What if we could exchange Transmutation Charges?

[Rasimir.6239]

> @"coso.9173" said:

> 50G is not cheap. i got 1k as a lv 6 characer in ESO just by selling loot. i don't get 50 g as a lv 6 character just by selling low lv loot.

On the other hand, getting skins unlocked is much more difficult and expensive in ESO, so there's not all that much you can put onto a level 6 character in the first place, unless you've been playing a long time on other characters. Plus things like dying your outfits that are totally free in GW2 require you to pay real money for the (optional) subscription in ESO, so they do have other parts of their cosmetics system gated, and gated much stricter than in GW2 where you have a wide variety of possibilites to get transmutation charges without paying real money.

[Cristalyan.5728]

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> Not cheap?? Everyone talks about how much gold GW2 just throws at us.

 

Are you serious? Or you just forget to put a **"/s"** at the end of the phrase?

 

I know, I'm not part of the "everyone" but still, for me it seems that ANet constantly tries to **take** from us (or to diminish) any posiibility of making gold. Remember Istan? Or the times when MF was a thing?

[Leo G.4501]

> @"Cristalyan.5728" said:

> > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > Not cheap?? Everyone talks about how much gold GW2 just throws at us.

>

> Are you serious? Or you just forget to put a **"/s"** at the end of the phrase?

>

 

Why would you put a say command at the end?

[Cristalyan.5728]

> @"Leo G.4501" said:

>

> Why would you put a say command at the end?

 

I was under the impression that a "/s" signals a sarcastic opinion. If I'm wrong, sorry. This was the mening of that sign.

[Yannir.4132]

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> Why would anyone be transmuting on a level 6 toon?

 

Why not? When you have 800 of them gathered from PvP, you can atleast look good while leveling.

[Turkeyspit.3965]

> @"Yannir.4132" said:

> > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > Why would anyone be transmuting on a level 6 toon?

>

> Why not? When you have 800 of them gathered from PvP, you can atleast look good while leveling.

 

Outfits! The saviour of the 15-minute old weekly key toon.

 

[Leo G.4501]

> @"Cristalyan.5728" said:

> > @"Leo G.4501" said:

> >

> > Why would you put a say command at the end?

>

> I was under the impression that a "/s" signals a sarcastic opinion. If I'm wrong, sorry. This was the mening of that sign.

 

I'd use /sarcasm as there is no ambiguity and the purpose of putting the tag is to eliminate ambiguity, yes?

[Rasimir.6239]

> @"Cristalyan.5728" said:

> > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > Not cheap?? Everyone talks about how much gold GW2 just throws at us.

>

> Are you serious? Or you just forget to put a **"/s"** at the end of the phrase?

>

> I know, I'm not part of the "everyone" but still, for me it seems that ANet constantly tries to **take** from us (or to diminish) any posiibility of making gold. Remember Istan? Or the times when MF was a thing?

Actually both Istan and the recent changes to magic find and unidentified gear (as well as several other changes people like to call out for "taking from them") did not take gold from the community as a whole but rather just distributed the flow of gold differently. You didn't create gold out of thin air with either of those farms (unless you went and sold all the loot to an npc vendor, at which point you wouldn't have gotten much gold to begin with). Instead you created goods to sell at the trading post, thus gaining other players' gold.

 

The changes ANet did to both Istan and unidentified gear made it so farming specific content (Istan meta, stacking short-term MF buffs for mass opening) would give more comparable loot to doing other (non-farm) stuff in the game, thus making the chances of those players not participating in the farms to exchange their loot for a decent price at the trading post more comparable to the chances of the farmers.

[Cristalyan.5728]

> @"Rasimir.6239" said:

 

> Actually both Istan and the recent changes to magic find and unidentified gear (as well as several other changes people like to call out for "taking from them") did not take gold from the community as a whole but rather just distributed the flow of gold differently. You didn't create gold out of thin air with either of those farms (unless you went and sold all the loot to an npc vendor, at which point you wouldn't have gotten much gold to begin with). Instead you created goods to sell at the trading post, thus gaining other players' gold.

>

> The changes ANet did to both Istan and unidentified gear made it so farming specific content (Istan meta, stacking short-term MF buffs for mass opening) would give more comparable loot to doing other (non-farm) stuff in the game, thus making the chances of those players not participating in the farms to exchange their loot for a decent price at the trading post more comparable to the chances of the farmers.

 

Let's take it step by step

1. The players farmed specific content for the loot (materials and other items). By using the high MF **all** the players were able to increase the chance of a better loot. (YES, all the players - any player was able to use boosters and to complete a meta event inSilverwastes).

2. Canceling of the effect of the MF you consider it a measure to **give** the players more gold?

3. By farming specific content the players were able to raise their income. ANet nerfed the farming and in this moment the income is comparable to the income you gain from non-farming activities. If these non-farming activities were so profitable, then why the players farmed other things? Something is wrong with your logic. In my opininion this is another step ANet made in **taking** from the players - not giving. Not to speak about the fact that your entire rationament is based on the premise that having a high MF is something illegal, something you must be ashamed. And another detail: If the non-farming activities generated enough gold to be considered by ANet the etalon for all the incoming sources, then what was wrong with the low prices? That means any non-farmer had enough gold to buy any material needed for its projects. **Or it is not like that?**

 

What was wrong before? if Istan and the MF were not sources og incoming liquid gold, then by selling the materials to the TP we had in fact a sink for the gold from the game. **Or it is not like that?**

 

But, this being a debate regarding the transmutation changes, I think allowing us to exchange them for gold on TP will be beneficial for the game. The taxes from the TP will drain some gold from the game and the economy (the character for which the GW2 game is developed) will be more healthy. The only issue here is that some players will be happy too. And this is intolerable for ANet.

 

Anyhow, we can sell Mystic Coins (an item we gain from daily login and other ingame activities). Why it is not possible that Transmutation Changes (an item we gain from daily login and other ingame activities) to have the same status?

[Rauderi.8706]

I still want to go a step beyond this: Being able to sell *any* premium good that we find useless to a consignment market (hello, Consortium, we have a business model for you) that sells these gem items for a discount as long as they're in stock and gives a tiny kickback to the selling player. Even if the kickback is just statuettes or some other sub-premium currency that's less free to convert into raw gold (statuettes -> commemorative coins could flood gold to the economy) and aren't gems (which might be giving away too much for free).

 

General flow would look like:

Player puts up unwanted item(s). Prices are static, no competition, just a queue until they sell. As a courtesy to players, item stock and volume are reported.

Price in gems is roughly 50-75% of normal cost. Make them affordable, and folks might spend gems on them.

Buyer pays in gems, and the seller gets a side currency (Consortium Bucks! ..or something) equal to roughly 5-10% of the sold item's price. (low end 2.5% the value of otherwise 'useless' items)

Side currency can be used to purchase old/common items from a special market at prices that approximate the gem store. (ie, 700 Consortidollars for an outfit.)

 

A system like that could help funnel kits, boosters, and other "I'm never going to use this" items to players who want them. Bonus points if there is a way to unbind Outfits from an account to sell them.

 

 

[ROMANG.1903]

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > @"coso.9173" said:

> > The system must be improved, simple as that.

> This is your opinion. Others believe that the current system does not need improvement.

 

Or perhaps it is your opinion that is different. It is easy to say that just as a way to make it look like the majority agrees with you. And 50 golds to change one outfit isn't cheap, at all.

 

[kharmin.7683]

> @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > @"coso.9173" said:

> > > The system must be improved, simple as that.

> > This is your opinion. Others believe that the current system does not need improvement.

>

> Or perhaps it is your opinion that is different. It is easy to say that just as a way to make it look like the majority agrees with you. And 50 golds to change one outfit isn't cheap, at all.

>

 

I never said that the majority agrees with me or anyone. Please don't mis-interpret my posts.

[ROMANG.1903]

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > > @"coso.9173" said:

> > > > The system must be improved, simple as that.

> > > This is your opinion. Others believe that the current system does not need improvement.

> >

> > Or perhaps it is your opinion that is different. It is easy to say that just as a way to make it look like the majority agrees with you. And 50 golds to change one outfit isn't cheap, at all.

> >

>

> I never said that the majority agrees with me or anyone. Please don't mis-interpret my posts.

Sure the phrasing didn't exactly say it, but it was heavily implied by putting "my opinion" as a single voice against "others", which in the context could very well mean "everyone else".

[Kylden Ar.3724]

> @"MithranArkanere.8957" said:

> They could use some sinks since people tend to hoard a lot of them from wvw and pvp, but trading them should not be it.

>

> For example, we could pay several charges to make a skin 'free to apply' like the skins from HoM and AP rewards.

> Spend 5, 10, 25 charges or something like that on a pair of glasses, you can then apply them freely on any character without charges from then on.

 

I like that idea a lot. Doesn't invalidate existing stocks of transmute charges, but gives us an option to make our own favorite skins free to apply.

 

@"Rubi Bayer.8493" - pretty please?

[runeblade.7514]

> @"JustTrogdor.7892" said:

> I'd rather see Anet sell say a Silver-Fed Transmute-o-Matic in the gem store. Cost a silver to use per transmute so it would sink a little bit of coin. I'm guessing something like that would sell more in gems than they make off selling transmutation charges, but I could be wrong. I have no data on how many people actually buy transmutation charges.

 

Psh, if they did that. They would sell it as a Black Lion Chest rng drop.