Jump to content
  • Sign Up

The Insane Cost of the Icebrood Saga Weapon Collections (Update - Still Insane)


Eloc Freidon.5692

Recommended Posts

@Eloc Freidon.5692 said:I don't care about people who don't want compensation for their loss. They are entitled to that. I care about people who want compensation. Those people are also entitled to that.

Imagine if Anet decides to cut the costs of all Legendary crafting requirements in half. Many people won't be happy. Yes these examples are comparable, so don't @ me.

And if costs were instead increased, would it be fair for all players with existing legendary equipment to fork over however much gold that they increased by?

I remember back in 2013 the refinement recipe for silk was increased to three scraps. Should everyone who had crafted those scraps prior been required to pay the difference of what they owed?

Players want compensation when something is made cheaper but then shouldn’t the game get compensation when something is more expensive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Eloc Freidon.5692 said:I don't care about people who don't want compensation for their loss. They are entitled to that. I care about people who want compensation. Those people are also entitled to that.

Imagine if Anet decides to cut the costs of all Legendary crafting requirements in half. Many people won't be happy. Yes these examples are comparable, so don't @ me.

And if costs were instead increased, would it be fair for all players with existing legendary equipment to fork over however much gold that they increased by?

I remember back in 2013 the refinement recipe for silk was increased to three scraps. Should everyone who had crafted those scraps prior been required to pay the difference of what they owed?

Players want compensation when something is made cheaper but then shouldn’t the game get compensation when something is more expensive?

Not comparable. What even?

I am totally FOR people coming out on top for investing early when they make something harder to craft. Because that is the opposite scenario. Making new players pay for old missed episodes IS a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayrilana.1396

The responsibility is always on the seller/manufacturer, never on the buyer, specially when the mistake/miscalculation was on the seller's end.If someone bought something from a store at half the price because the store put the wrong bar code on said item, they are not asked to pay the real price of said item.If on the other hand, someone paid more than the price of the item, the store will reimburse the person the difference in good faith.

This is how it has always worked, no matter where you go.

In-game example:If someone bought a gemstore item for 3000 gems, then tomorrow it immediately goes on sale at 2000 gems discounted price, everyone here knows to email support, and they WILL refund you the difference in gems in good faith.If ArenaNet somehow made a mistake and labeled an item worth 2000 gems for 200 gems instead, whoever managed to buy it for 200 will just get away with the "freebie".Arenanet will update the price, explaining the mistake, but they will not ask for the 1800 gems difference from those who "got lucky".

Even in the Silk situation, yes these people are entitled to compensation, but nobody is going to ask for compensation on something as trivial as Silk. Prismatium Crystals are a different matter. At a rate of 8 mins for 2, and several people being down 500+, that is a lot of hours lost, more than a day's(24hours) worth.

Arenanet has already admitted that they made a miscalculation regarding this. I will quote, from the annoucement for you

We wanted the final meta-achievement tier to be an optional bonus challenge round, but we miscalculated the full scope of the requirements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Eloc Freidon.5692 said:

@Eloc Freidon.5692 said:I don't care about people who don't want compensation for their loss. They are entitled to that. I care about people who want compensation. Those people are also entitled to that.

Imagine if Anet decides to cut the costs of all Legendary crafting requirements in half. Many people won't be happy. Yes these examples are comparable, so don't @ me.

And if costs were instead increased, would it be fair for all players with existing legendary equipment to fork over however much gold that they increased by?

I remember back in 2013 the refinement recipe for silk was increased to three scraps. Should everyone who had crafted those scraps prior been required to pay the difference of what they owed?

Players want compensation when something is made cheaper but then shouldn’t the game get compensation when something is more expensive?

Not comparable. What even?

I am totally FOR people coming out on top for investing early when they make something harder to craft. Because that is the opposite scenario. Making new players pay for old missed episodes IS a thing.

This is exactly like all the people who sold the ingots early and have made a hefty profit. Good for them. But Anet is nerfing the quantity needed for collections going forward, and for those who have already completed any of the collections it sucks (whether they bought the ingots or grinded them out).

I didn't buy any ingots myself (grinded all my crystals out), and completed 2 of the 3 collections (128 ingots). I am happy to see the amount of resources necessary for these collections to go down, but the fact I put all that effort in only to get nerfed is pretty insulting.

128 ingots took 1,280 crystals. With the price of crystals needed to make ingots being halved I would have been able to craft 256 ingots. You will only need 208 ingots to craft the first 3 collections, and yet I'll still going to be short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Eloc Freidon.5692 said:

@Eloc Freidon.5692 said:I don't care about people who don't want compensation for their loss. They are entitled to that. I care about people who want compensation. Those people are also entitled to that.

Imagine if Anet decides to cut the costs of all Legendary crafting requirements in half. Many people won't be happy. Yes these examples are comparable, so don't @ me.

And if costs were instead increased, would it be fair for all players with existing legendary equipment to fork over however much gold that they increased by?

I remember back in 2013 the refinement recipe for silk was increased to three scraps. Should everyone who had crafted those scraps prior been required to pay the difference of what they owed?

Players want compensation when something is made cheaper but then shouldn’t the game get compensation when something is more expensive?

Not comparable. What even?

I am totally FOR people coming out on top for investing early when they make something harder to craft. Because that is the opposite scenario. Making new players pay for old missed episodes IS a thing.

It is completely comparable. It's just hypocritical that when a change benefits someone, they don't have an issue but when it doesn't benefit them then they have an issue.

When a recipe for an item is made to take less materials, those that already spent their materials on those items want compensation to bring them back to where they would have been had the newer version of the recipe been available from the beginning. When a recipe for an item is made to take more materials, those that already spent their materials on the items would be against any action which would force them to give up additional materials to bring them to where they would have been had the newer version of the recipe been available from the beginning.

If you traded an item with a player and then later it became significantly cheaper, would you go to that player and ask for compensation? If you traded an item with a player and then later it became significantly expensive, how would you feel if that player came to you asking for compensation?

Just because something occurs which puts you in a worse situation, this doesn't mean that you're entitled to some compensation. In the end, the likelihood of being compensated those crystals/ingots is next to zero so all this arguing back and forth really isn't going to go anywhere. I've made my stance and you can agree or disagree with it. It's safe to assume that you'll continue to disagree with it. That's fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Turtle Dragon.9241 said:@Ayrilana.1396

The responsibility is always on the seller/manufacturer, never on the buyer, specially when the mistake/miscalculation was on the seller's end.If someone bought something from a store at half the price because the store put the wrong bar code on said item, they are not asked to pay the real price of said item.If on the other hand, someone paid more than the price of the item, the store will reimburse the person the difference in good faith.

This is how it has always worked, no matter where you go.

In-game example:If someone bought a gemstore item for 3000 gems, then tomorrow it immediately goes on sale at 2000 gems discounted price, everyone here knows to email support, and they WILL refund you the difference in gems in good faith.If ArenaNet somehow made a mistake and labeled an item worth 2000 gems for 200 gems instead, whoever managed to buy it for 200 will just get away with the "freebie".Arenanet will update the price, explaining the mistake, but they will not ask for the 1800 gems difference from those who "got lucky".

Even in the Silk situation, yes these people are entitled to compensation, but nobody is going to ask for compensation on something as trivial as Silk. Prismatium Crystals are a different matter. At a rate of 8 mins for 2, and several people being down 500+, that is a lot of hours lost, more than a day's(24hours) worth.

Arenanet has already admitted that they made a miscalculation regarding this. I will quote, from the annoucement for you

We wanted the final meta-achievement tier to be an optional bonus challenge round, but we
miscalculated
the full scope of the requirements.

The difference being that that is in the real world which is generally consumer leaning. It leads to good will for a company to offer consumers price difference compensation within a certain time period of a purchase if the price decreases. That's not the same situation as it's a recipe in a game.

Whether they made a miscalculation or not really doesn't have anything to do with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Turtle Dragon.9241 said:@Ayrilana.1396

The responsibility is always on the seller/manufacturer, never on the buyer, specially when the mistake/miscalculation was on the seller's end.
If someone bought something from a store at half the price because the store put the wrong bar code on said item, they are not asked to pay the real price of said item.If on the other hand, someone paid more than the price of the item, the store will reimburse the person the difference in good faith.

This is how it has always worked, no matter where you go.

In-game example:If someone bought a gemstore item for 3000 gems, then tomorrow it immediately goes on sale at 2000 gems discounted price, everyone here knows to email support, and they WILL refund you the difference in gems in good faith.If ArenaNet somehow made a mistake and labeled an item worth 2000 gems for 200 gems instead, whoever managed to buy it for 200 will just get away with the "freebie".Arenanet will update the price, explaining the mistake, but they will not ask for the 1800 gems difference from those who "got lucky".

Even in the Silk situation, yes these people are entitled to compensation, but nobody is going to ask for compensation on something as trivial as Silk. Prismatium Crystals are a different matter. At a rate of 8 mins for 2, and several people being down 500+, that is a lot of hours lost, more than a day's(24hours) worth.

Arenanet has already
admitted
that they made a miscalculation regarding this. I will quote, from the annoucement for you

We wanted the final meta-achievement tier to be an optional bonus challenge round, but we
miscalculated
the full scope of the requirements.

The difference being that that is in the real world which is generally consumer leaning. It leads to good will for a company to offer consumers price difference compensation within a certain time period of a purchase if the price decreases. That's not the same situation as it's a recipe in a game.

Whether they made a miscalculation or not really doesn't have anything to do with this.

@Turtle Dragon.9241 said:@Ayrilana.1396

The responsibility is always on the seller/manufacturer, never on the buyer, specially when the mistake/miscalculation was on the seller's end.
If someone bought something from a store at half the price because the store put the wrong bar code on said item, they are not asked to pay the real price of said item.If on the other hand, someone paid more than the price of the item, the store will reimburse the person the difference in good faith.

This is how it has always worked, no matter where you go.

In-game example:If someone bought a gemstore item for 3000 gems, then tomorrow it immediately goes on sale at 2000 gems discounted price, everyone here knows to email support, and they WILL refund you the difference in gems in good faith.If ArenaNet somehow made a mistake and labeled an item worth 2000 gems for 200 gems instead, whoever managed to buy it for 200 will just get away with the "freebie".Arenanet will update the price, explaining the mistake, but they will not ask for the 1800 gems difference from those who "got lucky".

Even in the Silk situation, yes these people are entitled to compensation, but nobody is going to ask for compensation on something as trivial as Silk. Prismatium Crystals are a different matter. At a rate of 8 mins for 2, and several people being down 500+, that is a lot of hours lost, more than a day's(24hours) worth.

Arenanet has already
admitted
that they made a miscalculation regarding this. I will quote, from the annoucement for you

We wanted the final meta-achievement tier to be an optional bonus challenge round, but we
miscalculated
the full scope of the requirements.

The difference being that that is in the real world which is generally consumer leaning. It leads to good will for a company to offer consumers price difference compensation within a certain time period of a purchase if the price decreases. That's not the same situation as it's a recipe in a game.

Whether they made a miscalculation or not really doesn't have anything to do with this.

I think good principles of the real world should still apply.We are afterall still customers and Arenanet is still a business.The most important role of a business is to make their customers happy and try to retain them.At the end of the day, it is true that a company can do whatever they want, they could even say no even if every single one of their customer is complaining about it.But everybody knows that a business without good faith towards their customer is doomed to fail.

Let's find out if Arenanet still has good faith now, shall we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Turtle Dragon.9241 said:

@Turtle Dragon.9241 said:@Ayrilana.1396

The responsibility is always on the seller/manufacturer, never on the buyer, specially when the mistake/miscalculation was on the seller's end.
If someone bought something from a store at half the price because the store put the wrong bar code on said item, they are not asked to pay the real price of said item.If on the other hand, someone paid more than the price of the item, the store will reimburse the person the difference in good faith.

This is how it has always worked, no matter where you go.

In-game example:If someone bought a gemstore item for 3000 gems, then tomorrow it immediately goes on sale at 2000 gems discounted price, everyone here knows to email support, and they WILL refund you the difference in gems in good faith.If ArenaNet somehow made a mistake and labeled an item worth 2000 gems for 200 gems instead, whoever managed to buy it for 200 will just get away with the "freebie".Arenanet will update the price, explaining the mistake, but they will not ask for the 1800 gems difference from those who "got lucky".

Even in the Silk situation, yes these people are entitled to compensation, but nobody is going to ask for compensation on something as trivial as Silk. Prismatium Crystals are a different matter. At a rate of 8 mins for 2, and several people being down 500+, that is a lot of hours lost, more than a day's(24hours) worth.

Arenanet has already
admitted
that they made a miscalculation regarding this. I will quote, from the annoucement for you

We wanted the final meta-achievement tier to be an optional bonus challenge round, but we
miscalculated
the full scope of the requirements.

The difference being that that is in the real world which is generally consumer leaning. It leads to good will for a company to offer consumers price difference compensation within a certain time period of a purchase if the price decreases. That's not the same situation as it's a recipe in a game.

Whether they made a miscalculation or not really doesn't have anything to do with this.

@Turtle Dragon.9241 said:@Ayrilana.1396

The responsibility is always on the seller/manufacturer, never on the buyer, specially when the mistake/miscalculation was on the seller's end.
If someone bought something from a store at half the price because the store put the wrong bar code on said item, they are not asked to pay the real price of said item.If on the other hand, someone paid more than the price of the item, the store will reimburse the person the difference in good faith.

This is how it has always worked, no matter where you go.

In-game example:If someone bought a gemstore item for 3000 gems, then tomorrow it immediately goes on sale at 2000 gems discounted price, everyone here knows to email support, and they WILL refund you the difference in gems in good faith.If ArenaNet somehow made a mistake and labeled an item worth 2000 gems for 200 gems instead, whoever managed to buy it for 200 will just get away with the "freebie".Arenanet will update the price, explaining the mistake, but they will not ask for the 1800 gems difference from those who "got lucky".

Even in the Silk situation, yes these people are entitled to compensation, but nobody is going to ask for compensation on something as trivial as Silk. Prismatium Crystals are a different matter. At a rate of 8 mins for 2, and several people being down 500+, that is a lot of hours lost, more than a day's(24hours) worth.

Arenanet has already
admitted
that they made a miscalculation regarding this. I will quote, from the annoucement for you

We wanted the final meta-achievement tier to be an optional bonus challenge round, but we
miscalculated
the full scope of the requirements.

The difference being that that is in the real world which is generally consumer leaning. It leads to good will for a company to offer consumers price difference compensation within a certain time period of a purchase if the price decreases. That's not the same situation as it's a recipe in a game.

Whether they made a miscalculation or not really doesn't have anything to do with this.

I think good principles of the real world should still apply.We are afterall still customers and Arenanet is still a business.The most important role of a business is to make their customers happy and try to retain them.At the end of the day, it is true that a company can do whatever they want, they could even say no even if every single one of their customer is complaining about it.But everybody knows that a business without good faith towards their customer is doomed to fail.

Let's find out if Arenanet still has good faith now, shall we?

They do but I dont want them to put in the man hours to look in who to compesate and not.It will take quite some time to investigate every single account that traded these ingots.Easier to compensate the accounts that did not trade and only crafted their own but only doing that part would not be fair to the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Linken.6345 said:

@Turtle Dragon.9241 said:@Ayrilana.1396

The responsibility is always on the seller/manufacturer, never on the buyer, specially when the mistake/miscalculation was on the seller's end.
If someone bought something from a store at half the price because the store put the wrong bar code on said item, they are not asked to pay the real price of said item.If on the other hand, someone paid more than the price of the item, the store will reimburse the person the difference in good faith.

This is how it has always worked, no matter where you go.

In-game example:If someone bought a gemstore item for 3000 gems, then tomorrow it immediately goes on sale at 2000 gems discounted price, everyone here knows to email support, and they WILL refund you the difference in gems in good faith.If ArenaNet somehow made a mistake and labeled an item worth 2000 gems for 200 gems instead, whoever managed to buy it for 200 will just get away with the "freebie".Arenanet will update the price, explaining the mistake, but they will not ask for the 1800 gems difference from those who "got lucky".

Even in the Silk situation, yes these people are entitled to compensation, but nobody is going to ask for compensation on something as trivial as Silk. Prismatium Crystals are a different matter. At a rate of 8 mins for 2, and several people being down 500+, that is a lot of hours lost, more than a day's(24hours) worth.

Arenanet has already
admitted
that they made a miscalculation regarding this. I will quote, from the annoucement for you

We wanted the final meta-achievement tier to be an optional bonus challenge round, but we
miscalculated
the full scope of the requirements.

The difference being that that is in the real world which is generally consumer leaning. It leads to good will for a company to offer consumers price difference compensation within a certain time period of a purchase if the price decreases. That's not the same situation as it's a recipe in a game.

Whether they made a miscalculation or not really doesn't have anything to do with this.

@Turtle Dragon.9241 said:@Ayrilana.1396

The responsibility is always on the seller/manufacturer, never on the buyer, specially when the mistake/miscalculation was on the seller's end.
If someone bought something from a store at half the price because the store put the wrong bar code on said item, they are not asked to pay the real price of said item.If on the other hand, someone paid more than the price of the item, the store will reimburse the person the difference in good faith.

This is how it has always worked, no matter where you go.

In-game example:If someone bought a gemstore item for 3000 gems, then tomorrow it immediately goes on sale at 2000 gems discounted price, everyone here knows to email support, and they WILL refund you the difference in gems in good faith.If ArenaNet somehow made a mistake and labeled an item worth 2000 gems for 200 gems instead, whoever managed to buy it for 200 will just get away with the "freebie".Arenanet will update the price, explaining the mistake, but they will not ask for the 1800 gems difference from those who "got lucky".

Even in the Silk situation, yes these people are entitled to compensation, but nobody is going to ask for compensation on something as trivial as Silk. Prismatium Crystals are a different matter. At a rate of 8 mins for 2, and several people being down 500+, that is a lot of hours lost, more than a day's(24hours) worth.

Arenanet has already
admitted
that they made a miscalculation regarding this. I will quote, from the annoucement for you

We wanted the final meta-achievement tier to be an optional bonus challenge round, but we
miscalculated
the full scope of the requirements.

The difference being that that is in the real world which is generally consumer leaning. It leads to good will for a company to offer consumers price difference compensation within a certain time period of a purchase if the price decreases. That's not the same situation as it's a recipe in a game.

Whether they made a miscalculation or not really doesn't have anything to do with this.

I think good principles of the real world should still apply.We are afterall still customers and Arenanet is still a business.The most important role of a business is to make their customers happy and try to retain them.At the end of the day, it is true that a company can do whatever they want, they could even say no even if every single one of their customer is complaining about it.But everybody knows that a business without good faith towards their customer is doomed to fail.

Let's find out if Arenanet still has good faith now, shall we?

They do but I dont want them to put in the man hours to look in who to compesate and not.It will take quite some time to investigate every single account that traded these ingots.Easier to compensate the accounts that did not trade and only crafted their own but only doing that part would not be fair to the others.

Or just compensate the players that used them. The ones who craft just to sell got their quick gold. In fact, making account bound materials suddenly tradeable after refined is a mistake. It always ends up being a mistake. Gen 1 legendaries never learned from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the recipes for the new weapons and I just... laughed.You may have solved the problem of the prismatium Ingots, but these collections still need a huge amount of lodestones. For being able to craft the ascended version, you need the exotic first which means :

  • 160 destroyer lodestones for exotic fire collection
  • 320 destroyer lodestones for ascended fire collection
  • 160 destroyer and corrupted lodestones for ascended fire collection (amalgamated draconic lodestones)

giving a total of 640 destroyer and 160 corrupted lodestones for fire ascended collection (the other way round for ice ascended collection).

I'm not sure I've looted so many lodestones in my entire life on gw2. Presently, I'm still struggling with Charged Stormcaller weapons (6/16) which need 320 destroyer and corrupted lodestones (plus a nice 320 charged lodestones).

Though being a completionist and an AP hunter, I don't think I will be doing any of these ascended collections soon (or ever).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, this Dragon Slayer stuff is just, frankly nuts xD. That's fine, I won't do it. But I actually enjoyed the Boreal weapon collections. They felt a bit like a precursor "journey". This.......!

I made the basic Dragon Slayer collection, so I could buy the next tier recipes while they were available from the faction vendor, but this time I won't even be buying the recipes. Just buy supply boxes for support marks and take my chances on getting more of the equally ridiculous Volcanic Stormcaller weapons!! I have a grand total of one of those after 100+ DRMs and that came from a Deldrimor Supply Box!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Fire Attunement.9835" said:Hi all, I just wanted to jump in and point you toward this post regarding some upcoming changes.

Thanks to all of you for your feedback!

Hi Fire,

Just to add my two penneth about where this is still out of kilter! The cost to craft the ascended version of these weapons is now not too bad. A bit expensive, but do-able. The lower tier are still far to expensive though - pretty much the normal cost of an ascended weapon, even if you farm the Prismaticite.

I do realise these weapons are entirely optional and people are at liberty to skip. But it is a shame if even those who normally do commit to these things just walk away due to the excessive grind and exorbitant cost.

Personally, I think, like Boreal weapons, the "Ingots" (Prismatium, in this case) should be account bound and the ingredients, largely, farmed - i.e., in this case, just convert Prisimaticite Crystals to Ingots for very little gold. This would drastically reduce the cost of the unfinished azure/crimson weapons while still requiring people commit to farming DRMs to make them. If you want to make them more widely available and give players an opportunity to profit, you could make these weapons saleable on the TP before they are bound, as with restored boreal weapons.

Of course changing the ingot recipe would also affect the ascended weapons, but a minor tweak to the ascended weapon recipe would fix the cost of those.

I realise this is all a little late and any change at this time would cause upset to the few who have already committed to these weapons, but that is true already. I really don't think the changes made so far are going to see a significant increase in the crafting of these weapon sets, which is a shame for those who took the time to design them!

tl;dr: Boreal weapons (apart from the whole including the lower tier weapon in the recipe thing) got this tiering right. Just use that! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Bandini.6185" said:I saw the recipes for the new weapons and I just... laughed.You may have solved the problem of the prismatium Ingots, but these collections still need a huge amount of lodestones. For being able to craft the ascended version, you need the exotic first which means :

  • 160 destroyer lodestones for exotic fire collection
  • 320 destroyer lodestones for ascended fire collection
  • 160 destroyer and corrupted lodestones for ascended fire collection (amalgamated draconic lodestones)

giving a total of 640 destroyer and 160 corrupted lodestones for fire ascended collection (the other way round for ice ascended collection).

I'm not sure I've looted so many lodestones in my entire life on gw2. Presently, I'm still struggling with Charged Stormcaller weapons (6/16) which need 320 destroyer and corrupted lodestones (plus a nice 320 charged lodestones).

Though being a completionist and an AP hunter, I don't think I will be doing any of these ascended collections soon (or ever).

You don't need to make the whole set. That said, the non-Prismatium Ingot pricing could have been further backloaded to the ascended when it was designed as I suspect the T2 ones were meant to make players learn to CC and if they're too expensive people won't even do them. Right now the T2 Crimson and T3 Fiery cost similarly. Current pricing if you get the crystals yourself is around 15-20g for T1, 30-40g for T2. 50-60g for T3. Each Prismatium Ingot runs around 4-6.5g.

For example for sword which is one of the most common weapons:https://gw2efficiency.com/crafting/calculator/a~0!b~1!c~0!d~1-94241;1-94479;1-94843and for axehttps://gw2efficiency.com/crafting/calculator/a~0!b~1!c~0!d~1-94261;1-94476;1-94716

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think the problem, as I described above, is mixing, in Prismatium ingots, the farmed DRM currency and a whole lot of other materials. That made it impossible to make T2 weapons require DRM participation without making them hugely expensive.

It's all the more annoying as they managed to avoid this last time around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Infusion.7149 said:

You don't need to make the whole set. That said, the non-Prismatium Ingot pricing could have been further backloaded to the ascended when it was designed as I suspect the T2 ones were meant to make players learn to CC and if they're too expensive people won't even do them. Right now the T2 Crimson and T3 Fiery cost similarly. Current pricing if you get the crystals yourself is around 15-20g for T1, 30-40g for T2. 50-60g for T3. Each Prismatium Ingot runs around 4-6.5g.

As I said, I give the point of view of a completionist and an AP hunter, which means I craft the whole set or nothing :) I wouldn't bother to complain if I just wanted to craft a weapon (though 100g for an ascended still seems expensive).

The problem with these collections is that you don't get lodestones very often. Supply of destroyer lodestones on TP wouldn't be enough for 10 players. It goes up to 32 players if you consider the cores in addition...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Running the numbers the changes don't really effect the overall cost of completion. My calculations didn't include Prismaticite Crystals. Lowering orichalcum but nearly doubling the mithril evened out the overall cost.

This change amounts to nothing other than stating "players who farmed DRMs up to this point wasted half their time".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:This is all just shifting buyers remorse onto Anet. If the ingots were really too expensive to make/buy, then you wouldn't have done it. Any gold spent on this was of your own volition.

Arenanet themselves have acknowledged that they made a mistake.If your car has a defect, and the manufacturer admits to it, they recall it and make amends at no cost to you. That is the right thing to do.

The original price of the weapons wasn't a defect. It was intended. Anet just changed their mind later.

they probably ran some calculation base on the mean value of players liquidatable assets of the entire population, which is gonna be skewed thanks to the barrons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Bandini.6185 said:

You don't
need
to make the whole set. That said, the non-Prismatium Ingot pricing could have been further backloaded to the ascended when it was designed as I suspect the T2 ones were meant to make players learn to CC and if they're too expensive people won't even do them. Right now the T2 Crimson and T3 Fiery cost similarly. Current pricing if you get the crystals yourself is around 15-20g for T1, 30-40g for T2. 50-60g for T3. Each Prismatium Ingot runs around 4-6.5g.

As I said, I give the point of view of a completionist and an AP hunter, which means I craft the whole set or nothing :) I wouldn't bother to complain if I just wanted to craft a weapon (though 100g for an ascended still seems expensive).

The problem with these collections is that you don't get lodestones very often. Supply of destroyer lodestones on TP wouldn't be enough for 10 players. It goes up to 32 players if you consider the cores in addition...

this is just my conspiracy theory, do you remember the recent removal of Spirit Shard drops from champ mobs after their *review*? I think they want to force players to spend their shards by upgrading from the lower grades

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:This is all just shifting buyers remorse onto Anet. If the ingots were really too expensive to make/buy, then you wouldn't have done it. Any gold spent on this was of your own volition.

Arenanet themselves have acknowledged that they made a mistake.If your car has a defect, and the manufacturer admits to it, they recall it and make amends at no cost to you. That is the right thing to do.

The original price of the weapons wasn't a defect. It was intended. Anet just changed their mind later.

Gen 1 Legendaries being tradable was intended too. They regret that decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@crepuscular.9047 said:

You don't
need
to make the whole set. That said, the non-Prismatium Ingot pricing could have been further backloaded to the ascended when it was designed as I suspect the T2 ones were meant to make players learn to CC and if they're too expensive people won't even do them. Right now the T2 Crimson and T3 Fiery cost similarly. Current pricing if you get the crystals yourself is around 15-20g for T1, 30-40g for T2. 50-60g for T3. Each Prismatium Ingot runs around 4-6.5g.

As I said, I give the point of view of a completionist and an AP hunter, which means I craft the whole set or nothing :) I wouldn't bother to complain if I just wanted to craft a weapon (though 100g for an ascended still seems expensive).

The problem with these collections is that you don't get lodestones very often. Supply of destroyer lodestones on TP wouldn't be enough for 10 players. It goes up to 32 players if you consider the cores in addition...

this is just my conspiracy theory, do you remember the recent removal of Spirit Shard drops from champ mobs after their *review*? I think they want to force players to spend their shards by upgrading from the lower grades

They removed those drops, because they made Spirit Shards farmable even when you didn't finish the masteries. There were more Spirit Shards to go around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Eloc Freidon.5692 said:

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:This is all just shifting buyers remorse onto Anet. If the ingots were really too expensive to make/buy, then you wouldn't have done it. Any gold spent on this was of your own volition.

Arenanet themselves have acknowledged that they made a mistake.If your car has a defect, and the manufacturer admits to it, they recall it and make amends at no cost to you. That is the right thing to do.

The original price of the weapons wasn't a defect. It was intended. Anet just changed their mind later.

Gen 1 Legendaries being tradable was intended too. They regret that decision.

Did they state that they regretted it? I thought they made Gen 2 account bound due to players' requests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:This is all just shifting buyers remorse onto Anet. If the ingots were really too expensive to make/buy, then you wouldn't have done it. Any gold spent on this was of your own volition.

Arenanet themselves have acknowledged that they made a mistake.If your car has a defect, and the manufacturer admits to it, they recall it and make amends at no cost to you. That is the right thing to do.

The original price of the weapons wasn't a defect. It was intended. Anet just changed their mind later.

Gen 1 Legendaries being tradable was intended too. They regret that decision.

Did they state that they regretted it? I thought they made Gen 2 account bound due to players' requests.

Certainly not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Eloc Freidon.5692 said:

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:This is all just shifting buyers remorse onto Anet. If the ingots were really too expensive to make/buy, then you wouldn't have done it. Any gold spent on this was of your own volition.

Arenanet themselves have acknowledged that they made a mistake.If your car has a defect, and the manufacturer admits to it, they recall it and make amends at no cost to you. That is the right thing to do.

The original price of the weapons wasn't a defect. It was intended. Anet just changed their mind later.

Gen 1 Legendaries being tradable was intended too. They regret that decision.

Did they state that they regretted it? I thought they made Gen 2 account bound due to players' requests.

Certainly not.

Well if you're so sure then you must have a source?

I spent the past 30 min trying to find something about their motivations and couldn't so I wouldn't blame you if you didn't want to provide one. In the end, whether there's a source or not wouldn't really matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So after crafting these and testing them out, I think I like the Icy set more than the Fiery one. There are just too many sets that follow a similar theme as the Fiery but the Icy skins are ones that I may actually use. It feels worth it to have decent looking skins with not over the top effects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...