{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/8/2014 11:10:34 PM
1
Listen my opinion is they should of kept it in but I also think it should of only been for vanguard marks. While I started as pve only I adjusted to doing both because I wanted thorn, invective, pocket infinity and bad juju. I now do PVP for the extra bounties to level gear.
Since my conversion I have come to the conclusion that you should only get rewards from doing the activities you do. Should they add some more vendors for pve to compensate for 5 pvp vendors? Maybe, there is a lot more specivity to play style in PVP vs pve imho. But I think the argument could be made.
I can't agree with the concept that you get to buy gear specifically offered for doing an action you never did.
Maybe a 5:1 conversion either direction... But even then I still don't feel that approach makes any sense.
If you want pvp gear do pvp.
English
-
The faction gear is not specifically geared to PvP. Getting specific abilities to recharge faster and bonuses for your preferred weapon is not remotely specific to PvP. Your argument is null and void. They need the same options for PvE as they do for PvP. Period. Be it more PvE vendors, FWC, Dead Orbit, and New Monarchy all accepting Vanguard Marks, or bringing back trading materials for crucible marks, something needs to change.
-
Not null and void. But I agree with the specification which is why I said the argument could be made for increasing the vendors to have same gear with only vanguard marks. The part I just can't agree with is buying gear from vendors that are use currency from pvp without doing pvp. That said I would like vendors to do the resources for their own marks since there are times I have extra and it'd be nice to dump them.
