Samnang.1879 Posted January 9, 2018 Author Share Posted January 9, 2018 if you dont agree with the suggestions, fine. i can deal with that. but dont turn into something completely different that anet will misunderstand me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobrakon.3108 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Wish there was an option to auto delete or dont loot bloodstone etc. Oh and all blue and green weps and armor. Its not worth the silver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnang.1879 Posted January 9, 2018 Author Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > I went through the same issue in my thread, dealing with critics who seem to like to argue for the sake of arguing instead of actually coming up with a solution that would benefit everybody. They instead think the status quo is 'it', and that _no_ already-existing system can be made better so as to perform more efficiently. Critical thinkers are few and far between. Agreed, people need to push for this. Cuz without suggestions, anet will keep thinking ppl are happy when we're not. if it weren't for ppl pushing for "open all" bags... we'd be stuck here with arthritis symptoms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illconceived Was Na.9781 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Samnang.1879" said: > i don't know how "ability to not receive it" translates to reducing drop rate or getting rid of item :/ > > also theres another suggestion: vendor-able.... why do ppl completely ignore everything in the OP and just try as hard as possible to be the devil's advocate or something Read what I wrote again. I didn't translate your idea. I listed all the alternatives, including yours: * Reduce the rate * Use it (or delete it) * Turn the supply off (your suggestion). And I'm saying that since the second is available, the third isn't needed. I'm sure people would use it if it were around and I'm sure folks would complain about not having enough later, too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eidolonemesis.5640 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Samnang.1879" said: > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > I went through the same issue in my thread, dealing with critics who seem to like to argue for the sake of arguing instead of actually coming up with a solution that would benefit everybody. They instead think the status quo is 'it', and that _no_ already-existing system can be made better so as to perform more efficiently. Critical thinkers are few and far between. > > Agreed, people need to push for this. Cuz without suggestions, anet will keep thinking ppl are happy when we're not. if it weren't for ppl pushing for "open all" bags... we'd be stuck here with arthritis symptoms  Agreed, and before Anet revamped the look of the official site here that erased all old threads, I _had_ proof of the very thread I created that 'pushed Anet to the edge to implement the 'Consume-all' and 'Salvage-all' options, to which I also brought up the medical drawback for players who have arthritis problems. And do you know what everyone said in response to that thread a while back? **1.** It will never happen and **2.** It is too much for Anet to code/implement. Guess what is happening in this thread? The same thing! Everybody's afraid of change/new improvement, yet sometimes people don't know what they really want until they finally have it (a paraphrased quote from Steve Jobs himself, co-founder of Apple [i was never a fan of Apple products, yet there was no denying that man's intelligence and scope of perception]). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eidolonemesis.5640 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Cobrakon.3108" said: > Wish there was an option to auto delete or dont loot bloodstone etc. Oh and all blue and green weps and armor. Its not worth the silver.  Bad idea, because then players will cry foul that options do not also exist for every other material to delete them or to not loot them at all. Therefore, what is the problem with Anet increasing the default stack cap for Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments from 250 to 2,500, + 2,500 more for every Material Storage Expander bought from the Gem Store (8 total allowed)? Why can nobody here answer that question? Stop complicating the complication with ideas that are bad for already-exampled reasons. **Now**, before you deliver the counterargument, "Players will also cry foul that all other materials will not also have their stack cap increased from the default 250 to 2,500, + 2,500 more for every Material Storage Expander bought from the Gem Store (8 total allowed)." that is _not_ wise and would make for a very poor argument for reason being every other material does _not_ even come close to being so easily farmed like Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments (fact!) **Therefore**, other materials do _not_ need their stack caps raised in the same way for the reason I just explained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnang.1879 Posted January 9, 2018 Author Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said: > > @"Samnang.1879" said: > > i don't know how "ability to not receive it" translates to reducing drop rate or getting rid of item :/ > > > > also theres another suggestion: vendor-able.... why do ppl completely ignore everything in the OP and just try as hard as possible to be the devil's advocate or something > > Read what I wrote again. I didn't translate your idea. I listed all the alternatives, including yours: > * Reduce the rate > * Use it (or delete it) > * Turn the supply off (your suggestion). > > And I'm saying that since the second is available, the third isn't needed. I'm sure people would use it if it were around and I'm sure folks would complain about not having enough later, too why bring those two up in the first place? since this thread isn't about reducing the rate of a drop... if u want to make that suggestion make ur own thread? its just contaminating this thread... with irrelevant ideas. this thread's pure objective is to a suggestion to implement a system where a player can choose to receieve or not receive bloodstone or be able to vendor it.. reducing the rate or getting rid of it has nothing to do with my thread. and shouldn't be part of this discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnang.1879 Posted January 9, 2018 Author Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > @"Samnang.1879" said: > > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > > I went through the same issue in my thread, dealing with critics who seem to like to argue for the sake of arguing instead of actually coming up with a solution that would benefit everybody. They instead think the status quo is 'it', and that _no_ already-existing system can be made better so as to perform more efficiently. Critical thinkers are few and far between. > > > > Agreed, people need to push for this. Cuz without suggestions, anet will keep thinking ppl are happy when we're not. if it weren't for ppl pushing for "open all" bags... we'd be stuck here with arthritis symptoms > > Agreed, and before Anet revamped the look of the official site here that erased all old threads, I _had_ proof of the very thread I created that 'pushed Anet to the edge to implement the 'Consume-all' and 'Salvage-all' options, to which I also brought up the medical drawback for players who have arthritis problems. And do you know what everyone said in response to that thread a while back? **1.** It will never happen and **2.** It is too much for Anet to code/implement. > > Guess what is happening in this thread? The same thing! Everybody's afraid of change/new improvement, yet sometimes people don't know what they really want until they finally have it (a paraphrased quote from Steve Jobs himself, co-founder of Apple [i was never a fan of Apple products, yet there was no denying that man's intelligence and scope of perception]). That quote is so true. And yes I saw that people opposed to "open all" because they like clicking things 1 by 1 or something. I mean... if they like doing that, then do that... why stop others from clicking all?  It's similar here, if you guys want bloodstone dusts, then go ahead and farm them, some of us play 24/7 so we dont' want it tyvm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenrai Senshi.2017 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 The solution to mats like Bloodstone dust could be very simple. Reduce the amount used in recipes drastically to be more in line with other mats, and subsequently reduce the drop rates proportionally to that amount. That way it would take much longer to cap out on them, but the rate of crafting for those who use them often would remain unchanged.  For example, crafting a bloodstone brick currently costs 100 bloodstone dust. Change the amount used to 10 bloodstone dust, and adjust drop rates to match the change (so, drop rates would be 10% of what they used to be). To begin with, I don't understand why ANet implemented them the way they did. It's almost like they were intentionally trying to create a mat that ate your inventory space, to justify more bank/inventory/collection expansion sales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illconceived Was Na.9781 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Samnang.1879" said: > > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said: > > > @"Samnang.1879" said: > > > i don't know how "ability to not receive it" translates to reducing drop rate or getting rid of item :/ > > > > > > also theres another suggestion: vendor-able.... why do ppl completely ignore everything in the OP and just try as hard as possible to be the devil's advocate or something > > > > Read what I wrote again. I didn't translate your idea. I listed all the alternatives, including yours: > > * Reduce the rate > > * Use it (or delete it) > > * Turn the supply off (your suggestion). > > > > And I'm saying that since the second is available, the third isn't needed. I'm sure people would use it if it were around and I'm sure folks would complain about not having enough later, too > > why bring those two up in the first place? since this thread isn't about reducing the rate of a drop... if u want to make that suggestion make ur own thread? > its just contaminating this thread... with irrelevant ideas. > > this thread's pure objective is to a suggestion to implement a system where a player can choose to receieve or not receive bloodstone or be able to vendor it.. reducing the rate or getting rid of it has nothing to do with my thread. and shouldn't be part of this discussion. On the contrary, if you want to address an issue, it's a good idea to understand what the issue is fundamentally and what alternatives are available. You've suggested one possibility, but that doesn't mean it's the only idea and it might be that some other concept is better suited to dealing with the issue you want to address.  Still, if you want to ignore everything outside the microcosm of a narrow view of the issue, then: no, I can't agree. You can literally just delete the stuff; that's not a big enough annoyance to warrant the creation of a new mechanic. And if I were going to enable people to turn off a faucet, I'd start with minor and major runes|sigils. Those don't stack, can't be deposited, and can't be deleted stack at a time. And they are worth even less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eidolonemesis.5640 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > The solution to mats like Bloodstone dust could be very simple. Reduce the amount used in recipes drastically to be more in line with other mats, and subsequently reduce the drop rates proportionally to that amount. That way it would take much longer to cap out on them, but the rate of crafting for those who use them often would remain unchanged. > > For example, crafting a bloodstone brick currently costs 100 bloodstone dust. Change the amount used to 10 bloodstone dust, and adjust drop rates to match the change (so, drop rates would be 10% of what they used to be). > > To begin with, I don't understand why ANet implemented them the way they did. It's almost like they were intentionally trying to create a mat that ate your inventory space, to justify more bank/inventory/collection expansion sales. My solution is much better, because not only it is a money-maker that _will_ generate sales, the solution I devised is directly tied to the Material Storage Expander from the Gem Store that _will_ benefit all players even more than they do now, and any player who already has the maximum number of Material Storage Expanders purchased on their Account will automatically receive the benefits of a 2,500 default stack cap increase to Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments, + 2,500 more for every Material Storage Expander they already bought from the Gem Store (8 total allowed). **Furthermore**, I would also like to add to those three listed materials that Pieces of Candy Corn be thrown into the mix, too, for a default stack size to 2,500, + 2,500 more for every Material Storage Expander bought, since the Candy Corn Gobbler is so useful for generating random buffs (players are buying Candy Corn like crazy because of it). **Note:** As noted in an earlier comment I made in this thread, the new Storage Expander text would need to be changed to, "Double-click to increase the maximum stack size of all stored materials by 250. Easily acquired materials like Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, Empyreal Fragments, and Pieces of Candy Corn have their stack sizes increased by 2,500." to ensure Material Storage Expander sales gain more traction. **P.S.** Oh, and while we are on the subject, decrease the cooldown on the Candy Corn Gobbler from 5 seconds to at least 3 seconds, if not to remove the cooldown entirely. **With that fix** to the Candy Corn Gobbler's cooldown, **in conjunction with** tying the 'clutter' solution for Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, Empyreal Fragments, _and_ Pieces of Candy Corn to the Material Storage Expanders, that = more $$$ for you, Anet, from the Material Storage Expanders _and_ the Candy Corn Gobbler when it is re-released next Halloween, and you know this. Thank you, Anet (even though you will more than likely never read this) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenrai Senshi.2017 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > The solution to mats like Bloodstone dust could be very simple. Reduce the amount used in recipes drastically to be more in line with other mats, and subsequently reduce the drop rates proportionally to that amount. That way it would take much longer to cap out on them, but the rate of crafting for those who use them often would remain unchanged. > > > > For example, crafting a bloodstone brick currently costs 100 bloodstone dust. Change the amount used to 10 bloodstone dust, and adjust drop rates to match the change (so, drop rates would be 10% of what they used to be). > > > > To begin with, I don't understand why ANet implemented them the way they did. It's almost like they were intentionally trying to create a mat that ate your inventory space, to justify more bank/inventory/collection expansion sales. > > My solution is much better, because not only it is a money-maker that _will_ generate sales, the solution I devised is directly tied to the Material Storage expander from the Gem Store that _will_ benefit all players even more than they do now, and any player who already has the maximum number of Material Storage expanders purchased on their Account will automatically receive the benefits of a 2,500 default stack cap increase to Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments, + 2,500 more for every Material Storage expander they already bought from the Gem Store (8 total allowed). To be honest, I don't see how your solution is better. You're sorely overestimating how much value players put in Bloodstone, Dragonite Ore or Imperial Fragments. They are widely considered useless mats, outside of being consumed for some loot bags. I can't imagine anyone saying to themselves "Oh, my Bloodstone dust collection is full, I better go buy a collection expansion so I can collect more!" No, they'd rather just delete the excess, instead of wasting money specifically just to collect more of it. Your idea certainly won't drive sales for ANet and there is no real benefit for gamers either, because if they are collecting so much bloodstone to the point where they are storing tens of thousands of it, it means they aren't crafting with it or consuming it fast enough. If they are doing neither of those two things, then the mat is essentially useless to them. In the end, collection balance can be achieved simply by balancing the drop rates for consumables, and having recipes balanced around those drop rates. The idea in this case is to simply circumvent the inconvenience of having to delete certain T6 mats on a regular basis and instead widen the time between such acts in order to render them moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eidolonemesis.5640 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > The solution to mats like Bloodstone dust could be very simple. Reduce the amount used in recipes drastically to be more in line with other mats, and subsequently reduce the drop rates proportionally to that amount. That way it would take much longer to cap out on them, but the rate of crafting for those who use them often would remain unchanged. > > > > > > For example, crafting a bloodstone brick currently costs 100 bloodstone dust. Change the amount used to 10 bloodstone dust, and adjust drop rates to match the change (so, drop rates would be 10% of what they used to be). > > > > > > To begin with, I don't understand why ANet implemented them the way they did. It's almost like they were intentionally trying to create a mat that ate your inventory space, to justify more bank/inventory/collection expansion sales. > > > > My solution is much better, because not only it is a money-maker that _will_ generate sales, the solution I devised is directly tied to the Material Storage expander from the Gem Store that _will_ benefit all players even more than they do now, and any player who already has the maximum number of Material Storage expanders purchased on their Account will automatically receive the benefits of a 2,500 default stack cap increase to Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments, + 2,500 more for every Material Storage expander they already bought from the Gem Store (8 total allowed). > > To be honest, I don't see how your solution is better. You're sorely overestimating how much value players put in Bloodstone, Dragonite Ore or Imperial Fragments. They are widely considered useless mats, outside of being consumed for some loot bags. I can't imagine anyone saying to themselves "Oh, my Bloodstone dust collection is full, I better go buy a collection expansion so I can collect more!" No, they'd rather just delete the excess, instead of wasting money specifically just to collect more of it. Your idea certainly won't drive sales for ANet and there is no real benefit for gamers either, because if they are collecting so much bloodstone to the point where they are storing tens of thousands of it, it means they aren't crafting with it or consuming it fast enough. If they are doing neither of those two things, then the mat is essentially useless to them. > > In the end, collection balance can be achieved simply by balancing the drop rates for consumables, and having recipes balanced around those drop rates. The idea in this case is to simply circumvent the inconvenience of having to delete certain T6 mats on a regular basis and instead widen the time between such acts in order to render them moot.  > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > The solution to mats like Bloodstone dust could be very simple. Reduce the amount used in recipes drastically to be more in line with other mats, and subsequently reduce the drop rates proportionally to that amount. That way it would take much longer to cap out on them, but the rate of crafting for those who use them often would remain unchanged. > > > > > > For example, crafting a bloodstone brick currently costs 100 bloodstone dust. Change the amount used to 10 bloodstone dust, and adjust drop rates to match the change (so, drop rates would be 10% of what they used to be). > > > > > > To begin with, I don't understand why ANet implemented them the way they did. It's almost like they were intentionally trying to create a mat that ate your inventory space, to justify more bank/inventory/collection expansion sales. > > > > My solution is much better, because not only it is a money-maker that _will_ generate sales, the solution I devised is directly tied to the Material Storage expander from the Gem Store that _will_ benefit all players even more than they do now, and any player who already has the maximum number of Material Storage expanders purchased on their Account will automatically receive the benefits of a 2,500 default stack cap increase to Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments, + 2,500 more for every Material Storage expander they already bought from the Gem Store (8 total allowed). > > To be honest, I don't see how your solution is better. You're sorely overestimating how much value players put in Bloodstone, Dragonite Ore or Imperial Fragments. They are widely considered useless mats, outside of being consumed for some loot bags. I can't imagine anyone saying to themselves "Oh, my Bloodstone dust collection is full, I better go buy a collection expansion so I can collect more!" No, they'd rather just delete the excess, instead of wasting money specifically just to collect more of it. Your idea certainly won't drive sales for ANet and there is no real benefit for gamers either, because if they are collecting so much bloodstone to the point where they are storing tens of thousands of it, it means they aren't crafting with it or consuming it fast enough. If they are doing neither of those two things, then the mat is essentially useless to them. > > In the end, collection balance can be achieved simply by balancing the drop rates for consumables, and having recipes balanced around those drop rates. The idea in this case is to simply circumvent the inconvenience of having to delete certain T6 mats on a regular basis and instead widen the time between such acts in order to render them moot.  Everything you said is very subjective, and in some parts, assumptuous. Whether or not certain players collecting Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments sees them as useful to them is _not_ the point. At least players can store more of it in one place **to deal with altogether at a later time**, be it they actually use it or they just destroy it all. You also did not acknowledge my mention of Pieces of Candy Corn getting a stack size increase to 2,500 by default (for those who bought/buy a Candy Corn Gobbler during Halloween), a bonus to the other 3 materials that also get their stack sizes increased to 2,500 by default, +2,500 more for every Material Storage Expander bought. Furthermore, no other idea in this thread even has so much an inkling of a chance of generating $$$ **whereas** my idea _does_, regardless of what _you_ personally think, because not everyone's gameplay experiences are the same. Anet is clearly, most certainly _not_ going to implement your proposed idea, so why not get behind an idea tied to a Gem Store item? You forget Anet is a business, too, **so** if you can come up with a better idea than mine that has the potential to generate $$$ in some way, shape, or form to make it worth Anet's time, then I will be convinced my idea is complete garbage as you insinuate. Until then, don't knock the idea I devised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenrai Senshi.2017 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > > The solution to mats like Bloodstone dust could be very simple. Reduce the amount used in recipes drastically to be more in line with other mats, and subsequently reduce the drop rates proportionally to that amount. That way it would take much longer to cap out on them, but the rate of crafting for those who use them often would remain unchanged. > > > > > > > > For example, crafting a bloodstone brick currently costs 100 bloodstone dust. Change the amount used to 10 bloodstone dust, and adjust drop rates to match the change (so, drop rates would be 10% of what they used to be). > > > > > > > > To begin with, I don't understand why ANet implemented them the way they did. It's almost like they were intentionally trying to create a mat that ate your inventory space, to justify more bank/inventory/collection expansion sales. > > > > > > My solution is much better, because not only it is a money-maker that _will_ generate sales, the solution I devised is directly tied to the Material Storage expander from the Gem Store that _will_ benefit all players even more than they do now, and any player who already has the maximum number of Material Storage expanders purchased on their Account will automatically receive the benefits of a 2,500 default stack cap increase to Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments, + 2,500 more for every Material Storage expander they already bought from the Gem Store (8 total allowed). > > > > To be honest, I don't see how your solution is better. You're sorely overestimating how much value players put in Bloodstone, Dragonite Ore or Imperial Fragments. They are widely considered useless mats, outside of being consumed for some loot bags. I can't imagine anyone saying to themselves "Oh, my Bloodstone dust collection is full, I better go buy a collection expansion so I can collect more!" No, they'd rather just delete the excess, instead of wasting money specifically just to collect more of it. Your idea certainly won't drive sales for ANet and there is no real benefit for gamers either, because if they are collecting so much bloodstone to the point where they are storing tens of thousands of it, it means they aren't crafting with it or consuming it fast enough. If they are doing neither of those two things, then the mat is essentially useless to them. > > > > In the end, collection balance can be achieved simply by balancing the drop rates for consumables, and having recipes balanced around those drop rates. The idea in this case is to simply circumvent the inconvenience of having to delete certain T6 mats on a regular basis and instead widen the time between such acts in order to render them moot. > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > > The solution to mats like Bloodstone dust could be very simple. Reduce the amount used in recipes drastically to be more in line with other mats, and subsequently reduce the drop rates proportionally to that amount. That way it would take much longer to cap out on them, but the rate of crafting for those who use them often would remain unchanged. > > > > > > > > For example, crafting a bloodstone brick currently costs 100 bloodstone dust. Change the amount used to 10 bloodstone dust, and adjust drop rates to match the change (so, drop rates would be 10% of what they used to be). > > > > > > > > To begin with, I don't understand why ANet implemented them the way they did. It's almost like they were intentionally trying to create a mat that ate your inventory space, to justify more bank/inventory/collection expansion sales. > > > > > > My solution is much better, because not only it is a money-maker that _will_ generate sales, the solution I devised is directly tied to the Material Storage expander from the Gem Store that _will_ benefit all players even more than they do now, and any player who already has the maximum number of Material Storage expanders purchased on their Account will automatically receive the benefits of a 2,500 default stack cap increase to Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments, + 2,500 more for every Material Storage expander they already bought from the Gem Store (8 total allowed). > > > > To be honest, I don't see how your solution is better. You're sorely overestimating how much value players put in Bloodstone, Dragonite Ore or Imperial Fragments. They are widely considered useless mats, outside of being consumed for some loot bags. I can't imagine anyone saying to themselves "Oh, my Bloodstone dust collection is full, I better go buy a collection expansion so I can collect more!" No, they'd rather just delete the excess, instead of wasting money specifically just to collect more of it. Your idea certainly won't drive sales for ANet and there is no real benefit for gamers either, because if they are collecting so much bloodstone to the point where they are storing tens of thousands of it, it means they aren't crafting with it or consuming it fast enough. If they are doing neither of those two things, then the mat is essentially useless to them. > > > > In the end, collection balance can be achieved simply by balancing the drop rates for consumables, and having recipes balanced around those drop rates. The idea in this case is to simply circumvent the inconvenience of having to delete certain T6 mats on a regular basis and instead widen the time between such acts in order to render them moot. > > Everything you said is very subjective. Whether or not certain players collecting Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments sees them as useful to them is _not_ the point. At least players can store more of it in one place **to deal with altogether at a later time**, be it they actually use it or they just destroy it all. You also did not acknowledge my mention of Pieces of Candy Corn getting a stack size increase to 2,500 by default, a bonus to the other 3 materials that also get their stack sizes increased to 2,500 by default. > > Furthermore, no other idea in this thread even has so much an inkling of a chance of generating $$$ **whereas** my idea _does_, regardless of what _you_ personally think, because not everyone's gameplay experiences are the same. > > Anet is clearly, most certainly _not_ going to implement your proposed idea, so why not get behind an idea tied to a Gem Store item? You forget Anet is a business, too, **so** if you can come up with a better idea than mine that has the potential to generate $$$ in some way, shape, or form to make it worth Anet's time, then I will be convinced my idea is complete garbage as you insinuate. Until then, don't knock the idea I devised. To be honest, you were the one knocking ideas, not me. My idea is functionally the same as your, but just a different way of implementing it. And chances are, neither of them would be implemented either way. If ANet wanted to come up with a way to drive collection sales, I'm sure they can think of something better. Lol. But you seem to think very highly of yourself, outright stating that your idea is better than someone else's, only to later accuse them of knocking yours. That seems very hypocritical. XD You seem to think that reducing drop rates for a mat is somehow fundamentally different from expanding the collection for that same mat. This is not really the case. If I get 250 of a mat per day and have a maximum storage of 2500, or get 25 a day and have a maximum storage of 250, it will still take the same amount of time to fill the collection. So your 'idea' does not incentivize increase collection sales any more than mine does, which is to say, not at all. If your idea includes other mats, so be it, but we're not discussing other mats right now, we are discussing the mats the original post has bought into question. Any other ideas that extend beyond that are irrelevant to the original post, and discussing them is akin to derailing the thread topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodstealer.5978 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said: > > Open all those Champion Bags on a mid-level character. You won't received any Ascended Mats. > > > > Good luck. > > Piles of Bloodstone Dust do _not_ come from Champion Bags alone. They come from Mining Bloodstone Crystals nodes in Bloodstone Fen (mind you, an area _not_ suited for mid-level characters), along with a slew of other sources Piles of Bloodstone Dust come from listed here: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Pile_of_Bloodstone_Dust > > And Piles of Bloodstone Dust are _not_ the only ascended material that is easy to acquire. Dragonite Ore and Empyreal Fragments fall in the same category of easily-acquired materials. > > All Anet needs to do is increase the storage cap of easily acquired ascended materials like Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments,(as explained in my other comment in this thread), for the simple fact ascended materials like Pile of Bloodstone Dust are a lot easier to acquire 250 of **vs.** other materials we store in our Material Storage that take more time to acquire 250 of. Therefore, instead of the default cap for Bloodstone Dust being 250 like other materials, the cap should be 2,500, and if you buy Material Storage Expanders, that cap increases in 2,500 increments. > > The solution is _not_ to make Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, or Empyreal Fragments 'destroyable'. The solution is _not_ to decrease their drop rate. The solution is _not_ to rely on feeders alone to combat the easy accumulation issue, since they are only good for a few uses per day, and the solution is _not_ to open certain Bags on mid-level characters to ensure no ascended items are given, since that is a tiny annoying thorn in the neck over time, having to log to the character screen to do that each time. **To cram it in a nutshell**, the solution is _none_ of the solutions mentioned thus far. > > **The apropos solution is** in the aforementioned as I explained it two bodies of texts ago, that way we have a 'tidy' amount of those materials beyond the 250/2000 stack cap (depending on how many Material Storage Expanders are bought) to do whatever we want with them **all at once** at that point. And that is the thing; you have to keep condensing and/or use feeders for each 250 Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments you receive to prevent your Inventory or your Bank from becoming too filled with them. You simply _cannot_ store them all at once beyond a 250/2500 stack cap and do whatever you want with them all at once for a later time. > > Arguing, "Well what do you need 2,500+ Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, or Empyreal Fragments for?" is beside the point. The point is they are too easy to acquire from too many sources. Yes, we can convert those materials to condense them, or have them consumed by feeders, yet that is _not_ enough, because we too many times accumulate those materials beyond the 250/2000 stack size, and feeders are only good for a few uses per day. > > I knew when I made my thread about this very issue back in Dec of 2017 that I was not the only one, so I totally understand where the OP is coming from, unlike other players here who do not seem to understand such a simple gripe. Like you were asked over and over in your poorly thought through post on this back last year.. what will you do if storage cap is increased and maxed out in a few more days. If you are amassing such quantities so quickly and not using/disposing of them in ways already mentioned then an increase in storage cap wont suffice it just gives you a few more days before you start whinning about it again. The issue is there needs to be more options of use or a low value vendor value attached to these products not the ability to hoard more for a few more days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eidolonemesis.5640 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > To be honest, you were the one knocking ideas, not me. I did, because I have room to do so, and do not sit there and say you did not knock my idea, because you did, saying it is useless. > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: >My idea is functionally the same as your, but just a different way of implementing it. Lol. No it is not. > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: >If ANet wanted to come up with a way to drive collection sales, I'm sure they can think of something better. Well, Anet clearly has _not_ thought up something better since Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments have been in the game, so start brainstorming a better idea than mine that actually is like mine, but better. > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: >Lol. But you seem to think very highly of yourself, outright stating that your idea is better than someone else's, only to later accuse them of knocking yours. That seems very hypocritical. XD There is a difference between confidence in oneself and/or in one's ideas and thinking highly of oneself. Learn the difference. Furthermore, your use of the word 'hypocritical' is incorrect. Hypocritical would be me saying I do not knock other people's ideas when I clearly do knock other people's ideas (and for good reason). In addition to that, to 'accuse' somebody of something often means to do so without evidence that they actually did something. In this case, you actually did knock my idea and called it useless, therefore, it is not considered an 'accusation' but a matter of fact. > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > You seem to think that reducing drop rates for a mat is somehow fundamentally different from expanding the collection for that same mat. This is not really the case. If I get 250 of a mat per day and have a maximum storage of 2500, or get 25 a day and have a maximum storage of 250, it will still take the same amount of time to fill the collection. So your 'idea' does not incentivize increase collection sales any more than mine does, which is to say, not at all. Giving your above point the benefit of the doubt, and in the hypothetical situation I were to agree with your point (which I do not), the difference between my idea and your idea at that point would be at least my idea gives players the impression they are getting more for their money, and that my friend, is the art of business, and Anet already uses such sale tactics to make it seem like players are getting more for their money, yet they are really not. With that being said in mind, in the event my idea did not give players more for their money (as you say), the implementation of my idea will also _not_ negatively affect Material Storage Expander sales, either. > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: >If your idea includes other mats, so be it, but we're not discussing other mats right now, we are discussing the mats the original post has bought into question. Any other ideas that extend beyond that are irrelevant to the original post, and discussing them is akin to derailing the thread topic. Just because a material (in this case, Pieces of Candy Corn) falls under the category 'Festive Materials' does _not_ mean it does not also fall under the category of easy-to-acquire materials like Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments. Therefore, my mention of Pieces of Candy Corn is _not_ off topic since they actually do have a good use with the release of the Candy Corn Gobbler, and since they _are_ considered a material too easy to acquire. **Sure**, there are other Festive Materials, too, yet they do not provide what Pieces of Candy Corn provide in buffs from the Candy Corn Gobbler so as to warrant a stack size increase to 2,500 by default. For example, Candy Canes give +10% Karma, yet that is all they give, and so that is _not_ enough to give them a stack size increase when other food items from the TP provide the same buff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eidolonemesis.5640 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Bloodstealer.5978" said: > Like you were asked over and over in your poorly thought through post on this back last year.. what will you do if storage cap is increased and maxed out in a few more days. > If you are amassing such quantities so quickly and not using/disposing of them in ways already mentioned then an increase in storage cap wont suffice it just gives you a few more days before you start whinning about it again. > The issue is there needs to be more options of use or a low value vendor value attached to these products not the ability to hoard more for a few more days. All answers to your questions _were_ answered in my thread last year. If you did not get it then, you will _not_ get it now (clearly!), and since I knew that last year, that is when I stopped replying to you altogether because I believed it a waste of my time. With that being said, I will try just once more... It is _not_ a question of 'what' I will use my stock of Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments on, but a matter of 'when' I will use them (and I will, on my time). Not everybody wants to consume Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments through feeders or condense them into another material **as they go** every time one of them reaches a 250 stack size in their Inventory. I like to have my materials all in one place that I can deal with altogether **at a later time**, and you're not getting that, I don't know what to tell you at this point. Furthermore, there would be no 'whining' involved (as explained to you in my thread last years) because a stack size of 20K Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments (assuming you bought 8 Material Storage Expanders) _is_ the same as have a regular material capped out at a stack size of 2,000, because they are not as 'common' so as to accumulate fast as Piles of Bloodstone Dust, Dragonite Ore, and Empyreal Fragments do in one's Inventory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inculpatus cedo.9234 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Dreamy Lu.3865" said: > I don't agree with your request OP sorry. Your personal opinion is not a global statement valid for all. > > @Inculpatus cedo.9234, I believe that you are probably wrong talking about a "few" players: You forget something important: Ascended armors. They require vision crystals, that are crafted using bloodstone dust, dragonite and empyreal. All players doing WvW, Fractals and Raids need ascended armors. I therefore tend to believe that saying about a "few" players does probably not reflect a reality. > > Personally, I use bloodstone dust a lot. On an - almost - daily basis, I consume them with the different gift eaters (Herta for bloodstone dust for example) and have good use of the drops I get that way. Since I do WvW, fractals and raid, I need them to craft ascended armors too. So, for me, an option to have them destroyed directly if the player do not want them is OK, but I do not agree on a reduction of the drop rate. Â Um...that's what I said. Doubtful the Devs would remove the items in question because a few/some request it. Many others use the materials. :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenrai Senshi.2017 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > To be honest, you were the one knocking ideas, not me. > > I did, because I have room to do so, and do not sit there and say you did not knock my idea, because you did, saying it is useless. > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > >My idea is functionally the same as your, but just a different way of implementing it. > > Lol. No it is not. Ah, when this the level of argument bought to a discussion, it's a good indication that it's time for me to stop taking part in it. Simple words, no actual substance to back them up. I'll leave you to your ideas, and your "confidence" in believing that they are simply so good that they cannot be scrutinized, but I'm afraid the reality is very different.  Still, do let me know when ANet implements your idea, I'd be interested to hear such news, though I may be waiting a very long time to hear it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eidolonemesis.5640 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > To be honest, you were the one knocking ideas, not me. > > > > I did, because I have room to do so, and do not sit there and say you did not knock my idea, because you did, saying it is useless. > > > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > >My idea is functionally the same as your, but just a different way of implementing it. > > > > Lol. No it is not. > > Ah, when this the level of argument bought to a discussion, it's a good indication that it's time for me to stop taking part in it. Simple words, no actual substance to back them up. I'll leave you to your ideas, and your "confidence" in believing that they are simply so good that they cannot be scrutinized, but I'm afraid the reality is very different. > > Still, do let me know when ANet implements your idea, I'd be interested to hear such news, though I may be waiting a very long time to hear it. It is more like you ran out of ammunition, so you forfeited. You can dish it out, yet you cannot take the heat. How silly of you to take one brief one-liner of mine and use that as leverage to say my argument is weak, when in fact I have been long-winded enough, in conjunction with the fact later on in that comment I countered you even more. You simply do not like the fact I pointed out your choice of words were used incorrectly (as a direct result of misplaced assumptions), along with the other points I made. Just to give you a recap (in case you did not understand my counterpoint to you), regardless if my idea is useless or not it will _not_ have a negative effect on Material Storage Expanders, and whether or not the 'additions' to those Material Storage Expanders are actually useful to certain players is subjective. Simple. as. that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenrai Senshi.2017 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > > To be honest, you were the one knocking ideas, not me. > > > > > > I did, because I have room to do so, and do not sit there and say you did not knock my idea, because you did, saying it is useless. > > > > > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > >My idea is functionally the same as your, but just a different way of implementing it. > > > > > > Lol. No it is not. > > > > Ah, when this the level of argument bought to a discussion, it's a good indication that it's time for me to stop taking part in it. Simple words, no actual substance to back them up. I'll leave you to your ideas, and your "confidence" in believing that they are simply so good that they cannot be scrutinized, but I'm afraid the reality is very different. > > > > Still, do let me know when ANet implements your idea, I'd be interested to hear such news, though I may be waiting a very long time to hear it. > > It is more like you ran out of ammunition, so you forfeited. You can dish it out, but you cannot take the heat. How silly of you to take one brief one-liner of mine and use that as leverage to say my argument is weak, when in fact I have been long-winded enough, in conjunction with the fact later on in that comment I countered you even more. > > You simply do not like the fact I pointed out your choice of words were used incorrectly (as a direct result of misplaced assumptions), along with the other points I made. So someone who dismisses another person's argument with a "Lol, no", without actually explaining their disagreement is telling me I ran out of ammo? Nice try, but in this case, I just don't feel like debating with someone who has double standards. It is my right to do so, Irrespective of whatever fanciful reasons you'd try to come up with to explain it off, which I really don't care about. Lol. XD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayakaru.6583 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Samnang.1879" said: > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > > > > Even if you don’t care about making gold, others do and since mystic forge stones are both rare enough and valuable enough because they’re needed to make mystic salvage kits to salvage rare items and to use in the mystic forge. It would be a bad idea to make them easily deletable. People should consider what is best over all when making suggestions that would affect others and not suggest changes that would cause problems for other people. > > > > > > > > the best thing in this case would be to not have to type something unless it's legendary item level. who cares if someone acc delete a mystic forge stone? its not even that important. > i accidentally deleted a lot of things, not gonna cry over them since they can be obtained back. and if it's that important to somebody then that somebody should think twice before clicking yes to something Please read what you reply to. *lots of people would care if they accidentally deleted their forge stones because to the average player they have a lot of value* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eidolonemesis.5640 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > > > To be honest, you were the one knocking ideas, not me. > > > > > > > > I did, because I have room to do so, and do not sit there and say you did not knock my idea, because you did, saying it is useless. > > > > > > > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > > >My idea is functionally the same as your, but just a different way of implementing it. > > > > > > > > Lol. No it is not. > > > > > > Ah, when this the level of argument bought to a discussion, it's a good indication that it's time for me to stop taking part in it. Simple words, no actual substance to back them up. I'll leave you to your ideas, and your "confidence" in believing that they are simply so good that they cannot be scrutinized, but I'm afraid the reality is very different. > > > > > > Still, do let me know when ANet implements your idea, I'd be interested to hear such news, though I may be waiting a very long time to hear it. > > > > It is more like you ran out of ammunition, so you forfeited. You can dish it out, but you cannot take the heat. How silly of you to take one brief one-liner of mine and use that as leverage to say my argument is weak, when in fact I have been long-winded enough, in conjunction with the fact later on in that comment I countered you even more. > > > > You simply do not like the fact I pointed out your choice of words were used incorrectly (as a direct result of misplaced assumptions), along with the other points I made. > > So someone who dismisses another person's argument with a "Lol, no", without actually explaining their disagreement is telling me I ran out of ammo? Nice try, but in this case, I just don't feel like debating with someone who has double standards. It is my right to do so, Irrespective of whatever fanciful reasons you'd try to come up with to explain it off, which I really don't care about. Lol. XD I do not have to explain to you that your idea is different from mine; you should already know it is different. Common sense. Start using it. My idea is a sales pitch, your idea is clearly not, and that is just one big difference between our ideas. And like I said, whether the additions to the Material Storage Expanders are 'useful' or not from my idea is subjective for each player. **P.S.** It is almost 6 a.m. for me at the moment and I am going to sleep now. I will get back to any feedback later on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenrai Senshi.2017 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said: > > > > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > > > > To be honest, you were the one knocking ideas, not me. > > > > > > > > > > I did, because I have room to do so, and do not sit there and say you did not knock my idea, because you did, saying it is useless. > > > > > > > > > > > @"Tenrai Senshi.2017" said: > > > > > >My idea is functionally the same as your, but just a different way of implementing it. > > > > > > > > > > Lol. No it is not. > > > > > > > > Ah, when this the level of argument bought to a discussion, it's a good indication that it's time for me to stop taking part in it. Simple words, no actual substance to back them up. I'll leave you to your ideas, and your "confidence" in believing that they are simply so good that they cannot be scrutinized, but I'm afraid the reality is very different. > > > > > > > > Still, do let me know when ANet implements your idea, I'd be interested to hear such news, though I may be waiting a very long time to hear it. > > > > > > It is more like you ran out of ammunition, so you forfeited. You can dish it out, but you cannot take the heat. How silly of you to take one brief one-liner of mine and use that as leverage to say my argument is weak, when in fact I have been long-winded enough, in conjunction with the fact later on in that comment I countered you even more. > > > > > > You simply do not like the fact I pointed out your choice of words were used incorrectly (as a direct result of misplaced assumptions), along with the other points I made. > > > > So someone who dismisses another person's argument with a "Lol, no", without actually explaining their disagreement is telling me I ran out of ammo? Nice try, but in this case, I just don't feel like debating with someone who has double standards. It is my right to do so, Irrespective of whatever fanciful reasons you'd try to come up with to explain it off, which I really don't care about. Lol. XD > > I do not have to explain to you that your idea is different from mine; you should already know that. Common sense. Start using it. My idea is a sales pitch, your idea is clearly not, and that is just one big difference between our ideas. And like I said, whether the additions to the Material Storage Expanders are 'useful' or not is subjective for each player. In the same breath, I don't have to take part in a debate I don't want to, which is also common sense. Isn't it strange some people like to project their own ideas, beliefs or standards onto others to try and explain their actions, when the reality is often much simpler? You're trying to continue a discussion I no longer want to have, you are welcome to do that with someone else. Good luck! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnang.1879 Posted January 9, 2018 Author Share Posted January 9, 2018 > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said: > On the contrary, if you want to address an issue, it's a good idea to understand what the issue is fundamentally and what alternatives are available. You've suggested one possibility, but that doesn't mean it's the only idea and it might be that some other concept is better suited to dealing with the issue you want to address. > > Still, if you want to ignore everything outside the microcosm of a narrow view of the issue, then: no, I can't agree. You can literally just delete the stuff; that's not a big enough annoyance to warrant the creation of a new mechanic. > > And if I were going to enable people to turn off a faucet, I'd start with minor and major runes|sigils. Those don't stack, can't be deposited, and can't be deleted stack at a time. And they are worth even less. they wont cuz like someobdy mentioned b4, these sigils/runes influence ppl to buy more bag slots and/or gamble for permanent merchants.  also i dont have a problem with items that are vendor-able. bloodstone dusts and co on the other hand, cannot be vendored. if anet wants to keep ppl buying bag slot yet improves QoL for others have already have maxed bag slots/inv space, then they should make it vendor-able or let us have the option to not receive it. it's simple as that.  it's got nothing to do with reducing the drop rate or getting rid of them, idk why a few ppl keep bringing this up, but it has nothing to do with my suggestion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now