Guild Wars 2

It depends on what you would otherwise do with that money. If you’re constantly ploughing it back into active investment opportunities, and you have the ability to consistently outpace inflation, then I would say no, buying now is not a good idea. But if you’re just saving up, with a lot of gold sitting doing nothing, then yes, buying now is a good idea.

It’s an incomplete idea, but it’s an interesting idea. I think the only way this could work is if the primary purpose of the guild was to acquire and pool information, and then put it to use. Each person in the guild would spend part of their time studying the price structure to find the largest profit opportunities. (I sincerely doubt crafting would ever serve as a profit opportunity.)

Each person would be responsible for knowing a particular area of the market, or the hunting and gathering opportunities in a particular region. Together, they would figure out what activity is the single most profitable activity in the game, and then dedicate themselves to that particular activity for a time. They would continue to monitor their areas of the market (with the huntmasters responsible for monitoring changes to things like spawn rates, drop rates, and so on), an periodically check to see if changing prices have opened up new or closed old opportunities.

Personally, I have a hard time seeing it work, but that’s just because I default to solo play. I would have a hard time trusting my fellow guildmembers to get it right.

Eowin Of Rohan.2619:

Hi,
My idea is that traders in GW2 are nothing more than parasites, and they exploit the TP to get money out of the community.

False. Traders exist to ensure efficient allocation of resources. The chief resource we allocate is time: I make it chaper to buy it now, more lucrative to sell it now. Speculators make it cheaper to buy in the future, more lucrative to farm now. Absent a system where everything is available in unlimited quantities on demand from NPC vendors, traders are necessary for getting things from when they are to when they need to be. (“Where” doesn’t enter into it, due to the geographic unity of the BLTC.)

Eowin Of Rohan.2619:

This is why I think that items bought from TP shouldn’t be able to be sold again in TP. Would prevent parasite “traders”.

The actual effect of this action would be to reduce the availability of items. Every purchase on the TP would be an act of consumption. There would be nobody bidding up the buy price and down the sell prices of crafted items, making the job harder for people leveling their crafting and people gearing up as they level. There would be nobody ensuring that things like precursors are priced according to their actual supply and demand, making them cheaper than they should be, reducing incentives to seek out more of them, resulting in a lower overall supply and therefore fewer players who have the opportunity to acquire legendaries. There would be nobody conserving holiday event resources, resulting in lower availability later in the year.

Finally, remember that with every transaction, traders lower the gold supply, raising the value of every gold piece in the game. This raises the value of gold drops in the field, making things easier for those who are just playing the game.

In short, the effect of your suggestion would be to impoverish the playerbase.

It would definitely reduce trading, and if this is your goal, your suggestion is as effective as it is vicious.

This thread is just neat as an overview of what engineers can do. As a new engineer, I appreciate it.

Smooth Penguin, there’s nothing wrong with your 1 copper undercuts. Sure, some selfish traders who exist in a constant state of kitten might have a problem with it, but enough 1 copper undercuts adds up to happy consumers.

Actually, what we really need is a new report from the staff economist.

I also make a lot of money of the TP. I do it buy making it cheaper to buy it now and more lucrative to sell it now.

No. Doylack “assasination” under the noses of its protector is a perfectly valid tactic… and the last thing we need is thieves making them permanently invulnerable by remaining permanently cloaked.

First off, you don’t mean inflation. Inflation is expansion of the money supply, and listing fees are an important mechanism reducing the money supply… so your suggestion would actually increase inflation. But again, I know that’s not what you meant.

I honestly don’t see how your solution would fix the “problem” or even what problem you’re trying to fix. Undercutting happens… all the time. I don’t see how more could occur, even with that rather minimal change to transaction costs. If anything, prices might increase slightly, due to a faster expanding money supply.

I doubt you’ll see a solution (except, perhaps, a refund and an “are you sure you want to buy this” in the future if someone tries to buy something they can’t equip). The impression I get is that skins are meant to say “This particular character did this particular thing.” It exists purely for the purpose of visual bragging… and do we really want that visual bragging to be lies?

This is the first time I’ve actually read through an entire three page thread I didn’t get in on before the first page was up. Good material. I can’t really comment on how faithful to GW1’s lore they’ve been, as I never played it. However, having been a long time Elder Scrolls fan who’s MO was to figure out how the lore of the different games fit together (even when the Dev’s didn’t really intend it to do so, as they basically did a lore re-boot with Redguard) rather than how they didn’t fit together, I suspect I’d be among those saying the Devs have done right by it.

The Charr/Human controversy is interesting. I see a lot of bitterness and pleas for understanding and forgiveness. I take the role of one of those kids, the ones who didn’t even fight in the recent wars, let alone the Ascalonian conflict. And in reply, I say, sure, the war was horrible… but it’s all better now, isn’t it? Isn’t peace better than war?

I think probably the reason a lot of people have trouble with the rise of the Charr is that they have cast the Charr in the same role as many of our own real-world ancestors. The rise of Europe is a very close analogy. A warlike people, united by religion, torn apart by internecine warfare, incredibly backward by the standards of the people of the East (whether we’re talking about the Caliphate or the Chinese Empire), who suddenly adopt technology and go forth, now a full fledged civilization, militarily, commercially, and industrially superior, but still culturally brutal. And so they took US, but didn’t cast US as Humans, as most games do. They cast US as humanity’s most bitter former enemy.

The future of the Sylvari is also rife with possibility. They are the “young nation”, rising out of the verdant wood. In a way, they might be compared to an early United States, with one of their own being sufficiently competant, and sufficiently culturally neutral, to head a difficult alliance.

Story spoilers ahead, in case anyone cares.

Unlike most, I do not hate Traehearne. He was the right man in the right place. Even if someone else was more technically qualified (and, indeed, the Commander—we, that is—is obviously the “manager” of the operation), only someone like Traehearne could serve as the head. As specifically mentioned in the story itself, he had never joined any of the three Orders, and thus was outside their own rivalry. He was neither Human nor Charr, meaning his appointment would not alienate the other group. He’s tall and attractive, not runty and ugly, which means he could be cast for the role even were it just a movie… unlike an Asura. And the Norn… forgive me, but were it not for their sheer size, I doubt they could contribute as equals.

I like humans. Thus far, I’ve only really played one character, a human male elementalist. I will admit, there was a moment during the storyline when I was really hoping for a divine encounter (that underwater temple to a lost god). But my disappointment can be called “in character”, not out-of-character. It isn’t as if the developers were deliberately taking my candy away because they’re mean people. :p

It’ll be interesting to see what our people accomplish once we’ve finished dealing with the Centaurs… and Caudecus.

Still, it’s a new age, all the races are working together, so if ever there was a time to open all professions to all races, it’s now.

Not sure. Probably only 5g between my bank account. on my character, and waiting at the tp. I literally have no idea how much I have out in inventory and buy orders. Tempted at times to liquidate just to see… but I don’t want to stop this train.

Probably just bowing to the fantasy convention of gold pieces, silver pieces, and copper pieces (like in D&D and everything else ever). The 100/1 conversion ratio is kind of new, though.

I think “anonymity” isn’t simply a “feature” of the Trading Post, as it is a policy of the Black Lion Trading Company, and it is a common policy for these kinds of organizations.

What I’d like to see is ways for players to write their name on the game world itself. Legendaries are a start (you see someone wielding a legendary, you know they’re good at the TP), but I’d also like to see things like player housing and such. In other words, more conspicuous modes of conspicuous consumption, so the really good traders can show off… while at the same time spending some of that money.

I think vendors should sell legendaries for 2 silver a piece. :p

Deathjester.9841:

Why do people sell them at a loss? They probably made them when the armor was cheaper to make. Mat prices seem to go up often depending on supply and demand.

This is an answer to my question, and was one possibility I was considering. I wonder if current armor prices will consistently lag behind current materials prices due to inflation.

Either way, there’s better ways to make money, as I expect there would be. When you put your money in the highest bid, while putting your inventory in the lowest offer, you’re essentially selling time. Given how impatient the average MMOer can be, time is the most profitable resource to sell.

Yeah, in the interests of those who don’t like it, I’d want it to be as inobtrusive as possible, either seamlessly fitting in with the existing architecture (and thus something you could ignore or maybe even not realize exists), or being built right into an expansion area in a fashion that makes sense.

M Steel.2574:

Dolyaks, marmox, bulls, and oakhearts are already used for pack animals, it would make sense for them to be used as mounts as well.

Not necessarily. Training an animal to pull a load is quite different from training an animal to accept a rider.

This would be great. I could see each of the racial capitals having a different kind of P(vP)(vE) tournaments hosted in their cities, with Lion’s Arch hosting champions from each area. You’d have to reach a certain ranking in one of the racial competitions to participate at Lion’s Arch.

Another event type: Townclothes match. No weapon skills, no armor bonuses, only abilities 6-10 and various objects scattered around the arena.

I was thinking about how this could be done, and then I remembered the number of buildings in the cities and towns you can’t actually enter. All they’d have to do is create interiors, doors, and price tags, and bam, you’ve got your player housing.

I wouldn’t want to be able to spam houses all over the countryside. I could, however… ooh! Idea!

Suppose they release an expansion in which Orr is nearly pacified (Zhaitan having been killed some time ago) and another dragon is on the move. While being able to buy existing space in the existing cities would be fun, being able to BUILD in a newly opened Orr would be an opportunity to let the players get creative. It was, after all, once a fantastically wealthy human kingdom. It stands to reason that with the spark of life rekindled and Zhaitan gone, a new city would grow where the old one once stood.

At the risk of being lumped in with Grizzledorf, I want to say I also like the really freaking hard toys. I used to run screaming from golems and princesses. But when I’m out exploring, just having a good time, now I like to fight them. They’ve made me better at my class. I kite better, I’m more accurate with my conical AOEs, better at timing my channeling… good training.

It is good to know there’s a time limit on the presents. Gotta grab those before they disappear.

ANet really ought to do the “check if you’re alive” thing (say “hi” with a character, see if they get a response) before banning.

If your favorite part of the game is crafting and playing the TP (ie you never leave town), you could head out with a full set of crafted gear at lower levels. You’d just have to do a lot of trading to get the money to pull it off without farming.

So I loaded up my spreadsheet, entered TP values for my chosen exotic armor set and all ingredients at all stages, and noticed something that didn’t make sense. My 400 tailoring skill is meaningless. I can buy the armor already made for a bit less than I could acquire the necessary components.

What this means to me is that people are crafting and selling exotics at a monetary loss. Lower level stuff I understand; the difference is the value of the skill points. And I’m not complaining; I’m not married to my crafting skill. I make money however I can, and this just means I’ll buy the armor, instead of crafting it.

Really, I’m just curious as to why people are doing this.

While I can see adding more points for more party members encouraging party formation, I don’t really see how it would encourage more talking (other than more lfg spam). And as a player who primarily solos, I don’t really like the idea of groups forming purely for the purpose of farming bonuses.

We form groups for dungeons and WvW because it’s necessary, the teamwork needs to happen. Dungeons, of course, are accessed by groups. In WvW it’s primarily to color name tags and create exclusive communications channels (text, but still). I think your suggestion would simply encourage purposeless, unsocial grouping.

The Marriage idea I do like, if only because I’m just sentimental like that. :p

Are you kidding? If waypoints were free, you’d never see anyone anywhere except where they planned to be. With waypoints costing something, people sometimes choose to make the run instead of teleporting. People run along, get caught up in events, see other people along the way—it’s great. If waypoints were free, the spaces in between would become desolate wastelands, inhabited only by NPCs, monsters, and those few players that have yet to unlock the waypoint.

I think it’s about not being able to insta-mail blueprints to the front lines; if you didn’t bring enough, someone has to actually traverse the distance, which takes time, and they can even be delayed if the enemy posts people in the middle of the path to cut their supply lines. Making them mailable would undermine strategy, which is the entire point of WvWvW.

Drop and pick up isn’t bad, because, #1, it doesn’t invalidate the physical space between the point of acquisition and the point of use, and #2, the enemy can come in and grab it if it’s done in the wrong place and the enemy is quick enough.

Hmm… mounts go “against” the lore? I’d like a further explanation that convinces me that Tyrians have some aversity to sitting on an animal’s back, as opposed to simply a historical lack of implementation (game-level, not world-level).

As to mounts in WvW, here’s an idea. Make them expensive, and make them killable. Not really an issue in PvE, so long as you’re smart and “park” them outside the battle zone. But in WvWvW, they’d be like siege, only designed for mobility, rather than damage dealing.

Waypoints are too expensive?

You’re obviously doing something wrong. I used to do a little running instead of teleporting at lower levels, but ever since I hit eighty, I’ve got money coming out of my ears.

This is kind of a neat idea, though it might clog rendering if every person out there was dragging a second character behind them everywhere. Still, if that’s not an issue, I like the idea of being able to take along an NPC companion (in addition to the pet, in the case of a ranger).

Idea the First: I’m not sure how this would go down with other players, but it would be kind of neat if the next story expansion, rather than simply continuing the commander’s storyline from the previous story, was designed to accomodate an entirely new character, sort of a “the next dragon for the next generation” type of thing. If the player also has a character that finished the current story in another slot, that character could cameo in the story. If not, a randomly chosen story finisher from someone else’s account could be used.

Idea the Second: It would be neat if the final “celebration” scene, after getting Trahearne and everything, turned into a merged instance, where all the characters (up to some numerical limit) who were in that scene could actually hang out and celebrate together. Maybe Woznack’s trick could trigger the shift to the shared instance.

Kittenattler? ROFL. Autocensor fail.

Bone_rattler Caverns.

My main focus, aside from playing the TP and following the story, has been exploration. I’ve been a lot of places, but right now, I’m sitting next to a waterfall in what is, in my opinion, quite possibly the most beautiful spot in all Tyria. It’s in kittenattler Caverns, in the Harathi Hinterlands. Between the streams babbling through the cave, the graveyard (where I found a giant visiting an ancestor’s grave), the lumanescent fungus on the high ceilings of the caverns (it almost feels like outside) and the waterfall, it’s enough to make you forget the place is a bandit hideout. Heck, it made a few other people forget: the bandit and the seraph sitting together on the other side of the pool. It’s a neat spot.

What spots have you found in your travels?

Human, because my first character is always human. And this is the first game ever where my first character was my main. Absolutely incredible.

The effect of adopting the OP’s suggestion would be to raise the price of everything.

First off, as previously mentioned, transaction fees are a considerable gold sink. The effect of having each item pass through the TP once and no more would be to create a higher currency supply than before; that is, it would cause inflation, which would cause prices to rise as gold entered the economy but failed to exit.

Secondly, having every purchase be an act of “consumption” would result in a lower supply of items people want on the TP. Lower supply = higher prices. This is why craftables are bind on equip; if they weren’t, craftable items would have an even lower value than they already do.

tl;dr: The OP’s idea would have precisely the opposite of its intended effect.

How about “undercut by however much you want.” I know that’s what I’m doing. :p

I honestly don’t know how the potato buyer expects to make money doing that. Buy it all, farmers get in on it. Attempt to sell at a profit, maybe a few cooks and speculators take the bait. But as supply returns to market, I honestly think they’d end up selling back at a rate similar to what they bought it at… minus TP costs… if not LOWER due to extra supply from people who changed their farming habits.

I’m not sure why TP bots aren’t operating. If there were, there wouldn’t be anywhere near the profits available in lower cost craftables there are.

phys.7689:

Much like if precursors were being manipulated (hypothetically) the guy who finds one from a monster is most likely not going to price his at 100 gold lower just because he can, he will probably sell it at the market price.

Which is my point, exactly. There are so few potential buyers he’ll have to list slightly lower than the last guy. It all comes down to “when do they want their money.” The longer they’re willing to wait, the higher they’ll price it, but also, the more likely it’ll just sit there as inventory accumulates. If nobody buys, eventually, somebody is going to have to lower their prices. Meanwhile, the artificially higher price will direct farmers in that direction, increasing the quantity supplied. The problem isn’t greedy traders; the problem is insufficient supply, and absent direct A-Net action, my argument is that higher selling prices have the effect of increasing supply.

Of course, to the sellers (the original producers, not the speculators who buy from them), it’s no problem at all.

phys.7689:

Anyhow they main problem with your whole line of thinking is you are taking a debators stance rather than a scientific stance.

You have already decided what side you are on, and now want to see if you can argue a point on that side in any situation.
A scientist may make a hypothesis, but accepts that results may not turn out the way he plans, and if it does looks for a reason and a solution, instead of trying to argue the point.

I would argue that an important component of the development of economic science is verbal logic. A debate, honestly conducted, is conducive to the development of that verbal logic. I am fully prepared to be convinced otherwise, and intend to use only truthful facts and reasoning, so far as I am able.

How else does one arrive at truth with regard to the study of a market economy? The system being studied is not composed of inanimate objects that rigidly obey physical laws; “an economy” is the sum of all human activity.

phys.7689:

Another flaw is that you are tying socially beneficial too closely with a possible benefit to a venture capitalist.

Quite the contrary. As I said in another thread (another undercutting complaint thread) paraphrased: "So far as I’m concerned, you guys are my competitors; my allies are farmers, crafters, and consumers. I am fully prepared to screw you guys to the benefit of myself, my suppliers, and my customers.

What I am trying to demonstrate is that honest mercantile action (you’ll notice I exclude “pump and dump” from the heading “honest”) is beneficial to those three groups: the suppliers (crafters and farmers), the customers (people who are just getting their gear off the TP) and, of course, the trader himself.

I make quite a lot of money flipping low level craftables. There’s just so many areas where the highest bid is, like 50c, while the lowest offer is around 3s. Just create buy orders slightly higher than the higest bid, sell it for slightly lower than the lowest offer, and you just made a 150% return in a day or two.

I get the impression there is a policy of preserving single-character identity. Attaching dies to characters rather than accounts is one example of this. The outright refusal to allow mid-stream race changes is another.

“Gentelemen’s agreement” = monopoly trust.

The TP is PvP. Asking this is like asking the other side in WvW to go easy on you.

As far as I’m concerned, you guys are my competitors. My allies are farmers, crafters, and consumers. I will gladly screw my fellow traders to the benefit of those who do not play the TP.

I think we need to define “inflation” if this thread is going to get anywhere.

There are two definitions. One is simply “rising prices”. The other is the expansion of the money supply.

The second is the older of the two, with rising prices being a possible result of the expansion. Even there, however, inflation is never uniform. Prices rise first in those areas the first to receive the money spend it into, and then into the areas their suppliers spend their extra money into, and so on.

If the money supply is static, rising prices indicate one of two things.

First, it could indicate some problem of supply. For whatever reason (crop failure, criminal activity, etc.) supply just isn’t what it used to be.

It could also indicate some increase in demand. Consumer tastes could have shifted. Some new use could have been discovered. Some great need could have manifested (ie medical supplies and construction materials after a disaster, or munitions after the outbreak of a war) It could simply be the result of population increase relative to the overall supply of goods.

However, if the money supply is static, greater spending in one area means, by definition, in the absence of the drawing down of cash balances, lesser spending in other areas. A price spike in one area leads directly to lower prices in all other areas.

In GW2, monster drops are where money comes from. This is very different from the real world, where the whim of some central authority is where money comes from (today; it wasn’t always like that). Thus inflation is distributed in GW2, unlike the real world where inflation benefits the central authority first, then politically favored groups, while the rest of us simply have to pay the higher prices before our own prices rise.

phys.7689:

Tarvok.4206:

I put this one in the “not honest” category.

Far better, of course, if we all simply behaved in an honest fashion

actually your reasoning why its good here is pretty weak, you merely try and say how it would be hard to enforce or try to say why it should be deregulated. What you are talking about here is basically called a con, whereby you trick people into believing something has value when you no it does not, and escaping with the money. It isnt social beneifical to anyone other than exploiters.

I should, perhaps, have left that part out, to avoid obscuring my central point.

phys.7689:

good old fashion collusion, whereby a group of people conspire to manipulate prices or supply in their benefit, so as to control the market, mostly using in this game, their higher available capital to control things

Explain to me how this works in the context of Guild Wars 2.

In the real world, this can create a temporary benefit. The owners of high value capital goods agree to restrict production to create “monopoly prices” and reap greater products than if they produced competitively. There are two problems with this strategy:

1. It can only work if demand is sufficiently inelastic in the price zone above the “perfect competition” market price. If it’s not, their efforts to raise the price will actually result in losses, not profits.

2. In the absence of violence aimed at preserving the cartel (usually from the government, often disguised as consumer protection), the cartel will soon be undermined by a combination of cheating from within (members selling on the side above their agreed-upon quota) and competition from without (as the profits draw new competitors into the field supplying either the same or competing goods). This may take longer if the necessary capital goods require large investments, but it does ultimately happen.

tl;dr: in the real world, in the absence of violent enforcement, this strategy does not actually work for long. (And where it does, it’s not the result of the collusion, but rather the violence; ie. it’s cleverly disguised banditry.)

It can’t work at all in GW2. The only “production goods” in this game are character levels and quickly maxed-out craft skills. IF someone artificially manipulates the price upward, there is no limit on how quickly crafters and farmers can fill the gap. Take the recent potato spike, for example. It wasn’t long before people were logging on alts in quick succession to restore supply.

Even in the precursors market, holding prices high only causes people to look ever harder for precursors, and those who find them but don’t need them can make bank selling them to the speculators… and there’s no guarantee they’ll actually make any money on them when its time to sell to the consumer (particularly when compared to high volume flipping).

tl;dr: The attempt benefits farmers and crafters in the short run, and producers in the long run (as it stimulate additional production that will enable more to use it), but I honestly don’t see how it can actually benefit the speculator.

For example: Pump and Dump.

Pump and Dump is the practice of buying a bunch of something, then releasing false information to the public about why it’s about to go up. If enough people believe it, it does go up, as lesser speculators drive the price up. The first buyer sells off to his marks and pockets his loot.

I put this one in the “not honest” category. Prices convey information, but in this case, the prices are simply conveying a lie. After the lie is exposed (ie. once the duped speculaters realize there’s nobody to sell to), they must take a loss.

There are a few third parties that potentially benefit. Producers who sold during this time accidentally get a piece of the manipulator’s action, so they git a bit of extra money. Buyers who get in after the market crashes get a lower price, as the higher price may have induced additional production, and the negative experience will definitely drive speculators away temporarily. However, this may also lower production for a time. So there’s both winners and losers… but I suspect the losses to be greater than the gains, overall.

Still, it would be impossible to consistently enforce a law against this practice. A widely known law against it would simply lull traders into a false sense of security, making them easier marks for those who are better at this tactic than the enforcers are at enforcing it. Further, it can be difficult to distinguish between a deliberate pump and an honest mistake, meaning the innocent are likely to be caught in the dragnet, discouraging the sharing of information generally.

Far better, IMO, to simply allow the practice, so that the less skilled pumpers can breed in traders generally a level of cynicism regarding “free information” that accurately reflects the dangers inherent in trading. Far better, of course, if we all simply behaved in an honest fashion (there are plenty of honest ways to make money, and the most skilled honest methods are, I believe, more effective than the most skilled dishonest ones)… but because that’s not going to happen, best not to pretend we can make it happen.

Though I suspect such a thread will degenerate quickly, I think it’s worth a try. I would like to host a debate (in its own thread, not as a derailment of another thread), between those who regard things like “market manipulation” and trade-based money making "schemes"as a dirty, unnecessary, if not downright criminal activity; and those of us (yes, I’m declaring my position at the outset) who believe any honestly made money as a just reward for something that is, ultimately, socially beneficial.

Basically, come in here and post some market tactic you consider socially irresponsible. I will then attempt either to explain who (beyond the trader himself) benefits from this activity, or to explain how it’s not an honest strategy, or how it’s not an effective strategy (though I will likely appeal to superior traders for that last part).

Assuming the thread does not become so flooded nobody can follow it, it could be fun.

I’m starting to see a few threads praising the merits of fire based staff builds. I even saw a scepter/focus thread recently, though I suspect there’s still more work to be done in that area.

I’m thinking it’s a fad. The Elementalist used to be universally reviled as “underpowered” and in serious need of a buff. Our bugfixes hadn’t even dropped, and some guy started posting videos of him totally pwning in pvp as a d/d elementalist, and furthermore telling us how he does it. Next thing I know, people of other classes are whining that d/d elementalist needs a nerf.

Now, the accepted wisdom is that d/d traited heavily into water and arcana is the only way to play… but I think that’s just because we haven’t yet had some genius both develop and popularize other highly effective methods of playing. I’ve seen a few promising fire staff threads, but they didn’t come with reams of videos showing just how awesome it is. Thus, I think it’s just a matter of time.

Link didn’t work.