Whats with the infatuation with low req weapons? - Guild Wars Guru archive powered by Guild Wars Legacy

slave_screams

Academy Page

Join Date: Nov 2005

R/Mo

11 Dec 2008 at 15:58 - 1

As the title says, ive been playing Guild Wars for a good while now and have never fully understood the fascination with paying huge sums of gold for low req weapons:

A point in case:

A gold inscripable Sundering Dwarven Axe of fortitude 15^50 req 8/9 will go for xxxx gold, while the exact same weapon with a req of 11/12/13 will go for a fraction of the price - Why?

How many axe warriors ever run less than 12 in axe mastery? And even if it was some vanity thing about the rarity value of a req 9, who gets to see it's requirement bar you? Am I to believe that people pay ten times the price for a low req weapon than a high one just for their own personal vanity/satisfaction?

Maybe im missing something or don't fully understand the attraction of paying loads for something that is not a requirement to use it, or maybe I underestimate some sense of pride that someone who has a req 9 clockwork scythe who never runs less than 14 in scythe mastery has over someone who uses the exact same weapon except for req at a fraction of the price who gets the same exact usage out of it.

Sorry if I have gone on a bit, im bored at work

HawkofStorms

Hall Hero

Join Date: Aug 2005

E/

11 Dec 2008 at 16:00 - 2

They are rarer. Req 8 weapons in particular are less common then other requirements.
Rarity = expensive, in the real world or in a video game. Simple supply and demand.

BJuno

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Apr 2006

11 Dec 2008 at 16:10 - 3

most valuable for pvp players....imo

i know my monk loves his req 7 shield for example....

slave_screams

Academy Page

Join Date: Nov 2005

R/Mo

11 Dec 2008 at 16:19 - 4

I realise req 8/9 are much rarer, but is that soley what accounts for the price disparity? A warrior has a req 9 crystalline sword that he paid 2zillion ecto for, but he never runs less than 12 in sword and no one knows one way or the other except him, so its simply vanity?

Abedeus

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Jan 2007

Niflheim

R/

11 Dec 2008 at 16:24 - 5

Some Rangers get r9 weapon, as they don't use 9+ bow mastery.

r8-9 shields are also very popular among casters, as they can hit the max defense more easily.

Mournblade

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: May 2005

Houston, Texas

Dawn Treaders [DAWN]

W/Mo

11 Dec 2008 at 16:28 - 6

Sometimes it helps with a particular build you are running but mostly it's something for the people with lots of money to occupy themselves with collecting.

Quaker

Hell's Protector

Join Date: Aug 2005

Canada

Brothers Disgruntled

11 Dec 2008 at 16:40 - 7

Quote:

Originally Posted by slave_screams

Am I to believe that people pay ten times the price for a low req weapon than a high one just for their own personal vanity/satisfaction?

Yes. Why not - see next answer.

Quote:

Maybe I'm missing something or don't fully understand the attraction of paying loads for something that is not a requirement to use it, or maybe I underestimate some sense of pride that someone who has a req 9 clockwork scythe who never runs less than 14 in scythe mastery has over someone who uses the exact same weapon except for req at a fraction of the price who gets the same exact usage out of it.

Ya gotta spend your gold on something.

You really can't take it with you.
Remember - it is just play-money. It's like asking if Boardwalk is really worth the $2000 rent.

There are, btw, some situations/builds in which you may want to pump a bunch of points into some other attributes, and having a low requirement weapon is then useful. I was doing that with my Dervish just the other day and had to dig around for a req9 Scythe to use. (I had one, just not a skin I like.)

[Morkai]

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Oct 2007

Heroes of Elonia [HE]

W/Rt

11 Dec 2008 at 16:41 - 8

Quite simply in most cases: ePeen.

Wish Swiftdeath

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Feb 2007

Mo/W

11 Dec 2008 at 16:41 - 9

id pay much much more for a req 8 shield than i would a req 9 because it allows me to hit the requirement, otherwise i agree totally.

slave_screams

Academy Page

Join Date: Nov 2005

R/Mo

11 Dec 2008 at 16:46 - 10

thanks for the quick reponses guys

i take all of the above points on board!

Dmitri3

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jul 2005

Canada, almost got to see a polar bear... :P

11 Dec 2008 at 16:54 - 11

Weapons don't gain as much advantage as Shields (tactics mostly, but command and motivation can still fit in here somewhere).

16 (req8), 15 (req7) or even 14 (req6) armor is much better that 8... The low req allows you not to invest heavily in one attribute.

P.S. Could be wrong about reqs, I just took them from the top of my head.

Captain Bulldozer

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jan 2008

Servants of the Dragon Flames [SODF]

11 Dec 2008 at 17:01 - 12

Its actually a much more complex process than you might think to determine the value of an item, whether it be in a real economy or a fake one. Rarity plays a large roll in this of course, accounting for why lower req (7, 8) items go for more. However, there's more to it than that. While the OP is right that most of the time the attributes being used far exceed the req of the weapon used, having lower req items sitting around means you have more flexibility of your build and attribute settings, both for your characters and your heros.

But more than this, there is a decent amount of shall we say Mob Mentality about value. For example, while I personally may not care about having a Tickle-Me-Elmo, there was a time when they were selling for a oodles of cash. Same goes for many fads of course. Now, in the GW economy players generally are most interested in low req weapons, driving up the cost BUT ALSO driving up the demand. Anyone wanting to farm and sell weapons for profit sees that people will only pay the big bucks for low req vanity items (with certain exceptions of course.... last I checked req 13 voltaic spears were still worth a whole lot) and so they value those low req items more as well. That is, value is determined not just buy the single buyer or seller, but by the collective of buyers and sellers. If the majority have decided to value low req items, this forces the general populace to largely accept this valuation as well.

Daisuko

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Mar 2007

California

[Vr]

E/Me

11 Dec 2008 at 17:12 - 13

Personally, when I was new to the game I thought lower req = more damage. However, upon getting a req 8 15^50 axe and testing with wild blow, req 8 dealt no more damage than a req 13 did. Now, the only feasable idea I can come up with, with wanting low req items... In my opinion, would be to have the req at least 1 less than whatever your weapon mastery/shield mastery will be, so as to not lose further benefits upon gain of weakness. (66% less damage, or 99% less damage, your choice) A req 7/8 tactics shield would really be the only shield I would ever pay more for.

Reason being that I could have 8~9 tactics on my monk in RA... And then even with weakness on me I'd gain the full +16 armor instead of +8. A req 7 shield would be optimal, as you could run 12 - 10 - 8... and not have any leftover attributes. Lower tactics req = more points to spend elsewhere.

Other than that, I see no reason to want any weapon with a requirement less than 9. You yourself wouldn't even know it was low requirement unless you hover your mouse over it.

Daisuko

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Mar 2007

California

[Vr]

E/Me

11 Dec 2008 at 17:14 - 14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dmitri3

Weapons don't gain as much advantage as Shields (tactics mostly, but command and motivation can still fit in here somewhere).

16 (req8), 15 (req7) or even 14 (req6) armor is much better that 8... The low req allows you not to invest heavily in one attribute.

P.S. Could be wrong about reqs, I just took them from the top of my head.

Actually, you CAN get max armor as low as req 7... but it's extremely rare. Not sure about req 6 though. Personally I only care about Q7 or Q5 (For when weakness gets put on my monk) :P

makosi

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Mar 2006

"Pre-nerf" is incorrect. It's pre-buff.

Requirement Begins With R [notQ]

Me/

11 Dec 2008 at 17:14 - 15

Low req items are trendy and there's a degree of follower-ism involved in the system. In a game where items do not deteriorate peoples' money goes, moreso, on vanity instead of maintenance and upgrading.

The trend was probably perpetuated by the old 2005 rumours about lower req items dealing more damage or having a greater chance to critical. Some people still believe these rumours which then prompts a mandatory /facepalm.

In terms of shields there is valid logical reasoning and rationale behind their increased value because they do have a functional benefit.

dilan155

Desert Nomad

Join Date: May 2007

living room

N/

11 Dec 2008 at 17:42 - 16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berek

Quite simply in most cases: ePeen.

simple reason this. also monks love lower req items because they might be able to put points into that to have max defense instead of just 8.

spun ducky

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Nov 2005

WTB: q8 bows

R/N

11 Dec 2008 at 17:43 - 17

I collect req 7 items for one very reason and that is build variety. I am sure some people here have seen some of the strange and unique yet useful farm builds I have made. I always like having the lowest req possible on my gear so I can do non standard break points for testing. It may be true the majority use 12+ in weapon mastery in PVP but that is not so much true anymore in pve with the wide variety of skills and pve skills now that can make a class like a ranger act more as a caster and like wise. It is also the fact of weakness which makes req 8 imo the most optimal req that stays reasonably affordable to mass buy sets of them.

Taisayacho

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jan 2007

England (GMT)

The Imperial Guards of Istan [TIGI]

R/

11 Dec 2008 at 18:08 - 18

as a ranger I ONLY have r9 bows because often, such as when speccing points into air/fire/water for a conjure, i need to bring down marksmanship a bit while keeping expertise high. other than that, e-peen is pretty much it.

lilraceangel3

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jan 2008

Western Mass

Passionate Kiss of the cats [Kiss]

W/N

11 Dec 2008 at 18:08 - 19

mostly to say they have a q8 blah blah blah, but there are some people out there who actually PLAY the game and want the low Q's so they can be more flexable with their builds.

Lyynyyrd

Banned

Join Date: Jun 2008

Aussie Trolling Crew - Spah!

11 Dec 2008 at 18:16 - 20

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=...Search&m eta=

slave_screams

Academy Page

Join Date: Nov 2005

R/Mo

11 Dec 2008 at 19:18 - 21

valid points all, thanks for response and nice link lyynyyrd:P

BenjZee

Forge Runner

Join Date: Dec 2006

The Overacheivers [Club]

Mo/

11 Dec 2008 at 19:24 - 22

It's mainly because if the req is lower than its obviously slightly better - even though this may not have an obvious effect on your character at all. Ya know everyone would want something taht slighly better than another one. Human nature makes us want the best we possibly can show off the 'rarity'.

Gift3d

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2007

Las Vegas

Enraged Whiny Carebears [oR]

W/E

11 Dec 2008 at 19:37 - 23

Like others said mostly for the rarity. I've actually made good use of my req7 flamberge a few times... most notably for that bison tournament on my warrior.

HawkofStorms

Hall Hero

Join Date: Aug 2005

E/

11 Dec 2008 at 20:15 - 24

Also, when the game was first released, many people had the misconcieved notion that a lower req weapon meant you did more damage or that the difference between your weapon's req and your attribute investment actually increased criticla hits.

This was systematically proving wrong, but some people have a hard time breaking urban myths. Plus, with all the people buying low req weapons for a lot of money becuase of rarity/epeen, a lot of newer players mistakenly thought that that must mean they are somehow "better."

bigb121074

Pre-Searing Cadet

Join Date: Dec 2008

elona

our castaways know true (LOVE)

D/W

11 Dec 2008 at 21:20 - 25

put the other few attribute points else where. thats why i like them.

Kwith

Academy Page

Join Date: May 2006

Canada

Gaming Continuum

W/

11 Dec 2008 at 21:38 - 26

I'm with you on this one slave, I don't see a point to paying 10x the price for a lower req.

I can understand the reasonings for it, but if I can save that much more by getting a req 11 or 12 instead of a 9, then of course I'm going for it.

I do the same thing with weapon upgrades, why should I pay 10k for a +30HP mod, when I can pay 2k for a +29HP mod? I have yet to run into a situation where that 1 HP made any difference.

As for the point that having a req 9 allows for more stats in other attributes, the builds I run tend to focus on 2 stats mainly. Which gives me 12 in each stat and 6 points to put where I feel like. If I do have a build that uses 3, then I just have 11 in the other 2 and put the remainder into the 3rd.

I can't wrap my head around it.

Yawgmoth

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Apr 2005

11 Dec 2008 at 22:01 - 27

Low req on most weapons is like having an extra line of text in it's description: "This item is uber rare and just awesome!" instead of "requires 8" and "This item is GODLIKE" instead of "requires 7". And people pay for the rarity.

Getting "Perfect" weapons is extremelly easy in GW, then there's just no hope of finding something "better" (if you like the skin you got), sadly.
Lower req is the only way for 'improvement' in this dull world. If all reqs were equal, collectors would probably pay more for higher listed merch gold value, if that was the only variable value, lol.

illidan009

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: May 2008

Volterra, Italy

A/

12 Dec 2008 at 00:19 - 28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berek

Quite simply in most cases: ePeen.

This. I can't afford the price that comes with it, so I stick to my crappy r11 Ele sword.

sosycpsycho

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: May 2008

Atlanta

Krazy Guild With Krazy People[KrZy]

12 Dec 2008 at 23:12 - 29

Yes and in the same line of thinking the value of gold weapons is in the same boat. Pre- nightfall (inscriptions) A gold was generally a weapon with max or potentially max modifications. A purple was often near max but very very rarely a max weapon in the mod department, but was most times max damage.
~[ in this example I am referring to two items with the same skin, I am aware a few select items only drop in gold ]~

Now it is easy with inscriptions and mods to make a max purple but nobody wants them.
I would say this shows the vanity side of purchasing as it is irrelevant.
http://guildwars.wikia.com/wiki/Item_rarity

Now as for r7-r8 it is nice to be able to lower the requirement to wield a weapon saving points for other attributes. The unfortunate side to this is it is only viable in certain builds or when using a weapon from a different class due to the fact most of the skills for the weapon will be tied to its attribute.
now its always nice to have +1 over the requirement for Weakness because it causes all attributes to drop by -1, so meeting the req. demand by even +1 should be the wisest choice.

http://guildwars.wikia.com/wiki/Requirement

So the general answer is it's 90% vanity and 10% practical
in the cases where it is used practically it is very effective.

Zebideedee

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Sep 2007

55?? 57' 0" N / 3?? 12' 0" W

N/Me

13 Dec 2008 at 12:40 - 30

Does anyone play (or hero) with their main skill being only 8 or 9? i'm just curious.

GhostKairi

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Mar 2008

WTB Q8 Fire/ES Staffs And OS Crystallines!

Teh Academy [PhD] - Tomb of the collectors

E/

13 Dec 2008 at 14:02 - 31

People want low Req. for Kudos, i mean come on.
People like me (lol) would love to go around in teams and say i have a Req.8 Crystalline.

byteme!

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jan 2006

On Earth

W/P

13 Dec 2008 at 21:57 - 32

Demand is higher for low req. items. They provide a lil more flexibility in terms of attribute points. Resale value is potentially higher. Low req.'s are a rare drop.

That's all I can think of at the moment.

Cale Roughstar

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jan 2007

Canada

Guy In Real Life [GIRL]

W/E

13 Dec 2008 at 23:07 - 33

Epeen ftw! When you have the money, what else is there to spend it on?

credit

Banned

Join Date: Jan 2008

Team Apathy [aFk]

W/P

13 Dec 2008 at 23:28 - 34

16 AL > 8AL shield.

sup

Dante the Warlord

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jul 2006

W/R

14 Dec 2008 at 00:00 - 35

because they are rare and you can put fewer attribute points in to fully yield the weapon

lemming

The Hotshot

Join Date: May 2006

Honolulu

International District [id???]

14 Dec 2008 at 08:17 - 36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dante the Warlord

because they are rare and you can put fewer attribute points in to fully yield the weapon

This is the answer to the op's question - people are dumb.

A11Eur0

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Apr 2005

W/

14 Dec 2008 at 08:35 - 37

All prices in this game on golds are arbitrary. Rarity and the players' perception of rarity and desireability make things cost more or less. Armbraces given the ease of farming DoA shouldn't be anywhere close to what they are now, but with DoA being post-endgame and requiring 15 SETS of gemstones people use that as an excuse to drive the prices up. If more people would farm DoA chests for gemstones, prices would fall. Then again, one armbrace requires at the most 6 full runs alternating the room order at just over an hour per full run, plus time spent organizing...that's a pretty hefty time consumption. Then again, it's an all but guaranteed 50 ecto. 6 hours in UW won't get you half of that unless you're lucky.

Low requirement weapons are obviously rare compared to r12-13 of the same skin, but honestly, an Eternal Blade is rare no matter what requirement it is. In fact, I'd say a r9 is just about as rare as a r12 from what I've seen. I'd be happy if I got a r13...as I've done hundreds of speed clears and have never even SEEN one drop. It's all just player perception and market trends. If people don't want something as much as something else, it'll cost less. Why run a req 13 sword on your warrior even though you're speccing 14 swordsmanship when you can run a req 9 and have the ability to bring it down to 12 att and run a 3rd att for conjure, splinter, what have you? Once you're there, that req 13 sword is useless.

cthulhu reborn

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jan 2007

the Netherlands

W/Mo

14 Dec 2008 at 09:16 - 38

Quote:

Originally Posted by illidan009

This. I can't afford the price that comes with it, so I stick to my crappy r11 Ele sword.

If you mean the elemental swords, then you must be really poor cause a r9 goes for about 10k these days.

To the OP: Some people actually need a lower requirement on items as they don't want to put many points in a given attribute.

But let's be honest, when you buy somthing in a store and one item is perfect and the other has scratches on it but still works perfectly fine, you will get a big discount on it. Requirement is a bit like that. It works fine but it doesn't say r9 or r8 on it. So yeah vanity is a thing and a very human thing indeed.

Amy Awien

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jul 2006

R/

14 Dec 2008 at 10:45 - 39

Quote:

Originally Posted by slave_screams

... even if it was some vanity thing about the rarity value of a req 9, who gets to see it's requirement bar you?

Requirement 9 weapons aren't rare, they are available from crafters and collectors on all continents.