Talk:Lieutenant Langmar/Archive 1

Requirements

Has anyone determined the requirements for accepting quests from her? I have a level 7 character with minimal quests completed and she says I "need more experience". 96.33.173.168 01:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Level 10 is required. --129.186.253.75 01:46, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

add it to notes someone, because even today, i still had to hit discussion to check this...FML--123.211.35.103 18:20, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Less-grindy LDoA?

Hmm, this could finally motivate me to make one, and devalue the accomplishments of everyone else who has one thus far! 64.245.3.212 01:44, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

its not really that less grindy you still have to get to lvl 10 and then you have to do each of the quests once a day. i am told it equates to about the same amount of time as it was before.- Zesbeer 01:50, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Going off just this quest's xp from level 10 to 20 is 101k xp, or 101 days of questing, which is slightly over 3 months, so yeah, sounds about the same. Ayaname Wolf 01:54, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Speaking as someone who's done LDoA: the quest reward is about the same amount of xp you can get from a day of death levelling, and since the quests are daily, and (so far) take about the same amount of time to complete as setting up a death level (~30 mins), I'm pretty happy that this is essentially the same investment, minus the pain of trying to maintain your connection for 18 hours. --Wormwood 03:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

that was the goal...- Zesbeer 03:01, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

No kidding, Mr. Sarcasm. :p --Wormwood 03:04, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I never had much interest in LDoA myself, and I'm not a pre-person, as my ingame friends hang out in post-searing. This may give me an incentive to spend some time in pre again. An ok addition in my own personal opinion. Maybe not so much for everyone tho. 193.215.199.34 11:41, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

It's a bit faster, but similar (ignoring the disconnections/crashes and / or not having time at the right time to change them out) - 3 groups of 4 charr death levels up to ~your level is a very hard day of death leveling and ~1200 XP; the quest only gives 1000, but you also get XP from the quest mobs - I was able to get more than 600 off of the bandits, and I lost some to being dead while my imp killed them. Personally, I'd say it's slightly easier in overall realtime commitment (but still a pain) and also a bit easier in time actually spent doing it - but FAR less frustrating because an internet hiccup or computer glitch or update won't wreck your effort. Having looked at it ... I don't feel like my achievement was devalued; they did a good job of keeping it fairly similar while removing some of the suckiness. And hey ... anyone who WANTS to do it faster can still deathlevel. So I guess it is easier that way, but I'm not going to begrudge that. Lillian ap Cor 19:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

There's no particular need to DL to speed things up: use the Charr@Gate farming method: take quest, kill foes, abandon quest, repeat. It still takes a long time, but no longer requires dying or going AFK instead of playing.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 20:07, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

This is WAY faster than the Old School way. You can farm the higher level baddies that spawn, kill the boss, go back to town and abandon the quest, retake it and do it ALL over again. Since the baddies scale to the highest player in the parties level you can grid all day and night til you hit 20. By my projections I figure one can go from level 10 to level 20 in less than 30 days with a minimum of grinding (1 hour a day, maybe 2).--98.238.87.246 22:47, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Repeating these quests is far better than death leveling. What time do new ones come out? Aro 06:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

True. And with the tiering enemies, it should be faster than Charr at the Gate is by the end. I'm already seeing people with the quest offering to take people without it outside for gold - that'll probably be useful for people who are almost L10 - tough, but much better XP than any of the other options. Lillian ap Cor 18:19, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

This is MUCH faster than DLing if you do not take the quest reward and farm the high level enemies you get tons of XP. Today I got my 3 year old level 16 (almost never DLed) to level 18 just through killing the level 15 and 16's that spawned. LDoA can now be gotten in a week easily. Also I don't like to grind much but I repeated the quest consistantly because after the update a rush of guildies and alliance members made Pre characters so I was letting them leech off of my high level mobs so that they could get to level 10 and start doing the dailies themselves. ..͏..Ðreki..͏ 08:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

In fact with abandoning and retaking the quest you can do from 16 to 20 in one day if you choose the right quest for your profession and grind it. So even though it might take some time to get the title, it´s far from the time you have to invest for the same result while doing it with DL. Also if you push it you can go from 1 to 16 in one day as well, so plan a weekend and you can do a fresh char from 1 to 20 even with the latest restrictions on the quests.[[80.137.22.148 03:59, 12 March 2011 (UTC)]]

Unfortunately, LDoA is a joke title now. Fastest time (that I know of) to LDoA AND Survivor in Pre was 6 hours and 42 minutes. [1] This was before the latest update though. Still, as it is now, LDoA is achievable in a few days.Wrend 04:39, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

In retrospect, having to DL low level enemies to get XP was a joke. As the only means to work on the title, that never really made any sense to me - I'm surprised Arena Net bothered having the title in the game! There should have been, say, a few level 17 - 20 mobs scattered about in the far corners of the Northlands to work on this title. While LDoA is much faster/easier to get now, the new means to get it - killing adequate level enemies without the ridiculous need to DL - makes much, much more sense. The change to drunkard was far worse. But then, I maxed that before its update so I guess I'm just a massive hypocrite. :-\ C0Zm1c 21:01, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

"nine new daily quests with her"

Nine? I only recieved 1

"Daily Quests in Pre-Searing Captain Langmar—or Lieutenant, as her rank was then—is making an appearance in Pre-Searing. She's got two good eyes and nine new daily quests with her. " Rudhraighe 03:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

As in 1 quest a day for 9 days (before they start repeating). - Tanetris 03:16, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Omg wow 2 eyes! Waar Kijk Je Naar 06:30, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Only 9 quests? when there are potentially 12 enemy types? Well i guess plants don't really do any harm, so 11 then. Wonder what other 2 didn't make the cut for these new quests. -Wrei 110.175.241.56 15:23, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Merge

I disagree as pet the reason why Nicholas Sandford and Nicholas the Traveler are split. Different name, model, and purpose. The NPCs which are merged between pre and post usually only have 1 or 2 difference (Gwen is the same name the whole way around but with new models and an additional purpose, Sarah is only a new model, etc.). -- Konig/talk 05:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

oh konig i beat you to making this topic....Talk:Captain_Langmar#merg- Zesbeer 07:02, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I think keep them seperated. first arguement is already given, there are 2 different names. My main reason is: Spoiler Alert. I just don't like to see them on the wiki if not needed. Silencio 07:18, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

They have completely different functions and different areas - I'd keep them split. --File:User Chieftain Alex Chieftain Signature.pngChieftain Alex 11:17, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Split. I'm generally against two articles where one will serve, but the Captain and the Lieut have almost nothing in common aside from their name. They are as different as e.g. the two Nicks, the two Regent Valleys, and the two Ascalons. We should only merge pre- and post- articles when there's so little to say that it makes little sense to separate them.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:32, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Against the splitmerge as well. She even has two eyes! Why can't we warn her to get infused... Aro 06:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Till consensus decide otherwise I updated the two pages with a trivia note, to make the link between them like was also done on the nick pages. If we decide to merge later it can be reverted (or anytime if you don't agree on this change)Rumian 14:49, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Research for the level of foes that spawn.

Wil we do that in this page? Or per Quest? Should we mention it on this page at all? Did the quest yesterday with 1 level 12 character and had company once from a level 17 character, got level 15/16 foes. Did it again with the company of a level 11 character and the foes dropped to level 8/9. Am going to add a note for now. Silencio 07:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

that should be done on a sub page.- Zesbeer 07:46, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I (lvl 11) went solo and got a level 8 raider outside of Ranik (the one who spawns near the res shrine, when partying up with a lvl 14 friend I had lvl 11-12 foes (ringleaders being 12, raiders/firestarters being 11).--Mark, het Beest 10:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

There's 3 tiers, every quest has the same level monsters. Level 15/16 is the highest tier and 8/9 is the lowest. -- Konig/talk 19:06, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't it technically be possible to...

Take the quest, chew off the foes, abandon the quest, and retake it to always gain experience from monsters in Pre? 72.70.225.18 12:27, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Yup! Just don't forget to accept the reward once you've finished farming for the day. --Wormwood 12:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes and it works quite well, got from lvl 10 to 12 doing just a few hours of farming. Thank you ANet!!!! --98.238.87.246 22:41, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Any minumum level req for party ?

Can my lvl 9 Ranger join a party with the quest and get the XP to level up? 63.96.196.197 21:16, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Yep it can. But you won't get the buff. Solo for more exp :D . Aro 06:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

No, the monsters will only spawn if all (both) party members are level 10 or higher. It's noted on the article page. --Kristofferus 22:26, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

LEGENDARY OF ASCALON AND SURVIVOR NOW!!!!

I CAN FINALLY GET LEGENADRY DEFENDER OF ASCALON AND SURVIVOR ON ONE CHARACTER!!!! THANK YOU ANET!!!!!

Isn't this just a huge middle finger to most players like me who decided to get Survivor vs LDoA on his post main char? Now my main with GWAMM can never have LDoA but other players who make a char after this update can, or players whom already have LDoA can go out and get Survivor now due to the change and have both as well. What about us players with mains walking around with Survivor? Why cant we have LDoA also. Just really screws us over good. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 99.62.182.143 (talk).

"but other players who make a char after this update can" You know you're not exempt from that group, right? Now, I ask you, what about mains walking around without Survivor? It doesn't "screw you over" it just gives more people more opportunities. -- Konig/talk 03:00, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Bah. so much QQing. most survivors Ive ever met have never survived a thing, or have had a fight at all, lmao events XP farmers or w.e just a big lol Beleeth 05:04, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

My Paragon actually got survivor via playing the game. But then again, para. :P -- Konig/talk 05:38, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Now if only my main char can be un-seared to get ldoa... Aro 06:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

or they can make ldoa account wide
YEAH *vote for account wide LDOA*

I have 3 characters that all got to Survivor 1 just playing the game. Ramei Arashi 15:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Drops?

Am I wrong, or do the higher level ennemies drop nothing, not even gold? 84.101.140.84 16:36, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Enemies from the Vanguard quests give experience, but have no drops. If you find any that drops items, it's a bug, and you should report it as such. MithTalk 16:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I kinda am wondering on the drops, and I suppose only time will tell .. for some events, I have gotten drops from Wolves, etc ... Things that normally don't drop anything, so these could well exhibit the same behavior Algonda 14:57, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Mith is in the TK - last we were told, they drop no items as to help preserve the unique pre-searing economy. -- Konig/talk 20:01, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

There are so many drops you can get from the new foes its unbelieveable out right not happening. The foes you encounter have a similar case to that of the players in pre, they just ain't got nothing worth to drop.131.183.105.26 13:00, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Even animals drop festival item; are the vanguard specials exempt from that? (Not a big deal, just means we need to adjust some notes/footnotes elsewhere.)  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 21:31, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I think with animals it's less of "they don't drop items" and more of "they have no items to drop" - I may be wrong, but I think the two are coded differently. We'll see when the next event comes around though. -- Konig/talk 21:41, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I can't tell that until a festival. If they keep not dropping and they start dropping during a festival, as long as they are festival items I think it should be fine. We can't know if animals just don't have anything to drop, since festival drops may just override any kind of 'this creature doesn't drop stuff' rule. We just don't know MithTalk 00:31, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

The reason these foes don't drop anything is because their lower level counterpart drop bundle items. If a foe of high level drops a bundle, chances are that bundle may contain a major or superior rune. We just can't have that in pre now, can we? --Kristofferus 22:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Eh... you mean salvageable items. I've got gold armors in Istan and Shing Jea from level 3 enemies. So I doubt that's the reason. MithTalk 23:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Redundancy

It's in the Notes section. Can we keep it to a minimum? I'd fix it, meself, but I'd rather not deal with the drama of reverts and "yoo kant doo dat!" nonsense.

the time the daily quest changes

^ what is it? no one answered or posted anywhere yet... 98.134.9.231 13:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

It looks like 16:00 UTC-- 16:09, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Split suggestion

I suggest to split this article to Lieutenant Langmar and Vanguard Quest. Langmar is an NPC with long life story, not a simple questgiver like Nicholas who has a few roles outside of his weekly quests, or like a Wanted by the Shining Blade signpost. I think that after few days the information about all Vanguart quests as well as their schedule will be known and it can be placed on the separate page like the aforementioned signpost, while an article about Langmar herself is almost ready right now. --Slavic 17:24, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Agree. Although the signpost might NPCs from a programming sense, they are visually non-characters and have no history of their own. The Loot is an exception to that pattern and has earned her own page.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:47, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I would tend to disagree. Captain Langmar has a long life story, but we know nothing of her story before the Searing except that she was a Lieutenant in the Ascalon Vanguard. In pre-searing, she is nothing much beside a more human version of a quest signpost. As such, a Captain Langmar page without the Vanguard Quest informations would be rather pointless. On the other hand, if you suggest both to split this article to Lieutenant Langmar and Vanguard Quest, and then to merge Lieutenant Langmar and Captain Langmar, it would make more sense... But I'd disagree with that too for the reasons given above. 88.139.244.223 19:24, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

She having a face doesn't make her different than a the wanted post. Firt of all, the page is small. If you split it, you'll get an almost empty 'Lieutenant Langmar' page, and everything else in the "Vanguard Quest" page. Second, she gives those quests, and the given quests are always linked to the page of the NPC that gives them. She is no different than Nicholas or the Wanted post. Nicholas' daily or weekly items are in his page, daily wanted pages are in the wanted NPC page. For her story, all that's needed is a link in 'see also' to Langmar's older page, at least until she does something else other than standing there. Thackeray's Scavenger hunt got split when his page grew enough. This page is not big enough. MithTalk 20:12, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

"Langmar is an NPC with long life story, not a simple questgiver like Nicholas who has a few roles outside of his weekly quests" I agree and disagree. Langmar has a long life story, Lieutenant Langmar is a simple quest giver who acts as a mere (rather small) portion of Langmar's story. If we split Lieutenant Langmar from the vanguard quests, then I suggest it is done simultaneously with a merge between pre and post Searing versions - which was already disagreed with on consensus - mainly due to the size of what this page would be and how the purpose of the pages have lost their distinctiveness from each other. Secondly, all the information for the other daily quests are on the NPC's page. -- Konig/talk 20:35, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Mith/Konig/et al have convinced me that there's a strong argument to leave it as two articles: Capt & Lieut. (I would be happier to see V Quests as a third article, but that's more a style preference.) With two articles, I would rather see Capt+Lieut (pre vs post) rather than V-Quest + Langmar (NPC vs quests given).

What ever we decide, we can do more here to distinguish the quests from the rest of the article.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 20:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Of course, eventually I'm for the merge of all articles about Langmar to one. Her military titles as a part of her name are a second thing and not really important. From encyclopaedic point (excuse for this), all information about any character should be consistent. Imagine would we have a number of separate articles: [[Gwen (pre-Searing)]], [[Gwen (BMP)]], [[Gwen (GW:EN)]], [[Gwen (War in Kryta)]], [[Gwen (post-WiK)]] etc. We know less about Langmar, but her story is somehow parallel to Gwen's story, why do we need to use different approach? Maybe it's against consensus, sorry... --Slavic 21:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

The difference is mainly the purpose of the NPC (and article) - for your Gwen example, it would rather be [[Gwen (Prophecies)]], [[Gwen (Eye of the North)]], [[Gwen (Bonus Mission Pack)]] and [[Gwen (Beyond)]] - something that was, in fact, attempted, like with Keiran Thackeray. However, there is a large difference between Gwen and Langmar - we're not splitting due to name, but by purpose. Gwen is always an idle NPC who either acts as a quest giver or a hero (and other heroes act as quest givers too) - there's no difference between Gwen and Koss or Dunkoro outside the fact that Gwen has more lore and information. Langmar, however, acts both as a typical NPC and as the daily quest page. Like I said before: If we want to split this from the vanguard quests, then Capt./Lieut. Langmar should be merged - this goes vice versa as well. And personally, I think it looks better like this, and more consistent too. Unfortunately, you cannot have simplistic unbending rules when there are non-simplistic, differing situations that the rules are meant to follow. We're doing something different because it's a different situation. -- Konig/talk 22:13, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Quest Monkey

Did the update make these obsolete? Sardaukar 03:49, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Only if the spawns stop appearing if an L1-9 character is a party member. They aren't as useful as before. (I suppose if you are having trouble defeating the enemy, you could hire a lower level Vanguard Monkey to make things easier.)  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 04:25, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

One of my alliance members used another account to help him get across to the northlands that was under lv 10 and he said he couldnt find any of the quest enemies/relevant NPCs 66.61.119.166 17:37, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Quest NPCs no longer spawn with a level 1-9 in the party and as the page was updated for, it is the lowest member that has the spawns decided upon. -- Konig/talk 19:43, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Old topic, but you can still use low lvl monkeys and get your high level spawns. Have them pull the lever, get between the two gates, but do not zone, have them leave the map, then go through the second gate and zone in by yourself. The second gate looks like it closes with the first, but it will let you through anyway. Rose Of Kali 20:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

BUG

Last week, I did the Utini quest, and got the reward for it. Now, I have ZERO quests in my log. So I log in today, and want to get a new quest, which so happens to be Utini again. But to my wonder, there's no exclamation mark over Langmar's head. I'm level 10 obviously, I tried to rezone, but nothing works. Apparently, you HAVE to do a different quest before you can do the same one again, even if it wasn't in your log when the quest got rotated... I think that should be fixed. Sjeng 16:51, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

You need to at least log in between the time the quest is repeated. elix Omni 16:53, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

If it works the same as the Zaishen quests, just remember to zone anywhere after accepting the reward. (e.g. map to Ashford Abbey or exit to Lakeside before closing the game)  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:25, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

If that's true then that is a bug. 58.111.64.52 04:14, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

It's unfortunate, but apparently expected behavior. From a programmer's perspective, it's not a bug. From our perspective, it's annoying.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 05:06, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Eh, I stand by my statement (sort of), but we did call it a bug on the Z-challenge article, so I'm adding a similar note here.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 05:10, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, forgive me, I'm blonde, I need help here. - 1) Why is it "expected behaviour" and "Not a bug from a programmer's perspective" when the game clearly doesn't do as intended on odd occasions? - 2) The phrasing of the bug note suggests to me that the quest will be forever unobtainable if the bug (or the expected behaviour) appears - Is this true? --Manassas 09:24, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

It's due to the fact that it isn't a repeating quest - I take it that the daily quests act like the festival quests - somewhere between the festivals, the chain resets so you can do it again. However, if you have a quest and keep it until that reset, then you won't be able to take it again. It's an annoyance but it's an expected behavior due to most likely not knowing an alternative to that except making the quest repeatable (which isn't desired).

It's not "forever unobtainable" - it's just that case for that return/day, I believe. May be wrong there, since I never encountered the problem. -- Konig/talk 16:07, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

• It's expected behavior because the developers told us it was. The game clearly doesn't do as we think it should; that's not the same as doesn't do as intended.
• It's not permanent. It only affects that day's quest and, all you have to do to prevent is zone your character after accepting the reward.

I'll look at the notes again to make sure that it's clear that it's fixable and preventable, but that there's nothing to be done about losing today's reward (if that happened).  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 16:39, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Reset indent. The bug note is wrong. I NEVER rezone or change district before I log out or switch char and I have NEVER experienced the bug. To me it sounds like the bug only appears under the narrow circumstances where: A) You don't log out or switch char. B) You don't log on to that char at all until next time the same quest comes up in rotation. --Manassas 09:59, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

That's exactly the point Manassas: you have to do something with the character in between cycles — if all you do is claim the reward, you won't be able to take the quest again; however, an easy way to prevent it is to rezone/redistrict immediately after. Please rephrase the note.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 16:19, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes of course ... I just wanted to make sure I understood the problem as not to start an edit war. --Manassas 20:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Reset indent. I always go see Nicholas after doing the quest so I've never encountered this bug. Ramei Arashi 16:08, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Scammers?

May I suggest that wiki inform players that standard equipment mods do not add a buff against Vanguard quest foes? Ignorance does not a scammer make. thanks

Is this necessary?

"There are no equipment upgrades (for armor or weapons) that offers any special benefit against Vanguard Foes" No ... and why would there be? Some of them are grawl, others are undead or bandits. Isn't it a slope if we start mentioning all the things that doesn't exist on the wiki pages? --Manassas 09:17, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

As I understand it, for the purposes of weapon upgrades etc., they are not what they are. Or, rather, they are what they are, but they aren't what you think they are. They are Vanguard Foes, and there aren't any upgrades that work against them, and (for example) if you have a +15%dmg vs undead mod on your weapon, it won't give any benefit against Vanguard Foe undead. The note exists to (sort of) make that clear. It doesn't do a very good job, but there you are. (There are claims of scammers trying to sell special items for use against VFs. The note serves to dispel that.) Cynique 09:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Aha *lightbulb moment* So, if I get it right, we should change it to an anomaly note and say something in the line of: "Equipment upgrades which has a benefit against a special type of foe, has no effect if the foe spawns as part of a Vanguard Quest"? --Manassas 10:08, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I think that's important, but the fact that there is nothing to replace the bonus, despite what some scammers claim, is worth keeping here. Cynique 10:17, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

It's not an anomaly; it's a caveat against getting scammed. There are no special bonuses that work against vanguard foes. +5% vs undead still works; but there's nothing that offers +5% vs vanguard foes. The note can probably be removed in 2-3 months, when the novelty wears off and the scammers are going back to selling Bear Pelts for 400.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 23:15, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

In that case, the anomaly note is wrong and we should clearly put it in as a scam warning instead of just circling the issue. --Manassas 11:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect Quest Update Time for This Page

The Lieutenant Langmar page doesn't update the quest at the right time. The other daily rotation pages including the front page update properly, but the Lieutenant Langmar page changes late. Right now it says Save the Ascalonian Noble when it should have started saying Undead since 3 hours and 45 minutes ago (11PST) I don't know anything about editing wikis so please can someone fix it --Mark

Did you try clicking the clock at the top of the page, and when it asks if you want to update/refresh, click OK? (Also, use the 4 tildes to date and mark your posts) 69.177.224.63 04:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I've noticed this several times as well. It appears that even though the page has refreshed, the wiki keeps a cache for faster loading and hence gives you an old copy (i.e. the outdated quest). The tip above of clicking the wiki's clock in the top right will refresh the page with the new info, updating the quest. 90.206.102.41 20:32, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

spawns

I've tried to test this, but could find someone to test it with. When you team up with someone with a different quest in the same area (like one having to kill Blazefiend Griefblade, and the other is on charr annihilation), does all the spawns double? Rumian 22:43, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

UTC/GMT

Ermm.... why is the UTC saying it changes at 16:00 when in actual fact UTC is the same as my time zone of GMT exactly! and the daily tasks do not update until 17:00 (5pm) i checked it today and have checked every website under the sun which clearly states that UTC is the exact same time zone as GMT. But Wiki and a few time zone conversation websites mistakingly put UTC 1 hour behind GMT

Because you are not on GMT, but on BST (which began in March); BST is one hour off from UTC. — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 20:59, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

"Professor Yakkington and his companion, Nicholas Sandford"

Is this a mistype or is Nicholas really Yakkington's companion? ·•·Crypto·•· 19:02, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

They are companions of each other. They are Penn and Teller — neither exists separate from the other. (But, arguably, neither is an animal companion, if that's what you meant.) — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:11, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Yea I was just getting this mental image of Yakkington riding around on Nicholas ·•·Crypto·•· 19:14, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Number of foes

No, not their level, but the number of them. I just went from lvl18 to lvl19, then went back in to the Catacombs to harvest garg skulls. Silly me, I forgot that I still had the Undead quest active, so the place was crawling with level 15/16 undeads. Fine, but it seemed to be more crawling than before. I went round the back of Necromancer Munne's chapel, and found a pair of undead illusionists to the left down the first set of stairs and another pair just by the little bridge. I don't remember either of these pairs being there when I was only level 15. (And, of course, while I was killing the second pair, the necromancer and his crew that live in front of the Grenth statue came out and jumped me from behind. Bah.)

So, is this a real phenomenon, where they add monsters as you gain levels, or is it just age softening my brain? Cynique 07:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Vanguard Quest: Farmer Hamnet

A link for that page ^ on the page for the Bandit Firestarter (Vanguard Foe) links to this page not to the quest page, not sure if it is supposed to do that, but I am pretty sure it shouldn't. :o Solliloqe 17:33, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. --File:User Chieftain Alex Chieftain Signature.pngChieftain Alex 17:52, 16 September 2011 (UTC)