Ayrilana.1396
-
Posts
6,970 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by Ayrilana.1396
-
-
> @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > > > @"TheGrimm.5624" said:
> > > > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > > > > > @"TheGrimm.5624" said:
> > > > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > > > > > > But this is the topic of the thread, market manipulators wanting to increase the gold cap to sell their expensive, manipulate items on the TP the "legit" way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fear mongering isn't an argument. If this happens, ArenaNet should have GMs to deal with it. And no, I don't have anything that would be priced at that value. But the best way for a gold sink to work is to let it work.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It is working, why "fix" it? I can think of a couple of reasons off the top of my head, but there's nothing I want to share here, because I don't want any forced vacations from the board. But how do I know it's working? Because items are staying in a reasonable-ish range in game. The only way to get the "worth" of the items is to take it off site to do it. I said it before, but I'm surprised that ANet allows this to the point where it's openly discussed on their forums.
> > > >
> > > > I admit I am using a simple guide here. A player made a request to raise the cap for the reason they feel something exceeds that cap and they think people will pay that. Most here seem to agree it's better that transactions occur in game for multiple reasons. So, if the seller has to pay gold to list, that is not returnable if it doesn't sell, the risk is on the seller for making a bad call on the value. Buyers can still list their lower offers at no risk. I don't personally think the market would suddenly go crazy if the cap was raised, even if I don't need it to be raised myself. The forums like to argue over arguing at times, and this seems like one of those. Player made their request, leave it to ArenaNet now.
> > >
> > > I'm all for discussing things that will actually improve the game, across the board. This isn't one of those things. I've listed a myriad of reasons for that, that are, of course, summarily ignored, at least by the people that really think this is a good idea. The most heinous reason is, of course, that gold sellers will want to get a piece of that pie. I made the comparison in another post, but all the games that have a no limit sales policy on their TP variant have a problem with gold spammers. This isn't the kind of activity we need, and these aren't the new players we want to attract. Does correlation equal causation? I don't know, but I don't want to find out either. The only items that are blowing the lid off the cap for sales are happening on third party websites that not everyone is aware of, and this has managed, over the course of years, to keep the general health of the game's economy in a good place. It really needs to stay there.
> >
> > We had gold spammers with the cap as it is years ago. You would often get whispered every time you went into a city almost instantly. Having a cap, or the lack of one, wouldn’t have an impact on that as far as GW2. I won’t comment about other games as they’re all designed differently.
> >
> > Trading can also be done outside of the TP so a cap is meaningless to the extent of preventing that.
>
> You know what else is true? I haven't been whispered once in three years of off and on playing. I have yet to receive a single message in my ingame mail advertising for gold. If I did the same thing in swtor today, I could have at least two mails, a few whispers, and a few more players, at least, on my block list if I had to go to fleet. I'll pass on even the potential, thanks.
That’s because Anet took direct action to prevent gold spammers from communicating with players in the game. The price cap has been 10K since launch and was 10K during the entire time there were gold spammers.
-
Unless Anet responded to the report and found that they were not AFK. I could easily have the game running on one screen while doing something on another.
-
> @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > @"TheGrimm.5624" said:
> > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > > > @"TheGrimm.5624" said:
> > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > > > > But this is the topic of the thread, market manipulators wanting to increase the gold cap to sell their expensive, manipulate items on the TP the "legit" way.
> > > >
> > > > Fear mongering isn't an argument. If this happens, ArenaNet should have GMs to deal with it. And no, I don't have anything that would be priced at that value. But the best way for a gold sink to work is to let it work.
> > > >
> > >
> > > It is working, why "fix" it? I can think of a couple of reasons off the top of my head, but there's nothing I want to share here, because I don't want any forced vacations from the board. But how do I know it's working? Because items are staying in a reasonable-ish range in game. The only way to get the "worth" of the items is to take it off site to do it. I said it before, but I'm surprised that ANet allows this to the point where it's openly discussed on their forums.
> >
> > I admit I am using a simple guide here. A player made a request to raise the cap for the reason they feel something exceeds that cap and they think people will pay that. Most here seem to agree it's better that transactions occur in game for multiple reasons. So, if the seller has to pay gold to list, that is not returnable if it doesn't sell, the risk is on the seller for making a bad call on the value. Buyers can still list their lower offers at no risk. I don't personally think the market would suddenly go crazy if the cap was raised, even if I don't need it to be raised myself. The forums like to argue over arguing at times, and this seems like one of those. Player made their request, leave it to ArenaNet now.
>
> I'm all for discussing things that will actually improve the game, across the board. This isn't one of those things. I've listed a myriad of reasons for that, that are, of course, summarily ignored, at least by the people that really think this is a good idea. The most heinous reason is, of course, that gold sellers will want to get a piece of that pie. I made the comparison in another post, but all the games that have a no limit sales policy on their TP variant have a problem with gold spammers. This isn't the kind of activity we need, and these aren't the new players we want to attract. Does correlation equal causation? I don't know, but I don't want to find out either. The only items that are blowing the lid off the cap for sales are happening on third party websites that not everyone is aware of, and this has managed, over the course of years, to keep the general health of the game's economy in a good place. It really needs to stay there.
We had gold spammers with the cap as it is years ago. You would often get whispered every time you went into a city almost instantly. Having a cap, or the lack of one, wouldn’t have an impact on that as far as GW2. I won’t comment about other games as they’re all designed differently.
Trading can also be done outside of the TP so a cap is meaningless to the extent of preventing that.
-
> @"suialthor.7164" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"suialthor.7164" said:
> > > With the new masteries, could you avoid mastery points behind gold sinks (such as in No Quarter). To clarify, gold sink achievements are fine but should not be associated with mastery points.
> >
> > Unless you’re a completionist, you don’t need to do any of the achievements that require you to spend a lot of gold. There are also enough excess mastery points which allow you to skip them as well.
>
> The last few chapters have felt a little low on the options for mastery points . By not locking it behind gold we are helping new players. Helping new players helps the community.
>
> BTW if I say its okay to have them without mastery points then being a completionist isn't the issue. I thought that would have been obvious with the clarification but perhaps I need to say it even more bluntly.
The mastery points are ~~season~~ saga wide. There are more than enough available from previous episodes to not require spending gold. This excess number of mastery points is likely to increase with further ~~episodes~~ chapters such as the ones mentioned in the announcement. .
-
> @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > Also please be aware that I have also included **removing** in all of my posts along with increasing.
>
> The thread is about increasing the cap, not removing it. If you want to argue about removing the cap you can create a new thread on the subject.
Funny. Well the cap can be put at 1 million gold then which effectively acts as if there were no cap. Better?
-
> @"Makuragee.3058" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > You don’t need to do metas or events to farm currencies.
>
> Yeah but without them it take much more time tho
Of course they’ll take more time because you’d be ignoring a source for the currencies but it’s not that detrimental to the overall time. Maps have a ton of nodes that you can farm and there are of course the hearts. The only LS3 map that I found a pain to farm currency for was Ember Bay.
-
> @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > It’s a bandaid solution to an item that was intended to be very rare.
>
> I'm not sure you understand what **band aid solution** means.
> https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/band-aid-solution
> > a **temporary** solution that does not deal with the **cause** of a problem
>
> Increasing the drop rate of current items and making sure any future items stay under the cap is NOT a band-aid solution, because it's not a temporary fix. It directly addresses the core of the problem (the scarcity) and then fixes the problem that is caused by the cap by not allowing items to surpass it in the first place.
>
> On the other hand, increasing the cap IS band aid solution by definition. Because, how much should they increase it for? 10k gold? So the next cap is gonna be 20k? What happens when a future item surpasses the NEXT cap? Especially during its release month, like the latest infusions are even more expensive now. Increasing the cap is a temporary solution, therefore a band aid solution. Meanwhile, increasing the drop rates of items IS a complete solution, the opposite of a band aid solution.
It only impacts that item and the price could still very well increase back to above the cap. The issue is the cap, not the price. Also please be aware that I have also included **removing** in all of my posts along with increasing. It’s concerning to simply ignore that I had said that.
-
> @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > Calls to increase the supply of an item should be in another thread.
> >
> > Why? Increasing supply of an item solves the need for an increase in the cap, why discuss it in a separate thread? This thread is about increasing the gold cap on the TP, which is a need that can be completely removed by increasing the supply of those items that some want to sell for a price above the cap. Why are you turning down this solution to the thread's question by calling it off-topic?
> Probably because it's a solution they don't want to hear. Even if it's a _good_ solution.
>
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > It’s a bandaid solution to an item that was intended to be very rare.
> But was it intended to be so rare it would cost more than the TP cap? Using the argument you love to use in similar cases, i can tell you that almost certaily not. How i know it? Because the cap _is still there_.
>
>
There are bugs still in the game. Does that mean they intended them to be there simply because they haven’t fixed them? There’s such a thing of having something be a low priority.
-
> @"Meabeye.8304" said:
> https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/thousands-guild-wars-2-accounts-hacked-flna985019
>
> Rule number 1 for ANY GAME is do NOT NOT NOT make the e mail address a part of the login system. I havent a clue why you would. THAT is the weak point right there. I create a character. I meet someone. Hey I want to chat with you on this subject outside the game, whats your e mail address.... Step 1 of being hacked is accomplished. Step 2 run an auto password cracker on it. Doesnt matter WHAT your password is, or HOW MANY TIMES you change it - they can still hack into it, because it is linked to your E MAIL ADDRESS.....
>
> DUH!
>
> Now post all the rebuttables you want to this, but the point is, once they have your e mail address, which you CAN NOT change, they CAN hack you....
>
> So WHY make the password so kitten hard to control when the real weak point of being hacked ISNT changeable?
Don’t use the same email to communicate with people.
-
> @"Tyson.5160" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"Tyson.5160" said:
> > > > @"Randulf.7614" said:
> > > > November according to todays announcement. Although epsidoes are gone and we have chapters now
> > >
> > > Wonder if there will be new maps... will have to wait and see from the trailer.
> >
> > If this is a continuation of the saga then we’ll see a new map with the next ~~episode~~ chapter.
>
> Yeah wonder if it’s going to be in smaller chunks then before.
The cadence they’re showing is the same cadence that they advertised for the four episodes so far.
We’ll likely continue to get half a map with each release along with enough grindy achievements as if it were a full episode from LS3 or LS4.
The story will likely still be minimal with a full instance at the beginning of the “chapter”, filler in between having us to map events, and then a final story instance.
-
> @"suialthor.7164" said:
> With the new masteries, could you avoid mastery points behind gold sinks (such as in No Quarter). To clarify, gold sink achievements are fine but should not be associated with mastery points.
Unless you’re a completionist, you don’t need to do any of the achievements that require you to spend a lot of gold. There are also enough excess mastery points which allow you to skip them as well.
-
> @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > Calls to increase the supply of an item should be in another thread.
>
> Why? Increasing supply of an item solves the need for an increase in the cap, why discuss it in a separate thread? This thread is about increasing the gold cap on the TP, which is a need that can be completely removed by increasing the supply of those items that some want to sell for a price above the cap. Why are you turning down this solution to the thread's question by calling it off-topic?
It’s a bandaid solution to an item that was intended to be very rare.
-
> @"guardian of fortuide.1724" said:
> I completely understand Elitist communities will always exist, and Anet has removed kp in the past from cm fractals to try and curb Elitist. I think they should for sure consider something similar shortly after the steam release. Because I'm sure there will be a mass influx of new players who want to see what GW2 endgame has to offer, and I believe everyone deserves a chance to see it and shouldn't be gatekept by arbitration set by the Elite community that's BS.
They aren’t gatekept. Those players can simply create their own groups and play with others that don’t want those restrictions. No different from the warrior only groups way back near launch that farmed CoF P1. If players didn’t like those restrictions then they could have created their own group that included all classes.
-
> @"Tyson.5160" said:
> > @"Randulf.7614" said:
> > November according to todays announcement. Although epsidoes are gone and we have chapters now
>
> Wonder if there will be new maps... will have to wait and see from the trailer.
If this is a continuation of the saga then we’ll see a new map with the next ~~episode~~ chapter.
-
> @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > It wouldn’t as it would be an instant sell to one of the queued bid orders. In fact, it’d probably be to one of those manipulators being talked about who would then flip it for even more profit. The current price cap essentially allows them to put a wall up with their bid orders so all sales of the item goes to them first as it’s essentially a queue system. This wouldn’t be the case without the cap.
>
> Or you can say the current cap essentially forces players to post items at a value Anet thought to be the "limit" of how much an in-game item should be sold for. If that isn't the case for an item due to its supply being low (or manipulated) then the simple solution would be to increase the supply of said item. It happened with old black lion chest weapons when they re-introduced them (I remember the crying in those threads about it) they could simply do the same. They have a "limit" in place, it's time to enforce it, by not allowing players to "value" an item above it, and that can only happen by increasing the supply of the item.
Except we don’t know if that was true or if it’s just a value they just happened to set it at. Things change during a game’s lifecycle as things are added that were not thought of when it launched. The game is over 8 years old after all.
Let us not forget that items are allowed to be traded off the TP at our own risk.
Please keep in mind that this thread is about the price cap and not the value of any specific item. Calls to increase the supply of an item should be in another thread.
-
> @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > If you got the chak egg as a drop, would you sell it at 5K (example) if that’s the value you feel that it’s worth? What would that look like in the system as it currently is? Would you not want to sell the chak egg at the price that others are willing to pay for it?
>
> I'd sell it for something like 5k just fine. If that caused the trade price of the item to start dropping then it's an extra bonus. As for selling it at the price others are willing to pay, no I don't care about those involved in such how gold transactions.
It wouldn’t as it would be an instant sell to one of the queued bid orders. In fact, it’d probably be to one of those manipulators being talked about who would then flip it for even more profit. The current price cap essentially allows them to put a wall up with their bid orders so all sales of the item goes to them first as it’s essentially a queue system. This wouldn’t be the case without the cap.
-
Or what we got so far was “Book 1” of the saga and this is “Book 2”.
-
> @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > The items didn’t magically come to exist in those players inventories. Regular players got them as drops and they’re forced to either sell at 10K or do 3rd party trades in order to sell them for what they’re being sold for.
>
> "Forced" is a strong word, if they don't like selling the items for 10k they can try lower values. As for going to 3rd party websites that's also their own fault for not setting values under the 10k cap. That's not a problem with the cap, but with how much those players want to value their items.
>
If you got the chak egg as a drop, would you sell it at 5K (example) if that’s the value you feel that it’s worth? What would that look like in the system as it currently is? Would you not want to sell the chak egg at the price that others are willing to pay for it?
-
> @"kharmin.7683" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"kharmin.7683" said:
> > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > The thread is about the price cap and not whether you believe the price of an item is manipulated.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure that the two concepts are exclusive. Without manipulation, would there be a need for a price cap? Not trolling, just trying to understand the two.
> >
> > Wouldn’t it be better for all transactions to occur within the TP?
>
> Yes, I agree. However, I don't know how Anet can police people trading outside of it.
I don’t believe there would be an easy way to police those type of transactions.
The issue with the current cap is that it prevents players who get it as a lucky drop from selling it at a price that others are willing to pay. For those that are willing to pay a lot of gold for them, they’re essentially stuck setting a buy order at the cap and waiting in a queue for it to be their turn to get it from someone who happens to instant sell theirs.
-
> @"kharmin.7683" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > The thread is about the price cap and not whether you believe the price of an item is manipulated.
>
> I'm not sure that the two concepts are exclusive. Without manipulation, would there be a need for a price cap? Not trolling, just trying to understand the two.
Wouldn’t it be better for all transactions to occur within the TP?
-
> @"Fuchslein.8639" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > > > @"kharmin.7683" said:
> > > > But if the item doesn't sell at such an inflated price, is that truly it's value? I disagree with the price being set by market manipulators.
> > >
> > > I repeat, 25 players have 158 chak egg sacks, average 6 per person. Are you telling me they have so many because they want to have the effect on multiple characters? Or to create artificial scarcity and inflate the price? There are 97 buy orders on the TP for the items, if they really wanted to sell, they would.
> >
> > If they bought them at 20K a piece from regular players that got lucky to have them drop then they’d be taking a substantial loss if they sold them in the TP with the price cap set at 10K. If the cap were raised/removed, perhaps they would sell them.
>
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > > > @"kharmin.7683" said:
> > > > But if the item doesn't sell at such an inflated price, is that truly it's value? I disagree with the price being set by market manipulators.
> > >
> > > I repeat, 25 players have 158 chak egg sacks, average 6 per person. Are you telling me they have so many because they want to have the effect on multiple characters? Or to create artificial scarcity and inflate the price? There are 97 buy orders on the TP for the items, if they really wanted to sell, they would.
> >
> > If they bought them at 20K a piece from regular players that got lucky to have them drop then they’d be taking a substantial loss if they sold them in the TP with the price cap set at 10K. If the cap were raised/removed, perhaps they would sell them.
>
> Again. I would like to know why these people would be more interested in selling it at TP. The fee is still there, and would be even higher as the price gets higher.
>
> One of the people here even said that as the price increases, the fee should be increased. This was immediately attacked, although it would be only logical.
There are players who may not wish to sell the item through trades, as they don’t feel comfortable with the risk, and would pay the TP tax. Unfortunately they don’t have the option to sell it for what it’s being traded at because of the price cap.
-
> @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > As opposed to trading outside of the TP? One way or another, the item is being traded at a price greater than 10K.
>
> It's being traded at greater prices by those who buy them at those prices and then relist the same item at an even higher price to provide the illusion that there is trading going on.
>
The items didn’t magically come to exist in those players inventories. Regular players got them as drops and they’re forced to either sell at 10K or do 3rd party trades in order to sell them for what they’re being sold for.
> > This thread isn’t about whether the item should or shouldn’t be worth that much or if certain players are manipulating the price.
>
> Actually this thread is all about what items should or shouldn't be worth because if you read the thread title it's about increasing the cap. Then you answered that the price is set by demand, and I provide you evidence that it's not, it's provided by manipulators.
>
The cap being increased/removed has nothing to do with whether a subset of players disagree with the legitimacy of a particular items value.
The reason I went into demand is that I mistakenly let some people to hijack the thread who had their own separate agenda about whether the item should really be worth that.
> > It would be beneficial for another thread to be created that covers that topic rather than hijack/derail this one.
>
> But this is the topic of the thread, market manipulators wanting to increase the gold cap to sell their expensive, manipulate items on the TP the "legit" way.
The thread is about the price cap and not whether you believe the price of an item is manipulated.
-
> @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > @"kharmin.7683" said:
> > But if the item doesn't sell at such an inflated price, is that truly it's value? I disagree with the price being set by market manipulators.
>
> I repeat, 25 players have 158 chak egg sacks, average 6 per person. Are you telling me they have so many because they want to have the effect on multiple characters? Or to create artificial scarcity and inflate the price? There are 97 buy orders on the TP for the items, if they really wanted to sell, they would.
If they bought them at 20K a piece from regular players that got lucky to have them drop then they’d be taking a substantial loss if they sold them in the TP with the price cap set at 10K. If the cap were raised/removed, perhaps they would sell them.
-
> @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > There are currently 97 buy orders at 10K gold from 67 accounts for the chak egg. Clearly there are people that feel that it's worth at least that much.
> > >
> > > Right. There are 25 people on gw2efficiency that combined have 158 chak egg sacks, that's 6.32 chak egg sacks on average on those 25 gw2efficiency accounts. So what's "clear" here is not that people feel it's "worth" it as much, but there are some "TP barons" that are hoarding all the chak egg sacks they can find to inflate its price. I'm willing to bet those 97 buy orders are from the same types of people that want to show the world that their investment is worth a lot.
> > >
> >
> > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > You do realize that players can put their sell posts below those overpriced orders? That the supply for 99% of the items in the game cannot be controlled by players?
> > >
> > > See above. Some might be posting items at lower prices, but they are quickly being bought by the rich tp barons and then relisted at higher prices. When an item has such low amounts in circulation it's very easy to be manipulated by bots, TP barons and market manipulators, after all we are talking about a 200$ transaction for an in-game cosmetic item.
> >
> > Ok. What does this have to do with whether the price cap should or shouldn’t be increased/removed?
> >
>
> The price that you are calling those are "worth" is a product of market manipulation. Those that are "saying" how much the items are worth are the same people selling them. The supply of those highly expensive items is actually controlled by players, given how there is handful with the entire supply, that can then post anything they want for it. So saying that the cap should be increased/removed because some market manipulators are setting higher prices than the cap (and calling it "what's it's worth") is an invalid argument. 25 people have 158 chak egg sacks and the same is true is for the other "expensive" items, why increase the cap to allow these players to profit further? Keep it and let them exploit each other or deal with RMT
>
> And you do understand that 10k gold is 600$ right? IT always brings the news when items in certain games are being sold for absurd prices, even 10k gold is such a price, so why raise the cap?
As opposed to trading outside of the TP? One way or another, the item is being traded at a price greater than 10K.
This thread isn’t about whether the item should or shouldn’t be worth that much or if certain players are manipulating the price. It would be beneficial for another thread to be created that covers that topic rather than hijack/derail this one.
Raise the sell price limit on the trading post
in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
Posted
> @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > > > > > @"TheGrimm.5624" said:
> > > > > > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:
> > > > > > > > @"TheGrimm.5624" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > > > > > > > > But this is the topic of the thread, market manipulators wanting to increase the gold cap to sell their expensive, manipulate items on the TP the "legit" way.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Fear mongering isn't an argument. If this happens, ArenaNet should have GMs to deal with it. And no, I don't have anything that would be priced at that value. But the best way for a gold sink to work is to let it work.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is working, why "fix" it? I can think of a couple of reasons off the top of my head, but there's nothing I want to share here, because I don't want any forced vacations from the board. But how do I know it's working? Because items are staying in a reasonable-ish range in game. The only way to get the "worth" of the items is to take it off site to do it. I said it before, but I'm surprised that ANet allows this to the point where it's openly discussed on their forums.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I admit I am using a simple guide here. A player made a request to raise the cap for the reason they feel something exceeds that cap and they think people will pay that. Most here seem to agree it's better that transactions occur in game for multiple reasons. So, if the seller has to pay gold to list, that is not returnable if it doesn't sell, the risk is on the seller for making a bad call on the value. Buyers can still list their lower offers at no risk. I don't personally think the market would suddenly go crazy if the cap was raised, even if I don't need it to be raised myself. The forums like to argue over arguing at times, and this seems like one of those. Player made their request, leave it to ArenaNet now.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm all for discussing things that will actually improve the game, across the board. This isn't one of those things. I've listed a myriad of reasons for that, that are, of course, summarily ignored, at least by the people that really think this is a good idea. The most heinous reason is, of course, that gold sellers will want to get a piece of that pie. I made the comparison in another post, but all the games that have a no limit sales policy on their TP variant have a problem with gold spammers. This isn't the kind of activity we need, and these aren't the new players we want to attract. Does correlation equal causation? I don't know, but I don't want to find out either. The only items that are blowing the lid off the cap for sales are happening on third party websites that not everyone is aware of, and this has managed, over the course of years, to keep the general health of the game's economy in a good place. It really needs to stay there.
> > > >
> > > > We had gold spammers with the cap as it is years ago. You would often get whispered every time you went into a city almost instantly. Having a cap, or the lack of one, wouldn’t have an impact on that as far as GW2. I won’t comment about other games as they’re all designed differently.
> > > >
> > > > Trading can also be done outside of the TP so a cap is meaningless to the extent of preventing that.
> > >
> > > You know what else is true? I haven't been whispered once in three years of off and on playing. I have yet to receive a single message in my ingame mail advertising for gold. If I did the same thing in swtor today, I could have at least two mails, a few whispers, and a few more players, at least, on my block list if I had to go to fleet. I'll pass on even the potential, thanks.
> >
> > That’s because Anet took direct action to prevent gold spammers from communicating with players in the game. The price cap has been 10K since launch and was 10K during the entire time there were gold spammers.
>
> ...and yet, they haven't returned. Why do you suppose that is? Do you think it may have something to do with creating an account, and getting to the TP and seeing that there's no profit in it for them? Every ad I've ever seen was "get xx million gold for xx dollars". Looking at the TP, how long do you think it would take for ANet to start banning people that suddenly got millions of gold for nothing? My guess, not very long. It's why I'm surprised they allow outside trading, since that could just as easily turn into RMT situations, where a player is selling items for cash, instead of in game gold.
They haven’t returned because of the actions Anet took to prevent them from spamming players with the advertisements. As I also said before, that price cap has been the same since launch. It was the same when they were spamming players.