Superior Sigil of Nullification [Merged]

[Astralporing.1957]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Hyper Cutter.9376 said:And to think, this whole thing could have been avoided if Anet had just charged gold outright to do that collection, like they did with the griffin (which few, if any, people complained about).

That's the big difference: the griffin's price was

fair

, paid equally by everyone. There weren't any people who rushed through PoF and got the griffin for a few gold, while people who took their time and savored the content ended up having to pay hundreds of times that much.

To be accurate, what is equal is not always fair. That's the case with Griffon.

Also, what is fair is not always equal either. That's the case with the sigil

Simply put, don't make a correlation between equality and fair.Indeed, with the caveat that the Sigil case might be considered to be neither equal nor fair.And whether griffon case was fair or not, it was at least equally (un)fair to everyone.

[xenon.3264]

EXPANSIVE ? it is. no doubt.

but doable. i just crafted help and next week will do same with chest. no money given to tp baron . all done by myself.

happy this way

[Super Hayes.6890]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Super Hayes.6890 said:Congrats on 31 pages OP! You are popular :)

Is this the point where we create many new threads as an attention grab? Joking everyone, calm down. Seriously though, if I want this sigil for it's functionality in the game I have to pay what now? If the sigil's actual intended function is worth the trading post price then there is no problem. Since we all know it isn't the collection requirement needs to be changed to some junk item that can also be sold on the TP so that this sigil can serve it's intended purpose. Simple fact is that this sigil price is not okay since it is not being purchased to use in weapons.

Wait ... that doesn't make sense here. Where the sigil is used as a mat is irrelevant to if the price is OK or not (which in most scenarios is completely subjective based on the player to begin with). That's not how the market works at all. I'm also pretty sure that if the sigil was being used in weapons, it would be irrelevant to the people complaining about it as well. It's just not a factor.

It's relevant by the fact that the reason the price skyrocketed has nothing to due with the original purpose of the weapon sigil. Don't create collections that make a sigil or rune go up in price. I have no issue paying more if demand goes up because a build makes it popular. What sucks is that some sigils and runes go up in value because of collections that have nothing to do with builds. If I want to play with builds I shouldn't have to pay 10g for a sigil that really isn't that powerful. It is still too expensive for what it is. Replace it in the collection with something else. Preferably a junk trophy that drops off mobs.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

@Hyper Cutter.9376 said:And to think, this whole thing could have been avoided if Anet had just charged gold outright to do that collection, like they did with the griffin (which few, if any, people complained about).Lots of people complained about the cost of the Griffon (and some still do, especially some who just bought PoF as their introduction to GW2).

Plus, as threads have evolved, it turns out that a lot of the complaints about the sigil's inclusion in requiem armor come down to costs, not to the availability of the sigil. (Certainly not all of the criticism, but a large fraction, perhaps even the vast majority.)

[Susy.7529]

In the meantime, the new LS Ep 5 has "Upgradable Weapon Sets"; which Sigil/Rune will go from a few silvers to many golds?

[Gop.8713]

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

@Hyper Cutter.9376 said:And to think, this whole thing could have been avoided if Anet had just charged gold outright to do that collection, like they did with the griffin (which few, if any, people complained about).Lots of people complained about the cost of the Griffon (and some still do, especially some who just bought PoF as their introduction to GW2).

Plus, as threads have evolved, it turns out that a lot of the complaints about the sigil's inclusion in requiem armor come down to costs, not to the availability of the sigil. (Certainly not all of the criticism, but a large fraction, perhaps even the vast majority.)

Can you link those? I've seen very few complaints since the revamp and was under the impression that the problem was solved. This collection was a fairly major fiasco and if it has not in fact reached a resolution I'd like to know . . .

[Super Hayes.6890]

@"Susy.7529" said:In the meantime, the new LS Ep 5 has "Upgradable Weapon Sets"; which Sigil/Rune will go from a few silvers to many golds?

It pains me to say that this was my first thought as well. To be fair we have no idea if collections will even be associated with the upgradable weapon sets. I hope that the cost will be more fixed on those and not tied to the trading post ebb and flow that this sigil is part of. In my opinion it is best that tradable items be left out of collections. I like the ones that have you achieve something in the game.

[Obtena.7952]

@Super Hayes.6890 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Super Hayes.6890 said:Congrats on 31 pages OP! You are popular :)

Is this the point where we create many new threads as an attention grab? Joking everyone, calm down. Seriously though, if I want this sigil for it's functionality in the game I have to pay what now? If the sigil's actual intended function is worth the trading post price then there is no problem. Since we all know it isn't the collection requirement needs to be changed to some junk item that can also be sold on the TP so that this sigil can serve it's intended purpose. Simple fact is that this sigil price is not okay since it is not being purchased to use in weapons.

Wait ... that doesn't make sense here. Where the sigil is used as a mat is irrelevant to if the price is OK or not (which in most scenarios is completely subjective based on the player to begin with). That's not how the market works at all. I'm also pretty sure that if the sigil was being used in weapons, it would be irrelevant to the people complaining about it as well. It's just not a factor.

It's relevant by the fact that the reason the price skyrocketed has nothing to due with the original purpose of the weapon sigil. Don't create collections that make a sigil or rune go up in price. I have no issue paying more if demand goes up because a build makes it popular. What sucks is that some sigils and runes go up in value because of collections that have nothing to do with builds. If I want to play with builds I shouldn't have to pay 10g for a sigil that really isn't that powerful. It is still too expensive for what it is. Replace it in the collection with something else. Preferably a junk trophy that drops off mobs.

I'm glad you necro'ed this thread because that makes no sense. The game evolves, things come in and out of relevance. So it really doesn't make sense to associate the the 'original purpose' with the value of the sigil, or any other material in this game. Thanks.

PS. It's funny you think you shouldn't have to pay 10G for a sigil. YOu will pay whatever the market value is ... if you prefer to buy it over crafting it.

[Trinnitty.8256]

ANET could control market value though. If they introduced a sigil and rune NPCs that sold them at steady value, say 3 gold 24/7. That would keep prices from skyrocketing. That would give 3 options: pay a flat gold rate at everyday price, craft them or buy direct off tp.

[Obtena.7952]

@Trinnitty.8256 said:ANET could control market value though. If they introduced a sigil and rune NPCs that sold them at steady value, say 3 gold 24/7. That would keep prices from skyrocketing. That would give 3 options: pay a flat gold rate at everyday price, craft them or buy direct off tp.

But why would they want to do that? Clearly that's not the intention of the TP. Anet could do lots of things, but we can see what they want by observing the game. TP is great example of this; Anet does not want to control prices; the TP is there to exchange value and facilitate game play between players. There are also secondary benefits to Anet not controlling prices ... like understanding the shifts in player consumption of materials, etc...

[Trinnitty.8256]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Trinnitty.8256 said:ANET could control market value though. If they introduced a sigil and rune NPCs that sold them at steady value, say 3 gold 24/7. That would keep prices from skyrocketing. That would give 3 options: pay a flat gold rate at everyday price, craft them or buy direct off tp.

But why would they want to do that? Clearly that's not the intention of the TP. Anet could do lots of things, but we can see what they want by observing the game. TP is great example of this; Anet does not want to control prices; the TP is there to exchange value and facilitate game play between players. There are also secondary benefits to Anet not controlling prices ... like understanding the shifts in player consumption of materials, etc...

Why would they do that? To keep things from getting out of control for months(high prices). To discourage the TP flipping on large scale. Convenience for player base .In my opinion they way they did this rune and sigil crafting update was a mistake by being more complicated than it needed to be. Kind of like precursor crafting was with complicated scavenger hunts tied to group events etc. Just my opinion

[Obtena.7952]

@Trinnitty.8256 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Trinnitty.8256 said:ANET could control market value though. If they introduced a sigil and rune NPCs that sold them at steady value, say 3 gold 24/7. That would keep prices from skyrocketing. That would give 3 options: pay a flat gold rate at everyday price, craft them or buy direct off tp.

But why would they want to do that? Clearly that's not the intention of the TP. Anet could do lots of things, but we can see what they want by observing the game. TP is great example of this; Anet does not want to control prices; the TP is there to exchange value and facilitate game play between players. There are also secondary benefits to Anet not controlling prices ... like understanding the shifts in player consumption of materials, etc...

Why would they do that? To keep things from getting out of control for months(high prices). To discourage the TP flipping on large scale. Convenience for player base .In my opinion they way they did this rune and sigil crafting update was a mistake by being more complicated than it needed to be. Kind of like precursor crafting was with complicated scavenger hunts tied to group events etc. Just my opinion

Sure, if they thought that was a good idea, they would be doing that already. It's not like the game is just released here. History indicates Anet does not want to manipulate market pricing directly. The TP wouldn't work if Anet was, so they don't. It's driven by market forces.

There isn't any value debating if Anet should intervene here. If that's how they wanted to do it, they would be doing it by now. Again, it has nothing to do with prices 'out of control' because the prices regulate themselves based on the flow of mats in and out of the market; they are ALWAYS in control; do not associate control with equilibrium here. There is no room here for players to insert their subjective opinions about the costs of mats here either.

[Cyninja.2954]

@Trinnitty.8256 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Trinnitty.8256 said:ANET could control market value though. If they introduced a sigil and rune NPCs that sold them at steady value, say 3 gold 24/7. That would keep prices from skyrocketing. That would give 3 options: pay a flat gold rate at everyday price, craft them or buy direct off tp.

But why would they want to do that? Clearly that's not the intention of the TP. Anet could do lots of things, but we can see what they want by observing the game. TP is great example of this; Anet does not want to control prices; the TP is there to exchange value and facilitate game play between players. There are also secondary benefits to Anet not controlling prices ... like understanding the shifts in player consumption of materials, etc...

Why would they do that? To keep things from getting out of control for months(high prices). To discourage the TP flipping on large scale. Convenience for player base .In my opinion they way they did this rune and sigil crafting update was a mistake by being more complicated than it needed to be. Kind of like precursor crafting was with complicated scavenger hunts tied to group events etc. Just my opinion

So who decides which price is to high and which to low? Are you volunteering? How often are you going to check prices? What is the metric you are going to use?

Does this only count one time, or for any item people think is to expensive or to cheap?

What about legendary weapons, are they to expensive? Are they to cheap?

What about very rare infusions?

What about expensive skins?

How often does Arenanet intervene? Do they rollback or reimburse players who spent gold before they intervened?

What's wrong with precursor crafting? Most people dislike that the precursors aren't free and thus do not feel the need to do the scavenger hunt since the gain is minuscule or negative compared to just buying them off the TP.

Are you noticing something by now? Intervening in a market causes new issues most of which are far unfairer then letting the market and the supply and demand work it out.

[Etria.3642]

Well the control things have plummeted in price. My buy order finally went through and I never thought it would. Getting my requiem set tonight. At least now you can craft the sigils!

[Super Hayes.6890]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Super Hayes.6890 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Super Hayes.6890 said:Congrats on 31 pages OP! You are popular :)

Is this the point where we create many new threads as an attention grab? Joking everyone, calm down. Seriously though, if I want this sigil for it's functionality in the game I have to pay what now? If the sigil's actual intended function is worth the trading post price then there is no problem. Since we all know it isn't the collection requirement needs to be changed to some junk item that can also be sold on the TP so that this sigil can serve it's intended purpose. Simple fact is that this sigil price is not okay since it is not being purchased to use in weapons.

Wait ... that doesn't make sense here. Where the sigil is used as a mat is irrelevant to if the price is OK or not (which in most scenarios is completely subjective based on the player to begin with). That's not how the market works at all. I'm also pretty sure that if the sigil was being used in weapons, it would be irrelevant to the people complaining about it as well. It's just not a factor.

It's relevant by the fact that the reason the price skyrocketed has nothing to due with the original purpose of the weapon sigil. Don't create collections that make a sigil or rune go up in price. I have no issue paying more if demand goes up because a build makes it popular. What sucks is that some sigils and runes go up in value because of collections that have nothing to do with builds. If I want to play with builds I shouldn't have to pay 10g for a sigil that really isn't that powerful. It is still too expensive for what it is. Replace it in the collection with something else. Preferably a junk trophy that drops off mobs.

I'm glad you necro'ed this thread because that makes no sense. The game evolves, things come in and out of relevance. So it really doesn't make sense to associate the the 'original purpose' with the value of the sigil, or any other material in this game. Thanks.

PS. It's funny you think you shouldn't have to pay 10G for a sigil. YOu will pay whatever the market value is ... if you prefer to buy it over crafting it.

Necro'ed? This is the first time I've logged on to the forums since you last tagged me. You think it's funny that I think I SHOULDN'T have to pay? Choose your words better. I don't want to spend that much and I'm posting my opinion as to why I feel that way. This thread should stay on the front page until that price levels out. I do feel that all sigils should be similar in price btw. Anything else discourages build experimenting.

[Hyper Cutter.9376]

@Cyninja.2954 said:What's wrong with precursor crafting?A lot of things, starting with the fact that the price to craft them was balanced on what each one was selling for on the TP (a price based almost entirely on the popularity of the weapon type), rather than any sort of objective measure.

[Cyninja.2954]

@Hyper Cutter.9376 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:What's wrong with precursor crafting?A lot of things, starting with the fact that the price to craft them was balanced on what each one was selling for on the TP (a price based almost entirely on the popularity of the weapon type), rather than any sort of objective measure.

Made absolute sense then, makes absolute sense now.

Arenanet has certain values in mind when it comes to different precursors. These values were implemented when crafting was introduced. Less desired precursors are cheaper with shorter collections. More desired precursors remain more expansive with more complex collections.

The popularity of the weapon was the baseline (and obviously the volume and amount traded on the TP).

Not all precursors are of equal value. Not all weapon types are equally desired.

[Dante.1763]

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Hyper Cutter.9376 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:What's wrong with precursor crafting?A lot of things, starting with the fact that the price to craft them was balanced on what each one was selling for on the TP (a price based almost entirely on the popularity of the weapon type), rather than any sort of objective measure.

Made absolute sense then, makes absolute sense now.

Arenanet has certain values in mind when it comes to different precursors. These values were implemented when crafting was introduced. Less desired precursors are cheaper with shorter collections. More desired precursors remain more expansive with more complex collections.

The popularity of the weapon was the baseline (and obviously the volume and amount traded on the TP).

Not all precursors are of equal value. Not all weapon types are equally desired.

As true as that is, arent some precursors still cheaper to buy at the moment than they are to craft them?

[Cyninja.2954]

@Dante.1763 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Hyper Cutter.9376 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:What's wrong with precursor crafting?A lot of things, starting with the fact that the price to craft them was balanced on what each one was selling for on the TP (a price based almost entirely on the popularity of the weapon type), rather than any sort of objective measure.

Made absolute sense then, makes absolute sense now.

Arenanet has certain values in mind when it comes to different precursors. These values were implemented when crafting was introduced. Less desired precursors are cheaper with shorter collections. More desired precursors remain more expansive with more complex collections.

The popularity of the weapon was the baseline (and obviously the volume and amount traded on the TP).

Not all precursors are of equal value. Not all weapon types are equally desired.

As true as that is, arent some precursors still cheaper to buy at the moment than they are to craft them?

That is due to the natural supply via drops and MF. Arenanet never implemented a bottom value for precursors. They merely addressed the upper end (which was the main concern of the community) and the rng element. They could have addressed both, but I doubt anyone was worrying about people complaining about precursors being to cheap.

People were and are disappointed that precursor crafting wasn't free for their favorite precursors and that values aligned close to prices back then (actually most precursors were more expensive to craft than buy when crafting was introduced). Most people aren't willing to do the collections even if they could sell the precursor for some profit (haven't checked but this was possible for some of the high value ones).

But we are getting off topic here.

[Ashen.2907]

@Hyper Cutter.9376 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:What's wrong with precursor crafting?A lot of things, starting with the fact that the price to craft them was balanced on what each one was selling for on the TP (a price based almost entirely on the popularity of the weapon type), rather than any sort of objective measure.

What objective measure could there be?

[Obtena.7952]

@Super Hayes.6890 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Super Hayes.6890 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Super Hayes.6890 said:Congrats on 31 pages OP! You are popular :)

Is this the point where we create many new threads as an attention grab? Joking everyone, calm down. Seriously though, if I want this sigil for it's functionality in the game I have to pay what now? If the sigil's actual intended function is worth the trading post price then there is no problem. Since we all know it isn't the collection requirement needs to be changed to some junk item that can also be sold on the TP so that this sigil can serve it's intended purpose. Simple fact is that this sigil price is not okay since it is not being purchased to use in weapons.

Wait ... that doesn't make sense here. Where the sigil is used as a mat is irrelevant to if the price is OK or not (which in most scenarios is completely subjective based on the player to begin with). That's not how the market works at all. I'm also pretty sure that if the sigil was being used in weapons, it would be irrelevant to the people complaining about it as well. It's just not a factor.

It's relevant by the fact that the reason the price skyrocketed has nothing to due with the original purpose of the weapon sigil. Don't create collections that make a sigil or rune go up in price. I have no issue paying more if demand goes up because a build makes it popular. What sucks is that some sigils and runes go up in value because of collections that have nothing to do with builds. If I want to play with builds I shouldn't have to pay 10g for a sigil that really isn't that powerful. It is still too expensive for what it is. Replace it in the collection with something else. Preferably a junk trophy that drops off mobs.

I'm glad you necro'ed this thread because that makes no sense. The game evolves, things come in and out of relevance. So it really doesn't make sense to associate the the 'original purpose' with the value of the sigil, or any other material in this game. Thanks.

PS. It's funny you think you shouldn't have to pay 10G for a sigil. YOu will pay whatever the market value is ... if you prefer to buy it over crafting it.

Necro'ed? This is the first time I've logged on to the forums since you last tagged me. You think it's funny that I think I SHOULDN'T have to pay? Choose your words better. I don't want to spend that much and I'm posting my opinion as to why I feel that way. This thread should stay on the front page until that price levels out. I do feel that all sigils should be similar in price btw. Anything else discourages build experimenting.

I guess you have bad expectations and some things to learn about market price mechanics then. The prices are whatever the market is willing to bear, not what you feel they should be. They will never be similar in price; they never were. If Anet thought it was more important for the prices to be the same to experiment with builds than the current situation, we wouldn't HAVE the current situation.

[Super Hayes.6890]

@Obtena.7952 said:

I guess you have bad expectations and some things to learn about market price mechanics then. The prices are whatever the market is willing to bear, not what you feel they should be. They will never be similar in price; they never were. If Anet thought it was more important for the prices to be the same to experiment with builds than the current situation, we wouldn't HAVE the current situation.

Again, I want it to be different. I don't expect it. I expect the market to behave exactly how it is behaving. It is working as intended. The problem I have with it is when non-cosmetic game play altering items don't have a price ceiling. The sigil of nullification does not have a large impact on game play, I'll admit, but what makes it more desirable on the trading post compared to any other sigil? The answer should not be a collection for a cosmetic item. It should be that players use it more often in builds. My opinion is that the collections should not include items like this since it impacts people who have no interest in the collection that caused the price spike as well as the people doing the collection.

[Obtena.7952]

@"Super Hayes.6890" said:The sigil of nullification does not have a large impact on game play, I'll admit, but what makes it more desirable on the trading post compared to any other sigil? The answer should not be a collection for a cosmetic item. It should be that players use it more often in builds. My opinion is that the collections should not include items like this since it impacts people who have no interest in the collection that caused the price spike as well as the people doing the collection.

That's a very practical ... but not the only ... way to look at the usefulness of sigils as a material that can be bought/sold on the TP. We can wax on academic all day about what we think should and shouldn't be happening; it's irrelevant, especially when the arguments are as weak as "because that's what I think". Somewhere buried in this thread are reasons that are plausible why Anet decided to make this sigil of interest outside of just being useful in builds, and they are very reasonable lines of thought.

[Super Hayes.6890]

Isn't the purpose of a forum for a bunch of threads about what we all think? I apologize if I missed the true purpose. I'll be sure to keep my opinions to myself in the future... Besides, isn't referring to other's reasonable lines of thought without quoting them a weak argument? To be fair, I can see why you wouldn't want to sift through this thread to find them as it has become extremely lengthy. I agree that my viewpoint is not the only way to look at the usefulness of sigils (never said it was). 46 pages about this sigil are hardly irrelevant though. Obviously many of us have strong opinions on the price hike of this sigil and they are all in their origin "because that's what I think" reasons.

[Obtena.7952]

@"Super Hayes.6890" said:Isn't the purpose of a forum for a bunch of threads about what we all think? I apologize if I missed the true purpose. I'll be sure to keep my opinions to myself in the future... Besides, isn't referring to other's reasonable lines of thought without quoting them a weak argument? To be fair, I can see why you wouldn't want to sift through this thread to find them as it has become extremely lengthy. I agree that my viewpoint is not the only way to look at the usefulness of sigils (never said it was). 46 pages about this sigil are hardly irrelevant though. Obviously many of us have strong opinions on the price hike of this sigil and they are all in their origin "because that's what I think" reasons.

No one is saying you can't say what you think ... just accept that it's not the only way to think. You're subjective reasoning to be unhappy about the price just doesn't recognize the value the market brings to the game and it's players ... and the fact that this value outweighs your personal thoughts on how it should work for whatever reason. You might not believe it but the market works this way to ensure materials are available for people to buy them.