared to TP fees.

Yet they’re still removing them. If gold sinks are so sorely needed, as most people here seem to champion as their reasoning, then removing what is there is counter-productive.

The point of NOT having secure p2p trade is that if you don’t want to get taxed, then you open yourself to the option of being royally screwed and having nobody to blame but yourself. If you don’t want to pay your 15% fee, go ahead, trade on good faith. The choice is entirely yours.

Exactly. Which is insulting to the players at large. If our only options are “entirely unsafe” and “safety for a considerable fee”, they’re denying what should be a basic right.

As to your other game question, it’s not a case of the gw2 economy being fragile, but other game economies being crap.

Let me get something straight here. When I asked that question, the only example I expected to be used would be WoW, simply because it’s the most popular to harp on, while being the worst example.

Let’s take world of herpcraft as an example. Compare the price of TBC stack of silk to a stack of silk in MoP. A few silver to a few hundred gold.

You’re right. That inflation is a lot.

After 10 years. Here’s where we hit your fallacious reasoning.

Did you forget that WoW has been out since 2004? People have had 10 years to amass gold. People in Guild Wars 2 have not had 10 years to amass gold. Give GW2 another 8 years for people to amass gold, and without any additional, large gold sinks, there’s going to be inflation here, too. That’s one reason why your example doesn’t work. You’re comparing huge time differences. Do you have any examples of terrible economies in games which have been out an equal amount of time as GW2, where people have had the same amount of time to acquire currency?

Now let’s go on to another reason why your example is fallacious, which you’d have to keep in mind if you’re even going to attempt giving another example. Remember that this is to do with having a secure trading option, and why other games can have healthy economies while having a secure trading option. So this, logically, leads to this question: Are you suggesting that WoW’s economy is a result of having a secure trading option? Because I can think of several reasons why their economy has nothing to do with having a secure trading option, not the least of which are, as I just pointed out, the game being out for 10 years for people to amass gold, and the fact that with each expansion and each increase in level cap, they also make it easier to get gold by increasing the amount you obtain through quests and otherwise.

If you’re going to compare the cost of items from BC to MoP, you also have to compare the fact that a single quest, while levelling, in BC gave you probably less than a gold, while by Cataclysm, you could get a handful of gold for a “Kill 10 guys” quest. Let’s also factor in that at some point in the game, I believe BC, but maybe WotLK, they also made it so that when you hit level cap, your experience from quests, because you can’t level, translated into extra gold. Add in a huge amount of daily quests, and people are gaining gold at severely increased rates since BC up to MoP.

So that being said, how is their economy’s state relevant to having a secure trading option?

And on the subject of cloth prices, Wool Cloth, in this game, is currently about 3 and a half silver per piece for a scrap, which comes to 7 silver for a bolt of cloth. It takes 24 bolts to make a light armour set, which would equal 1.68G for the cloth alone for that armour. That’s the second tier of cloth. Keep that in mind, that the basic use of that cloth is to make low-level armour. Let’s also consider that you can wait 2 more levels to 32, and get Masterwork rather than Fine quality armour for a quarter of the price.
So consider that the current price of wool cloth makes it unrealistic to actually use as a purchased commodity for what should be its primary use, low level armour. The only uses it has at its current price are for people who have already leveled to 80 and can farm gold easily to buy for alts, or spend real money on gems to trade for gold, or to make Bolts of Damask.

So, given that the cost of a low level material makes it unrealistic to even use it as a low level material, would you consider this economy good as it stands?

And that’s just an example of a larger problem. The cloth market in this game is ridiculous in general. Deldrimor Steel Ingots are 3.8G. Spiritwood is 4G. Elonian Leather is 2G. Damask is just shy of 15G.

Wanze.8410:

So just because you want to send mail at a quicker rate to give away your food stuff, you want Anet to implement direct trading?

Yes, that’s clearly the only thing I said in the thread that has anything to do with reasoning for it. Disregarding everything else I said and the fact that the example of giving things away was more of an example of why the current system is just purely inconvenient rather than reason for secure trading, of course.

Supported direct trading will never happen in this game, John Smith already stated that.

Things are said. Minds get changed. That’s how things grow. If you asked them when the game came out to remove repair fees or the cost of redistributing trait points, what do you think the answer would have been then?

Speaking of which, if the game economy is so delicately balanced right now that it needs gold sinks to not come crashing down around everyone, why were both of those gold sinks removed? And why was a third purchasable crafting slot put into the game when switching crafts would be another gold sink? Hmmmmm.

Izaya.2906:

Again, you’re talking about what you will do.

No, I’m talking about an example. It doesn’t have to be me. It could be anybody who wants to trade item-for-item.

Given the current system, people who want a secure transaction will sell off their Dusk on the tp removing 225g from circulation and 180g for the Dawn seller and satisfying people with gold on hand’s demand.

Which, to be honest, is insulting to the playerbase to make them pay for a secure trade system which is free in practically every other MMO.

Even regardless of how I or anyone would use it, it’s terrible customer care to make it so that your only options for trading are either “Risk easy scams” or “Spend unnecessary gold”.

Behellagh.1468:

@Filaha – If they did everything you suggested in making a reasonably unscamable UI for Player to Player trading and skill took their 15% (or 10% sales tax) if currency is part of the transaction, would that be unacceptable to you?

TBH, I think that gold should not be added into the trade system regardless because if you want gold for your item, you could just use the TP. Personally, I think it’d be more beneficial to have a specifically item-for-item trading system since we already have one in the game, just horribly unsafe.

In addition to not having to worry about if it should or shouldn’t be taxed, it would alleviate a majority of the concerns of “WTS/WTB spam”, because they couldn’t sell or buy things through it. Only trade it. And to alleviate even that, they could, instead of a standard trade UI, put item-for-item trades through a similar service to the TP. So if I want to trade my Dusk for someone’s Dawn, I can just search up Dawn and see if anyone wants to trade for it, or put up a request myself for that trade.

laokoko.7403:

I think one of the problem is there really isn’t too many gold sink in this game, trading post fee is pretty much the gold sink.

Then they shouldn’t be removing the gold sinks they do have, if it’s such a problem.

Olba.5376:

Simplest reason is that item-for-item trading cannot be taxed in any sane way

And it shouldn’t be. If I want to swap Xbox games with a friend, should I have to send $10 to the government?

So more open questions to whoever thinks they can defend it.

What is it about the GW2 economy that makes it so precariously balanced that adding a trade option would destroy everything, yet there are countless other MMOs with trade options which have healthy economies?

As a follow-up, do you not think that a fragile system such as this should be fixed, rather than continuing to rely on such a precious balance?

And as asked earlier in the post and further to those questions, if gold sinks are so necessary and shouldn’t possibly be removed because destruction for everyone’s money, why do you think they’re actively removing gold sinks? Since April, they’ve removed repair costs, they’ve removed trait respec costs, and they’ve offered an extra crafting slot for purchase which, if purchased, allows for an extra slot so that you don’t have to pay to switch up to three professions, for examples. Those are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head.

And finally, why do you accept that you should have to pay for security in trades compared to a vast majority of MMOs which would allow you security in trading as a basic right? Is it solely because you think it’s a necessary evil, or do you really not see a problem in that?

Vexander.9850:

Filaha.1678:

I hope not, since that would trivialize the time people who actually earned it spent on it.

It was a reward purchasable during the attack on Lion’s Arch.

Got it myself. Would not care if it was put up on the Gem Store or Laurel Merchants. It wasn’t hard to get at all. People need to stop acting like everything you can’t get anymore was as hard as pulling teeth to get in the first place, Geesh!

Didn’t say it was hard. Strawmen don’t fight back, but you gain nothing by being able to best them.

It consumed time and resources. Had I not spent those resources on the Selfless and Thoughtless Potions, I could have spent them on other items offered by the same trader.

By putting it up on the gem shop so that anyone with a few dollars can buy it, then I’d have to question each time they put up a special reward for an event whether it’s worth it to put the time and effort into working for it while forsaking more potentially useful rewards, if I could just potentially drop an hour from a paycheque into the game and buy the same thing later.

Why bother putting in anything for special rewards if you’re just going to offer it for sale later?

I’d be just as annoyed if I farmed out 2,000 geodes for a good set of bug weapon skins, just to find out next month that they put the bug weapon skins on the gem store for a couple hundred gems each. Because while it isn’t hard to get geodes, I could have used those geodes on 100+ lockpicks that would get me ascended materials which are actually useful and potentially get me kites to sell.

Izaya.2906:

Scammed people will file tickets

Prove it.

It’s all well and good to make the claim that it will happen, but you don’t actually have proof that it will, do you? Isn’t it also possible that if they do get reports of being scammed now, those will go down if a secure trading option were to be put into the game?

So prove your assertion over mine.

That removes 1 Dusk(1500g) and 1 Dawn(1200g) from the market and eliminates a potential sale of each item on the TP.

Hold on here. Let’s fill out the whole scenario here.

I have Dusk. I want Dawn. I will trade Dusk for Dawn, because I don’t want to pay a fee on the TP simply because I want to trade an item for an item. It will not go onto the market for absolutely anybody to buy in any scenario, because I will be trading it item-for-item.

Under the current system: I have the option of trading through the mail, risking that someone is going to run off with my Dusk without sending back Dawn.

Under a proposed secure trade system: I have the option of meeting up with the person, offering my Dusk for their Dawn with the ability to check and doublecheck they’re the right items, and we are both guaranteed the item we wanted.

Now there are several possible effects for this.

And this is where your argument becomes fallacious by ignoring the crux of the matter, i.e. that the item will be “traded” to a specific person.

One is less money is removed from the game contributing to gold having less value faster over time.

Except no money is removed from the game in either case, because I don’t want to spend the fees on something that I shouldn’t have to pay fees on, because no money is being spent in either case.

Another one is less supply on the TP of those two high demand items translating to higher prices for those items.

Except there is no lesser supply because my Dusk and the other person’s Dawn were not going to be put on the TP in any event.

Even if I were to put it on the TP now, and the other person bought it from me, and I bought their Dawn, it still wouldn’t affect the general supply because our respective items are not being applied to the general supply. Because we could set a specific buy price that the other party sells directly to, nobody else can possible get their hands on the items.

The only thing that gets affected is that now I had to pay a couple hundred gold in order to do a simple item trade that is absolutely free in practically every other MMO.

Item to item trade may be good to you but it isn’t for others.

Except if I’m going to trade item-for-item, it won’t affect “others” in any case, because nobody else is going to see my item except my prospective trading partner. Since the items are going to go specifically to each of our hands, nobody else will be affected by a decrease in supply, and since no gold is changing hands, gold isn’t being devalued. It’s a net zero. It is neither going up nor down in value.

Let’s put this in a real world situation.

Let’s say Person A has a motorcycle that they don’t want anymore, because now they have a family and need a car in which they can drive their kids. Let’s say Person B claims to have an extra car they don’t need, but would love a motorcycle.

Current system:
The government says that you shouldn’t trade things directly, so A has two options. The first is to just leave their motorcycle in a parking lot while B leaves their car in a different parking lot, and A has to go to that parking lot after leaving his motorcycle at its lot for B. This forces him to trust that B is honest.

The other option is to take the motorcycle to a dealer and sell it to the dealer while B sells their car to the dealer, both less a 15% cut, and then each party has to buy their respective vehicles from the dealer with the funds they just got (plus filling in any shortfall with their own money). However, the dealer is selling the respective vehicles at the price they paid to the person plus that cut.

Prospective system:
A now has the option of just driving to the same parking lot as B, with a police officer waiting there for the two of them, and each hands their keys to the officer. The officer then walks to both vehicles and tests the keys in each one to ensure that the keys work in their respective vehicles, then hands the happy new owners their keys.

Now let’s assume that the motorcycle is only 75% the value of the car. That means A now has to not only spend the money he made off selling the motorcycle to the dealer, but also the extra 25% difference plus the 15% he lost to the dealer. All to do a simple trade with one, single, specific person.

Seems a little bit ridiculous to me.

If they’re actually worried about the devaluation of gold, there are other ways they can make gold sinks. For one thing, they shouldn’t have removed the repair cost.

Izaya.2906:

Filaha.1678:

Counter-points.

1. It’s already possible to do “non-TP” trades through the mail. Why would there suddenly be a massive influx of spams about selling items if a better, safer system was put in? Besides, they could cut out the projected spamming significantly by not putting gold as tradable in the trade window. After all, if you want to give someone gold, you can already through the mail.

2. A well-built trading system does not allow for scamming except through practised carelessness (which doesn’t need to be investigated). For example, a “lock” step for trades where once you accept the other side’s offer, they cannot change it before you accept the full trade negates someone quickly removing something just before you click it, as well as gives you all the time you need to ensure you’re getting the right items or amount. By only offering the current system for giving items outside the TP, it actually makes it less secure if someone wants to trade through there, item for item instead of item for gold then gold for item. So yeah, a properly built trading system means that they can simply say “If you get scammed, it is your own fault”, regardless of reused icons. That lock step makes it so that you never have “not enough time” to look at what you’re trading before accepting.

3. Why put it in? Well, it might be unnecessary if it wasn’t super inconvenient to trade things through the mail, blocking you from “spamming” someone if you need to send more than two mails. Also, let’s say I get the Heavy version of the Dry Top goggles and someone else needs that but I need the Light version and they have that and don’t need it. A direct, item-for-item trade system would be better, in that case, than selling my goggles at a loss and then buying another set of goggles, having to make up the difference. Or say I get one of the new kites but want a different colour. Then it gets even more annoying if you’re dealing with more expensive items. If I’m wanting to trade a precursor for a precursor, I’d have to foot a difference of more than 100 gold depending on the specific one by selling mine and then buying the other.

So, any logical refutations that don’t rely on a presupposed massive influx of blockable spam?

Anet is a business and it is good for them to not support out of TP trading, people are stupid and will always be stupid and get scammed.

No matter what fancy trading system Anet spends on, people will still get scammed and file tickets/complain to Anet claiming this and that. I have friends who work for another gaming company’s Customer Service department and you wouldn’t believe how much employee time they waste investigating scamming claims. The time/money used to investigate these claims is an unnecessary expense for Anet.

Gold sink, go look it up in google. 5% listing fee and 10% selling fee helps keep the economy healthy. You wanting to trade an item for an item is good an all but that isn’t the only concern when trading.

They don’t need to investigate anything if they adopt the stance that if you get scammed, it’s your own fault. As I said in the very post you quoted, a properly built trading system removes the possibility of scamming that is outside of the control of the scammed. A simple lock step makes it so that once you accept what the other person is offering, they cannot change it. So if you think it’s the right things and click “Accept”, then it locks it, and they cannot change it and you have the time to double-check the items to make sure that they’re the right items, even in the case of reused icons. Then, once you make sure it’s what you wanted and you are satisfied, you hit “Confirm” to finalize the trade.

That one step makes it so that the only reason anyone would get scammed is an intentional carelessness, which doesn’t need to be investigated. There is no “investigation time” that has to be allowed for, because they can literally just adopt the stance that if you got scammed, it was because you didn’t utilize the safety feature given to you.

I know what a gold sink is. I don’t feel that I, or anyone, should have to lose money on a simple item-for-item trade which shouldn’t involve gold at all, though. There’s a line where “It’s a gold sink for the good of the economy” becomes “It’s an unnecessary cost and an inconvenience to a player who isn’t even trying to spend any gold at all”.

And, again, if I want to skip the TP fees, I can do it now. Unsafely. The only options for the convenience of their paying customers should not be “Pay gold you shouldn’t need to spend while trading an item for an item” and “Roll the dice if the person you want to trade with is trustworthy”.

Convenience and caring about customers. Go look it up on Google.

I hope not, since that would trivialize the time people who actually earned it spent on it.

It was a reward purchasable during the attack on Lion’s Arch.

Wanze.8410:

Filaha.1678:

So, any logical refutations that don’t rely on a presupposed massive influx of blockable spam?

Implementation costs for example. All this feature seems to do is give people a way to avoid the tp fees and taxes, so why dedicate dev time to it?

Did you read my counter-points?

Because I did, in fact, point out reasons for it.

Namely that it’s already possible to “trade” through the mail to avoid TP fees and taxes, except it’s easier to scam people, the current mail system blocks you from sending more than two mails in quick order, making it inconvenient if you are trading a large amount of things (I frequently give away food I make through leveling cooking), and it’d be more convenient for item-for-item trades instead of having to sell your item (probably at a loss) on the TP, then buy the item you wanted, having to foot the difference.

Again, if you remove gold from the trade window, since you can already give gold through mail if you want, and if you want only gold, you can sell it on the TP, then there is no avoidance of TP taxes, except for item-for-item trades, which you can unsafely do now.

One could make the argument that the new traits system did nothing except make things more of a hassle for people and didn’t functionally change anything for the better, yet dev time was spent on it. Why would a more useful and safer trading system be a bad use of it?

I actually prefer that they’re not, like, deep in some mysterious dungeon and/or guarded by a powerful entity.

Why?

Because why weren’t they found sooner if they were being guarded by an obvious guardian?

In a world full of adventurers and the like, dungeons and deep, ancient caves will have been picked clean by scavengers and someone would have come across it at some point. But who’s going to look in a random pile of rocks next to a small house in a haunted forest? At best, they’ll scavenge through the house and ignore the rubble because it’s rubble. If you were going to rob a house of its valuables (don’t), would you climb the tree in their yard expecting their jewelry to be hidden up it?

I think it makes it more believable that they’re not found if they are just sitting in unassuming, random places with nothing special about them, because special things attract attention. If you find an ancient vault guarded by Legendary Champion Elite Veteran Cerberus backed by his own lethal squad of ninja cyborgs, you are going to loot it.

AVM.5746:

Ashandar.2570:

AVM.5746:

The ship that shot down Zhaitan:
Who made this giant ship that conveniently saved us in midair? Better yet, why weren’t we on it in the beginning of that mission? Why wasn’t I notified we had this superweapon in the first place?! I was commander of the pact!!

The pact made it. When wrapping up the final mission before Arah story, two pact members that you pass in fort Trinity argue about that ship:
After returning to Fort Trinity
While passing through the fort:
Pact Mechanic: No, no, no. I told you, it’s not ready!
Pact Mechanic: But…the “Glory of Tyria” is our flagship! It should be in the fight against Zhaitan! It-
Pact Mechanic: -isn’t FINISHED yet! By the Bear, do you want it to sink like a stone in its first battle?
Pact Mechanic: Your problem. You better hope we win without it, because we may not get another chance.

Thank you! That relieves me of one thing that bugged me in the story line (though I’d personally would’ve like to have known we had that thing to begin with and be personally informed our superweapon with anti-dragon weapons isn’t operational yet, being the Pact Commander and all). How bout everything else?

Well, maybe if you weren’t too busy running around personally killing all the things and completing all the missions, they’d have kept you up-to-date on the logistics.

It’s not the mechanics’ fault that you’re never in the base to give news to. :P

Bubi.7942:

I agree that exchanging Geodudes (like 400-500 depending on tier reached) would be a nice feature.

If I evolve them into Golem first, could it only cost 100?

Counter-points.

1. It’s already possible to do “non-TP” trades through the mail. Why would there suddenly be a massive influx of spams about selling items if a better, safer system was put in? Besides, they could cut out the projected spamming significantly by not putting gold as tradable in the trade window. After all, if you want to give someone gold, you can already through the mail.

2. A well-built trading system does not allow for scamming except through practised carelessness (which doesn’t need to be investigated). For example, a “lock” step for trades where once you accept the other side’s offer, they cannot change it before you accept the full trade negates someone quickly removing something just before you click it, as well as gives you all the time you need to ensure you’re getting the right items or amount. By only offering the current system for giving items outside the TP, it actually makes it less secure if someone wants to trade through there, item for item instead of item for gold then gold for item. So yeah, a properly built trading system means that they can simply say “If you get scammed, it is your own fault”, regardless of reused icons. That lock step makes it so that you never have “not enough time” to look at what you’re trading before accepting.

3. Why put it in? Well, it might be unnecessary if it wasn’t super inconvenient to trade things through the mail, blocking you from “spamming” someone if you need to send more than two mails. Also, let’s say I get the Heavy version of the Dry Top goggles and someone else needs that but I need the Light version and they have that and don’t need it. A direct, item-for-item trade system would be better, in that case, than selling my goggles at a loss and then buying another set of goggles, having to make up the difference. Or say I get one of the new kites but want a different colour. Then it gets even more annoying if you’re dealing with more expensive items. If I’m wanting to trade a precursor for a precursor, I’d have to foot a difference of more than 100 gold depending on the specific one by selling mine and then buying the other.

So, any logical refutations that don’t rely on a presupposed massive influx of blockable spam?

I’m up to 12 now.

Only weapon I like is the torch.

I’m still confused about why they put in an item to change your hair style and colour in the same pack as they give you a hat that makes you bald.

If you want to see your hair, you won’t wear the hat. If you want to wear the hat, you don’t have any hair.

I disagree.

Firstly, the dragons don’t “most threaten” anybody. They threaten everyone. If everyone else left, say, the Sylvari to their own devices, what happens if the Sylvari fall?

Secondly, it’d make them feel like lesser threats if just the efforts of one race can beat them.

Thirdly, it makes more sense to have outside forces aid with the defeat of something that threatens one specific race to which it is “attuned”. Example, Mordremoth. It’s a plant dragon. It’s fighting plants. It would make less sense to send more plants at it, rather than, say, to throw Charr tanks equipped with flamethrowers at it, or Asurans with flying lawnmowers. Just like how when fighting Zhaitan, it makes sense to have a leader of the Pact that is Sylvari, meaning he can’t be corrupted, meaning Zhaitan couldn’t possibly corrupt him and learn everything about the Pact as a new Risen.

Fourthly, regarding the Pact, given the existence of the entire first season, your character has clearly moved on from being second in command of the Pact. You’ve been moving as an autonomous entity separate and apart from the Pact, on the guidance of E. Unless E stands for trahearnE, you’re not on Pact business.

Lastly, that’s irrelevant anyways since Trahearne is going to go to the Summit, as he is, in fact, still in the dragon-killing business.

What should be done, instead of leaving each species to its own dragon, is to make the method of defeating them unique, rather than making the combatants unique. For example, for Zhaitan, one could argue that (beginning the) cleansing (of) the corruption of Orr managed to weaken him, as well as killing the Eyes and Mouth, allowing you to combat him without getting stomped. For Mordremoth, he’s gaining power from the Waypoints, so Taimi’s fix could potentially be used to end up weakening him, or maybe Scarlet has built an Ultimate Nullifier that she’s got locked up somewhere. Striking differently at each dragon is far better than writing that 4 out of 5 races think that any specific dragon doesn’t affect them and can be ignored after the threat of Zhaitan.

Aerensiniac.3584:

Ayrilana.1396:

Actively coordinating and doing events in an efficient manner or just random people showing up to whatever event?

Random people, but i fail to see your point. Do you seriously want to imply that 30 ppl randomly doing events cant pull the same kitten 1 person is doing on a table basis?
In theory 30 ppl doing just 1 single event each 10 minutes would amount to multiple times the event completion of a single player, and trust me: They do not do 1 event.

The argument that 1 person can set off tier 3 is mathematically kittened.

In theory, 30 people doing one single event each ten minutes means that only one event is being done each ten minutes. And since the number of people doing an event doesn’t increase the amount of favour you get, 30 people doing one event each ten minutes is pretty dang poor for favour.

And I could probably set off tier 3 alone provided people don’t mess up the bonus favour on Tendrils.

If you have random people all zerging the same event, it doesn’t matter whether you have 1, 10, 30, or 50 people. They’re still only doing one event.

Well… yes. Why wouldn’t you be?

It’s her project that she’s running. You are there to assist her with her project. Therefore, she is the project lead and you are her assistant.

Why does this need any explanation or justification or deeper meaning?

Maybe they should give new weapon skins instead so that —-

Oh wait.

We’re getting back slot skins because it’s easier to make a single back slot skin that people will complain about than make a whole set of clothing that people will complain about.

Considering how easy the achievements are, they don’t deserve big rewards.

And don’t forget that not only did not all meta achievements give special rewards (for example, Escape From LA only gave a box of supplies), you had to do multiple achievements to get those rewards. You don’t need to do multiple achievements to get the rewards for each achievement now, and get rewarded for each so you get rewards no matter how many you do as opposed to getting generally nothing but points until you got a certain number.

And the rewards from these are far more useful than minis and skins, especially since using the rewards from these could net you extra skins if you use them in Dry Top.

When we fight the water dragon.

Presumably after we fight Primordus in Magma Middle.

Kalocin.5982:

I’m not sure why people are criticizing this post, it’s pretty valid. Don’t insult people that feel burned by their purchases or else they’ll never purchase again, which is obviously bad for the game.

The kites should be patched to have equivalent boosts, or a way to upgrade them in-game.

It isn’t valid, though.

When they were bought, they were clearly considered worth the cost to just be a kite.

Now that there’s something else that has another added effect doesn’t mean you automatically deserve the added effect.

The kites were never represented as being anything more than toys, so expecting them to now be more than toys is silly.

Zaxares.5419:

Well, it’s a start. I think the Fossils are more valuable than 3 masterwork bags, but at least players who don’t want the Ambrite weapons can do SOMETHING with them now.

If they can’t be sold/traded, aren’t going to be used for the one purpose they had, and would only be junk otherwise, then their value is objectively 0.

Getting even one bag is a greater value.

It’s kind of the same way I view the sand piles. If I’m getting them for doing what I was going to be doing anyways (killing things, doing events), then getting 1 geode out of a stack of 250 is still a greater value than just not getting the sand at all.

Dragon threatens entire world.
Need to band together with everyone in order to stand against the threat.
Not a good story unless I’m doing it alone.

That’s what I’m getting here.

Eshady.9146:

RyuDragnier.9476:

Filaha.1678:

Eshady.9146:

IMO, stick with instances so that challenges like “Masters” or a “Hard Mode” (GW1) can be added and used for a reason to actually replay episodes. I mean look at LS2 E1&2. It was instanced, had a lot less problems at launch, if something bugs for you just restart and still.. it had open world co-existing beautifully with the story.
Why did we go backwards to the LS1 player mash up debacle?

Because people complained that everything was instanced and they wanted more open world content.

See the pattern here?

That people are foolish and forget WHY we went away from the stuff like Tower of Nightmares? I hope this reminds them why we don’t need open world stuff, it’s too much of a pain.

Filaha I see the pattern, It’s just that pattern isn’t relevant to the current story content being used and/or implemented as Blix and I are trying to tell ya.

RyuDragnier Very True. After all in the end it just turns into another Zone event hardly worthy of an episode replay.

Actually, I think it is quite relevant, given the definition of relevant.

It describes the situation perfectly.

People didn’t just suddenly start wanting open world content now, just as they’re not just developing all the new content now.

Captain Unusual.9163:

I bought a phone several years ago. Now that company makes smartphones, when do they send me one of those?

I’m still waiting for the free upgrade to my computer since all the companies that make the parts made better parts.

Blix.8021:

Filaha.1678:

Blix.8021:

Filaha.1678:

Eshady.9146:

Filaha.1678:

Eshady.9146:

IMO, stick with instances so that challenges like “Masters” or a “Hard Mode” (GW1) can be added and used for a reason to actually replay episodes. I mean look at LS2 E1&2. It was instanced, had a lot less problems at launch, if something bugs for you just restart and still.. it had open world co-existing beautifully with the story.
Why did we go backwards to the LS1 player mash up debacle?

Because people complained that everything was instanced and they wanted more open world content.

See the pattern here?

I doubt very much they rewrote everything back into open world content because people complained too much. With that being said there is no pattern and I find your lack of faith disturbing, Anet does what they want how they planed it. So again I ask, Why go backwards as a planed installment?

The pattern is:

Anet does something.
Players complain about it and want it another way.
Repeat.

If they kept it instanced, people would complain about open world.
If they make it open world, people complain it should be instanced.

A strange game.

Anet is not designing the living story week by week.

Didn’t say they were.

I said that people were complaining regardless of what they did.

Yeah, people complain, but their complaints have literally zero impact until months later when they’re already complaining about something else.

And?

I’m not really sure why you’re telling me this.

My point was that people will complain regardless of what they do, so they might as well just do whatever because why not.

Blix.8021:

Filaha.1678:

Eshady.9146:

Filaha.1678:

Eshady.9146:

IMO, stick with instances so that challenges like “Masters” or a “Hard Mode” (GW1) can be added and used for a reason to actually replay episodes. I mean look at LS2 E1&2. It was instanced, had a lot less problems at launch, if something bugs for you just restart and still.. it had open world co-existing beautifully with the story.
Why did we go backwards to the LS1 player mash up debacle?

Because people complained that everything was instanced and they wanted more open world content.

See the pattern here?

I doubt very much they rewrote everything back into open world content because people complained too much. With that being said there is no pattern and I find your lack of faith disturbing, Anet does what they want how they planed it. So again I ask, Why go backwards as a planed installment?

The pattern is:

Anet does something.
Players complain about it and want it another way.
Repeat.

If they kept it instanced, people would complain about open world.
If they make it open world, people complain it should be instanced.

A strange game.

Anet is not designing the living story week by week.

Didn’t say they were.

I said that people were complaining regardless of what they did.

Electro.4173:

This is pretty much the worst thing they could have done short of doing nothing at all.

It basically confirms that they will never be tradable to other players, its always going to be RNG, period. And for the people who get them and don’t want them… I guess they get SOMETHING besides just deleting them now, but 3 extra greens (or at least I assume that’s all that’s in the dusty bags) isn’t exactly high reward for getting a rare drop.

Considering it’s something I got without doing anything other than what I was doing for ascended mats anyways, can’t complain about extra items.

Getting salvage bait is better reward for getting a rare item than just trashing it.

Eshady.9146:

Filaha.1678:

Eshady.9146:

IMO, stick with instances so that challenges like “Masters” or a “Hard Mode” (GW1) can be added and used for a reason to actually replay episodes. I mean look at LS2 E1&2. It was instanced, had a lot less problems at launch, if something bugs for you just restart and still.. it had open world co-existing beautifully with the story.
Why did we go backwards to the LS1 player mash up debacle?

Because people complained that everything was instanced and they wanted more open world content.

See the pattern here?

I doubt very much they rewrote everything back into open world content because people complained too much. With that being said there is no pattern and I find your lack of faith disturbing, Anet does what they want how they planed it. So again I ask, Why go backwards as a planed installment?

The pattern is:

Anet does something.
Players complain about it and want it another way.
Repeat.

If they kept it instanced, people would complain about open world.
If they make it open world, people complain it should be instanced.

A strange game.

Eshady.9146:

IMO, stick with instances so that challenges like “Masters” or a “Hard Mode” (GW1) can be added and used for a reason to actually replay episodes. I mean look at LS2 E1&2. It was instanced, had a lot less problems at launch, if something bugs for you just restart and still.. it had open world co-existing beautifully with the story.
Why did we go backwards to the LS1 player mash up debacle?

Because people complained that everything was instanced and they wanted more open world content.

See the pattern here?

I saw a Mosquito in [PYRE] until I killed it.

You paid for a kite. You got a kite.

You did not pay for a kite that gives a speed buff. Now there are other kites that give speed buffs that are not the kites you paid for.

Karizee.8076:

revy.4320:

Ariella Goldstein.3562:

Palador.2170:

This is what you all get for not jumping in on the public test server and helping to make sure these events work right.

Oh…wait….

PTS aren’t a cure all, and let’s not pretend otherwise. Most of the people I know who were on PTS for WoW did it so their guilds could get raid timing down for when it went live. Did nothing to help with the bugs. They were only interested in getting world firsts or whatever.

I repeat, public test servers aren’t a cure all.

We don’t pretend it is a cure, we know it should be integrated as a part of their testing workflow. Also, "Most of the people I know " is a meaningless extrapolation, PTR in WoW did serve it’s purpose to an acceptable degree. It is not my intention to come out harsh, but PTR is not just a fancy idea it’s a essentially a developing tool.

Don’t be holding WoW up like it’s some kind of shining beacon of perfectly polished gaming because it’s not. I played that game and every single patch without fail was full of bugs, from wildly unstable servers to bosses twirling off into the lava to low level paladins beating end game raid bosses and throwing their rankings off for entire seasons.

The only reason you don’t hear about it as much is they rarely launch patches. I think they are going on a year now without one and their bug forums are still full of bugs from the last one!

I still remember boats randomly zoning into the middle of mountains in the middle of a continent, nowhere near the ocean, during AQ opening.

If they push it as it is and there’s a bug, people will rage that they’re sloppy and suck and should have put it off.
If they push it back for further testing and bugfixes, people will rage that they’re sloppy and suck and should stick to their announced schedule.

Let’s face it, there’s pretty much no way they can avoid people raging short of going door to door to each customer and giving them $500.00 every two weeks for playing.

Except then again, people would just rage that it should have been $1,000.00 and that anything less is sloppy and they suck.

Pass.

I’d rather they focus on making good content that’s accessible to everyone than try to think up special little things for only one class to see.

I’d agree if there weren’t things that PVE players can’t get without going into PVP.

Living Story rewards should remain rewarded for doing the living story. Otherwise, PVP-only rewards and WVW-only rewards should be available to people who don’t want to do PVP and WVW and just want to do PVE things.

Zerker staff ele is an easy, fast kill, and easier (thought not as fast) if you’re not trying for the achievement to not let the minions die.

Air can blind, knock back, and stun the hounds, Earth can immobilize and unsteady ground, Water can chill and heal minion. Plenty of tools to help the minion survive. Then once the minion is reaching the boss, start channeling Fire 5 just before the shield drops, and Fire 2 afterwards. Got it down in two shield drops.

BrunoBRS.5178:

Shardelyss.4807:

@BrunoBRS.5178:

Did you read the post before you said “wrong”. Because I’m pretty sure that the opinion of what I said was that this living story plays out as someone coming from both sides of the fence. They ignore AND not ignore the personal story.

They are trying to make it so that if you didn’t do your personal story you GET NO references to content that came before and if you did your personal story you may get a tag back to it, but(more importantly) not always. To me this is ignoring and not ignoring something that came before the living story part 2. Because now you can go "time travel’ back and complete that and it’ll change small little parts that may tag at you, but it’s NOT anything substantial. They don’t reference your mentors, friends or anything like that.

It’s in the playing of both sides of the fence that we get the glaring discrepancies when you try to look back at the overall story.

---

I will add this though:

Just because someone says it “counts” for something doesn’t mean it IS a personal story. I played through my personal story on more than 2 characters and each one should not be ignored for Kasmeer deciding she was going to plan out how we got an audience when I could have gone to Trahearne and got my buddy to let me in.

Oh sure, others might not have done the Personal story, but they have the potential to do it which will change their future. I however did my personal story and watching that scene left me feeling left out of the process that I should be looking into… not Kasmeer.

yes i did. just because you don’t like what the writers did doesn’t mean your assumption is right. the writers have confirmed that for all intents and purposes, season 2 will treat your character like someone that has beat the personal story and season 1, even if you didn’t. saying they’re still on the fence is factually wrong.

And as pointed out in detail, what is said in that post is factually wrong.

Belinda changes what she says based on whether or not you’re the Commander. If you are not at the point where you’re the Commander of the Pact, she does not refer to you as such. So for the purposes of dialogue, they do not assume you have completed it.

Serophous.9085:

Flash.6912:

Witham.5621:

Dawdler.8521:

Traherne comes back…

… as a horribly disfigured creature corrupted by the dragon, which we proceed to stomp and mercy kill.

That’s what i have been thinking from the start to! Corrupted into modremoth’s Champ.

U got it wrong! Traherne is the one that controlling Mordremoth. Mord is his champ.

No, YOU got it wrong! Traherne IS Mordremoth!

Trahearne was controlling Scarlet.

After the end of the PS, Trahearne found himself leader of the largest army in Tyria, formed for the purpose of fighting a dragon, and tested in that same endeavour. His Wild Hunt achieved, he also found himself without a purpose. His desire for importance swelled, and, being the leader of a force that was tested and succeeded against a dragon, decided that the best way to become relevant again was to kill another dragon.

He decides to control Scarlet, using her research and engineering ingenuity to awaken another dragon before its time, hoping to catch it when it’s weakened due to premature awakening (kind of like if you poke a person in bed until they wake up and then punch them in the face before they even sit up). Being the leader of the only force proven to be effective against dragons, he is therefore clearly the best choice for everyone to run to to protect them.

Having been brought before the leaders of all nations of Tyria, Trahearne hears out their pleas, and states calmly, in his monotone voice, “This is a really nice continent you have here. Be a shame if something were to happen to it. … This won’t end well.” He agrees to aid the nations of Tyria in fighting the dragon, on the agreement that they offer their own funds and resources to support him, as he is clearly their best option. He intentionally toys with the dragon, knowing it is not fully awakened, while squandering the resources of the various nations.

Having thus squandered the resources of these nations, he finally strikes to deal the killing blow. The Pact defeats another dragon, as expected. However, this leaves all the nations in Tyria in a bad place, as they have overspent in this endeavour. It is then that Trahearne reveals his true colours and uses his Pact, the only army capable of fighting after he forced the other nations to empty their own coffers, to conquer the various nations and bring themselves under his rule, renaming the continent from Tyria to Tyriahearne.

Season 3: Trahearne expands his rule. Cantha confirmed.

Vesuvius.9874:

Silvercyclone.1462:

I doubt it will happen cause it would change the game way too much. plus if the only way to get ghost buster achievement is to do AC story that would make a lot of players really upset.

Hmmm if I were a player, would I care more about a pointless achievement? or driving the story forward in absolutely unexpected ways that breathe life into an otherwise static world? Decisions, decisions….

Considering they’ve been incapable of properly making it a dynamic world thus far?

I’d pick the first.

And by properly, I mean that the effects of the future should not be felt in the past. Vines in Concordia NOW should not be in the personal story which chronologically comes before it. Destroyed LA NOW should not be in the personal story which chronologically comes before it.

When they can prove themselves capable of separating the future from the past, then I’ll hope they change the world some more. Until then though, I’d rather not have a whole story arc about protecting a city that’s already evacuated and destroyed.

If you’re having trouble with the boss fight (not counting bugs), you might want to consider looking at your gear and traits and changing them.

Can do it easily as zerker anything as long as you don’t stand in the boss’ bombs.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

There was no “aspect of Ceara”. Why do people want to idolize – heroize, or whatever – a rather poor character and an obviously pure evil villain at that?

Because of the things she says which implies she feels that she’s helping the world somehow.

It’s not like we know why she did it yet.

I have 7.

CBA buying a recipe for the amount of lockpicks I could get given the amount of Dragonite Ore I could get to make some actually useful ascended gear.

If they put in 4 leeway coins, who’s to say you won’t just get stuck at 29/34 and still be “forced” to go to a guide?

If you found all 30 yourself, why does it remove your sense of accomplishment if someone else didn’t? If you solo a champion, does it remove your sense of accomplishment if someone else does it in a group? If you craft your own legendary, does it remove your sense of accomplishment if someone else buys it off the TP?

I mean, nobody else knows, or cares, whether you got all 30 yourself or not, because it doesn’t show it. Nobody’s forcing you to use the guide. If you want to spend 30 hours finding the 30th coin, that’s your prerogative.

Besides, people will still use the guide for 30/34, so…

BrunoBRS.5178:

Shardelyss.4807:

The real problem is that this living story tries to both ignore and not ignore the personal story. I think that’s why its riddled with all these little bits and pieces that by themselves are oddities, but together are jarring big discrepancies when you look back at the bigger picture.

I come from the boat that the story should assume, regardless, that you did your Personal Story. Even one of the three explorers in Dry Top refer to you as Commander, regardless of if you did your story. Meanwhile Belinda only refers to you as Commander if you go into chapter 1 as a character that did enough of the PS to be a commander. Why does she know the difference when the Explorers do not?

Even visiting the Pale Tree (and no, I wasn’t asked for my passport or promised to give them my first born) she had no qualms talking to me and thanking me for killing Scarlett.

wrong. living story right now is personal story 2. it even counts for personal story completion. the devs said it assumes that they assume you completed all the story before the current release, including season 1 and personal story.

the reason they’re doing that should be obvious to anyone, they need a cliffhanger, something to tie both releases.

Wrong. Just because the devs said it doesn’t mean it’s true. As was pointed out in the post you said was wrong (which was right), in the very first instance of the first episode, Belinda says two different things to you if you talk to her after the fighting is over. If you haven’t yet become Commander of the Pact (not sure exactly where it cuts off), she will just vaguely remark about how you’ve done some big things. If you are Commander, she’ll make specific mention of how you’re the Commander and killed Zhaitan (oddly enough, she makes this comment even if you haven’t killed Zhaitan yet).

So no, it doesn’t just assume you’ve done the entire personal story, or else everyone would have the Commander dialogue. They are, in fact, playing both sides of the fence, in what is clearly a poorly-planned dialogue change. They won’t assume you’re Commander unless you got that far, but will assume you killed Zhaitan if you became a Commander.