ROMANG.1903

> @"BlackBeard.2873" said:

> > @"bOTEB.1573" said:

> > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > > @"bOTEB.1573" said:

> > > > Now, with that said, I don't know how Anet may fix it because ele is super complex but the most reasonable solution for me is a complete rework + building the next elite spec while keeping in mind all these things.

> > >

> > > Is this the point of this thread? To find solution to the Elementalist problems?

> >

> > We are giving suggestions based on our concerns (which I think is the point of this thread). How and if Anet will make any changes is a completely different story.

>

> **What players will do:** Give well thought out suggestions that come from hours of experience and thought about ways to improve an ailing class, with the hope that devs will listen and implement some desired changes.

>

> **What Devs will do:** "lol, shatterstone does +15% damage....ele is now fixed!"

I really hope they don't go this way. Even if that may be their first time doing it, a major rework of a few mechanics is, I think, what the ele needs.

* Several people have asked for Conjured Weapons to use a charges system, sometimes even suggesting removing the time limit before the weapon automatically drops to avoid being cut off in our combos. It's not a good idea to stick to a weapon for too long anyway. This may work, with the last charge only starting to reload after you dropped the weapon in order to balance things out. Sharing the weapon is an outdated system that brings nothing to the table, simply because the ele knows better than you how to use the weapon, so it's always better to keep it for them. It's as if the engineer could give their kits to someone else instead of using it themselves...

* I find weapons like the scepter and the focus could use a full rework. This is personnal, but air #2 feels stressful to use because you can't pre-cast it (pressing the button before the cooldown is ready so the skill is used as soon as it becomes avalaible). So you have to watch the cooldown closely and spam it if you want to optimize the rotation. Why not give it a second charge (while removing a little bit of damage if necessary for balance purpose)? That would allow to "load" your burst when you're not in Air attunement, without rewarding staying in Air attunement for a long time.

> @"Linken.6345" said:

> > @"Llethander.3972" said:

> > > @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > > > @"Llethander.3972" said:

> > > > > @"Buran.3796" said:

> > > > > Please, if you still find the skin system hard go try some other MMOs, in most of them you can't avoid to look like a hobo without spending real money. Plus in most of them every time they release a new expansion your stats automatically become trash and you need to grind new levels and gear to even been able to play top content.

> > > >

> > > > WoW's Transmog system would like to have a word with you. In-game cost for in-game cosmetic changes. I think it works quite nicely and, heck, it even doubles as another gold sink to remove currency from the economy.

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > One thing that Blizzard is terrible at is managing the gold economy / sinks. This is evidenced by them introducing new mounts each expansion for outrageous sums of gold (5M I think in the new one?)

> > >

> > > ANET is pretty good with money sinks though; if nothing else, the entire Legendary crafting process drains tons of gold out of the economy, mostly through TP fees and having to buy expensive items from vendors (*glares at icy runestones)

> > >

> > > So with that in mind, while in Wow the gold cost to transmute is pretty trivial, imagine how expensive it would be if ANET decided to use your idea? Keep in mind, to craft a simple 18 slot bag costs you 2 gold for the rune of holding.

> >

> > I'm not sure how to respond when you call the cost both trivial and expensive in the same sentence...

>

> Well if you read said sentence they say that the transmute in one game is trivial but in the other it wont be since just a rune for a not max slot bag cost 2 gold what would the transmute of 1 skin cost I would say atleast 1 so for a whole armor thats minimum 6 gold a pop probabely

Are you saying that because bags are expensive, changing armor skin should be expensive too? I'm not really sure I get your logic there :/

> @"steki.1478" said:

> > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > @"steki.1478" said:

> > > I have a feeling you dont understand what OP means. If class requires mastering to be useful then it's not OP, it's intended. If class requires "correct" stats to do what some classes can do in glass cannon gear, it's not OP, it's intended.

> > But a class being hard to play shouldn't be a reason to make it more powerful than others classes when played correctly. In the perfect world, all classes would have the same power when played at peak mastery, but that peak mastery would be harder to reach on some classes than others.

>

> Then there's no reason to play such classes. If you have to play flawlessly to achieve same results that someone gets from passive trait procs and two weapon skills then such class is worthless.Why would you put effort in something if you get nothing out of it? And no, answer is not fun since there's nothing fun about losing a fight because you mistimed some skill by half second, while your enemy just spams stuff and gets easy results with no drawbacks.

>

> It's like saying that programmers should have same salary as cashiers.

The reason to play such classes should not be because they are more powerful, but because they bring something _else_ to the table than the easyer classes. For example a ranger is easy to play and has good damage with a good amount of CC, but if you want to have more versatility instead of your CC, then the elementalist is the way to go. You won't be more powerful because you're playing the elementalist, but you will have access to tools that the ranger doesn't have access to (and the ranger will have access to tools that the elementalist doesn't have access to).

To put it simply, a class's difficulty to play shouldn't be define _how powerful_ they are, but rather each class should have (to some extent) a different role and a _thing_ that no other class can do. Wether that _thing_ is more difficult to use for a class than another should come after, and skillcap shouldn't be forced into a class just for the sake of it.

> @"steki.1478" said:

> I have a feeling you dont understand what OP means. If class requires mastering to be useful then it's not OP, it's intended. If class requires "correct" stats to do what some classes can do in glass cannon gear, it's not OP, it's intended.

But a class being hard to play shouldn't be a reason to make it more powerful than others classes when played correctly. In the perfect world, all classes would have the same power when played at peak mastery, but that peak mastery would be harder to reach on some classes than others.

> @"GunshotsByComputer.8051" said:

> We loved Elements of Rage (EoR) but on a pure design standpoint it does not make much sense, Weaver is all about weaving magic and dual attune, therefore EoR should compliment dual-attunements gameplay.

I agree with almost your entire post (the lingering X-mancer idea is great!) however I have to disagree on this. I don't feel like double-attuning to the same element should not be a thing to do.

On the contrary, I beleive that since you're giving up the new, refreshed cooldowns that you would have accessed to by attuning to a different element instead, double attuning is a high-risk move, that should be rewarded somehow, and the current EoR effect does that. I like that dynamic, and I wouldn't want to see it go away. However, if it is possible to make it even more interesting (because let's be honnest, it's currently nothing more than a flat damage increase :p), I'm all for it!

Ever since I started GW2 (a bit less than 5 years ago), I've been an elementalist main, mainly (but not only) PvE.

On a class that's so versatile, I find that one of the worst drawbacks is actually to require more than one gear set. I think that stats changing is too expensive and complicated, but that's a more general problem, I just find it more present on a class like the elementalist.

* Now to the ele, let's start with the core specs:

I find the core ele to be a good design overall. One of the main issues I have is with the utility skills... I find very few of them are useful in any way. Conjured weapons in particular, feel very clunky to use, enough for me not to use them at all, not even the elite greatsword. The ground-target component which allows allies to (sometimes by mistake) pick it up when you wanted to save it for later, as well as the time limit (both for the weapon in your hand and that on the ground) make me feel particularly limitted in my actions.

Since I find the ability to give a weapon to an ally to be barely useful, I'd like them mutch better if they had an ammunition/charge system like stances (but please don't make them like engineer kits, the elem gameplay is complicated enough already xD).

* On the Tempest, I find the specialisation to be waaay to slow in general. First you wait for the Overload to be ready, then you wait for the Overload to end its cast, then you wait 20 seconds for the attunement to be ready again... Perhaps Overloads should be ready mutch sooner, the huge cooldown being enough of a drawback? I particularly hate the interraction between Fresh Air and Air Overload - the former shouldn't reduce the later's cooldown at all, it should only reload the attunement. Because of this, I feel like spamming Air Overload is the only way to play a decent Tempest DPS build, and I find it so uninteresting... I also think offensive Overloads (Air and Fire) should be reworked, perhaps into something with a shorter cast, and then the AOE would folow you around but you would still be able to use others things?

* The weaver is a very interesting design and I love it. That said, I feel like both the elite stance and the healing stance should have instant initial casts, because both of them require additional actions after they're cast to be fully effective. Unravel doesn't feel good to use as a 5-seconds boon, because sometimes when it is active and you want to dual attune, then you need to wait for the effect to wear off before swapping attunement. In the opposite situation, it can also make you feel like you need to swap attunement early in order to fully attune before the effect disappears. It should perhaps be reworked to either make you fully attune to your current attunement, or make your next attunement swap fully attune instead of only attuning your main hand (with the ability to "uncast" it if we pressed it by mistake or changed our mind).

> @"Donari.5237" said:

> I'm trying to recall if there are any other land weapons that have never had a gem skin.

Torch :P

> @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said:

> The Voucher system seems to be for older gemstore items and when I checked I did not see any gemstore warhorns at all. So it’s not likely there will be a warhorn in the Voucher list anytime soon. Gemstore weapon skins are usually the more commonly used items. The best bet for getting a unique skin for an offhand weapon such as a warhorn would be the Black Lion weapons.

I find it hard to understand why they went for such a system. Individual weapon prices were higher than the price we have now with a voucher... But I like that new system.

I don't recall any warhorn skin being sold individually in the gemstore (and now that I think about it, we don't have any torch either). I'd really like to have more customization options on my Tempest...

I really like the new ticket vouchers, but I just realised there was no warhorn skin in them... I think we lack warhorn skins that "stand out" in general, this system may be the occasion to add some?

> @"SnowHawk.3615" said:

> Were you around when they weren't account bound and there were different transmute crystals for the type of gear? You wanted to make sure that you kept them separate and they were hard to get IF you didn't buy them with real money, it was a hassle to keep up with. Yellow crystals for anything not exotic and white crystals for exotics/legendaries- and there was no wardrobe option to preview. You also had to make sure you did it in a specific order so that you didn't lose the original item that was being transmuted. Like some players made the mistake of transmuting their legendaries into exotics instead of exotic skins onto legendary. Make sense? Maybe we should go back to that since you don't like what we have now.

> It was an awesome thing when they implemented the charges as they are.

> You're coming off very entitled and unaware that it's one of the ways Anet can make money w/o charging a SUB fee every month. Not to mention there are several ways to get loads of transmutes just by playing the game.

So basically you're saying that because they already improved the system once a few years ago, there is no point improving it again? :/

> @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > @"GreyWolf.8670" said:

> > > @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > > > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > > > @"Buran.3796" said:

> > > > > I have ~1050 unused and want to keep them, thanx.

> > > >

> > > > If you have so many what will it change to simply remove them?

> > > >

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

> > > > > Play PvP/WvW and you'll be swimming in charges. With this many options to get them without having to buy them they don't need to change

> > > >

> > > > And nothing for PvE players? Not everyone likes every mode.

> > >

> > > To your first point: " if having to pay to change armor skin is a good mechanic " you said, well Romang is refuting your statement in saying that you don't have to pay to change armor skin.

> > >

> > > To your second point: there are many mechanisms through which a PvE only player can earn transmutation charges, the most readily method being map completion. Completing the map on a capital city rewards 1 charge. Completing any other core tyria map rewards either a BL key, or more likely 1 transmutation charge.

> > >

> > > My wife who is a very casual player, and only steps into WvW to bang out a missing daily, still has about 30 unused charges in her wallet, after only playing this game for 4-5 months.

> > >

> > > To answer your question, why remove a system that works fine?

> > >

> > > I'm not going to defend this system by saying it's good (it isn't), but it was a design choice ANET made, and it works just fine, so we just roll with it.

> > >

> >

> > You can complete the map once per character. How many times can you run WvW with one character? They're not really equivocal.

>

> I never said they were. In fact, if you read my post, I clearly identified that they are easier to obtain in WvW than in PvE, and that is likely by design. What I did say though is that they are obtainable through PvE - just because you don't like the method of obtaining them in PvE remains irrelevant.

>

> If you want charges, you can get them in PvE.

> If you want charges easier you can WvW

> If you don't like WvW but want charges easier than hold your nose and WvW

>

> We're kinda just going around in circles here.

>

> Transmutations charges are available to be earned by all players in GW2 in all game modes, but are easier to obtain in some modes vs others. If the player doesn't like those game modes, then they must accept they will have to work harder / longer as a consequence.

>

> I would love a full set of Legendary Armor, but I don't have time for raiding or the amount of WvW necessary to make that happen. So....I live without a set of Legendary Armor.

>

I am sorry but I don't beleive ANet designed the system so that the only way of getting charges through PvE is to create new characters. That looks like something they didn't think through.

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > @"sorudo.9054" said:

> > > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > > @"sorudo.9054" said:

> > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > > > > @"sorudo.9054" said:

> > > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > > > > > > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > > > > > > > > @"Hevoskuuri.3891" said:

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

> > > > > > > > > > > > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > It sounds to me like Transmutation Charges come from a time where ANet didn't know yet that the game would be so cosmetic-focused.

> > > > > > > > > > > On the contrary, it sounds to me exactly as if they knew that. Which is why they charge for it.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > They are easy enough to come by without spending real cash, I doubt Anet makes any serious revenue with TM charges at all.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Now we can freely change our outfit, our dyes, our mount, our glider, our finisher, our gathering tools, our miniature, and our mail carrier, all for free.

> > > > > > > > > > > Dyes, finishers, and miniatures never required transmutation. When introduced, gliders, mail carriers, and mounts also didn't require it. Part of the trade-off for Outfits is that they are free to swap.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Because of this, Anet should bring armor and weapon transmutation in line with the other free-to-swap cosmetics.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > is there any point keeping transmutation charges in the game?

> > > > > > > > > > > Yes, to generate revenue for ANet. Allowing for the pretense that we can ignore refunding those who purchased transmutation charges, what's you plan for maintaining the current income from people buying them on the gem store?

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I don't know the numbers, but again I doubt any real revenue is made from selling TM charges. Bad systems have been changed before, and I don't think anyone would actually whine about refunds because they spent a few bucks on the charges.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Simple fact, you not knowing and them not changing the system already shows that you might be incorrect or they might not have come around to changing it. Then again it could also show that there is justifiable income from TM charge purchases and as such they are hesitant in changing the system (after originally changing TO this system in the past).

> > > > > > > > It is obvious. No one is going to pay 2 days worth of playtime to change an armor set, when you can do the same in less than 2 hours in WvW.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Stop assuming and realize your own personal very subjective view and financial situation is not applicable for everyone else.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > WvW is a niche game mode, that alone should tell you that not very many people play it. There is a ton of pve only players who never step into spvp or wvw. If transmutation charges are so easy to come by, why are you not using your own advice and get them via WvW?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > > > > > > > I personally like to believe developers remove or change system that are un-fun and generate no income since there is no point in keeping them. Same goes for very convoluted systems.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > @"Hevoskuuri.3891" said:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Anet could also introduce an infinite TM stone in the gem store for ~1000-ish gems or so. Now I believe this would create some actual revenue, since most non-WvW or PvP players would probably want this, unless they want to keep grinding map completion multiple times just to swap their armor. Maybe there could be a system where you can buy this from a vendor with 10k transmutation charges or something as well. I would definitely be buying this, since I'm literally always out of TMs. Even with WvW I'm struggling with them all the time, for I like to constantly try out different looks and have many alts.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > WvW is a niche game mode. It is very likely that a vast majority of PvE only players are spending significant money on TM charges.

> > > > > > > > Even though I can only speak for myself, as a PvE-only player, I have never, ever in my entire life spent a single gem on TM charges. And it seems I'm not the only one in that case. However, no one came to brag about regularly paying for TM charges yet.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Good for you, I have never ever purchased Black Lion Keys yet I know people who buy 75-100 of them with each new Black Lion upgrade. I have never bought any type of waypoint unlock, boosters of any kind or the home instance teleport stone (or transmutation charges), yet I know people buy these items and would never assume that my personal approach is not applicable for everyone.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Again, if the system does not generate revenue, it will get changed to either generate revenue or be more convenient (again considering the old system was changed to the current one). Subjective experiences are of 0 value when discussing what is possible.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > > > > > > > > @"Hevoskuuri.3891" said:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I've said this before and I'll say it now; TM charges is an outdated and just a bad system overall. Most MMOs out there let you change your skins for free without all the hassle, and it should pretty much be self-explanatory in games like this. It is also a very unfair system, since players of certain gamemodes can hoard them up by the thousands, while PvE players either pay gems for them, or work boring and repetitive content just to get their hands on a few.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Most MMOs out there also have way more annoying pay to win or convenience cash shops. You are literally saying you want more of one bad thing in exchange for another. If I had a choice between the TM charge system and some of the things other MMOs charge for, I'm happy to curb my TM charge spending for not having to deal with more invasive mechanics for money.

> > > > > > > > It is funny that you keep saying that while offering no example at all. And even so, it is not because others games do it very badly that GW2 should be Ok doing it "just a bit" badly.

> > > > > > > > But again, we already talked about LOTRO, and there's also WoW that allows you to freely change your set (it costs a ridiculously small amount of golds to do so).

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > WoW has a subscription fee, LOTRO charges for a ton of things which GW2 does not charge for like transportation, imposed limitations on free accounts, new maps, classes etc. unless you subscribe. I can go on about SWTOR and how EA charges for hotskill bars and many other basically necessary items. So I'm not sure how you believe any of these games to be fair comparisons when GW2 is by far the cheapest, most free to play one among all of them. The revenue has to come from somewhere.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > a sub fee has nothing to do with systems, Anet could just as much add an outfit system like SWTOR and still get something out of it, they would just make it more convenient for ppl.

> > > > > > IMO there should be a system that balances this out, allowing skin sets being used without directly applying it on armors yet have a way for Anet to still get something stable out of it.

> > > > >

> > > > > What?

> > > > >

> > > > > A sub fee has everything to do with systems if those systems are part of the monetization.

> > > > >

> > > > > EDIT: yes and they could adopt many of the other SWTOR monetization items and make the game way worse by forcing people to sub or pay for every minor thing. Stop looking at partial system and try to make assumptions based on things which sort of are similar. SWTOR has a terrible exploitative monetization model compared to GW2.

> > > >

> > > > wrong, there are free games with the exact system yet they don't use any sub.

> > > > and you should stop assuming everything good needs a sub, think outside the box and explore possibilities beyond what you know.

> > >

> > > What, I never assumed anything good needs a sub or even remotely said so. I said that the games you named used subscriptions to generate revenue thus they can afford to not have monetization in things like transmutation or cosmetic.

> > >

> > > Are we even talking about the same thing here?

> >

> > again, it has nothing to do with a sub, stop using the sub excuse.

> > aslo, SWToR and LOTRO sells outfit slots, pretty much the same thing but better.

>

> WoW makes money via their subscription. They pay their developers from that money thus they have no pay to win or pay for convenience systems in place.

>

> LOTRO, SWTOR, ESO and similar monetization models impose severe restrictions (as does GW2 on it's F2P version) and use a balance between forcing people to spend money and locking things behind must by or want to have items. They offer subscriptions to remove a majority of said restrictions or one time payments. GW2 does so in a similar manner just on different items and with no subscriptions possibility.

>

> You not understanding how business works does not mean that one has nothing to do with the other. I've tried to explain how SWTOR, ESO and LOTRO make money in different areas, but you just keep looking at 1 aspect of the entire business model without trying to understand that it has to be viewed as a while.

>

> If GW2 is making money with TM charges and they change the system, this loss in revenue needs to get made from some where else. It's that simple.

Everything you ever say is "if they do it, there's a reason", and when people try to tell you that _perhaps_ there aren't that many reasons, or there are better ways, you just say that we can't know. In short you seem to beleive ANet can't make any mistake and their way must be the best way. I hear you but at this point you can say that for absolutely everything in the game, and thus user feedback would be useless. I'm sorry, there is no point arguing with you if that's all you're going to say...

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> WoW has a subscription fee, LOTRO charges for a ton of things which GW2 does not charge for like transportation, imposed limitations on free accounts, new maps, classes etc. unless you subscribe. I can go on about SWTOR and how EA charges for hotskill bars and many other basically necessary items. So I'm not sure how you believe any of these games to be fair comparisons when GW2 is by far the cheapest, most free to play one among all of them. The revenue has to come from somewhere.

And you need to pay an expansion on GW2 to play the said expansion. You're comparing what shouldn't be compared...

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Stop assuming and realize your own personal very subjective view and financial situation is not applicable for everyone else.

>

> WvW is a niche game mode, that alone should tell you that not very many people play it. There is a ton of pve only players who never step into spvp or wvw. If transmutation charges are so easy to come by, why are you not using your own advice and get them via WvW?

Because I don't want to play that mode. And I shouldn't be forced to it, there should be others way to gain them (other than overpriced gemstore purchases).

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Good for you, I have never ever purchased Black Lion Keys yet I know people who buy 75-100 of them with each new Black Lion upgrade. I have never bought any type of waypoint unlock, boosters of any kind or the home instance teleport stone (or transmutation charges), yet I know people buy these items and would never assume that my personal approach is applicable for everyone.

But here we have some actual statistics, that of the people who come here to discuss it. Many of them are saying that transmutation charges are super easy to come by. None of them, outside of PvE players (and those don't seem to say they're buying any charge), need to buy any charge.

In that logic, I think it's only fair to assume that the income generated by transmutation charges is minimal. Also, as I already said, if ANet really wanted to generate income from this, changing others things than armor skins, like outfits, would also require transmutation charges. That alone seems to prove that they are an outdated system that ANet wouldn't implement if they had to do it all over again.

I only discovered recently that the Salvage-o-Matics had voice lines playing when using them to salvage items one by one. However, I've never heard them because most of the time I right clic on them to salvage all my useless items at once. I think it would be nice if they played dialogues when used that way too...

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> GW2 doesn't charge you for changing clothes. I swap armor sets all the time.

>

> It charges you for fashion changes. Cosmetic.

Yes?

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > @"Hevoskuuri.3891" said:

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

> > > > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > > It sounds to me like Transmutation Charges come from a time where ANet didn't know yet that the game would be so cosmetic-focused.

> > > On the contrary, it sounds to me exactly as if they knew that. Which is why they charge for it.

> >

> > They are easy enough to come by without spending real cash, I doubt Anet makes any serious revenue with TM charges at all.

> > >

> > > > Now we can freely change our outfit, our dyes, our mount, our glider, our finisher, our gathering tools, our miniature, and our mail carrier, all for free.

> > > Dyes, finishers, and miniatures never required transmutation. When introduced, gliders, mail carriers, and mounts also didn't require it. Part of the trade-off for Outfits is that they are free to swap.

> >

> > Because of this, Anet should bring armor and weapon transmutation in line with the other free-to-swap cosmetics.

> > >

> > > > is there any point keeping transmutation charges in the game?

> > > Yes, to generate revenue for ANet. Allowing for the pretense that we can ignore refunding those who purchased transmutation charges, what's you plan for maintaining the current income from people buying them on the gem store?

> >

> > I don't know the numbers, but again I doubt any real revenue is made from selling TM charges. Bad systems have been changed before, and I don't think anyone would actually whine about refunds because they spent a few bucks on the charges.

>

> Simple fact, you not knowing and them not changing the system already shows that you might be incorrect or they might not have come around to changing it. Then again it could also show that there is justifiable income from TM charge purchases and as such they are hesitant in changing the system (after originally changing TO this system in the past).

It is obvious. No one is going to pay 2 days worth of playtime to change an armor set, when you can do the same in less than 2 hours in WvW.

> I personally like to believe developers remove or change system that are un-fun and generate no income since there is no point in keeping them. Same goes for very convoluted systems.

>

> > @"Hevoskuuri.3891" said:

> >

> > Anet could also introduce an infinite TM stone in the gem store for ~1000-ish gems or so. Now I believe this would create some actual revenue, since most non-WvW or PvP players would probably want this, unless they want to keep grinding map completion multiple times just to swap their armor. Maybe there could be a system where you can buy this from a vendor with 10k transmutation charges or something as well. I would definitely be buying this, since I'm literally always out of TMs. Even with WvW I'm struggling with them all the time, for I like to constantly try out different looks and have many alts.

>

> WvW is a niche game mode. It is very likely that a vast majority of PvE only players are spending significant money on TM charges.

Even though I can only speak for myself, as a PvE-only player, I have never, ever in my entire life spent a single gem on TM charges. And it seems I'm not the only one in that case. However, no one came to brag about regularly paying for TM charges yet.

> > @"Hevoskuuri.3891" said:

> >

> > I've said this before and I'll say it now; TM charges is an outdated and just a bad system overall. Most MMOs out there let you change your skins for free without all the hassle, and it should pretty much be self-explanatory in games like this. It is also a very unfair system, since players of certain gamemodes can hoard them up by the thousands, while PvE players either pay gems for them, or work boring and repetitive content just to get their hands on a few.

> >

>

> Most MMOs out there also have way more annoying pay to win or convenience cash shops. You are literally saying you want more of one bad thing in exchange for another. If I had a choice between the TM charge system and some of the things other MMOs charge for, I'm happy to curb my TM charge spending for not having to deal with more invasive mechanics for money.

It is funny that you keep saying that while offering no example at all. And even so, it is not because others games do it very badly that GW2 should be Ok doing it "just a bit" badly.

But again, we already talked about LOTRO, and there's also WoW that allows you to freely change your set (it costs a ridiculously small amount of golds to do so).

> @"phs.6089" said:

> > @"sorudo.9054" said:

> > > @"RazielSpecter.6295" said:

> > > PvE players can get completing the map

> >

> > and after completing a map........?

>

> farm gold in pve, convert to gems, buy from bl

>

> Seriously to farm 600 gems to get 25 transmutation charges is way quicker them me doing 8 pvp tracks

That's for PvP, in WvW you get even more of them.

> @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> For instance, if you want crafting materials, you're far better off running around the open world / metas than farming nodes or salvaging loot bags in WvW.

> sPvP players (who win, I should add) get tons upon tons of unidentified dyes as part of their rewards.

> Depending on the reward track they choose, WvW players can get Mystic Clovers or Mystic Coins as rewards, and can get weapons and armor (and also the skins) normally reserved for people who run the Explorable Dungeon paths.

>

> Dye's are obtainable through crafting, purchasable off the TP, or via in game rewards - they are just more easily obtainable through successful sPvP play.

> Crafting materials are obtainable through salvaging gear from loot bags, harvested off synthesizer nodes, or purchasable off the TP - they are just more easily obtainable through open world PvE play.

> Transmutation charges are obtainable through open world map completion, log in rewards, achievement chests, and are purchaseable with either Gems or BL statuettes - they are just more easily obtainable through WvW reward tracks and leveling.

But the difference is, that each and every one of these items are obtainable at a fair price at the trading post. Except transmutation charges. 50 golds to change an armor set? Are you kidding?

There would be no problem at all if the charges were, just like the others items you listed, tradable on the trading post. This regulates all items, making that if they are abundant in a mode, you'll be able to get them at a fairly low price even if you play another mode where you don't get any of them. However, them being gemstore-only, makes it that the price increases to unbeleivable amounts from people buying items that are completely unrelated. You buy a mount skin? Transmutation Charges price increases. You get a new toy? Transmutation Charges price increases again. You want a new outfit? Yea, I suppose you guessed what happened.

While writing this I'm thinking, wouldn't that actually be a good way for PvP players to earn golds? By selling their charges to PvE players?

There would be a merchant where you can use your charges as a currency to buy the same amount in "physical" version (like you have before you consume your charge), so people can convert their southands of piled charges and sell them.

That would fix the issues each of us brought up?

> @"Jack Redline.5379" said:

> So basically Improvisations definition : "You can use stolen skills twice. One random skill category is immediately recharged when you steal."

> It has 20 sec CD

> the problem is the one random skill category is immediately recharged part doesnt work. At least not always after 20 sec CD is gone. I was testing it today in WvW and the skill would be recharged only like 2/5 times each time i stopped 20 sec, I know it becasuse I have 20 sec CD on a Steal itself = each steal should applicate Improvisation by what the skill says right. But as i said it doesnt do it always. If anyone has more insight into this i would appreciate

This is purely supposition, but it may be that one random skill category is recharged, regardless of wether you equiped it or not. So for example if you have no tricks equiped, it might still be that category that gets recharged, effectively recharging none of your equiped skills.

My personnal opinion is that all traits or skills based on pure luck are complete garbage, and I feel like that one in particular takes this to an even higher level. I don't mean to offend the devs who worked on it, the idea is fun on paper, but becomes frustrating and impractical in practice.

**Edit:** A quick look at the wiki page seems to confirm what I beleive:

_"Randomly selects one of the 5–6 skill types (venoms, signets, traps, tricks, deception, and Daredevil physical or Deadeye cantrips) to recharge, so **it will not necessarily choose a skill type that you are using**."_

Funny thing, using an elite specialisation effectively weakens that trait, because it increases its randomness, by making it pick 1 out of 6 skill types, instead of 1 out of the 5 core types. In others words, by using an elite spec, you are even less likely to get a recharge on the type of skills you're using.

It would indeed help if you gave some example of these "bad armours".

> @"Dante.1763" said:

> To be honest i think they really should go through and do a texture update on all the older armor sets(before HOT) the newer ones have so much more detail than the old ones.

This, true. Dye channels could be added to a lot of them too.

> @"Buran.3796" said:

> > @"Nikal.4921" said:

> > > @"Buran.3796" said:

> > > > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > > > @"Buran.3796" said:

> > >

> > > > > Play PvP/WvW and you'll be swimming in charges. With this many options to get them without having to buy them they don't need to change

> > > >

> > > > And nothing for PvE players? Not everyone likes every mode.

> > >

> > > Then play PvE and get the free completing maps.

> > >

> > > Seriously dude, this is the MMO with the easiest life for wardrobe fashionistas.

> > Every other MMO I've played allows players to change their clothes for free. Anet's system is outdated. It should be enough that we pay for the skins IMO.

>

> And how many lets you to share every skin, every dye (with infinite uses) account along. Plus, you can customize the skin of every part, and outfits are also shared and can be changed at no cost. And the dyes are affordable outside a few onew whicha nyway end being free in the birthay gifts.

>

> Please, if you still find the skin system hard go try some other MMOs, in most of them you can't avoid to look like a hobo without spending real money. Plus in most of them every time they release a new expansion your stats automatically become trash and you need to grind new levels and gear to even been able to play top content.

>

It's not because others games do it poorly that we shouldn't do it better. There's no reason armor should require money, while all the rest is completely free. At least be consitent.

> @"RazielSpecter.6295" said:

> > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > @"RazielSpecter.6295" said:

> > > PvE players can get completing the map

> >

> > Assuming that I get 1 charge per map, that leaves me with about 50 of them. Wow, my problem is sovled here, that will totally last me for the rest of my life, I'll never have to worry about it again.

> You complete with another character

>

And once I don't have characters anymore? I'm assuming that you'll tell me to delete and create a new one. Sorry, that's not something I should be forced to do to obtain them. It's obviously not an intended gameplay, and it's not fun to do.

> @"Ephemiel.5694" said:

> They will never remove it since it's another way indie company ANet can make money.

If they wanted to make money out of it, armors wouldn't be the only thing requiring charges. Outfits&co would do too. But they don't, because they were implemented more recently. Which leads to only one conclusion: The only reason charges still exist is because they were there from the start, but it's not the dirrection ANet would take if they had to do it all over again. They are afraid to do the change because of the handful of people who would complain about all their charges lost.

Mini Ley-Line: When standing still it would just be a small spark, barely visible. When moving it would leave a long Ley-Line trail behind it. It would emit a bit of blue-ish light around it, a bit like the Mini Fire Tornado.

Mini Vinetooth: I absolutely love their model and I'd love having a miniature option for it (wether it be gemstore or in-game content, I don't actually care :p)

Not that I know of. Perhaps there are, because I know that to avoid someone stealing your account and emptying everything instantly, you can't sell more than a set amount of items at once in the trading post. But I don't think there are any restrictions in sending golds or items to another player.

I wouldn't mind them being unbuyable if you already have them. Though perhaps this would be an opening to bugs where the game thinks you already have it and so you can't buy it even if you need it?

But yea, there is a big red line in the description if you already have it, it's very easy to see. ^^

Also, there are several merchants that will give you a full refund if you sell them back your item. You might want to try it.

> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > > There might be a potential to game this and gain an advantage. I believe Ele’s attunements having cooldowns when out of combat isn’t by accident either.

> >

> > Funny that I made a post recently asking to remove attunement swap cooldowns out of combat. Plenty of people said that it would be unbalanced because of arcane traitline, but, I think weapon (attunement) swap boons should be removed too, when out of combat. Why should others classes be free to swap, but not the ele/revenant? And why should the ele be the only one to have weapon swap boons when out of combat? Both the cooldown and the boons need to go. I suppose the same problem applies to the revenant...

>

> The ability to pre-load buffs without having to worry about attunement cooldowns when you enter a fight may be of an issue. Other classes don’t have access to the number of skills as Ele.

>

In which case, give normal cooldowns to everyone when outside of combat. I'm sure there are plenty of boon stack combos with weapon swaps. If you're going to prevent one class from doing it, do it for everyone.

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > I don't think having to make a new character should be the way to get them. I should be able to get them on my main.

> And you can, via the gem shop.

Expensive. Again, why should I pay, but not PvP or WvW players?

> > And why should PvE players have to spend gold, while PvP and WvW players receive plenty of them for free?

> I don't have a good answer for that. I _suspect_ that ANet grossly underestimated how quickly people would earn them and then haven't wanted to adjust the reward tracks, because they aren't sure what to replace it with.

If you're not going to fix your mistake, at least make it fair for everyone, and make PvE players earn them just as easily.

> > I'm sorry but PvE players already represent a good part of those who pay for gemstore things (mount skins, bank access, repair canisters... All of these, PvP and WvW players don't need).

> First, until relatively recently, PvP & WvW players earned almost nothing (and WvWarriors often had to spend substantially on siege etc). The introduction of reward tracks, PvP season pips, and WvW skirmish pips closed the gap, but it's still easier to farm PvE than the other modes. That is, PvE players can more easily afford it.

> Second, WvW has exactly the same access to banks/repair/etc as PvE. I doubt very much if PvErs pay anything more for anything you mentioned except MountFits. Plus, PvPers & WvWarriors have an interest in Finishers, that cost gems or gold.

When do you use repair canisters in WvW? When do you use bank access? I really don't see any situation where these would come useful. In PvE however, there are plenty of instances that you don't want to leave.

> > Can't it be the other way around, for once? Or better, can't it be equally difficult/easy to get them for everyone?

> What do you mean the other way around? On the whole, it's easier for PvErs more often.

If it was easyer for PvE players, they wouldn't get a hard time getting charges while PvP and WvW players drown under thousands of charges.

> >

> > And no one is buying charges anyway.

> What data are you using to make that determination? You want more charges badly enough to be insisting that ANet remove the system. Can't you imagine that some people are willing to pay cash or gold, rather than wait for ANet to change their mind?

I'll never spend cash on them. I'll go WvW or PvP until I get them, even if I don't like these modes. The point is, I shouldn't have to do that. I should be able to earn them in PvE. Or even better, I shouldn't have to pay just to use a skin I already own.

> > Removing them entirely would probably make people more willing to buy weapon and armor skins in the gem store, because they'd be able to change at will.

> And what's your source for that? I can guarantee that it would make no difference to me. I simply don't change looks as often as I earn charges (despite having too many alt characters), and that was true even when I was a strict PvE-only player.

You can't use your own situation and make it everyone's normality. We shouldn't have to pay extra to be able to use the item we just purchased.

> I'm not against ANet changing or overhauling the system. I wouldn't mind seeing less of a disparity between PvE and the other modes.

>

> The point is that there's a reason why this system exists and reasons why it's unlikely to be in ANet's interests to change.

>

There are no reason this system exist. If they really wanted to generate income with cosmetic changes, then swapping outfits, gliders, mounts, mail carriers, finishers would also cost transmutation charges. And if you're going to tell me that these shouldn't cost charges because they are gemstore items, then why do gemstore armor and weapon skins cost charges to apply? We know it's possible to exempt a specific item from appearance swap cost. They did it for Zenith weapons. If that was their motive, this would apply to gemstore skins. But it doesn't. They just keep it because they don't want to make people with a lot of stored charges unhappy. But the game needs to move forward.