User talk:Gaile Gray/Archive Game-Related Topics/September 2007
From Guild Wars Wiki
| Archives by Topic |
|---|
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#A_Challenge_of_Game_Design} this commentary]]. 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
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
21:06, 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
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- I would like a hood with a full metal mask underneath, no eye holes!
- 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 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 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![1]--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 17:36, 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
- 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![1]--Redfeather 17:25, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- I was thinking [User_talk:Gaile_Gray/Guild_Wars_Art_issues| this page]. Does that work for you? --Gaile
- 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)
- 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
- 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)
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 =) --
(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
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 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 12:59, 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
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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
- 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.
- 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
- 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.
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 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 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
19:43, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- According to my sources *wink wink nudge nudge* you will see satisfactory changes in an upcoming build. --Gaile 22:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- According to my sources *wink wink nudge nudge* you will see satisfactory changes in an upcoming build. --Gaile
- 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
- 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
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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.
- 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)
[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 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 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 21:14, 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
- 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)
- I just got 3000 points for completing a Dungeon. Plus all the Dwarf points i got while inside. Seems enough to me.--ChronicinabilitY
- You can get the bounties inside dungeons too... --Lemming
- 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)
- 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)
(Reset indent) 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 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)
- Agreed, 1/10 is pretty harsh, but it shouldn't be the full reward as the first time, maybe ½ or ¼? --Lou-Saydus
- 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)
- 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)
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 20:00, 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
- 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 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)
- 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
- 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)
(Reset indent) 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 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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
- 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•
•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 21:49, 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
- 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)
- 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.
- 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)
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#A_Challenge_of_Game_Design} this commentary]]. 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 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 21:06, 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
- 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)
- 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 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 23:43, 14 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
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••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 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)
- 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
- 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•
- 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)
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 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 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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
- 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)
(Reset indent) 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 
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 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
13:06, 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
- 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
- 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 02:20, 5 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
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 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 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)
- 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)
- 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
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
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 23:51, 14 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
- 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 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 02:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Image:Tomoko's Cookie.jpg >.> wasnt me. okay, okay it was >< i couldn't resist. --Lou-Saydus 21:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Image:Tomoko's Cookie.jpg >.> wasnt me. okay, okay it was >< i couldn't resist. --Lou-Saydus
- 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)
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 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)
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 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)
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
- 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) 11:17, 6 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)
- 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)
- 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
- I found it easier to far them using Tihark Orchard, higher drop rate there too IMO. DBZVelena | (Talk page)
- 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)
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 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 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 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)
- 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
- 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
- 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
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 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 14:15, 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
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. --
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. -- 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)
- 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. --
- 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-
- 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)
- 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. --
(Reset indent) 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. --
(gem / talk) 01:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- I think you mean "will not be undeleted".
(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)
- 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)
- I think you mean "will not be undeleted".
- We cannot restore deleted characters, and honestly, the process of deletion seems secure enough to us that we don't anticipate a change. --Gaile 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). -- 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••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)
- 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 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)
- 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•
- 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)
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
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 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 09:51, 21 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
- 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
![[1]](http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/538/mesmergauntletof2.jpg){kind=link}
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