Diak Atoli.2085
-
Posts
496 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by Diak Atoli.2085
-
-
> @"kharmin.7683" said:
> > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > @"Ashantara.8731" said:
> > > WvW is also highly populated by Warriors and Engineers, and you see a moderate number of Revenants and Mesmers, too. In small scale groups, you have Rangers and Thieves as well.
> > >
> > > As for PvP, I haven't played that in years, because it's bad in every regard.
> > >
> > > PvE, like strikes, also has a healthy mix of professions.
> >
> > I've seen more Rangers in strikes than anything else, really.
>
> You're welcome. ;)
I'm usually one of them, so that might change things... :p
-
> @"Ashantara.8731" said:
> WvW is also highly populated by Warriors and Engineers, and you see a moderate number of Revenants and Mesmers, too. In small scale groups, you have Rangers and Thieves as well.
>
> As for PvP, I haven't played that in years, because it's bad in every regard.
>
> PvE, like strikes, also has a healthy mix of professions.
I've seen more Rangers in strikes than anything else, really.
-
I'll start raiding if ArenaNet introduces a scaling mechanic so that I don't need a ten-person squad.
-
> @"Yasai.3549" said:
> Thieves need cooldowns. End of story.
> They were designed with proper execution and planning in mind when given Initiative, but what we got in the end was extreme frontloading of skills to the point that other Professions cannot hope to keep up.
>
> Thief vs other Professions is just like a guy who is playing a Card game, except instead of playing a set amount of cards per turn, he straight up combos his whole deck in the first turn.
>
> Some might call this broken, or cheating even.
Of course, you're forgetting the part where the combo is countered or nullified, and the combo player is then punished for the rest of the game by the other players...
-
What's Twitch?
-
> @"Exalted Quality.8534" said:
> in general, they listen to what people are wingeing the most about on forums (squeaky wheel gets the grease).
>
> for this update, they went super lazy and just pained a broad stroke over anything that heals or ccs not considering how useless certain skills already were (did you really need to nerf renegade shortbow..smh)
>
> also, the fact that dh/fb doesn’t yet have a tradeoff is ludicrous.
If it was based on the forums, every class would deal 10~ dps and have 50 health...
-
> @"Pterikdactyl.7630" said:
> Ever since somebody here suggested the idea of a scepter being used as a whip, I have wanted it to be a thing for Ranger.
Lightning Whip! Elementalists already have it with dagger, so there's precedent. Make it 600 range, and we're golden.
-
Yeah, no. Even if we get a new race, I would still say no to this proposal.
-
> @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > > > @"Dark Red Killian.3946" said:
> > > > Plus a scrapper can’t use a sword, while a holosmith can’t use a hammer, so a build technically can’t use any weapon it wants. Same with a third elite spec. It won’t be able to use a hammer and sword, but it will use its new weapon.
> > >
> > > A thief can't use a staff either, oh, wait...
> >
> > A Thief can't use a staff. A Daredevil can, though.
>
> So Daredevil isn't an Elite Spec for a Thief? I'm going to have double check mine, because I was sure that it was.
A Thief can't use staff, rifle, or 'insert weapon here.' A Daredevil can use staff, but not rifle or 'insert weapon here.' A Deadeye can use rifle, but not staff or 'insert weapon here.' A 'insert e-spec here' can use 'insert weapon here,' but not staff or rifle...
The OP asked why people were excited for new e-specs. The above is an example of one of the reasons: E-specs offer ways to play a particular class, different (hopefully) from the base class or other e-specs.
-
> @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > @"Dark Red Killian.3946" said:
> > Plus a scrapper can’t use a sword, while a holosmith can’t use a hammer, so a build technically can’t use any weapon it wants. Same with a third elite spec. It won’t be able to use a hammer and sword, but it will use its new weapon.
>
> A thief can't use a staff either, oh, wait...
A Thief can't use a staff. A Daredevil can, though.
-
> @"SkyCakeLight.3750" said:
> Because I like Engineer and want more Engineer.
Because I like Ranger and want more Ranger, you mean. ;)
-
The necromancers are coming out of the woodwork now, aren't they?
-
> @"GHOST.8609" said:
> > @"Jilora.9524" said:
> > Yeah either take 8500 with sell it now. Risk chance getting scammed or wasting time in black market to get more or keep it cause I doubt Anet ever bumping up that cap. And if they did to say 15k then 20 buy orders would be 15k and the black market price would still be more. You got super lucky and would of been fine if you hit sell instantly after drop but now want everything adjusted because you didn't and found out you can get more but it's a pain.
>
> In case if you had not noticed I said I wont sell it anymore, but wanted that cap increase players who get it and do not want to sell it in black market can sell it easily and reliably. Black market will remain a increase cap or not, lot of legendaries are being traded there but at 90% or 80% of the tp price but for chak egg you allmost get 50% in tp and that is unfair to people won a lottery and people with buy order with good rep in those community are making 10k profit so yeah do the math.
Players who get it can sell it easily and reliably. If they don't like the price that reliability costs, they can use the grey market. Raising the BLTC gold limit is not a bad thing, but I see no compelling reason to.
-
> @"Taelac.7036" said:
> *throws money at screen*
_Throws gold bricks at screen._. Ah, wait...
-
> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > @"zombyturtle.5980" said:
> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > > > > > > Either way, buying gems with gold doesn't deny ArenaNet any money and buying templates with either gold-to-gems or gems is a recorded transaction. If there are enough transactions regarding a particular product, it's reasonable for a business to assume the product is 'successful.'
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It does deny them money as they don’t receive any from that transaction.
> > > > > > They don't receive any from that transaction anyway. The purchase price is in _gems_, not real cash or gold. They receive money from players buying gems for real cash, which _does_ happen in this case. The difference lies only in which person does the buying.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > So then you agree that they don’t receive any revenue through gold->gem transactions.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, the specific gold->gems transaction doesn't generate revenue, but the exchange system as a whole does. The system started with a pool of gems and a pool of gold at launch. Since then, all* gems entering the exchange have been bought with real money. That is why the gold->gem transaction doesn't deny them revenue.
> > > >
> > >
> > > But they do not receive as much revenue as if players would have purchased the gems with money in order to purchase the equipment template slots.
> > >
> > > Me purchasing 8000 gems with gold in order to purchase equipment build slots is unlikely to change the exchange rate and entice someone to purchase gems to exchange for gold. This is $800 in revenue that Anet loses out on.
> >
> > >
> > Maybe not you individually but all players across both servers will. If enough people buy gems with gold to get build templates, gems will cost more gold; enticing people to buy gems to sell for gold. Its not complicated..
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> If 8000 gems isn’t reflected then how would you expect more purchases to be reflected enough so that Anet isn’t taking a loss in revenues from gold->gem purchases over money->gem purchases? That’s the whole point.
>
> > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > > > > > > Either way, buying gems with gold doesn't deny ArenaNet any money and buying templates with either gold-to-gems or gems is a recorded transaction. If there are enough transactions regarding a particular product, it's reasonable for a business to assume the product is 'successful.'
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It does deny them money as they don’t receive any from that transaction.
> > > > > > They don't receive any from that transaction anyway. The purchase price is in _gems_, not real cash or gold. They receive money from players buying gems for real cash, which _does_ happen in this case. The difference lies only in which person does the buying.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > So then you agree that they don’t receive any revenue through gold->gem transactions.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, the specific gold->gems transaction doesn't generate revenue, but the exchange system as a whole does. The system started with a pool of gems and a pool of gold at launch. Since then, all* gems entering the exchange have been bought with real money. That is why the gold->gem transaction doesn't deny them revenue.
> > > >
> > >
> > > But they do not receive as much revenue as if players would have purchased the gems with money in order to purchase the equipment template slots.
> > >
> > > Me purchasing 8000 gems with gold in order to purchase equipment build slots is unlikely to change the exchange rate and entice someone to purchase gems to exchange for gold. This is $800 in revenue that Anet loses out on.
> > >
> > > > As for why expansions are not sold in the gemstore, I don't know. Possibly because more revenue is generated this way, possibly because it might completely tank the gem exchange.
> > > > *Minus gems received from achievement rewards.
> > >
> > > Most likely because they receive more revenue.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I think the part left off the quote may be more relevant, but just because one person's exchange does visibly effect the rate, doesn't mean _multiple_ people doing the same thing won't either.
> >
> > Also, the exchange isn't just limited to templates. You have to take into account all the other items people are exchanging gold for, as well as all those who want to buy gold through 'official' means.
> >
> > ... And now I have a headache, which probably explains why I slept through college economics ten years ago...
>
> Oh. Looks like I did accidentally delete something from your post as I was edited my response.
>
> What I said to the person above goes for this as well. If you feel that Anet will be equally compensated from X amount of players converting Y amount of gold to gems as if they had purchased that same amount of gems with money then by all means provide your evidence.
>
> Or have Astralporing do it as they made the original claim.
>
But I'm having fun debating! ;)
Now, to be clear: My position is that the exchange does not deny them revenue, period. They still make money whether gemstore items (templates) are purchased with gems from either money or gold. That they might earn less revenue is entirely possible.
Further, neither of us (A correct assumption?) knows exactly how the exchange rate works beyond the basic provided by the wiki. It's possible the system has a time lapse before it updates the rate, it might adjust based on the totals of both gems and gold and not just the ratio, etc.
All that being said, I'm interested to see if math can support my view. However, it'll take a while (Math! O.o) and I'm currently at work. Apologies for the likely delay.
-
> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > > > > Either way, buying gems with gold doesn't deny ArenaNet any money and buying templates with either gold-to-gems or gems is a recorded transaction. If there are enough transactions regarding a particular product, it's reasonable for a business to assume the product is 'successful.'
> > > > >
> > > > > It does deny them money as they don’t receive any from that transaction.
> > > > They don't receive any from that transaction anyway. The purchase price is in _gems_, not real cash or gold. They receive money from players buying gems for real cash, which _does_ happen in this case. The difference lies only in which person does the buying.
> > > >
> > >
> > > So then you agree that they don’t receive any revenue through gold->gem transactions.
> >
> > Yes, the specific gold->gems transaction doesn't generate revenue, but the exchange system as a whole does. The system started with a pool of gems and a pool of gold at launch. Since then, all* gems entering the exchange have been bought with real money. That is why the gold->gem transaction doesn't deny them revenue.
> >
>
> But they do not receive as much revenue as if players would have purchased the gems with money in order to purchase the equipment template slots.
>
> Me purchasing 8000 gems with gold in order to purchase equipment build slots is unlikely to change the exchange rate and entice someone to purchase gems to exchange for gold. This is $800 in revenue that Anet loses out on.
>
> > As for why expansions are not sold in the gemstore, I don't know. Possibly because more revenue is generated this way, possibly because it might completely tank the gem exchange.
> > *Minus gems received from achievement rewards.
>
> Most likely because they receive more revenue.
>
>
I think the part left off the quote may be more relevant, but just because one person's exchange does visibly effect the rate, doesn't mean _multiple_ people doing the same thing won't either.
Also, the exchange isn't just limited to templates. You have to take into account all the other items people are exchanging gold for, as well as all those who want to buy gold through 'official' means.
... And now I have a headache, which probably explains why I slept through college economics ten years ago...
-
> @"Kodama.6453" said:
> > @"Aaron Forestman.4758" said:
> > > @"Kodama.6453" said:
> > > Soulbeast gave up absolutely nothing, they just got another button added to their gameplay. They needed to get brought in line with other elite spec designs and removing pet swap during combat fits both gameplaywise and thematically. It was a good change.
> >
> > I've been quite confused about this update since they first revealed where they were going with soulbeast. It's had a tradeoff since PoF first came out, one of the most glaring ones out there: when you merge to get your extra skills/stats, you don't have your pet there anymore. That seems like a pretty explicit tradeoff to me.
>
> Not exactly.
>
> The thing with Soulbeast was that they were able to play like a core Ranger. Nothing was forcing you to merge with your pet, you could have your pet out attacking all the time if you want it to. So even if the pet disappears when merging, it is not really a trade off. It is giving you another option you _can_ use if you desire and it benefits you, but you still had the choice.
> And having additional choices is always good. It was not really a disadvantage for you to get the option to merge with your pet.
>
> Other classes had to actually really give something up permanently, without the option to chose. The equivalent of what the Soulbeast had for the Necromancer, as an example, would have been not to replace his death shroud with reapers shroud, but giving him **both** shrouds available, with death shroud staying on F1 and reapers shroud becoming a new F2 button.
> It would have been the same situation like the Soulbeast. Both shrouds consume your life force, so you won't be able to use both shrouds too frequently because of your lacking resource. But having the option to either use death shroud or reapers shroud would have been an advantage and there wouldn't have been a trade off anymore.
>
> Another example: Holosmith
> If Holosmith would have the same "trade off" Soulbeast had back then, then they wouldn't have replaced his F5 skill with the Holoforge, but give it to him as a F6 skill instead. Because by your logic he obviously had a trade off since using Holoforge would replace your weapon skills with the Holoforge skills, meaning you can't use your weapons in this mode. But this isn't a trade off in their sense, Holosmith would still have all the same stuff the Engineer has, but more, thanks to the Holoforge.
>
> This is the thing here. Giving up something _permanently_, meaning that it is not at all available to you anymore. Many classes already had such system before Soulbeast got theirs.
> Scrapper and Holosmith give up their F5 skill permanently (Scrapper additionally has permanent 180 vitality removed)
> Reaper and Scourge give up their death shroud on F1
> Firebrands and Dragonhunters give up their virtues on F1-F3
> And so on. Soulbeast never really gave up a mechanic, they just got another button added, but they still had everything avaiable at their disposal as the Ranger.
Beastmode also revived your pet on a 10-second cooldown, where as core ranger had a 60-second cooldown when swapping a downed pet. Unless I'm misremembering, that was patched in PvP/WvW though.
-
> @"Yasai.3549" said:
> Lol I remembered there was some other thread where someone was suggesting that Beastmode should let the Soulbeast have an extra attack to compensate for the loss of the pet.
> I thought that thread was a big hee hee but this one is even better lmao.
I know, right? It's like merging with your pet doesn't give you any benefits at all, such as extra stats, skills, or all those wonderful traits in Beastmastery... Oh, wait...
-
> @"Jimbru.6014" said:
> My seven-plus years old main is a male human ranger. My only regret is that if I had known more lore back when I made him, I might have made him a different race.
>
> My male Asura warrior has one small regret: as a melee class, he gets lost in the dogpile easily. It's hard to avoid damage when I can't even see my own toon amid the horde of bodies sharing the same few square meters of space beating on Drakkar, just for example.
>
> The one character I truly regret making was a female Norn Revenant. She started with a RP idea but after getting her to 80, I could not find a build I was happy with, hated having to constantly swap spirits, and ended up deleting her as a waste of time.
Offtopic: You can adjust the character model limit so that there fewer characters in the dogpile when doing large scale events. Also, it does wonders for FPS.
-
> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > > Either way, buying gems with gold doesn't deny ArenaNet any money and buying templates with either gold-to-gems or gems is a recorded transaction. If there are enough transactions regarding a particular product, it's reasonable for a business to assume the product is 'successful.'
> > >
> > > It does deny them money as they don’t receive any from that transaction.
> > They don't receive any from that transaction anyway. The purchase price is in _gems_, not real cash or gold. They receive money from players buying gems for real cash, which _does_ happen in this case. The difference lies only in which person does the buying.
> >
>
> So then you agree that they don’t receive any revenue through gold->gem transactions.
Yes, the specific gold->gems transaction doesn't generate revenue, but the exchange system as a whole does. The system started with a pool of gems and a pool of gold at launch. Since then, all* gems entering the exchange have been bought with real money. That is why the gold->gem transaction doesn't deny them revenue.
It's entirely possible the exchange is/was generating more revenue for the gemstore than if it didn't exist. I'm honestly not sure.
As for why expansions are not sold in the gemstore, I don't know. Possibly because more revenue is generated this way, possibly because it might completely tank the gem exchange.
*Minus gems received from achievement rewards.
-
> @"Safandula.8723" said:
> > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > @"Safandula.8723" said:
> > > > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > @"Linken.6345" said:
> > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"Safandula.8723" said:
> > > > > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > @"Safandula.8723" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > @"TwoGhosts.6790" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry you wasted your money. ?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > So am I. The more people pay them for this system, the less chance we'll ever get a good and working one.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > i didnt pay single penny for that. Still 500 gold hurts. but thats not even a problem, i can spend another 500 if i could make it on the same character, and wouldnt have to craft another set of armor and weapons.
> > > > > > > > > > You didn't pay for this directly, but Anet still got paid. Remember, buying gems for gold also puts real money in Anet's pockets. Anyone buying into the current system, whether using gems bought with real money, or with gold, is supporting the system as it is, and sending Anet the message that "all is fine, carry on as if nothing happened".
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > How do they actually get money if u transfer gold to gems? Im curious now
> > > > > > > > They don't get them from you, but **they get them from people that bought gems for real money then sold them for gold**. In the end the gems used to purchase those slots were still bought for RL money by someone. Just not by you.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Which has nothing to do with buying equipment slots with gold.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes it does for you to be able to buy gems for gold.
> > > > > > Someone must have sold their gems for gold in the first place.
> > > > >
> > > > > No. That realistically only impacts the exchange rate.
> > > >
> > > > It could be argued that the impact on the exchange rate can influences others to buy gems to convert to gold.
> > > >
> > > > Either way, buying gems with gold doesn't deny ArenaNet any money and buying templates with either gold-to-gems or gems is a recorded transaction. If there are enough transactions regarding a particular product, it's reasonable for a business to assume the product is 'successful.'
> > >
> > > Its like saying that Nissan quashqai is succesfull product, becouse Nissans primavera are sold well.
> >
> > ... I have no idea what those are.
>
> Neither do i but it doesnt matter. Fact that PPL are actively spending money on 1 product of some company doesnt mean, other product of this company is succesfull as well
I think you skipped over a part of my post.
>**buying templates** with either gold-to-gems or gems is a recorded transaction.
People are actively purchasing one product with a single currency. The transaction doesn't care where that currency comes from. With enough purchases (transactions), it's reasonable to assume **that product** is successful.
-
> @"Safandula.8723" said:
> > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > @"Linken.6345" said:
> > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > > > @"Safandula.8723" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"Safandula.8723" said:
> > > > > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > @"TwoGhosts.6790" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry you wasted your money. ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > So am I. The more people pay them for this system, the less chance we'll ever get a good and working one.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > i didnt pay single penny for that. Still 500 gold hurts. but thats not even a problem, i can spend another 500 if i could make it on the same character, and wouldnt have to craft another set of armor and weapons.
> > > > > > > > You didn't pay for this directly, but Anet still got paid. Remember, buying gems for gold also puts real money in Anet's pockets. Anyone buying into the current system, whether using gems bought with real money, or with gold, is supporting the system as it is, and sending Anet the message that "all is fine, carry on as if nothing happened".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How do they actually get money if u transfer gold to gems? Im curious now
> > > > > > They don't get them from you, but **they get them from people that bought gems for real money then sold them for gold**. In the end the gems used to purchase those slots were still bought for RL money by someone. Just not by you.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Which has nothing to do with buying equipment slots with gold.
> > > >
> > > > Yes it does for you to be able to buy gems for gold.
> > > > Someone must have sold their gems for gold in the first place.
> > >
> > > No. That realistically only impacts the exchange rate.
> >
> > It could be argued that the impact on the exchange rate can influences others to buy gems to convert to gold.
> >
> > Either way, buying gems with gold doesn't deny ArenaNet any money and buying templates with either gold-to-gems or gems is a recorded transaction. If there are enough transactions regarding a particular product, it's reasonable for a business to assume the product is 'successful.'
>
> Its like saying that Nissan quashqai is succesfull product, becouse Nissans primavera are sold well.
... I have no idea what those are.
-
> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:
> > Either way, buying gems with gold doesn't deny ArenaNet any money and buying templates with either gold-to-gems or gems is a recorded transaction. If there are enough transactions regarding a particular product, it's reasonable for a business to assume the product is 'successful.'
>
> It does deny them money as they don’t receive any from that transaction.
>
Not that specific transaction, no. However, it's two different transactions that are generating the money. First, another player buys gems and then converts them into gold. Our template-buyer then converts gold to gems. Because of the way the exchange rate works, these two transactions generate money while removing more gold from the in-game economy than was introduced.
-
> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > @"Linken.6345" said:
> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > @"Safandula.8723" said:
> > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > > > @"Safandula.8723" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"TwoGhosts.6790" said:
> > > > > > > > > I'm sorry you wasted your money. ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So am I. The more people pay them for this system, the less chance we'll ever get a good and working one.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > i didnt pay single penny for that. Still 500 gold hurts. but thats not even a problem, i can spend another 500 if i could make it on the same character, and wouldnt have to craft another set of armor and weapons.
> > > > > > You didn't pay for this directly, but Anet still got paid. Remember, buying gems for gold also puts real money in Anet's pockets. Anyone buying into the current system, whether using gems bought with real money, or with gold, is supporting the system as it is, and sending Anet the message that "all is fine, carry on as if nothing happened".
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > How do they actually get money if u transfer gold to gems? Im curious now
> > > > They don't get them from you, but **they get them from people that bought gems for real money then sold them for gold**. In the end the gems used to purchase those slots were still bought for RL money by someone. Just not by you.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Which has nothing to do with buying equipment slots with gold.
> >
> > Yes it does for you to be able to buy gems for gold.
> > Someone must have sold their gems for gold in the first place.
>
> No. That realistically only impacts the exchange rate.
It could be argued that the impact on the exchange rate can influences others to buy gems to convert to gold.
Either way, buying gems with gold doesn't deny ArenaNet any money and buying templates with either gold-to-gems or gems is a recorded transaction. If there are enough transactions regarding a particular product, it's reasonable for a business to assume the product is 'successful.'
About the Engineer's Flamethrower
in Professions
Posted
> @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> The flamethrower is a hybrid weapon, not just condi (AA does ~ 2x the damage of the "power" rifle in the same amount of time I believe). I hope you're running vipers or similar, or it's gonna be really lackluster in PvE.
I think Grieving stats with Runes of the Flame Legion would be the best option for camping flamethrower.