Guild Wars 2

Conski Deshan.2057:

And your post actually highlights the differences in player opinions on different aspects because I don’t consider being able to outright buy with real money a legendary a saving grace but rather a large flaw in a game system, where top rewards would ideally only be obtainable through actual advanced game-play.

WoW is that way >>>
Enjoy your exclusive “advanced game-play” restricted rewards over there where the treadmill is how they keep you paying them every month.

Kruhljak.2705:

The prices of dyes will rebalance over time, so I would think it would be pretty dodgy of ANet to make the compensatory unid’d dyes account bound given the amount of lead time they’ll have had to mention it. Making those versions account bound and saying so up front might irritate some of the opportunists, but it would be 100% legit and respectfully transparent to the player base. Springing it on people—despite the “fact” that there are boatloads of folks trying to game the system for profits on this (what’s new there?)—would be a big slap in the face. “Ha ha ha, you fools! We gotcha!”

This is primarily an in-game thing, rather than a marketing thing, so I think it’s safe to assume by now that the dyes will be tradeable since ANet’s devs have been good about not willfully screwing people over with such bait and switch tactics so far.

I would say that there probably weren’t a “boatload” of people since the volume of dyes for sale was very low and so were the prices. There will be a few people who figured out how it was going to work and bought up the cheapest dyes, and a lot of people who jumped on that bandwagon after it passed the point of no profit who will lose a lot of gold on patch day.

Killstreak Boosters are wonderful when you are leveling up, if you can find some events that spawn a lot of mobs.

The Scarlet Invasion of Lion’s Arch was pretty much designed for those things.

Svarty.8019:

John Smith.4610:

Flippers increase liquidity and bring prices closer to equilibrium, almost always lowering prices and providing preferences to other players. I see no reason why anyone would want to stop that.

I do. When I see the price of petrol (gas) and other commodities being speculated up by RL flippers, I see people suffering through lack of essential goods while the wealthy can still afford them but at ripoff prices. I don’t call that “equilibrium”.

It’s a good thing your character doesn’t need gas then, isn’t———it?
(the dashes were inserted to bypass the overzealous kitten censor).

I salvaged 10 rares last night and got 12 ectos.

What makes your useless anecdote more valid than my useless anecdote?

0.85 is the overall average (when using the appropriate kit). What that means is that over a huge sample size across ALL players, it will be approximately 0.85 Ectos per salvaged Rare.

In order to test for an aberration in the drop rate, you would need a lot of samples. When I say “a lot” I mean more than “hundreds”.
If you are too poor to consider yourself “rich”, you are definitely too poor to adequately sample the drop rate.

You may as well argue that the 1 side of a die is broken because you threw the die once and it landed on 4.

My early cash stockpile came from doing map completions on the high level zones for the exotic gear.

Today, it comes from a mix of speculation, farming, and TP/Salvage>MF>TP/Salvage secrets.

The day I got 3 Mystery Tonics was the day I determined that I would never buy a Black Lion Key.

I’d rather spend my money buying thumb tacks over Mystery Tonics.

Behellagh.1468:

Wanze.8410:

Behellagh.1468:

It’s fear of the unknown that is driving up the dye, sigil and rune markets right now.

I dare you to show me a regular dye that gained value in the last 7 days.

Not in the last seven days. The announcement was over two weeks ago and elevated the price of basic dyes by 5-10×.

http://www.gw2tp.com/item/20666-citrus-ice-dye

Switch to month view.

Now masterwork and rare dyes weren’t affected as much if at all in terms of a price hike.

I think that would be more accurately described as a low supply item being bought out for speculation purposes rather than an actual increase in value. The price of the dye “went up” only because the only ones left on the market were those that were priced too high for the speculators to gamble on.

Dungeons provide tokens which are used to buy unique armor and weapon skins.

There are also some Gifts and Runes that can be purchased with the tokens as well, so you may need to run a Dungeon for a specific Legendary weapon or build.

Pokecenter.3548:

What does BiS stands for?

Best in Slot

As for the Capacitor and it’s quality and upgrade potential:
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Prototype_Fractal_Capacitor

MauricioCezar.2673:

129g x 5 = 645gold. A little too much

That’s kind of the point of the achievement.

Essence Snow.3194:

Now why would they hope to maintain equality, yet indulge something that results in the opposite?

This is an example of why the term “equality” shouldn’t be used.

There are those who believe “equality” means equal access/opportunity and those who believe it means equal result. Those two positions are mutually exclusive which frequently leads to a breakdown in communication when the word is used.

John Smith did not use “equality” in the sense that everyone should have the same rate of income, regardless of the content they choose to play.

Bunda.2691:

Come on, let’s be honest now. There is next to no risk flipping many items, for example many blue weapons and trinkets. Now, it’s not zero risk, and it may be a bit cumbersome, and you may have to wait a while, but there is essentially no risk. This might change if more people enter the market, but as yet many of these items can more or less be flipped risk free.

I haven’t played around with blue weapons and trinkets, but if the risk is as low as you say then the profits are probably quite low as well.

Charismatic Harm.9683:

mtpelion.4562:

An example of a “Risk Free” activity:

Mine Iron Ore.
Sell Iron Ore to Merchant for 3c.

And you’ve made a 2.4c profit without using the Trading Post at all. Congratulations!!! :-)

More or less, depending on what pick you used and whether you consider opportunity costs in a video game.

An example of a “Risk Free” activity:

Mine Iron Ore.
Sell Iron Ore to Merchant for 3c.

Zaxares.5419:

I jump down the right side of the slide and deliberately aim for the stalagmites. You get falling damage when you slam into them, but it’s not enough to kill you. You can then jump off it again and land in the water; you might get some falling damage while sliding, but the shorter distance means it now won’t kill you either.

I always get killed there unless I have the “reduce fall damage” trait active.
When I say “always” I mean “ever since the Battle for Lion’s Arch”. Prior to that I used the slide often with no issues.

RavenClaw.4608:

Ok so just do what I can to my levels in Queensdale, and after this move to another main city and do there and after this go back? this is how it should work for leveling as fast as I can?
And how I fight with axes/swords if I’m Ranger? I should fight with bows no? so why you choose to be Ranger if you fight with swords? its better? its kinda wired.. because Rangers should be stronger with bows no?

Killing enemies that haven’t been killed in a long time gets you BONUS XP, which can sometimes be almost as much as doing an event!

Be sure to use apple and wrench buffs (food and potions), as they give you +10% XP from kills.

Sword is the highest damage weapon for a Ranger. Bows let you stay back while your pet kills things. Bows are generally very weak, but while leveling they do allow you to stay alive since you aren’t getting hit by the enemies.

DarkSpirit.7046:

He said “TP lacks risk…..”. How else would you interpret that? Does that mean I am probably going to make a profit even if I invest carelessly?

I’m fairly certain that LordByron is an English as a Second Language user, so I find it helps to rely more on the gist of what he posts, rather than the actual text.

Belzebu.3912:

PvP only skins will still exist, what will be “removed” is the PvP tag from armors, after the update your PvP skin will be the same as the PvE skin, but no gear will be removed at all.

I think the confusion is this:

In WvW, you use gear.
In PvP, you use skins (there is no gear).

They are going to remove the skins in PvP on patch day, but give you free Transmutation Charges to rebuild your PvP look since you will now be wearing gear in PvP (just like in WvW). You still won’t get the stats from gear in PvP, but they have to do it this way in order to implement the wardrobe system.

I threw a die and it landed on 4. Did they nerf 1?

I’m fairly certain that Charak is having a go at you all. There is no way that this is a serious suggestion.

deSade.9437:

DON’T EVEN TALK ABOUT THAT DISGRACED MOVIE EVER AGAIN.
Or I shall strike you down.
Ugh, what have they done to my favourite book…
That scene in the river with the kegs… oh god that scene. I groaned when I watched it at the cinema and burst out with something like “Oh, please, what is this”. A guy behind me loled harder at my comment than the scene itself.
Legolas jumping on… on… I can’t go any further. Ugh.

And yeah, Gandalf is average at best, eve if he brings good support. Aragorn does the highest dps/buff support while still being able to skip proficiently… and do jumping puzzles way better than Gimli.
A good all-around dungeoneer.

What movie?

Do you mean The Hobbit: Legolas Doing Flips & Stuff, part 2 of The Hobbit, an Adventure in Action Packed Revulsion?

Ohoni.6057:

So are you asserting that if there were a real life society in which minimal housing, nutrition, and healthcare were all assured, regardless of income level, then income inequality would be a non-issue?

I actually assert that income inequality is a non-issue now, but all the unproven vices of the concept are tied to those problems which is why they must be present before that issue can be raised.

Ohoni.6057:

Yes, but I never suggested that they wanted to break up groups, just that they wanted players to be doing a diverse variety of activities, whether solo, grouped, or in zergs. If all players are doing is CoF path 1, for example, they seem to not like that, so they might nerf that path or buff the other ones to spread players to other aspects of the game. If has nothing to do with “breaking up groups.”

Well, then perhaps I read more into your point than you intended. I don’t believe that ArenaNet intends to hit specific “diversity” targets with regard to how many players attend specific types of content. Their history of changes suggests that they target areas that generate a lot of coin out of thin air for minimal effort.

Ohoni.6057:

I never said that they did. I have no idea where you got that idea but you’re arguing with yourself.

You listed player concentration as a reason for diminishing returns under the premise that ArenaNet wants to coerce activity diversification.

Ohoni.6057:

1 and 2 are both true, but also mutually exclusive. By that I mean, both will happen, but they cannot happen simultaneously. Sometimes people would get less gold than they do now, but in those cases, the other party would be paying less. Sometimes people would pay more than they currently do, but in those cases the other party would be making more. Over the long run, both situations would balance out to a wash. The only time in which the initial seller and the eventual buyer would BOTH be paying more and making less is in the CURRENT system, in which the TP-middleman pays the seller the minimum and sells it to the customer for the maximum, pocketing the difference.

As for 3, there’s absolutely no reason why farming would be reduced, the player demand for goods would remain the same, so there’s no reason the player supply would be different. Traders do not create supply or demand, they just move the deckchairs around. Every item that currently gets added to the economy or removed from the economy would still get added and removed, it just wouldn’t be juggled around once or more in between.

The items that the general playerbase wants to sell will bring in less money while the items that the general playerbase wants to buy will cost more. It won’t be the same items, true, but the negative impacts will hit the general playerbase, not the “rich”.

And yes, farming will be nerfed. I should have been more specific as I meant gold farming. Without the deflationary power of the Trading Post, gold creation will need to be nearly stopped to prevent rampant inflation from occurring.

That can be your premise if you like, but I disagree, just as I’m sure that if one class was otherwise equal to all others, but on top of that could also deal ten times the damage of any other class, “who does the DPS is irrelevant” would not be a very satisfying response. “Let them eat cake” has never been a particularly popular policy.

You’re conflating two separate arguments and using an apples to oranges comparison here.

Who has wealth is 100% irrelevant. It is also a separate argument from how wealth is generated (the conflation).

Second, doing damage would be more akin to farming gold, not getting it from the Trading Post. If you wanted your analogy to work, you’d need to phrase it like this:
There are 3 classes that do damage and 1 class that supports his team with healing and buffs. No matter which path they choose, the goal for each is to kill the boss. It’s totally unfair that the class that supports the team with healing and buffs but generates no DPS can out heal and out buff the DPS classes.

Buttercup.5871:

The answer is way more basic than that. All your fancy explanations won’t help, until you understand one basic fact. Two out of three classes that use leather – ranger and engineer – are unpopular PvE classes. They always have been.

That certainly doesn’t help, but leather is also used far less than the other base materials in crafting recipes which is a huge part of the oversupply problem.

Lankybrit.4598:

What do you mean ‘Loot is not random’ with your definition of random.

It can’t be predicted, so it’s random.

It may have an algorithm for how likely, but then it comes down to random whether you roll right to get it.

It may not be able to be predicted by you, but it is not random.
It’s like how to you, meteorites are random because you can’t predict when they will show up but to an astronomer or astrophysicist, the meteorites are completed scheduled.

Loot drops based on a formula. That formula is hidden from view and further veiled by an algorithm that selects a number to give it the appearance of randomness. It is not random though.

Essence Snow.3194:

I’ll leave this here because obviously it is needed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_inequality

When your character requires housing, food, and healthcare or else it will permanently die, you can raise economic inequality as a legitimate concern in a video game.

Magnus Steelgrave.6580:

Pretty sure thats what they meant by BotW

I guess that could be “Bazaar of the Winds”. I didn’t put that together until now.

Vol.7601:

Just hope for future leather uses in the future that can be huge sinks:
-Capes
-Precursor crafting books
-Trader Merchant for BotW

I’d even take a return of the Zephyr Sanctum so I can gamble those useless squares away.

The cap from luck consumption is 300%. You are able to exceed that with banners, food, guild buffs, etc.

400% of 0.00000000001 is 0.00000000004

You will see a marked improvement in some types of loot, but the improvement in rare loot (rare as in scarcity, not yellow colored name tags) will be so low as to not be perceptible through normal gameplay.

I wouldn’t mind seeing the ability to promote potions. Low level potions are currently pointless. They are used to level artificing and for the XP boost while leveling. You aren’t fighting any one enemy type often enough at low levels for the buff to mean anything, plus you level so quickly that you typically don’t need more than 10 per level requirement.

That is why there is such a massive oversupply of these things. They are useful for a very brief window 2-3 hours, then forever valueless.

I welcome ideas that allow you to do SOMETHING with them.

Drago Ivansen.5398:

mtpelion.4562:

Let’s not also forget that the entire economy benefits when people relist their items.

There is a difference between relisting to set a new value and relisting to get to the front of the stack.

That’s news to me. Care to elaborate?
Last I checked, there was only one cancel button and only one post button. I haven’t found the one that lets me choose why I’m relisting.

Let’s not also forget that the entire economy benefits when people relist their items.

Drago Ivansen.5398:

mtpelion.4562:

Wait… did you honestly just admit to not knowing what you suggested?

I haven’t had my coffee yet, so I want to be sure that you just said that you didn’t say you said what you said.

I honestly said that and your coffee is still off topic. Please show how dealing with percentages removes the copper completely and causes inflation.

It’s pretty apparent then that you haven’t thought your idea through all the way.

If you have a minimum currency but enact a rule that makes it so that the minimum currency can no longer be used as the minimum currency increment, then you have replaced that minimum currency with a new minimum currency (in your example, that new minimum currency is a percentage instead of a fixed value).

All you’ve done is made copper less valuable and raised the prices across the board until the next guy comes along who suggests that 1% is now “meaningless” and it should be 2%.

I’d also like to point out that if 1c is so meaningless, why on earth have you spent so much time talking about it? If it was actually meaningless, you’d never have taken the time to make this suggestion. You’ve got a solution looking for a problem here.

Delete the email, it’s a fake.

ArenaNet will not tell you when you are getting banned, they will simply ban you. At that point it is up to you to reach out to them to contest it.

Drago Ivansen.5398:

Please read the forum in its entirety if you would like to participate. This post is off topic. No one said to remove the lowest denomination of currency.

Wait… did you honestly just admit to not knowing what you suggested?

I haven’t had my coffee yet, so I want to be sure that you just said that you didn’t say you said what you said.

You do realize that if you remove the lowest denomination of currency, you will simply have a new lowest denomination of currency (this time a percent instead of finite point)?

Given time, this same argument will crop up about why the minimum bid is 1% when it should be 2% to prevent all those people from undercutting by 1% which is an insignificant amount. You start down this road and you wind up like those many African nations that have to pass laws that simply drop zeros off of their currency because the lowest bill is for 1,000,000,000,000.

Ohoni.6057:

And the third is just player concentration. If a given activity is much more efficient than others for making gold in PvE, then players feel compelled to migrating to that activity, whether they enjoy it or not. This leads them to burn out more quickly because it turns play into work, but they have to struggle to do other things because they know they will not recieve similar reward for them.

Wanting to avoid this, the devs add DR to certain activities, to encourage players to diversify their experiences, that maybe a given activity is most efficient for a little bit, but after some time they’ll have to do something else or lose that efficiency. The same philosophy applies to the trading post.

ArenaNet does not implement DR to break up groups of players. That is quite honestly the single most ridiculous thing I’ve ever read on these forums. The whole POINT of an MMO is to form groups of players! ArenaNet targets activities that generate too much coin out of thin air. Those happen to frequently have a lot of players doing them because they generate too much coin out of thin air. It has nothing to do with “burn out”.

Reducing the number of transactions would not harm the playerbase. The playerbase is only concerned with having items available when they need them, and having them sell when they put them up. At the end of the day, both of those functions are served by the standard players, the non-flippers, so reducing the number of players on the TP would not reduce either of those functions. The transactions that would be reduced would only be those in the middle, the juggling of the items back and forth between its origin and its end, and those transactions benefit nobody by the flippers.

Reducing the number of transactions will mean three things:
1. The general playerbase will get less gold for the items they sell.
2. The general playerbase will pay more gold for the items they buy.
3. Farming will be significantly nerfed so that the general playerbase will be unable to generate as much income.

The poor would get many times poorer, to the point where they would quit.

That is what happens when you reduce trading volume. You widen the margin so that those with money get better deals and those without money get worse deals.

That is also what happens when your primary inflation fighting device is based on transaction volume.

And whether something creates gold or removes it is irrelevant, what matters is who HAS the gold. If an activity generates gold for a player, then it doesn’t matter whether that gold comes from ANet or another player, what matters is that the player has the gold. You may not agree, but accept that this is the position we are coming from. It is impossible to convince us that you are right if your endpoint is “nothing can be a problem unless it is inflationary.” There are plenty of problems that have nothing to do with inflation.

Who has gold is irrelevant. 100% irrelevant.

If that is where your argument is coming from, it’s no wonder it is so very, very wrong on every single level.

Stop caring about what others have and enjoy what you have.

Blude.6812:

Disagree—there is a bug in the code—they just can’t find it.
Kinda like the sudden acceleration problem that Toyota kept denying. How did that work out for them? 1.2 billion!

If the probability that a Precursor drops is 1 in 1,000,000, that doesn’t mean that you will get a Precursor every 1,000,000 kills, it means that across the entire game, the current ratio of kills to Precursors is going to be approximately 1,000,000:1.

Because you’d need to have the data on every single kill and every single drop from every single player in order to make any kind of determination, there is no way that you can say that there is or that there is not a bug.

Ohoni.6057:

Stop raising inflation as though it’s the only concern. “If it doesn’t cause inflation then it can’t be a problem.” Inflation is a problem, but it’s not the only problem that needs to be worried about. The diminishing returns are not needed to prevent inflation, they are needed to prevent people from using that resource too often. Just as certain PvE content needed DR to reduce the amount of farming on them, the TP could benefit from DR too.

Diminishing Returns are used to combat two things in PvE. Inflation is the one that gets talked about most because that’s the one that impacts most players. The other issue is botting which doesn’t get talked about because botters aren’t on here complaining about how they are getting banned/restricted for botting.

Diminishing Returns would not benefit any aspect of the Trading Post and would in fact directly harm the playerbase in aggregate by reducing the number of transactions.

Mono.7320:

Lankybrit.4598:

It’s still convenient. Just go to WvW (any map) and take the Lion’s Arch portal there (takes you to Vigil’s Keep).

alright thanks for the tip because i made lvl1 character today and wanted to leave to metrica but there were no portal in Divinity’s Reach

Just for the record, there was never a portal to Divinity’s Reach in Metrica Province.

Just as before, the method to get to DR is to go to Rata Sum, take the portal to Lion’s Arch (which is currently redirected to the Vigil Keep), and then take the portal to Divinity’s Reach (which, again, is currently in the Vigil Keep).

“Random” means “unable to be predicted” (a definition that is becoming less and less applicable as we expand our knowledge of science and thus can predict things).

Loot is not random, it is dropped from a table with set probabilities. How those probabilities are controlled is through a bit of software known as a “random number generator”, which is an algorithm that seeks to imitate randomness while keeping overall drop rates within the defined probability margins. Everything about getting loot is formulaic, thus not random. That being said, the idea that some accounts are flagged to get more drops makes for a good consolation story to ease your jealousy when you hear about someone else’s fortunate drop, it would be a business practice that quickly lead to the collapse of the game once news of it got out (which it would).

Wanze.8410:

mtpelion.4562:

Doubt it, since that would reduce the number of bag slot expansions sold.

I think the general arguement that Anet wont implement anything, if it would reduce storage space gem purchases got very old and they proved multiple times that this is not the case. The wallet is a prime example, as well as the wardrobe and account bound ascended gear and legendaries.

Do you still get kicks out of posting this?

I said “doubt” because that is my opinion. Bag slots are a monetized aspect of the game, thus I find it unlikely that they will further reduce the demand for one of their revenue items.

The previous changes mentioned all fixed “dumb” things that were wasting space (like currencies that were treated differently or the complicated system for changing skins). Fixing those had the benefit of freeing up space, true, but those changes were quality of life items whereas adding a larger bag would be a direct reduction in demand for a monetized item which is why I don’t find it likely.

As for kicks, I always get one from posting my opinions… that’s kind of why I do it :P
For this specifically, I don’t actually recall ever saying anything about bag space (I may have, as that’s always been my opinion).

Doubt it, since that would reduce the number of bag slot expansions sold.

It comes down to this:

If you care about the speed at which your item will sell, don’t list it but rather sell it to a buy order.

If you care about the price at which your item will sell, list it and don’t worry about undercutting. If you have listed it at an appropriate price, it will eventually sell.

Essence Snow.3194:

DarkSpirit.7046:

LordByron.8369:

Why not Diminishing returns on TP?
The more you buy/sell the more taxes you pay….every part of the game has it

That is already implemented.

It’s a flat tax not a progressive tax.

From a literal interpretation, the more transactions you engage in, the more dollars that will be taxed, thus the more taxes that you will pay.

LordByron obviously intended a different interpretation, which of course would be that the tax rate increases with volume.

LordByron.8369:

Its really nice to often try to derail posts…yet i explicitly said that the demand was infact really high due to an economy-breaking patch that led to this wonderful situation with SIlk more expensive than gossamer (as people predicted easily when they read patchnotes about ascended crafting…)

Aside that the issue was extremely aggravated and shown a clear sign of insider trading.

Expecially since even john Smith admitted there were suspects of insider tradings.

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

Every other part of the game creates pure inflation by spawning money out of thin air and dropping it into your hands.

The Trading Post is simply an exchange where you offer some of your gold/goods for goods/gold at a price you are willing to pay/receive.

That is why there are no diminishing returns on the trading post, it simply isn’t warranted.

DiogoSilva.7089:

Asmodeus.5782:

It’s ‘funny’ how the word exciting is used for the introduction of a system that makes the most interesting and beautiful monsters in the game as boring and predictable as your average public tv programme. Oh look, the fire elemental is going to spontaneously explode in 5 minutes, better grab mah tea. Bleh.

I can understand the arguments against the schedule, but how is the current situation with the API sites any different?

It isn’t.

Some people do have a valid reason to be upset, and those would be the people on highly populated servers that guested around to other highly populated servers every day in order to maximize the number of world bosses killed every day. They are going to be capped now since a finite number of bosses will be spawning on a regular schedule so their overall number of kills per day is going to take a hit.

Most people won’t be affected by this, and with one boss popping every fifteen minutes, the majority of players will actually get more boss kills per day now since they will not only know when the boss arrives, but will also have enough people present to kill the boss.

I think that it wouldn’t hurt to have them keep your connection open for 5 minutes or so after you disconnect, that way if the boss event ends within that 5 minute window you would still get credit for the kill and get your daily bonus chest.