User talk:Gaile Gray/Archive Misplaced Articles and So Forth/Archive 1

This article contains older materials from the category Misplaced Articles and So Forth on the User: Gaile Gray discussion pages. This Misplaced Articles and So Forth category contains game-related questions or comments placed on the discussion pages of User: Gaile Gray. More relevant discussion of these topics can be found on the discussion pages for each specific topic.

The Future of GW1
I have had some time to read through the info about the expansion pack Eye of the North (sounds great) and Guild Wars 2 (sounds great too) but I suddenly find myself with an important question regarding Guild Wars 1 chapters. Will ANet continue making chapters/expansions for GW1 or is GW:EN and GW2 marking the end of more chapters and improvements to GW1? I hate leaving messages like this on your user page but I think it's a very big and important issue that you may want to look into or answer early before too many fan threads start with the wrong information. I also realize you may not be privy or allowed to answer such a question but just the same, I thought it was well worth asking. Thanks in advance. --  Vallen Frostweaver  11:35, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Hi, Vallen. With the announcement of Guild Wars: Eye of the North and Guild Wars 2, there naturally are a ton of questions of all kinds. We'd like to keep those on the Fansite Forums at this time. I'm sure we'll see folks put together and help edit great fact sheets about both the expansion pack and GW2. There's probably a lot of information that can be gained already from the PC Gamer and PC Zone articles, from various forum posts, and from other sources as well. So we'll address questions, when we are able, on the fansites and then the factual information can be used to create articles here. Perhaps a fact sheet of known (confirmed) information and a separate sheet of player speculation? The formatting and article creation is up to you guys! --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 14:16, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Understood. Thanks Gaile.--[[Image:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG]]  Vallen Frostweaver  14:19, 26 March 2007 (EDT)

From what I've seen, ArenaNet have said that the original Guild Wars server will continue to be supported "until there are no players left". If hell freezes over and the GW1 servers are taken down eventually then I imagine that an offline version of GW will be available for download to all that bought the original game. --Santax 14:01, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
 * And that's the answer I was not hoping for (no offense). That just answers part of the question.  I already knew that ANet would continue "supporting" GW1 but I don't know if they plan to continue adding any more chapters, expansions, or even balances/competitions to it with the news of GW2 coming out.  Will they only come out with new major material (expansions/chapters) for GW2 after GW:EN?  I hope this better explains what I'm asking.--[[Image:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG]]  Vallen Frostweaver  14:15, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
 * The downloadable sounds pretty shweet, but it probably wont happen. Vallen, probably not. :( [[Image:User Blastedt sig.jpg]] B LASTED T  15:39, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
 * I'm guessing the same too but I figured I'll follow Gaile's suggestion. I posted a thread on GWOnline and we'll see what happens. --[[Image:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG]]  Vallen Frostweaver  15:54, 26 March 2007 (EDT)

Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Now that GW2 has been annouced, will ANet want to make an offical wiki for that too or will you guys want the content combined here? Might be good to know and start organizing it early so that it can get a head start unlike this official wiki which is trying to catch up. I started the discussion here. --  Vallen Frostweaver  16:21, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
 * I would imagine it would be a big one-wiki thing, and the name Guild Wars Wiki doesn't specify chapter orentation. So best guess is no, this will be the wiki for GW1, and GW2. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:204.112.204.142.
 * I would actually guess the exact opposite - two different wikis. As it takes place in the same area, but at a later time, it would grow increasingly confusing to have a single article that's split in two - one part describing how it relates to the original series, and one part to how it relates to GW2. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:11, 27 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Yup. The best example would be Ascalon City. If you put GW1 and GW2, we'd now have to differentiate between pre-Searing, post-Searing, and 100+ years in the future. I'd say that's needlessly confusing to players who only started in GW2. -- ab.er. rant [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 21:14, 27 March 2007 (EDT)
 * As an update, it appears that Mike O'Brien is checking into it with his IT dept.--[[Image:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG]]  Vallen Frostweaver  08:00, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

I don't see a problem in having the complete (GW1/2) content in this GWW. Just create an Ascalon "main-page" summarising that there exist two versions of the city (or three with pre-searing). Then simply link to the different pages for Ascalon-GW1 pre-/post-searing and Ascalon-GW2 from there. Wiking 22:27, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
 * That seems like a really good idea. I'll see if that's a presentation that we might consider. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 23:16, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Actually, the downside of that solution isn't that pretty, from a usability point of view; too many disambiguation pages and the wiki becomes a mess to navigate without clicking links at random trying to figure out where you really want to go. What's the purpose of keeping both games on this site (aside for not needing to click on an extra link in your bookmarks to go to the second wiki)? If we keep the games separate on their own sites, it drastically lowers the amount of confusion and extra work needed to keep everything from getting chaotic. If there's material from this wiki that will need to belong on the other one, it can be copied easily since both sites would have compatible GFDL licenses. Everything we do here on the wiki aims to keep the information as accessible and intuitive as possible; needlessly mixing in one place the documentation for two different games goes against that idea, and is ... I'll just say, not cool :P . --Dirigible 23:50, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
 * I agree with Dirigible - from a useability standpoint, it'll be much better to have two wikis. They should have links to each other from the main page, and inter-wiki linking available between them to simplify cross-referencing; but from what has been mentioned so far about GW2, it would be far too confusing and unweildy to try to contain them both in a single wiki.  Aside from the basics of places and objects with shared names between the two - you also have articles on fundamental game mechanics and user interface and controls that already appear to be different between the two.  For ease of site navigation, use, and not to mention everyone's sanity, it's several times better to use two wikis for the two different game series. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:00, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
 * I also agree with Dirigible. For a player new to GW (1 or 2), coming here and doing a search for "Experience" would give him two very different results - it would make it rather confusing for him which is the proper one. Having two different wikies would make it easier to "complete" this one (as GW1 content is likely going to be stable after GW:EN) and then invest fully on GW2, while being able to use different templates and alikes, without the risk of incompatibility. Erasculio 00:04, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
 * If you consider the objective of the creation of this official wiki--that is, tieing the wiki directly to the game--then yes, having two wikis is obviously a good idea. It may, indeed, be the only workable one. But the idea of points of demarkation into the Guild Wars and Guild Wars 2 articles also has a certain appeal. I don't necessarily see where they are mutually exclusive. But then, numerous points of replication within the two structures probably would not be as objectionable as it would be on, say, a website and in fact their creation, editing, and presence now would ease the establishment of a base for the second project in the future. In other words, because Guild Wars 2 will be a new game, it would appear most likely that a new wiki would be the way we will go. Which is why that very thing is being discussed with our IT Department. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 02:19, 31 March 2007 (EDT)


 * If GW2 takes place 100 years in the future wouldn't at least *some* of the places be named the same? That's just 1 more reason why there should be another wiki for Guild Wars 2 -- Scourge  [[Image:User Scourge Spade.gif]] 02:41, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

Presuming inter-wiki linking would be in place by then, I think it would be cool if we could link to from Ascalon to GW2:Ascalon, or something similar. LordBiro 05:37, 31 March 2007 (EDT)


 * We could try the idea of Wikipedia for other language version of the wikipedia. There is a link in the left bar to the same article in different languages. We could use it to have links to the GW2 version of the article. -- [[Image:User Gem sig.png|Gem]] (gem / talk) 06:14, 31 March 2007 (EDT)


 * No, I don't think that makes any sense Gem. Surely we would use that for different language versions of the wiki(s) once they launch? LordBiro 06:49, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

An important point for GW2 Wiki, on my mind, would be to lauch it at the same time as the game and to initially reserve the name and the minimal syntaxe of some models such as skills, NPC, Weapon, Object... Well, all summary models for description of in-game content. The interest would be that it would make possible to initially integrate the wiki in the game -making some informations accessible in game and, why not, if a good vandalisme protection, making possible to add info directly from the game- and that fansites will be allowed to organise them database in consequence when creating it so that the wiki will be the center database for sites. I think there will always be fansites even if there is an official wiki^^.--Ttibot 09:22, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Just a small note - I think it would be better to launch the GW2 Wiki before the game is released. Right now we already have some information about it - by the time of the Beta, we will have enough information to begin the Wiki. Erasculio 09:27, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Yes, I am sure that we will be doing that. That's why Mike O'Brien is working with our IT folks now, in fact. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 15:28, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
 * As Gaile said, he has been. Thought others knew when I linked to it above but HERE it is again with Mike's last comments on it for any that may have missed this. --[[Image:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG]]  Vallen Frostweaver  08:17, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Mini Varesh Bug
Hey, I just wanted to say, I had my Mini Varesh out in my Guild Hall but instead of walking around, it randomly teleported places every couple of seconds. Just thought I would bring that to your attention.--Eloc 04:14, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
 * Hi, Eloc. Sorry to hear about the problem. It's really important that such matters are reported to Support. I would love to be able to offer to do that for people, but I simply cannot do that. There may be info they need that I don't know about, they may have follow-up questions, etc. So if you could please submit a ticket through the Support system, that would be marvelous. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 15:46, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

On Mursaat
There are so many questions remaining from Prophecies, and the good fan base has eeked out some pretty good hypotheses for many questions. However, I fear that the Mursaat will never re-appear. In my mind, the more I see the complete picture the more I believe that the Mursaat were the most interesting of non-player races. They were advanced (coming from different worlds like the Seers). They were powerful ("not imbued? oh you die then.")

They also probably have the highest potential for backstory. Did they know they were stopping Abaddon in a way? Did they have any connection with Glint? Were they really a good, albeit pragmatic race, that just was in the wrong place at the wrong time? Are they really all dead (at least from the current GW world)?

So my question is will we hear more about this enigmatic, yet significant race in GW:EN or beyond? Or were they basically a plot device, and done is done? --Ravious 12:48, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
 * I did not realize this was such a heavy topic on the Lore forums at GWO. I am glad that others are interested/concerned with the Mursaat's "current" state of things, and I also agree that giving Asurans too much credit in Tyrian development or whatever might cause a disconnect. Oh well...hope we get thrown a bone in GW:EN.  Thanks for reading this anyway.  --Ravious 12:04, 3 April 2007 (EDT)


 * I think these are very interesting comments. If we have a page on the Mursaat, I would encourage you to place this as a point of conversation on the Discussion page, because I'm sure there are others who feel as you do, or may have other insights to share. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 16:27, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Any Word on when the Armor Crafters will be Fixed?
I was just wondering if there was any word yet on when they might get the armor crafters fixed, so that they are not missing parts of the armor anymore. I haven't checked them all again today, but I know the armor crafter in LA is still missing the Monk Leggings and the armor crafter outside of Sanctum Cay is still missing the Necromancer's Leggings... and they were both missing the leggings for both, as well as other items, but again, I didn't recheck them all today. Missing Necro Pants & Missing Monk Pants. ~ J.Kougar
 * You should submit a report directly to support so that they can contact you easily with any followup enquiries they might have. Also, the Amnoon Oasis crafter offers the same menu as Sol Pyrrhus so you may want to mention that too. - B e X o R  03:51, 4 April 2007 (EDT)


 * I did actually, last week, but like so many of my reports they tend to go unanswered. Half the time anymore I never even get a notice thet they were closed down after they do send a message if I don't respond back after 72 hours, so as far as I know there are still tickets open from weeks ago. lol ~ J.Kougar


 * The way this works best is to have a player share an observation via a Support Ticket. Support, in turn, sends the information to QA, who can place it into the queue for investigation. Upon validation of the report by a QA tester, the issue is added to the report as a verified bug that requires a fix. This then is sorted into the proper queue for that update or fix. In this case, it may be a UI programming queue, the artist queue, or even the designer queue. I know that these things are addressed over time, for in this week's update notes, I noticed that a "missing" helm is being added. Frankly, with the press of so many other things, there can be delays -- well, obviously that is so. :) I suggest that the best way to report this is via the Support System. I will verify with them that I've outlined the proper procedures, but this is as I understand it. --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 01:08, 5 April 2007 (EDT)


 * Well, as I said I sent in a support ticket, but the last few for abuse, bugs, etc. have not been followed up on very well, so I thought I'd ask to see if you knew. Thanks though.
 * Also, I like your purple paw print image. I have a Purple Paw Print similar to it tattooed a little below the pant line on the left side.  ;)  Needless to say, I'm a little paw print obsessive as well as purple obsessive. lol  My fiance tolerates it though, he is also a big cat fan.  ;)  ~ J.Kougar

The new skill updates
From what i can tell this may be one of the greatest skill updates yet. It balances avatars, it increses the assasins ability to spread conditions(yay for the sharpen daggers thing) rangers will be even more usefull to use in the trapper UW and FOW runs. The monks 2 huge builds are being killed by the moving of the glyph of lesser energy. Only one thing you should add to that.... NERF BURST OF AGGRESSION ARGGGGG. These sins are THE BEST spikers in the entire game. unless you know what your doing, or have a very fast working monk with condition removal. Also the change to mesmers will hugely help me in my treks across the salt flats and other storm kin affected regions of the desert(dam that clumsiness). i think it would be fair to move BOA as a core skill maybe even out the sin playing feild? these are some sugesstions to this great update. tell the development team there doing great and to make GW:EN and GW2 the best they can.... maybe make the infinite level things just for show and each level after say 20 only give skill points, that would be awsome. Also add more elites to the desert bosses?66.225.141.109

Why!!! *crys* why would you attack lesser energy? being a pve monk that has to be the saddest thing i've heard since the great mm nerf of 2k6...oh well I hope my little thought can help keep it in the free range )': for me pleaaase.*thinks* Anet should think about employing some players from GW to talk about skills and what should be changed not to be offencive but having some people who logged 2,000+ and dont get paid to know about the game might have a good effect on what could be improved and disimproved. Zerosmileyguy 15:54, 5 April 2007 (EDT)


 * Gailes talk page is not a good place for complaints and ideas. He has nothing to do with skill balancing. I would suggest using the talk page for the Gaile News where the balances were explained. -- [[Image:User Gem sig.png|Gem]] (gem / talk) 15:58, 5 April 2007 (EDT)


 * Okay i will i thought he was lik cheif in development so i was bassicly given him kudos(although are you sure he isent she? what ever. Thank you for the knowaladge thoug.142.161.88.161 16:15, 5 April 2007 (EDT)


 * He = She, As far as I know Gaile has been and always will be female lol -- Scourge  [[Image:User Scourge Spade.gif]] 16:46, 5 April 2007 (EDT)
 * Also, Izzy is the one in charge of skill balances =P User:Isaiah Cartwright - of course, any skill balance suggestion should not appear in the wiki at all - the fansite forums are much better for that =P MisterPepe talk 16:53, 5 April 2007 (EDT)
 * Sould'nt a page be added for this in the wiki? since must people are knowing only this site and so that gaile's talk page will no be spammed anymore. --Ttibot 17:02, 5 April 2007 (EDT)


 * Too true! The best place to discuss these -- and we will see your thoughts! -- is in the fan forums.
 * (And yes, I'm a she.) --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 17:03, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Pet bug or intended update?
Hello Gaile. Once again I frequent your page (I can't stay away and I'm trying to stay away, honest). I have discovered a couple things that may either be a bug or was intended to happen and before I go reporting it and getting the usual reply I thought I might drop a line here for clarification (though I did already post this info in some forums). After the big update d/l yesterday night I discovered the following:
 * My pet would not be effected by any pet attacks or pet buffs (shouts) when I clicked on my skill once the pet was outside of my aggro range. This really hurt me as I usually play with a Longbow when beastmastering and was forced to run behind my pet with a shorbow just to keep it in my aggro range while attacking an enemy.
 * My pet will not attack a targeted enemy with the new "attack" button unless the target is at the edge of my aggro circle or closer (but it will attack when I start attacking). Once again, I have to advance closer than longbow range to get the pet to attack (without me attacking) which then causes the enemy to charge me instead.

Conclusion, I think that the range of the "attack" button (as far as sending in the pet to attack without attacking) and "pet attack" or pet buff shouts have all been reduced to "within earshot" range which greatly penalizes any ranger that uses a bow (even at recurve range I miss 1/2 the shouts on my pet as it's just in and outside of the range). I'm guessing this was either intentional and not mentioned or a bug and needs to be fixed. Please help to clear this up for me. Thank you. --  Vallen Frostweaver  10:52, 6 April 2007 (EDT)


 * Interesting, I wouldn't be surprised if the new updates have introduced many bugs like those that you've stated, as we already know some of the documented pet bugs involving pets following mini-pets. I think the new window, almost like the hero windows but for pets looks pretty cool. As someone who loves monking, I'm glad to finally know how much health my pet has! Look forward and expectantly to hearing more on these issues. -- Zoidberg 11:11, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

1175 AE
so according to the timeline, GW2 will be set in 1175 AE, and will be set in tyria which is awesome. (Sneaky Take a Bow 03:46, 6 April 2007 (EDT))
 * What's your source on GW2 being set in 1175? --77.98.24.142 08:52, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
 * Per the timeline (based on the Mouvelian Calendar - which is the ones used in the kingdoms of Tyria), the first three campaigns take place in 1072 (Prophecies and Factions) and 1075 (Nightfall); and the magazine articles on Guild Wars 2 says that it will take place about 100 years after the events of the original series ... so, 1175 is likely close if not correct. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 10:44, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
 * Remember that Eye of the North takes place sometime after Nightfall and also, iirc, the PCG article says GW2 takes place hundreds of years after the original. --Santax 10:48, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
 * If it's hundreds rather than hundred, then our Guild Wars 2 article is wrong. Based on what the article states and what is known thus far, 1175 seems a reasonable estimate - it may not be exact, but should be close. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 10:55, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

Eye of the North Collectors
Hi Gaile! I'm sure if I asked you to reveal anything about the collector's edition of camp 4 then I'd be welcomed with the reply of "sorry can't tell" lol! But is there anything at all you can slip to us, Gaile, about the collector's edition (assuming that there is one) :D ? Thinking about it, I'm still keeping my eyes out for the Prophecies CE, as sadly I missed the pre-order date and started playing GW very soon after, still no luck (grr) ! -- Zoidberg 11:20, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
 * All I can say in response to this question is that I did ask if we were considering the notion of a Collector's Edition for Guild Wars: Eye of the North and the answer was "Yes, we are considering it." Don't worry, I have relayed players' thoughts on the matter, for sure. I think it's a good idea, and I'll be a sound advocate for the whole concept of a CE. :) --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 17:57, 10 April 2007 (EDT)
 * Brilliant, cheers Gaile :) -- Zoidberg 03:55, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

GW:EN Release Date
i've been searching through the website and have conficting reports on when GW:EN will be released, some say Summer '07 []and some say Oct-Dec '07 [], care to clarify? thank you (Sneaky Take a Bow 22:06, 6 April 2007 (EDT))
 * No official date has been released so Gaile can't tell you. (Gaile, I think you need some sort of notice box to prevent all the stuff that gets posted on your talk page) -- [[Image:User Gem sig.png|Gem]] (gem / talk) 22:15, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
 * I knew it ^^ --Jamie [[Image:User Jamie.gif|(Talk Page)]] 04:53, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
 * You may have noticed elsewhere on the GWW -- we've updated or better defined the release window for Guild Wars: Eye of the North to be "Third Quarter 2007." Now, folks ask what "third quarter" may be, and generally that means the months of July, August, and September of a year. Just thought you'd want to know. :) --Gaile [[Image:User gaile_2.png| ]] 21:40, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

While i was visiting my local EB Games, I was looking through the Upcoming Releases book and saw that GW:EN was listed for a release on August 27, 2007. Has the date of release been finalized or is there still a few wrinkles left to iron out about the date? B.N 05:08, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
 * If you didn't hear it from anet it isn't true. - FireFox [[Image:firefoxav.png]] 05:12, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
 * From what I've seen, a lot of times retailers and such will put a release date on an item even when nothing has been released. For instance, Best Buy's web site had a release date for Metroid Prime 3, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and Super Mario Galaxy for release in March for awhile, then changed it to Dec 31, 2007 sometime in February. Like Firefox said, if you didn't get the information from the company producing the game, it probably isn't true Avatarian86 18:38, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

LOL Am I the only person who caught that? GW:EN/Gwen/cute little girl in ascalon? 72.79.96.30 18:51, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
 * As a matter of fact, you are NOT the first person to catch it. Its been posted many times on the forums and mentioned on several discussion pages on this wiki. ;)  --[[Image:User Rohar icon.jpg]] Rohar ( talk|contribs ) 18:53, 11 May 2007 (EDT)