On difficulty modes (Game Maker's Toolkit)

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"yann.1946" said:

> @"Ohoni.6057"

> Would you then be happy if everything could be sold and bought trough the tradingpost?

 

The idea came up earlier in the thread. I think it would be an improvement over the current reality, in that it would at least provide some additional options, but if that's all that changes then it raises two new problems, 1. the prices would be set by the people already raiding, and 2. it would give raiders even *more* cool stuff just for raiding. Part of the problem is the unreasonable level of rewards for players just enjoying the game, it shouldn't also be a massive revenue stream. The actual solution needs to involve making the items available *without* other players acting as middlmen. There should be alternate methods to earn them *directly* from the game.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> That argument can't apply where multiple rewards are involved, because "you can have these rewards, but not these other rewards" is not a satisfactory response when you don't care about the rewards offered, and want the rewards withheld. If you can come up with a way to *genuinely* satisfy players who want Envoy armor but never want to hard mode raid or buy raid runs, then I'm all ears, but until then, you aren't selling anything I'm interested in buying.

 

Why do you expect these players should be satisfied? No matter what you do, you can't satisfy everyone. It's literally impossible. So what makes *these* players special so we should seek solutions to their specific satisfaction?

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > That argument can't apply where multiple rewards are involved, because "you can have these rewards, but not these other rewards" is not a satisfactory response when you don't care about the rewards offered, and want the rewards withheld. If you can come up with a way to *genuinely* satisfy players who want Envoy armor but never want to hard mode raid or buy raid runs, then I'm all ears, but until then, you aren't selling anything I'm interested in buying.

>

> Why do you expect these players should be satisfied? No matter what you do, you can't satisfy everyone. It's literally impossible. So what makes *these* players special so we should seek solutions to their specific satisfaction?

 

We can only try to satisfy those that can be satisfied. If someone can't be satisfied that he has something, unless he's *also* allowed to insist that someone else *can't* have it? Then nothing can be done for him.

[yann.1946]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"yann.1946" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057"

> > Would you then be happy if everything could be sold and bought trough the tradingpost?

>

> The idea came up earlier in the thread. I think it would be an improvement over the current reality, in that it would at least provide some additional options, but if that's all that changes then it raises two new problems, 1. the prices would be set by the people already raiding, and 2. it would give raiders even *more* cool stuff just for raiding. Part of the problem is the unreasonable level of rewards for players just enjoying the game, it shouldn't also be a massive revenue stream. The actual solution needs to involve making the items available *without* other players acting as middlmen. There should be alternate methods to earn them *directly* from the game.

 

It's both the sellers and buyers to set the price, not only the sellers.

 

Personaly i feel being able to buying everything would be a bad move for the game because people would get bored faster. People need An incentive to do the new maps for example

[FrizzFreston.5290]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > That argument can't apply where multiple rewards are involved, because "you can have these rewards, but not these other rewards" is not a satisfactory response when you don't care about the rewards offered, and want the rewards withheld. If you can come up with a way to *genuinely* satisfy players who want Envoy armor but never want to hard mode raid or buy raid runs, then I'm all ears, but until then, you aren't selling anything I'm interested in buying.

> >

> > Why do you expect these players should be satisfied? No matter what you do, you can't satisfy everyone. It's literally impossible. So what makes *these* players special so we should seek solutions to their specific satisfaction?

>

> We can only try to satisfy those that can be satisfied. If someone can't be satisfied that he has something, unless he's *also* allowed to insist that someone else *can't* have it? Then nothing can be done for him.

 

I think its more that players who like unique rewards like that theres specific challenges to overcome that those rewards represent that and has very little to do with other people not having it. Especially as the content is there and everyone can have it. Ofcourse not everyone will want to overcome said challenges.

 

This argument of yours that players who like unique rewards want others not to have it and thats the only reason they like it, is false. Youre filling in what these people think, how they think and if not that they wouldnt have a problem with it. You know what kind of argument that is all too well.

[zealex.9410]

Yeah id prob like it but im an adult and i understand that i cant have everything and wvw will lose something if all their unique items are available in pve.

 

Im not entitled to anything u see i can just work towards stuff, not demand to get them.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > That argument can't apply where multiple rewards are involved, because "you can have these rewards, but not these other rewards" is not a satisfactory response when you don't care about the rewards offered, and want the rewards withheld. If you can come up with a way to *genuinely* satisfy players who want Envoy armor but never want to hard mode raid or buy raid runs, then I'm all ears, but until then, you aren't selling anything I'm interested in buying.

> >

> > Why do you expect these players should be satisfied? No matter what you do, you can't satisfy everyone. It's literally impossible. So what makes *these* players special so we should seek solutions to their specific satisfaction?

>

> We can only try to satisfy those that can be satisfied. If someone can't be satisfied that he has something, unless he's *also* allowed to insist that someone else *can't* have it? Then nothing can be done for him.

 

But everyone can, in fact, have it. The game gives all its players exactly the same rules. It's not about not having it, it's about being fair. And giving everyone the **same** rules is as fair as it gets. All you're asking is changing the rules because you don't like them. But what about people who already followed the existing rules and won?

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> This argument of yours that players who like unique rewards want others not to have it and thats the only reason they like it, is false. Youre filling in what these people think, how they think and if not that they wouldnt have a problem with it. You know what kind of argument that is all too well.

The only value of "unique" in unique rewards is exactly this - that the other people do not have them. The only reason why someone might be insisting on exclusives remaining exclusives is because they don't want those exclusives to become more widely available.

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> But everyone can, in fact, have it.

No. Only Raiders can.

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> The game gives all its players exactly the same rules. It's not about not having it, it's about being fair. And giving everyone the **same** rules is as fair as it gets.

When the same rules treat different players differently based on what they like and what they find entertaining, they're hardly fair.

 

 

[Sarrs.4831]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> When the same rules treat different players differently based on what they like and what they find entertaining, they're hardly fair.

 

How much exactly do you get? Do you get +25% Magic Find for liking content and another +25% for being entertained or is it some other formula?

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > This argument of yours that players who like unique rewards want others not to have it and thats the only reason they like it, is false. Youre filling in what these people think, how they think and if not that they wouldnt have a problem with it. You know what kind of argument that is all too well.

> The only value of "unique" in unique rewards is exactly this - that the other people do not have them. The only reason why someone might be insisting on exclusives remaining exclusives is because they don't want those exclusives to become more widely available.

>

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > But everyone can, in fact, have it.

> No. Only Raiders can.

>

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > The game gives all its players exactly the same rules. It's not about not having it, it's about being fair. And giving everyone the **same** rules is as fair as it gets.

> When the same rules treat different players differently based on what they like and what they find entertaining, they're hardly fair.

>

>

 

1. Nobody is born a raider. You become one, by (wait for it).... raiding.

2. Rules don't treat anyone differently. Or at all, for that matter. It is you who treats the rules differently and thinks that somehow this justifies changing them so they suit you. Unlike real life, game rules *ARE* fair.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"yann.1946" said:

>It's both the sellers and buyers to set the price, not only the sellers.

 

That's kind of nonsense. Obviously, the sellers can't ask for more than people are willing to pay, but still, it's a seller's market since there are way more customers than there are sellers, and the buyers have no alternative if they want that item. It should not be a system in which players can prey on other players like that. *There need to be alternate methods by which players can earn the items for themselves from the game.*

 

Stop looking for an angle by which raiders can get rich off of other players, *they do not deserve to get rich off of other players just because they enjoy raiding.*

 

> @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> I think its more that players who like unique rewards like that theres specific challenges to overcome that those rewards represent that and has very little to do with other people not having it.

 

As I've noted in the past, if there is to be a [thing which denotes that a player has done something difficult], that's fine, but it should not come in the form of a skin that a player might want whether or not he cares about that [something difficult]. Trophies of accomplishment should be nothing more than that, a trophy of accomplishment, unrelated to cosmetics.

 

>Especially as the content is there and everyone can have it. Ofcourse not everyone will want to overcome said challenges.

 

And that's the problem I'm trying to solve here, that clear and obvious disconnect.

 

> This argument of yours that players who like unique rewards want others not to have it and thats the only reason they like it, is false. Youre filling in what these people think, how they think and if not that they wouldnt have a problem with it. You know what kind of argument that is all too well.

 

So then everyone can have the items. Problem solved.

 

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> Yeah id prob like it but im an adult and i understand that i cant have everything and wvw will lose something if all their unique items are available in pve.

 

Not really. People who enjoy WvW can continue to do so. They would lose nothing. At the same time, they would gain a ton of new items that they could work towards while doing WvW, without having to enter PvP or PvE at all. Imagine if you could just WvW and work towards things like dungeon armor, or PvE map specific rewards!

 

> Im not entitled to anything u see i can just work towards stuff, not demand to get them.

 

Agreed. All I'm asking for is methods to work toward stuff that don't require playing content that I have no interest in playing.

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> But everyone can, in fact, have it. The game gives all its players exactly the same rules.

 

But that's like saying that they don't need handicap ramps because the building gives everyone the same rules, just climb the stairs and you can come in. Yes, the game provides a single set of rules, but the rules, as they are laid out, greatly benefit people who like to raid, and do not work well at all for people with no interest in raiding. The rules need to adapt to be welcoming of a broader variety of players.

 

>But what about people who already followed the existing rules and won?

 

They have nothing to complain about.

 

> @"Sarrs.4831" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > When the same rules treat different players differently based on what they like and what they find entertaining, they're hardly fair.

>

> How much exactly do you get? Do you get +25% Magic Find for liking content and another +25% for being entertained or is it some other formula?

 

Currently, the rate is 100% Legendary armor completion for players who do enjoy raiding, 0% Legendary armor completion for those who do not.

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> Nobody is born a raider. You become one, by (wait for it).... raiding.

 

Different players have different tastes. Just because you enjoy raiding doesn't mean it's for everyone.

[FrizzFreston.5290]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"yann.1946" said:

> >It's both the sellers and buyers to set the price, not only the sellers.

>

> That's kind of nonsense. Obviously, the sellers can't ask for more than people are willing to pay, but still, it's a seller's market since there are way more customers than there are sellers, and the buyers have no alternative if they want that item. It should not be a system in which players can prey on other players like that. *There need to be alternate methods by which players can earn the items for themselves from the game.*

>

> Stop looking for an angle by which raiders can get rich off of other players, *they do not deserve to get rich off of other players just because they enjoy raiding.*

"Stop looking at it from an angle which players can get rich of other players. Players don't deserve to get rich of other players just because they enjoy content."

 

That's all you're saying. The rest is pure discrimination.

 

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > I think its more that players who like unique rewards like that theres specific challenges to overcome that those rewards represent that and has very little to do with other people not having it.

>

> As I've noted in the past, if there is to be a [thing which denotes that a player has done something difficult], that's fine, but it should not come in the form of a skin that a player might want whether or not he cares about that [something difficult]. Trophies of accomplishment should be nothing more than that, a trophy of accomplishment, unrelated to cosmetics.

 

Well that's just your opinion. There's loads of people playing Guild Wars 2 every day who are perfectly fine with skins being locked behind accomplishments. There's been very little complaints about it. And there's no difference in my view between wanting a title, skin or other virtual do-dats. A person might want them. Your opinion that skins somehow should be exempt from trophies is entirely arbitrary. And not even popular at that.

 

> >Especially as the content is there and everyone can have it. Ofcourse not everyone will want to overcome said challenges.

>

> And that's the problem I'm trying to solve here, that clear and obvious disconnect.

 

It's not a problem nor a disconnect. Players not willing to do content is on the terms of the player. Nor is it solvable in general. It might be solvable for one player and then you're making content too boring and unimpactful for others. You just put your opinion on a pedestal and claim it's superior to others.

 

> > This argument of yours that players who like unique rewards want others not to have it and thats the only reason they like it, is false. Youre filling in what these people think, how they think and if not that they wouldnt have a problem with it. You know what kind of argument that is all too well.

>

> So then everyone can have the items. Problem solved.

That doesn't even flow from eachother.

 

 

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > @"yann.1946" said:

> > >It's both the sellers and buyers to set the price, not only the sellers.

> >

> > That's kind of nonsense. Obviously, the sellers can't ask for more than people are willing to pay, but still, it's a seller's market since there are way more customers than there are sellers, and the buyers have no alternative if they want that item. It should not be a system in which players can prey on other players like that. *There need to be alternate methods by which players can earn the items for themselves from the game.*

> >

> > Stop looking for an angle by which raiders can get rich off of other players, *they do not deserve to get rich off of other players just because they enjoy raiding.*

> "Stop looking at it from an angle which players can get rich of other players. Players don't deserve to get rich of other players just because they enjoy content."

>

> That's all you're saying. The rest is pure discrimination.

 

Ok.

 

>Well that's just your opinion. There's loads of people playing Guild Wars 2 every day who are perfectly fine with skins being locked behind accomplishments. There's been very little complaints about it. And there's no difference in my view between wanting a title, skin or other virtual do-dats. A person might want them. Your opinion that skins somehow should be exempt from trophies is entirely arbitrary. And not even popular at that.

 

It's by no means an arbitrary distinction. [This is a pair of aviator sunglasses](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Aviator_Sunglasses) Many people might want this purely because they want their character to be wearing aviator sunglasses. If they included this item in the game as something that could *only* be earned by getting World Completion on at least five characters, then only people who got World Completion on at least five characters could have those glasses. It stands to reason that a significant amount of players who wanted those glasses, would have no interest in accomplishing that task, while a significant number of players who accomplished that task would not particularly care about wearing aviator sunglasses. Given that, there's no benefit to associating the two. If they want to provide a trophy for getting World Completion five times, they certain can, but it should be something that almost nobody would want *except* for the purpose of making clear to themselves and others that they had accomplished that feat. It should not be something that anyone would want *unless* they wanted to show off that they had done that thing.

 

What do you believe is the benefit in withholding the aviator glasses from players who definitely want them, but have no interest whatsoever in the associated task?

[Sarrs.4831]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> Currently, the rate is 100% Legendary armor completion for players who do enjoy raiding, 0% Legendary armor completion for those who do not.

 

I enjoy raiding, I don't see my legendary armor anywhere in my bags. Are you sure that's how the game works?

 

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

>If they want to provide a trophy for getting World Completion five times, they certain can, but it should be something that almost nobody would want

 

You can stop there.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> 1. Nobody is born a raider. You become one, by (wait for it).... raiding.

> 2. Rules don't treat anyone differently. Or at all, for that matter. It is you who treats the rules differently and thinks that somehow this justifies changing them so they suit you. Unlike real life, game rules *ARE* fair.

Lol. This is the same as Ferrari deciding they are going to sell their cars only to doctors. Nobody is born a doctor, anyone (in theory) can become one.

Would you ever think that this rule would treat everyone equally? Would you ever say that this rule is fair?

It has nothing to do with fairness. It's completely arbitrary, and _does_ treat people differently.

 

 

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"Sarrs.4831" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > Currently, the rate is 100% Legendary armor completion for players who do enjoy raiding, 0% Legendary armor completion for those who do not.

>

> I enjoy raiding, I don't see my legendary armor anywhere in my bags. Are you sure that's how the game works?

 

Yes.

 

What do you believe is stopping you from having the armor?

 

>You can stop there. Your sentence can read "you're allowed to have unique things, so long as they're nothing that I want".

 

Close, but not quite. More like "you're allowed to have unique things, so long as they're nothing that [that anyone who doesn't want to complete that task would] want".

[Sarrs.4831]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> Yes.

>

> What do you believe is stopping you from having the armor?

 

No idea man. Apparently the drop rate for the legendary armor while you like raiding is 100%. I like raiding and I've done tons of stuff that isn't raiding and it just hasn't popped up yet.

 

>Close, but not quite. More like "you're allowed to have unique things, so long as they're nothing that [that anyone who doesn't want to complete that task would] want".

 

And since you want everything without doing anything...

[zealex.9410]

And how could a raider show that hes/shes a raider? Thay goes to everything btw how could a fractal runners a pvp player a wvwer show thats what they do to the rest of the population?

[FrizzFreston.5290]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > @"yann.1946" said:

> > > >It's both the sellers and buyers to set the price, not only the sellers.

> > >

> > > That's kind of nonsense. Obviously, the sellers can't ask for more than people are willing to pay, but still, it's a seller's market since there are way more customers than there are sellers, and the buyers have no alternative if they want that item. It should not be a system in which players can prey on other players like that. *There need to be alternate methods by which players can earn the items for themselves from the game.*

> > >

> > > Stop looking for an angle by which raiders can get rich off of other players, *they do not deserve to get rich off of other players just because they enjoy raiding.*

> > "Stop looking at it from an angle which players can get rich of other players. Players don't deserve to get rich of other players just because they enjoy content."

> >

> > That's all you're saying. The rest is pure discrimination.

>

> Ok.

>

> >Well that's just your opinion. There's loads of people playing Guild Wars 2 every day who are perfectly fine with skins being locked behind accomplishments. There's been very little complaints about it. And there's no difference in my view between wanting a title, skin or other virtual do-dats. A person might want them. Your opinion that skins somehow should be exempt from trophies is entirely arbitrary. And not even popular at that.

>

> It's by no means an arbitrary distinction. [This is a pair of aviator sunglasses](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Aviator_Sunglasses) Many people might want this purely because they want their character to be wearing aviator sunglasses. If they included this item in the game as something that could *only* be earned by getting World Completion on at least five characters, then only people who got World Completion on at least five characters could have those glasses. It stands to reason that a significant amount of players who wanted those glasses, would have no interest in accomplishing that task, while a significant number of players who accomplished that task would not particularly care about wearing aviator sunglasses. Given that, there's no benefit to associating the two. If they want to provide a trophy for getting World Completion five times, they certain can, but it should be something that almost nobody would want *except* for the purpose of making clear to themselves and others that they had accomplished that feat. It should not be something that anyone would want *unless* they wanted to show off that they had done that thing.

>

> What do you believe is the benefit in withholding the aviator glasses from players who definitely want them, but have no interest whatsoever in the associated task?

 

To make people play the game rather than just feeling entitled to the reward. It's a reward for doing something. If they don't have to do the associated task there's no game.

[FrizzFreston.5290]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > 1. Nobody is born a raider. You become one, by (wait for it).... raiding.

> > 2. Rules don't treat anyone differently. Or at all, for that matter. It is you who treats the rules differently and thinks that somehow this justifies changing them so they suit you. Unlike real life, game rules *ARE* fair.

> Lol. This is the same as Ferrari deciding they are going to sell their cars only to doctors. Nobody is born a doctor, anyone (in theory) can become one.

> Would you ever think that this rule would treat everyone equally? Would you ever say that this rule is fair?

> It has nothing to do with fairness. It's completely arbitrary, and _does_ treat people differently.

>

I don't think you got the meaning of the words "unlike real life" right.

It's like you're telling people that Going to jail, not passing Go and not receiving $200 isn't fair.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"Sarrs.4831" said:

> No idea man. Apparently the drop rate for the legendary armor while you like raiding is 100%. I like raiding and I've done tons of stuff that isn't raiding and it just hasn't popped up yet.

 

Ah, that would be the problem, it's not a dropped item, it's part of an achievement chain. You've probably already completed most of it and not even realized it. Next time you log in, open the Hero panel and check what you're still missing.

 

>And since you want everything without doing anything...

 

Like I've told others, that sounds nothing like me. I get that you *want* that to be my position, since it'd be easier to dismiss, but it's never been *my* position.

 

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> And how could a raider show that hes/shes a raider? Thay goes to everything btw how could a fractal runners a pvp player a wvwer show thats what they do to the rest of the population?

 

There are all sorts of ways. PvPers have been able to show their PvP skills using those season gem things on the nametags. There could be a similar element for raiders, either unique titles, or unique nametag flairs, something that would really serve no function other than to say "I have raided quite a bit."

 

It's also worth noting that a few of my characters are running around with The Ascension on. I LOATHE PvP, I did the bare minimum to acquire it, which really wasn't all that much, and so now I have it. That doesn't mean I want other players to take me for a PvPer, or that I consider myself one, I just enjoy the way it looks. To be fair, you can't even argue that having legendary armor *does* indicate someone is a good raider, since all of you have been urging me to just buy raid runs. I imagine there are quite a few people running around in GW2 right now with Legendary armor that have never meaningfully contributed to a raid victory. Just because I don't want to be one of them doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

 

> @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

>To make people play the game rather than just feeling entitled to the reward.

 

Nothing I am suggestion would give any rewards to players who aren't playing the game. Players would still have to play as much, or in most cases MORE than they currently play if they wanted the rewards. All I'm proposing is a change that would lead to them having more FUN when they are playing for that amount of time.

 

 

 

[zealex.9410]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

>

> > @"zealex.9410" said:

> > And how could a raider show that hes/shes a raider? Thay goes to everything btw how could a fractal runners a pvp player a wvwer show thats what they do to the rest of the population?

>

> There are all sorts of ways. PvPers have been able to show their PvP skills using those season gem things on the nametags. There could be a similar element for raiders, either unique titles, or unique nametag flairs, something that would really serve no function other than to say "I have raided quite a bit."

>

 

What if i want those specific nametags and titles?

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> >

> > > @"zealex.9410" said:

> > > And how could a raider show that hes/shes a raider? Thay goes to everything btw how could a fractal runners a pvp player a wvwer show thats what they do to the rest of the population?

> >

> > There are all sorts of ways. PvPers have been able to show their PvP skills using those season gem things on the nametags. There could be a similar element for raiders, either unique titles, or unique nametag flairs, something that would really serve no function other than to say "I have raided quite a bit."

> >

>

> What if i want those specific nametags and titles?

 

Oh, that would be called a "false equivalency," or perhaps a "strawman argument."

[zealex.9410]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"zealex.9410" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > >

> > > > @"zealex.9410" said:

> > > > And how could a raider show that hes/shes a raider? Thay goes to everything btw how could a fractal runners a pvp player a wvwer show thats what they do to the rest of the population?

> > >

> > > There are all sorts of ways. PvPers have been able to show their PvP skills using those season gem things on the nametags. There could be a similar element for raiders, either unique titles, or unique nametag flairs, something that would really serve no function other than to say "I have raided quite a bit."

> > >

> >

> > What if i want those specific nametags and titles?

>

> Oh, that would be called a "false equivalency," or perhaps a "strawman argument."

 

Why? Because i cant get elsewhere something that interests me but not you?

 

For the record id be fine with other pve parts getting a legendary armor of their own. Im mostly concerned with the specific skin staying exclusive.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> Why? Because i cant get elsewhere something that interests me but not you?

 

Ok, I'm willing to hear your case on this one. Are you willing to *swear,* on whatever it is that you hold dear, that you *personally* care more about having a nametag flair or a title,\* that denote that you completed an activity that you do *not* enjoy doing, than I do about having a skin that I think is cool?

 

Why?

 

\* And just to be clear, I'm not talking about a "flavor" title, like "Killer Queen" or "Master Carver," I'm talking a purely functional title, like "Raid Master" that really makes no sense without the context of telling people what you enjoy doing.

 

>For the record id be fine with other pve parts getting a legendary armor of their own. Im mostly concerned with the specific skin staying exclusive.

 

And for the record, I could care less about other PvE parts getting access to legendary armor of their own, I'm mostly concerned with opening up access to specific skins.