Guild Wars 2

Wanze.8410:

Drago Ivansen.5398:

This proves the intent…

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/ALERT-Major-Flaw-in-the-BLTP-System/3805970

So the only comments that are still necessary are any that can prove that the markets doesn’t degrade to a LIFO at “high values”

For multiple listings at the same value, its FIFO.

For listings of different value, is Lowest In, First Out.

Usually, LIFO = Last In, First Out. But your definition works well in this case. The lowest priced item is sold first.

I think in his mind, the prices look similar, so he believes his items should be sold first, regardless if his is priced higher.

Im Mudbone.1437:

tigirius.9014:

GW2 Mystery Patch Notes

I do hope this is only concerning content like LS content for example and not balance patches for either play style. Please tell us that this is only concerning content.

You do realize that is a GW1 link and not GW2 right?

Maybe that’s what makes it a mystery?

Drago Ivansen.5398:

This proves the intent…

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/ALERT-Major-Flaw-in-the-BLTP-System/3805970

So the only comments that are still necessary are any that can prove that the markets doesn’t degrade to a LIFO at “high values”

You posted a link to a comment that verifies the TP acts on a FIFO basis. What does that have to do with 1 Copper undercuts?

Drago Ivansen.5398:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

How does it not make sense? If I sell something for 1 Copper less, the tax from the listing fee is rounded to the nearest 1 Copper. Last nite, I posted the same item with two different prices that were 1 Copper apart. The listing fee was 20 Silver and 19 Silver 99 Copper respectively.

So tell me again how 1 Copper isn’t negligible if the taxes can account for this?

Just so you can understand what negligible mean, even though I feel like I should created a new thread for this.

The following are examples of what is and is not negligible.

When I list an Item for 20 copper I pay 1 copper in listing fees, 1 copper here is very relevant here and is not negligible. When you list an item for 4 gold the listing fee will be 20 silver. The reason it is 20 silver and not 1 copper like the previous sale is because in this case 1 copper is negligible. For a 10 gold item, I would change my listing every time I was undercut by 1 copper because a 1 copper listing fee is negligible.

I still don’t understand. 1 Copper listing fees on a 20 Copper item is still a tax. Same was 20 Silver listing fees on a 4 Gold item. And since the Trading Post was set up to not only provide players as a secure means of trade, but also as a Gold Sink, isn’t the end result of your items being taxed what Anet intended?

Therefore, if I were to place a Dusk that’s 1 Copper less than the currently listed one, I’m still being taxed. If I placed two Dusks for 1 Copper less each, I’m still being hit with taxes on both, which removes Gold from the economy.

So I don’t see what the problem here is. Aren’t you being unreasonable by assuming what’s “negligible” and what isn’t when you don’t even work for Anet? It’s like you’re trying to advocate a punishment on me for selling items for prices I deem valid.

Drago Ivansen.5398:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Actually, it’s not negligible, since the tax is rounded to the nearest 1 Copper. So you countered your own argument.

Your point does not make sense and is unrelated to using percentages vs a flat rate. The value is round to the nearest copper (as a unit) not the nearest 1 copper as a value, otherwise all number would round to 1 copper.

I realize you are a troll please try to be more constructive while doing so.

How does it not make sense? If I sell something for 1 Copper less, the tax from the listing fee is rounded to the nearest 1 Copper. Last nite, I posted the same item with two different prices that were 1 Copper apart. The listing fee was 20 Silver and 19 Silver 99 Copper respectively.

So tell me again how 1 Copper isn’t negligible if the taxes can account for this?

Ohoni.6057:

You know what? This whole debate on rich people’s networth has us looking in the wrong direction. Right now, there’s no “sales tax” for when buyers purchase goods. So I propose we implement a 15% sales tax on all items purchased, and eliminate the “seller’s tax”.

By taxing only items that are purchased, that would in turn put more economic pressure on “Flippers”, since they buy a lot of stuff. Doing this should satisfy both sides of the debate at hand!

Hmm, I’m thinking it over but I don’t see the value. If you put it on the buyer rather than the seller, it would make it easier on adventurers selling loot, and harder on flippers buying stuff in hopes of reselling it for more, but it would probably have other problems. One I can think of is that the current listing fees act to prevent reckless sell offers, since there’s a cost to you if the item doesn’t sell. Maybe adding a sales tax would be good though, but balanced along with a sellers tax, like keep the listing fees, but transfer the transaction complete fees to the seller rather than the buyer? I don’t know, I’m not an economist so I’m not sure whether that would do more harm than good.

This whole thread was based on the idea that some people want to punish “rich players”. So with this idea, you put more emphasis on Flippers. Maybe do a 10% sales tax on all items purchased, and keep the 5% listing fee for sellers.

Of course there’s two negatives I can think off right away.

1) It puts pressure on the “poor player” who now has to pay more for the same goods
2) Not all “rich players” are Flippers. Farmers who sell Rare/Exotic items they find will get richer faster, since they’re only hit with a 5% tax on listing fees.

You know what? This whole debate on rich people’s networth has us looking in the wrong direction. Right now, there’s no “sales tax” for when buyers purchase goods. So I propose we implement a 15% sales tax on all items purchased, and eliminate the “seller’s tax”.

By taxing only items that are purchased, that would in turn put more economic pressure on “Flippers”, since they buy a lot of stuff. Doing this should satisfy both sides of the debate at hand!

Edit – Moved my post so Ohoni’s 2-part post was together.

Drago Ivansen.5398:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

You keep ignoring the question at hand. Who is the 1 Copper difference negligible to? It seems that you’re trying to push an idea based solely on your own personal preferences. If that’s the case, then feel free to post items for values more than 1% less than the current offering, and post Buy Orders for 1% more than the highest offer.

We can’t stop you from using the TP as you see fit, just as you can’t stop us from undercutting by 1 Copper.

I didn’t ignore you. It is negligible to anet, hence the reason they already use percentages for all other trading post aspects.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/Min-1-price-difference/3868663

Actually, it’s not negligible, since the tax is rounded to the nearest 1 Copper. So you countered your own argument.

Drago Ivansen.5398:

It is relevant because 1c is negligible when dealing with 100’s of gold. This was not an issue at the beginning of the game, but as inflation has increase the copper is becoming more and more useless. Its only power is its OP ability to skip to the front of the line in the trading post. This is a hack in an otherwise brilliant market and only those who flip and manipulate the market would object to it.

You keep ignoring the question at hand. Who is the 1 Copper difference negligible to? It seems that you’re trying to push an idea based solely on your own personal preferences. If that’s the case, then feel free to post items for values more than 1% less than the current offering, and post Buy Orders for 1% more than the highest offer.

We can’t stop you from using the TP as you see fit, just as you can’t stop us from undercutting by 1 Copper.

Drago Ivansen.5398:

Obtena.7952:

“Meaningful” as a description of an amount is “meaningless”. We are dealing with numbers here … go ahead and tell us why working in differences of 1c are ‘meaningless’, then there can be a rational discussion.

The truth is that your ‘meaningful’ amount is irrelevant. No imagined problem is going to be fixed by changing the minimum buy/sell increment. The system works now; it works especially well for everyone that isn’t basing their prices on unrealistic values.

neg·li·gi·ble
adjective
1. so small or unimportant as to be not worth considering; insignificant.

There is a reason as to why the tax and listing fees are in percents and not a fixed copper amount. The minimal bid should be as well for the exact same reasons.

Please see the following:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

To me, selling an item for 1 Copper less is meaningful, since I get to sell mine ahead of the higher priced good. So I’m still not understanding what your point is. Do you mean to say that the price difference of 1 Copper is not meaningful to you? And how am I up to no good if my selling habits don’t conform to a non-existent standard?

I propose the same to your previous post. Who deems 1 Copper as “insignificant”? You? Because the way I see it, I’m selling my item before another player whose price is 1 Copper more. That’s pretty significant to me, esp. when I’m trying to sell my item more quickly than the other guy.

On the flip side, it’s pretty significant to the person buying my item, since they’re getting it cheaper than if they bought it from the other guy.

Ohoni.6057:

Can you imagine the forum rage if TP taxes had DR? Someone doing hundreds or thousands of transactions would have 0 tax.

DR stands for “diminishing _returns,”_ what you’re talking about would be “diminishing penalties.” A Trading Post DR would reduce the returns people make from playing the TP, not the penalties they would face, any more than PvE DR results in players having lower WP costs the more world events they clear.

The DR would apply to Anet’s end, where there would be “diminishing returns” on the taxes applied to sales.

But I digress. The fact is that the Trading Post acts as a Gold Sink. It does not generate Gold into the economy, thus by definition, DR wouldn’t apply. What you’re advocating for is a “luxury tax”.

On the topic of luxury taxes on high volumes, one can easily get around this by just selling goods using multiple accounts, and placing profits into a Guild Bank.

Wanze.8410:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Drago Ivansen.5398:

This post is not about being undercut. It is about dealing in meaningful amounts.

It should be noted on the trading post there are only two items valued more than a gold where the buy and sell price is within 1%. Meaning the community agrees that 1% is negligible. So anyone trolling in that range is most likely up to no good anyways.

To me, selling an item for 1 Copper less is meaningful, since I get to sell mine ahead of the higher priced good. So I’m still not understanding what your point is. Do you mean to say that the price difference of 1 Copper is not meaningful to you? And how am I up to no good if my selling habits don’t conform to a non-existent standard?

Because…. mounts.

I’ve never lost a debate over something as obvious as this. You have my apologies for not understanding the true purpose of this thread.

/bow

Drago Ivansen.5398:

This post is not about being undercut. It is about dealing in meaningful amounts.

It should be noted on the trading post there are only two items valued more than a gold where the buy and sell price is within 1%. Meaning the community agrees that 1% is negligible. So anyone trolling in that range is most likely up to no good anyways.

To me, selling an item for 1 Copper less is meaningful, since I get to sell mine ahead of the higher priced good. So I’m still not understanding what your point is. Do you mean to say that the price difference of 1 Copper is not meaningful to you? And how am I up to no good if my selling habits don’t conform to a non-existent standard?

Drago Ivansen.5398:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

That analogy doesn’t apply to me, because I always tap the pump until my gas price is a round number. If I miss it by a single penny, I overfill until I get to the next round number. If I keep missing, I’ll go until my tank can no longer physically hold the gas.

Pumps don’t show the tenth of cent on the end total, so you can’t tell when the you are being “forced” to pay an extra tenth of a cent because it is not meaningful. Now please stop trolling.

Gold inflation has made the copper meaningless on large ticket items and should no longer be used in transactions.

A Zap that cost 999 gold is effectively the same price as a 998 gold (anyone who says otherwise is a troll as well), the first person to sell at that price point should move their item first.

You’re missing the point. I have full control over the prices I select both at the gas station, and at the Trading Post.

And a Zap for 999 Gold is more expensive than a Zap for 998 Gold. Going further, a Zap for 998 Gold is more expensive than a Zap for 997 Gold 99 Silver and 99 Copper. The TP allows us to determine what we’re selling items for, and what we want to buy items for. If someone doesn’t like that their prices were undercut, they should consider selling their items for a price point that will sell faster.

Drago Ivansen.5398:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

So you want the TP to force me to buy something at a price that I don’t intend?

Comrade, this is a free market. If I want to buy or sell something, it’ll be on my terms.

Yes, the trading post should for it users to deal in relatively meaningful values. Do you complain at the gas station when your bill is $3.499 for a gallon and they charge you $3.50 because the tenth of a cent is not meaningful?

That analogy doesn’t apply to me, because I always tap the pump until my gas price is a round number. If I miss it by a single penny, I overfill until I get to the next round number. If I keep missing, I’ll go until my tank can no longer physically hold the gas.

Drago Ivansen.5398:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

But I refuse to pay the extra 1 Copper for the item. So by my maths, the prices between the Sell Order and Buy Order are different.

For the specifics of implementation:

• A buy listing must be at least 1% more than the previous buy listing
• A sell listing must be at least 1% less than the previous sell listing
• If the buy and sell price are within 1% of each other you force the next prospective buyer/seller to use the buy/sell now feature

So with these rules your example is fine and should be expected.

So you want the TP to force me to buy something at a price that I don’t intend?

Comrade, this is a free market. If I want to buy or sell something, it’ll be on my terms.

KarateKid.5648:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

LordByron.8369:

And once again another proposal.
Can we have similar balancing to the rest of the game?
Why not Diminishing returns on TP?
The more you buy/sell the more taxes you pay….every part of the game has it

Just to point out a huge flaw in this post. The Trading Post does not create Gold. How can you have DR on something that’s mainly a Gold Sink?

hmmm, the more we trade, the less our gold sinks… I’m down with that.

Can you imagine the forum rage if TP taxes had DR? Someone doing hundreds or thousands of transactions would have 0 tax.

Drago Ivansen.5398:

First, could someone please post the link to the previous thread?

Smooth Penguin.5294:

What if someone is selling something for 10 Gold, and I’m willing to buy it for 9 Gold 99 Silver and 99 Copper? If I put in a Buy Order for that amount, with your idea, someone wouldn’t be able to fill my order.

If you are buying items worth 10 gold, then 1 copper has no real value to you any more. You would have purchased the item for 10 gold instead of wasting your time with a buy order.

Also, if 10 gold is effectively equal to 9 gold 99 silver and 99 copper, why should someone be allowed to come after my listing and sell the same item for the “same price” and get priority over me?

How often do you see real auctions going “Do I hear 10 thousand” … “here” … “Do I hear 10 thousand and 1 penny”?

This change would just force people that undercut to undercut at an effectively different price and hopefully remove the profitable difference between the buy and sell price. This would closer resemble a real market.

But I refuse to pay the extra 1 Copper for the item. So by my maths, the prices between the Sell Order and Buy Order are different.

LordByron.8369:

And once again another proposal.
Can we have similar balancing to the rest of the game?
Why not Diminishing returns on TP?
The more you buy/sell the more taxes you pay….every part of the game has it

Just to point out a huge flaw in this post. The Trading Post does not create Gold. How can you have DR on something that’s mainly a Gold Sink?

Dee Jay.2460:

True, and I still don’t see a downside to it. Yet people here are getting their panties in a twist because why?

I still don’t know….

What if someone is selling something for 10 Gold, and I’m willing to buy it for 9 Gold 99 Silver and 99 Copper? If I put in a Buy Order for that amount, with your idea, someone wouldn’t be able to fill my order.

Sharkinu.8096:

Yes, I know the time they expire(that’s morning for me). What I wanted to say is that they usually put a 24 hours counter on the item before they remove it. Yesterday when I checked them, there was no such counter so I assumed they will be on sale till Tuesday(assuming were going to put a 24 hours counter on monday morning).

Last I checked, weekends only go up until Sunday night:

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/weekend-sale-bag-slot-and-bank-tab-expansions/

LordByron.8369:

@penguin
Simple question.
Do you know ANY non supercasual TP player that has not get an income per hour a digit higher than most non TP players?

Its not that even my guild started this stuff because its really easy…

The only reason why we nowaday see some minor risk is because anet is pushing every player to play with the TP.

It may happen that the risk will balance in this way…at that point the game will be so horrible most people will have left already due to the insane inflation (see inflation on ANY useful item paired with deflation of everything else….proof of a broken economy).

This post. I don’t even……. where do I begin?

lmperdigao.2567:

Jhawk.1360:

FA isn’t imploding HoD has better numbers and coverage then us.

Maybe you should change your signature, then.

You must be part Fire Ele… because that was a burn!

LordByron.8369:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

LordByron.8369:

John Smith.4610:

An increase in the tax rate would simply get passed on to consumers, with a little bit being absorbed by sellers. It would not be an effective tax on the rich.

More taxes = more risk.
Speculation currently lacks risk that is why everyone is speculating…..

What about removing the 5+10% tax on selling and going for a straight 15% on listing?

TP needs LOT more risk.

Not sure you understand what the term “speculation” means.

People only remember what happens when a speculator is right. No one remembers when a speculator losses hundreds of Gold.

Forgive me if from day one threads here explains how its incredibly hard to lose money on the TP.
So i won t answer that again….i expect anyone playing the TP to know basics as differentiating and stuff…..

But i think seeing the appearance in mass of TP players to defend their broken business means it could actually be the right idea to heal a bit this absurd economy….

Most people talk about how they made money on the TP. I’m one of the few that has openly admitted that I made horrible decisions that lead to massive Gold losses. Last month, I was down to ~150 Gold in cash. Luckily some of my long term investments tripled in value, so I made up for a lot of the losses I took.

StinVec.3621:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Hyperion.9704:

John Smith
Totally a Legal Representative from Divinity’s Reach

Reported… for pretending to be our god!

There is more than one “John Smith” in this world. John Smith is also the accepted “generic name” for males in the US and UK (and possibly elsewhere). You seem to assume they are meaning the ArenaNet John Smith, despite their stating an entirely different profession in their response.

Also, I suspect falsely reporting posts may lead to an infraction for wasting a moderator’s time.

---

Nicely written, OP. I second the +1 for the effort.

There’s only one John Smith in these forums, and he’s by no means “generic”.

Alice.8694:

There is one thing you could of course do…

Force it so that a player has to sell or destroy everything the character holds before it can be deleted.

OR…. you can just do it yourself, without having to add extra steps for the other 99.99% of players who are aware of what they’re doing.

Hyperion.9704:

John Smith
Totally a Legal Representative from Divinity’s Reach

Reported… for pretending to be our deity!

Ohai! This thread again!

Dee Jay.2460:

I find it a bit weird that, especially when selling an expensive item worth multiple Gold, you can be undercut by single Coppers.

I think it would be reasonable if there was a minimum price-difference of 1% for undercutting.

So if someone is selling an item worth 10 Gold, you can’t undercut him with 9 Gold, 99 Silver and 57 Copper. Instead you’d have to go down to at least 9 Gold and 90 Silver. Someone undercutting him would also have to maintain at least a 1% price-difference.

Obviously items worth less than 1 Silver would not be affected by this change. But I think it would make trading a little more transparent and user-friendly, especially if you add an automatic “undercut” option.

Thoughts?

How would a minimum price-difference of 1% affect trading?

Sorry, but minimums of 1% would require maths. I don’t like maths. It’s a lot easier to just take the current price, and offer 1 Copper less. If you don’t like it, feel free to undercut me 1 Copper as well. Tis the circle of life!

LordByron.8369:

John Smith.4610:

An increase in the tax rate would simply get passed on to consumers, with a little bit being absorbed by sellers. It would not be an effective tax on the rich.

More taxes = more risk.
Speculation currently lacks risk that is why everyone is speculating…..

What about removing the 5+10% tax on selling and going for a straight 15% on listing?

TP needs LOT more risk.

Not sure you understand what the term “speculation” means.

People only remember what happens when a speculator is right. No one remembers when a speculator losses hundreds of Gold.

Minato.5294:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Minato.5294:

I see. So a tax increase will cause TP players to increase the price of items to compensate and players buying take on the cost.

What about a diminishing returns type of tax where for example the first 100g that goes into your TP inbox is normally taxed. The next 100g will incur an additional 0.5% tax and the next 100g will get another 0.5% increase (1% total on that 100g) and so on. This way professional TP players must compete with casual TP players that pay less tax.

1) Any increase in taxes will increase the cost of goods overall. The only way for prices to be lower is for Supply to increase, or more aggressive competition between TP players.

2) TP players not only compete with each other, but with the Casual player too. Meaning, they’re efficient with both selling goods, and buying them. To put this into perspective, not only do we undercut other Sell Orders by 1 Copper, but we outbid Buy Orders the same way.

Overall, the current system works fine. There’s a tax on all goods that move through the TP. There’s no real need to increase or decrease the tax, since adjusting drop rates is a better way to control target price points for goods. Now if you brought up this topic just to find a way to punish rich players, the only way to do that is to become a TP player, and increase the competition.

Seeing as the TP is the most profitable method to make gold by far, I was trying to find a way to slightly decrease the income from this group of people instead of other parts of the game (almost every part of the game has had a nerf at one point or another except the TP and now the champ bags are getting another decrease in gold drop).

I was hesitant posting this topic under this forum subsection because obviously no one in here wants a more difficult time playing the TP.

I figured that was your reason. But remember this: The Trading Post does not generate Gold, but rather serves to eliminate it via the taxes. Only existing Gold flows through the TP. Because of this, if you want to punish rich players by increasing taxes, you basically punish anyone participating in the economy. Just like in the real world, if you increase taxes on a business, they just pass that increase down, preserving their profit margins.

If a player truly wants to limit the profit of TP players, the only way is to become one of them, and sell the same goods for a cheaper price. However, because the TP is also game wide, spanning all servers NA and EU, there’s no way just one person will make a difference. If you tried to sell goods for cheap to undercut a TP player, your stuff will sell, but unless you have an unlimited supply of the same item, it’ll only take a few seconds for the TP players’ goods to be next on the list. One person can’t keep up with the demand of hundreds of thousands of players, not even barons like Vol or Wanze. It would take a collective of hundreds of players undercutting prices constantly in order to affect the market.

You can edit your message box to show only Guild messages.

Minato.5294:

I see. So a tax increase will cause TP players to increase the price of items to compensate and players buying take on the cost.

What about a diminishing returns type of tax where for example the first 100g that goes into your TP inbox is normally taxed. The next 100g will incur an additional 0.5% tax and the next 100g will get another 0.5% increase (1% total on that 100g) and so on. This way professional TP players must compete with casual TP players that pay less tax.

1) Any increase in taxes will increase the cost of goods overall. The only way for prices to be lower is for Supply to increase, or more aggressive competition between TP players.

2) TP players not only compete with each other, but with the Casual player too. Meaning, they’re efficient with both selling goods, and buying them. To put this into perspective, not only do we undercut other Sell Orders by 1 Copper, but we outbid Buy Orders the same way.

Overall, the current system works fine. There’s a tax on all goods that move through the TP. There’s no real need to increase or decrease the tax, since adjusting drop rates is a better way to control target price points for goods. Now if you brought up this topic just to find a way to punish rich players, the only way to do that is to become a TP player, and increase the competition.

Skeletonwitch.3280:

Hi, I just want to ask a couple questions…

1. Is it against any rules to leave a character at a Jumping Puzzle chest, and log in to that character each day to open it? I’ve seen people do this and am wondering if it is allowed.

2. Is it allowed to log on to someones account WITH their permission and them actively knowing you are on it? I don’t mean in the same household, because obviously you could do that and no one would know any different.

Thanks in advance.

Answers:

1) No

2) Absolutely no. If you allow someone else to access your account, that’s grounds for an account termination. Please read the User Agreement 9(b)

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/legal/guild-wars-2-user-agreement/

Just an FYI. If you suggest Elite Zones, the Casuals will complain that it’s too hard for them. It’s best to leave zones to be doable by all players, but just add more Elite Content within the zones.

Behellagh.1468:

Their scratch tickets. If you don’t like getting a three pack of minis, unidentified dyes and a handful of boosters that don’t buy any. “But … but … cool skin …” It’s a trap for the week minded. Sure maybe you’ll get lucky but looking for enough ticket scraps or even an actual ticket? Charlie had better luck.

Wait… so Evon is Willy? That’s a meme waiting to happen.

Minato.5294:

This was kind of my point though. Factors like supply, demand, and competition will always exist in the market. But the more you play the TP for gold, the more this tax drains your income. Lets say a typical player who wants a 10g item will now have to pay 10g 1s because of this tax. A person who plays the TP and flips this item might sell 10 of these items in a day make 100g from this item but now has to pay an extra 1g. This isn’t a way to balance those with low income and high income but a drain for the economy that affects those who play the TP more over those who play every other aspect of the game.

But the point you’re missing is that there are players who purchase from the TP because they actually need the item. If you increase the tax, you basically increase the price of items. The “poor” players who don’t know how to efficiently use the TP are the ones who get hurt, not the Professional TP players.

Minato.5294:

mtpelion.4562:

Minato.5294:

I’ll be honest.. I don’t really know how the GW2 economy works which is partly why I created this post to get some feedback. Is it better to increase the gold sink or decrease the influx of gold into the game (tax the tp over slight champ bag nerf)? How would adding a 1% tax to the tp change the game economy? Will it be enough to significantly alter prices of goods listed on the tp? I don’t play the tp so maybe someone who knows this economy better can chime in. Maybe I should change the title because people seem to go crazy when the word tax is mentioned.

Basically, while the TP tycoons may be sitting on fat stacks of coin, they get that coin from everyone who buys things. If you increase the cost of the transaction (i.e., increasing the tax), the guy who is selling (the “rich”) is simply going to raise his prices and the guy who is buying (the “poor”) is going to wind up spending even more money to get the same thing.

The reason they are targeting the champion bags is because that is passive income. You aren’t doing it for the gold, the gold is just an added, inflationary, bonus. By nipping that flow of “unearned” gold, they can stem inflation without seriously impacting the people who are targeting gold with their playstyle.

A 1% tax increase will hardly make a flipper change the sell order price. They mostly make a profit by gaining the difference between buy orders+tax and sell orders and normally the sell orders are well above buy orders+tax for a profit to be made. Once the market for that item hits an equilibrium is where everyone might lose some silver when the sell order nears the price of buy order+tax (which I think is affected more by supply and demand than people who play the TP). This will affect flippers who gain hundreds to thousands of gold flipping these items until they reach equilibrium and less so other players who make a few purchases for their needs.

Professional TP players factor in the 15% tax into their profit margins. So if you were to make it 16%, that just means we’ll just increase the cost we sell at to account for the extra tax. Pretty simple. The rich will stay rich, and the poor will have to pay more for the same goods they desire.

One of the reason why a TP player would make less money at any point is due to things like Supply, Demand, and his competition on the market. If I undercut someone else’s prices, and start a Price War, taxes would only determine how low someone will go before they back out.

Instant Trait Resets and Repair Kits are still usable now, thus they have value. If you don’t use them before the change, that’s your choice.

Only 35? That’s quite a low number.

Raine.1394:

Again, the distinction PvP vs PvE appears lost on you.

The only distinction that matters is that Map/World Completion requires all maps in the world. Thus if someone wants to get theirs, seek out all POIs in WvW.

Teratus.2859:

The title stands for itself

honestly I am tired of it
I am not someone who plays WvW content and when I do I find it severely annoying and entirely lacking in entertainment

im just not into PvP

WvW is treated more like PvE than PvP which makes no sense at all considering its PvP content
I am requesting that the Map Completion be removed from the WvW maps so that 100% map completion will be gained once all PvE maps are completed

there is no need to force everyone into WvW to play content we do not like or enjoy and those who do enjoy it are probably sick of us lesser equipped players taking up place on the map.. and nagging people in the chat to help us capture that last Poi or Vista..

its non beneficial for everyone and its annoying for everyone who enjoys WvW and for those of us who absolutely hate WvW
there is nothing fun about running accross a map alone and getting utterly destroyed by 50+ players
not to mention having to complete 3 maps that are pretty much identical..

please just remove WvW maps from world completion
it will benefit everyone in the end whether you are a WvW fan or not

WvW has maps, right? It is also part of the Guild Wars 2 world. So if you want your World Completion, you must do all WvW maps too.

Downfall.2671:

Sarrs.4831:

Well they do have the raid boss summoning upgrade so that might help jab that in the gob.

I agree, but that is just a small step. Anet should look into ways that make mega guilds unnecessary, IMHO. Like LFG but for zergs, where everyone gets ported to an exclusive instance with 30min to prepare the raid or whatever

Actually, we formed a community among players from different servers. While it’s not “necessary” for us to all be in TTS, we rep because we all like to play with each other. It’s like our own Fellowship for PvE. It makes no sense for all of us to transfer to the same server, because we’re also loyal to our main servers in WvW. I can do events with my fellow TTS guildies from BG, or RP with my friends from TC, but I rep the #1 NA skilled server – Maguuma.

Another idea that could help with this. Allow players to select with metric in the Megaserver formula they’d like to use. For example, if a German speaking player plays with mostly American speaking, the formulas won’t allow him to be group with other Germans. If we could select “German language” or “Same Guild/Alliance” to have a higher priority in the formula, that could help with which Megaserver a player will be placed on.

Edit – As for “bad design”, you have to understand that each server has a limit to how many players can be based there. The limitations of server capacity forced Anet to separate worlds as they are. TTS formed because players from different servers had a common purpose/goal. It’s not like we all knew each other from GW1, or outside of the game, so we couldn’t all select the same server to be on. We all met after the new Tequatl was introduced.

I felt that this issue deserved its own thread, as the concerns here aren’t the same as in the other threads.

The current system that Anet had, coupled with their desire for players to socialize, spawned mega guilds. This isn’t just one single guild filled with people, but rather a Community that spans all servers (i.e. TTS). In order for our Community to get together, we were able to guest to specific servers with low activity, thus being able to temporarily share the same world for boss runs or other events. The new Megaserver system eliminates guesting, so that presents a new problem: How will our players, spread across multiple servers in multiple guilds, play together now?

One thing that I’m thankful for is that we can still “taxi” to another party member’s maps. But while this option is available, the current formula to determine which Megaserver you’re placed it doesn’t accommodate multiple guilds in the same community. If players from 12+ different guilds within the community, from 12+ different home servers travel to the same location, we could potentially be spread across 12+ different Megaserver maps. Joining a single specific shared map becomes next to impossible even with the ability to “taxi” over.

With the recent blogs, guild will be able to start our own Guild World Events in the future. I like this very much. It will allow us to start a Teq or Great Wurm run at any time except for server scheduled events. It could give us time to organize and taxi on each other so we all reach the same map, but the issue still remains on how many different maps we’ll be separated on initially.

Potential solution: One way around this would be to create an Alliance system, like how we had in GW1. Since each guild has a maximum cap on the amount of members we can have, allowing each of our guilds in the community to be in the same Alliance could help with the distribution metrics Anet has. Then, with an Alliance grouping as part of the Megaserver formulas, if you are representing a guild within the Alliance, you’ll more likely go to a map with fellow Alliance members.

Overall, this system is great for players on servers with low PvE populations. The idea of the Megaservers helps to solve the Casual player’s problems, but it might be at the cost of the organized Communities. I’m hopeful that Anet will consider our dilemma as they beta test this new idea.

Edit – Wow… moderators merged my thread.

I believe that your “blackouts” are merely coincidental to a slot becoming available. It makes no sense that a server can have unlimited capacity for accounts it houses. Why do I say “unlimited”? If your server did “blackouts” constantly, that would mean people could constantly get in. But I know this isn’t the case.

Gaile’s examples are how servers work (or should work). You have limited space, and until Anet frees up space or someone transfers off, the amount is finite. 200 seats in a movie theater, all taken = full. One person leaves, meaning 199 seats out of 200 taken = very high.

This is basically turning into another conspiracy theory, since Anet says one thing, but players believe another (without proof beyond coincidence). That’s why I’ll side with Anet until they confirm otherwise.

Black Scoutsman.5830:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Fluffball.8307:

Are you dying in 1v1s and not knowing who killed you?

I think he wants to be sure that when he losses 1 vs 1 fight, that it wasn’t an invisible Thief backstabbing him constantly.

Strangely enough, this also shows up in the combat log.

Unless he’s already fighting another Thief of the same rank 1 vs 1. Then he would want to know which Thief did the damage. Hard to understand the Combat Log when all you see is “Backstab…. Backstab…. Backstab… Heartseeker x 10”.

I suggest they also remove repair costs for armor damage.

Anet is the final say on any decisions. If they can’t change a guild name, and had to delete it in its entirety, we can’t really say anything about it. Esp. if the name or tag was purposely vulgar.

Maybe this will help people understand: If I were to transfer my spy account off of BG, the population will turn from “full” to “very high” for a moment. The first person to click the transfer button will get my former slot.