Skill Rebalances Costs Gold/Gems!

[Turkeyspit.3965]

> @"Donutdude.9582" said:

> I disagree wholeheartedly with the original post. This is an unnecessary QoL option. Simply overwrite your runes/sigils - the gold cost is not _that_ expensive. Gold is incredibly easy to come by nowadays.

 

Depends on your perspective. I recall when I my main source of income was the 2g awarded from doing the dailies. Its easy to remember because that was about 10 months ago. Sure, today I have more gold than most players, and running T4s alone puts about 20-30g in my pocket.

 

But considering that Superior Rune of the Scholar now costs 8g each, that's 4 days of Daily Completionist for a single rune, and you need 6 (technically 7). Not everyone has tons of extra gold lying around, had years to accumulate wealth, or who want to spend their game time farming gold in silverwastes / Istan.

 

Normally the recommendation would then be to craft them yourselves, but since there is currently no way to farm Charm of Brilliance that isn't pure RNG, they have to resort to buying them from the TP, and that alone will run them 4g per rune. Incidentally I've salvaged everything that has dropped for me since the last patch, and I have 3 Charms of Brilliance in my storage - enough to craft only 1 Superior Rune of the Scholar.

 

So no, changing your gear around wasn't cheap to start with, and since the rune revamp, it's gotten much much worse. I'm personally unaffected, but I sympathize with players who have sunk significant resources into acquiring specialized gear to fill a specialized role that is no longer viable because of skill changes.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

90% of the time, old builds using the old gear still work just fine. 90% of the time, changing gear isn't that expensive.

****

The rune|sigil revamp had the following impacts:

* It lowered the ceiling on the costs, because the supply of any particular upgrade is now unlimited; there's no more depending on RNG.

* It increased the cost of budget upgrades from "pennies" to silver.

* It limits the market's ability to spike up due to sudden changes, such as a rebalance or a snowcrows update of benchmarking builds

 

On the whole, it's going to make it cheaper to regear.

[Khisanth.2948]

I haven't had to make much changes in the last couple of years except in cases like remembering that I can't use a rune that gives more damage to burning enemies if I remove my only source of burning.

[kharmin.7683]

In case people didn't see this...

 

> @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> Greetings Tyrians!

>

> We are aware that the previous update to Runes and Sigils, coupled with the balance updates released this week, created a situation where boon duration has become a more highly-valued resource.

>

> As you can see in the [December 11 release notes](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/62731/game-update-notes-december-11-2018#latest "December 11 release notes"), we’re moving toward a world where various professions are specialized at offering different boons and not all boons can (or should!) be provided by a single profession.

>

> Toward that end, we wanted to let you know that we’re looking at new attribute combinations for the coming year to offer you better options. You may want to watch for those updates before making significant changes to your gear.

>

> Merry Wintersday!

>

> ~GW2 Systems Team

[Psientist.6437]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> 90% of the time, old builds using the old gear still work just fine. 90% of the time, changing gear isn't that expensive.

> ****

> The rune|sigil revamp had the following impacts:

> * It lowered the ceiling on the costs, because the supply of any particular upgrade is now unlimited; there's no more depending on RNG.

> * It increased the cost of budget upgrades from "pennies" to silver.

> * It limits the market's ability to spike up due to sudden changes, such as a rebalance or a snowcrows update of benchmarking builds

>

> On the whole, it's going to make it cheaper to regear.

 

I can accept, even applaud, the benefits but still question how upgrade extractors describe the studio's definition of a convenience item. If upgrade extractors are a convenience item, then the studio defines convenience as not getting legendary gear or not having to remake armor or upgrades. That is a very awkward definition for convenience and will only become more awkward as upgrades are made more interesting.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"Psientist.6437" said:

> I ... question how upgrade extractors describe the studio's definition of a convenience item. If upgrade extractors are a convenience item, then the studio defines convenience as not getting legendary gear or not having to remake armor or upgrades. That is a very awkward definition for convenience and will only become more awkward as upgrades are made more interesting.

 

How is that not "convenience"? The [Endless Upgrade Extractor Contract](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Endless_Upgrade_Extractor_Contract) cost 4k. Even for upgrades that cost 4g (of which there aren't many any longer), you can afford a thousand replacements. It's not a cost savings; it's just convenient to not have to spend time, mats, or gold.

 

Legendary gear is a reward. Some players choose to work on it because it has features that are convenient to have, but that's different.

 

****

In the end, the real convenience item would be build templates & loadouts. Until that exists, it's always going to be a tedious amount of effort to swap stats.

[Turkeyspit.3965]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> * It lowered the ceiling on the costs, because the supply of any particular upgrade is now unlimited; there's no more depending on RNG.

 

I disagree, as the RNG element still remains. If you cannot salvage the charms you need, you cannot craft the upgrade you want. RNG only played a role for certain upgrades that could only be obtained off exotic gear or through the magic toilet.

 

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> * It increased the cost of budget upgrades from "pennies" to silver.

They cost "pennies" because nobody used them for lack of utility. The Superior Rune of Ogre Slaying has increased in value on the TP from 2s to 7s.

/golfclap ?

 

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> * It limits the market's ability to spike up due to sudden changes, such as a rebalance or a snowcrows update of benchmarking builds

Perhaps, but if the way it does that is by keeping the cost artificially high because of the scarcity of crafting material, I'm not sure how that is better overall.

 

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> On the whole, it's going to make it cheaper to regear.

That would be an optimistic view, but the question then is, when? From what I see now, things have gotten much worse rather than better. And oh, the Sigil of Nullification is still rounding at 8g.

 

Anet needs to address the scarcity of charms. Either drastically improve the drop rate from salvage, or allow players to craft them using lucent motes or some other "common" crafting material.

 

Because the best way to get a Rune of the Scholar right now is to either buy them from the TP, or buy the Charms off the TP to craft them yourself - both methods cost significantly more than the previous methods of acquiring this component.

 

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

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

> > * It lowered the ceiling on the costs, because the supply of any particular upgrade is now unlimited; there's no more depending on RNG.

>

> I disagree, as the RNG element still remains. If you cannot salvage the charms you need, you cannot craft the upgrade you want. RNG only played a role for certain upgrades that could only be obtained off exotic gear or through the magic toilet.

The RNG element is spread out over 10000000s of items in the game. You don't have to salvage the charms|symbols, because they are available in bulk on the TP. Previously though, as we have seen with Force, Nullification, Air, and other sigils (and runes), RNG limited the supply severely, so that any change in demand changed prices enormously.

 

>

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

> > * It increased the cost of budget upgrades from "pennies" to silver.

> They cost "pennies" because nobody used them for lack of utility. The Superior Rune of Ogre Slaying has increased in value on the TP from 2s to 7s.

> /golfclap ?

 

Actual applause. Previously, if you recovered that sigil (not rune), it had no value to you. Now it's worth more. We get far, far more stuff we don't need/want than stuff we do and now that stuff is worth silver. That helps defray the costs of symbols & charms, because we can buy them from _anyone_, instead of just people who were lucky enough to get the specific rune or sigil we wanted.

 

>

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

> > * It limits the market's ability to spike up due to sudden changes, such as a rebalance or a snowcrows update of benchmarking builds

> Perhaps, but if the way it does that is by keeping the cost artificially high because of the scarcity of crafting material, I'm not sure how that is better overall.

You cut off the introduction of my statement: I wrote: "The rune|sigil revamp had the following impacts:" — impacts, not benefits.

 

Like most meaningful changes, there's pluses and minuses. A lot of people keep forgetting that a lower floor means we all get more for our unwanted loot than before.

 

It's far too soon to tell if this is "good" or "bad." So far, we just know it's different.

 

>

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

> > On the whole, it's going to make it cheaper to regear.

> That would be an optimistic view, but the question then is, when?

It's already cheaper for some specific items.

 

> From what I see now, things have gotten much worse rather than better.

You are looking only at costs; you haven't looked at all at income.

 

> And oh, the Sigil of Nullification is still rounding at 8g.

It's 7.3g in material costs to craft, if you instantly buy. Using the higher buy offer prices, it's 6.8g. 2.8g of that is the elaborate totems. I don't know why ANet chose to require 10 of those instead of e.g. a stack of something that had zero demand, but they did. The symbols are another 2g of the crafting costs and that seems to be dropping still, as TP supply starts to finally accumulate.

 

 

>

> Anet needs to address the scarcity of charms. Either drastically improve the drop rate from salvage, or allow players to craft them using lucent motes or some other "common" crafting material.

They aren't "scarce." We just started with zero supply, so people are (a) getting used to them and (b) still hoarding them in banks. Next year, they'll be a commodity like any other mat, instead of a novelty.

 

>

> Because the best way to get a Rune of the Scholar right now is to either buy them from the TP, or buy the Charms off the TP to craft them yourself - both methods cost significantly more than the previous methods of acquiring this component.

Sure, any time there's market disruption, you can find examples of things that cost more, sometimes outrageously more. I'm more interested in looking at the entire market, the total economy, and the long term impact.

 

****

Put another way:

* What will things look like a year from now?

* If we had started with this system, instead of the oddly specific "some runes drop, some are crafted, some are forged, some are bound, some can't be found except at festivals", would we really have asked ANet to introduce the old system?

 

 

 

 

[Eloc Freidon.5692]

Upgrade extractors are way too overpriced as well as most single use items in general.

[Psientist.6437]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > @"Psientist.6437" said:

> > I ... question how upgrade extractors describe the studio's definition of a convenience item. If upgrade extractors are a convenience item, then the studio defines convenience as not getting legendary gear or not having to remake armor or upgrades. That is a very awkward definition for convenience and will only become more awkward as upgrades are made more interesting.

>

> How is that not "convenience"? The [Endless Upgrade Extractor Contract](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Endless_Upgrade_Extractor_Contract) cost 4k. Even for upgrades that cost 4g (of which there aren't many any longer), you can afford a thousand replacements. It's not a cost savings; it's just convenient to not have to spend time, mats, or gold.

>

> Legendary gear is a reward. Some players choose to work on it because it has features that are convenient to have, but that's different.

>

> ****

> In the end, the real convenience item would be build templates & loadouts. Until that exists, it's always going to be a tedious amount of effort to swap stats.

 

The definition of convenience is broad enough to cover any item within a workload topography. That doesn't change the fact that how the studio designs and monetizes convenience describes their design philosophy. The studio's design philosophy is to frequently change gear and skills to impact the meta, while directly monetizing the cost of experimenting within the new meta that results from their changes. The studio's design philosophy is that indirectly monetizing changes to gear through the marketplace isn't enough. The question isn't whether upgrade extractors can be described as convenience items, but what directly monetizing gear life styles, a fundamental aspect of game play, says about the studio. By making all upgrades craftable, the studio reinforced the value of upgrades to players (many players put tremendous value in making things themselves) while also monetizing the ability to preserve the work players have already accomplished. If a player wants to experiment with gear stats and upgrades, they must pay to preserve the work they put into upgrades or gear. Not having to redo work is an awkward way to describe convenience.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"Psientist.6437" said:

> The studio's design philosophy is to frequently change gear and skills to impact the meta, while directly monetizing the cost of experimenting within the new meta that results from their changes.

 

The cost of experimenting is not directly monetized. It costs gold, not gems. I doubt you'll find evidence that there's a lot of people who need to convert RL cash to gold to afford to get a new set of runes or stat swap. A lot of people just choose not to experiment, mostly because most of us don't care to spend the time. Those that do are very passionate and vocal (and the rest of us owe them a great debt for their time), but that's very different.

 

I think the existing system is rather convoluted, in how prefix and suffix items are created, traded, applied. It could be a lot better. There's just no evidence that it's a cash-generating mechanic.

 

> Not having to redo work is an awkward way to describe convenience.

Because it's not accurate to describe it as "not having to redo work." Any game that is any good is going to rebalance, otherwise it gets stale, unless we live in a utopia in which devs always release skills & traits perfectly the first time, in which players aren't creative enough to figure out how to extract every bit of efficiency. Things change, and as players, we adapt. Sometimes (but not all that often), it results in changes to gear. (On the whole, power builds are going to be zerk, condi builds take viper's, and even within support, there's not all that much variety.)

[Psientist.6437]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > @"Psientist.6437" said:

> > The studio's design philosophy is to frequently change gear and skills to impact the meta, while directly monetizing the cost of experimenting within the new meta that results from their changes.

>

> The cost of experimenting is not directly monetized. It costs gold, not gems. I doubt you'll find evidence that there's a lot of people who need to convert RL cash to gold to afford to get a new set of runes or stat swap. A lot of people just choose not to experiment, mostly because most of us don't care to spend the time. Those that do are very passionate and vocal (and the rest of us owe them a great debt for their time), but that's very different.

>

> I think the existing system is rather convoluted, in how prefix and suffix items are created, traded, applied. It could be a lot better. There's just no evidence that it's a cash-generating mechanic.

>

> > Not having to redo work is an awkward way to describe convenience.

> Because it's not accurate to describe it as "not having to redo work." Any game that is any good is going to rebalance, otherwise it gets stale, unless we live in a utopia in which devs always release skills & traits perfectly the first time, in which players aren't creative enough to figure out how to extract every bit of efficiency. Things change, and as players, we adapt. Sometimes (but not all that often), it results in changes to gear. (On the whole, power builds are going to be zerk, condi builds take viper's, and even within support, there's not all that much variety.)

 

Can any player preserve the work they put into gearing a character, experiment with gear and upgrade combinations and not buy a device from the gem shop? If no player can do those three things concurrently, then the cost of experimenting is directly monetized. The answer is no they can't. You are never going to convince me that it isn't cheesy or that it doesn't describe a part of the studio's personality.

 

edit: Any item in the cash shop can be analyzed using two broad categories: what part of the game topography the item is entangled with and the studio's negotiating position. For instance:

Dyes are entangled with fashion and the studio's position is "if you want to be colorful, pay us."

Upgrade extractors are entangled with gear and the studio's position is "if don't want to destroy your gear, pay us." (edit: destroy is an emotionally loaded term, it would be more accurate to describe the studio's position as "if you don't want to dramatically reduce the value of your gear, pay us.")

 

If upgrades were given their own slot, the studio would be free to follow whatever gameplay narrative they wanted for upgrades.