ANet has posted elsewhere that they are aware of a few bugs with this. Keep reporting them here or via in-game reporting feature. No ETA for a fix, yet.
You can find other relevant threads in the official forums via google search: add the following to your search:
site:forum-en.guildwars2.com
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
has anyone else “lost” listings older than 3 months…? in myselling history i can see upto 3 months ago listings that i have on tp.. BUT… i had many more listings that have now simply dissapeared from the list from over 3 months ago…
a lot of stacks of mats that have just dissapeared!
so…. i spent a lot of gold getting these stacks and listing them on tp and now looks like theyve gone…
anyone else?
They aren’t gone, you “just” can’t see them. I agree that’s bad, especially if, like me, you have tons of buy (or sell) orders for below vendor +18% — those orders will never fulfill (unit amount is too low to process), but since they can’t be removed, we can’t recover the gold/item.
However, at some point (soon, I hope) ANet will fix the display issue.
Meantime, as the Talking Heads never said, “they say patience is a virtue, but I don’t have the time.”
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Q: And if someone determined a way to increase the 7-series golem damage to excessive amounts?
A: Well, then we die or we bow down to our new golem overlords.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
It’s bugged and ANet is aware of it. There have been about a dozen of posts about this collection (and a few others). It’s possible that this one needs a “container” to be unlocked first, before you can start collecting (as is true for some collections).
*Regarding Search: *
Use google search. Prepend (or append) your query with
site:forum-en.guildwars2.com
Most site-specific search engines are terrible; the main advantage to this one is that it returns no results (instead of incomplete or misleading ones). Another advantage of using Google is if the website in question is down, you can still view cached versions of the articles/threads you seek.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I don’t understand this. Why not just play as normal players and join guilds? Announcing it just makes you into a target for all the built up frustration at how the game mode has been handled(I can bet money you will be quickly made to feel uncomfortable and end up bowing out). I know new games are coming out and you now need to appear involved but I can’t fathom what will come out of this.
I’m sure some guilds would treat people that way, but somehow I doubt many of those signed up for the adoption services. I know my guild will do a good job of welcoming the ANet employee (and save the snarky comments for a week into the season, once we know they can dish it out as well as take it).
I would hope all game companies would want to do this regularly, whether PvE, WvW, or PvP. It’s healthy for players to realize devs are also gamers and the company has solid reasons behind all of its actions (whether or not we agree or embrace the implementation). It’s also good for devs to get to see things from other people’s points of view.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Crafting, Guild Bank, and TP are very close to each other in Rata Sum. There are similarly-convenient setups in other cities, depending on your preferences.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I prefer it this way, so people who like multiple game modes don’t have to choose. And so that none of the affected areas are hurt by people having to choose. My server always participates in new PvE content, so we had no presence in WvW during the end of the last tourney (it overlapped with the LS). Similarly, LS sometimes suffers when WvW has a new tourney.
I expect that ANet will do a little of each: overlap + no overlap, since there’s no way to please everyone in this regard.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
The point of the OP isn’t about whether a particular build is good or not. It’s about how others deal with being in a group with a non-meta build or playstyle. I’m not sure why people expect PUGs to play a certain way; the beauty (and the horror) of PUGs is that anything can happen (and often does).
If you can’t stand it when people behave randomly, why join a random group of people? Seems like a recipe for frustration.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Adjusted the warmup times on the Coiled Watch event chain in Frostgorge Sound.
That’s the reset on the full chain. It doesn’t affect the timing on any of the individual events. They slowed down how quickly the chain would restart after failure, which is what prompted people to look for a more efficient alternative.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Since ANet found the time to gussy up the icons for various otherwise identical icons for junk items, I believe that we can call it a bug that the Mystic Salvage Kit Icon still looks like that of the Crude Salvage Kit. One is great at recovering ectos from rares, one is a waste.
Can we get a little shininess shone on one of the most popular tools?
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
lol it’s not insider trading. That information was reasonably available for people to access.
Uh-huh.
Some mighty fine distinctions you’re making there.
Right now, if you buy the right vendor items, you can sell them on the tp for 100% profit.
Its only a 1 silver value item and everybody only buys 1 but they sell quite fast.
Not at all an exploit.
“Insider” trading requires an insider; when information is available to the public, by definition, it can’t be “insider trading.” One could make the argument that it’s “unfair” (since some will have time to see the previews and some wouldn’t), but I don’t buy that either: some will get the release first, too, and have an advantage. Publishing the info in previews ensures maximum exposure, especially when people like Dulfy and Wooden Potatoes are able to spread the word.
Calling the second example an “exploit” is not as bad, but still stretching things. It’s always been possible to farm vendors. Anyone can learn where any item can be acquired from the wiki (which gets updated very quickly). That said, I would support a change that would make it easier for people to look up stuff on the wiki and/or learn vendor prices in game (e.g. by right-clicking items).
tl;dr use of negative imagery to make a point is always a poor rhetorical tactic, as the important points get lost in a discussion of the words used, especially when such hyperbole can be easily shown to be untrue and/or misleading. Instead, offer a suggestion about how ANet could prevent such situations from being an issue in the first.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Technically, nothing changed about the first event per se. What’s new is that people only recently realized that, when scaled with enough people, you could get ~10 champs to spawn while driving the Svanir from the Coil . Further, it was easier to avoid success by simply stepping out of the capping circle early.
The root cause remains the same: event failure is overwhelming more rewarding than success. Whenever that’s true, farmers will eventually discover it and figure out a way to organize scaling to their advantage.
99% of the time, there’s no way for ANet to know this until/unless someone contacts them. So this won’t be the last time we see something like this.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
GW2TP.COM seems okay if you want to look at that site.
I use that site; it’s far more reliable in terms of adding new items and up time. I’m looking at a way to import JSON-format data into Excel automatically, which would allow me to use the official API directly.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
The original issue the OP described can still occur, and is mirrored by a similar buyer’s issue. It’s possible this was addressed in the patch, but not mentioned (wouldn’t be the first time an important and desired change was hidden).
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
One man’s ceiling is another man’s floor. People who want insta-coin prefer sell to highest buyer; people who want more coin prefer match lowest seller.
I agree with the OP et al: how about some options for the TP?
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
@BlackLeech: the problem is that I’m targeting things that I can’t hit, not that they aren’t in my field of view. With two foes nearby on either side and one twice as far away, I still end up shooting at the Centaur Supplies which are even farther away and not something I care about during a major event. At this point, I have to manually click on the target, because I can no longer rely on targeting something that is both near and able to take damage from my weapon. It’s bad for guardian loot stick, but it’s been devastating for mesmer: my illusion skills go into cooldown with no phantasm or clone, because the game’s idea of a nearest target is blocked, behind a wall, while the actual threat is about to hammer train my rear end.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Squirrel: could you also send your data to exploits@arena.net ? Given the volume of posting in the forums right now, I have a feeling that this thread might not get immediate attention..
Thanks for the suggestion; I just sent a copy to that address. I never knew about that email, so I always reported TP-bots in game, which probably wasn’t productive.
Thank you for taking the extra time
Reporting bots is in-game is helpful, but the email is more efficient when the scope is global, i.e. a lot of bots or stuff affecting the TP.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
There are a lot of really good features in TP 2.0 and some excellent market impacts. I just wish it wasn’t muddled by various bugs (large or small), hard-to-read text, and a few UI problems.
I know that it’s impossible to have a perfect rollout of something this complex, but I would have thought that these particular glitches would have been easily caught, by any power trader. Put another way, this seem like the wrong sorts of bugs for ANet to be allowing during a Feature Patch.
Regardless, I hope they are able to fix all/most soon.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Ah, thanks; I get it now. I thought your first phrase (“you can now only sell”) meant you couldn’t sell at all.
There’s a similar glitch on the buyer’s side, in that it want’s you to check off existing offers. The old system let you set a price and then the TP would figure out which offers to accept and how much to set aside as a custom offer. Now, it’s asking us to do that manually.
I agree that this makes the TP unnecessarily difficult to use and interrupts my free market choice to set my offer prices (buy or sell).
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
There are a couple of people who have published data on this on Reddit. They claim to be getting 10 scraps with every 30 chests or less, based on about 500 keys across a bunch of guildies.
6 chests is far too few to attempt to discern any pattern. In fact, 60 runs is too few, so I’m not surprised by your results.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Can we get an official response on whether it’s intended that the highest tier exotic crafted back items are only level 78? (Thus restricting the kind of upgrades you can put on them.)
I actually think there’s some use to an L78 item, but agree with your sentiment. There’s another way to resolve it: change the minimum gear level requirement to 60 or 70 for the various items you can slot in. After all, exotic Superior Runes and Sigils only require L60, so why not make it L78 for exquisite jewels?
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
If you want long-lasting swiftness, I cannot think of a better way than an Engineer with the Speedy Kits trait and at least one weapon kit.
Swiftness: 10s upon equipping a weapon kit. Cooldown: 10s.
It’s a great trait, but it only provides 10s of swiftness per swap (two swaps, if only running one kit); it’s not very long-lasting. For those who don’t mind that level of micromanagement, it does offer 100% uptime, which, I agree, is good.
The OP is trying to figure out a way to front-load the effort and then enjoy swiftness for a while, before having to worry about it.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
metrics like this never make sense, out of context of the tests. People spend a lot of time pouring over the details to understand just what they are — and are not — telling them.
Even if ANet were to publish the studies, players wouldn’t automatically agree with how the company interpreted or adjusted the game as a result. All the people up in arms would still be up in arms; all the people who love the changes would still love the changes.
As a result, there’s no benefit to ANet to take the time to publish and a lot of potential downside.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I think probably the message is too generic. It should probably read, “display of miniatures has been turned off temporarily, due to the number of players in your area.”
Culling has always been about limiting what displays on your screen, so it has never mattered how many people are on the map: if you’re alone in a cave on a full map, there’s no need to reduce what you see; if you’re next to the only 25 people on a map, it probably makes sense to turn off some assets.
The thing that’s different about minis is that they tell us when those are about to vanish, whereas they don’t tell us when anything else gets culled. As a result, we notice it happening more often, when in fact, there was always some level of culling going on under the same circumstances.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
While true, I believe some people have had success contacting support about this. (I haven’t tried myself.)
True, the support randomly helped people with this issue and others not.
Hoped I might receive better help from them here. :P
It’s never “random” about whether they help people or not. There are times when Support is hammered, and that means staff and manager discretion is limited. There are times when a new person only knows the default answer to questions about skins (“sorry, you have to get a new one”) and doesn’t know that there are exceptions. In nearly all cases, if you ask nicely, they will follow-up and if it’s within their power to help, they will.
One of the biggest headaches of people who manage support teams is getting them to be consistent, fair, speedy, and accurate all at the same time. It’s only easy in theory.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
The company I work for never lets major updates like this go live without knowing in advance what is wrong. They release them on a test server first, where they duplicate ALL user experiences that they can think of, and see what happens. I’m left wondering if that happened in this case.
In some fields, it’s easy to run those sorts of tests because it’s easy to list all the things that users might do and test. In many fields, it’s not remotely possible to do comprehensive testing in that way. In gaming, you have 100s of 1000s of players, trying out dozens of things, interacting with each other, etc. There are just too many things that can happen that can’t be predicted or even easily replicated.
Player tests only uncover a handful of such issues, because (a) there aren’t nearly as many people and (b) the circumstances tend to be narrow. Plus, we already know how big a fuss people are making about letting some people have early access to changes (giving them economic opportunities unavailable to others).
I’m not saying that ANet does a great job of testing. They certainly miss out on stuff that I think should be caught by reasonable regression tests. But it’s unrealistic to expect that there won’t be any bugs, major or minor, after a patch. The only question is: how quickly can ANet address them without making things worse.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
They were separate items. You can no longer unlock it if you did not hold onto it.
While true, I believe some people have had success contacting support about this. (I haven’t tried myself.)
However, I’d wait 3-4 weeks; there are probably a lot of requests right now and my guess is that the team members are getting asked to say “no” more often at the moment, to help alleviate the backlog.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I don’t want ANet to just punish people for misbehaving; I want to see the system do a better job of preventing that from happening in the first place.
For argument’s sake, I’ll accept that ANet doesn’t want to get involved in party or guild drama. I’ll also accept that they don’t want to make it easy for people to sell dungeons (not sure exactly why, but that doesn’t matter).
The current situation still makes it all too easy for folks to lose their personal progress because two people decided to abuse the system.
There used to be good reasons for allowing party-kicks by only two people. Now, there aren’t any. If there is no longer an instance owner, then require four votes to kick and allow anyone to veto the kick request (so it doesn’t remain up).
Some have proposed some interesting variations, but all of those sound costly in terms of coding and troubleshooting. I’m hoping that just making it harder to kick will be relatively easy; I know that it would eliminate 80-90% of the current concerns.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
They want those extra runes to be destroyed so that demand doesn’t ever bottom out.
Also possible, but … it seems like there should be other ways to improve the supply|demand ratio, especially since people tend to fixate on 5-6 sets of runes to the exclusion of all others.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I use google search for the forums (and imo, that works better than the search functions on 90% of all websites; it’s just not just the GW2 forums that have trouble with this feature).
append or prepend any google (or bing) search with: site:forum-en-guildwars2.com — that restricts the search to this site. It has the added advantage that, on the rare occasions this site is unavailable, you can also read cached versions of posts.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Or are you trying to sell them for too little? I just read in the BLTC forum that the TP seems to have smartened up so you have to list for enough to make vendor + 1 c. No idea if that is accurate.
From patch notes
Minimum buy and sell prices are now vendor value + 15%.
This through me for a loop — I read the patch notes all the time & completely missed it until last night. (I have to say I’m surprised they didn’t discuss it in the preview, since this was a frequently-requested feature.)
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Squirrel: could you also send your data to exploits@arena.net ? Given the volume of posting in the forums right now, I have a feeling that this thread might not get immediate attention.
It really shouldn’t matter if this is RMT, profiteering bots, or individual players using identical scripts/routines — this smells like exploitative behavior and ANet has said they want to be on top of things like this. (Plus, I hope that they can do something about it quickly, if only identify the accounts used to start watching them.)
Thanks for the post.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
If we assume that the extractor’s purpose is to allow you to extract +X Agony Infusions from ascended or legendary gear, the price seems ok. To make a +12 AI, you need two +11s. You might have one in your Twilight, which would cost 80-10g to replace; 31g to recover it from the Legendary is a bargain.
That said, I agree with the OP’s sentiment: it should be easier and/or cheaper to move a valuable upgrade from one weapon to another. If I decided that I prefer to use runes of the ranger on my ranger, instead of my mesmer, I currently have to buy 7 more runes.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I agree that “target nearest” and “auto-target” are a lot less useful since the patch:
as the OP says, too often you target something outside your field of view, instead of something just in front.
as Verteiron says, “furniture” is prioritized — I don’t want to destroy centaur supplies when fighting off the harathi counter-offensive at King’s Gate; I want to fight the centaurs.
I also found that, despite the patch notes, it was also harder to keep locked on the Karka Queen. Not sure about furniture-like world bosses; perhaps that is easier.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
That’s a good work-around, but it’s to a problem that shouldn’t exist: it should be easier to find the right item if you type (or paste) the full name.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Geikamir really screwed me up because Chaos Skin prices took a nose dive after the patch went live because they were still 1 ticket. Made 50g less than I would have if I sold the night before.
I was going off of history and also this:
“New Chaos weapon skins are available for the next four weeks from Black Lion Weapons Specialists for the introductory price of one Black Lion Weapon Ticket. Black Lion Weapon Tickets can be found in Black Lion Chests.”
So technically they could mean AFTER 4 weeks, but that’s misleading.
Wouldn’t be the first time that ANet pulled a Tolkien (“speak, friend, and enter”) or a Sting (“place it on Lucky Dan”), where the phrasing could be interpreted in several “correct” ways.
I doubt very much it’s intended; I think some of the flavor-text writers aren’t very careful with their word choices.
edit: syntax fix
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
