Shirlias.8104

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > @"Shirlias.8104" said:

> >

> > > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > > In other words, the evidence is that the off-TP trading in those infusions can be explained without considering RMT. If you have evidence that points the other way, I'd be very interested to see it.

> >

> > Since there are no data for both we are discussing about nothing.

> > Whatever you think that most of the transitions which happen not on TP could come from Golds or Cash, there is no outcome.

>

> But there is data. I've been watching people buy and sell the infusions via the exchange since their buy offer price hit 10k. (The posts are still there, so you can take a look, too.) And the primary traders are a tiny group of people and we know how they make their coin.

>

> >

> > But I see that you think that is way more legit to think about "more players which buy things like confetti infusions for gold, instead of money".

> > Your point.

>

> "More legit" — what does that even mean?

>

> I don't see that there's any evidence that RMT is a major factor in off-TP trading. And in-game gold does explain a huge portion of the trades we know about.

>

> Can RMT theoretically have a meaningful impact on the off-market or in-market value of items? sure. Just because we can describe a theory doesn't mean it's worth consideration; there has to be some evidence or lack of other explanation.

There's data from outside the game for both trades ( gold and cash ).

I still fatigue to understand what are you pointing at.

Ps: if you happened to see trades for 10k for the confetti they were those who hit a buyout in order to sell outisde the game ( i feel sorry for those who didn't realize the real value of the item though ), because its price were higher than 10k + taxes. About the kind of trade, both were definitely possible.

And about which one is more used, there's no answer ( unless you expect to find an equal amount of illegal trades on the net, with account names, prices, and so on ).

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> In other words, the evidence is that the off-TP trading in those infusions can be explained without considering RMT. If you have evidence that points the other way, I'd be very interested to see it.

Since there are no data for both we are discussing about nothing.

Whatever you think that most of the transitions which happen not on TP could come from Golds or Cash, there is no outcome.

But I see that you think that is way more legit to think about "more players which buy things like confetti infusions for gold, instead of money".

Your point.

> @"Tanner Blackfeather.6509" said:

> > @"Shirlias.8104" said:

> > > @"Wanze.8410" said:

> > > > @"Shirlias.8104" said:

> > > > Droprate is definitely low ( not sure about a comparison with the chak egg ).

> > > > The fact it isn't on the TP is due to the fact that it's something which is traded outside the game due its value ( real cash ), because there's not control in terms of mail ( there are limits on golds you can send, but not about items ).

> > >

> > > Its traded outside the TP because the player base values it higher than the trading post limit of 10k gold (most of them go for 14-18k gold). While some players may decide to sell it for RMT, plenty of them are traded for other valuable items and gold outside the TP.

> >

> > I don't see how this could not be applied to real cash trades too.

> > Or maybe you simply wanted to say that there are also players which buy outside TP for golds and not real cash ( which is true ).

>

> Your original statement insinuated that the primary reason it isn't on the TP is that it's traded for real money. While I agree that off-TP trades are what's keeping them away from TP, I find it much more likely that the majority of off-TP trades are legitimate traded of item-gold or item-item, as there is an established grey market for that kind of trade.

That's obvious.

If you want to think different and not to consider the irl cash black market be my guest.

This one?

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Box_of_Berserker%27s_Draconic_Armor

I tried to copy the item link and i see no "account bound" nor "soulbound".

I guess it becomes souldbound on craft since there are no tags...

If I were you i would try to open a ticked explaing your situation ( maybe you will get back your materials or they will move the box to another character ).

Are you talking about boxes?

Like https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Box_of_Celestial_Draconic_Armor

The box itself is account bound if the wiki is correct.

Which exotics are soulbound on craft?

> @"Wanze.8410" said:

> > @"Shirlias.8104" said:

> > Droprate is definitely low ( not sure about a comparison with the chak egg ).

> > The fact it isn't on the TP is due to the fact that it's something which is traded outside the game due its value ( real cash ), because there's not control in terms of mail ( there are limits on golds you can send, but not about items ).

>

> Its traded outside the TP because the player base values it higher than the trading post limit of 10k gold (most of them go for 14-18k gold). While some players may decide to sell it for RMT, plenty of them are traded for other valuable items and gold outside the TP.

I don't see how this could not be applied to real cash trades too.

Or maybe you simply wanted to say that there are also players which buy outside TP for golds and not real cash ( which is true ).

No please.

Nekommanders were a mistake to begin with.

I have fun once in a while.

The real problem, as for everything in this game ( and any other game ), is the moment you decide to hit one achievement.

Achievements are meant to let you play, not to have fun ( even though we do have exceptions ).

Imho the sooner you realize that you have to play in order to have fun and not to bend and complain about things like this, the better.

> @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> Imagine the outcry that would ensue if all of the people who had done what was needful to get top tier gear for use in WvW had all of that invalidated by a change to how gear works in WvW. While this might be a good idea, it is long past time where it could be implemented. The ship has sailed.

They should simply not to care about players complaints.

A more balanced equipment and less runes/sigils would be nice ( a definitely lower powercreep ).

> @"Heika.5403" said:

> Taken into account the size of the PvP population in this game, ban stacking will naturally make that players that want to compete with their favorite specialization or the one that they control better try to get it, dispute the right to use it, leave the match if not, etc. How leave the match at that point must be punished being ranked, the final consequency will have the mayority of PvP players avoiding to play rankeds less the hardcore minority. Or in other words, an empty ranked queue with the same few players there matching between them all the time and the unranked queue plenty of players and healthier.

>

> But hey, if that is what you want go with it. What you can be sure is that you can't force people to play what they don't want.

You will be able to play the class you want.

Simply you won't be put together with another class like yours.

Feel free to explain how this will be forcing you into playing different.

> @"BlaqueFyre.5678" said:

> > @"Wolfric.9380" said:

> > Matchmaker already avoids stacking and distributes between sides. It is way better then befor that poll to lock or not class swap.

> > There is no need to limit it to only one. Double of the same class will happen if a class is played more often, which is usually due to being OP .... But even with this happening if they are not stacked on one side it shall even out in the long run.

> > What is a problem is if MMR is not measured on personal performance. But this is hard to do. At least MMR win/loss should depend on the team averages and thus always be nearly the same, and not on personal MMR compared to oposing team average. And it will be much more accurate if class MMR is used.

> >

>

> Except the Mm is being exploited by players to overstack the team with certain classes, players queue on say undesirable classes like Revenant/Ele to have the MM not place another of those classes on their team and then they swap to an overtuned class that is desirable to have multiples of.

>

> They need to stop Class swapping and stacking, the sad thing is whoever wrote the Poll for preventing class swapping worded it worse than a 3rd grader and I’m pretty sure based on the average trend of the Gw2 Forum goer half of them probably didn’t understand either option being presented.

Oh right, i should have explained how the class stack works just to be sure ( i gave it for granted ).

You are definitely wrong.

In a hypothetical scenario with balanced classes it would be the way you say.

But it's not this way since the release of the game, class stacking is definitely an issue ( or exploit if you prefer. Because players tend to play a specific class not to build different setups, but to stop because the class given ).

And It's not me.

You could simply check the most HR/LR for every single season, but you probably remember this if you played at least some of them.

About the queue tries you talk, they were done in a different scenario which saw solo + duoq and 5v5.

In a soloq scenario, the 1x class limit will not bring any sensible extra queue.

And remember that with the current queue they have to deal matchmaking also with 2players premade, so if you remove that part too you will get even a faster queue because the only thing which will count will be the class and the rating.

Also I hope that you understand that being ok with class stacking you are putting a choice before balance.

I really do.

> @"rank eleven monk.9502" said:

> > @"Shirlias.8104" said:

> >

> > I don't get you.

> >

> > 60% is almost a 50% as 40% is almost a 50%.

> > And just because you can't have 2 1/2 classes.

> My question is simple: why is it wrong to have 2 of the same classes in one team?

Was this your question?

Whatever, many are the reasons

* It kills diversity ( mostly due to the absence of balance, but this since the core game with elementalists and engineers ) in terms of played classes and strategies.

* It does not allow other classes to be played, becuase of better setups ( why another class when bringing 2x of this one is way better? different is the situation if you are forbidden to bring 2 or more of the same class ).

* As somebody said, before this was impossible due to the queue features. But now they changed it ( and hopefully they are going to put an end to duoq in ranked ) having 1x class will not mean long queues.

There are only positive things about given these premises

* SPvP WvW and PvE not separated in terms of skills

* We have to wait too much for a balancing patch, which most of the time does not bring balance ( due to the previous point. I still think it's not SPvP team's fault ) but simply a change of meta ( which will result in a new broken class which will appear 2x or 3x ).

* SPvP team has low resources. As for WvW. This is related to the second point, and it results into some **MEH** changes ( like conditions ).

If you want to play you class you will still be able to do this.

If you want to play with more of the same classes into your team, you are definitely exploiting with classes balance ( by pretending this ).

edit: or better here's a questions

Knowing the fact that allowing 2x or more classes brings more disadvantages and balance than 1x class, why, if you like competitive SPvP, would you desire this?

> @"rank eleven monk.9502" said:

> > @"Shirlias.8104" said:

> > > @"rank eleven monk.9502" said:

> > > > @"Shirlias.8104" said:

> > > > And btw 2x is wrong as more, because 2x in a 5v5 scenario is almost a 50% of the same class, and it's definitely wrong.

> > > This logic though.

> > >

> > > Care to elaborate? :D

> > >

> >

> > * 5 classes per team

> > * 20% covered by each player

> > * 2 classes = 40%

> > * 40% is almost a 50% ( as 3x, which is 60%, is almost 50% ).

> >

> > There's no way to get a full 50%, but from 40% and 60% there's a 10% difference, so be my guest.

> I meant you said 'is almost a 50% of the same class, and it's definitely wrong'

>

> Why is it wrong? There is no factual right or wrong in this case.

I don't get you.

60% is almost a 50% as 40% is almost a 50%.

And just because you can't have 2 1/2 classes.

> @"Mr Godlike.6098" said:

> > @"Shirlias.8104" said:

> > Waiting time could incrase at first, but since now we are going toward soloq, the queue won't be a problem at all.

> > And btw 2x is wrong as more, because 2x in a 5v5 scenario is almost a 50% of the same class, and it's definitely wrong.

> >

> > So the modifies would be

> >

> > * 1x class per team.

> > * Change character before the match removed ( instead, there should be different builds avaible in order to change strategy ).

>

> Sorry just no - even if class stacking was banned some team comps will just instantly be stomped

Then it would be a problem balance related, and every team would be able to do the same setup if that so performant.

The scenario would be

* 1x class

* A more performant setup than another ( like any other game, but let's procede ).

So, players will queue with classes related to that setup probably ( 5 classes out of 9 ).

Players from both teams.

The only difference is that we will have 2 problems less

* No more class stack

* No more class change, which will result into a class stack

The fact that there would be a better setup doesn't deny the improvement in terms of balance that the game could have.

And it is something which we happened to see with the beginning of HoT, as for PoF.

As for now ( necros and firebrand mostly, and also mirages ).

> @"rank eleven monk.9502" said:

> > @"Shirlias.8104" said:

> > And btw 2x is wrong as more, because 2x in a 5v5 scenario is almost a 50% of the same class, and it's definitely wrong.

> This logic though.

>

> Care to elaborate? :D

>

* 5 classes per team

* 20% covered by each player

* 2 classes = 40%

* 40% is almost a 50% ( as 3x, which is 60%, is almost 50% ).

There's no way to get a full 50%, but from 40% and 60% there's a 10% difference, so be my guest.

> @"MarshallLaw.9260" said:

> > @"Shirlias.8104" said:

> > * Change character before the match removed

>

> This has been addressed multiple times; general consensus was that the playerbase wanted to keep options of character picking. As a result this is **very** unlikely to change in the foreseeable future as it will go against majority vote.

> Please consider that before beating this dead horse of a subject.

>

This was before the ranked changes ( i ask you not to forget this, because it's the point of everything ).

Now if they will pursue this way

> In Season 9, players ranked Platinum 2 (1,600) and above can no longer duo-queue in Ranked matches while seasons are active.

They have to give it the last adjustement, which will be

> ranked only for solo whatever the rank.

This because players can definitely exploit by playing duoq then decide to lose rank while near platinum in order to stomp ( and it happens, and has to be stopped ).

Fixed that part, they should face the problems related to class stacking.

And since the only conquest queue will be the soloq, there won't be any difference in queue times ( maybe just at the beginning, because some pretends to play unbalanced high reward low risk braindead classes ), and there will instead be more diversity and balance.

Just be sure to have redimed the item ( let's say a mini, which needs to be add to wardrobe account ) before deleting a character.

Waiting time could incrase at first, but since now we are going toward soloq, the queue won't be a problem at all.

And btw 2x is wrong as more, because 2x in a 5v5 scenario is almost a 50% of the same class, and it's definitely wrong.

So the modifies would be

* 1x class per team.

* Change character before the match removed ( instead, there should be different builds avaible in order to change strategy ).

epic thread

I don't get the issues with Servers, WvW apart.

If you really love to lvling and exploration, then forget mounts.

They will definitely ruin your CORE and HOT experience.

It's nonsense to get mounts and claim to love exloration, because mounts will allow you to skip content, take the easier path and so on.

> @"MyPuppy.8970" said:

> Looks like everyone seems to have lost hope :)

Pupupupu...

Worst possible balance patch scenario

* Magi Neck not removed

* Confusion still works on AA and has a persistent dot

* Corrupted boons still have a long duration, bad converion match and weakness feast is still a thing