Originally Posted by jkyarr

One of my biggest frustrations about GW1 is that everyone around me seems to be so flippin uber-rich that they can toss plats around without remorse like I toss skales. You've got to take a closer look at the flow of the money before you start using words like "economy". Fact is there's very little that serves the purpose of removing wealth from the economy because players ability to amass wealth has far surpassed the cost of NPC services. The increased usage of Runes of Superior Vigor and rise in the number Guild Hall NPCs are clear indications of that.

GW2 could be an entirely different economic paradigm, so that's a big wait and see, but for the purposes of excluding Item Decay based on an incomplete glance at the GW1 economy, I just don't see that argument having any substance to it.

Originally Posted by jkyarr

Originally Posted by Splatter Mcnasty

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it almost looks like you brought this whole concept up because you dont like other people having more money than you...How is item decay going to solve that problem? Its not. Your items would be subject to the same decay as the weapons of the rich people.

Originally Posted by jkyarr

That would be wrong and stand in need of correction. The other postee brought up the economy in a rather 1/2 baked comment and so I proceeded to discuss the economy in further detail. The original topic is obviously item decay.

Other people's money has never been my concern. I'm a casual player on the relative scale and feel very well satisfied with my level of success in the game. When I get outbid for a rare weapon every now and then I accept it as a consequence of my inability to play the game more often. I merely included an observation that was relevant to my point on the economy.

But thanks for the meaningless off-topic tactic attempting to undermine the credibility of the original topic provider. You should thoroughly waste other's time more often...

Originally Posted by Mordakai

QFT. That should end the discussion right there.

I find it odd you're arguing for this, when you are against other forms of grind (and, yes, decay would lead to grind because I would have to repeat steps in order to keep my weapon at peak condition, whatever those steps may be).

Why not add old age to our characters, so more we play them, the weaker and weaker they get until they die. That sounds like fun...

Originally Posted by Delutia

There will always be players with millions of gold. Item decay will barely touch them at all - especially since players with that much money aren't earning it through grinding. As for rarity, if they wanted really rare items, they could make them only drop once a month or something.

Gold sinks should remain as positive things for players, i.e. better-looking armor, guild stuff, etc. If they really want more gold sinks they can add tons of things like these, with high price tags. This will allow uber-rich players to spend their gold on stuff, while not hurting the rest of the players.

Originally Posted by Curse You

His point was well founded, as you have failed to give us a reason for your "poll" either than that you felt like it. The whole topic is incredibly far from what is the Guild Wars model.

If I make a thread requesting that all skills be changed to Frenzy and Mending (largely exaggerated), the most probable reason would be that I either think they are the only good skills, or dislike people using other skills. However, I did not state either, only implied.

Originally Posted by jkyarr

1. I think the concept of item decay makes sense and adds an element of realism to gaming. I think that every implementation of item decay I've ever seen in any game absolutely sucked! Item decay adds a level of complexity to a game that one could debate is/isn't conducive to enjoying the experience of the game and may/not distract from the main focus/purpose for playing. All-in-All, I am for "the right" implementation of Item Decay
2. So what is "the right" implementation of item decay? I'll get back to my opinion in a subsequent post because I intend to make a proposal, give specific formulas, & point out the strengths and weaknesses of the system I think up.
3. Yes I do think it should be in GW2 for one reason only.... How else does Anet intend to control item rarity?

In GW1 green weapons used to be the bomb. As time has gone on the actual rarity of such weapons amongst the population has decreased. Yes... item customization decreases availability to an extent, but there are never repeat customers for the same item. As time goes on the game will inevitably become saturated with green weapons (I already have a around a dozen from me and my heroes). Was this the original design intent when green weapons were thought of? So what can be done to keep item rarity at a level that is in line with the original design intent? What does it do for game replayability? I don't count grinding as replayable content, so what would I do if my item wore out and I needed a new one? I'll undertake to account for these questions in my proposal.