Guild Wars 2

LucosTheDutch.4819:

Mourningcry.9428:

I mentioned this in passing in my earlier post, but it strikes me as directly relevant….

Why not infusion swapping as well? Surely this would be just as desirable….

I mean, the cost to swap an infusion can be vastly greater than a mere sigil, why not have that as well, right?

Sure why not? Just introduce legendary infusions that cost as much as 3 normal infusions and call it a day.

No issue with this – if that legendary infusion, regardless of how it’s created, can be put on to Ascended weapons as well. This keeps them in parity. Same could be said of a Legenday Sigil as suggested earlier and elsewhere.

However, if such an infusion can only be applied to Legendary weapons, well, now we’re back to the discussion of why legendary quality is the equivalent of Ascended and how this breaks that parity…. Which is the whole intent of this thread.

xDudisx.5914:

/snip/

@Mourningcry

The market should adapt the game changes not the opposite. Imagine if they stop buffing/nerfing sigils/traits/runes/skill because it will affect the market… It would ruin the game.

The collections for example made some exotics skyrocket on price. Is it bad? No. Should they have not implemented the collection because it was going to affect the market? No.

Every small change will affect the trading post in some way. They can’t just stop making good changes to the game “because it will affect the market”….

Actually, I never really implied any market impacts at all. My contention is based simply on the cost associated with replacing sigils. Their market value is irrelevant, they can be high or low – the disparity will remain. Ascended users will pay it on an ongoing basis, Legendary users will not.

It’s pedantic if they even swap once, or never. It’s the fact that such a disparity could exist which is my contention to why it would violate Anet’s intent on equivalency.

I mentioned this in passing in my earlier post, but it strikes me as directly relevant….

Why not infusion swapping as well? Surely this would be just as desirable….

I mean, the cost to swap an infusion can be vastly greater than a mere sigil, why not have that as well, right?

@Elestian

My contention has always been based upon the OP’s specific suggestion to implement free stat swapping to Legendary items.

My use of sunk and opportunity costs are neither arbitrary, nor flowery descriptions. These are economic terms with discrete meanings which are neither narrow nor ignore the overall economics of the market and are used accordingly.

If a player is making a decision to spend 50g to craft an Ascended or 2000g to craft a Legendary the opportunity costs are of consideration, as I stated. The one opportunity costs of the decision are correlated to the market and directly have consequence on it.

Once the decision to craft the item has been made, however, the costs associated with it are sunk, unrecoverable. All that remains is an item of Ascended quality. My example of the 40g and 50g Ascended demonstrate this – the 40g item is identical to the 50g Ascended items and are functionally equivalent regardless of the costs associated with their individual creation.

Your comparison to home nodes is not a valid comparison as the cost analysis is very different for those in this topic. It’s beyond the scope of this discussion, and can be discussed in another topic if you like, but the analysis is not the same nor entirely applicable here.

Ascended weapons are defined primarily by providing stats of either +97/ +64/ +64 for one handed or +184/ +128/ +128 for two handed variants. They do not have any upgrades or infusions.

Adding an upgrade, or an infusion for that matter, changes this baseline and adds another dimension to ensure equivalence on, which, is beyond the scope of the defined item’s equivalency factors. Why would the OP not request free infusion swapping as well?

The stat swapping functionality does not undermine Anet’s intent,rather, it’s the chosen implementation that allows to ensure equivalence of Legendary to Ascended as it is defined.

My contention is also not internally inconsistent as it holds and demonstrates this equivalence. Your scenario of a sigil swapping functionality instead of stats does not, and my analysis does not even discuss this or imply this in anyway. Specifically:

A crafted Ascended with +97 Power/ +64 Precision/ +64 Ferocity with Sigil X
Will never be equivalent to
A Legendary with +97 Power/ +64 Toughness/ +64 Vitality with Sigil Y without stat swapping, regardless of what sigil is freely chosen.

Stand alone sigil swapping would never have meet Anet’s intent of equivalency. Stat versus Sigil swapping are not in principle the same and I never implied, reasoned, or even alluded that it is. It is your (mis)interpretation that it doesn’t violate the intended equivalency.

As I stated, my contention has always been based upon the economic disparity free sigil swapping would cause. If you can demonstrate how the OP’s suggestion can be done without creating such as disparity please elaborate.

Or, if you have an alternative of how this could be implemented without creating a disparity, also please elaborate for discussion.

Edited to add clarifications/formatting.

Behellagh.1468:

Mourningcry.9428:

Not to derail it, but looks like you’ve already OC’ed your 980, no? Isn’t stock clock 1227mhz?

Not that it mattered much. The GPU Core load peaked at only 39%.

Agreed. Was just responding to OP’s query if they should attempt overclocking.

The GPU is very much the unlikely bottleneck. Stock or otherwise.

Elestian.6134:

Has everyone forgotten that this thread is nothing more than a suggestion? And yet every doomsayer here has warned of some inevitable market impact without even knowing or specifying the cost/method of acquisition of such a feature, or how the feature would be implemented.

Mourningcry.9428:

As I said in response to another post, and noted by Aomine, sigil swapping would provide an economic imbalance in favor of Legendary over Ascended, which is not intended.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Suppose you permit Legendaries to Sigil-swap without needing to purchase a new Sigil. That implies you don’t need to purchase them any more, if at all, which indicates all that money you wish to be saving for convenience isn’t going to circulate.

Like these. Consider if “unlocking” single sigils on legendary weapons instead involved “feeding” them ascended weapons bearing the sigils. The cost of crafting multiple ascended weapons to achieve the same effect is maintained, and the argument is reduced to the benefits of saved space. (And if you’re genuinely concerned by the advantages of saved space, there’s an entire thread that I think you should read about how bank tabs, bag slots, and the Salvage-o-Matic are pay2win because they increase/save space and allow owners to farm for longer durations without stopping, thus effectively increasing their gold income over time. This is a bad line of argument.) The same defense can be made for a “legendary sigil” that functions completely independent of any legendary weapon.

My point isn’t that I necessarily believe these would be good implementations of such a feature, but that people here are unilaterally tossing the suggestion out the door because their specific vision of how it has to be implemented might have negative consequences. These claims are moot.

The argument has nothing to do with cost. As explained earlier, the cost of either a legendary vs multiple ascended is moot as it’s a sunk cost, only the opportunity cost is a consideration.
(Edit: Cost here refers to the initial creation of either. At completion, a weapon of baseline equivalence is created, and the cost to do so is no longer a consideration as each weapon is equivalent. It’s the same as if one player crafted an ascended for 45g and one player made the same ascended, instead of a Legenday, but it cost them 50g – it no longer matters what was spent as now each player has an ascended of equal value)

Until stated otherwise by Anet, the intent of a Legendary is to be on par, equivalent, of any other weapon. This is currently what they are. Adding a sigil alters the baseline.

I’ll try to explain as simply as possible…

Take the simplest base case:
* Player A has Bolt
* Player B forges an Ascended Sword

Any sword player B forges, player A can equal.

Now player B equips a Sigil of Force.
Player A must equip a Sigil of Force to maintain equality.

If player B equips a new sigil, they must pay a cost.
If player A also equips the new sigil, they pay the same cost.

Player B now wants to go back to Sigil of Force – they pay a cost.
Player A must also now do so.

If player A does not have to pay this cost, an economic disparity is created. The Legendary is no longer on par with the Ascended, thus breaking Anet’s intent.

So, you say, Player B can create another Ascended, or any number more Ascended at a lower cost than what Player A spent. Again, cost is not a consideration as the choice is made up front whether to create n Ascended weapons, or 1 Legendary. Once that decision is made cost is no longer a consideration as it’s sunk.

Creating either a Legendary or an Ascended weapon will result in two equivalent weapons. Two ascended weapons > 1 Legendary, but the Legendary will be the equivalent of any one of those Ascended. (edit: To clarify, a player equipping two ascended swords, will be “better off” than the player equipping a single Bolt. No one would argue that Bolt should be the equivalent of two Ascended swords because it cost x amount more to create.)

The simple fact is that as it now stand at any time a Legendary is the equivalent of any other similar Ascended weapon. Allowing sigil swapping at no cost creates a disparity of the Legendary over the Ascended item. This is not the intent.

Not to derail it, but looks like you’ve already OC’ed your 980, no? Isn’t stock clock 1227mhz?

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Mourningcry.9428:

But yes, in regard to functionality, it clearly not a driving factor – which further goes back to undermine the OPs stance that they require more functionality to justify their price, as it isn’t even really a factor with respect to price in the first place.

I already said it.

The idea of just being able to swap sigils on Legendaries is bro-ken. Not just broken, but bro-ken.

It’s a great and awesome possibility; and it would work fantastically towards giving them better/more functionality. But it’s absolutely not the right thing to let past the design and development stage. For numerous reasons.

Agreed. Don’t think we ever disagreed on that.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Mourningcry.9428:

The price of Legendary weapons are determined exclusively by the player base. While you may not feel that their current incarnation justifies their current price, the market disagrees.

The market on that score is really less a matter of “does the function justify the price” and more “how much gold can I squeeze out of someone desperate enough to avoid making one themselves”.

The reasons Legendaries are so expensive is greed, plain as the fat on a quaggan.

The fact remains that there are players willing to pay those prices. Right, wrong or even why is irrelevant. Discussion around that is older than the BLTC sub-forum (now that it no longer exists).

But yes, in regard to functionality, it clearly not a driving factor – which further goes back to undermine the OPs stance that they require more functionality to justify their price, as it isn’t even really a factor with respect to price in the first place.

Dragonax.6487:

It’s not a big feature by any mean. To be honest, I strongly believe Legendary weapons need WAY more feature to deserve its current cost not just something as pathetically simple as this.

Sigil swapping doesn’t make legendary any stronger, only more convenient for those who are willing to pay 30 times more to have a pretty skin with EXACTLY the same level of strength as an ascended that any scrub can get with little effort, it’s UNFAIR. Now you have convinced me, it’s still definitely not worth it. Legendary also needs at least 5% more power over ascended, the ability to change weapon and aura’s color, a special sign on your name ( For ex: thunder for Bolt, black hole for Twilight ), better special effects for each skill….etc and I may consider them worth the CURRENT price.

The price of Legendary weapons are determined exclusively by the player base. While you may not feel that their current incarnation justifies their current price, the market disagrees.

Dragonax.6487:

Mourningcry.9428:

Have to disagree with this.

The stat swapping utility of a Legendary is already enough of a benefit over a standard Ascended item. This already provides a significant edge over having to craft multiple ascended weapons for multiple builds. Especially when taking account bound into consideration.

Having to purchase/replace sigils to accommodate a build is a pittance compared to having to craft an entire ascended weapon. Also, unless you’re at the tippy-tippy-top of record setting performances, use of rare sigils over exotics would be just fine for frequent build changes (often 1%-3% variance between exotic and rare). Or even taking a loss of maybe 5% performance by not swapping at all is hardly even a material consideration for general use.

And if, for arguments sake, that level of min/max performance is a consideration, having to craft additional ascended weapons – (edit) in addition to already having a legendary – is also a pittance compared to the collaborative armor/runes/trinkets/(edit)infusions which would be necessary as well to achieve that performance.

And yes, this comes from a legendary user.

For the price of 1 legendary, you can craft 30-40 ascended weapons. With all of those ascended, you can have every combination of stats with a big variety of Sigils and builds + you can have weapon of every type and put them on every character so u won’t have to move them around.

To conclude: Even with the Sigil swapping feature, 30-40 ascended are still far more convenient than 1 legendary if u don’t care about the skin.

As I said in response to another post, and noted by Aomine, sigil swapping would provide an economic imbalance in favor of Legendary over Ascended, which is not intended.

The cost of crafting 1 Legendary or n Ascended weapons is moot as it’s a sunk cost once the crafting is complete. The decision to do one over the other is a matter of opportunity cost – nothing more.

The variable cost of freely swapping sigils going forward is what will cause an economic imbalance/advantage.

Xyonon.3987:

@ Everyone who says “Legis are only supposed to be skins”. Show me the exact quote from ANet that says that. It’s just a personal opinion. If they would be just skins, they would have created them as skins, like all the lion weapons. No – legendary weapons are more than just skins and they are supposed to be better than asceneded gear, yet not stronger!

snip

Legendary weapons were designed to equally, not more, powerful than the best in slot items currently available.

Ascended items are not crafted with a inherent sigil, where a Legendary is (albeit a junk one). So, in that sense, along with the stat swapping ability they are already argueably superior. And they had to be able to swap stats to ensure that any Legendary would be, at any time, equal to any other weapon.

In essence, sigil swapping would provide a further economic benefit, which was never intended. The cost of crafting 1 Legendary or n Ascended weapons is moot as it’s a sunk cost once the crafting is complete. The variable cost of swapping sigils going forward is what will cause an economic imbalance/advantage.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/linsey-murdock-unveils-new-high-end-ascended-gear/

“Legendary items were always intended to be on par with other “best-in-slot” items. So fear not, all existing Legendary weapons, which are currently on par with Exotics, will be upgraded to be on par with Ascended weapons at the same time that we add Ascended weapons to the game. Thus Legendaries will remain “best-in-slot” items….”

Have to disagree with this.

The stat swapping utility of a Legendary is already enough of a benefit over a standard Ascended item. This already provides a significant edge over having to craft multiple ascended weapons for multiple builds. Especially when taking account bound into consideration.

Having to purchase/replace sigils to accommodate a build is a pittance compared to having to craft an entire ascended weapon. Also, unless you’re at the tippy-tippy-top of record setting performances, use of rare sigils over exotics would be just fine for frequent build changes (often 1%-3% variance between exotic and rare). Or even taking a loss of maybe 5% performance by not swapping at all is hardly even a material consideration for general use.

And if, for arguments sake, that level of min/max performance is a consideration, having to craft additional ascended weapons – (edit) in addition to already having a legendary – is also a pittance compared to the collaborative armor/runes/trinkets/(edit)infusions which would be necessary as well to achieve that performance.

And yes, this comes from a legendary user.

Running gtx 980?

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/support/Strange-FPS-drops/4872223

Also had this happen to me on Mai… also persisted until reboot.

No idea of the cause. Did notice GPU utilization was about the same as idle. It’s as if the GPU didn’t recognize GW2…

Also running 980s, latest drivers.

Sad (glad) I’m not the only one who’s experienced this.

They’re a nice convenience for leveling alts… 10-16 levels over the course of a month is nothing really. Most can level an 80 in less time it takes to acquire any meaningful stack of tombs. A single tomb saves maybe 20-40min of casual play time?

Don’t like ’em, simple solution, destroy em.

Edit: Sorry i was thinking Tombs of Knowledge, but the same can be applied to Skill Points Scrolls. In fact even more so, if level 80s no longer will get skill points for excess levels come the expansion. Skill points will be come a scarce commodity as world complete will only yield 200 or so.

Obtena.7952:

That’s too bad because you have made a kittenumption (or been misinformed) about what is necessary to be successful in WvW.

You mean a lone Ele in ascended celestial gear isn’t the ultimate force factor in WvW?

MrWubzy.3587:

It’s fine, I knew it was a really, really stupid idea from the get-go. I should probably avoid theorycrafting altogether from now on, I’m horrible at it

Let’s let this thread disappear into the depths.

Not a stupid idea at all; it’s been done well in other games.

Unfortunately, it just may not be optimal for GW2 at this time. Never hurts to explore options which could benefit the game.

No offense, but “hard” in GW2 is more dependent upon individual player skill than anything else.

Simulated hard mode has already been demonstrated by such things as naked and un-traited dungeon runs, solo runs, etc.

While providing additional rewards for this style of play would be nice, players able to perform under such conditions are already inherently compensated by being able to acquire gold/exp/karma/tokens/loot at a faster rate than “average” players under the existing implementation. So much so that changes were implemented to nerf rewards, and events to slow down the earning rate – even so far as to be entirely removed.

Additionally, unless a way to explicitly segregate “hard” tagged characters from the rest of the population is implemented, it’d be easy to exploit the rewards by being carried by “normal” players. While possible, it’s development resource that could probably be better spent elsewhere on existing content that needs attention (or new content) accessible by the majority of the player base.

Not trying to come down on the idea, but if a challenge is the goal (not the reward) than this can already be done on an individual basis quite easily. As another example, someone in Queensdale was map-chatting about attempting getting level 80 and world complete w/o a death (perma-death style) – even though there is no “survivor” title. People are already challenging themselves w/o expectation of reward – the effort being its own reward.

Ursan.7846:

Ahahahahahahahaha.

I can’t wait until the disappointment and tears which will undoubtedly happen when people discover that the precursor hunt is going to be RIDICULOUSLY grindy.

I would love to agree with you. However, ANet has been notorious for underestimating their playerbase with respect to their projected completion timeframes.

Whatever they are currently projecting in terms of effort to complete the hunt, unless they increase those efforts tenfold, and then double it again for good measure, it’s unlikely it’ll be the grind that you and I anticipate and expect.

Mystic.5934:

they only influence it so far as to add attractive items for sale in the gem store.
buying gems with gold does benefit Anet, as then gems become more attractive to buy with $$, resulting in more gems bought with $$.

also, what’s up with the conversion rate? every time I buy gems with coin I have to check several prices around the amount I’m looking to spend. This is a theoretical example that illustrates what I have observed:
100g00s00c = 1428 gems
100g05s00c = 1428 gems
100g06s00c = 1426 gems
100g07s00c = 1428 gems
100g08s00c = 1429 gems
100g07s00c = 1428 gems
100g06s00c = 1426 gems
100g08s00c = 1429 gems
100g09s00c = 1428 gems
it’s happened often enough that I convinced myself it’s not just other people buying and selling gems. It’s like there are some magical amounts that give more than the amounts around it, and some amounts that give less. 200g always seems to give about 4 gems more than 199g99s00c…

It’s a floating rate. Any transactions taking place while you’re pricing would account for those changes. How sensitive the rate is, remains unknown.

John Smith.4610:

The gold to gem rate on the exchange is not a measure of inflation. If you consider how the exchange works and interacts with players you’ll realize that it’s a great measure of only one thing…

Quaggan.

Definitely quaggan.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Is-precursor-crafting-going-to-happen-or-not/first

Zoltreez.6435:

ever start to use phasing ?.

This begs the question, why do think they should?

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

This is not a loophole, this is a desire to retain and distribute what we feel are valuable assets. This is why we right wills, set up retirement funds, have marriage laws, etc.

I simply don’t want all my hard work lost, if, for whatever reason I am unable to continue playing this game. Based on the evidence available, the second most likely reason this would be the case (first being that I’m running out of patience), is that my account is terminated based on the decision of ANet.

I don’t think it is unreasonable to plan for this.

Unforuntuately, there is no mechanism for this in game.

Items are held in three placecs
– On a private space (personal bank or inventory or mail)
– On a shared private space (guild bank)
– On a public space (trading post)

There is no way for an item to passively transfer from one area to another upon some trigger (account termination).

So, it seems pretty clear what your choices are. If your items are in a private space upon termination, they’re gone. If they’re in either of the other two spaces, which you need to actively put them into, then all is good.

Seems pretty straightforward….

If the assests are transferable, transfer them to a “safe” party.

However, if you feel that the safe party is also at risk, then how would you propose to protect that party from similar circumstances which concern you? If they partake in the same behavior which you consider at risk, the assests are then equally at risk.

However, if you truly feel that the safe party is beyond reproach, perhaps consider using them as a basis for how you should conduct yourself, and then you too won’t be at risk.

Your second post on this forum was along the similar lines. Exploits, bans, and the like are also seem to be of particular concern to you. Seeing that you’re still here, you should be able to take some relief in that. I think it would be safe to presume you’re in no greater risk of being terminated then a typical player.

However, If you are engaging in what could be deemed questionable behavior, and are seeking ways to launder or otherwise divest yourself from ill gotten gains, then repeatedly posting about such topics, and drawing attention to yourself is rather counterproductive, no?

So, probably best to just carry on, and not worry too much about it, because, as you said, the ultimate judegement is beyond your control anyway.

Kimyrielle.3826:

@Mourningcry:

…

Yes, not everyone will have a legendary. Many players don’t want to face the huge workload required. Some don’t even want one to being with. And that’s ok. However, unless you’re already rich in this game and can effectively print money, a legendary is largely out of your reach at this point.

….

It’s actually no further out of reach then it was at the very launch of the game. Argueably, within closer reach since there’s actual supply hitting the TP (regardless of attainability).

It may be considered unfortunate that wealth offers some players a quicker path to precursor acquisition,however, it doesn’t lengthen the path for anyone.

Not that it’s higly relevant to this discussion, but in my opinion, for a brand new player, the Shards are now the bottleneck. Karma, not gold, is the limited resource.

We’ll have to just wait and see how ANet ultimately chooses to handle this.

@Kimyrielle.3826

Economics and Statistics aside, I’m not quite sure where you’re going with it.

On one hand you propose that the natural drop rate is so low that it drives the high prices.

On the other, you propose that there is a segment that can profitably produce precursors ad infinitum.

If the rate of the second exceeds that of the first, which one would have to assume, then this segment is now the controller of rate of supply, no?

So, any increase in the natural drop rate, which you earlier propose, would also serve to decrease the cost for the second. Argueably driving price down, but only to the point that it exceeds the equivalent cost of the natural drop before it becomes irrational.

Therefore to arrest control away from the second group, you would need to allow equilibrium to reach the point where acquiring a precursor from a drop was equivalent to buying one. Which, if you follow, would spiral down to a trivial amount. (Which I would say Rage is representative now, @~30g; i.e supply > demand).

So, in order to maintain any semblance of rarity and exclusivity, adjusting the natural drop rate at this point to anything meaningful would be nothing but detrementail to the concept of the Legendary as any rarity would be removed by doing do.

No?

Kimyrielle.3826:

Mourningcry.9428:

I think it also should be noted that the simple fact is that every precursor was brought into the game through what some people have called “dumb luck”. Every. Single. One. As intended.

Not quite. Again, it’s math.

If you have a large enough sum of gold to start with (aka. are rich), you can buy Mystic Forge fodder (e.g. rare weapons) by the hundreds. Statistics demand that by increasing the sample size enough (=using the forge often enough), chances for an precursor to drop for you will eventually rise pretty close to 100%.

…

In theory yes, but in practice, that ugly thing called economics comes into play. The cost to increase the sample size to reach inevitability quickly erradicates any profit, thus making it a losing endeavor. Uncertain cost to manfacture can simply easily exceed market price. Thus making it a losing proposition.

If it were feasible, then it could be assumed that threshold had already been reached and sellers were recursively printing gold. Which they currently can’t do reliably. If they could, we’d witness a much diffrent dynamic then we’re currently seeing.

It’s been discussed numerous times in the BLTC subforum. There are actually better markets then precursors to achieve this “infinite” cycle which have been discussed. But once they’re discovered, that margin disappears, and they too become unsustainable.

Edit: Just some napkin calcs….

~20s per rare
~80s per Forge attempt

Sell price of ~600g (not even shooting for Dusk)

Gives you 750 attempts to break even (not even profit, and ignoring fees). Which, if we’re assuming to get one hit, would be ~0.14%. Which is far greater then the presumed natural percentage, but far from a reliable rate to make the process viable.

So, “statistically” speaking, what would presume the bankroll needed to reach inevitability?

Kimyrielle.3826:

Yes, the problem in this case is the supply side a.k.a. drop rate, which is set by ANet to such a ridiculously low value that the prices had no other chance than to rise to the moon. That’s basic economics at work, would take less than 2 minutes to adjust on ANet’s side and completely solve the issue.
…

Actually, assuming the natural drop rate of all precursors are equal, and given the disparity between precursor prices, it really looks to be demand.

Would even go so far as to presume that the majority of Mystic Forge attempts are with great swords, and not harpoon guns. So, that’d also lend to a higher supply of Dusk/Dawn over Rage/Venom.

Vayne.8563:

I’m not thinking that Simin is too good an example personally, of content that’s hard or not hard. That entire fight is 100% down to technique. I’ve not seen a party wipe on that fight. I’ve hardly seen people go down on that fight. The fight is a race to get the sparks in fast enough so she doesn’t heal.

The point I was trying to convey, in a lighthearted but sincere way, was that there is little to no content outside of Fractals which is at all gear dependent.

Gear serves as an enabler – increasing survivability and damage output in the most basic sense. Ascended gear, outside of AR, simply provides more. Without it, content may take longer, or be more risky.

As you stated, and is applicable to numerous other situations, is that technique is the differentiating factor.

CryxTryx.9208:

…

You know if I had it my way the only thing I would change to the current Legendary system was to make precursors account bound.

….

They should not be something everyone can have. Something anyone can have yes, but not everyone.

The fact that many people currently believe Legendaries should readily accessible to everyone is contrary to the very idea of a Legendary weapon. The fact that people feel entitled to a Legendary simply by being a member of the Guild Wars 2 players base is ridiculous, and if the Devs cater to it will be the very thing that ruins the Legendary weapon class altogether.

There is nothing wrong with the current Legendary system. What is wrong is the sense of entitlement you have if you feel you deserve your ‘Legend’.

…

Well said.

I think it also should be noted that the simple fact is that every precursor was brought into the game through what some people have called “dumb luck”. Every. Single. One. As intended.

ANet intentionally, or otherwise, made the option to acquire them through the TP should be seen as a boon, in that it allows those with “smart luck” or, no luck at all, to otherwise acquire them.

The fact is that through that method they are economically beyond the reach of the “average” player is, as has been said, is strictly a function of the player base itself.

Average players are not excluded from acquiring them.The average player can have one. Average players do have them. That said, not every player will have one. And that isn’t necessarily a bad thing at all.

Gear is needed for PvE?

Maybe someone should tell these guys:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/dungeons/Simin-vs-5-Naked-Double-Bow-Rangers/2995257

Giotto.2607:

I have an idea about this.
They can just put a npc selling all the precursor lets say, 300g each.
So the speculation of it will simply end.

Brilliant…

but.. not quite seeing why would you want to jack up the price on some precursors by 4x-10x?

Well played

Kimyrielle.3826:

Yes and no. If they based their estimation on the -fastest- player to gain a legendary, they were obviously off. However, if they based their estimate on the -average- player, they erred on the -wrong- side, since the average GW2 player doesn’t yet have a legendary. That group got long priced out of the market by the steadily rising precursor prices in particular.

In general, it’s a bad idea to take the most hardcore of all hardcore players as basis for scaling time requirements for achievements like this (same goes for Teq btw.). For if you do that, you’re basically guaranteed to lock out 99% of the playerbase from -ever- completing the task. If they had set the workload required to get a legendary so that the fastest player in GW2 would have needed 8 months to get it – the average GW2 player would certainly have needed multiple lifetimes for the same achievement . Which I am sure is not their intention, despite how much some of the more elitist players might love just that.

Be that as it may, in the case of Legendaries, I do think intent was to lockout the majority of players.

But not lock them out in terms of ability; as have been demonstrated thus – any mob can drop one, even a one killed by an otherwise below-par player. Likewise in MF combines. And even more so on the TP by someone with deep pockets, but shallow skills.

Let’s be clear on that, it wasn’t a lockout based on player skill or wealth (game or otherwise), it was an unbiased lockout. Not making them account bound opened up the opportunity for bias. But that, in turn was, and is, player driven.

An early dev post described precursors as “exteremely rare exotic weapons”. Further, it was even described as the frist step of the process, afterwhich the players would then go on to acquire the other bits.

Being the ambitious and efficient players that they are, many players found, and now find themselves in the position of needing the first step as their last. Contrary to the intent of the developers.

By the nature of the precursor, the intent really was to lockout the majority of the player base from even attempting the process.

Introducing a new method of acquisition as a concession to various outcries still remains to be seen how much of a lockout will be persisted.

That being said, while I did use the world-first accomplishments to demostrate my point, the lag between those, and and a non-trivial representation isn’t that large, and still, I think is agreeable, well ahead of ANet’s estimations. So, yes, whatever the new barrier of entry will be for this new method, I do hope they make a very conservative effort. In fact, spreading various parts of it out over multiple releases would allow them to control the rate even better.

Kimyrielle.3826:

@Mourningcry.9428:
I understand. You’re looking at the a-priori chances (which are indeed even per kill, I can’t argue that) and neglect what math will do with these. Me? Statistics is part of what I do, so I am looking at the results such a system will produce. Which are quite uneven (you can’t argue that point in return, for it’s just applied statistics).

Anyway, perhaps we can agree on farming gold not being a very satisfying gaming experience for anyone? And since you can’t argue that RNG isn’t a -reliable- method to get a precursor, even if you think it’s a fair one…. maaaaybe it would be awesome if we’d get a -reliable- method for dedicated players to get their precursors that doesn’t involve repetitive, mindless grind of that magnitude?

I would absolutely agree that farming gold is not a very satisfying gaming experience. And would also agree that RNG isn’t at all a reliable method.

However, I think we’ll have to agree to disagree whether another inevitable method is needed. However unfavorable each current method is, they are undeniably viable to one degree or another.And given the proliferation of Legendaries already out there, it’s not exactly a trivial degree.

On another note, I think ANet’s original estimation for completion of a Legendary was 6-8months minimally and intended as a “long term” goal. Now, despite the early exploits, I think it would be entire reasonable to say that ANet was way off in those estimates. How about ascended crafting… what did it take, 2-3days before the first one was crafted? How about the new Teq – less than 24 hours before being downed.

Needless to say, ANet has a record of grossly underestimating their playerbase.

Given that, I think that if they do go down this reliable plath, and intend a crafted precursor to take a month to craft, I’d suggest they multiply those efforts tenfold. And then double it again. Maybe then they’d get closer to their expected results.

Shelledfade.6435:

oh you sold your last FOUR dusks for 800g huh ? LOL way to make up some ridiculous bull story in order to make a point of no consequence.

No one spends 800g on precursors. There are always the exact same amount of them on the TP and they never sell, its probably ANET who puts them on the TP in the first place to make people buy gold.

Actually -

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/Dusk-sold-out-1-Left/2713593

Thre are numerous discussion in the BLTC subforum discussing the active market for precursors.

Kimyrielle.3826:

RNG is a fair drop mechanism for high-frequency drops. Like greens and blues, even yellows.

However, RNG is a horribly unfair mechanic for anything rare. Why? Again, it’s math. We all get a lot of greens and rares, so chances are very good that the average total value of all items assigned to us in that fashion is equal (math demands this to happen with large sample sizes). But with super-rare items, the sample size will be too small to even out, even if we all play the game for a decade. Player A will get a precursor for killing her very first Risen, Player B will annihilate entire armies of mobs and -never- get one. That’s entirely possible. And intrinsically unfair, for player A didn’t do anything to deserve or earn that additional reward. She was just…lucky.

So yeah… I guess that’s why we’re unlikely to agree on this. My definition of fairness doesn’t include randomly making a player considerably richer than others. I believe in equal work = equal reward. With common drops using RNG doesn’t matter, for the distribution will still result in equality. But like I said, MMO makers need to understand that it’s a horrible idea to use RNG for anything rare.

Yes.. I think we’ll be unlikely to agree on this.

In your example, both player A and B had the same chance to “get rich” on their first kill. Likewise, on their second, third, nth kill. Each kill counted the same. So, on a per-event basis, each player received an equal chance at reward – and it’s this chance for reward is what makes it fair.

And gauranteed reward for effort is a whole other discussion.

So, yes. We’re unlikely to agree on this.

Kimyrielle.3826:

It might sound equally harsh, but the habit of brushing away valid points against broken systems with the “It’s not meant to be easy” line is getting a tad old, really.

Particularly since I already said that I don’t want this to be easy.

The three methods you keep defending so vigourously are

a) Sheer luck.
…
b) Gambling.
…
c) Actually farming money like a Chinese goldfarmer.

What you don’t seem want to see is that methods b) and c) are virtually identical. Both require you to stupidly farm large amounts of money, except that b) comes with a gambling component that might either lower or raise the total price you’re paying. It’s again nothing you can control. On -average-, this method isn’t any cheaper than outright buying it.

You’re covering your eyes and ears, uttering the mantra “There is no problem” because you don’t want to see it. Fine, I can’t keep you. shrug

That’s not exactly a fair summary of my feelings.

Actually, I’d say A & B are more akin. Both are mechanics of RNG (kill for drops; drops/carft/buy for MF)/

I’ve argued elsewhere that RNG is a fair mechanic- that’s where i’m coming from.

Now, perhaps it’s a bit clearer why I don’t consider this situation problematic?

Kimyrielle.3826:

Except that precursor price inflation outpaced most people’s ability to farm money by an order of magnitude. The went up from 300k to 600-820g in matter of months, after all.

Not that requiring people to waste endless hours with mindlessly farming cash like a Chinese goldseller to pay off a gambler is something that’s worthy of being in a modern MMO, mind you.

So I can’t exactly agree with you saying it’s not a problem.

It sounds harsh, but the fact that that particular method is beyond the capabilities of most players isn’t necessarily an issue. Not sure where it was mandated that all aspects of the game be accessable to all players equally.

Beyond that, if an outright purchase isn’t viable, then the other two methods most certainly are. Albeit, they may not be enviable, or favorable alternatives.

Parisalchuk.9230:

Mourningcry.9428:

Arnath.2319:

Mourningcry.9428:

Arnath.2319:

…

It should not take this long to fix this massive problem.
…

Only if it really is a problem. And that’s pretty much a matter of opinion.

GW2 entire end game was designed around cosmetics, working towards your legendary IS part of the end game. The current system to get a precursor is so broken it is impossible for thousands of players to even start working towards end game.

This precursor problem is like Warcraft not having any raids or tiers of gears for an entire year.

So yes this is a massive problem.

Complete nonsensical depiction of the situation – A player begins working towards their end game the moment they start mapcompletion, or earn their first gold, get a T6 mat… The precurosor is 25%-45% or less of the actual Legenday (depending on how you portion the components).

Three methods to get a precursor exist now. Two are RNG based, the third provides inevitability.

• Random drop
• Mystic Forge
• BLTP

Don’t like RNG, the trading post offers an absolute way to acquire one. If a player is incappable, or unwilling to employ any of those methods, that is their problem.

Three solutions (perhaps only 1 viable) solutions already exist to what you call a “problem”.

The problem is getting 25% of the legendary (the precursor) costs almost 50% of the entire weapon and is almost universally the final piece. There is also no incremented way to work towards that goal. Saving money is not the answer as its an endless battle of gaining and spending as you work towards a moving target. You get no choice in this matter as well as the only way to make money in the game is to play, and the only way to play invloves spending money on repairs and waypoints at minimum and if you take a week off enjoy the new 20 gold increase to your goal. You dont shell out T6 mats to play this game and you always need just 250 each of those.

The fact is everything BUILDS to making the weapon except the precursor which only subtracts. You make clovers you get T6 mats/ectos/shards. You do map completion you get money to spend and other mats. You want a precursor you only pay money and your only return is either unreleated weapons (via forge) that will let you try again if you spend more or nothing if you are saving money.

If I had to guess you are someone who has a legendary or two and fear that your precious weapon is going to be devalued because people who play this game will have an actual shot of acquiring one.

Nope, I don’t have multiple legendaries, or even one. I didn’t even bother to start the process until I got one a precursor as a drop (because I understood the undertaking it would require a casual such as myself in order to complete)

But this is the same stance I’ve had since nearly the start -

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/crafting/There-need-to-be-more-ways-to-get-precursor-weapons/324579

If nothing else, all this time hasn’t changed my opinion. I’m well aware of the current situation, the current mechanics of what it takes to acquire, and yet unlike some players, don’t feel it is an inherent problem that warrants a solution.

Parisalchuk.9230:

Mourningcry.9428:

Parisalchuk.9230:

Mourningcry.9428:

Arnath.2319:

…

It should not take this long to fix this massive problem.
…

Only if it really is a problem. And that’s pretty much a matter of opinion.

What isn’t opinion is that they have committed to eventually implementing an alternative.

Be it warranted or not….

Read my quote above from Lindsey – they admitted it was a problem 1 year ago, its no longer a matter of opinion.

I have read it, in fact when it was first posted. Maybe you need to (re-)read it.

No mention of it being a problem.

Just because something is concerning, doesn’t mean it’s a problem. And further, if they had felt action was warranted, they would have done so (if they had felt it necessary).

Reading comprehension – it’s not for everyone.

They did try and fix it with the Lost Shores event by dropping a high rate of precursors. If you were part of that thread or read through it (using this reading comprehension you so speak of) you would know that.

But good try attempting to defeat my point with semantics and not actual support.

I don’t recall seeing a post by a dev saying that this was the intended fix. I’ll browse the thread again just to be sure. But I do know for sure a one time event reward isn’t a viable solution to a long term supply problem. At most, it’s a supply-shock, which quickly fades. So, no, I don’t think was a solution, rather just a nice reward for the event.

If this had been an intended solution, there have been plenty of similar events since where this method could have been repeated to again shock supply. Given that it hasn’t been repeated, it wouldn’t be a reach to conclude that this was not the intent of that event.

And just for absolute clarity, you reference the single quote by Lindsay, not the thread or any other quote, in your original response to me. And in that quote, there is no mention of ANet conceding that an actual problematic situation exists.

Arnath.2319:

Mourningcry.9428:

Arnath.2319:

…

It should not take this long to fix this massive problem.
…

Only if it really is a problem. And that’s pretty much a matter of opinion.

GW2 entire end game was designed around cosmetics, working towards your legendary IS part of the end game. The current system to get a precursor is so broken it is impossible for thousands of players to even start working towards end game.

This precursor problem is like Warcraft not having any raids or tiers of gears for an entire year.

So yes this is a massive problem.

Complete nonsensical depiction of the situation – A player begins working towards their end game the moment they start mapcompletion, or earn their first gold, get a T6 mat… The precurosor is 25%-45% or less of the actual Legenday (depending on how you portion the components).

Three methods to get a precursor exist now. Two are RNG based, the third provides inevitability.

• Random drop
• Mystic Forge
• BLTP

Don’t like RNG, the trading post offers an absolute way to acquire one. If a player is incappable, or unwilling to employ any of those methods, that is their problem.

Three solutions (perhaps only 1 viable) solutions already exist to what you call a “problem”.

Parisalchuk.9230:

Mourningcry.9428:

Arnath.2319:

…

It should not take this long to fix this massive problem.
…

Only if it really is a problem. And that’s pretty much a matter of opinion.

What isn’t opinion is that they have committed to eventually implementing an alternative.

Be it warranted or not….

Read my quote above from Lindsey – they admitted it was a problem 1 year ago, its no longer a matter of opinion.

I have read it, in fact when it was first posted. Maybe you need to (re-)read it.

No mention of it being a problem.

Just because something is concerning, doesn’t mean it’s a problem. And further, if they had felt action was warranted, they would have done so (if they had felt it necessary).

Reading comprehension – it’s not for everyone.

Arnath.2319:

…

It should not take this long to fix this massive problem.
…

Only if it really is a problem. And that’s pretty much a matter of opinion.

What isn’t opinion is that they have committed to eventually implementing an alternative.

Be it warranted or not….

Fletch.3572:

I’m willing to bet current legendary precursors will be untouched, and
that only the new slew of them that are added will use a new sort of crafting
feature for them.

I’m of the same mind on this…

Would be ideal to have a new set of Legendaries that are crafted. This would preserve the existing market and “exclusivity” of the current set, while creating access to an alternative Legendary weapon set. Stat-wise, all would be equal.

Patch notes from September 3.

Today is October 4th.

Were you debating whether or not to actually let us all in on your revelation? Why keep us in suspense so long?

Deniara Devious.3948:

…

Instead of the traditional pseudo-random number generator each player has several randomized lists of numbers e.g. numbers 0-999 shuffled in random order (using e.g. Knuth’s algorithm / Fisher–Yates shuffle). Every time player has some random change to gain important loot e.g. drop from major event or chest, mystic forge etc. the game selects a new number from that list. Once the list is depleted, the game gives the player a new randomized list. Thus each and every player will have equal amount of big and small and medium numbers in the long run. Let’s say a chest has 1% chance to drop exotic and 0.1% chance to drop precursor. Each time the player opens the chest, he gets a new number from the chest. If the number is 0 he gets precursor, if the number is 1-9 he gets exotic, if the number if 10-999 he gets rare. After opening 1000 chests, each player has received same amount of exotics (9), precursor (1) and rare (990). Some players just get lucky much faster e.g. get it on their 1st attempt, while others require 1000 attempts, but will eventually get it.
…

While the method does offer some degree of inevitablity, the downside to this method is that once the “optimal” drop has been acheived there remains a gauranteed “glut” of useless junk that the player must deplete before getting another shot another optimal drop.

If this is known to the player, if the optimal drop was undesired (i.e. you got the junk of the best, which was objectively useless to that character), and the glut is sufficiently large, the desire to abandon the character may be preferable to working through the glut.

Resetting the list once the optimal drop has been acheived is a possible alternative, and has been discussed elsewhere. Ultimately, it’s just a matter of offering the player some form of inevitability to getting a certain drop. Some people feel this is a good thing, others don’t.

Edit: After a little thought one thing that you could consider adding on to the above method would be to perform a second, pure random roll (same list, but non-depleting), and take the better of the two. Thus continuing to deplete the list, offering some form of inevitability, and also not precluding the chance of “getting lucky” even if you’ve “used up all your luck”.

Ardenwolfe.8590:

This would be true if ANet hadn’t set a standard early on where ALL content was made available to all players to the point where they temporarily increased levels. If this wasn’t previously done, throughout the year, then your point would be valid.

But experience has shown otherwise.

This is a huge reason for the increase in complaints. People are starting to worry the game is going the casual versus the specific player-type only.

And it’s a valid concern.

No one wants an us versus them situation with updated content. Well, no one expect those that benefit . . . obviously.

I do believe my point is still valid.

Just because some content was available to all players doesn’t require that all content be avaialble to everyone, nor does it mean that just because that some content was avaialble to all was it enjoyble nor inclusive of all players in the least. My point being that even when it was inclusive, there was always some demographic that had issues with it. And I would daresay there will always be such a contingent.

The way things turn into an “us vs. them” situation is when “they” start to think that their needs are more important than those others….

My original point being that if some content isn’t appealing, there’s plenty of other stuff out there to do. And as ANet has shown, the breadth of their content releases has demonstrated a desire to cater to all playstyles. Maybe not all in one update, but eventually.