Talk:Vanquisher

Saoshang Trail min count
I think the current Saoshang Trail min count (24) is a typo because
 * Case 1. The max count is 37 (if you popup all the foes).
 * Case 2. You can avoid one popup group if you stick to the path, reducing the count to 34.
 * Case 3. If you start from Linnok Courtyard, you can longbow pull the last mantid, avoid 6 more popup enemies, reducing the count to 28.

I think the current min count (24) is a typo of Case 2 (34). Either there is a way to get a count of 24, or I propose increasing the min for Saoshang Trail to 28. Jafar 03:25, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I support your idea (as long as we fix both this article and the explorable). Even if 24 is possible, it paints a misleading picture of what nearly everyone should expect. (I imagine that some insane combination of shadowsteps and corpse-traversal might allow one to skip some pops, but it seems that it would be more trouble than it's worth.) — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 04:21, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I'd say go for 28 too. Beleeth 10:10, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

remove 'combines well with cartographer'...
It is a myth that these two titles can be combined well: being able to max cartographer and vanquisher with just entering an area only a single time does not mean that it is efficient. When doing both titles at once you have to kill more mobs in hard mode, since you always get all/most pop-up groups which are normally hidden. For cartographer you can simply rush though most areas (in normal mode) if you have to discover a tiny spot on the far end of a map. Unless you have to vanquish AND explore an area that is NOT near an outpost, like (Dreadnoughts drift, Icedome, etc.) it is much faster and easier to max vanquisher & cartographer titles seperately. nabiki 04:21, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * It's not a myth; it just doesn't apply to everyone. I prefer your idea: optimize builds for VQ/HM and bring lots of speed boosts for finishing Carto. But most of the people I play with prefer to spend 15% more time in a VQ to avoid returning; for them, it's faster to do both together. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 05:19, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * "When doing both titles at once you have to kill more mobs in hard mode, since you always get all/most pop-up groups which are normally hidden." .. Wait..? You actually try to kill as few monsters as possible? It is really better to try and pop more spawns and monsters, as this earns you extra gold, experience (for survivor), faction (if in Jade Sea/Echovald), Sunspear/LB points (if in Elona) or reputation (if in EotN, Master of the North title = VQ/Carto). Waar Kijk Je Naar User_Waar_Kijk_Je_Naar_sig.png 05:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You didn't get what I was trying to say Waar Kijk Je Naar... sorry. Most people in most areas explore the area AFTER they vanquished it (border of areas), so there is no extra faction/money for killing the pop-ups which appear after you finished VQ. If you explore and vanquish at the same time, really the same time (kill a group and explore nearby area), you might want to think again about what you are going to achieve with this procedure: wasting as much time as possible? - No, thats nonsense, especially if you achieved a special mob-hunt in EOTN... Btw. getting an average extra gold of about 100g isn't worth spending 10~15 min for aggro-ing all pop-ups before you have 'cleaned' the area. nabiki 23:07, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * @Tennessee Ernie Ford, I used to be a person that thought the same but two years ago I realized that doing both titles together is really a waste of time: it takes about 20% longer for average sized areas and increases the bigger the area is. Another issue I forgot to mention is that VQ is very efficient to do with other players since the amount of mobs is the same for all people within the instance - On the other hand: Cartographing an area is a pure client-side procedure. nabiki 23:07, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with you; I do them separately. But in the end, the only true measure of efficiency in the game is: is it more fun? or more grind/boring? And, for a lot of people, having to retrace their steps feel like a setback and a waste of time. And that cannot be measured simply by counting hours spent acquiring titles. Sometimes better depends on the person's play style, skill, and/or outlook. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 00:36, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The fact that combining the two isn't necessarily optimal in no way proves that combining the two isn't a reasonable suggestion. It works well most of the time.  Don't remove the suggestion, but if you want to expound on more optimal procedures, go ahead. --71.203.195.195 08:48, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I wall hug the map while killing foes within a compass band of the edge. After circling the zone i finish off the center to complete the vanq. Yes I could Vanq alot faster without wall huging. Yes I could just pack on speed skills and run in normal mode and acheive cartographer much faster. No I cannot do both sepperatly and say I was more efficient. Even if I could break even or even do it faster I wouldnt for the same reason I dont do easy ZBs for 70 coin bosses. Its boring as hell and nty to the added grind. Same thing annoys me when people say "do ZM in HM then do bonus in nm" when its like why not do both in HM and save yourself the grind? Justice 05:13, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Is it technically possible to reuse counts on other pages?
There are foe counts and hints on this page. Then there are (slightly different) foe counts and further hints on each area's article. And lastly, it might be nice to have the counts and hints on the respective Zaishen Vanquish quest pages.

It seems to be possible to reuse the counts using DPL, but that seems to require that we move the vanquisher kill counts to each area's article. It appears that DPL will only accept whole articles, and cannot filter if multiple data points are on a single article. You can output "all kill counts on the Vanquisher article", but not "the kill counts on the Vanquisher article where %AREA%=Riven Earth". If we moved them, we could selectively output "the kill count on the Riven Earth article".

Then again, my wiki-fu is weak and the DPL Manual is daunting. Does someone know a way to make it work while retaining the current way to adjust counts? If not, would it be an option to move the kill counts? Tub 00:44, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Twin Serpent Lakes: should the max count for WiK instance be lowered from 150 to 133?
User:AngelicaNoctros suggested in this edit that the maximum count for VQing Twin Serpent Lakes (War in Kryta) be lowered from 150 to 133. Generally, we don't drop the max count (or raise the min count) because any individual VQ can only show that the max needs to be raised (or the min needs to be lowered).

However, in rare situations, someone has snuck in an unrealistic or inaccurate count and we have changed it. Is this such a situation? The current text on the instance article reads, "There are about 140 foes to vanquish," implying that 150 is a reasonable count for the max (and that 133 is too low). Can those who have recently VQ'd the WiK-version of the area post their results (screen or no screen) so that we can evaluate the number? Thanks! — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 16:09, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you're confused. The user increased the maximum count from 133 to 150, not decrease it. --Silver Edge 05:42, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Frick. I was confused. Sigh. Soz, Angelica. (Thanks for catching my mistake.) — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 06:06, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Kill count disputes
I disputed kill counts several times above, and maybe there will be more, so I'm making a single section for all of them. Today's dispute is Mamnoon Lagoon. If you go to the Mamnoon Lagoon talk page, you'll find a similar dispute - that the max count of 95 is too high. I tried it again today and with all popups I get 58 kills. I can't find a quest that changes the spawns. Jafar 01:09, 22 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Guild Wiki lists 53-60 as the range. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 01:19, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe it was a digit transposition error: 95 should have been 59 76.164.71.104 02:58, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Update: I just went and vanquished it. I scraped the zone after getting credit for 57, and found no more popups. The only quest I can think of that brings one here is Mysterious Message. I can't repeat that one, but unless it spawns masses of extra creatures, 95 is very debatable. 76.164.71.104 04:02, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I vanquished it on 6 chars (Zaishen Vanquish from a few days ago) and I got between 56-58. Some popups can be avoided to reduce the count I guess, and some Warthogs may be killed to increase the count, which I didn't bother to try. So now that it seems everyone agrees to reduce the max count, what should it be? 58 (recent experience) or 60 (another website's seemingly reasonable number)?
 * Forgot to sign the above comment. Jafar 04:24, 23 April 2011 (UTC)


 * The advantage of using 58 is that when someone raises it (perhaps b/c they hate warthogs more than Jafar does), we will have more faith in the new max. (The advantage of 60 is that is comes pre-vetted.) I'm willing to trust Jafar's instincts on this; he (she?) has demonstrated excellent attention to the details of reconfirming the min/max VQ counts. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 04:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Changed to 58. Jafar 06:03, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Watchtower Coast (war in kryta)
Today I Vanquished Watchtower Coast (war in kryta), with the quest The Undead Hordes active. My total kill count was 226. On the vanquishing page it says 185 is the max number of enemy's. I think this should be edited. --"Miki-chan"


 * That's significantly larger than anyone else has reported. You could also be bold and just update the number on this article and at Watchtower Coast (War in Kryta).


 * If it were me and I had forgotten to take a screenshot, I would post the number on the talk page and wait for confirmation or refutation. For data that's been on the wiki a long time, I prefer to err on the side of the status quo unless I can provide enough info to others to replicate my results.

to (the two show up the same on the wiki, but the latter is easier to read when editing) — it doesn't seem like it was a typo, but that sort of thing doesn't inspire confidence either. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 15:51, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth: Guild Wiki reports a max of 172. This 2009 edit of their Vanquisher article upped the max to 221 (obviously without WiK active), but most of that edit was about changing "&amp;#x25bc;"


 * http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa127/Craften/gw093.jpg
 * I can only give a link to my screenshot since I have no idea how to get my picture on the wiki
 * --"Miki-chan"


 * Super! Thanks for posting it. Can you update this article and Watchtower Coast (War in Kryta) with the new max? — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 17:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)


 * page updated --"Miki-chan"

Winds of Change
Anyone wanting Canthan Vanquisher better do it before starting on WoC. Some of the new mobs are nasty, especially in newbie zones like Minister Cho's. -- Hong 14:59, 9 July 2011 (UTC)