A question about the new mount.

[smsarasin.3468]

I am just wondering if this will be something we can obtain in game, or will we need to buy it from the Gem Store. I've got a feeling (maybe wrongly so) that this will be something that we get teased with in the next LS episode and can use it for the map, but if we want to keep it, we'll have to pay with Gems...

 

I hope it is just me being wary and this will be like the other mounts where you do a heart, pay some gold, and you unlock the mount.. But I had high hopes for the skins too when they were first introduced and we got a little burned on those.... But for now, I'll try and be positive an just chalk this up to my own paranoia... :)

 

[Rasp Sabreblade.5421]

> @"smsarasin.3468" said:

> I am just wondering if this will be something we can obtain in game, or will we need to buy it from the Gem Store. I've got a feeling (maybe wrongly so) that this will be something that we get teased with in the next LS episode and can use it for the map, but if we want to keep it, we'll have to pay with Gems...

>

> I hope it is just me being wary and this will be like the other mounts where you do a heart, pay some gold, and you unlock the mount.. But I had high hopes for the skins too when they were first introduced and we got a little burned on those.... But for now, I'll try and be positive an just chalk this up to my own paranoia... :)

>

I think making it a gem store item would create even more back lash than the RNG mount skins.

 

[MokahTGS.7850]

Financially it is to Anet's advantage to sell you individual skins for individual mounts. Sets are a good thing for you, not them. Anet will keep adding mounts. I'd be shocked if they included those mount skins into preexisting sets.

[JDub.1530]

> @"Steve The Cynic.3217" said:

> > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said:

> > > @"JDub.1530" said:

> > > I'm guessing no, but wouldn't be surprised if later this year they bring back those mount sets at a higher price with the new mount added

> >

> > If they do, they will have to consider offering the beetle separately for those who already bought the rest of the set.

>

> Why? The random-draw aspect takes into account what you already have, so they just add the new skins to the "loot table" of the ticket and away you go!

 

We're talking about the 5-mount packs (Branded/Wintersday/Spooky), not the adoption licenses.

[Oldirtbeard.9834]

I doubt it, if they do I imagine it would be separate micro transaction or perhaps even a mount pack including versions of the new mount for each separate mount pack. Either way I appreciate the effort but with out mount skins, or being forced to buy new ones for packs I've already bought I don't see my self using the mount unless I absolutely have too.

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Vavume.8065" said:

> > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said:

> > What? I have bought a mount set. It was advertised as five skins, for those mounts. Why should I feel entitled to something that wasn't ever promised?

>

> You bought a set that will no longer be a set, if you are ok with that then happy days, I'm pretty sure you will be in the minority though, just saying.

 

Of course he will be in the minority. People whine about wanting things that they did not pay for all of the time.

 

"I did not earn it, or pay for it, but the company owes me anyway!!!" Is far more likely to be the majority opinion than, "I want X so I guess I should earn or pay for it."

[Sarge shot Grif.6450]

> @"smsarasin.3468" said:

> I am just wondering if this will be something we can obtain in game, or will we need to buy it from the Gem Store. I've got a feeling (maybe wrongly so) that this will be something that we get teased with in the next LS episode and can use it for the map, but if we want to keep it, we'll have to pay with Gems...

>

> I hope it is just me being wary and this will be like the other mounts where you do a heart, pay some gold, and you unlock the mount.. But I had high hopes for the skins too when they were first introduced and we got a little burned on those.... But for now, I'll try and be positive an just chalk this up to my own paranoia... :)

>

 

I don't believe they would advertise it as part of the free LS release if that was the case.

[Oldirtbeard.9834]

> @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > @"Vavume.8065" said:

> > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said:

> > > What? I have bought a mount set. It was advertised as five skins, for those mounts. Why should I feel entitled to something that wasn't ever promised?

> >

> > You bought a set that will no longer be a set, if you are ok with that then happy days, I'm pretty sure you will be in the minority though, just saying.

>

> Of course he will be in the minority. People whine about wanting things that they did not pay for all of the time.

>

> "I did not earn it, or pay for it, but the company owes me anyway!!!" Is far more likely to be the majority opinion than, "I want X so I guess I should earn or pay for it."

 

Technically it was sold as a set for all mounts, that's my understanding. I expect ANet to explain their way out of it and I don't fault them for it, business is business; how ever the question is whether some one would be willing to pay extra for something that should be included retroactively in my opinion at least (don't bother judging me for it as it won't get you any where with me personally). At this time I couldn't see my self spending extra for beetle skins, that might change I did after all drop money on the mount licenses so I may change my mind.

 

I think judging a whole group of ANet customers like us is a poor misjudgement on your part, many of us spend and have spent plenty of money on Gems, we just spend discriminantely based on where we see value.

[Oldirtbeard.9834]

> @"Blocki.4931" said:

> Just in case that it will happen but this would also explain the delay even better

 

I think the delay might have included unexpected map breaking in older maps caused by the new mount. can you imagine people breaking outside the maps causing tons of support tickets or perhaps tunneling under the map for gathering purposes like the Hacker/Gold-Framers used to do in WoW during Wrath of the Lich King.

 

I bet you anything this was a major bullet point in reasons for the delay, I get it now and I don't hold that delay against them any more for this reason alone.

 

Just a theory though.

[Blocki.4931]

> @"Oldirtbeard.9834" said:

> > @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > Just in case that it will happen but this would also explain the delay even better

>

> I think the delay might have included unexpected map breaking in older maps caused by the new mount. can you imagine people breaking outside the maps causing tons of support tickets or perhaps tunneling under the map for gathering purposes like the Hacker/Gold-Framers used to do in WoW during Wrath of the Lich King.

>

> I bet you anything this was a major bullet point in reasons for the delay, I get it now and I don't hold that delay against them any more for this reason alone.

>

> Just a theory though.

 

Yeah I said that in the other thread before this one existed. I assumed that was why they had to double and triple check it wouldn't happen (and we all know somebody is gonna find a way) :D

[HumbleMoe.4391]

How fast do you think a Choya skin is coming out for it?

[Sarge shot Grif.6450]

> @"Oldirtbeard.9834" said:

> > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > @"Vavume.8065" said:

> > > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said:

> > > > What? I have bought a mount set. It was advertised as five skins, for those mounts. Why should I feel entitled to something that wasn't ever promised?

> > >

> > > You bought a set that will no longer be a set, if you are ok with that then happy days, I'm pretty sure you will be in the minority though, just saying.

> >

> > Of course he will be in the minority. People whine about wanting things that they did not pay for all of the time.

> >

> > "I did not earn it, or pay for it, but the company owes me anyway!!!" Is far more likely to be the majority opinion than, "I want X so I guess I should earn or pay for it."

>

> Technically it was sold as a set for all mounts, that's my understanding. I expect ANet to explain their way out of it and I don't fault them for it, business is business; how ever the question is whether some one would be willing to pay extra for something that should be included retroactively in my opinion at least (don't bother judging me for it as it won't get you any where with me personally). At this time I couldn't see my self spending extra for beetle skins, that might change I did after all drop money on the mount licenses so I may change my mind.

>

> I think judging a whole group of ANet customers like us is a poor misjudgement on your part, many of us spend and have spent plenty of money on Gems, we just spend discriminantely based on where we see value.

 

I would personally not mind spending 400 gems to get the branded skin for the beetle (if it will even be a thing that exists) but I do think that it would be fair to retroactively give the skin to players who already bought the pack. The reason being that I, and probably many others, had bought the pack for the sole purpose of having a solid and consistent theme for my mounts and I was under the impression that we weren't getting any legitimately new mounts after the first five. I've supported the game a lot over the past 4 years and I don't actually EXPECT to get two free mount skins (spooky and branded), I'm just saying that either a retroactive gifting of or discounting of the skins themselves would be reasonable in my book and I would really like a clear answer on whether or not the skins exist/will exist/will be handled this way.

 

The main point of my thread was to ask for clarification on all the possible ways the new mount could be handled.

[Fenom.9457]

I hope so, will pay

[Steve The Cynic.3217]

> @"JDub.1530" said:

> > @"Steve The Cynic.3217" said:

> > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said:

> > > > @"JDub.1530" said:

> > > > I'm guessing no, but wouldn't be surprised if later this year they bring back those mount sets at a higher price with the new mount added

> > >

> > > If they do, they will have to consider offering the beetle separately for those who already bought the rest of the set.

> >

> > Why? The random-draw aspect takes into account what you already have, so they just add the new skins to the "loot table" of the ticket and away you go!

>

> We're talking about the 5-mount packs (Branded/Wintersday/Spooky), not the adoption licenses.

 

Ah, OK. Yes, that would be a good thing to include. But it would also be good to update the adoption and Istani adoption license loot tables.

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Oldirtbeard.9834" said:

> > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > @"Vavume.8065" said:

> > > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said:

> > > > What? I have bought a mount set. It was advertised as five skins, for those mounts. Why should I feel entitled to something that wasn't ever promised?

> > >

> > > You bought a set that will no longer be a set, if you are ok with that then happy days, I'm pretty sure you will be in the minority though, just saying.

> >

> > Of course he will be in the minority. People whine about wanting things that they did not pay for all of the time.

> >

> > "I did not earn it, or pay for it, but the company owes me anyway!!!" Is far more likely to be the majority opinion than, "I want X so I guess I should earn or pay for it."

>

> Technically it was sold as a set for all mounts, that's my understanding. I expect ANet to explain their way out of it and I don't fault them for it, business is business; how ever the question is whether some one would be willing to pay extra for something that should be included retroactively in my opinion at least (don't bother judging me for it as it won't get you any where with me personally). At this time I couldn't see my self spending extra for beetle skins, that might change I did after all drop money on the mount licenses so I may change my mind.

>

> I think judging a whole group of ANet customers like us is a poor misjudgement on your part, many of us spend and have spent plenty of money on Gems, we just spend discriminantely based on where we see value.

 

The set listed what was included for the price. This consisted, specifically, of Springer, Jackal, Raptor, Skimmer, and Griffon. People bought it with that description of what was included at the price.

 

Now, of course, people who received 100% of what they paid for, exactly what was promised as part of their purchase, are calling for more for free. If Anet decides to give more of their work away for free, more power to them and to the players, but it doesnt change the entitlement expressed by some of those players.

[JDub.1530]

> @"Steve The Cynic.3217" said:

> > @"JDub.1530" said:

> > > @"Steve The Cynic.3217" said:

> > > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said:

> > > > > @"JDub.1530" said:

> > > > > I'm guessing no, but wouldn't be surprised if later this year they bring back those mount sets at a higher price with the new mount added

> > > >

> > > > If they do, they will have to consider offering the beetle separately for those who already bought the rest of the set.

> > >

> > > Why? The random-draw aspect takes into account what you already have, so they just add the new skins to the "loot table" of the ticket and away you go!

> >

> > We're talking about the 5-mount packs (Branded/Wintersday/Spooky), not the adoption licenses.

>

> Ah, OK. Yes, that would be a good thing to include. But it would also be good to update the adoption and Istani adoption license loot tables.

 

That implies they're going to add a bunch of (adoption license) beetle skins to catch up. I bet it's more likely they put out a new set of adoption licenses and only add beetles to that. But for the 5-pack sets, I have no clue.

[Ayakaru.6583]

I *personally* doubt we'll get those skins *right of the bat*.

but knowing anet, we'll get them *eventually*

either in the form of "seperate purchases" or "added to the existing packs with a true price reduction"

that said, no one knows which way they'll go.

 

e.g., Branded Mounts, 1600 gems for 5 skins (that's 320 per skin)

so the branded Beetle could be sold seperate for 320 gems, OR, the price for the pack will be increases to 1920 gems, (and will cost 320 gems for the people who already bought the pack before)

[Miriam Mjolnir.8619]

 

 

> @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > @"Oldirtbeard.9834" said:

> > > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > > @"Vavume.8065" said:

> > > > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said:

> > > > > What? I have bought a mount set. It was advertised as five skins, for those mounts. Why should I feel entitled to something that wasn't ever promised?

> > > >

> > > > You bought a set that will no longer be a set, if you are ok with that then happy days, I'm pretty sure you will be in the minority though, just saying.

> > >

> > > Of course he will be in the minority. People whine about wanting things that they did not pay for all of the time.

> > >

> > > "I did not earn it, or pay for it, but the company owes me anyway!!!" Is far more likely to be the majority opinion than, "I want X so I guess I should earn or pay for it."

> >

> > Technically it was sold as a set for all mounts, that's my understanding. I expect ANet to explain their way out of it and I don't fault them for it, business is business; how ever the question is whether some one would be willing to pay extra for something that should be included retroactively in my opinion at least (don't bother judging me for it as it won't get you any where with me personally). At this time I couldn't see my self spending extra for beetle skins, that might change I did after all drop money on the mount licenses so I may change my mind.

> >

> > I think judging a whole group of ANet customers like us is a poor misjudgement on your part, many of us spend and have spent plenty of money on Gems, we just spend discriminantely based on where we see value.

>

> The set listed what was included for the price. This consisted, specifically, of Springer, Jackal, Raptor, Skimmer, and Griffon. People bought it with that description of what was included at the price.

>

> Now, of course, people who received 100% of what they paid for, exactly what was promised as part of their purchase, are calling for more for free. If Anet decides to give more of their work away for free, more power to them and to the players, but it doesnt change the entitlement expressed by some of those players.

 

Clam down there buddy. Nobody is like, demanding free stuff. People are just asking if their completed sets are going to be rendered incomplete. Theres bigger things in the world for you to get worked up over.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"Miriam Mjolnir.8619" said:

> Nobody is like, demanding free stuff.

Some people were asking for the skins being included retroactively. That would be free, gratis, without charge.

 

Others are just wondering if the skins would be made available at all. And many of those people are wondering whether the cost will be prorated (to ~400 gems) or whether they'd have to pay 1.2 or 2k gems, as any "I get to choose" MountFit costs. While that's not "asking for free stuff," there is a level of expectation in some of the posts, an implied idea that the costs should be lower for some people.

 

> People are just asking if their completed sets are going to be rendered incomplete.

They won't be "incomplete." The sets have exactly what they were sold to include: 5 skins, covering the four basic mounts plus the formerly super-secret griffon. There are always going to be new MountFits, so all of us are always going to sometimes be without one or more.