John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
There may also be an issue with the arcane brilliance… I say this because I cannot get the kitten thing to combo underwater with a static field consistently, the field is often quite far from where I think the blast should hit for combo. I say static because it’s the easiest to see the boundaries of and I can get the swiftness combo if I use the arcane blast utility rather than brilliance. So, perhaps trying a different blast might change your results.
But, I don’t know.
Arcane Brilliance is a finisher centered on the caster, therefore likely of different height (z-axis) then a lot of fields, depending on how they were applied.
It would explain a lot of the conflicting reports if we assumed that proximity of the finisher to the field mattered and that each field and finisher can be centered at different heights, not just different geographic (x- & y-axes) locations. If this is true, people would have to be very careful when testing to control all the relevant variables.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Will someone at ANet please tell the rest of us if you reward certain people for their forum comments? If you could just issue a flat out denial then that might diminish the number of accusations, especially right now.
Are you paid by Blizzard to stir up drama on the GW2 forums? If you could just issue a flat out denial, then that might diminish the number of accusations.
Posing a personal attack as a question doesn’t make it any less of an unfounded accusation.
There are plenty of meaty topics to discuss regarding the new patch; we don’t have to invent controversies.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Great tip, Behellagh. I was using the mousewheel (which is very, erm, handy, too). This is better.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Sorry for messing your thread up, but I have to correct myself. I logged in this evening and my older buy orders appeared. After a good 2 hour delay. So cancelling works, you just gotta wait a little. However it still only works for buy orders placed after the patch. Anything older than 2 days is completely gone.
I’ve amended the amendment ;-)
Thanks for the follow-up. Either way, it’s still a major bug until it’s fixed. You should be able to see all existing offers, no matter how old. I’m okay with losing the buy/sell history after 60 days (even though I’d like that to remain, given the new ability to search history). But I can’t imagine that they intended to leave us unable to manage your own live offers.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Currently, you can only see around 100 buy orders on the TP; anything older is completely hidden, even if you use the filters. This prevents people from reviewing and canceling older orders.
At least one player has said that removing newer listings does not allow one to see any older ones.
There are a few posts about this in the BLTC forum. I’m adding this one to make sure the dev staff are aware that this is a major bug for high-frequency traders.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
They front-loaded experience gain for early levels, i.e. it takes less XP to get to 15 now, so more XP to get to 27.
Goatjug is also correct: Jeweler and Chef both give XP as if you can level to rank 500, even though that’s not currently possible. When the game launched, you could max all crafts (to 400) and reach L80; now, if you max all crafts (six to 500, two to 400), you’ll end up a few levels short of 80.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Well-written original post.
I’m assuming that ANet was correct and that these changes are better for a lot of new players (and some relatively-new-to-MMO veterans). I then evaluate the changes based on that point of view and, on the whole, they have done a nice job of separating out each new mechanic, so you are only ever learning 1-2 new things.
However, like the OP, I hate how the changes affect my game, too. It’s made leveling up a lot less enjoyable: it’s more linear, it’s full of gates that are tedious after the first few characters, and it makes starting a new character a chore I want to avoid, rather than a challenge I want to embrace.
What if ANet was right? I think they probably were…about new players. But, they also affected the game substantially for veterans and I hope they can find a better balance going forward.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I can’t slot an exquisite ruby jewel or a ruby orb in the exotic leatherworker backpack but I can slot masterwork and below jewelry in that slot.
It’s an anomaly due to the level of crafted backpack, L78. I’m not sure why the packs aren’t L80 or why, if they are below, the level requirements for upgrades weren’t also updated.
In other words, this is probably “working as intended,” but perhaps ANet should revisit what their intent.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Hi, thanks for bringing this up.
I’ve looked into the down-scaling calculations and identified the bug that is causing this issue. There’s definitely a lot of stats being lost when scaled down that isn’t intended.
Thanks for looking into it. Will we see smoothing of the stat increases? The game goes from easy -> difficult -> easy as you progress through the levels, (likely) due to your stats coming in large portions.
There’s an inherent issue with using step-functions for leveling and whole-number stats. That creates breakpoints, i.e. combinations of numbers where “one point less” creates a difference of kind (not just of degree).
I hope that the next iteration of leveling can smooth progress: there shouldn’t be sudden changes in difficult from L20 to L22 or moving from an L5 area of the map to an L7, outside of whatever mechanics are added at each step along the way. Wearing better gear should always be better, too; we shouldn’t have to read the wiki to learn when rare armor isn’t really better than masterwork.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Shademehr’s numbers match mine. Worth noting, the costs per slot are as follows:
- Stash = 50 slots @5g or 10s/slot.
- Trove = +100 slots @40g or 40s/slot
- Cave = +100 slots: @60g or 60s/slot.
- Total = +250 slots: @105g or 42s/slot
In contrast,
- Vault Expander = +30 slots @600 gems = ~72g or 240s/slot
- Mule Toon = + 60 slots @800 gems = 96g or 160s/slot (assuming 10-slot bags, which are “almost free”)
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I agree. There should be a drop down in the mini list for Set 1, 2, and 3, the same as you can filter weapons by off-hand or specific weapon type. Be great if there was also:
- rarity filter
- NPC type (sylvari, hylek, etc) (some of us like to collect a different sort of “set” than the official ones).
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I’m very, very annoyed. I get two days worth of bought/sold info when isolating those lists, which is all but useless. We don’t even have the ability to manually search deeper than this.
This overhaul looked pretty good in the preview video on Twitch, but in general, it’s just made virtually everything I do slower, more tedious, and less efficient than it was yesterday.
I never would have believed I’d be pining for the old interface.
I don’t miss the old interface at all. Well, unless they tell us it will be 3 months before they fix the issues with the new TP.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
When you collected 100 and then 56, the actual queue was 156. The box filled at 100 items and the rest of the items were already purchased, but not in the pickup box. Then, when you clicked “pick up,” the box emptied and allowed you to collect the remaining 56 — those orders didn’t suddenly fulfill; they were there already.
That’s exactly how the TP worked prior to the patch, the difference being how that was visually displayed.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I’d love to have a normal trade function as well, in order to trade stuff with people without paying a 15% fee -_-
You can trade with people now, avoid fees entirely. What the game is unlikely to see is a dedicated mechanic for P2P trading, for all of the reasons covered in this post and several others.
The TP does nearly everything that P2P does, it does so more efficiently and without the need for Support to be involved. It only lacks the bartering aspect, that many of us (including myself) enjoy. Since that’s still possible using mail, albeit with higher risk, I don’t see ANet deciding to spend effort to make it easier for people to bypass the TP.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
There’s no pattern at all. They just had all of them available for the anniversary sale, so I don’t expect to see any of the old ones available any time soon. However, they do periodically release new ones.
I agree with Phoebe that you might have to wait as long as 6 months, but it wouldn’t surprise me if we something when the LS returns in November.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Summarizing info for other posts:
Most tabs/etc on the new TP only look at ~100 listings. This persists through any of the variety of filters or sort orders that you can use.
I’m going to call it a bug, since I can’t imagine that this was done deliberately. Until it’s fixed, there is no way to cancel older orders, unless you first cancel enough of the newer ones.
Cancelling doesnt work either. Check my last post in this thread: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/Maximum-number-of-items-for-sale
Thanks. I’ve updated my “answer” accordingly.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Whenever I try to use a miniature I get a message saying that “Miniatures have been hidden due to rising player population”, yet just now I also got a little popup saying that the instance of the map I was in (Brisban Wildlands) had almost no players in it and I could choose to stay in that instance, or move to a more populated one.
So I tried to enable my mini again, and I got the same error message about the rising player population again. It seems to me that this is a bit bugged.
I had the same thing happen to me earlier.
Perhaps it’s the error message that is incorrect, e.g. maybe it should say, “miniatures are hidden due to a sudden increase in the number of nearby players.” In other words, it’s not about overall population, just about people close by.
That would make more sense, since a map can be down to 25 people (making it efficient to combine with other 25 person maps), while at the same time, 25 are at the same boss, thus triggering the need to cull.
Still, be nice if they tweaked this so we can see our own minis almost all the time.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Said there was a test. Nobody seems to know about that. Was that the free trail? If it’s the beta in China, does that correctly reflect NA/EU playbase?
It was not a free trial and not the beta in China. ANet (or their consultants) ran focus groups: they paid people to play and they watched. They saw what stuff discouraged the groups from trying stuff out, what stuff made players more likely to adventure out beyond their comfort zone.
Typically, such tests will offer a variety of versions of the game, with tweaks for individual groups or markedly different choices for some, to see how people react.
For any of a number of reasons, ANet isn’t going to release the gory details. Data like that makes sense only in context and it’s just too easy to misinterpret if you’re on the outside looking in.
I think, therefore, it’s remarkable that Colin et al say that they at ANet were surprised by the results. They went in expecting that people would like things as open-ended as possible and were stunned to find out that people, at least initially, wanted the mechanics added gradually instead.
Personally, I hate that sort of gameplay. I want to find my own way, no gates for anything. I love going to places “before I’m ready,” because that tests my abilities and my understanding of the mechanics.
But I get that’s not everyone. I get that, in order for this game to thrive, we need an influx of new players to replace the veterans that inevitably leave due to RL attrition and attraction to the next big thing.
So I applaud ANet for changing the game so that it’s easy to adopt, even if you aren’t a traditional MMOer. Moreoever, I know plenty of people with L80s that haven’t learned some of the important mechanics of their mains, because they learned something leveling up and they never updated their approach. They, too, are benefiting from some of the changes.
I only fault ANet for seemingly not allowing for veterans, too. At some point, people don’t need the safety net anymore. Leveling up now, especially trait acquisition, is so tedious (for me) that I have no interest in alts.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Summarizing info for other posts:
Most tabs/etc on the new TP only look at ~100 listings. This persists through any of the variety of filters or sort orders that you can use.
I’m going to call it a bug, since I can’t imagine that this was done deliberately. Until it’s fixed, there is no way to cancel older orders, unless you first cancel enough of the newer ones and then wait (and wait some more). However, anything prior to 9 September will still be hidden.
edit: per Nimrud, cancelling orders doesn’t help you see older ones, until a few hours after doing so.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
(edited by Illconceived Was Na.9781)
The older TP was worse in most ways. If they fix the 100-item limit display, then the current system is excellent: you can filter your buy order by item name, rarity, etc, just like when you look for an item to purchase (or sell). That makes it far easier to manage a long list of offers.
(The new TP has other elements I’d like to see tweaked, too, but I wouldn’t go back to the old system unless they aren’t able to evolve the existing system in a timely fashion.)
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
It appears that only the 100 most recent buy orders are displayed. Definitely a bug, since none of us with 101+ orders have received any coin back.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I noticed that a ton of buy orders for a few items are gone. I now wonder if those were actually refunded or simply vanished.
It seems that only the first 100 buy orders are displayed. I’m hoping it’s just missing a “next” button.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Arrows are optional, scroll wheel still works in those fields. Interface layout I think is sized to fit at UI small on a 1024×768 or 1280×720 resolution.
Scroll wheel still works, whoever, it doesnt matter if you scroll the wheel up or down, the value always decreases.
Not for me. It scrolls up and down with my mousewheel.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
The TP has always limited how many items you could pick up at once. A few patches back, they made sure that gold was never queued (but it used to be). I’ve always had to press “take all” a couple of times (even when my inventory didn’t fill up).
Are you seeing something else?
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
One month, try 2 days. I think it’s a fixed number of items that get fetched and filtered from there.
Jeeze. Did you start a thread in Game Bugs? If not, I can in a bit. (I wanted to make sure I wasn’t missing anything; the new UI has some cool features that are, alas, well-hidden.)
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
How do I show buy orders older than one month? I probably have 100s worth a lot of gold. I was waiting for the patch to cancel stuff (since I figured it would be quicker), but I can only see listings that are less than 30 days old. Nothing from July or earlier.
(I’ve tried filtering for items that I know are older; I still only see recent offers.)
Thanks in advance for any tips.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Ability to send something COD through the mail would be nice. Works well in another MMO. If buyer doesn’t pay, they don’t get the item. Great for trades. Avoids scams.
It does not avoid scams. It prevents people from shipping an item without paying, which is not the same thing. It will not prevent people from misrepresenting the value of the item(s) they trade.
P2P trading allows savvy traders to take advantage less educated players, about how easily items are obtained, market prices, and so forth. The TP already offers goods at market price, it already allows you to set you own price.
It doesn’t allow bargaining, which saddens me, because I find it to be one of the most enjoyable aspects of MMOs. But that’s a small price to pay for having a system that is fair, incredibly efficient about exchanging goods, and one of the best MMO gold sinks ever created.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
The problem is that there are several numbers they ought to post and it’s hard to setup the UI so it’s unambiguous and unobtrusive.
- Item Price
- Quantity
- Total Value of Sale
- Listing Fee
- Sales Tax
- Gross Profit (the amount that will actually show up in your collections box, = Value – Tax)
- Net Profit (the amount of profit, after all fees are accounted for, assuming listing only once, = Gross Profit – Listing Fee = Value – Tax – Fee)
Most people’s eyes glaze over looking at more than three numbers so ANet keeps erring on the side of too few. I think they should post them all and then work on tweaking/retweaking until it’s easy for the majority of the community.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Please dont. That will just drive prices up even more.
How would this drive prices down? Isn’t it likely that if people could store them in their collections (where mats go to hide from their owners), people would be less likely to sell, decreasing the supply on TP and thus putting pressure on prices to rise?
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
- the 10-clover recipe is good if you’re lucky; the 1-clover recipe will have less variance, so you’ll generally get closer to average on your way to 77 clovers
- using clover forging to get T6 mats is horribly inefficient; you are far better off selling the ecto you’d use and buying what you need on the TP
- The gold:gem exchange rate works both ways. A low rate is good for cheapskates like me who don’t want to spend cash. A high rate is better for people who don’t have much time to play, because they get more gold for their dollar/euro. A high rate also serves to discourage gold sellers, because the competition with legit gold is steeper.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
So this guy left cause we got content and better game now?Yeahhhh
No, he is leaving because the April feature pack screwed him over transmutation stones. He spent money that he lost out on (read his past post history for a better understanding). And he wants Anet to apologise. It would have been better for him to go to support and take it up with them, imo.
I read his original post. Saying he was “screwed over” exaggerates the situation. He spent real money on Transmutation Stones because he enjoyed reskinning lowbie toons a lot. Those stones were converted to charges at the same rate as everyone’s free stones, but in his case, that meant he ended up with a lot fewer charges than if he had spent on crystals originally.
I don’t fault him for spending money on stones, when most people were complaining about having too many. I am sympathetic with his feeling that the conversion didn’t take his situation into account. I can see why he was extremely upset and why he posted and subsequently decided to leave the game.
But my sympathy ends at the point he decided to complain publicly, without having first tried to resolve the situation with Support. He wrote one post 4 months ago and there’s no indication he even contacted ANet to ask for a refund or some extra transmutation charges. I feel sure that had he made a polite request, Gaile would have made sure that the team could provide some accommodation.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
A dozen people from ANet isn’t representative of the company, any more than 500 players would be representative of the overall player base. I’d be more concerned if you had 50-100 ANet employees listed and first compared them to a similar fraction of non-ANet players who also have 50+ hr/week jobs. (Making suitable allowance for how many hrs of company time those employees use to play on the live system.)
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
How is this remotely P2W even in the (incorrect) assumption that there’s any “win” associated with more APs?
- Anyone can grind gold to buy gems, and therefore compete on gems.
- Anyone can spend cash on gems, to get gold, which can be used to acquire things from the TP.
Everyone I know who is near the top of the leaderboards has done so because they play a lot and they are efficient at earning points (e.g. by using hammer to kill jotun, to advance two tracks at once). They won’t need to worry about people getting a few AP by spending gems.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
also means that anyone can develop an app (phone, web, whatever) that can see all listings, not just at the highest buy or lowest sell offers
I am hopeful it will allow people to create really powerful tools that allow everyone to learn more about how the market works.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
It was fixed and the wiki article was updated 2 June, around the time this thread was created.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
@laokoko.7403. Excellent. Thanks for these. As it turns out, I think I have the same links, but from Reddit. I’ll go back to double-check.
FYI to others: my data and laokoko’s don’t match up exactly: my posts combine scraps + tickets and just count skins; theirs separates out the two kinds. For example, I’d report the last two as 3.7 (half of 7.4) and 2.3 respectively; laokoko lists them as 44% + 3% and 23% respectively.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
To misstate the quote wrongly attributed to Louis Armstrong, if you have to ask what “hot” is, you’ll never know.
More seriously: the “hot” notation probably appears when certain conditions are true, e.g. shop sold 20% more of the item in the last hour than average for the given time/weekdday.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
The Sylvari glow is one of the more interesting elements of their look. You do have to make extensive use of the lighting and armor-off toggles to get things how you want.
It would be useful if the Hints system included something about the glow. It also be helpful if “someone” added appropriate verbiage to the wiki articles on Sylvari, Character Creation, Physical Appearance, and Sylvari Appearance.
In the meantime, I’d recommend you open a support ticket. Politely explain the situation and ask for a refund or replacement kit. I don’t know if they can do that, but it should take only a few minutes of your time to try.
Good luck and let us know how it works out.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Take a look again after the patch tomorrow. The entire interface for the trading post is being changed. If you still can’t access to the TP using that command-line argument, I recommend you create a suggestion in the BLTC Forum, as I doubt ANet regards this as a bug — use of the nopatchui argument is an undocumented & unsupported element of the game; it’s not guaranteed to work.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I agree with you that ANet should ensure that the game doesn’t allow events to stall, especially when those events are required to unlock traits. Almost as important are these two that you mention, events that create the only opportunities to find certain items.
Thanks both for the post and for being specific about what goes wrong, so it’s easier for ANet to troubleshoot.
(The title of the post is a little misleading: these aren’t bugs with the Collections or Treasure Hunter; these are normal event bugs. It just happens that these bugs also affect other parts of the game.)
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Could that be the sylvari glow? You can set a color and a brightness. It affects the hair, as well as any “skin” (bark?) that isn’t hidden behind armor. Makes designing a sylvari more time consuming (and more rewarding).
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
See the 1957 after your name or the 8976 after mine? If that number is used as the fixed seed would it not give each account a separate seed?
Why? Why would they do that? It would require them to run a separate rng generator process for every player. That would be extremely dumb. I don’t have that good opinion of Anet lately, but even i wouldn’t expect them do be that bad.
And I’m not even going to comment on the idea that they would use a fixed seed…
There are 1,000s of way they could code RNG, but not as many that are efficient and sensible. Why would they purposely create a system that would cause some accounts to have permanently better “luck” than others? How does that fit ANet’s design philosophies?
If you choose to believe that there are such things as lucky and unlucky accounts, go ahead. It’s a (mostly) free country. At the same time, I’ll continue to put my faith in the evidence, which doesn’t support such a claim.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
While it’s true you get bonuses for each map, the final 100% is also an accomplishment and it would be nice for there to be something besides a token that only has value for people working on a legendary. Malediktus is correct that it’s possible to get 400-600g for the gift to those who want a legend and don’t want to do maps, but that brings its own set of headaches.
I’m not sure what a “fair” reward would be, though. Maybe reduced WP costs and a special tonic?
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
We can put some limits on the release time. The patch won’t be before 9 am PDT and I believe it has never been later than 3 pm PDT, without ANet apologizing for a delay. My best recollection is that there are a lot more releases that happened before noon than after and only 2-3 releases have been later than 3 pm.
Past behavior is not a predictor of future earnings. Your mileage might vary. Void where prohibited.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Testing above suggests that the wiki article (based on earlier tests) might not be correct now.
I suspect that it’s a combination of things that people are saying:
- It’s FIFO unless something else overrides it.
- Certain fields might be prioritized over others. Certain finishers might trigger some fields more easily.
- We might think of the fields as overlapping, but they might not be. What if they have different centers, different bits that are overlapping, or different heights.
- Some fields also pulse and that seems to effect when they can be finished.
- Similarly, finishers are different. Some center on the caster, some on the ground. This might affect how they interact.
I think a completely rigorous set of tests would be complicated to set up, so we might never have a definitive answer to this question.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I far prefer the current system of having too much b-dust, empty frags, or dragonite. It’s easier to delete extra stuff than it is to be forced to farm because it’s hard to get enough, as is the situation (for me) with Dark Matter.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
They should do away with breathers as gear and just use it as a skin. You don’t actually need them to survive underwater, so the only value is cosmetic.
Instead, you should just have your land-helm provide the stats/rune.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
ok. i kinda noticed more stuff after map loads but never made the connection.
thanx guys!
Quite welcome.
Personally, I think the system is more confusing than it needs to be.
- There’s one visual limit: 3 bouncies (chests, hearts, whatever).
- There a second limit in how many of each type you can store (I think 5 hearts, 5 map completion chests, and 5 bonus chests; not sure about rank up chests).
- There’s no way to know how big the backlog is.
- There’s also no way to tell which bouncy is from what, in case you like opening them in a certain order.
I’d prefer to see a number on the bouncy that tells you how many you have compared to the max possible, e.g. W-Boss Bonus: 4|5, Dungeon Bonus: 4|5, Heart: 4|5, with appropriate icons. And the same count should appear in the dialogue box/pop-ups, so you learn when bouncies are opened for you because of changing maps.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
The problem with the first post is that in each “paragraph,” the author combines sparse facts, extrapolations (without context), speculations, and opinion.
This makes the thread a perfect Rorschach test to see people’s views of the state of the game. People who want traditional expansions will find quotes suggesting ANet is in trouble. People who think that GW2 is beating ANet’s own expectations can find quotes that support that, too.
I’m not ready to conclude anything based on what’s posted here. I’m sure there’s a lot of interesting data we could discuss from the NCSOFT financial report. But I don’t see that happening in this thread.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”