Guild Wars Wiki talk:Projects/Interactive Maps/Archive 1

First things first
The first thing that should probably be discussed and decided with at least a few people would be whether or not the interactive maps are to be their own pages or not.

I think they should be, whether templates, or some other voodoo wiki magic I'm unaware of. This would let a map be updated and have every page that contains the map also instantly change, so there's no worrying about forgetting a map, or parts of it going out of date. It also keeps the massive coding clutter from a map like that off of the main article page, which is always nice.

Secondly, there's the debate about font. I agree the default font looks a bit terrible, so let's get some thoughts going.

Third, and last for now, is how we're going to handle the templates. I made the original ones straight from the wiki, but now that I have a better (somewhat) understanding of the format, we could simplify/clarify the process quite a bit. I was thinking it would go something like this: (paraphrasing the code)


 * Main map label template:Image
 * label for outpost icons
 * label for outpost texts
 * label for town/arena icons
 * label for town/arena texts
 * label for mission/challenge mission icons
 * label for mission/challenge mission texts
 * label for explorable area texts

I was thinking we could have different templates for the different tasks, instead of trying to differentiate them in the map's code, which gets very confusing in big maps. Although it could get a little complex with too many templates, so we could probably just make one for icons that changes depending on a variable as to what icon it puts, another for text with a variable that changes color, and then other templates for whatever may be needed down the road (boss names, important parts of the mission, etc). ~Farlo Talk 17:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Might want to link to your sandbox where you have the test version at the moment. --[[Image:User_Chieftain_Alex_Chieftain Signature.png]] Chieftain  Alex 17:36, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I did one better, I created test pages inside the project! We need to go deeper! ~Farlo Talk 18:08, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Page Names
Should each map be a sub-page of each article (Archipelagos Map -> Archipelagos/Map)? • • • Mora  23:38, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that would have probably been a better idea, and I'll slap the move tag on that one before I start more. Thanks very much for finishing that one up by the way, are you going to help contribute some more? ~Farlo Talk 23:57, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, how should dungeon maps be labled, I was thinking:
 * Catacombs of Kathandrax
 * Catacombs of Kathandrax/Map (level 1)
 * Catacombs of Kathandrax/Map (level 2)
 * Catacombs of Kathandrax/Map (level 3)
 * Slavers' Exile
 * Slavers' Exile/Map (Justiciar Thommis and Rand Stormweaver)
 * Slavers' Exile/Map (Selvetarm)
 * Slavers' Exile/Map (Forgewight)
 * Slavers' Exile/Map (Duncan the Black)
 * .. and should the Eye of the North primary quests be added under Missions? • • • Mora  21:20, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * EOTNMissionIncomplete.png - this is what I began doing on the far shiverpeak region map before I noticed we need a new version of that one :( (Yes I'm adding the primary quests under Missions, and I'm using the icon for it from the World Map page) [[Image:User_Chieftain_Alex_Chieftain Signature.png]] Chieftain  Alex 21:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the primaries are essentially missions, and correct, use the Normal Mode incomplete icon, like everything else. I'm not sure on the structure for dungeons though, it might be easier to just have all the levels in a series down the page, unless that'd be too cluttered?
 * If we're doing them separately, that naming scheme seems best, although I think we should have Slaver's (and any others that act like that) use some number system, if nothing else than just number them based on their order in the quest text. ~Farlo Talk 02:23, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't really think numbering Slavers' is too accurate though, given that there is no order requirement (except Duncan). • • • Mora  02:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I know, but having the pages be that long would just bug me, haha. I suppose it is the proper way to go about this though.  ~Farlo Talk 02:54, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Colors
Aside from the bosses, cause we all know they get their class's color, are there any suggestions for colors for towns, collectors, etc? I like the Tan currently used on Archipelagos, but I don't think it will work in Elona or the Crystal Desert. Does anyone know a way to have an outlined font, or something else to make an off-white color stand out against the background no matter what color? ~Farlo Talk 00:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, Tan doesn't work in the Shiverpeaks either, and DarkKhaki kind of works, but not really. Unless someone has a good suggestion for colors, I can't think of a color (much less a set of colors) that would work across every map unless we used neon, really annoying colors.  ~Farlo Talk 07:00, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Now that the templates are (mostly) sorted out, what say we start figuring out a color scheme? Since having one overall theme is almost impossible, I'd like to suggest either doing it by region (that region and it's sub-zones all share a theme) or by geography (Snow, Desert, Jungle, etc).  I'm leaning towards region just because doing it by type or geography might cause some confusion as to what belongs where and also some zones within a geographic group might not like those colors.  ~Farlo Talk 07:18, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Map overlays
I don't know if you should make the "clean" map images redirect to "labelled" pages. It just seems to be against the point of a "clean" map. --JonTheMon 12:40, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that was something I thought of, but alot of zones don't have an image of all the information on there. I guess, if we wanted a ton more photos here,we could take snapshots of the interactive map and add another image for each zone. ~Farlo Talk 19:50, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't it just be easier to show the clean map in the infobox, then have another link to the /map page? So the click the clean map and get that, or go to the labelled /map page? --JonTheMon 20:19, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm obviously not thinking very well at the moment. Where would you want to put the link? ~Farlo Talk 20:21, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It's kinda subtle, but I changed up Ascalon (pre-Searing) --JonTheMon 20:24, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, so that's what you meant :P It is rather subtle, but oh well.  For individual zone maps, do you think it's alright to replace all the different maps for bosses, collectors, etc with just the interactive one? ~Farlo Talk 20:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * If you can't easily turn off parts of it, I'd say individual maps would probably still be better. you might want to bring the question up to the project. --JonTheMon 20:36, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, was gonna post that somewhere there, but sadly no one seems to talk there. I'd love to get it complex enough to toggle different aspects, but I'm no where near good enough. ~Farlo Talk 20:49, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Just going to point out the recent edit here because I thought it was pretty cool. Feel free to undo it if you disagree. • • • Mora  20:57, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You are a God among men Mora, that is awesome. I haven't looked over the code yet, but I'll be sure to and then I guess it's time to get working on the tutorial and final formatting styles before I start mass production. ~Farlo Talk 03:32, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Font
I hereby ask you to change the current used front to anything else than Comic Sans. Thank you. poke | talk 12:30, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I didn't really like it either, but it was the best looking at the time. On my sandbox, 72 suggested a bigger Times New Roman, so I'll have to check that out.  Any other suggestions? ~Farlo Talk 17:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Ascalon/Map no longer is interactive for me. Checking the history, making the font to Times New Roman screwed it up. -- Konig / talk 10:06, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Replacing/adding
Ok, so which pages should these maps be added to/replace the maps on the current pages? Personally, I'm for just leaving the link on the main explorable page. I'm not really a big fan of putting a link on, say, every boss' page. --JonTheMon 12:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I can see that. I'm not entirely sure how that should be dealt with, but I suppose I'll stay off the boss pages, I just wish more people would talk and give an opinion, it seems like I'm just doing it all alone, lol. ~Farlo Talk 17:41, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Two suggestions
Since I'm not a wiki-coding expert and literally have no clue how to help, I'd just like to make 2 suggestions based on what I've seen: Firstly, I would like to suggest making interactive maps for Tyria, Cantha, and Elona. They'd be simpler than explorables, to say the least. Secondly, this is more of a question, but has it been tested to see how inclusion would work (e.g., taking Ascalon/Map (which btw, for me the interactiveness has disappeared) and inclusion-ing it into a new section in Ascalon)? It may help increase people's looking at these maps if so. Also, perhaps the interactive maps could replace the labelled maps and the lists of towns/outposts, missions outposts, and explorables - since there'd be no need to list them twice. Just some thoughts. Won't work for the various instances, but could for the regions (and continents if those are ever done). I had another thought but I lost it while typing. -- Konig / talk 10:18, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That's weird, Ascalon still works for me. Does it work if you view an older revision without the font change?  Also, I planned on doing a continent map with regions and major cities once I got going.  My original idea was to put the interactive maps on the actual article page, but as discussed... somewhere here... it kind of overwhelms the page.  You could use the Article test page and mess around to see what you can come up with and if it'd work.  I did have the labelled map link to the interactive one at one point, but JonTheMon thought it'd be better to just have it as a text link in the infobox.  I do like the idea of making these more pronounced and easily accessible, but I think that might be too big of an overhaul for a wiki so slow, haha.  ~Farlo Talk 15:44, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Older revisions does work, it was the font change which messed it up. Regarding the map linking - actually you had the clean map linking to such, not the labelled. Having the text is far too small to be noticed. -- Konig / talk 22:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I did? Oops >.<  Does Archipelagos or Northern Shiverpeaks work with the Times New Roman? ~Farlo Talk 06:43, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, odd. Ascalon/Map is now working for me. The other day it was appearing blank. -- Konig / talk 10:32, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The reason the current link is so small (unfortunately) is that this new system doesn't make a good thumbnail image, which means you'd have a labelled image and a map with dynamic labels. Just seems awkward to me. --JonTheMon 19:10, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

"You could use the Article test page and mess around to see what you can come up with and if it'd work." Just made something at that page, tell me what you think (for reference sake - the actual version would be having a transclusion of the map page - I just did it manually to avoid the category and navbox without altering the map page). To me, the pro is that the map is bigger and in turn causes less loading for viewers. The con is that the lists of the location are static and may cause longer loading times (hard for me to tell). On the fence (for me) lies that one side has lists, the other shows where the things are and you can remove certain kinds of links. -- Konig / talk 12:07, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

labeling template
I've created User:Tennessee_Ernie_Ford/Sandbox_6 to show how the project could use a labeling template instead of fixed values for color. (There's a couple of examples on the page.)

All of the values are deliberately, horribly ugly in this first iteration to demonstrate that we can set the formatting at the template level. That allows the maps to be created now while other people can work out a (theoretically) better look in the future, without having to edit any of the maps directly.


 * example

The current version is limited:
 * limitations
 * It doesn't prevent bad input (e.g. change variables from upper to the expected lower case)
 * It only allows variation for the type of label (e.g. whether it's for a boss or a landmark)
 * It does not allow variation for the type of map, local variations in background color, etc.
 * It only alters these formatting parameters: background color, Size, font-family, Font-weight (bold/normal)
 * It does not change important other formatting parameters (because I couldn't find them or wanted to setup an example quickly): font-color (didn't see it), font-style (italics, normal), etc
 * It does build in padding using the div style (rather than a carriage return, i.e. ), for flexibility in spacing.

Anyone involved in contributing to this project has permission to (a) copy the template to one's own sandbox, (b) move the template into mainspace or this project area, or (c) edit it mercilessly to make it more useful. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 16:58, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * permission to edit mercilessly for the project
 * That's a really good step forward, and I had thought of this when I was making it, but I didn't understand the template formatting enough at the time to bother. This would be a way better way to make sure things stay uniform, as it's been annoying keeping the 4 pages we have now in order (and I forgot about Pre).


 * I noticed, by Chieftan and a couple others on various other pages, that they suggested different fonts and the removal of the background from the text. I would definitely like to have the backgrounds gone, but on some maps (Shiverpeaks >.>), the fonts just don't stick out very well.  The next best thing, if we can't find a color scheme that works universally, would be one for each type of region or something like that.  I'll have to look at the templates more, but this shouldn't be too hard to implement and get going.  ~Farlo Talk 20:04, 22 May 2011 (UTC)


 * You can use the template as if there are going to be variations; the template can be updated later on to take them into account, e.g. light will assume the map is lightly colored...and change the font-color and background-color accordingly. We can also add borders/not, again depending on the type of map on which the labels will show.


 * We can basically assume that the template will be limited to four parameters (label, link, label-type, & map-type) and setup the maps accordingly. That should allow the project to move forward without having to wait for the perfect color scheme...or keep things in synch. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 20:44, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. Have you set up the new templates outside the Sandbox, or do you plan on it? ~Farlo Talk 02:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Wanted to make sure you liked the idea. I'll move it (I hope) by the time you read this.) — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 03:18, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks good, I'm going to test out one of the test maps, then do the real map. One thing I have noticed about this template... where do we type the placement of the label?  I hope I'm not just being dumb again... ~Farlo Talk 03:51, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I have a better mousetrap: User:Tennessee Ernie Ford/Sandbox 7; much easier to edit. If you like, you can replace the contents of the current mainspace template with the sandbox's.


 * This template doesn't cover the placement; that's already covered by the other stuff you've been doing (which, I confess, I don't completely understand). This template allows you to completely separate content (the label) from the format from the position, giving maximum flexibility ... and, perhaps, more importantly, allowing someone to come in later with a better set of formatting suggestions. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 04:41, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * How would this integrate with the placement label? Some of the base formatting I don't understand either, but the template currently used places the label and leaves an empty space for formatting.  How would we use both? ~Farlo Talk 04:48, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Edit: Let's see if I can word that better... Basically, the template used places a hovering box at the coordinates given, then has the text for the link and the formatting inserted by the template syntax. So we'd have to somehow input your template into the placement template.  That seems like a bit of work >.< ~Farlo Talk 04:51, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * You call one template from within the other, i.e. #2 instead of #1:




 * (I just tested that you can replace everything on the maps this way, but I leave it to you verify/validate before we proceed.) Also, I think I (or we) might have misnamed the templates. Map label is really Map label position while Dynamic map label could be just Map label, but it probably doesn't matter much as long as they have the same beginning. So mebbe, keep map label and change the new one to Map label display — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 07:31, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I tested that on the test map page a couple hours ago, lol. I'm not too concerned with the naming, I just copied Wikipedia's in fear of ruining the random symbols that make stuff work.  I'm fine renaming any of them.  How about we have Image label begin (same as it is, sets up map), Image label (same as it is, sets up the floating labels), and then Image label style (your new template, defines style of the label)?  Seems the easiest to do since none of the other templates need to change.


 * As for how to specify the different map colors/types, you want to just add another parameter and let that control everything else? If you know a quick way to get that implemented, cause I'm too tired at the moment, I'd love to see it, because then I can finally start cranking out maps while someone else fiddles with the colors.  ~Farlo Talk 07:49, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Maps linking to other maps?
I was wondering what the opinion was towards having a link/label on the map in the direction of the other regions that linked to that region, maybe with an arrow image or something? Another idea is a Navbar thing like the Titles navigation. Any thoughts on something like this, or should the maps just be left alone? ~Farlo Talk 09:16, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Template:Interactive Region nav I've copied the code from the tonics nav, and then taken the colour from the explorable infobox, + inserted it on all pages so far. --[[Image:User_Chieftain_Alex_Chieftain Signature.png]] Chieftain  Alex 13:22, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, many problems
One problem with the maps is the name for areas. The text is not outlined like cursors are, it's either pure white or brown square with black text in front of it. What image editor are you using? Stroking the text is much more efficient as no box will be needed and is pretty easy to do. Previously Unsigned 06:00, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, have they been sharpened. The Desolation map looks ridiculously crisp and sharp. Maybe went overboard. Haven't seen other maps. Previously Unsigned 06:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually I'm probably entering nitpicking territory now, but the fonts all look like there is no anti-aliasing or font smoothing applied to them. I am convinced there isn't. Could we add that as well? All these little touches. Previously Unsigned 06:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)


 * That's the thing, we aren't using images. The labels are text compiled through Template:Dynamic map label.  There is a discussion on that page about using shadows on the text to make it look more like the in-game maps, but Internet Explorer doesn't currently support that feature sadly, so we opted against using it for now.


 * The look of compression on the maps is because we're shrinking a much larger map to fit in a 1000px wide image in order to not have to scroll sideways (unless you run super-low resolution). It looks particularly bad on this map just because the map is already so grainy because of the desert environment.


 * Effects like font smoothing and anti-aliasing aren't really things that a browser and html could do easily, or is widely supported. I think that statement is under the impression we use images for the labels (see above as to why not). ~Farlo Talk 06:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Addition: Using images as labels would allow a lot more customization and much sharper looking effects, but I just don't think it's viable to create an image for every name of every outpost, mission, boss, area, etc. ~Farlo Talk 06:11, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well I tried looking quickly at the code to make it interactive and I thought images were used. I don't mind having to scroll lol. In game we have to. Previously Unsigned 21:16, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Haha, I guess that's something to consider. I think they look alright for the most part.  Perhaps I could smooth out the images or compress them better for the maps if it bugs you that much, but I kind of like it all being on one screen, except Kryta, cause that place is long as hell.

Few things to clear up for formatting
As I noted on the maps, should the Vortex landmark be the icon? If it is an icon, should we have a "map" for the Realm of Torment, as bad as it would be? Also, should the ships and Asura Gates be added to their respective maps?

Another thing is which icon should be used for the EotN Primary quests? The NM incomplete icon is rather invisible on either map, so I think we should use the complete NM icon. ~Farlo Talk 21:57, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Addition: Chieftan, I changed them so someone would notice and chime in on their ideas :P ~Farlo Talk 22:00, 1 June 2011 (UTC)


 * We seem to have nice png icons with no white background on the World Map page so it would be a nice idea to have the Ships, Asuran Gate and Vortex on the maps.
 * Obviously the Hard Mode Incomplete icon won't work because it hasn't got a cutout background - I can see what you mean by the incomplete being invisible, probably a good idea to change to complete. (Does this mean we should go for continuity and put the mission complete icons on the other maps too? Or just treat eotn as "odd" by primary quests not missions so do whatever the hell we like :D ) --[[Image:User_Chieftain_Alex_Chieftain Signature.png]] Chieftain  Alex 22:04, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think we can leave the rest as incomplete, I think it looks better. Also, the HM icon is transparent now, I changed it. You might have to force a reload to see it changed (ctrl+F5 on Firefox). ~Farlo Talk 22:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Asuran Maps
Ok we all know that the asuran regions are split by Gadd's, Umbral Grotto and the actual Tarnished Coast - do we stick all the maps in one file with some big boundaries, or do we keep them seperate? -- Chieftain  Alex 22:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I tend to favor individual maps. We can always choose to combine them later. However, there are some strong proponents of combined maps (I've had this discussion before with relation to dungeon maps: one per level? or one per dungeon?). I think you should go with whatever seems easier to work with now; it can always be changed. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 22:26, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * For the Asuran map, once I mapped the rest, I was going to put a 3-4px black border between the main zone, and then put the other two separate zones underneath it, but I guess we can figure that out later.
 * On another note, does anyone have a non-terrible-looking Battle Isles clean map to upload? I explored too much >.< ~Farlo Talk 22:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Now that the maps are starting to get made
I was wondering what the final plans were going to be to implement these in the articles. I'd rather like them to have more of a presence than a little blue link under an image. ~Farlo Talk 06:16, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * My subtle link with the image on Kaineng City was too subtle right? (if you click on the image it links to the interactive map as well as the blue link underneath) also get the feeling I shouldn't have done that since people might want to view the non interactive maps but labelled.. --[[Image:User_Chieftain_Alex_Chieftain Signature.png]] Chieftain  Alex 12:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That would have been fine, except the image just serves as a placeholder/thumbnail and it feels like an extra, semi-useless image. I dunno, it looks the clearest. --JonTheMon 15:03, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Chieftan, I saw that page, figured someone forgot to revert it, and then posted here. I tried that idea before, but Konig got mad at me and just put in the link under the image.  I do like the way that works, and if someone would really rather see the image instead of our map, put a link to that under the thumbnail :P ~Farlo Talk 18:06, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Mists maps
"Do we really want the Mist areas? they're just maps from Tombs." Tombs has nothing to interact with, however, mechanically, the Mists also include the Underworld and the Fissure of Woe, which do have interactives (quest givers if you're doing them, bosses (well UW doesn't have any non-quest bosses), and FoW has the armor crafter. Depends on how specific you're going - based on the two maps that are done for Tarnished Coast, you're only doing exits, in which case none of the Mists explorables would have any. So no, no need to do those is my imput. If you were to decide to add collectors and bosses as per the old version of Archipelagos, then I would for FoW at least. -- Konig / talk 06:00, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I just meant the ones listed there, which are useless. I'll probably add FoW and UW to either the Dungeons or Missions set, or with the other Elite Areas in their own section. Also, thanks for reminding me that I forgot the portals and collectors for the Tarnished Coast maps >.< ~Farlo Talk 06:09, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Since those got removed on the Archipelagos map, I thought it was decided not to do those things. :P -- Konig / talk 11:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I just never updated the Archipelagos map with TEF's new template we've been using. I'll let that one stew in it's oldness until I get around to Cantha. Once I get a couple bigger zones done, look at those, or check out Sparkfly and Verdant for what I'd like to see them look like (besides the colors and styling, not my strong suite). ~Farlo Talk 20:30, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Spawn rotation bosses
I was wondering if anyone had a decent idea to mark variable bosses on the map? One thing would be to put the grey circle icon and then link to the first one, but that seems kind of shoddy. Maybe we could show which spawn where when you click [Show], and have it under the map itself. ~Farlo Talk 06:44, 4 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Some of the older maps handle this by posting the profession icon (or an icon representing the species/type) and then use a footnote to name the potential bosses (those could display underneath the show/hide button). I think that would work for the interactive maps, too (our mileage might vary, so tweaking might be required).


 * If helpful, we could create a template that would allows us to change the presentation style/colors later. e.g. we could use boss A. We would use the same template on the map and in the footnote section; it would display as the icon on the map and with the list of names when it appears below. (Details tbd, of course.)


 * We could add a parameter to name the influencing quest(s) and/or likelihoods.


 * In other words, what would we like to see? We should be able to figure out how to (again) separate form from function, as we did with the colors for the text. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 08:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Something like that should work well enough. Would we have the footnotes below the map or overlayed on it? ~Farlo Talk 09:07, 4 June 2011 (UTC)


 * What do you think? If it's on the map, you need to set that up as part of the boss show/hide markers. You and Alex tell me what you want to see and I'll try to put something together that works well enough so that you can proceed while it gets tweaked. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 09:26, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the map would get a bit too cluttered with a list of bosses on it, and I don't really want to have a Show/Hide tag on the map. I think it'd work fine as a mini table or list that appears when you toggle on the bosses.  If we go that way, not much work needs to be done, just have a simple list appear under the "Bosses   Show/Hide" tag.  Something like:


 * Labelled boss Possible spawns:
 * [[File:Dervish-tango-icon-20.png]] Boss
 * [[File:Mesmer-tango-icon-20.png]] Boss
 * etc... Maybe even make an invisible table and such for multiple bosses with rotaions, and it could look pretty snazzy :P ~Farlo Talk 20:50, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Bosses with patrol routes
Is there an easy way to add patrol routes instead of just text labels for those bosses (e.g. Mungri, Mobrin) whose AI take them far from any particular spot? — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 08:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought about this, and I can't think of any easy answer. It does suck that they roam around, but the only way I could think of now would be to track their path, and then make an image that shows that path, upload that image, and make it a label itself.  If no one minded the huge number of new images, I guess it could work if someone tracked the boss and if I could make a path image that reflected it well. ~Farlo Talk 09:07, 4 June 2011 (UTC)


 * How about a prototype? Mungri's current location map is one of the better versions iirc. Let's see what that looks like and go from there. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 09:15, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, I can put together that map and then toy with his paths. I was thinking of a solid line for their path, something like:
 * Sparkfly Swamp foe map.jpg
 * The main problem is going to be getting the right size for the label, and all the paths are ruined if a new picture is uploaded. But none the less, I'll give it a shot, let's see how painful it is. ~Farlo Talk 09:30, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Edit: Scratch that, can't tonight, Luxon's have kicked enough ass to have the border split through Ferndale, and I can't get rid of it with the Hide UI key. I'll add this to the Interactive Maps Texmod and then hit the sack. Go Luxon! ~Farlo Talk 09:35, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

My suggestion is this: Do the line as stated to show the patrol, but rather than having the line itself a link, have a clickable icon and the name where the boss first spawns (should be easy to figure out, as the boss cannot start patrolling until he's spawned). -- Konig / talk 11:39, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that was my image of how I was going to do it, cause having click-able paths would get really annoying. The one hard part is figuring out where the bosses actually start since they're patting as soon as you get there. Otherwise, just slap the label somewhere on the line that looks alright and be done with it. ~Farlo Talk 20:52, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I gave it a shot for Ferndale/Map, and it turned out alright. I don't think my Photoshop skills are up to par to make something that would look good and it's pretty hard to size and place them correctly, but it's a start.  I'd hate to have to make these for all the bosses that moved >.< ~Farlo Talk 22:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Page for the maps?
If we want these featured and probably give them a bigger role for the general GWW user, I've (very slowly) started a sandbox to make a general namespace page for the maps. Contribute/discuss at my sandbox and let's see if we can make a feature-worthy page. ~Farlo Talk 07:44, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Missing things in the region maps
Just wanted to make a note of it. -- Konig / talk 11:23, 5 June 2011 (UTC) ... They aren't. Take Ascalon/Map and its landmark/explorable area. Now turn the landmark names white. Bam, that's what I mean. The names are clearly smaller (and thinner) than the explorable areas, but green makes it far to hard to read. It's clearly different yet at the same time, still reasonable to read. Or for a more accurate comparison, how Kryta/Map is now, I realize upon looking at it. Point is: get rid of the green on the Ascalon map. -- Konig / talk 18:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC) Nope, it's holiday only. ~Farlo Talk 19:46, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Kryta is missing the War in Kryta mission explorables.
 * 2) Some regions have a couple of their landmarks listed, but not all of the landmarks - likewise, not every region (pre-searing for one) has landmarks listed.
 * As for WiK... That page is too cluttered already, haha, although maybe I can do ''The Black Curtain (WiK version) as the label or something. It depends if the label can support different links in one template, but if not I can always put another series in if you really feel they should be included.
 * Landmarks were tricky, but I decided to not clutter everything up with towns and random hills and stuff, and I chose the seemingly important ones, related to either the GW storyline, GW2, or just really big and/or cool points of interest. I, or anyone that disagrees, could always add other ones if they feel it belongs there. ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 14:42, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I was referring to D'Alessio Seaboard, Divinity Coast, and Riverside Province's explorable areas, not all the other areas. Though that is a good point to make. With the fact that landmarks are 1) smaller text and 2) automatically hidden, I don't think "clutter" will be an issue since they can, as said, be hidden. Though I do suggest having them the same color (though, again, smaller) as explorable areas because Ascalon's landmarks are very hard to see. And there aren't that many landmarks - well, except for Nightfall and Shing Jea Island - but for Nightfall, we don't know where half of them are cuz they're from the gw.dat. -- Konig / talk 14:59, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I completely forgot about those areas! I tried to put in the WiK links, but the template doesn't like it, and it makes the page a bit cluttered (sure am using that word a lot) if I use a separate label.  For the new areas, I'll go ahead and add them.  Another idea is to have another "section" of labels that is auto-hidden that toggles the WiK version of the explorable areas.
 * You do have a point for the landmarks, and I had thought about that, so I guess that's another thing on the to-do list. Do you think we should include the landmarks on the area map if they're in an area we can reach?  As for the color and formatting of the labels, try your hand at the label template and see what better combinations you can come up with :P.  I'm style-illiterate or I'd put more effort into the labels looking nice, but I think you and TEF can figure it out. ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 16:16, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * If I knew how you guys were coding things, I'd probably help solve the WiK explorable issue. I do think that having a (War in Kryta) at the end would work - or even (WiK) would do. For the Hearts of the North missions (as the wedding explorable doesn't need mentioning on the map imo, but the repeatable missions do), one can go directly other. Luckily, the only tightly spaced one is Rise, so small name=<3. For when WoC comes out... we'll figure it out, I guess.
 * I was thinking about doing landmarks on individual explorable areas, and that's certainly a possibility. I'd wait on it though and see how cluttered they can get first though.
 * For the labels, my suggestion is simple: Landmarks are smaller than explorable (think of comparing size 10 times new roman to size 12 - respectively), that's the only difference; everything else is fine for me atm. -- Konig / talk 16:40, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * If you want to learn it, take a look at the Formatting/Tutorial page, it's fairly simple once you know the template and toy with it a bit. Do you think we should have a default-hidden toggle for the HotN missions overlayed as well?  As for WoC, I guess we'll do the same thing I just did for WiK on the Kryta map depending on what the content gives us to play with.
 * For explorable areas and all that jazz, we need more people cranking out maps, haha. I wish I had some AI bots that were smart enough to decipher the maps and put them together automatically, but alas, humans rock too hard.
 * For landmark labels, I don't think they should be the same as explorable areas, just so there's a difference in things, but the colors it has now were arbitrarily picked by TEF to demonstrate the template abilities, so they sure do need a change. I'll see if I can think of a decent combination. Any font or color suggestions? ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 17:03, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * "I don't think they should be the same as explorable areas"
 * BTW, the Kryta/Map one has the ship with campaign travel, but no asura gate! :O And what about the Mausoleum? (Hmmm, is that accessible outside of the Halloween quest? I don't recall - if it isn't, ignore). -- Konig / talk 18:21, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh! I thought you meant to give them the same styling, I can definitely make them white. I've been meaning to add Asura Gates, but Kryta is crowded already and I wanted to make at least some headway into the explorable maps, but I can pop those in in a bit.
 * "During the quest Commandeering a Mortal Vessel, click on the Enter the Mausoleum"

Towns & Outposts Maps
I've noticed that missions and zones have maps indicating important features, so shouldn't towns and outposts have a similar map. Say you're in Lion's Arch by the portal to North Kryta Province and need to find Jiaju Tai. You can't press ALT or CTRL and click on her name so you must wander around the town looking for her wasting your precious minutes, but that's when a town map would be helpful.

Now that I've convinced you... I hope ^.^


 * There's an issue with how to obtain a detailed map of small locations. Taking a screenshot of the zoomed in mission map results in a blurry image of the world map as seen in this example (It was taken at 1280x800 resolution. It could've been better, I forgot to take the screen shot with the png flag and didn't have access to my 1920x1080 computer).

Darthlight 18:43, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Then there's the icons representing the important npc's. something like this?
 * Didn't need much convincing, this seems like a great fit in with the rest of the project, assuming it gets moving again, haha.


 * Sadly, the resolution of the screen doesn't matter as even in the GW.dat file, they're only 512x512, so yeah, this is an issue, and will be one with just about any small area in this project. I'm not sure how we'd want to go about this, and sadly I doubt ANet would give us any support in the matter, even though they must have better resolution maps somewhere.  So unless a Test Krewe member asks very nicely and the Live team feels generous, I think we're stuck with the in-game maps.


 * As for the icons, might need to move the page you created for them, but those will do, although they might need some editing and shrinking to get them to looks good on a smaller scale.


 * Other than that, later tonight I'll throw a table of the outposts up on the main page and do LA or something as a demo and see how it looks . If you want to try your hand at making the maps, have at it, although I wouldn't exactly follow the tutorial/formatting guide, it's a bit outdated. ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 23:00, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Edit: Seems you already made a project page. I don't know if it should be a separate page if we're using the same methods as the rest of the maps, but I'll let other decide that, I honestly don't care :P ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 23:02, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Edit: Man, I am way behind, just saw your map. Looks alright, but yeah, we need to figure out what, if anything, we're gonna do about the crappy resolution.  ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 23:05, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * My only worry/issue/complaint is that some NPCs can be very close together. Also: Where do we stop with what NPCs to mark?  Konig / talk 23:29, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That could be pretty tough in the market areas especially. As for who to include, I think anyone that has a gameplay function, and forget about the random NPCs that walk around or give idle conversation. ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 03:44, 14 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm with Farlo: the map need only include those NPCs that ppls really need to find, e.g. quest givers, services (esp. skill trainers, xunlai,...). In corners with 3+ NPCs (so it's hard to label them all), I'd aim for a generic label + footnote/legend. For example, in LA, the map should show merchant's corner (erm, with the correct name) and the footnote/legend provides the details (merch, mat traders, ...). There's relatively few towns that are both concentrated and the NPCs are hard to find.


 * Another wrinkle though might be holiday/festival NPCs. That affects even fewer towns. However, I find most of them difficult to find (esp. the H'ween/Wintersday collectors in LA and some of the quest givers). — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 04:54, 14 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I made the new project page before asking that question on the talk page. I was planning to map all static npcs (those that don't patrol), but excluding those that have no function or aren't involved in any quests. I'm going to merge Guild_Wars_Wiki:Projects/Town_maps with this project later today. I couldn't find any in-game icons for the armorer, artisans, costume maker, guild & mercenary registrars. Most of the icons were from the guild lord in the guild hall. Darthlight 14:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * @ TEF: For holiday towns, we can either make another map, or do something like Kryta has for the WiK, so I don't think that's much of an issue.
 * @ Darthlight: Yeah, finding those might be hard.  I wonder if Google would yeild any tango style icons that would work well.  If we stick to in-game icons, I think some of those have icons somewhere. ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 16:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion for quests
Typing out the names creates clutter as seen on the Underworld/FoW maps. Likewise, linking the icon to the quest doesn't work as there are NPCs which give multiple quests. My suggestion is to not name the quests and have the icons link to questgivers rather than the quests. Less clutter and while a little more clicking, it's not that many.  Konig / talk 18:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well I considered having maps without quest names - but even though the name appears when you hover over the map, I wasn't sure it would have the instant effect of someone knowing which quest was where - if you're needing this map you probably need to know which quest is where right? --[[Image:User_Chieftain_Alex_Chieftain Signature.png]] Chieftain  Alex 19:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I care more about seeing which quest; the quest-giver names aren't that helpful. There's only 1 dot with two quest givers and only one other location in which the quest givers are near each other. In contrast, there are other locations where you can take multiple quests and where it matters which you take first. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 19:29, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * @TEF: That's simply the case with FoW and UW. But overall, there are close-by quest NPCS and NPCs which give multiple quests all over. It unnecessarily clutters things, imo. Don't matter much to me though, was merely a suggestion.  Konig / talk 19:33, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Fair point (those were the maps I was looking at when I posted). So, probably the best thing to do is to find a couple of case-in-point maps so that people can compare which version looks better (quest names or NPCs). I would continue to favor the quest names, unless there's no reasonable way to present them. In convos and alli-chat, people tend to say, take quest X rather than talk to NPC Y. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 19:43, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * How about having the quest icons link to the quest givers, and have the quests text/links themselves hidden? This makes it less cluttered, but still have the complete info, if people choose to show it. I'll edit to show, feel free to revert. • • • Mora  20:04, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with TEF - if I'm consulting a map to look for a quest, I don't really want to find the NPC - I'm looking for the quest so I can find out what to do. Also this would mean you'd need some kind of explanation on the page when theres two nearby NPCs - e.g. the marker at the camp on the Great Battlefield would have to point at Great_Battle_Field to indicate that theres Kromil the Eternal and the Eternal Weaponsmith's quests in the same location :/ --[[Image:User_Chieftain_Alex_Chieftain Signature.png]] Chieftain  Alex 20:17, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I also think TEF's suggestion is best, and the giver is only one click away from the quest, so it's not much clicking. Alex, I'd like to keep all related labels linking to the same place, cause if icons went one way and the text another, that will confuse people.  As for the rest of the maps, does this mean we should start adding quest labels to the area maps?  Once I get cracking on them again (hopefully soon), I'm not sure how much more cluttered they'll be.  On a side note, it sounds like WoC is going to severely screw with these maps (as well as all the articles) at least until we figure out everything that gets changed, so that'll be fun. ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 20:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Elite Areas
Ok, so I've already done most of The Deep/Map, and I'm wondering what else you guys would like to see on it.. would anyone benefit from another 11 assassin symbols thrown at the map to symbolise the locations of the aspects?

Also, when I get a decent map for Urgoz (may be a while) - current one is too small, as well as Urgoz, the enviromental effects and  icon, what other details should I put in? -- Chieftain  Alex 22:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sadly, I don't think there's much more that could be put on it, and even the Aspect markers would be a tight fit, although possible (and maybe helpful). Perhaps some of the bigger mechanics of the rooms if the map was a lot bigger, but as it stands, not much else can fit well I think.  Also, for those zones it's pretty difficult to convey any meaning/description of the areas and their mechanics (WTB Thesaurus) with just images and labels.  The main page and the table you made pretty much cover everything about the area.
 * One possible thing to do, if we wanted a lot more detail in the map, would be to break it up into pieces for every 3-4 rooms and then a lot more could be put in. I'm not sure if I like the idea of breaking it up though.
 * As for maps, if you use Texmod at all you can simply grab the textures of the map in Urgoz off the mission map and Photoshop/crop them just like a screenshot. (I'm pretty sure that's how we got the Deep map.) I'm going to do the same for all the Pre areas as I have no perma-Pre and get cracking on those first, however useless they are, I like the area.  ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 01:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Edit:Gordon Ecker uploaded that image, but the principle works anyways. ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 02:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Non-interactive maps would be a good start for de-stubbing those Aspect pages. I could provide the leads. Manifold [[Image:User_Manifold_Neptune.jpg|19px]] 02:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't do that place enough to even pretend to know anything about it, but possibly. If you have Photoshop or GIMP, you can do pretty much everything needed to make them pretty quickly, but if you don't, show me a screenshot with rough locations and any other info and I can make it happen :P  ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 02:07, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Guild Hall maps
Wondering how difficult it would be to do maps for each of the guild hall, marking things such as the flagstand, front/backdoor footies, boat npcs, base archers etc. Seems like it would be something really suited to this project.--Four Year Strong 01:55, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Those definitely fit right in here! It wouldn't be that difficult, they'd function like any other map. Unless anyone disagrees, I can tack those on to the (now massive o.0) list of zones to do.  We'd need to find icons for some of the stuff, but that's no biggie.  Unfortunately, I hate PvP and don't know the maps at all, so I won't be making these. ~FarloUser Farlo Triad.png Talk 02:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)