plz make neverending harvest stuff legendary

[aiinseinn.5914]

si i dont have to switch it around after relog to another char

 

best wishes to all

[Dayra.7405]

And glyhes or it will be worser than now

[Sugar Min.5834]

Just buy three shared inventory slots?

[misterman.1530]

Yeah, this should have been brought in when shared Legendaries were enabled.

However, I doubt they will since they make money off of people buying tools for all their characters. 

[Sinmir.6504]

8 hours ago, misterman.1530 said:

Yeah, this should have been brought in when shared Legendaries were enabled.

However, I doubt they will since they make money off of people buying tools for all their characters. 

I'm not sure. As it is now I'd rather unequip my only set and transfer it to another character than buy another. Making it legendary would be more convenient for people in my position.

I'd say I'd actually be more likely to buy another for the skin if they were legendary. As it is now, I like the skin, if I buy I'll  have another unbreakable set floating about my account.  If it was legendary it would be much more concvenient if I wanted the skin on multiple characters.

For people who don't have an unbreakable set, they would have more reason to buy one.

 

Also, this is the WvW board.

[Solvar.7953]

With the introduction of shared inventory slots, I wonder how many folks actually buy a set of gathering tools for all their characters.  For myself, I just keep the set in shared inventory slots and swap between them.

I imagine this also depends on how many characters someone has/plays.  If you only have a few, buying tools for all of them is not as costly as if you have 20 characters.

I would certainly like some slot where these sit simply so I don't have to do that swap, and I would actually pay some amount of gems for it, since it would then effectively free up 3 shared inventory slots.

 

[Gibson.4036]

Even with shared inventory slots, having to swap out is kind of annoying.

[Dayra.7405]

On 3/30/2023 at 1:00 PM, Min Min.9368 said:

Just buy three shared inventory slots?

I have all (28), still:

23 minutes ago, Gibson.4036 said:

Even with shared inventory slots, having to swap out is kind of annoying.

 

And I agree with

16 hours ago, Sinmir.6504 said:

I'm not sure. As it is now I'd rather unequip my only set and transfer it to another character than buy another. Making it legendary would be more convenient for people in my position.

I'd say I'd actually be more likely to buy another for the skin if they were legendary. As it is now, I like the skin, if I buy I'll  have another unbreakable set floating about my account.  If it was legendary it would be much more concvenient if I wanted the skin on multiple characters.

For people who don't have an unbreakable set, they would have more reason to buy one.

Having multiple sets floting around on all my alts would let me search for them even more. Having the disipline to swap them in and out on char login/logout mostly works, but only for 1 set. More than one set is only more likely if there is a better way, and a set for every char is completely unreasonable, I've 21, around 5 I would call my mains.

[floppypuppy.5789]

This is purely convenience, and as such it is firmly in the monetization category.  That's the price you pay for a no-sub fee game.

[Gibson.4036]

3 minutes ago, floppypuppy.5789 said:

This is purely convenience, and as such it is firmly in the monetization category.  That's the price you pay for a no-sub fee game.

The problem is that even after I’ve paid to eliminate “inconvenience”with three unlimited tools and three shared inventory slots, it’s still annoyingly inconvenient.

I’d happily turn in three inventory slots to make my unlimited tools legendary.

[Dayra.7405]

11 minutes ago, floppypuppy.5789 said:

This is purely convenience, and as such it is firmly in the monetization category.  That's the price you pay for a no-sub fee game.

How about paying 500 gems to add one of them (500 per 1 harvesting tool or 500 per 1 glyph, i.e. 3000 gems for a complete set) to the armory? I would love to pay that 😉 

Edited March 31, 2023 by Dayra.7405

[floppypuppy.5789]

43 minutes ago, Gibson.4036 said:

The problem is that even after I’ve paid to eliminate “inconvenience”with three unlimited tools and three shared inventory slots, it’s still annoyingly inconvenient.

I’d happily turn in three inventory slots to make my unlimited tools legendary.

You miss the point of monetization: you are supposed to get one set for each character.  That's the way to eliminate the inconvenience.

Feel free to wait a month between the purchase of each set, such is the way of maintaining things with recurring expenses and salaries to pay.

[floppypuppy.5789]

50 minutes ago, Dayra.7405 said:

How about paying 500 gems to add one of them (500 per 1 harvesting tool or 500 per 1 glyph, i.e. 3000 gems for a complete set) to the armory? I would love to pay that 😉 

So you want them to implement something that will drastically reduce their income compared to selling one set of tools for each character?

That's not how free to play games survive.

Edited March 31, 2023 by floppypuppy.5789

[Aerthan.1907]

12 minutes ago, floppypuppy.5789 said:

That's not how free to play games survive.

 

There is likely some middle ground. I doubt that most people have 1 set for every character. I personally have 2 sets, one set is mostly permanent and one set is mostly shared. Anet has the actual stats, if most people have 2-3 sets then charging 4x or 5x the amount for a set that can be shared/skinned would be more money for them and a better experience for us.

[floppypuppy.5789]

18 minutes ago, Aerthan.1907 said:

 

There is likely some middle ground. I doubt that most people have 1 set for every character. I personally have 2 sets, one set is mostly permanent and one set is mostly shared. Anet has the actual stats, if most people have 2-3 sets then charging 4x or 5x the amount for a set that can be shared/skinned would be more money for them and a better experience for us.

You can try and haggle over the price of convenience if that pleases you, but in-game monetization is about funding the whole game not just the tiny piece you are looking at right now.  That means your current sense of worth and their sense of worth are very different.

Wait for a sale if it makes you feel better.

[Dayra.7405]

50 minutes ago, floppypuppy.5789 said:

So you want them to implement something that will drastically reduce their income compared to selling one set of tools for each character?

Read above:

18 hours ago, Sinmir.6504 said:

I'm not sure. As it is now I'd rather unequip my only set and transfer it to another character than buy another. Making it legendary would be more convenient for people in my position.

I'd say I'd actually be more likely to buy another for the skin if they were legendary. As it is now, I like the skin, if I buy I'll  have another unbreakable set floating about my account.  If it was legendary it would be much more concvenient if I wanted the skin on multiple characters.

For people who don't have an unbreakable set, they would have more reason to buy one.

 

 

And I wonder your math to add a tool and it's glyph to the leg. Armory cost 2*500=1000 gems according to my proposal, if you already own both tool and glyph (you need to buy them additionally if you don't) and tool with glyph occupies 1 slot, while a shared inv slot is 400-700 depending on how many you buy and if you are in an occasion or not. So freeing a shared inv slot by adding it to the leg. armory cost you 1k gems, while buying another slot cost you half.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Dayra.7405

[Gibson.4036]

1 hour ago, floppypuppy.5789 said:

You miss the point of monetization: you are supposed to get one set for each character.  That's the way to eliminate the inconvenience.

Feel free to wait a month between the purchase of each set, such is the way of maintaining things with recurring expenses and salaries to pay.

I don't miss the point, I question the implementation.

If I've purchased three shared inventory slots and a set of infinite volatile tools, that's over $50. Well over the cost of a new expansion. You'd think that would get me complete convenience when it comes to gathering tools. Instead, it takes a very inconvenient system (constantly buying and stocking them) and makes it mildly inconvenient (switching them in and out each time I switch characters).

For true convenience (just in the gathering tool department, not touching the other incoveniences designed to tempt me to the gem shop), you're saying I should buy a set for each of my (currently) 16 characters? That's 43,200 gems, or a whopping $540! 

That's 3 years of a standard MMO sub fee! The character slots are another year and a half! I've almost reached half the game's life in sub fees already, without touching the inconveniences of limited material storage, bank slots, unlimited salvaging kit, and shared slots to hold that and portal tomes. Nor any cosmetics.

I totally understand how f2p works. In this case, I think it would be reasonable if 3 months of sub fee, or the cost of almost two expansions would completely remove the inconvenience of gathering tools, not just minimize it.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Gibson.4036

[kharmin.7683]

51 minutes ago, Gibson.4036 said:

I don't miss the point, I question the implementation.

If I've purchased three shared inventory slots and a set of infinite volatile tools, that's over $50. Well over the cost of a new expansion. You'd think that would get me complete convenience when it comes to gathering tools. Instead, it takes a very inconvenient system (constantly buying and stocking them) and makes it mildly inconvenient (switching them in and out each time I switch characters).

For true convenience (just in the gathering tool department, not touching the other incoveniences designed to tempt me to the gem shop), you're saying I should buy a set for each of my (currently) 16 characters? That's 43,200 gems, or a whopping $540! 

That's 3 years of a standard MMO sub fee! The character slots are another year and a half! I've almost reached half the game's life in sub fees already, without touching the inconveniences of limited material storage, bank slots, unlimited salvaging kit, and shared slots to hold that and portal tomes. Nor any cosmetics.

I totally understand how f2p works. In this case, I think it would be reasonable if 3 months of sub fee, or the cost of almost two expansions would completely remove the inconvenience of gathering tools, not just minimize it.

Except not everyone who purchases these tools or inventory slots is using RL cash to do so.  Sure, in your example, it may cost over $50, but I didn't pay a cent for my tools or slots.  Anet needs to make up the difference somehow for players like me who spend very little RL cash.

[floppypuppy.5789]

43 minutes ago, Gibson.4036 said:

That's 3 years of a standard MMO sub fee! The character slots are another year and a half! I've almost reached half the game's life in sub fees already, without touching the inconveniences of limited material storage, bank slots, unlimited salvaging kit, and shared slots to hold that and portal tomes. Nor any cosmetics.

This is precisely the point and goal of monetization.  No ambiguity.  Giving you something for nothing is not the goal, although maybe they could do something to mollify you or improve your feels.

43 minutes ago, Gibson.4036 said:

you're saying I should buy a set for each of my (currently) 16 character

Now you need to discover that monetization is designed for the player base as a whole not for the outliers.  Extravagance traditionally costs extra.

[KerryTT.4792]

I have mentioned this one before, but my friend has come up with a way to track who has the tools.His toons have unique color schemes and he has picked up the karma harvesting tools and matched the tools to the color scheme of the character. If he forgets to swap out he can tell by the karma tools which character has the infinite ones.

[Ronin.4501]

Just be glad they're not soulbound like they originally were. I used to own 4 sets.

[Gibson.4036]

43 minutes ago, floppypuppy.5789 said:

Giving you something for nothing is not the goal

False dichotomy fallacy and strawman argument.

43 minutes ago, floppypuppy.5789 said:

Extravagance traditionally costs extra.

Nice loaded word. Now I'm curious where the arbitrary line is between a moderate number of additional character slots and an extravagant one. From what I can tell WoW allows 50. That's 30 years of monthly sub fee to get the same "extravagance" in GW2. Hm.

54 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

Except not everyone who purchases these tools or inventory slots is using RL cash to do so.  Sure, in your example, it may cost over $50, but I didn't pay a cent for my tools or slots.  Anet needs to make up the difference somehow for players like me who spend very little RL cash.

Someone paid real money for your infite gathering tools and character slots, even though you did not. That person bought the gems and sold them to you in exchange for your gold. ArenaNet does not need to "make up the difference" between the income for your tools and mine becuase there is no difference. They still got cash for them.

Where they do need to make up the difference, is between players like you and me, who engage with the gem store whether with gold or RL money, and those who play without ever touching the gemstore. But that comes from the totality of all things being sold there. Since they are all digital goods, none of them have a "break even" price they need to stay above. All of it is just a game of trying to maximize the income generated there.

Clearly, thousands of us have bought infinite tools and the shared inventory slots already, so it's unlikely to change. I do think it would be a nice QoL change to make them legendary, since they are a $33 dollar item.

 

[Aerthan.1907]

3 hours ago, floppypuppy.5789 said:

That means your current sense of worth and their sense of worth are very different.

 

I'm fairly certain both sides are using number of gems as the sense of worth. Maybe you're using a different kind of math where the average person paying 9k gems for a set of legendary harvesters is less money than the average person paying 6k gems for 2 sets of regular harvesters. I just see 3k more gems. Like I mentioned if the average player is paying 15k gems and more so all their characters can have their own set then yes it wouldn't make sense for them to do the legendaries. Only Anet knows the magic number.

[Vavume.8065]

They should add Legendary harvesting tools to the legendary armory. To make a legendary harvesting tool would require combining 3 infinite tools (Pickaxe's for example) and a gift of exploration in the mystic forge to gain a legendary Pickaxe.

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

As a general rule, the gemstore doesn't offer pay to win, and despite being convenience items the "legendary" system is considered an in-game reward and not something you can buy off. I doubt they're going to change this, as there's not a single instance of it so far.

 

If you want them to add legendary harvesting tools, you'd have to earn them in game.

Edited March 31, 2023 by SoftFootpaws.9134