Legendary trinkets

[Cuks.8241]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

Meanwhile you just pretend everyone should get everything just because they logged in.No, that's only how

you

try to present my stance. In an extremely biased, and completely untrue way.

Well, that's actually exactly what you're trying to say. You're saying that all rewards should be available through playing any content you like and the game should not force you to play any specific content. Which means everything should be just handed to everyone for free. Otherwise, you're just drawing a line that suits you personally.

But this is a game. Which is actually a completely fine reason by itself why the limited acquisition methods are ok. Games have rules and hurdles. You need to overcome the hurdles within the confines of the rules. And they are the same for everyone. Victory and rewards are behind those hurdles. Do you want rewards? Overcome hurdles, not advocate for change of rules.

[Astralporing.1957]

@"yann.1946" said:Ofcourse but the gap between just enticing or keeping them to long is highly subjective and variable. So i don't know where one would draw the line. Also do you think exclusive rewards are a bad thing ( as rewards you have to spent a lot of time in a specific place to acquire) .Exclusive rewards are not a bad thing. Exclusive categories of rewards are.For example, you won't see me complaining about the fact that raids do have a ton of other exclusive skins. Or that there are many content-exclusive skins elsewhere.

I don't bedrudge raids their share of exclusive skins. I do not think it's bad for envoy set to be raid-exclusive either. I do think it's bad that the only transforming skin is raid-locked, and that the only non-pvp legendary armor set is raid locked however.

On the second thing,its about how much fun is lost by pushing some people in content they don't like vs how much fun is added by people discovering more content they enjoy. Every puch to any activity will decrease the fun for some people, but where merely interested in the totality of all fun. (to be fair anet is probably more interested in total engagement then fun, but that another discussion entirely.)"Totality of all fun" might be an argument if we were talking about a content that was supposed to be wildly popular, or if the loss from pushing players into it was minimal. Raids happened to be niche from the beginning, and ended up being ultimately abandoned because the amount of people interested in it did not justify spending enough resources on it that those people playing it required to be happy. And apparently amount of new players pulled in was still relatively small - much, much smaller than the amount of people that found this content to be majorly unappealing.

Also, i don't think there's much subjectivity about whether the amount of effort required for legendary gear in raids is way, way past the point where players can decide if they like the content or not. It's not a reward that is supposed to entice players to drop in and check the content. It's something that is supposed to keep them there longterm.

Same can be said about legendaries in both PvP modes, by the way. Both in the regard of how players might react to the content, and by the amount of time spend in content that is required.

I was merely responding to the claim that its okay to change the game for one but not for the other, but i don't think raids where that change to the game. They where a continuation of things which where already their. I would argue that HoT is more where the changes to the game where.Initially, Raids were to be an expansion feature. Them and HoT were part of the same package.

[Astralporing.1957]

@Cuks.8241 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@"Sobx.1758" said:

Meanwhile you just pretend everyone should get everything just because they logged in.No, that's only how

you

try to present my stance. In an extremely biased, and completely untrue way.

Well, that's actually exactly what you're trying to say. You're saying that all rewards should be available through playing any content you like and the game should not force you to play any specific content. Which means everything should be just handed to everyone for free.No. That's not what i said. That's a complete strawman.

Unless by "for free" you mean "for playing the content you like, even if it were to take a lot of actual effort you'd have to put into said content", in which case raiders also should be considered getting their legendary armor for free.

[Sobx.1758]

@Cuks.8241 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@"Sobx.1758" said:

Meanwhile you just pretend everyone should get everything just because they logged in.No, that's only how

you

try to present my stance. In an extremely biased, and completely untrue way.

Well, that's actually exactly what you're trying to say. You're saying that all rewards should be available through playing any content you like and the game should not force you to play any specific content. Which means everything should be just handed to everyone for free. Otherwise, you're just drawing a line that suits you personally.

But this is a game. Which is actually a completely fine reason by itself why the limited acquisition methods are ok. Games have rules and hurdles. You need to overcome the hurdles within the confines of the rules. And they are the same for everyone. Victory and rewards are behind those hurdles. Do you want rewards? Overcome hurdles, not advocate for change of rules.

Exactly. He pretends that having a "line" (play through content to receive the rewards) made to receive the reward is bad, but then all he does is redraw the line in the place he wants it to be.

At that point, what if I enjoy standing in a city, but still want the rewards? Shouldn't I still be getting full legendary gear, because otherwise "I can't play the game any way I want"? Why aren't we getting full legendary gear as character birthday gifts? Isn't it "incomparably longer than completing the regular content"? It is. So why not?

@Astralporing.1957 said:Unless by "for free" you mean "for playing the content you like, even if it were to take a lot of actual effort you'd have to put into said content", in which case raiders also should be considered getting their legendary armor for free.

This is suggesting that "raiders" (as if that's a seperate group of people not doing anything else in the game but just camping raids, as you apparently like to pretend) didn't need to put an effort to learn the content, which is just false.

[Cuks.8241]

@"Astralporing.1957" said:Unless by "for free" you mean "for playing the content you like, even if it were to take a lot of actual effort you'd have to put into said content", in which case raiders also should be considered getting their legendary armor for free.

"For playing the content you like". You see there is the big problem.Read the first pages of the forums and you will see the following: people DON'T like: Hot maps, core maps, IB maps, Dragon Stand, Dragon fall, Pof maps, JPs, Red border land, Alpine border lands, EBG, collections that take place in more than one map, collections that involve doing events, collections in general, hearths, VB meta, tangled depths, DRMs...Now read the same topics and see what people like: Hot maps, core maps, IB maps, Dragon Stand, Dragon fall, Pof maps, JPs, Red border land, Alpine border lands, EBG, collections that take place in more than one map, collections that involve doing events, collections in general, hearths, VB meta, tangled depths, DRMs... (maybe not DRMs :)).

Now design reward structure around that. The only conclusion you make of it give everyone everything for free.

[Touchme.1097]

The next legendary can only be a Breathing Apparatus, logically, and that would be the last of them

[yann.1946]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@"yann.1946" said:Ofcourse but the gap between just enticing or keeping them to long is highly subjective and variable. So i don't know where one would draw the line. Also do you think exclusive rewards are a bad thing ( as rewards you have to spent a lot of time in a specific place to acquire) .Exclusive rewards are not a bad thing. Exclusive

categories

of rewards are.For example, you won't see me complaining about the fact that raids do have a ton of

other

exclusive skins. Or that there are many content-exclusive skins elsewhere.

I don't bedrudge raids their share of exclusive skins. I do not think it's bad for envoy set to be raid-exclusive either. I do think it's bad that the only transforming skin is raid-locked, and that the only non-pvp legendary armor set is raid locked however.

Do you feel that their should be more non-pve legendaries then?

On the second thing,its about how much fun is lost by pushing some people in content they don't like vs how much fun is added by people discovering more content they enjoy. Every puch to any activity will decrease the fun for some people, but where merely interested in the totality of all fun. (to be fair anet is probably more interested in total engagement then fun, but that another discussion entirely.)"Totality of all fun" might be an argument if we were talking about a content that was supposed to be wildly popular, or if the loss from pushing players into it was minimal. Raids happened to be niche from the beginning, and ended up being ultimately abandoned because the amount of people interested in it did not justify spending enough resources on it that those people playing it required to be happy. And apparently amount of new players pulled in was still relatively small - much, much smaller than the amount of people that found this content to be majorly unappealing.

The fact that we need raids to be non niche for the argument to hold is not really true though. It depends on how annoyed people get by trying raids when they don't like it and how many start enjoying when trying it. TBH, i see a strong argument thato the amount of people annoyed because they tried raiding migh be smaller then you think as i think people don't really give raids a shot in general. (it would be interesting to see who actually tried them.)

Also, i don't think there's much subjectivity about whether the amount of effort required for legendary gear in raids is way, way past the point where players can decide if they like the content or not. It's not a reward that is supposed to entice players to drop in and check the content. It's something that is supposed to keep them there longterm.

Probably true. But the line in general is quite blurry.

Same can be said about legendaries in both PvP modes, by the way. Both in the regard of how players might react to the content, and by the amount of time spend in content that is required.

I was merely responding to the claim that its okay to change the game for one but not for the other, but i don't think raids where that change to the game. They where a continuation of things which where already their. I would argue that HoT is more where the changes to the game where.Initially, Raids were to be an expansion feature. Them and HoT were part of the same package.

yes, but raids where more an extention of previous existing contenttypes, while masteries and elie specs where way bigger changes. (elite specs mostly because they introduced some new game mechanics.)

[Astralporing.1957]

@Cuks.8241 said:

@"Astralporing.1957" said:Unless by "for free" you mean "for playing the content you like, even if it were to take a lot of actual effort you'd have to put into said content", in which case raiders also should be considered getting their legendary armor for free.

"For playing the content you like". You see there is the big problem.Read the first pages of the forums and you will see the following: people DON'T like: Hot maps, core maps, IB maps, Dragon Stand, Dragon fall, Pof maps, JPs, Red border land, Alpine border lands, EBG, collections that take place in more than one map, collections that involve doing events, collections in general, hearths, VB meta, tangled depths, DRMs...Now read the same topics and see what people like: Hot maps, core maps, IB maps, Dragon Stand, Dragon fall, Pof maps, JPs, Red border land, Alpine border lands, EBG, collections that take place in more than one map, collections that involve doing events, collections in general, hearths, VB meta, tangled depths, DRMs... (maybe not DRMs :)).

Now design reward structure around that. The only conclusion you make of it give everyone everything for free.Or you give several alternative paths that cover most popular content types, and hope at least one of those is going to work out.

Like, for example, we've got core gen1 weapons, HoT gen 2, and a PoF option for gen2.5 ones.

But if you just can't offer options for everyone, you should at least try to not limit them to only niche content most players avoid like a plague.

Also, notice that even an option that doesn;t require you to play any specific content does not actually mean that option is going to be free. Gen1 weapons can be straight out bought from tp - which means that even if you dislike every single type of content that is required to obtain gifts for them, you still can get them. Are they free, then? Not even close.

The "for free" argument is just a strawman, nothing more.

[Astralporing.1957]

@yann.1946 said:Do you feel that their should be more non-pve legendaries then?Yes. For example, i do believe WvW players should obtain their own path for legendary weapons. As well as for trinkets and amulet. Since SPvP is mostly mirrored, it should probably also get a set (although i'm not sure how would that benefit SPvP players, since they don't benefit from BiS gear, and don;t need the QoL legendaries offer either). Just as i'm not against raids getting their own full legendary set, not just armor and one ring.

The fact that we need raids to be non niche for the argument to hold is not really true though. It depends on how annoyed people get by trying raids when they don't like it and how many start enjoying when trying it. TBH, i see a strong argument thato the amount of people annoyed because they tried raiding migh be smaller then you think as i think people don't really give raids a shot in general. (it would be interesting to see who actually tried them.)If people don't try them at all, then perhaps there's no point in trying to lure them there with rewards that would require massive participation levels to get, don't you think?

yes, but raids where more an extention of previous existing contenttypesNot really. Anet had to either ignore or twist into pretzels at least some of the features of the existing combat system to make them work (for example, the complete change to how aggro system worked in GW2 until that point).while masteries and elie specs where way bigger changes. (elite specs mostly because they introduced some new game mechanics.)Did you not notice how at least some of those changes were driven by raids? Druid for example was made to be a healer spec. Ventari line was also clearly made with this role in mind. That in a game where at some point devs said they wanted people to take care of survival on their own. And where healers, up to that point, were not needed in any content. And suddenly they appeared, because anet needed them to make an attempt at recreating the holy trinity (which they needed in order for raids to present a feeling of challenge, but without actually straight up murdering most of the would be hardcores)

[Sobx.1758]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Cuks.8241 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:Unless by "for free" you mean "for playing the content you like, even if it were to take a lot of actual effort you'd have to put into said content", in which case raiders also should be considered getting their legendary armor for free.

"For playing the content you like". You see there is the big problem.Read the first pages of the forums and you will see the following: people DON'T like: Hot maps, core maps, IB maps, Dragon Stand, Dragon fall, Pof maps, JPs, Red border land, Alpine border lands, EBG, collections that take place in more than one map, collections that involve doing events, collections in general, hearths, VB meta, tangled depths, DRMs...Now read the same topics and see what people like: Hot maps, core maps, IB maps, Dragon Stand, Dragon fall, Pof maps, JPs, Red border land, Alpine border lands, EBG, collections that take place in more than one map, collections that involve doing events, collections in general, hearths, VB meta, tangled depths, DRMs... (maybe not DRMs :)).

Now design reward structure around that. The only conclusion you make of it give everyone everything for free.Or you give several alternative paths that cover most popular content types, and hope at least one of those is going to work out.

Or you deal with the fact that to get certain rewards you need to play through certain content. There's no reason to pretend everyone needs to have everything regardless of what they do, because that's not how games work and it's not how they ever worked.

@Astralporing.1957 said:The "for free" argument is just a strawman, nothing more.

Why are people playing through content you want them to play supposed to get the rewards, but when I want to log in and talk in a map chat in a city, I won't be qualifying for legendary items? Who decides what activity is "enough to get the rewards", you?

[Sobx.1758]

[double post, delete]

[yann.1946]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@yann.1946 said:Do you feel that their should be more non-pve legendaries then?Yes. For example, i do believe WvW players should obtain their own path for legendary weapons. As well as for trinkets and amulet. Since SPvP is mostly mirrored, it should probably also get a set (although i'm not sure how would that benefit SPvP players, since they don't benefit from BiS gear, and don;t need the QoL legendaries offer either). Just as i'm not against raids getting their own

full

legendary set, not just armor and one ring.

I guess that is where we disagree. funnily enough, if we where talking about the real world i would probably share your opinion, but in a videogame i don't because i think in those cases their is way less of a loss for people never to obtain something.

The fact that we need raids to be non niche for the argument to hold is not really true though. It depends on how annoyed people get by trying raids when they don't like it and how many start enjoying when trying it. TBH, i see a strong argument thato the amount of people annoyed because they tried raiding migh be smaller then you think as i think people don't really give raids a shot in general. (it would be interesting to see who actually tried them.)If people don't try them at all, then perhaps there's no point in trying to lure them there with rewards that would require massive participation levels to get, don't you think?

not really, this is just a numbers game. Say hypothetically without leg armor 5 percent would raid and enjoy it and 0 percent would raid and not enjoy it, now with leg armor 10 percent would enjoy it and raid and two percent would start raiding and not enjoy it. Thats a total gain of three percent who enjoy it and tried. although the gamemode stays niche in both senarios, and the majority will never play them.This is just to show how the math could work and ze need some more info to draw conclusions.

To be clear, i try to not talk in absolutes. when we talk about player behavior its about how percentages change nothing more.

yes, but raids where more an extention of previous existing contenttypesNot really. Anet had to either ignore or twist into pretzels at least some of the features of the existing combat system to make them work (for example, the complete change to how aggro system worked in GW2 until that point).while masteries and elie specs where way bigger changes. (elite specs mostly because they introduced some new game mechanics.)Did you not notice how at least some of those changes were driven by raids? Druid for example was made to be a healer spec. Ventari line was also clearly made with this role in mind. That in a game where at some point devs said they wanted people to take care of survival on their own. And where healers, up to that point, were not needed in any content. And suddenly they appeared, because anet needed them to make an attempt at recreating the holy trinity (which they needed in order for raids to present a feeling of challenge, but without actually straight up murdering most of the would be hardcores)

well i did notice the addition of healers etc, but i considered it more a consequence from people wanting to play healers (as far as i remember their where lots of people complaining that they couldn't really play a healer) I guess we view the situation slightly differentlyme: Elite specs where added in HOT and where a change in the game because healers where added (etc) -> Raids took this into account when development started and adjusted to the existence of those elite specs.you: Raids where added and where a big change to the game because of the necessity of healers etc. -> Elite specs where adjusted to the existence for raids.

Now to clarify, i don't think changing the game for the desires of the community is that bad, i just don't really consider raids a change of direction.

[Astralporing.1957]

@"yann.1946" said:not really, this is just a numbers game. Say hypothetically without leg armor 5 percent would raid and enjoy it and 0 percent would raid and not enjoy it, now with leg armor 10 percent would enjoy it and raid and two percent would start raiding and not enjoy it. Thats a total gain of three percent who enjoy it and tried. although the gamemode stays niche in both senarios, and the majority will never play them.This is just to show how the math could work and ze need some more info to draw conclusions.There are many ways you can encourage people to scout the content. The one used for legendary armor is one that maximizes the negative aspects without any gains to the positive ones. I'd say that just doing the first collection is already more than enough for someone to decide whether they like the content or not. If anyone could be persuaded to like it, it already happened by that point (and probably long before that point - i am quite sure that killing 2-3 different bosses is already enough to decide that). Any stuff beyond that does not gain you any more players that would enjoy the content anymore. It can only (temporarily) "gain" you players that do not like it. As far as overall total enjoyment goes, it results in a loss, not gain. And, in fact, the more players you bring in due to that part, the greater that loss is.

Also, the only legendary armor set available in PvE is way too strong a bait. It's guaranteed to bring way more people in that would ever be interested in the content. And even if many of them end up giving up at the very first step, it's already some discontent generated.

Additionally, in case of niche content modes that are designed for a relatively small group of players, the gains you get from such "enticing" (counted in the amount of players that did not realize they would like the content, but started doing so after being drawn in) is generally not big. Most of those that would like that content would gravitate towards it anyway. So, it's generally enough to hang an easily acquirable carrot just behind the entrance. Or, often, just create clear signs pointing in the right direction.

well i did notice the addition of healers etc, but i considered it more a consequence from people wanting to play healers (as far as i remember their where lots of people complaining that they couldn't really play a healer) I guess we view the situation slightly differentlyme: Elite specs where added in HOT and where a change in the game because healers where added (etc) -> Raids took this into account when development started and adjusted to the existence of those elite specs.you: Raids where added and where a big change to the game because of the necessity of healers etc. -> Elite specs where adjusted to the existence for raids.Well, let's then just say that i feel my interpretation seems to me more fitting with how it all went then. The changes to combat paradigms were way too great to be a result of organic change. It was a massive change of direction, made with a definite purpose in mind, and for quite a time the only content this new direction was compatible with was Raids. In fact, most of the game is still not compatible with it - and the consequences of those changes on both PvP modes can be seen to fall somewhere in between "merely" bad and completely disastrous (depending on whom you ask about it).

I doubt Anet devs would have been so willing to introduce changes to combat paradigm they were so strongly set against not so long before, at a massive cost to a large part of their game, just to placate the few players wanting to play healers. Them wanting to do that for the sake of raids is a more plausible explanation to me.

[Alice.4215]

There is already a Legendary Armor set for PvE, PvP, WvW.There is already a Legendary Backpack for PvE, PvP, WvW.There should be a Legendary Trinket set for PvE, PvP, WvW.

Add 1 Amulet and 1 more Ring to PvE, make sure they upgrade the combined aesthetic effect.Add 1 Accessory and 1 Ring to PvP, and make sure they are not Unique.Add 1 Accessory and 1 Amulet to WvW, make sure the Accessory is not Unique. Remove Unique from Conflux/Slumbering Conflux.(Actually, remove the Unique feature completely from the game, what purpose does that feature even serve other than being a useless and outdated restriction?)

Then everyone can be happy, whichever game mode they play.Putting the only Legendary Amulet locked behind PvP(and PvP Wins on top of that) was a very bad decision.What you did is actually killing PvP rather than reviving it. Consider that PvE players are entering PvP Ranked SOLELY for the purpose of getting the Amulet.They are not interested in that game mode nor are they interested in getting good in that game mode.Some of them will leech/afk matches very early when they see there is little chance of winning.This causes frustration for them since they are being made to play a game mode they do not want to. They will never touch PvP again once they have their reward.This causes frustration for real PvPers as well since they are being paired with players who are making the quality of matches drop drastically.This is a No-Win situation. Player types dont mix so Arenanet should stop trying to mix them.

Imagine a serious PvP player who is serious about their rating entering a match, and just picture their anger when their teammate announces clearly "I am here for the Legendary Backpack/Amulet, I dont care about your rating or game mode".

If PvP is dying, it is because of bad balancing and blatant rampage of bots. Bringing PvE players into PvP will not revive the game mode, it will kill it even faster.

Create a PvE alternative for a Legendary Amulet.

Edit: If you need proof, I encourage anyone to test this themselves. Enter PvP Ranked, anytime your team starts losing, announce this in Team/Map chat "I am here for the Legendary Amulet" and watch the rage that ensues and the sheer number of insults you get.Do know that you are in your right to do this, because Arenanet has not created a PvE alternative for a Legendary Amulet.

[Evil.1580]

I think there will be a legendary amulet after the Icebrood Saga. There is a chance for another legendary ring but less likely because we can already create Coalescence 2 times (but who knows).

I vote for this option because:

1. The WvW and PvP legendary trinkets aren't in the "Legendary trinkets" achievement section, which implies they are separate collection.
2. The WvW and PvP legendary trinkets doesn't upgrade the visual effect of Aurora + Vision + Coalescence. Instead, they add completely new effect, which implies that they are separate collection.
3. The effect of Aurora + Vision + Coalescence looks unfinished.

[Manasa Devi.7958]

@"Sobx.1758" said:Why are people playing through content you want them to play supposed to get the rewards, but when I want to log in and talk in a map chat in a city, I won't be qualifying for legendary items? Who decides what activity is "enough to get the rewards", you?You should try to avoid this kind of disingenuous strawman nonsense in a discussion. It will only serve to create the assumption that you have no cae at all.

[Solanum.6983]

I think It'd be best for the game if They did the same thing for Trinkets as they have done for the Legendary Armor and Backpacks and have a version of each in all game modes, there's no reason not to, all it takes is making a new recipe and some new orb effect.I understand wanting to entice players into game modes but having a legendary item exclusive to raids/wvw/pvp is hardly a solution.

I'd love to see new trinkets but I think the breather might be next and maybe a legendary infusion depending on how the Armory will work.

[Will.9785]

I want an amulet. They ruined the PVP one with the tournament wins requirement. A water breather would be pretty much worthless to me.

[Sobx.1758]

@Manasa Devi.7958 said:

@"Sobx.1758" said:Why are people playing through content you want them to play supposed to get the rewards, but when I want to log in and talk in a map chat in a city, I won't be qualifying for legendary items? Who decides what activity is "enough to get the rewards", you?You should try to avoid this kind of disingenuous strawman nonsense in a discussion. It will only serve to create the assumption that you have no cae at all.

It's not "a strawman" if you actually read the posts before answering to just last one. His claim is ~"players should be able to get legendaries for whatever they want to do without forcing people into whatever content" (in this case: raiding).And for that exact reason you can see me asking Who decides what activity is "enough to get the rewards", you? Who draws the line? Me? You? Him? Nope, it's the game devs that make the game as they think it should be played and put certain rewards in relation to certain content -this is not a new concept and it's nothing out of ordinary or limited to gw2. If he claims that people should be able to get legendaries just for playing the game how they want and by participating in limited parts of it as they see fit, then I should be able to get legendary gear if I value the mmorpgs strictly for their socialisation aspect. Or does that approach not count because he (or you) doesn't want it to count?

Hope it's clear enough now.

[yann.1946]

With the trailer of judgment with didn't get info about a legendary. It probably is less likely that we will get a new legendary. :(

[Zaraki.5784]

@yann.1946 said:With the trailer of judgment with didn't get info about a legendary. It probably is less likely that we will get a new legendary. :(

It's not certain yet, I rember Vision (S4 legendary accessory) not being advertised in trailer but we still got it two weeks (may 28th) after S4 finale (may 14th).So we can still hope, for a bit more at least.

[Firebeard.1746]

I actually want a new Armor. I don't like any of the current legendary armor acquisition methods.

[yann.1946]

@Zaraki.5784 said:

@yann.1946 said:With the trailer of judgment with didn't get info about a legendary. It probably is less likely that we will get a new legendary. :(

It's not certain yet, I rember Vision (S4 legendary accessory) not being advertised in trailer but we still got it two weeks (may 28th) after S4 finale (may 14th).So we can still hope, for a bit more at least.

did we get it two weeks late after the last patch?Wasn't it more that the collection wasn't accesible because you needed the skyscale?

[Shadowmoon.7986]

Both vision and aurura where not advertised.

[Zaraki.5784]

@yann.1946 said:

@Zaraki.5784 said:

@yann.1946 said:With the trailer of judgment with didn't get info about a legendary. It probably is less likely that we will get a new legendary. :(

It's not certain yet, I rember Vision (S4 legendary accessory) not being advertised in trailer but we still got it two weeks (may 28th) after S4 finale (may 14th).So we can still hope, for a bit more at least.

did we get it two weeks late after the last patch?Wasn't it more that the collection wasn't accesible because you needed the skyscale?

Don't remember that part exactly, but I'm sure about it not being advertised in trailer.