User talk:Gaile Gray/Archive Game-Related Topics/September 2007

Rainbow Phoenix - not casual player friendly?
The concern about items, titles, or other game attainments not being readily available to all players has been addressed in User_talk:Gaile_Gray. Because of the length of the post asking a question that directly pertains to that response, I'm archiving the post. --Gaile 21:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I know this isn't one of the most pressing issues about GWEN. But it is something I feel I must bring up for all casual players and pet collectors that would like to get this pet. As most people now know you must reach the 2nd rank of the "Kind of a Big Deal" title, along with other minor requirements to be able to obtain this pet. Something that most causal players or multiple character players won't get to.

Even though I understand it this way to show that that person really worked hard on that char. I think rank 2 is rather overkill and only benefit players who work on just one or two characters. For people who, like me has 10+ chars and use all of them pretty equally, reaching rank 2 in KoaBD is nearly impossible. I'm pretty sure we put in just as much work as people who just work on one char. Most people agree that having a reward that is title based is a bad idea, and it promotes grinding (something GW is suppose to diverge from?) I personally find it pretty hard/boring to max out titles..., and I rather be doing missions and other more interesting things, then wall hugging and spending tons of money to get drunk.

I'm already rather annoyed with the hall since it's character based and not account based, since all my stuff is spread throughout my 11 chars and that I can't display many of my 15k armor, despite having spent around 1 million(G) on them due to having mix-match pairs for the sake of uniqueness, now I can't even get the newest end game pet... Right now most of the benefits are only geared to players that focuses on one or two chars.

Here's a couple quotes from disappoint players from the gwonline forums.

"Bah, I was hoping to get one for my rit, but now I know she'll never get it. I might get her on level 1 but level two I'll never reach."

"If it was connected with story completion only then that's great...but if max titles are a requirement, then no thx. I'm not about to grind the game for that, even if I like collecting pets. Trying to get armour from this expansion was boring enough as it is. In the end, it's just not worth the trouble."

I hope Anet actually takes this post into consideration comes up with an alternative way to allow more casual players access to it. Say like having 2nd rank KoaBD OR - Beating all 4 gw games - Completing a hard quest/mission, or a chain quest (similar to the black moa chain quest) - Or perhaps just limit it to beating gwen main story line --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:85.195.123.26.


 * Please forgive me if I seem cranky here, but I'm trying very hard to archive this page to get it back to where everyone can participate. This very lengthy thread -- complete with extraneous forum quotes -- deals with a topic I've already addressed, at length, on this very page: The challenge of creating and expanding a game that fulfills the needs and desires of both casual and hard-core or long-term players. Please read "the cost of gloves" above. It responds to the request to make everything in the game "casual friendly." We cannot and should not do that, for in fact to do so would be counterproductive and would greatly and negatively impact the community as a whole.
 * Please, for the sake of allowing continued discussion on this page, I ask that you edit your post to greatly reduce the commentary, remove the quotes, and make your point in a sentence or two. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 20:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I really don't see why the entire game should be easier to "max" just because a casual player can't get something within reasonable(in their opinion) time. If a casual player wants a particularly hard item, than they better be ready to play more or focus on that specific item. Many of the things that people are complaining are not "casual player friendly", are status symbols and should 'not' be available to people other than those who have done a tremendous amount of work towards it. I don't have a single maxed title yet to contribute towards the pet and I see nothing wrong with having content for the more ... committed players. - Txzeenath 20:59, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The bit of this whole thread that I find most entertaining is the part where you say all max titles are grinding, and you would rather do missions, yet you can get no less then 7 maxed titles just from missions. -- Lemming [[Image:User Lemming64 sigicon.png]] 21:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I need to archive this post, because of size concerns and because I had already addressed the matter on my talk page in that same timeframe. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 21:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * While I am indifferent about the Glacial Gauntlets, personally feeling 100 Glacial Stones is extreme but I don't want them, etc the Rainbow Phoenix I don't think belongs in this category. Sure a player who doesn't have a lot of time to max titles at all can't get it. If the designers don't want casual gamers to have it fair enough, but the Rainbow Phoenix is, as is mentioned elsewhere on the page, not accessible to people having gained the required titles across a range of characters on their account, but not on a single character. Some people preffer to play the same toon over and over, storing accomplishments on that one character. That's their perogative. One of the greatest strengths of Guild Wars is it's easy to reach level 20, the game is only beginning there. The challenge is then your skill and so you can easily experience all the different classes and builds without hooking up to the game via an IV drip. This is where the titles which are character based, particularly the KoaBD one, are working against a lot of the dedicated community, and don't truly reward player accomplishments but character favouritism, and things like this discourage players from playing diverse characters in the game. If I got 10 unique max titles on 5 different characters I didn't put in less work than someone else with the same titles on a single character, I probably worked harder to establish the 5 characters to get those titles, but the single character gets a greater reward. Making it account based would also prevent older characters from pre-survivor and legendary defender from being exempt from two titles, and also allow me to maybe reach rank 10 in this title. Everytime I use a key I feel like I wasted a point because it wasn't on my ranger, everytime I drink alcohol with guildies during a holiday event I feel like I wasted it if it wasn;t on my warrior. I know people who deleted their original toons from the launch of GW because they were unable to get survivor title to contribute to KoaBD. I don't see any reason why this shouldn't be made account based. Dancing Gnome 19:04, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

1 million dollars
Hi Gaile, can you let the art team know that if they include a full head covering armor piece for Mesmers in a future game, eg. GW2, I will pay them 1 million dollars!
 * /me holds pinky finger up to corner of mouth
 * I would like a hood with a full metal mask underneath, no eye holes!
 * Thanks so much. BTW, my mesmer is very hideous. This is not for me, but for him and his social pursuits. Ciao! --Redfeather 08:00, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Assuming there are mesmers in GW2. None of the GW2 professions have been announced yet, so any of the GW1 professions could theoretically be merged, split or reworked and renamed. -- Gordon Ecker 08:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That's silliness Gordon. Of course there will be mesmer in GW2 if they go to the trouble of making a hooded mask for mesmers! --Redfeather 08:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Silliness aside, I have a serious question! Gaile is it possible to ask the modelers if the way the special Eye of the North Gauntlets look on mesmers is intentional? On mesmers the glacial gauntlets, for example, look very weird. They end abruptly at the wrist and look so tiny, it's hard to notice them. :O --Redfeather 15:03, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, I can ask them, but I wonder -- could you add the question to the Art Issues page linked from this page? I love having one spot to put all the areas of concern as well as the questions, so if you'd be so kind (maybe include a small image?) that would be helpful. Thanks. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 16:37, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ohhhh, the art department page. Thank you Gaile, I will do that instead. Do not worry about asking them in that case. Enjoy your weekend! --Redfeather 17:03, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I was thinking [User_talk:Gaile_Gray/Guild_Wars_Art_issues| this page]. Does that work for you? --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 17:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I added it to that page. When I think about it, I think the art team had no choice but to make the gauntlets look that way for mesmers as the mesmer is the only profession whose chest piece includes sleeves that actually goes down to their wrists. They just look so tiny!--Redfeather 17:25, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you've hit the nail on the head: it's the profession outfit that requires the size reduction. (I happen to like the look, myself.) Anyway, I'll see if I can get confirmation of that. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 17:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Cost of Gloves
im not going to go into that much detail because GWEN is very new but i think the cost/time effort of the glacial, destroyer and chaos gauntlets seems very, very ridiculously high(according to the info from the wiki). i would like you to think about this. thank you :) --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:24.69.179.206.
 * I think it should be, they are special. If you could get everything in like 1-2 days.. what is their to play for then? Now you have a goal to play for =) I love it =) --[[Image:User_Tribina_Mulogo.jpg]] (Tribina / talk) 08:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * i know but look at it even if 1 in every 3 drops you got from a destroyer was a core in order to get the gauntlets with a group of 8 would require killing 6000 destroyers... and because of loot scaling it wouldn't matter what your group size. it just seems incredibly ridiculous... maybe 50-75 cores and glacial stones at a max and 25-50 ectos for the chaos gauntlets. still alot but not ridiculous.EDIT: also even if you killed 1 destroyer every 10 seconds... it would still take around 16 and a half hours of constant playing to get them.
 * The point IS that they take so long! You've got over a year to do it before we get any GW2 stuff. They are Prestige items, hence the high cost. Don't reduce them! -- ChronicinabilitY [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 09:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * yeah but since these are not weapons they don't transfer anything to GW2 so it shouldn't cost that much. also id much rather do a 10 lvl dungeon with them as a guaranteed drop from the chest then have to farm the same guys over and over again.
 * You dont have to get them. They are a reward for the players that do spend a lot of time farming and grinding. If you're not one of those people you dont get the reward. You cant have everything! -- ChronicinabilitY [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 09:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it's funny gw would start trying to promote the grinding...wasn't that one of the things they were trying to prevent from the very beginning by making almost every item in the game essentially the same as any number of other ones? 76.102.172.202 03:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * well im not going to argue with you. i know that this talk will just end up being us arguing...all i want is another way to get this other then super grinding like a quest chain, a giant dungeon or a reward for beating GWEN, the same way pvpers got the tournament points to get all the skins that were only availiable to pve.
 * Pay someone to do the grinding?? Plenty of folks around selling the items. Stop trying to do everything yourself :P 196.2.124.253 10:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * People who want them are going to get them. Why make farming for them boring? 85.228.66.197 12:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Work on your Norn Title while you're at it. Couple guildies and I just kept zoning back in right there and we got several of them each within a matter of ... 10 minutes or so? - elviondale  (tahlk) 12:48, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * What I love is people who whine about stuff that takes ages to get, yet you do not NEED to do it. It is for the hardcore grinders out there who love stuff like that. -- Lemming [[Image:User Lemming64 sigicon.png]] 12:59, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

A Challenge of Game Design
One of the challenges of developing a game that is as popular as Guild Wars, and which has a large number of players who continue to play for a long time, is that you want to create an experience that is easily accessible, so that newer players aren't barred at the door with extreme difficulty, yet at the same time, you need to offer continuing challenges for those veteran players, particularly those player who have been with you a long while and for whom a long-range goal is highly desirable.

If all areas were like Pre-Searing, sure, it would be a beautiful game, but it would not be particularly challenging. If all the areas were like the Underworld and Fissure of Woe, it would be challenging, but that difficulty, and the time investment required to make it through those large areas, might disappoint or drive away the newer or more casual player.

Some missions, certain areas, and Hard Mode itself are designed to give greater challenge and in return they give great rewards. Some items require a significant investment of time and effort, and for that investment one receives extraordinary goods. Consider: if you take Halls, you might get a Ghostly Hero, how cool is that? But shall we add a GH to some random chest in Vabbi or Kryta to make it more accessible or more achievable by the casual player? I don't think so! There have been very few cases where player feedback has caused the design team to substantially alter a mission, quest, or area. One case I do recall was the acquisition of Razah, and that change came after several weeks of observation, much team discussion, and a lot of internal testing. The design team took the time to assure that changing that process was the right decision. The items in question -- Glacial, Destroyer, and Chaos gloves -- are each a long-term goal. I would suggest that the acquisition of the gloves and other high-end items will remain as they are, unless there is sound evidence that they are truly substantially too difficult to obtain. I do not think that anyone is saying that this is the case; they are difficult and time-consuming to acquire, yes, but it would seem strongly the case that they are not so difficult to obtain that a change would be warranted. So at this juncture, while being sure to say I'm not the final authority, I would say that players should not expect a change, and that they should keep in mind that these are truly high-end optional rewards. --Gaile 19:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Gaile, something seems to have changed in the Destroyer Core item drop rate since the sneak peek weekend. I'm wondering if because of that the quests Destructive Research and the cores required for the Destroyer Gauntlets should be tweaked. I have not seen 1 core drop since the live release. The quest Destructive Research requires 10 cores and isn't an endgame quest. :O --Redfeather 04:26, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with Redfeather (and perhaps this issue should be made its own section); I got 3 Cores over the Preview weekend. I've since played through to the Central Transfer Chamber and killed enough Destroyers to fill the Underworld without a single Core dropping for me or anyone else in my party. My guildmates are reporting similar results. Something definitely seems to have changed here.
 * I hadn't thought about it, but it's true. I got 1 core during preview (in the 1 day I had to play) then never got another one for the quest requiring 10 since the release. --MrSmiles 06:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmmmmm. While anecdotal, I do think that's worth passing along to QA, so that they can test this and see if maybe a glitch developed in the drop code. If anyone else has observations to share, let me know. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 18:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * To add to the anecdotes, I managed to get 8 destroyer cores over the sneak-peek weekend, none since GW:EN came out. Even in the last two missions, where it's pretty much all Destroyers the whole way, I didn't see a single one drop for anyone in my party. So close to getting Destructive Research, yet so far away... - Tanetris 04:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Agree, playing in 8ppl team over all destroyer quests did not result in ANY destroyer core drop... ridiculous!--82.197.13.7 13:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Just adding my addition to the people who have killed hundreds of Destroyers since the release without a single Core drop. --Thervold 17:00, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Update: We are discussing this today. The drop isn't "zero," but it is very low, it's true. Should have an answer on this today. Thanks again for letting me know. :) --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 17:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Hehe I guess im lucky I got 3 to drop for me yesterday, one of which was while doing the quest to get mind bender(very..very...very...very frustrating quest) --Lou-Saydus[[image:User Lou-Saydus Hail Storm.jpg|19px]] 19:43, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * According to my sources *wink wink nudge nudge* you will see satisfactory changes in an upcoming build. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 22:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[reset indent] i have found that all drops have had this effect...in order to get 5 skree wings for the quest i had to clear the bottom half of Resplendent Makuun 3 and 1/2 times to get 5. also i have done the Cathedral of Flames 2 times and have not gotten 1 Diessa Chalice. has the drop rate for all of these somehow changed?[EDIT] the quest i mentioned was mini black moa :)

Dungeon Rewards
Atm, we get 200 points towards the corresponding faction title that the dungeon is related to. It seems rather low compared to how much you can get for just fighting in explorables. Its one of the few ways to increase the title, so please make it on par with the other methods. (200 for 45-1 hour is MUCH less that near 2-4k for the same time clearing an explorable.--Renegade 19:59, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you get 200 points for ALL dungeons? Some are very short (e.g. Ooze Pit could be done in 15 minutes by a good team, I am sure), while others take *much* longer. --Xeeron 20:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Even at 200 faction per 15 minutes, that is FAR inferior to the 3k per hour from just clearing an explorable. I think some of them give 1k, which is still somewhat low. --Deathwing 20:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I know its 200 from the Cathedral of Flame for completions after the first, every time. Kind of sucks how its such a clear comparison for time vs points between dungeons and explorables, where explorables win every time by ease.--Renegade 21:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You can get the bounties inside dungeons too... -- Lemming [[Image:User Lemming64 sigicon.png]] 02:34, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I just got 3000 points for completing a Dungeon. Plus all the Dwarf points i got while inside. Seems enough to me.-- ChronicinabilitY [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 16:21, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 3000 for the first clearing, 200 for every one after that. Also its 200 Ebon Vanguard points, and the bounties are towards Dwarven title (which is stupid in itself). --Renegade 20:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah i didnt know it reduced, but still meh. I don't think it makes much of a difference. None of the titles are particularly hard to get to a decent level in. I suppose a greater reward may seem more appropriate but i dont think its 'needed' There are enough rewards from completing a dungeon, just because you don't get a huge chuck of free Rep points doesn't really matter IMO. -- ChronicinabilitY [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 21:14, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

The first clearing depends on the dungeon, I got 1000 for ooze pit. -- Lemming 21:32, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * First clearings on Frostmaw are 3000, 300 thereafter. Seems fair to me. --Tankity Tank 08:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If both the first time bonus and the repetition bonus scales with the size of the dungeon, I dont see anything wrong with the system. Remember that while doing a dungeon you also get the additional chest at the end, which you do not get in explorable regions and you get the normal bounties, so I dont see explorable regions being favored. --Xeeron 11:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * How can you not see a favour towards explorables. When doing explorables the money will be less, because there will be no chest reward, and also dungeons reward you with a 1.5k quest reward. However, for points its far inferior. 1/10th of the first reward seems pretty harsh to me, and I'm highlighting that issue.--Renegade 17:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed, 1/10 is pretty harsh, but it shouldn't be the full reward as the first time, maybe ½ or ¼? --Lou-Saydus[[image:User Lou-Saydus Hail Storm.jpg|19px]] 19:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Possibly make it so that you get an amount per level completed. That way short dungeons reward less, longer dungeons reward more. 1 level of Ooze Pit is longer than 1 of Cathedral of Flames, so that should be taken into account.--Renegade 20:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

The Question on Storage
No, this is not a request for more storage. I simply want to know, why is is difficult to add storage. Is it coding problems? Database management problems? Or something to do with gameplay balance? Why is it that ArenaNet seems to fight tooth and nail when it comes to adding storage? It took almost two years to finally get the material storage, and another few months to get the storage tabs. We all know that a huge majority of the community wants more storage, and it has been consistently requested almost as often as the auction house. Why is it taking so long for storage and what is the reasoning behind to frequent "No." response we get regarding storage? What are we missing? Please, if you can, provide as much detail as your time and knowledge allows on this matter. Thank you. Counciler 16:10, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * It is more a matter of, not hording things. Possibly even relates to GW economics. Who knows? Readem   Promote My Ban Here  18:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * First, yes, this is a request for more storage. ;) Secondly, I have responded to this many times on fan forums. I'm loathe to repeat myself or to get into old discussions on a new page. Please feel free to do a search for my name and such key words as "storage" to get the full background. Note: Storage will remain as it is for Guild Wars. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 20:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Excuse me if I seem frank, ma'am.... but I am quite sure of what I am and am not asking. No, I was NOT asking for more storage. I was asking for the reasoning behind the common 'no' answer. I may have said a huge part of the community wants more storage, but I did not say I did as well, nor was I specifically asking for more. Counciler 21:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * lol@Gaile. You picked the wrong job, if you don't enjoy repeating yourself. Readem   Promote My Ban Here  21:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * If you don't want more why do you want to know why you can't have more? The two seem mutually exclusive to me. -- Lemming [[Image:User Lemming64 sigicon.png]] 21:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * We, as Human beings, question all Yes/No questions with no direct explanations. It is a part of Human Nature. Readem   Promote My Ban Here  22:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I was curious to see if there was some specific reason to it all. Is that so hard to understand? Have you never questioned why something is the way it is without really caring how it affects you? Perhaps wondering why something in a store is grossly overpriced even though you did not intend to buy it? Or maybe wondering why your landlord did not allow you to paint your walls even though you hadn't planned on painting them anyways? It's not very complicated people. Counciler 22:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

First, let's be clear there is no "war on storage." There is a request from players but a design decision to cap it as it now stands, and as it will stand, for the foreseeable future. So it's a decision, not a limitation, that guides what we have in the game, just as it's a decision to have Warriors, to not have Clowns (I guess Norbu is on the "iffy" side of that equation ;) ) and to offer eight skills on the skill bar. I hope that helps, and I guess it saves you seeking the longer explanation that might be found elsewhere. --Gaile  22:39, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you, That is what I was asking for. And to be clear as to my title, I was making a joke; I already changed the title. Counciler 22:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, honestly, Counciler, I should have seen that. I'm just really worried that a lot of people are locked out of the page because it's growing so quickly, so I failed to read for subtle touches of humour, and for that I apologize. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 22:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Meh, it's okay. I should have been more careful with my title. I don't have the 42KB warning message yet, so you should be okay. The 'war' part of the original title was a nod to the fact that many many players seems to be fighting a never ending battle to get more storage, hence... war. Really, it was a bad analogy, combined with lack of explanation. So that part is more my fault than yours. Counciler 23:37, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * One thing you should always consider is that ANet is a company that exists to make money: They have to pay for the employees wages, for the servers running and if there is a profit at the end, the owners will be happy as well. Given the system of GW, ANet only gets a big boost of money everytime a campaign is released. Selling additional character slots is one of the few ways for them to make money "in between". Expanding storage a lot would do away with the need to have mule characters and therefore with a steady stream of revenue for Anet. I guess it is one of the things you have to live with if you play a game that does not have monthly fees. --Xeeron 11:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Personally I would prefer to buy 2 storage tabs than another character slot. The main reason is the hassle of switching characters to find gear. I'm fine with the storage we have, but would "prefer" an option that doesnt require me to keep a log of what char has what kind of drop and swap chars regularly to find the drop. Each character brings 45 inventory slots while an inventory tab brings 20. I could see additional inventory tabs sold at $5 each (or 2 for 10, the current price for a character slot). If they choose not to, fine, i'll be buying more characters soon anyway. It would just be a more conveniant option. (i'd buy 2 chars and 2 inventory slots or 3 chars atm)--Midnight08 13:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Bad "design decision" in my opinion. Shall we review Storage upgrades in the past?
 * Material Storage - allowing us to store 250 of each type...but wait, max level armor requires more than 250 of normal crafting material so we either have to buy it or store it in our storage.
 * Fesival Hat Guy - wonderful...they no longer take up room in our inventories unless we want them to.
 * Storage tab for each campaign - this means if you own all campaigns you get 4 tabs...but no tab for gw:en...but wait...those who don't own all three campaigns got a storage tab when they bought gw:en. Too bad that doesn't help those of us who have bought everything you've released.
 * Ability to purchase more character slots - yeah...this is the way most people are solving their storage problems...and frankly it's pissing me off that all but 3 of my characters (out of 14) on my second account are reserved for mules because I don't have enough storage on my first account.
 * Now let's look over what's been added:
 * More Armors (want a complete set? goodbye one row in your storage)
 * More consumable items...festival items and non-festival items
 * More skins for more weapons
 * More Minis
 * More "Collectible Items"
 * The stuff you put out is increasing all the time...we have more and more stuff to store but never enough storage to store it. No doubt you will introduce new items with upcoming festival events. Use the HoM as storage or give us a way to store stuff that takes up a lot of room. The biggest gripe I have with this game right now is storage. If I could store the armors I have that would solve a lot of my problems. I would love to get a lot of the armors in this game...unfortunately I have no room to store them. The decision you made was not "ok we think they have enough storage now"...no the decision you made was "We can get more money out of them by giving them more stuff because they'll have to buy more characters to store it all". There's no possible way you can come to any other conclusion. Why piss off your customers by making a decision like this? Character slots should be bought to expand the number of possible characters you can play (such as if you want to play every profession)...they should not be bought simply for storage reasons. Unfortunately that's what they've become...the purchasable storage option. I don't need another character...I do need their storage however. I don't care if you want to charge us for more storage....just give us an option for storage other than buying additional character slots. I looked at my excel spreadsheet I use to track all my characters (yes I have so many I have to do this otherwise I would go insane)...right now 9 out of 15 characters on my second account are mule characters.--Thor79•[[Image:User-thor79.png]]•Talk 23:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thor's got a point, we need more space maybe make a storage space to fit armor sets for each character they all have to pay its not an account wide thing, also maybe minipet storage. Weapons and consumables can stay in the regular storage. I was also thinking maybe make a rune storage just like the materials storage. --[[Image:Hellbringer siggy fun.jpg]] HeLlBrInGeR talk 23:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I like the idea of using the HoM as storage--maybe place a xunlai chest in there and a special, HoM only storage chest with 2 xunlai tabs worth of storage. Just because the HoM was primarily intended to allow passing on some benefit to our future Guild Wars 2 descendants doesn't mean the hall has to be devoid of actual practical use. In my case, I don't have much by the way of weapons and armor in the hall, and I don't see that changing much in the future so my HoM is basically my mini-pets, heroes, and campaign completion/protector displays.
 * As an aside, might it be possible for the Monument of Fellowship to store mini-pets as each are customized? I have a modest collection of 8 mini-pets and prior to GWEN, I kept them in the xunlai storage so that all my characters could take out a different one to accompany me when I play. Now that I added them to the Monument keeping them in xunlai it a quite pointless, as my other characters can no longer use them, but now having to carry all of them with me when at most I could only display one puts quite a strain on my inventory. If the Monument of Fellowship was made to store the mini pets as they are added, then the character for whom they are customized could come back and take out one or more for showing off in town and then put them back on ice when time comes for dungeon delving--all the better to pillage with.Svartalve 01:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The Hall of Monuments is emphatically not intended as storage. We understand the requests, but that is not the intention in either a design, gameplay, or story sense. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 21:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Rainbow Phoenix - not casual player friendly?
The concern about items, titles, or other game attainments not being readily available to all players has been addressed in User_talk:Gaile_Gray. Because of the length of the post asking a question that directly pertains to that response, I'm archiving the post. --Gaile 21:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I know this isn't one of the most pressing issues about GWEN. But it is something I feel I must bring up for all casual players and pet collectors that would like to get this pet. As most people now know you must reach the 2nd rank of the "Kind of a Big Deal" title, along with other minor requirements to be able to obtain this pet. Something that most causal players or multiple character players won't get to.

Even though I understand it this way to show that that person really worked hard on that char. I think rank 2 is rather overkill and only benefit players who work on just one or two characters. For people who, like me has 10+ chars and use all of them pretty equally, reaching rank 2 in KoaBD is nearly impossible. I'm pretty sure we put in just as much work as people who just work on one char. Most people agree that having a reward that is title based is a bad idea, and it promotes grinding (something GW is suppose to diverge from?) I personally find it pretty hard/boring to max out titles..., and I rather be doing missions and other more interesting things, then wall hugging and spending tons of money to get drunk.

I'm already rather annoyed with the hall since it's character based and not account based, since all my stuff is spread throughout my 11 chars and that I can't display many of my 15k armor, despite having spent around 1 million(G) on them due to having mix-match pairs for the sake of uniqueness, now I can't even get the newest end game pet... Right now most of the benefits are only geared to players that focuses on one or two chars.

Here's a couple quotes from disappoint players from the gwonline forums.

"Bah, I was hoping to get one for my rit, but now I know she'll never get it. I might get her on level 1 but level two I'll never reach."

"If it was connected with story completion only then that's great...but if max titles are a requirement, then no thx. I'm not about to grind the game for that, even if I like collecting pets. Trying to get armour from this expansion was boring enough as it is. In the end, it's just not worth the trouble."

I hope Anet actually takes this post into consideration comes up with an alternative way to allow more casual players access to it. Say like having 2nd rank KoaBD OR - Beating all 4 gw games - Completing a hard quest/mission, or a chain quest (similar to the black moa chain quest) - Or perhaps just limit it to beating gwen main story line --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:85.195.123.26.


 * Please forgive me if I seem cranky here, but I'm trying very hard to archive this page to get it back to where everyone can participate. This very lengthy thread -- complete with extraneous forum quotes -- deals with a topic I've already addressed, at length, on this very page: The challenge of creating and expanding a game that fulfills the needs and desires of both casual and hard-core or long-term players. Please read "the cost of gloves" above. It responds to the request to make everything in the game "casual friendly." We cannot and should not do that, for in fact to do so would be counterproductive and would greatly and negatively impact the community as a whole.
 * Please, for the sake of allowing continued discussion on this page, I ask that you edit your post to greatly reduce the commentary, remove the quotes, and make your point in a sentence or two. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 20:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I really don't see why the entire game should be easier to "max" just because a casual player can't get something within reasonable(in their opinion) time. If a casual player wants a particularly hard item, than they better be ready to play more or focus on that specific item. Many of the things that people are complaining are not "casual player friendly", are status symbols and should 'not' be available to people other than those who have done a tremendous amount of work towards it. I don't have a single maxed title yet to contribute towards the pet and I see nothing wrong with having content for the more ... committed players. - Txzeenath 20:59, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The bit of this whole thread that I find most entertaining is the part where you say all max titles are grinding, and you would rather do missions, yet you can get no less then 7 maxed titles just from missions. -- Lemming [[Image:User Lemming64 sigicon.png]] 21:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I need to archive this post, because of size concerns and because I had already addressed the matter on my talk page in that same timeframe. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 21:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * While I am indifferent about the Glacial Gauntlets, personally feeling 100 Glacial Stones is extreme but I don't want them, etc the Rainbow Phoenix I don't think belongs in this category. Sure a player who doesn't have a lot of time to max titles at all can't get it. If the designers don't want casual gamers to have it fair enough, but the Rainbow Phoenix is, as is mentioned elsewhere on the page, not accessible to people having gained the required titles across a range of characters on their account, but not on a single character. Some people preffer to play the same toon over and over, storing accomplishments on that one character. That's their perogative. One of the greatest strengths of Guild Wars is it's easy to reach level 20, the game is only beginning there. The challenge is then your skill and so you can easily experience all the different classes and builds without hooking up to the game via an IV drip. This is where the titles which are character based, particularly the KoaBD one, are working against a lot of the dedicated community, and don't truly reward player accomplishments but character favouritism, and things like this discourage players from playing diverse characters in the game. If I got 10 unique max titles on 5 different characters I didn't put in less work than someone else with the same titles on a single character, I probably worked harder to establish the 5 characters to get those titles, but the single character gets a greater reward. Making it account based would also prevent older characters from pre-survivor and legendary defender from being exempt from two titles, and also allow me to maybe reach rank 10 in this title. Everytime I use a key I feel like I wasted a point because it wasn't on my ranger, everytime I drink alcohol with guildies during a holiday event I feel like I wasted it if it wasn;t on my warrior. I know people who deleted their original toons from the launch of GW because they were unable to get survivor title to contribute to KoaBD. I don't see any reason why this shouldn't be made account based. Dancing Gnome 19:04, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Why are some armors dye-able but not others?
Just asking cos I love the new Tinted Spectacles, but I was hoping my paragon could have rose tinted, and my warrior wanted full on The Matrix black :) Sadie2k 19:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah I was disappointed when my ele couldnt have jet black cia-style glasses :( --Lou-Saydus[[image:User Lou-Saydus Hail Storm.jpg|19px]] 21:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I answered this on a fan forum in relation to blindfolds, but the information applies to glasses, as well: It was intended that masks not accept dyes, or rather, it was necessary that they not accept dyes due to technical limitations. The reason for this is that masks are, essentially, the "helm model." In order to place a helm of any sort on your character's head, we replace the hair with the helm. You may have noticed that when your long-haired PC puts on a hat of some sort -- the hair disappears, right? Well, with the blindfold, if we replace the hair with the "helm," the character will be bald! (There is an exception with the masks of the Mesmer, but we cannot extend that exception to all models, as they were not designed that way to begin with, as the Mesmer was.) The technical limitation is something I imagine we'll address in Guild Wars 2. For Guild Wars, it's not something that we can change. I hope this is helpful information. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 23:43, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Tomb of the Primeval Kings
Now that we killed Mallyx and all the Margonites could you plz bring tombs back?--Pablo24 08:30, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. Heroes' Ascent? Can be accessed by all campaigns, not just Prophecies. In terms of lore, I dont think that it was neither Mallyx nor the Margonites who invaded the original tombs. --Xeeron 14:02, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You are wrong, the Tombs were invaded by the army of Fury, who is one of the 4 generals of Mallyx. --Isfit 18:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well gee...what about all of us who haven't beaten Mallyx and all the Margonites? There will always be someone who hasn't done it yet that's why it remains the same.--Thor79•[[Image:User-thor79.png]]•Talk 21:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Just to let you know, there are currently no plans to change Tombs. We find that players really enjoy that area and the special challenges that it offers, and therefore plan to keep it the way it evolved for the time being. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 04:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Excluding holiday events and crossover quests, it's still 1072 in Prophecies. -- Gordon Ecker 04:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Locked Chest in GW:EN
Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't locked chests(that require a lockpick) supposed to be in Hardmode? And they are supposed to offer a greater reward than normal mode chests?

If that is true then are the chests in GWEN considered hardmode chests or normal mode chests even though there isn't a hard mode? There has been a lot of talk about chests and chest drops on various forums and it seems as if this is the biggest question. Any information would be appreciated.--Coridan 15:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Just for the records, in the Norn areas the lockpicks have a base 40% chance of retention (for someone who does not have the Lucky title). That's between the 300 gold keys and the 450 gold keys, suggesting (at least as far as I can see) that the quality of the drops there would be between, for example, the Maguuma chests (where the prices are 300g per key) and the Crystal Desert chests (which keys cost 450g) . Maybe that's the mechanism Arena Net used to display the quality of drops? Not the kind of chest (as seen on the chapters), but rather how likely it is for the lockpicks to break when you try to use them? Erasculio 16:02, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well if that is the case then I think Anet should state that. I am of the same opinion as you Erasculion that the chests are subpar(normal mode) chests.  But i think that Anet let the assumption go that they were indeed high end (hard mode) chests.  I think some clarication is in order as to what we should expect from chests in GW:EN because non max items is bogus for a lvl 20 expansion and i would rather save my lockpicks for chests worth opening.--Coridan 16:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm a bit confused here, although I confess I'm reading lightly because there's so much to get caught up on. GW:EN does not yet have Hard Mode. That is coming in the future, but is not here yet. In the meantime, why would chests in GW:EN, now, be Hard Mode-level chests? Are you basing the expected drops on the cost of the keys? I think that may be a faulty mechanism for determining value, but I'll be happy to ask the designers about that. In the meantime, remember to base your overall expectations on the current game. Not what you were doing last week, in Hard Mode, in one of the campaigns, or what you may have expected upon release. GW:EN is high-level content for Level 20 characters, but it does not currently offer Hard Mode, nor the rewards that go with the level of play. (And if I misunderstood, I do apologize.) --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 18:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The chests in GW:EN are all named Locked Chest and can only be opened by Lockpicks, something which has so far been exclusive to Hard Mode. However, since lockpicks cost as much as 1.500 gold, people expected the chests to have drops similar to those in Hard Mode - apparently the drops are worse. -- Cynaes 18:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes I meant what Cynaes has said..I guess the expectations where that since it is a "locked chest" that it must be "hard mode" type of chest dropping equipment that is similar to what is expected from a "hard mode" chest. Thank you for the clarification Gaile. Surely you can see where the confusion is coming from and I think it would be beneficial to the community if you were to post your response reguarding this on some of the Elite forums. I for one will save my lockpicks for later stages of the game or for Hard Mode in other chapters. As to basing my assumptions that cost of keys determines "quality" of the items take any chests in the game. For example Starting with Prophecies ascalon keys cost 50g and drops are expected for the level of players that play in that area. Move to the Jungle and keys go for around 300g and are equal in value to the level of players expected to play there..move to the Southern Shiverpeaks and the keys cost 600g and the drops are or were at one time the best drops to be had. FOW and UW keys likewise, they were more expensive because you expected to get better drops from them, hence they were worth the cost. But now that is no longer the case. I for one feel that was a valid assumption even though it is wrong but that Anet did nothing to "debunk" this assumption.--Coridan 19:12, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Here is the designer response about the chests in GW:EN: There are many regions in GW:EN, very closely packed together. Rather than requiring you to get keys for five regions and then carry them with you (thus eatting up your storage or inventory space), the designers decided to simply add only a single kind of chest. Culturally, we're familiar with "locked chests," so that was the choice for GW:EN: locked chests that can be opened only with lockpicks. Now, to be fair to the players, the breakage rate for the lockpicks in GW:EN is the same as it is in other areas of the game in Normal Mode. Therefore, yes, you are paying for the lockpicks, but you are not burning through the lockpicks as often as you would in Hard Mode--and as you will in Hard Mode for GW:EN--and you're not crowding inventory with various keys as you cross regions.
 * The quality of the drops via the locked chests is similar to the quality of the drops in other high-end areas of the game. It did not necessarily rise for GW:EN, but it certainly is not lower than, say, Vabbi or other areas where you are a Level 20 character. I hope this is helpful information. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 19:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * As someone who uses a lot of lockpicks I'm totally satisfied with the quality of EotN chest drops. --Tankity Tank 03:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the main problem I have with it is the drops from the chests are also coming as non-max weapons. In an area where we are fighting against lvl 20+ baddies, people are expecting the drops and the chests to at least be max damage. Additionally, you have a chance of getting a dropped Lockpick in Hard Mode that would offset the cost; whereas in GW:EN Normal Mode, that doesn't happen. I know a lot of people who will only open chests if they happen to have a dropped lockpick on them and seeing as how those aren't dropping in GW:EN...Brothermallon 14:12, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, lockpicks do drop on GW:EN. I got around 2 while playing these days, on Normal Mode (that's how I know about the chance of keeping one, I never buy lockpicks). And regarding the drops...I was also puzzled on why I was getting so many non maxed drops, but I think I can guess why: I have spent most of my time on the Charr Homelands (/shakefist at Arena Net for making such an amazingly beautiful area as small as it is : D), and there most enemies are weak. Yes, all Charrs are level 20, but that means they are weaker than we are (as we have the benefits of runes and etc). We usually get maxed weapons and drops from higher level enemies - for example, all the Jade Brotherhood enemies in Cantha are level 24, the Stone Summit dwarves in Prophecies are level 24, and so on. Erasculio 14:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * A bit off topic, but go look again -- the Jade Brotherhood are level 20. They seem so strong because they do get the benefit of runes and whatnot. The JB Mesmers, for example, have Domination Magic 15. The Charr are just running weak builds. Bcstingg 15:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem with the non-max weapons isn't restricted to Charr Homelands. Look at Far Shiverpeaks, where you have level 24 and level 28 elementals and level 28 jotuns dropping non-max white weapons. And my lockpick break is at 40%, and I'm averaging about 1 plat per locked chest, which is still more than the 600 for other campaigns. I got only one dropped lockpick so far (halfway). -- ab.er. rant  [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 02:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Hall of Monuments Questions.
First I noticed for every campaign that I unlocked I got a Monument but I didn't get one for beating EotN. Is this a bug?

Second, What does it take to make your name reserved in GW2? Do you just have to put one tapestry up or do you have you have at least one thing in every monument. I know it is a little early but could you ask them so I know if I have to buy 15K armor for all my char and heroes or what I have to do.

Thanks. I thought this should go in your talk page as I don't know if the first one is a bug or not and the second is a question to you. -- Natalie Black 01:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I think the name reserve is automatic. But thats just a guess. Counciler 01:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * First: You get a special mention for each of the campaigns you beat because they're campaigns. EotN is an expansion, not a campaign ;)


 * Second: You probably just need to link your GW account with your GW2 account. I would say it's a little too early to ask for implementation details. -- ab.er. rant [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 02:18, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ya you are probably right since EotN is an expansion it won't be on there. Thanks for your thoughts and answers Counciler and Ab.er.rant. -- Natalie Black [[Image:User_NatalieBlack_sig.jpg| ]] 13:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe the answer to No. 1 is the difference between a campaign and the XP, but I will ask. For No. 2, it is indeed a bit early to talk about implementations within Guild Wars 2, but of course because we've mentioned some things -- such as name reservations -- you can be assured they will happen. Whether you can pass along inheritances from each character on your account to new characters on your GW account is something I do not yet know, so I cannot advise about whether you'd want to purchase a full set of 15K for each and every character. I know there are still discussions about potential changes and expansions of the Hall of Monuments, so bear with us for a bit while we work out some details. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 02:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

New Question/Bug? I wonder if it is intended that the Dwarven armor cannot be added to the Hall of Monuments. I can guess the reason from a technical standpoint (all the pieces show different names, unlike other armor sets), but I'd like to know if this is a design decision or merely an oversight that can (and hopefully will) be corrected. After all, the Dwarven armor has the same prerequisites and costs just as much to craft as the other EotN armor sets (and the Dwarven Monk armor happens to be the one I like best of all the new sets ^^). -- Cynaes 18:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I can ask about this. I don't know that it's a bug, and your point about the pieces having different names (and therefore being less obviously "a set") is a good observation. I have sent an email to inquire if this may change in the future. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 02:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * And the answer is that there are no plans to make the Dwarven Armor into a set. They were designed as random pieces, and do not make up intended components of the HoM. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 21:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, not the answer I had hoped for, but thanks anyway :) And to add to that: It might be good to include some kind of warning on the Dwarven armor crafter, so that players know the set can't be added to the HoM. Dwarven armor crafter will be the first accessible crafter for most players (since there are plenty of points simply by playing through the main storyline), and alot of players will be disappointed when they learn that their money has been spent for 'nothing' (not literally, but in terms of HoM-achievements). Again, thanks for asking the devs -- Cynaes 22:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I for one am bummed about not seeing dwarven armor in the HoM, I would love to see my chaos gloves immortalized for my great great great (and so on) grandkids! I mean cmon...who wouldn't want to see gloves with a lightbulb inside?--Flycken 16:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

these have been mentioned before but i'll mention again, the armor problem could be addressed by simply allowing us to create one statue with our current armor on, it doesnt have to "unlock" anything for gw2 and if revisiting the hall in gw2 is a problem this statue can be "crumbled with time). This solution would allow people to display various unique armor combos including the super expensive gloves and the dwrven armor.  And while im on the subject of requested features, if your not going to make the hall a storage for minipets, we could use a toymaker that would unlock the customized pets on the account.


 * Gaile, do you think you could ask if they are going to add the Silver Eagle armor to the monument? It is a full set, and all the pieces have the same tag. I really don't know why I can't add it... Mattman243  [[Image:User Mattman243 Shadow Axe.png|19px]] 14:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


 * At this time, the Silver Eagle Armour is not one of the sets that can be added to the HoM, as you have noticed. It is possible that this may change in the future, but there are no definite plans in place to make this change, and it is likely if this change were made it would be part of a larger adjustment to multiple aspects of the Hall of Monuments. The HoM is something that the designers will review on a regular basis, and it is likely that some small modifications may be made in the future. Whether a change will be made to this armour is, again, not possible to predict right now. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 23:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * This might be a stupid question (cos i don't have EN yet..SORRY! promise ill buy it =P, already preorderd) but can your pvp characters access the HOM?--WikiWu 23:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)


 * This is on the questions and answers above. Many people have the same feeling. Is there a reason you could give us why we can't put any armor or weapon in HOM? Also I looked up the Dwarven armor and I don't understand why it isn't a set if all the pieces match. Here is a petition that people have signed on Guild Wars Guru. http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10190929 Alimar

New Areas like FoW or UW
Hey Gayle, I like you to tell me what you know about new areas to the other Gods (Lyssa, Melandru, Dwayna and the new God). Can the ArenaNet Team implement this soon? It will be implemented? I like very much the actual Favor of the Gods system but the UW and the FoW are very repetitive. Do you know anything about this? Thanks. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:212.166.209.1.
 * Hi, there, and thanks for asking. There are no plans to offer new areas for the other gods at this point in time. It's a question we've been asked in the past, but as far as I know, such an exploration of new regions is not planned in the foreseeable future. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 02:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That spelling of her name wins this talk page. Reinforced by putting it at the very top of the page, and unsigned. I think a cookie is in order. Someone give this man a cookie. Good idea though :) --Deathwing 07:18, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, there are a lot of spellings of my name, Gayle amongst them. Mine is not the typical spelling and it's pronounced slightly differently, perhaps. But it is a derivation from the same Welsh roots and I am proud of my name and of its ties to my Celtic heritage.
 * Please, on this page especially, I ask everyone to make extra efforts to be kind. All members are welcome to post on my page. I know personally that learning the ropes of a wiki is not easy, so I beg that we put our energies into helping and teaching, not teasing, mmk? Thanks. :) --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 02:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Tomoko's Cookie.jpg]] >.> wasnt me. okay, okay it was >< i couldn't resist. --Lou-Saydus[[image:User Lou-Saydus Hail Storm.jpg|19px]] 21:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Elite Mission
I was recently running the EotN elite mission with my paragon and a friend, and I'm just wondering. Is there a reason GW loves the full ele teams so much? There's countless anti-attacking areas (I liked the 8 blindbots, shadowsong, guardian, and pensive guardian on the enemies...) without a huge anti-cast presence. Maybe they just don't know how to make something anti-nuker and therefore support it? It'd just be nice if running a classic nuker-packed team wasn't the best option... 76.102.172.202 01:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Destroyer's don't burn, i think that had an enormous impact on the Nuker parties. Not everything can be anti-everything. -- ChronicinabilitY [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 01:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Point is, all the areas in elite mish, are filled with tons of block, plentiful blind, but almost no anti-cast (like 5 ppl in the dungeon w/ interrupt?) 76.102.172.202 02:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Sandstorm --- Raptors

Black Moa Chick
Gaile, have you seen the new mini: Black Moa Chick? I absolutly adore the lil fuzzball. He's sooooo cute. Are you going to hunt/scavenger for one your self Gaile? Or will you buy/trade for one? I did the hunt my self, it was very cool. And thanks to the wiki it only took me a day to get it. DBZVelena |  (Talk page)   01:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That little critter is simply adorable! I saw one last night as I was playing. I'd seen it before at a distance, but "from ground level" it's even cuter! I honestly don't know that I will be able to do the hunt myself -- it's pretty elaborate and requires things I don't own -- but I do commend those who add the Baby Moa to their family, and maybe with time I'll be able to get one, too. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 02:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * TBH, its not really that hard. Getting the scree wings has been the hardest so far (takes a while to farm them) but even thats doable in 20 minutes with a few guildies. - elviondale  (tahlk) 02:52, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I found it easier to far them using Tihark Orchard, higher drop rate there too IMO. DBZVelena  |  (Talk page)  [[image:User_DBZVelena_sig.jpg]] 03:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That's actually something I hadn't even considered -- here I am trying to think of a solo build that would work in explorable areas when there's skree in an area designed for a solo quest. Nice thinking! - Thulsey  [[Image:User Thulsey good.gif|Zheng]] - talk 03:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * These are the most adorable little things. I have a small problem in that even though I own all campaigns, none of my characters are actually far enough in the Prophecies campaign to 'seal the deal'. Any idea if there's going to be a time limit of sorts on this hunt? or will it always be there? Riallews 14:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think they'll be taking it out of the game any time soon. Its a hunt to give a use for items previusly thought to be useless. And if you need a lil help in proff, give me a call when i'm on. I'll help you with some missions. DBZVelena  |  (Talk page)  [[image:User_DBZVelena_sig.jpg]] 11:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. This quest will remain in the game. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 21:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry for the late reply - thanks for the answer gaile, and thanks velena for the offer of help :) Glad to hear I won't miss out on this. Riallews 19:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Brutal Mauling
Hi Gaile, Is there a reason why bear pets still have the skill Brutal Mauling? The long activation on this skill makes a bear a poor choice as a ranger pet because it does substantially less damage per second than other pets. Basically this skill makes the bear an undesired pet to everyone except new players who don't know better. The only reason I can think of to keep the skill around is to allow characters in pre-searing to charm the bear, but there has to be a better way to allow that. There is some discussion of the skill on Izzy's page also, click click. --Tankity Tank 00:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If there's discussion on Izzy's page, that's the right place for it. Thanks. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 21:25, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Bug or Suggestion? Sorry, I can't tell...
I used one of those consumable items, the one that gives your party like +100 max health, +10 energy, whatever, for like 30 minutes. Well, I did that on the first floor of a dungeon, and then I go to the second, and it wasn't there anymore! Is this meant to happen? If it is, then I suggest we be able to carry it through dungeons. If it isn't, then I guess I reported a bug? ;) Vael Victus 20:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Changing level counts as zoning and you lose benefits like that due to zoning. Not a bug 81.241.182.176 21:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I guess the answer is, only use the 30-minute buffs in an Explorable Area, where you're sure to spend the full time. I will point out to the team that we may want to change the wording, although I don't know if we will want or be able to do that. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 21:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It's understandable why buffs from crafted consumables like that would go away upon zoning when currently bounties from beacons and their kill tallies don't carry over as well. It's just a shame that you can't use them for the entire intended duration within any dungeon unless you tarry on a level long enough to squeeze out all the utility from it.
 * I believe someone suggested that bounties and their current status become persistent through a dungeons' levels. I think it does make sense given that the dungeons are sets of linked instances. Forgive the rough analogy, but say I had a "happy" buff while I am upstairs, just because I go down a level doesn't mean I reset my mood when I get to the basement downstairs. The lack of persistence with regards to bounties and apparently 30 min consumable buffs really does detract from the feeling of exploring a monolithic dungeon.
 * P.S. I wish i had all my consumable buffs last night at Shards of Orr Level 3 when I henched/Heroed. I hate Fendi Nin lolSvartalve 01:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it would be better to simply half the duration/cost on these, 30 min is a long time in-game. Especially when you are in a dungeon, you usually only stay in one area for more than 30 if you are doing a mission. Or something along those lines, a 30min buff is just a little bit too much if you ask me. Sure it's nice to fire and forget, but you really do waste a lot of use when you zone and have 15min left on the buff. Essence of Celerity ftw --Lou-Saydus[[image:User Lou-Saydus Hail Storm.jpg|19px]] 05:47, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No, by no means should they be shortened. These things should be great for vanquishing (haven't tried it yet, but I will), which always takes longer than 30 minutes, and 15-minute consumables would get too expensive for vanquishing. (NM, I just saw you wrote half the cost as well.) I haven't even considered using these things in normal mode. Bcstingg 01:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

EotN Hard Mode
Forgive me if this has already been answered, but is there any date(or guess) when hard mode will be released for eotn? --Lou-Saydus 05:40, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No estimate on that release date, but I'm sure it will not be too long from now. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 07:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If you play through factions it will give you a hint of when EotN HM is coming out. Anet left a secret in one of the cut-scenes. When Shiro asks the lady with the crystal ball questions she says the emperor has his eye on him and something will happen soon, very soon. For me that was the hint to let me know EotN Hard Mode will be coming out soon, very soon. -- Natalie Black [[Image:User_NatalieBlack_sig.jpg| ]] 14:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Um... no, I saw that cut scene before GW:EN existed. Єяøהħ 17:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think they were joking :) --[[Image:User Gummy Joe Sig Icon.PNG]]Gummy Joe 18:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I kinda had a feeling that was the case, but i suck at comp sarcasm. Єяøהħ 18:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Disease
Hi. thought id post about this while i posted my above concern. Disease states its transmittable between creatures "of the same type". so why can Ogden, Vekk, Zhed and Pyre transmit/contract disease from human players? there not the same type as humans. i posted this in the page about disease, but apparently our ppl who check the recent changes missed it, or just didn't know. as this isn't a support issue (how would i bring this up to them ^.^) i thought id ask the expert with access to the other experts ;) -TehBuG-
 * Are you sure it actually transfers? I've seen for myself that Zhed doesn't interact with disease with humans (nor does Talon). Capcom 06:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think what was found out from research was, Razah, Zhed, Talon, etc, doesn't spread disease to other humans. Not in PvE, anyway. In PvP, everyone's the same, for all intents and purposes, otherwise that would possibly make some Heros better choices then human players, simply because they had advantages like that. I can't be sure though; there was a long discussion on the subject at Razah's GuildWiki page, I believe. --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]] Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> .cнаt^  07:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That's what I have seen as well. Jora and Ogden won't spread disease to human characters, or to each other, in PvE. Erasculio 13:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * thats strange. ive had every hero/npc on my team diseased at once and i had Vekk, Zhed, Ogden, Talon, herta and Kilm and mhenlo as a team. -TehBuG-
 * Are you sure they didn't get diseased separately? I think a good way to test it is in Isle of the Nameless, send just one of them into the Student of Disease, then have them come back, and see what happens. Keep in mind, the Student can spread disease to anyone. --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]] Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> .cнаt^  00:35, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I just cast rotting flesh on a couple of white mantle, they ran up and passed disease to koss and I, whilst Zhed and Ogden remained unaffected. I'm glad I tested it too, because the last time I ran this same test (well over a year ago) disease was passed to allies (at least in pve) rather then by species Cloud 14:11, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I will ask the designers and QA if there is an issue with this. I don't think it's a concern, but they will take a look. --Gaile 00:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Character Recovery
i have a question, is there any way to recover a character if they are deleted? i mean if your character got deleted by some strange error or a friend or some strange hacker that had nothing better to do. this has not happened to me and i have never heard of it happening but i find this very interesting. Im guessing the answer is no but im wondering what the official stance is on this. will anet roll back a char if sufficient research and proof is given that it was accident or other means.
 * This has been asked by many and the answer has always been no. Deleted character, what ever the reason for deletion has been, will not be deleted. Actually, I think they don't even store any characters after deleting them so it would be completely impossible. -- [[Image:User Gem sig.png|Gem]] (gem / talk) 01:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you mean "will not be undeleted". [[Image:User Aiiane-a.gif|Go to Aiiane's Talk page]] (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 01:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe there needs to be a LOCK for any characters in game that are level 20. An ingame option to make this character permanant, never to be deleted kind of thing.Forgot to log in and sign...Killer Revan 19:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * you already have to type in the full char name to delete it... I think theyve done pleenty to prevent accedental deletion and this is a matter of player responsibility. Hackers get access due to trojans distributed with 3rd party programs, and "friends" technically shouldnt have access to your account. If this happens, sorry... but players are ultimately responsible for their own accounts. The only exception would likely be a major bug that caused accidental deletions and this would probably call for a server roll back. Besides that unlikely possibility i dont see this happening.--Midnight08 18:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * We cannot restore deleted characters, and honestly, the process of deletion seems secure enough to us that we don't anticipate a change. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 22:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

stormwing incubus AI -> azure shadow AI
just a suggestion to stop super spikes by stromwing incubus, having a group of 6 drop down and them getting stuck by 12X Mind Shock in less then a second or getting stuck by 10X and 2X Mystic Shriek will instantly kill almost anyone. i would like the stormwing incubus AI to be changed more to the azure shadows which use signet of judgment 1 after the other rather then all at once. this will allow the person who triggered the spawn to survive. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Mashav.
 * Especially as it's a hidden spawn, so most players can't just bond up before the spawn, it's especially unfair for the player. Giving players a moment to heal, even if it's only half a second between blasts, would help; having them attempt to spread targets (I.E., not all hit the same guy) might also help. Nobody enjoys instantly dying to a random hidden spawn, with no way to prevent it (other then already knowing it's there and using Spell Breaker or the like). --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]] Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> .cнаt^  07:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Was I just lucky then? I found them to be an irritant that inflicted useless damage :S 85.210.25.233 13:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I found them only to be an annoyance as well...never had anyone die as a result of one for their hidden spawns. Maybe that's because I'm using Heroes for healing though who can react faster than a human healer? I don't know but I never found them to really be a threat.--Thor79•[[Image:User-thor79.png]]•Talk 14:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the shadows use their signet one at a time so as not to waste the knockdown. If you use a knockdown before someone has recovered it does nothing. I know Mind Shock also knocks down but it does a lot more damage and is a lot faster so it is also a spike, and they use it that way. I know it sucks, but after doing a dungeon once or twice you know where they spawn and can prepare for it next time. I would like them to be removed from the tangles of other mobs though, it doesnt matter if they drop down, they shouldn't drop down in an already crowded mob. Dancing Gnome 18:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It seems for every "Please make PvE require thought" suggestion there's a corresponding "Please stop the enemies from using tactics that actually kill me" suggestion. What is a game designer to do? Anyway, I'm with the people who haven't had a problem with these; I've never considered the Stormcloud Incubus more than a minor annoyance regardless of group size. -- bcstingg (talk • contribs) 18:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with the above comment. At the first they were nasty but after a while I learned to tread carefully and now they're not a problem.  Dungeons are supposed to be challenging after all :) Barinthus 18:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh come on, its not the Mind Shock spike thats the problem. I have nothing against enemies using normal skills in order to kill a player. Its Soulrending Shriek thats the problem. The skill completely eliminates any and all forms of enchantment based Protection vs these things, not every group can carry a Save Yourselves spammer. They aren't too much of a problem when your fighting them with 0dp or a morale boost, but once you get dp theres almost nothing you can do to prevent them killing someone.
 * Every group can carry an Infuse Health monk... that saves you from dying pretty much without fail. Unless your infuse monk fails at infuse, of course. - Auron 14:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Hasta la vista Scales
I don't know it's just a bug or what... anyway durning and after first quest What Lies Beneath we see there are not anymore Scales. I completed GW:EN and that quest - crevasse didn't disappear(naturally) and there are still no scales.

I know it's Gaile Userpage but i think only Gaile would anserw :/. -- Grethort 17:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well there are still skales, they're just further north than where the crevasse is. After all, they probably peeked down that crevasse already, and were smart enough to stay away from it. Yukiko [[Image:User_Yukiko_Sig.png]] 20:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually Yukiko I grouped with a skale once so a few did go down the crevasse. j/k Grethort I think it is a bug so it may be good you brought it up. -- Natalie Black [[Image:User_NatalieBlack_sig.jpg| ]] 02:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That's ok Natalie, I'm just sad that you didn't invite me along. :( The area around the fissure in Plains of Jarin doesn't seem t have the spawns moved. So it could be a bug, or just a revision to the area for the location of the spawns. There's still quite a few, unless I decimated the population when I needs some bog skale fins for the herring. Yukiko [[Image:User_Yukiko_Sig.png]] 09:51, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Bypassing the 3 Hero Limit - Bannable Offense?
Obviously there are still a lot of us who want 7 heroes in our parties so we can play the game solo closer to the level of a full human group...you know this from the poll on GWO that continues to show that nearly 80% of the people responding to the poll want to be able to have 7 heroes in their groups. A question has come up that some of us Solo players with multiple accounts want answered. Do we risk our account getting banned for using a second account to get 3 additional heroes (for a total of 6 heroes, 7 characters in the group total) in our party because more than 3 heroes is not in Anet's vision for the game? (in the same way some exploit is not in their vision) I think you owe us this answer at the very least....considering you are limiting our game play because you want us to group with people we have no interest in grouping with. PUGs are not socializing...PUGs are about getting the job done....and are usually a lot less fun then playing by myself.--Thor79••Talk 20:17, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * People sepose to be "forced" to team up with pugs who often posses level of cooperation and intelligence infinitely close to one of a brick, in order to make this even more frustrating heroes are made inherently weaker then pugs by not being able to use pve skills, but then again, very useful to have 20 heroes if only 3 at the time can be used. =) - Biz 20:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Technically speaking, Thor, doing that with two accounts would be fundamentally the same as playing with yourself on two computers at once. I don't see how you could possibly be caught, and if so, I don't see any policies or whatnot that you would be breaking.
 * Gaile, it's been made clear many times before that having a full A.I. team isn't what ANet whats players to do, but the fact remains, if people want to go it alone, they will. I personally would rather use henchmen that engage foes I don't want to fight, rather then team up with players who only have a small chance of doing what I'd like us to be doing. If I want to party with humans, I do that; if I want to go solo, I may be slightly hindered by the lack of options, but it doesn't stop me. Perhaps it's time for a re-think of the limit? Maybe it could even be implemented as a test for a week; ANet can look over the results and feedback, and really get a good feel for what sort of impact it would have on the game. --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]] Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> .cнаt^  20:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Dual clienting is not allowed, AFAIK - [[Image:UserDrago-sig.gif]]  Drago 
 * We don't care HOW it is done....whether it be running two clients on the same computer or two clients on separate computers...The issue at hand is whether or not bypassing the 3 hero limit by using a second account (form a party....go out into an explorable area...have the second account leave so that its heroes become essentially henchmen on steroids) is allowed or if that is a bannable offense. I personally use two separate computers to play my two accounts which is clearly not against the rules...but I'm wondering if bypassing the 3 hero limit is. I'm particularly interested because I'm working my second account through the campaigns now so I can use it's heroes as I see fit on my first account.--Thor79•[[Image:User-thor79.png]]•Talk 01:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd just like to say that this "only 3 hero business" is quite lame. =/ I've expressed this before, but as it's being discussed in a different manner now... I mean seriously, the only person I party with is my friend Rug, because I know he's pro. People are always whining in outposts that they need help in an EOTN quest. To me, GW has always been about using humans only if I need to. I hate general humanity because of their filthy tongues and bodies, so why would I want to party with another human? NPCs don't have dinner, they don't get tired, they're always there, they're not annoying, and I can direct them where to go. Humans? Okay, maybe I'll like the person, and that'll be fun. Humans should be for PvP, not PvE. Vael Victus 16:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Why is it that everyone loves to whine about how they want full AI teams and don't want to play with other players in an online game, when to start with, GW didn't have heroes at all and we did just fine. People have sucked since the start and everyone managed to play and some people did very well. Ever think that perhaps it's the heroes themselves making people suck even more? If you have a monk hero in every party, why should a monk try hard? If a warrior has two monk heroes with perfect bars, why will he ever need a good self-sustaining build(this applies to every profession as well). Anyone using a full hero party generally has the playing skill of a henchman anyway, since all they're doing is relying on the AI to do work they are incapable of themselves.

On the actual topic, there's no reason any such thing would be bannable, it is a separate account and assumably(if you didn't tell anyone) a separate person. You won't be banned for playing with a friend and 3 of their heroes, why 3 of another account you own. If you're not running multi-client to begin with (two computers) you really aren't breaking any existing rule since you aren't bypassing any game functioning. -- Txzeenath 20:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Lol @ heroes making people worse. No, bad heroes are making people worse. I remember I just stopped playing GW for like two weeks when I first started, because I had seriously been in that mission where you protect Jalis (or instantly fail...) over 20 times. I met one group, and everyone stayed, and we rushed right through it and crushed everyone. No griefing, no anything. I don't care if the game's online and you want to protect its essence. Taking essences into play can severely limit a game. Vael Victus 19:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It's bypassing a limit intentionally set by Anet...bypassing the rules of the game...which in some cases is considered an exploit. I just want an official answer or a link to an official answer regarding this. Doesn't matter how it is done or whether or not it can be detected. Is it a bannable offense or not? Is this considered an exploit by the devs?--Thor79•[[Image:User-thor79.png]]•Talk 02:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I apologize for the length of time it took me to post this answer. I checked with the design team, and the fact that the heroes remain in the game in the event of a disconnection of the player is a design decision, and we are not banning people who do this. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 04:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The simple truth is that players will just use the henchmen and solo anyway at a disadvantage, even before that, players would often try soloing with henchmen. Heros provide an improvement to using henchmen, and limiting their use is quite arbitrary, in most cases, if ai controlled members are able to function in a mission, henchmen will fill the role if they need to, and if the mission or quest is designed with a catch to prevent it's effectivness, than it is difficult to impossible to do.  Being able to use 7 heros at once is really about gameplay quality, not whether you can solo or not.


 * Really, the only serious difficulty with using 7 heros is that operating more than 3 other skill bars besides your own is madness, even tinkering with 3 can cover your screen in skillbars. It would be just as well if the final 4 heros were not capable of manual control, and any bugs in operation and selection would be a liablity of your build choices, but overall, it would still be great if we could use 7 heros.  Even with all the PvE effect benifits, the synergy and coordination win out over players 90% of the time, and the convenience wins out 100% of the time.  If additional heros arn't offered, perhaps we could get customize henchmen, or choose from multiple builds for each henchmen.  At least get Visu and a ritualist and paragon into the henchmen lineup in EotN, we got 2 warriors, 2 elementist, 2 rangers and 2 monks and none of the additional professions available, even though expansion includes characters from those chapters.--BahamutKaiser 05:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * All arguments for those wanting to play all-hero parties are well known by the design team. As we have said, consistently and with respect, the all-hero party is not something that we will be incorporating into the game, nor do we foresee incorporating it into the the game in the future. I ask that this post, and this page, not be used as another medium for requesting this gameplay change, for the subject has been more than exhausted here and on the fan forums. Thank you for your cooperation. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 05:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Play Style - Solo vs. Group - How are decisions made?
I wanted to ask about how you guys make decisions on how players want to play the game - solo vs. groups. The introduction of heroes has brought along with it questions like "why can't I bring 7 heroes instead of only 3?" or "why can't my heroes use pve skills too?" and the common answer we are given is you want to "encourage" players to play in groups, but give a choice to play otherwise. This si often retorted with someone quoting Jeff Strain in a comment he made about the importance of solo play. Apparently you don't consider the fact we bought an online game was expression enough that our intention was to play with other people in the first place. I wanted to know how you decide what the players want to do - if they want to group at all? Also how do you decide that three heroes will force players to play with other people sometimes instead of pick up 4 henchmen? - This last comment comes from my belief that 3 heros is enough that if I want to play solo I will, and only play with other people when I want to - If I had 7 heroes this wouldn't change. Where does your information come from? Do you poll random players and ask them how many heroes to give them before they feel there is a balance between heroes and real players? How did you decide that the PvE skills should be made for players only, preventing heros from using them too? I've seen many people ask questions about the limitations put on heros, but I've never seen the reasoning behind the response so I thought I would ask. Dancing Gnome 18:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * About PvE skills I'm sure Ive seen Izzy write something in the lines of "getting 3 additional pve skills copyes on heros would be too good". Then some one else stated "Peepl like playing alone or with One buddy" there comes the idea of 3 heroes as two players can make a full 8 man party. Biz 18:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * 7 Heroes would not only be insanely powerful due to the fact that you can make some pretty crazy builds, but if you have 7 heroes, you wouldn't bother with players. Atleast with henchmen you do infact gain a benefit in playing with other people, since even an ill-prepared player is better than a henchman at certain things. So it's not only a game balance issue, it does keep some degree of player interaction(while still low compared to pre-hero days) -- Txzeenath 20:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Some of us frankly do not want to party with PUGs....they are all about getting the job done. It is not a fun experience. That is why I choose to play solo over playing with a PUG. 7 Heroes would only help to increase my ability to play certain parts of the game. 7 heroes would be no more insanely powerful than a full coordinated PvE Guild group. It is actually closer to the level of 2 players playing together since the coordination and control is not there as much. There are people who want to play with others...they usually find a guild...there are people who want to play with others but aren't in an active guild...those are the people that should make up the PUG community. People who want to play by themselves should be able to play by themselves...and their solo play should not be gimped by the fact that they aren't partying with other players. When they find they can't do something you are forcing them to play a game mode (playing with other people they do not know) they do NOT want to play. You are forcing them to sacrifice their fun to get something done. Using the "we want to keep people socializing" argument is BS...we're already not socializing...and in most PUGS there is not much socializing...no they are all about getting the job done and are usually quite hostile because they don't care about the social experience they just want the most efficient team to get the job done.--Thor79•[[Image:User-thor79.png]]•Talk 21:23, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * If I didn't like playing with people, I wouldn't have started my own guild. Heros are still a rather lackluster option; I'm reminded of this fact every time I fight a boss with an AoE skill, and watch my party die in one hit. (Murakai's nasty, that Searing Flames boss in EotN is especially nasty.) But the option to use seven Heros would open up just so many interesting and creative possibilities... if I want smart teammates, I find a player. If I just want to get a quest over and done with, I take Heros and/or henchmen. Unless you start seeing Hero teams killing Mallyx and clearing Domain of Anguish, then human players are still in the consideration. --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]] Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> .cнаt^  21:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Call me a meanie... thats ok, but the only real people I play with are guildies. And Lady Sinaea from time to time :) Otherwise, I go solo. Less hassle, less wait, fewer headaches - elviondale  (tahlk) 21:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Sometimes on harder missions, I'll post around until I find a person, then talk them into bringing Heros and going duo. Normally works out great; less people to make mistakes, but you still have the ability to spread out or split up. Of course, I'm always helping out newbies and whatnot too (whenever I see someone running from Marketplace to Kaineng Center for 500g, I always end up taking players for free, to prove how easy it is). And like I mentioned before, I've got guildmates and alliance members; the alliance has a TeamSpeak server, so we end up doing tough missions together sometimes. But I've got eight characters; I'm used to doing quests, and I trust myself to do it faster alone, so if I don't need help, I bring henchmen. --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]] Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> .cнаt^  22:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Exactly what I mean- although I ran the desert instead ;-) Tip runners for the win. - elviondale  (tahlk) 22:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I will answer your core question of how decisions are made. In a nutshell, game design cannot take place with a "design by committee" approach. Successful game design comes, first and foremost, when a group of professionals work together to develop a "vision" of a game, then hone, perfect, discuss, amend, and polish it before moving forward with production of the final product. Upon release and ever after, a good company seeks and listens to player input. We pay careful attention to player opinions, wishes, desires, and even complaints. Yet design cannot and should be be driven by player polls, by votes, or by requests, no matter how fervent. It can be guided by such things, but it should never be led by them. Many times, players ask for things that are not feasible, either from a technology or staffing viewpoint. Many times, they ask for things that are not in keeping with the core philosophy of the game's design. And let's be honest: There are as many expectations as there are players. Where one wants X, another as strongly wants Y, and don't forget the person who thinks that both X and Y will bring about the death of the game... and probably the end of civilization as we know it. :)


 * We do very much listen to players and we have made and will no doubt continue to make modest amendments to our game when what the players propose is in keeping with the over-arcing design vision. But the basis of the core design -- the philosophy, the values, the objectives -- remains in the hands of the game designers, and end of the day, that it as it should, must, and shall remain. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 22:35, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Very good answer hearkening back to the root question. While you might hear a lot of people asking/complaining/polling about something- they might not always see the consequences of the changes they seek to have enacted. Its an MMORPG and its called Guild Wars. Those very words ascribe to the game a characteristic of working with other people. That being said, if you want a group of 8 with only yourself as a RL person, you can do that: get 4 henchmen. I really don't know how people can enjoy the game and be devoted to it without a guild or interaction with real people... :\ - elviondale  (tahlk) 23:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Gaile - Favor was once thought of as such a core element that it would never be changed...well look what happened. Considering the community asked for and finally got the change to Favor...it's obvious that the designers can be influenced by the community...which is why we Solo players persist.
 * Elviondale - Can you do stuff like beat Mallyx with 3 heroes and 4 henchmen...not likely. Can you get Guardian on Hard mode using only 3 heroes and 4 henchmen? I don't know....but I bet it's very difficult. My point is there are certain areas that REQUIRE you to group....it's simply not possible to do it without other players. I just want to have my best shot about being able to do it by myself...and that's not with henchmen. Solo players are the only ones who have their play gimped in this way.
 * How can I enjoy this game without a guild? Because this game allows me to play by myself for most of the content. I would love to be able to play this game with my guild...problems is they play WoW....and I'm a bit spoiled by my interaction with them. I've tried to join other guilds but it's just not the same. So I choose to play this game solo. I do it because I can...most other games restrict a lot more of their games to groups only....and there's no AI to help in those games. This game is different.
 * This game allows me to do that yet restricts me when I try the really tough areas because I can't equip more than 3 heroes. The lead designer or whatever his position was...the one who talked about solo play....does he really believe what he said....or only for low level content. Because as it stands this game is turning out like a lot of games turn out...high end content is restricted to those who are fortunate enough to have a good group to group with. You have the resources to let us be able to attempt that high level content by ourselves...but you are choosing not to let us play that how we want to play it. You are intentionally forcing us to group with people we don't want to group with. Let's be honest....the only real content that really matters when it comes to 7 heroes is the high end content...because the low end content can already be completed solo with heroes and henchmen. If people want to solo for 95% of the game they already can...and more heroes aren't going to change that. It's only that last 5% that people can't really play without the help of a group. You've given us the tools to be able to solo most of the game....why not go the entire way and let us solo the entire game if we want?--Thor79•[[Image:User-thor79.png]]•Talk 23:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I play Guild Wars because it's a fun game. I'm not in a Guild and I don't want to join one. I've beaten all three games with just my heros and henchies and I've even taken a run through Sorrow's Furnace with them. The only reason I've not run at any other Elite areas is because they don't offer henchmen. I don't like playing with people. People make mistakes and get you killed or cost you time. I don't have a lot of time to play and if I play alone, the mistakes are only mine. I can live with that. As for why I would play an online only game with millions of other people only to play solo...because they don't make an offline version of the game. I played Diablo 2 from begining to end with all the classes it had to offer just as I have done with GW, and never once played a single time online. I love that GW allows me to play by my self. It's one of the coolest things they did with there game. I just wish I could check out the harder stuff without having to build a trusting relationship with other people half a world away. You do have to trust the people you play with, because it's your fun that is in their hands. I'm stationed in Korea and I can't find other Americans to play with if I wanted to. The Heros speak english and understand my target calls. Just let me keep my guild the way it is, just me and the heroes I've unlocked on the character I've chosen to play that day. Every single hero I have has fully insignia'd armor, full runes for their class with at least a minor vigor rune and green weapons that I've picked up along the way and put to good use. If your guild can do DoA runs when they plan their approach, mine should be able to as well. Signed Kevin (since I don't have an account here)210.206.175.162 01:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Urgent: Duncan taxis/elite dungeon farming
''Sorry for bumping this, but I feel it needs more urgent attention than the 3 hero limit. If unchanged, this will ruin the dungeon reward economy of GWEN very quickly by devaluating Onyx gems and assorted chest gold/greens''

Hi Gaile, I wanted to direct you to this thread: http://guildwars.incgamers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=464030

It sounds like people can access the elite, end-game dungeon of GW:EN from almost the start of the game and I wasn't sure if this was intended to be so.Lightow 16:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


 * To expand on this, you can read up in the link the bug makes it possible for people to repeatedly do the last part of that dungeon to farm the high end Hierophant's Chest in a very short amount of time. Seeing how the GWEN economy is based around dungeon chests, this is a serious problem that needs to be adressed soon, or players will stop playing all other dungeons. --Xeeron 09:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * At the moment, I saw 4 ferries at Umbral grotto searching for groups, only a matter of time before the chest will be farmed to death. Don't buy hierophant weapons right now ... --Xeeron 20:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * This is a serious issue, and it affects all of us, not just those dealing in the high end of the economy. It's nice to be able to sell the occasional Onyx gemstone for a few platinum, which isn't chump change to me. This definitely looks like an unintended exploit. -- bcstingg (talk • contribs) 21:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Getting to the dungeon early? No big deal. Skipping to the end of the dungeon on a repeatable basis? Now that's just begging for exploitation. That's like beating the Mallix quest to the point where you can fight Mallix, then just beating him over. And over. And over. --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]] Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> .cнаt^  21:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It is...except beating Duncan is faster! =P Very wrong needs fixing. -- ChronicinabilitY [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 21:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * On the flip-side getting a group together of 8 members all on the last quest would be next to impossible. -- Lemming [[Image:User Lemming64 sigicon.png]] 21:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well...only because there is no set outpost. If there was then it would be just like Mallyx and fine. Umbral seems to have been chosen but i personally think it's an easier run from Olofstead. Either way it's still a problem that needs fixing. -- ChronicinabilitY [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 21:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * What about turning the first level into an outpost, or adding an outpost before the first level? -- Gordon Ecker 22:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * What "Economy" are we talking about? =) from what Ive seen prices haven't even began finding their equilibrium yet, still onyxes are good 10k each, making destroyer weapons around 130k not much for "economical crush" of high end and other imaginary things, Armor is losing value, rares are usually bad so only onyx is worth it, here you end up with onyx + few k a run that you cant do alone, making this not much profitable or "harmful for economy" then UW solo Biz 06:08, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Generally, prices drop when people figure out an effective way to obtain these items. Stygian Gems were expensive, until people figured out trapping worked there. Now they've balanced. While Onyx will level out in the same way, the ability to do this run this easily will cause a unneeded drop in the price, a little bit faster then it should. Done normally, players simply need to finish the dungeon to get stuff; any dungeon will do. People will figure out quick ways to do it. But in this case, it's an exploit in the sense that, they're not really beating the dungeon, only skipping to the boss (from what I understand). This speeds up the process by a rather big factor, and while it might not "crush" anything, it will make an impact in the economy, and even a tiny dent is still a dent. Besides, no matter what, it's still an exploit, right? And it should be fixed. --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]]<font color="#237d00"> Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> <font color="#237d00">.cнаt^  06:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm really sorry, I thought I had answered that thread. Well, I have now. The fact is, we're grateful that you guys have passed this along, and the designers will be taking a good hard look at this--in fact some already have and they'll be making a decision on this sooner rather than later. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 01:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for looking at this problem. -- [[Image:User Gem sig.png|Gem]] (gem / talk) 01:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you very much for responding Gaile. :) Lightow 01:36, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I just finished the Justiciar Thommis level of Slaver's exile with Heroes and Henchmen, and the difficulty of the area really makes the accomplishment very rewarding. As a largely solo Guild Wars player I would like to suggest that if the design team does decide to have Duncan's gate open only for parties where all members are on the final objective of "The Last Hierophant"and as a consequence make the "lobby" area of Slaver's Exile into an outpost to facilitate grouping, that henchmen will be present and still be allowed in the Slaver's Exile's different wings.
 * Having an irregular and varying play schedule, I haven't been able to experience the elite areas of the other campaigns, but with the ability to bring henchmen and heroes into Slaver's Exile, I'm seeing more of GWEN than I would have otherwise. Do note that I'm not advocating that Duncan's dungeon wing gate remain open for parties with players that have not vanquished the other four bosses involved in "The Last Hierophant"; It does seem that it would be detrimental for the game if people who have not met the requirements for facing Duncan are able to skip to the final challenge of the dungeon--I only ask that players who have finished GWEN and thus have access to Slaver's Exile still have the option to bring henchmen with them to any of the levels. Svartalve 10:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Making the Slaver's Exile lobby area an outpost would awesome. But what about the destroyer weapons crafter?? --Pulse Reaction 21:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd presume that *if* Slaver's Exile's lobby gets transformed into an outpost that Balthor Coalforge would remain where he is--no reason for him to move. Svartalve 22:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Another solution would be to make it so that while people can enter without having the quest to assist someone that does have the quest, they can't get credit for just killing Duncan. For example, after they kill Duncan they will still have to kill all the others before turning in the quest for 15k xp and 2.75k gold. The most they can do is help a friend through and get the chest and not the direct 2.75k cash from the quest each time.70.125.133.27 08:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I laughed really hard when I did this run for the first time, it's pretty broken. IMO, if you wanted to fix it so that the exploit run didn't work all you need to do is add another massive spirit spawn at the base of the stairs. G'bye SV exploiter. Don't bother fixing the thing, let people pay for taxis and then realize that they can't exploit the boss. --Tankity Tank 09:10, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, that's a bad idea. As much fun as it would be, people would just use swap to move the new spirit spawns out of range. --Tankity Tank 09:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I posted this on the un-official forums so I thought I had might as well post it here too. In my personal opinion, it should be where the are quests chained where the first one is to defeat the first four bosses and then make a separate, repeatable quest to destroy Duncan the Black. Divide the reward evenly between the two and make it so that: a)Everyone must have finished GW:EN before anyone in the party even enters Slaver's Exile. b)Everyone in the party must have the second quest in their quest logs. c)The entrance to Slaver's Exile is it's own outpost. Lightow 02:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think by now any potential fix on this exploit is too late. Onyx Gemstones which may have been fairly earned by players through the other dungeons or by working through Slaver's Exile properly are now worth less than half their value prior to the last 3 days. Every outpost has 2 traders trying to sell the Deldrimor Armor Remnants for 5k or less - and these people have 20+ of them to sell. The only things which have retained any value are the Heirophant Items which drop pretty rarely so I think their value will hold up for a long while. The decision took too long and now the damage has been done, if anything it wouldn't be fair to people yet to start Slaver's Exile with the current easy access system and so it should remain in its broken state. Dancing Gnome 05:13, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If your reason for fixing the way that quest works at the moment is the value of the items obtained then it is a bad reason. It is a shame that people make the choice to bypass part of the quest but fixing it should have in mind the fun that is to be had in playing the quest fully and not the value of the reward at the end of the quest line -- Darak 06:20, 17 September 2007
 * If players don't want to play the quest fully and would rather skip it for the value of the items then forcing them to play the quest fully isn't going to make it "fun" for them. The only reason to "fix" this was to protect the value of the items but they drop by 1k every 24 hours. The most profitable role now isn't doing the quest, it's running. Dancing Gnome 08:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * They need to change how the reward chest works. It drops loot for each character doesn't it. If they're unwilling to stop the quest giving out a reward for the whole thing after doing nothing, fine. If they're unwilling to stop the quest been skipped and just killing Duncan fine. But nerf the damn chest for people who skip it. If you've killed all 4 bosses previous to Duncan then you get the current reward. If you've skipped all 4 bosses and have just had a run to this dungeon, you get the typical reward for a dungeon that takes 20-45 minutes, a single gold item + a small chance at an Onyx. As far as i'm concerned the reason this chest drops such a good reward is because the path to it is a long 1. If you got a taxi from the start to the last 4/5ths of a Marathon you won't be rewarded for running the whole thing (you'd be disqualified obviously, but you get the idea). - Evilsod
 * Interesting idea, I kinda like it--especially now that I've just gone through the grueling and expensive experience of killing the previous 4 bosses involved in "The Last Hierophant". Now I just need to make some gold so I can buy consumables for Duncan the Black. Svartalve 20:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Pre-searing fix
"To prevent players from being taken through the Searing involuntarily, players in Pre-Searing Ascalon must now talk to Sir Tydus individually in order to head off to war."

Just want to say, thank you so much on sorting this out :), even though my perma pre is only level 13 (>.<) I dont have to worry about being pulled to post!

Thanks so much Gaile+Anet. Chrs181818 16:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * That is the change I was most happy to see in the update notes this week, for I have been keenly aware of the situation and very concerned about it, too, from the viewpoint of causing players frustration, lost time, and potential heartbreak. I'm really happy that this has been solved! --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 18:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Underworld Bug (Hall Of Monuments)
I cleared Underworld 2 times with guildies, done all quests and guess what? No statue ! I sent a support ticket but I always get kind of an auto-message. This is why I post here. Any of you got the same problem? Gaile, can you tell me something more about this?
 * I'm not sure what you're asking about, as there is no link between Underworld and the Hall of Monuments and never has been one. The only thing you can put in Hall of Monuments that is connected to UW in any way would be a caputured spider. If that's what you're asking about, make sure that you reset the pet name prior to adding it to the Fellowship monument. Check out the Hall of Monuments article for more information on what affects the statues in the room.210.206.175.162 01:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You get a state for completing the UW, FoW and the Elite Missions. They are called "Eternal Conqueror of the x" - B e X  [[Image:User BeXoR sig.gif|iawtc]] 02:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/%22Honor%22 69.146.226.55 15:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes you even get one for Sorrow's Furnace :) --Flycken 16:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

This is really starting to get frustrating now. I've just finished a 3rd clearance of this damn place, cleared every quest and this time killed every red dot in sight (bar Chained Souls). 5 man 3 hero this time. And we failed to recieve the statue for the Hall of Monuments AGAIN. An actual response would be nice as to what the hell your going to do about this. I've wasted about 8 hours in total now in the UW now for a grand total of 1 ecto in loot and no statues and tbh i'm starting to get sick of this incompetance. Something obviously hasn't been implemented properly and nobody is saying a thing about if its been corrected or even acknowledging something is wrong with it. And no, WE HAVE NOT MISSED A QUEST!
 * Now tell me something......When you did all of your UW runs.....did you use heroes on all 3 of them? :) --User:Soki
 * Yes we did, but that shouldn't matter. We recieved the FoW monument with Heroes. Several others have got it with heroes.
 * I had the same problem with the FOW... did all the quests, even killed every monster.... the FOW eternal conqueror is not available for meJaxgreystar 15:29, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have relayed this to the QA team. They will investigate and I'll let you know what the outcome is on this. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 05:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Wasn't this fixed in Game updates/20070927? "Fixed a bug in the Underworld that incorrectly awarded completion for the quest "The Terrorweb Queen" if the player had previously completed the quest "The Demon Assassin." This error prevented players from being awarded the Underworld Hall of Monuments trophy." -- [[Image:User Gem sig.png|Gem]] (gem / talk) 05:39, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Quite likely it was fixed, Gem, and thanks for pointing that out. I was not able to keep up to date as diligently as usual on bug fixes while I was away. Does everyone who had concerns agree that this was corrected in the bug fix of 27 September? --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 15:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * QA comfirmed this afternoon that the issues reported here have indeed been fixed. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 20:26, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Underworld/FoW Monument
Gaile I have completed the Underworld Quests (Normal Mode)two times in the last two nights to try to get this monument. The first night was quests only, and the next was quests and all of the monsters. I ran around even to be sure. Could you maybe have a developer post the requirements for this monument. Do the quests have to be completed in Hard Mode to count? Also there is a bug with one of the quests, "Terrorweb Queen" upon taking it the quests goes directly to "(Completed)" status before killing the Queen. Archangel Avoca 04:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Reported and slated for a fix in an upcoming build. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 23:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Asuran Title Effect Bug
Hey Gaile, A couple of others and I have noticed that the title effect from the asuran race effects human players but not their heroes. I'm fairly certain it wasn't meant to be that way because the norn title track affects them just fine in norn lands. Yes this was tested in asuran lands. Energy gain for me, but not for heroes. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks! --Flycken 16:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Works fine for me, I think you may be in an outpost and not in an explorable area, once in an explorable the energy buff goes into effect. Xitoahc 13:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Same as Xitoahc. Vael Victus 19:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Other books
The four reputation NPCs make references to "other books" in addition to the Hero's Handbook and Master Dungeon Guide, and imply that these are books which are filled out to gain reputation. Are these books going to be added later (possibly as part of hard mode), or are the other books a feature which didn't make the cut? -- Gordon Ecker 06:02, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Kodan - "You've accomplished more than I'd have ever imagined! That's good...but not good enough anymore. Now, you'll really need to put forth effort. The best way to do that is to seek out the Beacons of Droknar in Hard Mode. Plus, the written records of your achievements in Hard Mode will carry more weight 'round these parts C'mon. Show you're as tough as any Dwarf and get back out there!" --24.179.151.252 12:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Bear Club For Men/Women just plain and simply too hard?
I wasn't sure this problem was getting the right attention it deserves, so I thought I'd bring it up here. I have tried this quest twice now, first on my Dervish and later on with my Paragon and both times I have simply been stumped at how insanely hard this quest really is. Though I wasn't here to enjoy the preview weekend, I have been given to understand this quest was a little too easy during the preview and the bar has been raised since then. However I wonder if it wasn't raised a little too high. Certainly as with any solo-quest certain classes will be favored over others, but it seems even the generally most suitable classes are having troubles. The bear seems to be a nearly invincible tank with buffed up armor, health, as well as natural regen and skills recharging twice as fast. Basically for most characters there simply is no way of beating the bear without heavily if not fully relying on secondary class skills and even then it is a gamble at best, seeing as you actually have to be HOLDING the club for the death blow. My Dervish spent over 2 hours trying out all sorts of weird and wacky combinations of skills and all of them resulted in the same impasse at around 40% hp on the bear's part. I was just about to give up when in a final effort I rolled out an Illusionary Weaponry build with which I narrowly managed to slay the beast. And right then I conveniently got DC-ed and when I logged back in the quest had reset >_< Still, aside from that, the point is that this quest has been made ridiculously hard. My characters have every skill in the game and they are simply failing to come up with something original to kill this bugger. As someone else remarked so rightly, instead of encouraging experimentation this quest is an excellent example of encouraging standard spirit-spamming builds as the only viable solution to getting it completed. So please tell me that this quest will at least be considered for rebalancing, because compared to this, the Norn tournament is like a holiday on Hawai. Liselle Morrow 22:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * * /W. Mighty blow, hammer bash, crushing blow. Hell, I did that on my monk. --Tankity Tank 22:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * May i refer to the section "instead of encouraging experimentation"... A Warrior hammer build is so standard. Besides, why should any character be forced to go Warrior secondary and buy skills especially for quests like these. What happened to free will? =_= Liselle Morrow 22:32, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I've heard of touch builds as well, although I imagine that they aren't that effective on anything but a Ranger - elviondale  (tahlk) 22:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I drove over it on the first time in a few seconds with my basic toucher. Life stealing or degen will probably work for other classes too. -- [[Image:User Gem sig.png|Gem]] (gem / talk) 22:41, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * For reference there's a section over here which is, I believe, a more appropriate place for this discussion.  Lojiin 22:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Lojiin is correct... that's where this dicussion should be taking place. It's not as if Gaile has the authority to overrule the designers' decisions in this regard, nor are there arguments here which aren't already being made there. [[Image:User Aiiane-a.gif|Go to Aiiane's Talk page]] (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 00:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It's a hammer people, and there's something fuzzy. You can experiment with hammer bash/crushing blow, it's not hard. --Tankity Tank 22:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I just nuked his ass. &mdash;The preceding comment of pure and undeniable awesome-sauce was added by Skakid9090. 00:44, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Is the previous signature allowed? Coran Ironclaw 05:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe so; it's within the coding limit, and doesn't feature any flashy colors or distracting effects. And all the coding's within the restrictions. --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]]<font color="#237d00"> Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> <font color="#237d00">.cнаt^  06:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Signatures should not include more than 30 characters when viewed on the page, which his signature exceeds. --Xeeron 09:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, the one rule I never had to even think about. :P --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]]<font color="#237d00"> Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> <font color="#237d00">.cнаt^  09:47, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I found this quest to be extremely easy, I am a ritualist and spirit spamming with the bear club equipped is an easy 30-40 second gg.-Global Warming Ftw
 * I believe I used one of the Norn Blessings to beat the bear-probably Usuran, set skill damage, pretty spammable, and some evasion/blocking, etc. Yukiko [[Image:User_Yukiko_Sig.png]] 19:35, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Henchmen AI
Gaile, if you check the forums on Guild wars guru, you will see that many of us are, to say the least, frustrated with the fact that henchmen and heroes seem to have contracted mad cow disease somewhere around the gwen release. Many of us have submitted support tickets, but all we receive is a very "yea yea whatever" message saying the report has been forwarded to the dev team.

Can you confirm or otherwise that someone is looking into fixing the hero/hench ai? or at least restoring it to what it was before gwen so that they don't charge off on their own when on guard, that they don't use meteor shower on spirits, that they don't get stuck becase there is a spirit in the area, and, most improtantly, so that they can once again use skills properly - perfect example, heroes use prot spirit to try and ward of degen but NOT heavy damage.

Furthmore, they have started to once again use long resurrections in mid battle, they will randomly refuse to follow targets, they will not stay by their flags, even on guard. Ele heroes treat meteor shower and other aoe spells as touch skills, often trying to tank at the front with warriors.

Heroes set up as minion masters cast death nova on the party but not on their minions. MM heroes will sometimes refuse to use order of undeath.

Mesmer heroes cast blackout and other anti-caster hexes on melee mobs.

Monk heroes will not maintain enchantments such as life barrier - its cancelled immediately.

There are many more problems that I can't recall right now, but please check the forums at gwguru.com. ~Zaxan Razor
 * This has been brought up multiple times on Gaile's talk page recently, and she's moved the discussions here (see Hero Kiting and Hero Brain Drain). In short, she said she'll ask the designers to look at the issues. -- bcstingg (talk • contribs) 14:24, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I wasted my life today
ONE powerstone. TWO grails of might. THREE hours of my life. NO boss down. I hereby request a nerf on the dungeon "Shards of Orr". There's no reason I should have to make three smite monks just to own one stupid dungeon, that when I finish the dungeon guide will give me 2,500 miserable rep for all my hard work. I got to the end, miraculously, and you simply cannot beat that boss with 60% DP. Games shouldn't piss you off or waste your life. Conditional dungeons like this shouldn't happen. It should be my fault I lost, not because I'm not built for smiting for a single dungeon. -- Spencer, September 19th.
 * I happen to agree with you about this. At the risk of sounding as if I'm a weakling, I found Shard of Orr extremely frustrating, as well. I think it's the sheer number of spawns, and their variety of abilities. I don't think it will be changed, but I wanted you to know I share your sentiments. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 05:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I just want to remark that you dont have to do it. How much time do you expend for farming 2500 rep? around an hour, so let me say you that there is no need for you to complete the dungeon. Because some people (specially smiters as me) love this dungeon. Coran Ironclaw 06:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Most people who play this game aren't farming. They just enjoy experiencing all the game has to offer. You don't have to play the game at all. :) &mdash;Tanaric 06:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * your comment is not clear to me. I talked about the rep points because that is the reason he gave for doing the dungeon. The game has many element it is obvious that something you wont like and that is ok, there is no need to do it. But you would feel that you need to do the dungeon if it was required to finish the story line, in that case i would agree to make it more accesible. But it is not the case.Coran Ironclaw 06:14, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have no issue with the rewards. Tanaric has it right -- I just want players to be able to experience all the that game has to offer. I'm not suggesting that this area be "dummied down" or "nerfed," not at all. I'm glad that some players like the area, that's great! But like THK a long time ago, I have to wonder if this area, or the spawns within it, could benefit from another wee look-see. (And I'm fairly sure that there are quests that -- in order to be successful in all quest trees -- do require success in this area, but I could be wrong.) --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 06:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict with Gaile, hehe.)
 * Filling the Dungeon Guild isn't just for the faction, it's for the trip. If he really wanted just the faction, well then finishing every dungeon in the game is a wee bit slower then just killing mobs, right? The whole point to beating dungeons is just that; beating dungeons. And if one of them's so hard that it just frustrates you to no end, and it's a dungeon that grants just the same bonuses as the others, then that just doesn't seem right. Take missions, for example; hard missions are just fine. But if mission number five is twice as hard as the final mission, then something's wrong, eh? --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]]<font color="#237d00"> Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> <font color="#237d00">.cнаt^  06:20, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * (conflict with Derako) I'm going to finish the dungeon whether I like it or not simply because I make it a point to try every PvE thing. As for being disappointed with the dungeon Spencer, I would say that while I share your pain of not being able to finish it, I would like to say that Guild Wars has so many skills for a reason. Adapt your strategies to the area, not demand that areas be adapted to your strategy. You don't have to go all out 3 smiting monks. Just make sure everyone knows that holy damage is the key. -- ab.er. rant [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 06:24, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * There is one important difference between THK and this dungeon: You had to do THK to advance in the storyline, you dont have to do shards of orr. About actually beating the dungeon, take a look at Light of Deldrimor. AoE holy damage that every class can take. Undead = dead. --Xeeron 09:24, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * When I did this dungeon (or rather, I was just trying to get to Gadd's Encampment) with my Ele... it was such a pain. My whole party (me + henchies/heroes) had 60dp by the time I got to the portal.  However, when bf and I were taking our monks through it... we decided to see how 600/smite would do and it was incredibly easy... until we got to the boss.  Soul of Fendi Nin is just impossible to kill with just 2 monks.  We've duo it various times (4+?) and every time we get to boss... he just won't die.  So, I understand the frustration :3 --<font color="#ff33ff">Doll  06:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I breezed through the dungeon with two hero smiters ... until I got to Fend Nin. I think it took about an hour to wear him down, and I really regretted not bringing Pain Inverter. -- Gordon Ecker 07:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Glad to hear I'm not alone in detesting Fendi Nin. I'm a "completist" at heart, so I try to do most of the things Guild Wars has to offer (in fact I just finished soloing Duncan the Black this morning after four hours-a fourth of which was spent on Duncan if I remember correctly). So it was just natural that I decided to visit "The Shards of Orr" in order to experience the dungeon and add another entry in my Dungeon Guide, plus gain Asura reputation. Unfortunately I'd left behind my Powerstone, Armor, Grail, and Essence consumables and had no way to recover from 60% DP come time to face Fendi. I sometimes wonder whether I could Hero and Hench him with a full complement of consumables (seems likely) but given my horrible experience I'm not very much tempted to try. Svartalve 07:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't agree with area being "2 hard", as good as everything is Undead, slap holy damage modifiers on all melee/rangers get One smiting monk and you should make it with at least few humans in the team. Did it yesterday for first time with Soul Leech Necro, Broadhead arrow ranger and me being war's endurance attack spam W/D on holy dmg, after 5 rainbow cc, grail, stone and boss was down. Biz 07:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe not too hard, but annoying as fuck. Groups with 5 physical shutdowns, 5 hammer bashers, and 2 decent SoD monks. Annoying, but not impossible. --<font face="times new roman" color="#990000">Deathwing 08:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Maybe because guildwarswiki sux. 09:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC) --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:86.83.15.245.
 * LOL, "great" try at trolling. Now be good and don't go to places you don't like to go. -- ab.er. rant [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 09:13, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Not trolling, just speaking truth. 86.83.15.245 09:15, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * What?...I'm sorry....WHAT?....People moan consstantly about PvE being too easy and they want someting more of a challenge, then along comes a dungeon they can't do with their standard Tank'em and Nuke'em build and they all complain! If its completeable then it's not too hard. and YES you should have to adjust you're build for different parts of the game. On a side note i completed this dungeon with a group of friends and we had not a single smite monk in our party. We ran 2 Monks, 1 War, 1 Sin, 2 Eles, 1 Mesmer 1 necro....and it was challenging but it was fine. I seriously can't believe pwople are complaining about it being too hard, and then on another page people want PvE to be more of a challange. -- ChronicinabilitY [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 11:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have to agree, rock, hard place, anet in the middle. Make it too hard people cry because they can't do it. Make it too easy, people cry because there is no challenge. and hang on, THIS IS A GAME, of course you wasted some of your life playing it today, that's the point! :p -- Lemming [[Image:User Lemming64 sigicon.png]] 11:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'm a bit puzzled about the comments on how the boss is impossible to kill at 60% DP. I did exactly that yesterday! It was time consuming, but I must have taken around the 3 hours mentioned in the beginning of this discussion. It was just a matter of dying, navigating to the boss (this was the really time consuming thing, given how there are many traps between the ressurrection shrine and the boss, and at 60%DP that health degeneration is really dangerous to a party), and, there, pulling the Undead Archers one by one. They are not linked to the boss - you can pull them individually. Then, when the boss was alone, I would pull him (I was fighting on the ramp before his room, between the poison traps and the flame traps - the flame traps burn our enemies too, they're fun : D), kill him (he does not have that much armor) and then, when the Soul of Fend Nin appeared, I would tell all my heroes to attack it. The Damned Crewman would then kill my entire party, but not before I had done some damage to the Soul. It was just a matter of "rise and repeat" until the boss died, given how (mercifully) the Soul does not regenerate health.
 * I don't know if this is going to help anyone else, but I have a suggestion: what was really time consuming to me was navigating through the traps (go past trap 1, wait, then go past trap 2, wait, then go past trap 3, wait, and those are only the poison traps, there were fire traps too). At the same time, when we lit all the Fire Braziers in the dungeon, the boss with the key appears, and a passage at the very beginning of the map opens. Currently there is no point in going back to said passage - if you go there, you'll just find a small path with a boss at the end, but you don't get anything when you kill that boss (and the dungeon key is already available from a different boss, where the map points that the dungeon key is). I would suggest making to so that, when we kill said boss, all the traps in the level are disabled. It would be a reward fitting to what we see in other dungeons (like with the Flame Guardians, that disable fire traps when killed), at the same time it's not something obvious (players would have to think about going all the way back to the passage that opens when we lit all the braziers), while making the fight with the boss easier without actually nerfing the boss. Erasculio 12:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That boss fight is what I hated the most in there, and that's saying a lot. Just plain tedious.  The wash, rinse, repeat aspect at least afforded me some experimentation in how the Damned Crewmen spawned.  There appears to be a finite set of spawn points, and which point they spawn at depends on where Fendi dies.  There's a large "sweet spot" in front of the fire traps you can pull Fendi to where the Crewman spawn completely out of aggro and you can attack Fendi's soul unmolested.  Hope this helps some people. --Valshia 19:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I love Shards of Orr because it's hard. And not hard in a frustrating way, like the stupid golem you have to follow through the fire darts. It's hard in the sense that you need to actually think about what party members and skills you're bringing, and why. It's like Hell's Precipice back when we had only Prophecies skills. Sure, nowadays you can just tear through that with Searing Flames, but remember when a ranger with Winter could greatly improve your chances for success, and little-used skills like Spinal Shivers had their chance to shine? Remember when a completely unprepared team using the same old builds that served them through the rest of the game would face nearly certain failure? Shards of Orr is like that. The majority of PvE in EotN can be experienced on auto-pilot where your team build is concerned -- take out the same old team, with the same old skills, kill everything, win. I'm not suggesting it's easy for everyone -- there may be some challenges with pulling groups and there may be some large battles or tough bosses, but my point is that one unchanging team configuration is ultimately going to work for nearly everything. Shards of Orr doesn't work that way, which is awesome. You actually have to wake up and think about your builds. And it's not going to look like anything you've used in PvE before. Rarely-used Smiting Prayers are now critical to team success. Assassins have to look into Deadly Arts because of the constant blind. Nearly everyone needs to make some adjustment, but the dungeon is not too hard because once you find the right build, it's challenging but not impossible. There's no need to waste 2 hours of your life. Leave Gadd's Encampment and try out your team on the first group of Skeletons you see. If that group strikes you as being hard, you're not going to be able to finish the dungeon -- go back and choose some new skills. Feel free to contact me on my talk page if you're stumped and would like to see some builds I've used. -- bcstingg (talk • contribs) 13:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

This is one of the 3 dungeons I have left to beat, and personally, I look foward to the challenge. Not all dungeons should be the same, you should not be able to take the same party through every dungeon. Dungeons such as this will force you to rethink your approach....build a differnt party then the one you always use. Finally, a challenge that requires a differnt thought approach. I think I'll try a party of smiting monks,, burnning elementalist,dervish set up with holy attacks, interrupt rangers with a touch of holy & fire, and maybe even a mm for some extra bodies.......Perhaps I'll finally get to use one or two of those consumeables I have. Med Luvin 19:27, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have to beat frostmaws and rragars, but i know that fendi was easy when i got to him...but this was before archers got bosws, so that could really make a difference. before the change, i had thought about farming the arhers for deldrimore points (10 pts ea at rampage) and doing the spearmarshal before HM thing with the boss, assuming that you can average 3,000 pts/hr doing this.  Im not that dedicated though, but it was a fun thought.  i do remember vloxen being infinitely more painful for me than this though68.62.26.48 23:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC) (forgot to log in)Killer Revan 23:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree having to run smite for this dungeon is annoying if you don't want to but if you try it the dungeon is hillarious. EVERY mob in there dies in seconds to smiter's boon monks - I used to solo it with heroes/hench using 3 hero smiters and Mhenlo to make up for the little healing needed outside of smiters boon, but seriously it's easy. I farmed the place it was so easy - double damage on 3 chars, armour ignoring AND they heal too! With 6 smiters boon monks you could practically sleep walk the place. Just try it - it's not hard if you smite. To sympathise, I went through here, I think to get to Gadd's encampment, on my ranger and it was a DP fest without smite. Another guildie I know was cranky with me when she tried the dungeon without smite because she had a hard time. My only fear is if they change the dungeon too much and mix it up smite wouldn't work so well - smiters boon works because almost every skill the undead use is a condition or hex and so Smite Condition and Smite Hex work so well, if it were changed bye bye smiters boon. Dancing Gnome 00:12, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * They've already made some changes, I think. Skeleton Archers now have Disrupting Shot instead of Throw Dirt and the Skeleton Illusionists have Power Return and Frustration.  I noticed the article for Shards of Orr doesn't even list Skeleton Illusionists as being in it.  I don't really remember if they were there before the last update, though. --<font color="#ff33ff">Doll  00:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

This dungeon is easy, only took 2 hours, 20 minutes to kill a boss that deals basically no damage, didn't need any smiters or "consumables", used the "normal tank and nuke build" and I'm planing on going back and farming the bosses minions to take my dwarven title over rank 8. The undead just can't fight! I don't understand how you all say this is a hard dungeon. -- Primeval Sentinel    Talk  01:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

If you're doing this with a fairly standard tank-n-nuke team build, adding Ward of Stability will make it a lot easier. &mdash; 130.58 (talk) 05:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree on the part about not nerfing the dungeons, I don't think they should be nerfed at all. However, I do believe the rewards at the end should be vamped up alot.  I'm not saying give everyone a green, or a diamond or even a gemstone, but at least make the gold items have a decent req, inscription and (god forbid) maxed mods.  I think spending three hours doing a dungeon, to be rewarded with a req 13 Smiting Prayers, Spiral Rod with a Highly Salvageable inscription and a +4 energy while enchanted mod on it is a load of ghey.Old Man Of Ascalon 11:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Eyes of The North Access Blocked
Any estimate on when the glitch/block will be fixed so that we can once again take characters over to Eyes of The North again? Currently the Crevasses are still missing from all three campaigns, making the completion of the quests to get to Eyes of The North impossible to complete, as there is no Crevasse to click and enter into. ~ <font color="#9300fa">  J.Kougar  12:08, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm having the same trouble. Seems to have started today which is odd since there's been no live update. EvilAzrael 14:25, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I haven't had any trouble. --[[Image:User Hellbringer sig.png]] HeLlBrInGeR talk 14:44, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * --EDIT-- Although for some reason I can't get on Guild Wars. --[[Image:User Hellbringer sig.png]] HeLlBrInGeR talk 14:56, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * A few friends abandoned quest and re-took it and it worked.
 * My gf also had this problem when she checked it out. Didn't try abandoning it though. -- [[Image:User Gem sig.png|Gem]] (gem / talk) 17:20, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I did, with no luck... but it seems the last undocumented update fixed it. Why can't they just say when they change things?  If we knew about the stealth update that broke it we might have more quickly figured out that it was broken, and now they fixed it but still no mention.  Is it laziness, or just a cover-up for their goof?  ~  [[Image:UserJKougar sig.gif|User:J.Kougar]]<font color="#9300fa">  J.Kougar  21:37, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Neither? It's a sunday, it's quite possible that a few of the devs hotfix'd something and Emily or the other web content managers are off for the day or have otherwise yet to update it. [[Image:User Aiiane-a.gif|Go to Aiiane's Talk page]] (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 21:57, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ahh, so it's bad business practices instead. ;)  Making changes with no one on call or available to make the updates known.  I see.  What about all the other stealth updates and such they make without ever posting about them?  I think they need to hire someone new to update their web page... someone with better availability and who won't miss so many things when they mention what was changed.  lol  In short, they should not be making changes without posting about them, look at all the issues it's caused for them over the years, and still nothing changes.  ~  [[Image:UserJKougar sig.gif|User:J.Kougar]]<font color="#9300fa">  J.Kougar  22:13, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Tell me, which is a worse business practice: fixing things without immediately blaring it to the world, or waiting to fix things and just letting people rot until you can blare it to the world? Quite honestly, all I'd care about is them fixing it. [[Image:User Aiiane-a.gif|Go to Aiiane's Talk page]] (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 22:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This is fixed. :F - [[Image:UserDrago-sig.gif]]  Drago 
 * Being that this is a Wiki, technically we could just list the update ourselves, right? Instead of complaining that ANet didn't mention it for us... --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]]<font color="#237d00"> Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> <font color="#237d00">.cнаt^  22:41, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Already done. -- Lemming [[Image:User Lemming64 sigicon.png]] 22:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I know Gaile was online while this was happening and said somethign about waking someone up to fix it. 58.110.139.72 05:14, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was online, in Paris, and we noted the problem at 3:00 AM studio time. The problem was fixed very quickly, and you are correct, because it was a weekend, we did not post update notes. Seems to me that everyone who experienced the problem was waiting for the fix, and would be able and likely grateful to note that it was made so promptly. In the end, that's what matters. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 20:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

= Redirected Conversations =