Would it be awful to have a P2W counterpart to the double xp buffs?

[DoctorDitko]

No XP+double inf, along the lines of what used to happen when you disabled XP.

But opt-in, since it would be a P2W buff. It could also turn off recipe/insp drops, if that makes it more fair.

[Rudra]

The original process of turning off xp and getting double xp was already an opt-in. You had to select to get 0 xp. I would much rather that system was restored. It never made any sense to me why they disabled that.

 

However, if the devs are opposed to restoring the system to how it was, then yes, I support the OP. Double inf' for 0 xp as a P2W buff would be fair.

[Astralock]

Double INF while XP was disabled was removed because people were using it to get double INF while level 49 farming in AE, essentially using an AE trick to double their INF while farming while still having all IO set bonuses and Incarnate abilities.  GM Jimmy stated that it led to serious inflation as a result.  I strongly disagreed with that decision then as it penalized non-farmers in addition to AE farmers, and I disagree with it now.  Regardless, that was the reasoning, and I seriously doubt that it has changed.

[UltraAlt]

11 hours ago, DoctorDitko said:

No XP+double inf, along the lines of what used to happen when you disabled XP.

But opt-in, since it would be a P2W buff. It could also turn off recipe/insp drops, if that makes it more fair.

 

This would be abused in the AE.

[srmalloy]

20 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

This would be abused in the AE.

Add a modifier to AE content that disables any increased inf scaling. This would allow the creation of new XP 'buffs' for the P2W store -- 75% XP/125% inf, 50% XP/150% inf, and 0% XP/200% inf. Disabling these three inf multipliers in AE content prevents a recurrence of the level 49 no-XP exploit.

[PoptartsNinja]

It wouldn't be great.

 

The problem with anything that boosts influence without boosting the IO Droprate is: it increases demand (inf) without increasing supply (drops). So prices would increase and then likely fluctuate wildly for a long time before finding a new (higher) equilibrium depending on how many people are running the inf booster and how quickly the AH's current supply of IOs got depleted. That might also encourage people to hoard their crafted IOs to see how or if the demand explodes.

 

 

If you went the other way (0xp = boosted IO drop rate) I'd be all for it.

[SeraphimKensai]

I'd be okay with an option to give up XP and influence if it significantly increased the rate of recipe/salvage drops.

[Doc_Scorpion]

14 hours ago, DoctorDitko said:

No XP+double inf, along the lines of what used to happen when you disabled XP.

That was disabled because it being widely abused, if restored those abuses would return.  So, I can't see it happening unless it was tied to some form of significant disadvantage to curb those abuses.

[Andreah]

I'd rather see a buff that eliminated all Inf and vendor-sellable drops, but increased (or added, since there aren't many) drops of things that could only be used or sold to other players.

 

My rationale is that we have enough sources of Inf (direct inf drops and drops of items that are generally vendored) and not enough sinks for inf, which auction fees for selling non-vendorable items would be. 

 

[Captain Fabulous]

6 hours ago, Doc_Scorpion said:

That was disabled because it being widely abused, if restored those abuses would return.  So, I can't see it happening unless it was tied to some form of significant disadvantage to curb those abuses.

Exactly. There was a reason why they took it out. So many nice things we can't have because people insist on abusing them. Some people just can't help themselves.

[megaericzero]

If memory serves, disabling XP was originally intended for people who wanted to complete all the story arcs in each level range without out-leveling them, especially on the low-end. From what someone said in a related thread, double XP was meant to allow people to recreate old characters and fast-track them back to level 50. The reasons for these two things to exist were not related to each other.

 

Personally, I'm not opposed to giving people something for playing with XP turned off, but INF definitely doesn't seem to be it. The only thing it would create is INF-lation. Getting SOs can be tough while leveling your first character but, once you have a 50, everything you can buy from NPCs is so cheap money is no longer an object for it. The only thing increasing INF gain would achieve is putting more INF into circulation faster, raising the asking prices on the market. All that really does is shift the decimal on your reward window and market listings one space to the right.