Diak Atoli.2085

> @"LucianDK.8615" said:

> Legendary stat swapping is only really useful if you frequently change spec. and I think mainly jewelry and armor have the most benefit from it. Weapons? Not so much, as different specs mostly use different weapons. But its not like its difficult getting extra jewelry and with a little effort you can craft another armor set. So no, legendaries is mainly only a cosmetic pursuit for Fashion Wars.

The statswapping effect is only really useful for trinkets. Exotic weapons and armor are extremely cheap and perfectly acceptable for testing different state combinations. Ascended weapons and armor are also cheaper to statswap.

Note: This is in comparison to the fold and effort required to make a full set of legendary gear.

> @"EmmetOtter.8542" said:

> When you think of a magical flying beast strong enough to carry a fully armored Knight into battle, you do expect that it magically has unlimited stamina capable of soaring into the stratosphere and flying around the entire globe.

>

> Skyscale falls way short of that.

>

> If 8 tiny wingless reindeer can pull a fat man's sled around the world non-stop in 1 night, you'd think a dragon could do a little better.

>

>

Actually... If you assume certain aspects of mythology to be true, and consider Santa Claus to be Fae, he'd totally kick a dragon's ass in a race.

> @"Heibi.4251" said:

> > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:

> > > @"Heibi.4251" said:

> > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > @"MrPhantasia.5924" said:

> > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > Again .. you have choices if you want either approach, so the complain is not really sensible. It's not like there is only a dozen armor sets in this game. To think THIS game is somehow exceptional as far as these armor designs go ... I don't think that's accurate. Yes, there are skins that show skin ... if you don't like them don't use them. This isn't a question of if there are armor skins that offend you. It's a question of choice ... and you have it. I honestly don't understand what the OP is complaining about .. he posted some example of 'good' armor looks ... many of those looks can be built from many of the choices easily available to all players; the core armor sets in the game are actually VERY tame.

> > > > >

> > > > > There are literally 3 heavy armor chest pieces that both are not revealing or have hideous looking boobplates to make sure you know oh boy there are definitely boobs here.

> > > > >

> > > > > Hunnan T3 cultural, counsel guard, and legendary. Thats it. Three choices out of close to 70 skins. So much choice. And none of it keeps up the pretense of stuff like the Elonian elementalist outfit of at least being similarly revealing for bith genders.

> > > >

> > > > No, there are way more than that. You're being sensational.

> > >

> > > You are correct. There are many many more sets that aren't "boobplates". Getting tired of that term actually. You know, if you really don't want anything resembling a boobplate play asurans, charr, or male characters. That solves the issue. However, that won't satisfy the OP it seems, or some of the posters here.

> > >

> > > Now, when I choose the skin I want I look for aesthetically pleasing, whether it be revealing or not. I loath the boxy looking armor skins. I want mine to be cool looking not utilitarian. This is a fantasy game not real life.

> >

> > It really funny when one stops to consider that the 'boobplate' would actually be historically accurate... If plate armor had ever been made with a female wearer in mind...

>

> I'm trying to remember an article or video that discussed that very concept. In the video/article it was "proven" to be a bad idea. Something about the weakness of the the design due to the protruding round parts. I'm actually serious here, even though this sounds ridiculous. I'll have to see if I can find that.

The YouTube channel Shadiversity actually has several videos discussing female armor and 'boobplates.' I think he makes very logical arguments as to why it would be historically accurate and still effective.

> @"Heibi.4251" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"MrPhantasia.5924" said:

> > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > Again .. you have choices if you want either approach, so the complain is not really sensible. It's not like there is only a dozen armor sets in this game. To think THIS game is somehow exceptional as far as these armor designs go ... I don't think that's accurate. Yes, there are skins that show skin ... if you don't like them don't use them. This isn't a question of if there are armor skins that offend you. It's a question of choice ... and you have it. I honestly don't understand what the OP is complaining about .. he posted some example of 'good' armor looks ... many of those looks can be built from many of the choices easily available to all players; the core armor sets in the game are actually VERY tame.

> > >

> > > There are literally 3 heavy armor chest pieces that both are not revealing or have hideous looking boobplates to make sure you know oh boy there are definitely boobs here.

> > >

> > > Hunnan T3 cultural, counsel guard, and legendary. Thats it. Three choices out of close to 70 skins. So much choice. And none of it keeps up the pretense of stuff like the Elonian elementalist outfit of at least being similarly revealing for bith genders.

> >

> > No, there are way more than that. You're being sensational.

>

> You are correct. There are many many more sets that aren't "boobplates". Getting tired of that term actually. You know, if you really don't want anything resembling a boobplate play asurans, charr, or male characters. That solves the issue. However, that won't satisfy the OP it seems, or some of the posters here.

>

> Now, when I choose the skin I want I look for aesthetically pleasing, whether it be revealing or not. I loath the boxy looking armor skins. I want mine to be cool looking not utilitarian. This is a fantasy game not real life.

It really funny when one stops to consider that the 'boobplate' would actually be historically accurate... If plate armor had ever been made with a female wearer in mind...

> @"Palador.2170" said:

> I would like to remind everyone that when Orr rose from the ocean it created wide-spread destruction, including the flooding of old Lion's Arch.

>

> That should give us a rough idea of what kind of destruction, and at what range, this event should have caused.

Except Orr is an entire continent, where as Dragonfall is three (small?) islands and a mountain ridge. If the impact occurred close to land I could imagine a local tsunami, but nothing even close the raising of Orr.

> @"finkle.9513" said:

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

> > The OP claims multi-mapping is a "loophole." No, it's not: you have to participate in each kill. The OP claims it's not fair that those with faster PCs (processor or load times) have more opportunities, except... even if it were, it's not new: richer people can buy more accounts, more character slots, and have always been able to map hop for kills.

> >

> > I sympathize with the idea that everyone should have equal opportunity. I just don't agree that is something that ANet needs to be hypervigilant about. As long as the rules apply to everyone, as long as active participation is required, I'm happy for those who have the patience to multi-map.

>

> It doesnt matter about this or that... We are talking about this event... It is Factual that a fast computer allows for far better yield in multi mapping....

> I read that quote above from the Dev, and if I honest Im not so convinced they fully understood what was meant.. as there was quiet a debate after in the comments..

> But regardless what that Dev said multi map looting was not against TOS.

> Thats differant to saying its not a Loop hole, I think we are all quiet sure the ability to swap map instances where not designed to kill the same boss over and over due to time delays...

>

> Its not fair.. Its as simple as that.

And? How does one player having a greater yield (In this case an extra bonus box) harm other players? Is there only a finite number of boxes per boss kill?

I see no problem in need of a solution.

> @"Tails.9372" said:

> I want MINIGUNS for warriors, rocket launchers for engineers and submachine guns for thiefs.

As long as my ranger gets an assault rifle, I'm happy.

> @"Westenev.5289" said:

> > @"Rattengeist.8165" said:

> > So what do you suggest should they do about it? Just saying the beetle sucks doesn't help the devs. If you have an idea, you should add it to the post.

>

>

> Add three more thrust devices to the beetle, all in sync, so the beetle can achieve super-sonic flight. What could possibly go wrong?

_Stares at the cliff face._ When did that get so close?

'Does this make me look fat?' - Most dangerous question ever uttered.

> @"Konig Des Todes.2086" said:

> The Hero of Nightfall never led anything more than a few missions, whereas the Commander does lead an elite guild and (despite some "muh spahtlight!" complainers) was indeed second-in-command of an army for a brief time. But at the same time, the Hero of Nightfall seemed far better versed in political matters than the Commander, and could be argued to have not kitten kitten up as much as the Commander with his actions. Whether one did greater acts than the other is up to debate, imo, as their acts of combat feel fairly on par. Though the Hero of Nightfall was definitely a lot more gullible during the majority of their heroic career, while the Commander's quite a bit more reckless.

>

> Comparing the two in a list:

>

> The Hero of Nightfall:

> 1. Greatest acts of combat were killing Abaddon, a full fledged god, with 5 / 8 / 22 allies (depending on whether you consider the canon to be Facing the Truth's show, the party size in GW1, or all henchmen/heroes available + Kormir + PC), imprisoning Dhuum, a former god, with 14 allies (7 reapers, 7 other humans),

> 2. Other major acts include: Killing 3 liches (Khilbron, Fendi, Zoldark), defeating 3 dragon champion heralds, overpowering another ancient dragon (Kuunavang), thwarting an army of constructs empowered by enslaved souls (Shiro'ken), temporarily uniting two nations that waged war for over 1,000 years (Luxons/Kurzicks), renewing the Sunspear order, overthrowing an oppressive cult leadership (White Mantle), annihilated a xenophobic civil warring faction (Stone Summit), eliminated three powerful criminal organizations (Crimson Skull, Am Fah, and Jade Brotherhood), bringing an entire race of powerful spellcasters to a single survivor (Mursaat), overthrowing charr tyrannical leadership (Hierophant Burntsoul) allowing a rebellion to spark, and defeating various powerful entities (Frostmaw, Iron Forgeman, Cyndr, The Darknesses, Duncan, other dungeon and elite mission bosses)

> 3. Greatest follies include: Freeing Joko and helping rebuild the foundation of his forces, left a nation to fall (Ascalon), assisted a xenophobic regime in taking power (Ministry of Purity).

> 4. Did not lead anything but a few missions, was not even part of the small but elite guild they often fought alongside.

> 5. Was very gullible at first, probably until the events of Nightfall.

> 6. By the end of it (Winds of Change), they seem... not really what the right word is... pragmatic, I guess. [This quest in particular shows what I mean](https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Ministry_of_Oppression).

>

> The Commander:

> 1. Greatest acts of combat were killing Zhaitan, an Elder Dragon, with an army, Mordremoth, an Elder Dragon, with an army, and Balthazar, a former god, with a dragon ally and ancient magical weapon.

> 2. Other major acts include: Killing 1 tyrannical lich (Joko), defeating too-many-to-count lesser dragon champions, 1 herald champion (Scarlet), and 9 greater dragon champions (thus far); thwarting an army of constructs empowered by enslaved souls (Forged), uniting three orders that bickered for a few years, renewing the Sunspear order, ending an oppressive cult (White Mantle), killing the last survivor of an endangered species of powerful spellcasters (Lazarus), depowered, but not annihilated, a xenophobic civil warring faction (Flame Legion), depowered but not annihilated a force waging war for 1,000 years (centaurs), depowered but did not overthrow xenophobic government (Moletariate), depowered but not annihilated powerful criminal organizations (Nightmare Court, Sons of Svanir, Inquest).

> NOTE: I do not count raids as the Commander's deeds as Glenna acts as if the raiders are random adventurers at first, but all five raids have been seemingly done by the same group canonically. I do count dungeons as the Commander's deeds though, both story and explorable.

> 3. Greatest follies include: killing two Elder Dragons without realizing the consequences until it was almost (literally) to late and endangered the entire world's existence, allowing a replacement for an Elder Dragon to die (pending....), constantly allowing radical groups (Flame Legion, Inquest, Dredge, centaurs, Nightmare Court, etc.) to reform years later (White Mantle only group wiped out thus far).

> 4. Second-in-Commander and temporarily First-in-Command of a powerful army (Pact), and leader of a small but elite guild.

> 5. Reckless, constantly doing plans that backfire in some way, and overall acting as if they don't ever plan things out when people think they do but manage it anyways.

> 6. The Commander, imo, suffers from depression and anxiety, as evident [here](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Sword_Regrown), [here](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Shining_Blade_Secrets), and throughout the various failed recruitment attempts in S3 (namely [Canach's](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Confessor%27s_End)).

>

> **TL;DR**

> I think the Hero of Nightfall began far more naive, and was both used by various parties and never put into a position of leadership because of such, but ultimately they were more competent fighters who more thoroughly devastated their opponents (even if not the first time, by the second time they were wiped out entirely with the only exception being the White Mantle and charr).

>

> The Commander, on the other hand, was thrown into perpetual larger scale conflicts far faster and earlier on than the Hero of Nightfall, but as a consequence has screwed up a lot more. The Commander also seems a hell of a lot more reckless and lacking plans compared to the Hero of Nightfall, which thankfully tends to work out anyways because ~~plot armor~~ mad skillz.

>

> Or to put it in more simpler terms (aka **TL;DR of TL;DR**):

> * Hero never led; Commander leads

> * Hero was gullible (at first); Commander is reckless (still is)

> * Overtime, Hero became pragmatic; Commander became depressed

> * Hero's actions kitten over nations; Commander's actions kitten over the world

> * Both overpowered AF and able to take down beings no mortal has the right to take down

> * Both tend to fight more or less the same kind of villains (looking at you, Forged'kin!)

I would like to point out that Abaddon's power was never fully realized when the Hero of Nightfall and company defeated him. He was still imprisoned by the Five Gods.

> @"Slowpokeking.8720" said:

> > @"Konig Des Todes.2086" said:

> > 3 Episodes. That's how long "Kralkatorrik's story" has been going on. And that's including the Season 4 finale. Merely the side-focus of an expansion (3 acts) and 3 episodes.

> >

> > Mordremoth was the focus of 8 episodes (Season 2) and an entire expansion, 4 acts. And the growing side-focus of 5 S1 releases.

> >

> > Zhaitan was the focus of effectively 10 chapters' worth of the PS.

> >

> > Primordus got the focus of 2 episodes and side-focus of an expansion in GW1 (4 chapters worth).

> >

> > Kralkatorrik has gotten more direct screentime than the other Elder Dragons, since Mordremoth and Zhaitan only showed up in the instance they die, but Kralkatorrik gotten less plot focus than either Mordremoth or Zhaitan really, and at the moment, just barely more than Primordus.

> >

> > So again, you're rather over-exaggerating the focus on Kralkatorrik, while still exagurating the lack of the quality of that plot.

>

> Not really, his story has started since the 2nd novel, the branded are all cross Ascalon and Elona. And even in this 3 episodes we got little fun. he didn't have memorable minions compare to the other 2. The All or Nothing fight pretty much covered the fight we need to have against him, nothing else is needed.

If the date of first appearance and presence of minions is the standard by which we measure the focus on any particular dragon, we've been focusing on Primordious since for the past twelve years. We were introduced to the Destroyers, including the dragon champion, at the beginning of Guild Wars: Eye of the North, and introduced to Primordious itself in the cinematic after the mission A Time for Heroes.

Compared to how Kralkatorrik and his minions have evolved through the story, I would argue the Destroyers are even more bland and uninteresting.

A CondiSoulbeast build worked very well for me. Had high DPS and plenty of self-healing from Predator's Cunning and Troll Unguent.

> @"Aracz.4702" said:

> > @"Narcemus.1348" said:

> > > @"Aracz.4702" said:

> > > > @"Loesh.4697" said:

> > > > Also i'm not sure why anyone would think Flame Legion, the literal head of the Charr Legions at the time would be poorly equipped or be less hardy then any of the other Charr Legions

> > >

> > > During war time, Flame Legion units were probably better equipped than other Legions, but still, you can see how charr armor looked during gw1 on screens and compare it to gw2 armors or Ebon Vanguard armors. It's like nothing, and this is first clue to assume that Charrs those times weren't capable of manufacturing quality weapons and armors for most of the Army

> >

> > I would like to point out that the same humans that fought them were mostly leathers (looking at ascalonian guards) and some of the humans that went out and slaughtered them were wearing just cloth or in some cases naked tattooed skin...

>

> I konw it's true, I mostly wanted to point the advantage of armor of Ebon Vanguar and current charrs (and probably current humans, cause they are now better equiped too).

> In situation when charr and human don't have armors, and both of them have any kind of weapon, they are like in equal situation. Both can deal huge damage to each other, and who would win depends on other factors than natural strenghts. In GW world, I assume mostly on will to fight, skill and plot ^^

Actually, in an 'all things being equal' scenario, a charr would be far more likely to win. Physically, the average charr has a massive advantage over the average human, standing at least half again as tall as a human with proportionally more muscle.

> @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:

> > How, exactly, has ArenaNet wasted time on Kralkatorik? We haven't even had a full Living World season of dealing with him, much less the season & expansion concerning Mordermoth.

> >

> > As for who has more personality or is more interesting, that merely personal opinion. I don't agree with yours.

>

> Mordremoth, Balthazar and Joko all had personal interaction with the player, moreso for the latter 2 baddies., and I don't think ANET managed to capture the same amount of "personality" with the Branded that they accomplished with the Risen. Maybe it's just me, but going through personal story, it felt like this sea of undead was rising up and we had to take out Zhaitan before we had World War Z Tyria Style. But the Branded? They are just kinda...there? And given we dont really interact with Kralk outside of the last chapter of LS S4, him being the 'villian' just doesn't have the same impact as those mentioned previously.

>

> Again, could just be me, so please correct me if I'm off on this.

>

I agree that so far the Branded, and Kralkatorik by extension, have shown little individual personality. The Risen had some very interesting minor characters, and Mordremoth was compelling in the final mission of Heart of Thorns. However, I find the overarching premise of this force of nature that corrupts its surroundings by its mere presence, something neither Zhaitan or Mordremoth show, to be fascinating. More so than the standard 'dead rising' that was the Risen.

The fact of the matter is, we've only had less than three living world episodes of direct confrontation with Kralkatorik. Only two, if one counts the episode as a whole and not individual parts. Two episodes out of a long personal story, four seasons, and two expansions. Saying that ArenaNet is wasting time on a character they've barely spent any time on at all, even though it's arguably one of the greatest villains in the story, honestly confuses me.

How, exactly, has ArenaNet wasted time on Kralkatorik? We haven't even had a full Living World season of dealing with him, much less the season & expansion concerning Mordermoth.

As for who has more personality or is more interesting, that merely personal opinion. I don't agree with yours.

> @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > @"Rikimaru.7890" said:

> > _The rune and sigil salvaging release last year was in anticipation of releasing legendary runes and sigils—the final components of legendary core equipment._

> >

> > Which I will point out with insufferable smugness is what I predicted last year will happen.

> > Yes, how did I know that?

> > https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/64232/this-is-not-going-to-work-unless

> > Do you think I have a crystal ball hidden somewhere at the back of my head?

> >

> > **Yeah, yeah now someone is going to say "Legendary not Ascended," as if that matters. Even if there won't be ascended too, then it's still going to be the same grind fest that I predicted. I knew this new upgrade salvagaing mechanic will evolve into something like that.**

> >

>

> So if it ends up sucking, we can blame you, yes?

On the other hand, if the implementation is good, we can applaud ANet for taking a bad idea and making it work. It's a win-win!

The OP has failed to present a convincing argument that adding achievements to old content is a problem for the player base. Given the responses in this thread, adding these achievements seems to even have had a positive effect. As such, there's no reason ArenaNet should change their approach.

You can earn keys from the Lvl 10, 40, and 60 Personal Story steps, as well as a 20% chance per map for doing map completion.

Note: The lvl 10 reward is limited to once a week.

Because the game is balanced with regard to mechanics, not story.

> @"Calvsie.3675" said:

> Wait prior to THE GUILD WARS or just prior to the first Guild Wars game?

> Heck going back to 1070 AE sounds fascinating but there is much less interchange among the races...

I have to admit, replaying the Guild Wars storylines within the current engine would be awesome... Then, quite quickly, stale.

> @"Cobra.6509" said:

> > @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > > @"derd.6413" said:

> > > and oceans of salt from ppl who are mad that you rested their progress

> >

> > Yep. Best way to kill a game is to announce a sequel while it's still going.

>

> not working at a sequel, not working at game itself, shout both (non)actions in your customers face, layoff 1/3 of your staff....is best way to ....?

.... Source for ArenaNet not working on Guild Wars 2, or is that just your opinion?

A novel idea, but all I can see is it backfiring.

By retiring all earned achievements and resetting the story back to the beginning, this 'update' will have wiped out the progress of a significant portion of players. Doing so is likely to turn many of those players off from playing the game, as they would have to make up that progress. Porting items/cosmetics over would do little to soften that kind of blow.

As for an engine update, I believe doing so would require the development of a whole new 'game', after which all items and progress would be ported over. Unfortunately, such a measure would be extremely expensive and time-consuming for what might amount to little gain.

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:

> > > @"Randulf.7614" said:

> > > > @"battledrone.8315" said:

> > > > > @"Zohane.7208" said:

> > > > > > @"battledrone.8315" said:

> > > > > > > @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > > > > > > > @"battledrone.8315" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > > > @"Randulf.7614" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > It was always microtransaction heavy ... that's GW2's business model.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Exactly and Istan was a mess. Couldn’t even see what was going on so if nerfing it means a better playing experience then fantastic.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > There is zero link between the nerf and the business model though

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > OH I agree, zones for farming have zero relation to game revenue ... though some people don't understand that.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > yea, you totally cant convert the gold to premium currency, and use it on cashshop items

> > > > > > > > the idea is ludicrous

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Those are gems come from a pool of gems that have been "sold" for gold already, so no revenue is lost.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > lol...do you know how money works? if i buy 20$ of gems, and you have gathered enough gold to convert those 20 $, where does the company

> > > > > > get the last 20$ from? god?

> > > > >

> > > > > Here's how it works, according to information published by Arenanet themselves (l-o-n-g ago):

> > > > > 1. If I buy 800 gems for €10, this creates 800 gems.

> > > > > 2. If I convert them to gold, I effectively sell them to a pool of gems available for others to buy for gold.

> > > > > 3. If you now buy 800 gems with gold, this removes those gems from the pool and transfers them to you. At the same time your gold is added to the pool ov gold available to buy for gems.

> > > > > 4. If you now spend these gems in the gem store, you get one or more items or services, and the gems cease to exist.

> > > > > So, in effect all that's happened is that I spent real cash once, you get items, and some gold was effectively transferred from you to me (albeit indirectly). So in fact there's no double set of transactions here, and no Money lost.

> > > >

> > > > sooo the gems "cease to exist" , but the value they had , somehow dont? if you cant see the issue with this, go to any economist

> > >

> > > The info came from the original gw2 economist FYI

> >

> > This also happens in real world economies.

> >

> > Fiat currency is destroyed by the countries' treasuries, but the economy as a whole still retains that destroyed 'value.' This is because new currency is printed to replace the destroyed currency, depending on whether the treasury wants the value to grow or shrink.

> >

> > Gems and gold act similarly. Gems are destroyed during the gem-gold conversion, and then replaced when players spend real money to buy more. Gold is destroyed through the various gold sinks in game, including gold-gem conversion, and then replaced by liquid gold from drops and reward chests.

>

> That is incorrect. Gems are not destroyed via the gem-gold conversion (unless you are referring to the transaction fee, where it is unclear if the total value of gems gets added into the exchange or not. Or if the amount of gold gained is taxed 15% thus resulting in the full amount of gems entering the exchange but the amount of gold gained is reduced). The only removal of gems from the games economy is when they get spent on gem store items.

I was assuming a transaction fee, yes. Apologies for not making that clear.

> @"Randulf.7614" said:

> > @"battledrone.8315" said:

> > > @"Zohane.7208" said:

> > > > @"battledrone.8315" said:

> > > > > @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > > > > > @"battledrone.8315" said:

> > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Randulf.7614" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > > It was always microtransaction heavy ... that's GW2's business model.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Exactly and Istan was a mess. Couldn’t even see what was going on so if nerfing it means a better playing experience then fantastic.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > There is zero link between the nerf and the business model though

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > OH I agree, zones for farming have zero relation to game revenue ... though some people don't understand that.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > yea, you totally cant convert the gold to premium currency, and use it on cashshop items

> > > > > > the idea is ludicrous

> > > > >

> > > > > Those are gems come from a pool of gems that have been "sold" for gold already, so no revenue is lost.

> > > >

> > > > lol...do you know how money works? if i buy 20$ of gems, and you have gathered enough gold to convert those 20 $, where does the company

> > > > get the last 20$ from? god?

> > >

> > > Here's how it works, according to information published by Arenanet themselves (l-o-n-g ago):

> > > 1. If I buy 800 gems for €10, this creates 800 gems.

> > > 2. If I convert them to gold, I effectively sell them to a pool of gems available for others to buy for gold.

> > > 3. If you now buy 800 gems with gold, this removes those gems from the pool and transfers them to you. At the same time your gold is added to the pool ov gold available to buy for gems.

> > > 4. If you now spend these gems in the gem store, you get one or more items or services, and the gems cease to exist.

> > > So, in effect all that's happened is that I spent real cash once, you get items, and some gold was effectively transferred from you to me (albeit indirectly). So in fact there's no double set of transactions here, and no Money lost.

> >

> > sooo the gems "cease to exist" , but the value they had , somehow dont? if you cant see the issue with this, go to any economist

>

> The info came from the original gw2 economist FYI

This also happens in real world economies.

Fiat currency is destroyed by the countries' treasuries, but the economy as a whole still retains that destroyed 'value.' This is because new currency is printed to replace the destroyed currency, depending on whether the treasury wants the value to grow or shrink.

Gems and gold act similarly. If one assumes a transaction fee, gems are destroyed during the gem-gold conversion as well as when being spent in the gemstore, and then replaced when players spend real money to buy more. Gold is destroyed through the various gold sinks in game, including gold-gem conversion, and then replaced by liquid gold from drops and reward chests.