RobynJoanne
Member
|
I agree with PD on this matter. I also deeply dislike rotational items for the very same reasons. I have been waiting over two years for Festive Mason Form to return, and I will have to continue to wait until 2024 for it to come back. I would not want others to suffer from the same issue. There are already plenty of items that have left with no guarantee of coming back any time soon. Why make it worse for a relatively subjective problem like clutter, especially when we have a search function? This is especially true for core items like Bard of War, which FD players have begged to return permanently for years. No one wants to wait months to years to complete their character.
Moving items to another shop would likely require the help of Captain Rhubarb. If he is getting involved, I would rather he help make the API provide more information so that we can have more detailed resources in-game and outside of it. A major problem with AQ is the relative lack of information provided to players, and Captain Rhubarb can work his magic to help with that. This is, in my opinion, a far more impactful change. This is, of course, just one example of something he can do. I know that he laid the groundwork for Craftin years ago, and he could continue his work on that if he had more free time. Regardless of what he chooses to do, I just think changing GGB shops is relatively small-impact work for someone whose work is so important.
We do know that the staff has moved items from the R shop to the UR shop and vice-versa in the past, usually due to mistakes with tiering returning items. The staff has always compensated those who paid a UR box for R items, but I'm unsure if this is something that can be easily done universally or if it is something that is done on an individual basis. The latter would just take too much developer time.
All of this is mere speculation, so I'd rather pivot to something more rewarding that PD brought up: the implementation of general guidelines for where items go. As PD noted, C GGBs are all non-MC'd items, but the difference between R and UR GGBs is far more nebulous. One thing I have noted recently is that armors are predominantly UR GGBs now, which makes sense since armors are the most important items in the game. Furthermore, many great pets are R GGBs. Perhaps, we could have it be based on item slot. The Bloodblades are top-tier weapons and only cost R GGBs, so they almost invalidate any weapon that costs a UR GGB. We could make most if not all future MC'd weapons cost a R GGB for example. This is just a very basic idea, and I think we should be more specific about the conditions anyway. I have also had the idea of more unique effects being limited to the UR GGB shop. I will use the Bloodblades as examples again. The Bloodblades are "just" the top-tier option for damage, so UR GGB weapons could be differentiated by having more special mechanics. Limit Buster is an example of something very unique. No other item that I can recall lets you unleash a skill by taking damage.
I am hoping we can just open up this discussion to more people, as it is indeed something worth exploring. GGBs, for better or worse, are a major source of items for players. Thus, there should be more guidelines on how items are tiered to make it so people feel that they have received worthy compensation for the cost.
< Message edited by RobynJoanne -- 4/17/2022 20:03:47 >
|
Printable Version
Icon Legend
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread
