Talk:Unique item

Progression

Color	Progress
	not started or nearly blank
	partially complete
	nearly complete, or complete but unformatted
	complete and formatted
	complete, formatted and proofread
	not applicable

Quick reference progession

Profession quick refs

Profession	Prophecies	Factions	Nightfall
Warrior
Ranger
Monk
Necromancer
Mesmer
Elementalist
Assassin
Ritualist
Paragon
Dervish

Here's a chart to keep track of which quick refs are complete. -- Gordon Ecker 19:13, 16 February 2007 (PST)

I'm taking a break from the list right now. I'll continue after the end of the Dragon Festival. -- Gordon Ecker 19:19, 16 February 2007 (PST)

And I managed to get some more done during rock paper scissors. Unfortunately, it turns out that I forgot the Channeling Magic sections. -- Gordon Ecker 18:03, 17 February 2007 (PST)

And now all Factions and Prophecies professions are complete, as is the Nightfall green list. -- Gordon Ecker 18:35, 17 February 2007 (PST)

What happen to the "by campagn, region and attribute" article, will they be droped in favor the the quick reference page? --Bob 20:24, 19 February 2007 (PST)

I don't think so. Both types of lists have their uses. But right now my priority is completing the quick references. -- Gordon Ecker 20:56, 19 February 2007 (PST)

And it's done. I'm taking a break from quick refs for a while. I copied the table for the list progression for Bob and anyone else interested in doing the lists. -- Gordon Ecker 02:04, 20 February 2007 (PST)

Didn't realise we were already doing the quick refs, should've paid more attention I guess. It's great we've got the stuff in place, it could do with a little tinkering here and there but nothing drastic. There's a couple of points of style I'd question though - personally I don't see the point in having a Replicable column, I think it's just a waste of space in the tables (some of which already fill my 1280 x 1024 resolution, so they must be pretty grim for anybody browsing at 1024 x 768 or lower). I also don't like the "Campaign" column that appears a couple of times, as the campaign is inherent in the location (makes it a click further away true, but I'd rather have a more compact table). There's also scope for rationalising some abbreviations into a general key and cutting down on the wordiness in the table too. I'll have a play myself if I get a chance. --NieA7 02:35, 20 February 2007 (PST)

I believe the replicable column is extremely relevant. For example, you can copy the stats of the rare and valuable Domain of Anguish Ghostly Staves for 5k + materials + components, but the only way to get an item with the stats of The Kindlerock, Deeproot's Sorrow, the Ungues of the Oni or even the cheap and common Flint's Artifact is to buy or farm the actual item. Anyway, unique item style & formatting in general is being discussed here. -- Gordon Ecker 02:11, 22 February 2007 (EST)

I re-added the chart to keep track of proofreading. -- Gordon Ecker 06:51, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

List progression

Campaign Lists

Prophecies	Factions	Nightfall

Profession Lists

Profession	Prophecies	Factions	Nightfall
Warrior
Ranger
Monk
Necromancer
Mesmer
Elementalist
Assassin
Ritualist
Paragon
Dervish

Location Lists

Prophecies	Kryta	Maguuma Jungle	Crystal Desert	Nightfallen Tombs	Southern Shiverpeaks	Sorrow's Furnace

Factions	Shing Jea Island	Kaineng City	Echovald Forest	The Jade Sea	Imperial Palace	Divine Path	The Deep	Urgoz's Warren

Nightfall	Istan	Kourna	Vabbi	The Desolation	Realm of Torment	Throne of Secrets	Domain of Anguish	The Ebony Citadel of Mallyx

Did warrior, ranger, monk, necromancer, mesmser, elementalist. need to finish sorting them by area so they got yellow status. --Bob 04:18, 20 February 2007 (PST)

Warrior is done, can anyone double check my list? this is long and boring, ill get ranger finish tomorrow. --Bob 01:50, 22 February 2007 (EST)

Checked, I'm pretty sure it's complete. -- Gordon Ecker 04:08, 22 February 2007 (EST)

I finished up the lists, but they still need proofreading. -- Gordon Ecker 06:50, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

And the campaign lists are also finished. -- Gordon Ecker 22:22, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

As are the drop location lists, although they all need proofreading. -- Gordon Ecker 04:21, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

Article progression

Profession	Prophecies	Factions	Nightfall
Warrior
Ranger
Monk
Necromancer
Mesmer
Elementalist
Assassin
Ritualist
Paragon
Dervish

Here's a table to keep track of which unique item articles are complete. -- Gordon Ecker 00:58, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

End game colector

While end game weapon are green, i think they more like collector items. I have added them under the listing whit additional info of what is avaible and what they require in exchange. Gordon Ecker started to move them on the main list so i was wondering witch way is prefered by the community. Please comment. --Bob 02:31, 24 February 2007 (EST)

I reckon we should categorise the individual pages as both unique and collector, but include them in the collector quick reference rather than the unique quick reference. --NieA7 09:37, 27 February 2007 (EST)

I think that, since they are both, they should be categorised as both, with some kind of note about how you can only get one Amulet of the Mists and one Book of Secrets per character. -- Gordon Ecker 18:30, 27 February 2007 (EST)

Sounds good to me (maybe even a sub-category could be created for them - if we've got them in Factions and Nightfall it seems a good bet that we'll get them in future campaigns too), but what about inclusions in quick ref tables? --NieA7 08:20, 2 March 2007 (EST)

Non-weapon Greens

Think we should add another row to the table for the Charr bag? At this time I believe it is the only non-weapon non-minipet non-hero armor green of its kind, maybe it should get its own little "see also" link or something. Although if ANet continues to release misc. greens like this, we should add it to the article somewhere. Technically, the article is called "unique item". File:Esig2.jpg Eldin 21:04, 6 March 2007 (EST)

Errors

This part:

"Ruins of the Tomb of the Primeval Kings

    * Divine Favor
         o Staves
               + Brohn's Staff
               + Gardock's Staff
               + The Yakslapper 

"

(It wants to put the border around it, ignore it, read between the quotes. :$) Are you sure? Sounds Sorrow's Furnace to me :P Turaak 18:12, 9 March 2007 (EST)

Yep, it appears to be a copy / paste error. It's fixed now. -- Gordon Ecker 20:39, 9 March 2007 (EST)

---

There is also a weapon error in the skins department. I was using my Stoneherder's Flatbow but it changed to a skin I never seen not even in wiki. The skin was a mix of Asuran bow shape mixed with Celestial bow and had weird glow to it. Not sure why it happen tho, was kinda cool looking, tried to get screen shot but changed back to normal when i went for it. I'll try again when i see it happen. till then any one have a clue why it did that? --Neji.B~ 02:17, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

One Word: Weapon Spell 83.236.214.68 12:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Primary attribute in quick references

Edit: Editing this comment as I now more clearly see what's going on. :-) OK, I just noticed there seem to be some inconsistencies in how the primary attribute is listed in the quick references. In the Paragon shield list, that information is part of a "table subheader", and in for example the Necromancer unique reference, it's a regular section. It would be good to see some better consistency there. -- Jonas N 04:18, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

Look at the Unique items quick reference (Prophecies) list - I'm hoping to standardise all weapon quick refs based on that, however that's finalised (check its talk page for the ongoing discussion :) --NieA7 04:22, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

Caster professions use subheadings based on attributes because they can use a weapon and an offhand item linked to the same attribute, while Warriors and Paragons use weapons and shields as subheadings because there are no Strength, Tactics, Command or Motivation weapons and no Axe Mastery, Hammer Mastery, Swordsmanship or Spear Mastery shields. -- Gordon Ecker 04:42, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

I support "Separate but Consistent ^TM" treatment of caster weapons vs martial weapons. Caster weapons should be grouped by attribute that gets enhanced first, then by profession (nobody gives a Lyssian Dime about requirements of staves and wands, unless you are wanding a Dying Nightmare in the Underworld). Martial weapons should be grouped by weapon type and required attribute. This way, all weapons are grouped by their "functionality" first, then by weapon type. In many cases, the functionality just happens to be consistently associated with certain attribute requirements.

Also, I advocate that we make the tables sortable. This would require weapon types not taking up a row (either split tables into smaller sub-tables, or add a "weapon type" column). See Mesmer perfect weapons for an example (the hiding of blank columns require customing CSS to work). -User:PanSola (talk to the File:Follower of Lyssa.png) 04:01, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

The Req of Focus Items determines whether you get the +12 energy or not - I'd give a Grenthian Quarter for that, never mind a Lyssian Dime. Also, grouping by enhanced attribute leaves you with a rather uncomfortable "other" category for those weapons that have general rather than specific enhancements. Personally I always try to use weapons that I meet the Req for, though it's not the primary concern I guess. --NieA7 06:02, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

I agree with adding sortability. -- Gordon Ecker 20:26, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

I'm fairly comfortable with an "other" category d-: If I recall correctly, the Prophecies and Factions weapons whose enhanced attributes don't match their requirement attributes are only the primary weapons, never focus items, so everyone is getting free Grenthian Quarters, making it completely valueless q-: -User:PanSola (talk to the File:Follower of Lyssa.png) 10:14, 29 April 2007 (EDT)

I just checked the Prophecies and Factions quick refs, Ivor's Icon enhances Smiting Prayers but has a DF req. -- Gordon Ecker 02:23, 30 April 2007 (EDT)

I've never liked "other" as a category, it seems to smack of a classification failure. When I redid the quick refs at GuildWiki it was used in some of them and not other, so I standardised on dividing the tables by requirement. One or two people complained about the Monk weapons all being listed under DF, but other than that it went down well. Personally I find it more intuitive than "attribute enhanced", but I don't know how other people feel. Sortability seems pretty sexy (love all the merge suggestions on that page by the way), I'll see about adding that. I guess with sortability in place we could dump a whole profession's unique's in one table and just let people sort it by whatever they like, though "attribute enhanced" is non-obvious so would need to be another column (along with req)... --NieA7 09:33, 1 May 2007 (EDT) (defending the value of Grenthian Quarters worldwide)

Added sortability for Warrior, Ranger and Monk weapons - is it an improvement? Suggested changes? --NieA7 10:43, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

Bump. It's a pretty big change and I'm not convinced it's for the better, anybody else have an opinion they'd like to share? --NieA7 06:08, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

Why are so many columns listed as unsortable? -User:PanSola (talk to the File:Follower of Lyssa.png) 05:53, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

BTW, I showed my other friend who plays GuildWars the quick reference tables on GuildWiki, the ones that list by requirements and put weapons that enhances different attributes into the same table. His immediate response is "but that makes it (the table) useless!" Anyways, I would still advocate that individual weapon types have separate tables, at least until stable sorting is implemented. Putting wands and focus items in the same table makes as little sense as putting swords and shields in the same table. -User:PanSola (talk to the File:Follower of Lyssa.png) 06:03, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Wow, sorry, never noticed anybody had answered here. I left many of the columns unsortable because I can't conceive why people would want to sort by them (considering that what's actually in those columns is an arbitrary description), but I guess other than the extra screen real estate there's no real harm allowing everything to be sorted. As for your other point, it seems like it's horses for courses because I at least prefer them listed by required attribute rather than enhanced. I guess this could be solved by having an "Enhances" sortable column then just dumping all the wands/staff/foci in their own tables. How would that be as an approach? --NieA7 15:47, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Tombs

I've just rushed around changing all the [[The Darkness (Prophecies)]] to The Darkness as we don't have a separate page for the Elonian versions. Most of the links were pointing to Hall of Heroes in various forms, so I changed all of them to point to Tomb of the Primeval Kings, which is correct. BUT - and I've never quite worked out why it's this way - the Tombs uniques are actually listed at Nightfallen Tomb, which is a missable link within the body text of the Tombs article (although I did stick in a sneaky direct link a while back ^^). Does anybody call it the Nightfallen Tombs? I don't know - it might just be me, but it annoys me! --Snograt 06:40, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

I'd prefer to link to the Hall of Heroes (explorable area), as that's the actual zone the bosses are in. As for Nightfallen Tomb(s), I don't know if anyone uses it outside of GuildWiki, who started using the term to follow the naming convention of the corrupted areas in Nightfall. Before that, it was called "tomb(s)" and "tomb ruins" by players and "Ruins of the Tomb of the Primeval Kings" on the wiki. Early on people called it the "new Underworld". -- Gordon Ecker 07:10, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Heh I actually didn't notice GuildWiki has changed to call it Nightfallen Tombs, I thought it's just a GWW thing d-: I vote for using in-game names, but more precise disambiguations, so somethiing like the Hall of Heroes (Nightfallen Tombs). The place functions more like an mission than an explorable area anyways (especially since when you kill all the mobs, it refers to mission completion, and teleports you out whether you like it or not). -User:PanSola (talk to the File:Follower of Lyssa.png) 07:19, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Edit conflict - here's what I was going to say: >>I'd argue that Tombs is somewhat unique. It's more of a mission than an explorable area - no res shrines, definite objective, "on-rails" progression. If anyone asks where to get a Victo's, do you say "from the Hall of Heroes explorable?"; no - you say "Tombs."

Spooky, eh? --Snograt 07:34, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

I was wrong, I checked the other Tomb of the Primeval Kings article and they didn't exactly call it Nightfallen Tomb(s), but the article talks about the ruins being considered "Nightfallen". -- Gordon Ecker 21:38, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

A case of legacy not fixed because "it ain't broken"

Once upon a time on GuildWiki, there was no collector weapons quick reference, and unique items wasn't introduced in the game yet. If you want to look for a wand that is 20/20 in Domination Magic, the best way was to search through a super long article that contains the inventory of every single collector in the game, and keep searching the keyword "Domination Magic". That was highly annoying and greatly tedious, so the collector weapon quick references were introduced, grouping and sorting the weapons by their stats (Crystal Desert and Southern Shiverpeaks share the same table because their weapons were all max stats). The creation of the quick reference list allows one to easily look up weapons with bonuses of interest in a relatively organized table.

Later on, the unique items were introduced with the Sorrow's Furnace update, and the Unique items list article was the single most viewed article on the wiki for many many months, because lots of people want to look up what perfect stat weapon with unique skin were available. However, if you want to look for a unique Mesmer cane that gives you 20/20 in Domination Magic, the best way was to open up each of the individual weapon articles, and read about them. That was highly annoying and greatly tedious, so the unique item quick reference was created following the format of the collector weapons. Looking back, that might've been the biggest mistake committed with respect to the quick reference lists...

Many more months passed. Crafter weapons got a major buff, actually having bonuses to make them worthy of buying; Additional unique items and collector items were introduced. The various weapons quick reference lists grew and evolved, got broken down, and regrouped, eventually getting to where they are at today.

A week ago, if I wanted to look up a 20/20 wand in Restoration Magic on GuildWiki, I need to open THREE different pages (unique, collector, crafter), and within each page look up TWO different tables (because Factions wands that enhances Restoration Magic typically requires 9 Spawning Powers, whereas Nightfall wands enhancing Restoration Magic would require 9 Restoration Magic). THAT, I claim, is highly annoying and tedious.

What is my point with the 4 paragraphs of boring and tedious narrative? I am claiming that having separate quick references by function for uniques, crafter, and collector items on GuildWiki is bad design, and the legacy of that mistake has influenced what we have on GuildWarsWiki. I regret ever introducing the Unique items quick reference into GuildWiki, I should've just put collector weapons and unique weapons in the same tables back in November 2005.

I am arguing that we should make a conscious push towards making weapon quick reference articles more functionality-oriented, so it will be easy and obvious to a user as to where to go to look up on how to acquire a 20/20 wand for Restoration Magic, and a HSR 20% Restoration , Restoration +1 20% focus. Let's not make users go through 3 different articles and look up 2 different tables per article (that'd actually be 4 tables per article if the user didn't know Restoration-enhancing wands are only tied to Spawning Powers in Factions, and only tied to Restoration in Nightfall) just to find a single set of weapons.

So now, what are the weaknesses in my argument? d-: -User:PanSola (talk to the File:Follower of Lyssa.png) 07:11, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Nice summary, I have to say I agree with the argument presented. I'm not sure how best to remedy the situation however, as people do still tend to differentiate between uniques and collectors/crafters (and hence find the existing references useful regardless). My own personal opinion is that having quick reference lists of all perfect weapons (unique, crafter and collector) in articles differentiated by either profession or requirement would be useful (e.g. Reference of perfect mesmer weapons). Perhaps then subdividing each page by requirement and acquisition method would also be helpful, e.g. (using profession):

• Profession
  • Requirement
    • Unique
    • Collector
    • Crafter

The only other concern to address is the campaign of the item, as not all users have access to all campaigns. Anyways, just thought I'd share my thoughts. --Indecision 07:47, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

I think that such a combined page "where can I get perfect weapons for my" profession is a good idea. I don't want to look "oh, Prophecies has this weapon, what has Factions"... I want to look in one article stating all available (for desired profession). That division into "how to acquire" could be useful, but should not be in separate tables (one column for type of acquisition linking to page of unique/collector/weaponsmith should be enough). Another column for Campaign should be enough to hint which campaign is needed (or if I have to ask someone to get me this item). I don't know weather it is possible to combine tables into each other to generate a big table with all items (sortable by any of the columns) out of 3 (4) separate tables for according campaign (to have better maintainable tables, not one huge one). - MSorglos 08:04, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

I would like to personally encourage the concept of a "single source" reference. I've posted the articles for about 150 unique items. As many of the old wiki articles were quite incomplete, I've been pouring through all of the old tables quite frequently to ensure that I identify all of the collectors/crafters that can provide base weapons for replication, I generally have to check 4 quick reference guides to find them all (I also need to check each individual article as the weapon type is not described on the quick reference tables, and there are a few errors). The sorting functionality of wiki tables would help to make this useful without having to worry about scrolling through the inevitably long list. You can see what NieA7 did with this concept at Unique items quick reference (Prophecies). You would have fields for profession, weapon type, requirement, collector/crafter name, prefix, suffix, inscription and inherent. You could sort by the most important field based on what you were looking for and your most relevant choices should "pop" to the top. -- Rohar (talk|contribs) 08:23, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

BTW, the thing I'm pushing for looks like Mesmer perfect weapons. Check the GuildWiki version for better styling. I want to argue that different weapon types should in general be in different tables, at least until we have "stable" sorting (which means the results can be essentially sorted by multiple criteria). -User:PanSola (talk to the File:Follower of Lyssa.png) 10:36, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

That page looks good. Campaign should be better stated than only with 1/2/3 (I did not find that information first...) Acquisition could have a hint what kind of acquisition this is (e.g. unique/collector/crafter). I don't know how much logic we can put into table sorting and perhaps table searching to get this: give my any Nightfall items, that have 20/20 Domination HCT. Sorting multiple criterias is another usefull thing. But with that Inscriptions/Bonus we can't do all sortings, because it won't sort that way. So giving some hint which values should be first for that column could be usefull (if implementable). Yes... I am computer science student... sometimes I think I have too many ideas which cannot be implemented with so little time.- MSorglos 10:51, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

I've been working on customizing sorting for a while (on and off). If you are interested, leave a note on my talk page. -User:PanSola (talk to the File:Follower of Lyssa.png) 12:48, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Although I agree that attribute-based lists are more useful, I think there's a place for both kinds of lists. There are people who are looking for a list of all perfect stat items for a given attribute and people who are looking for a list of all the crafted / collector / unique items for a given campaign or profession. -- Gordon Ecker 21:38, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

I agree with Gordon Ecker - there's scope and use for both individual lists and a combined list. Not to mention that many collector and weapon smith perfect items don't include prefix and suffix upgrades, making greens more "complete". I've added sortability on a trial basis to the Unique items quick reference (Prophecies), waiting for comments before I do any more. --NieA7 06:05, 8 May 2007 (EDT)

Nongreen uniques

should holiday weapons such as the Wintergreen Bow be classified as unique? or if not unique, then somehow special b/c they can't be salvaged and don't have normal reqs. i changed it already (but not the other wintergreen items), but then realized it didn't conform to the current definition of unique but i didn't want to change it back willy nilly. --Wongba 20:19, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

They should not be considered unique because they are not dropped by a boss (or high level foe). -- Rohar (talk|contribs) 20:59, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

They're special, but they belong in another category, since they're not green. I'd go with category:promotional items. -- Gordon Ecker 21:12, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Yea that sounds like a good idea Quazark Zeklar

Green link?

I'm not very good with wiki's and what i'm asking is probably not possible, but I wanna be sure.

is it possible to make the links to green items appear in green? because i've seen several pages with links to other pages containing stuff like Ironwing Flatbow green. is it possible to have the 'Ironwing Flatbow' appear in green, so its easyer to spot the unique weapons? Rhydeble 17:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Ironwing Flatbow, Yes it can be done but it takes more wiki markup to get the job done, of course I'm no wiki expert and there might be an easier way to get it done. Personally I would not like to see colours leading to different articles it could make some pages look messy. -- Broodling67 00:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Item Value

Greens actually go for way more than the price stated here. I don't know the current market value, but I know they are much more valuable than this. Can someone please change this?--Yankeefan984 22:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

That's their merchant sale price. -- Gordon Ecker 02:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

It should be mentioned that if you ID a green it's value will increase by between 1gp and 29gp 86.17.72.80 20:54, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Article reorganization?

can this article be reorganized to be in a Table format that has all the different combinations? 75.165.96.67 05:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Farming

should we add a note into this about how these are often farmed by some players? Thanks in advance. Saya Maho 21:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Isn't that kinda a given? Chiyu! 16:48, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Where is the information that gives tips on increasing the chances of getting a green item to drop? I have been farming the same boss over and over, until the trail of mobs leading to my desired capture were no longer dropping anything for me. ( save the occasional token gold drop for the group.) There appears to be some sort of mechanic dealing diminishing returns (as far as non-boss drops go), and i wonder how that would apply to killing a boss over and over and over again on the same day. Can I increase my odds by trying less frequently per gaming session? I do not understand if the game designers put in algorithms to prevent farmers, and how odds are calculated for a particular green to drop. Then again, that information may not be available (publicly at least). I wish i knew more about what users are experiencing in regard to drop rates of green items. Are some more difficult to drop than others? Setting aside the difficulty in reaching, and killing a particular boss, are the drop rates equal (percentage wise) to drop for most green items when factoring only those bosses that have a single green item that they drop? (i.e. ignoring special one time use chests, and bosses with multiple unique items in both gold and green color.) 24.23.36.34 18:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Do greens drop in missions? I've been trying to farm Sword Ancient Kai's green from the mission and can't seem to get it. Not that he has a good unique sword or anything, it just has my name on it. <>Sparky, the Tainted 22:41, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure but it seams like the more players in the team the higher the chance for a green to drop. See when I farmed out Asterius' Scythe solo it took me 17 runs to get it, but 2 days later my guild and I went out to help get some one through to Rata (with out them dieing do to survivor tittle) it dropped again. 5 players 3 Hero Monks. So yeah higher chance with more players it seams. Just hope that it drops for you if you and someone else wants it.--Neji.B~ 07:17, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Alphabetization of lists, the

Before I fix the numerous alphabetization errors on the greens lists, is there policy on leading "the"s? 76.84.34.210 19:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

No one had anything to say, so I alphabetized all of the "List of [class] unique items" lists with leading "the"s omitted. Manifold 17:52, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Non-boss greens

Apparently, there are some non-boss greens, such as the Tattered Fan. Is there a list of these somewhere? 98.216.204.201 01:31, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

The Tattered Fan Drops from the Wind riders in The Falls. The only other non boss Green I know of is the Totem Axe which drops from the Behmoths, also in the Falls

Disputing droprate difference in HM

I have personally recorded close to 1,500 solo boss kills in the game in both NM and HM and while there is clearly a difference in droprates of uniques between campaigns, I strongly dispute there is any difference at all between NM and HM. I'll wait a few days and see if any of you have any comments on this, before I change the article. Manassas 11:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to Silver Edge for saving me the trouble :) Manassas 08:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Affecting non-boss drops ?

Hey everyone, I has a question. I wonder if the event this week-end affects the Peacekeeper and White Mantle greens, as they've been recently added, they might be bugged or something and considered as greens from bosses. Sorry for crappy english by the way. --92.154.57.190 15:00, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

i think it does, Double Green Drop rate from Everything i suppose. also, your english isent half bad :P --Neil2250 15:02, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Pity there isn't a title for collecting these

It would have been interesting to have such a title and would fit in easily with other titles, such as Skill Hunter and Cartographer. One point for the first time you collect a unique item, I would say would have worked well. It would mean that people would take the time to fight lesser bosses, for instance, such as those on the Plains of Jarin, who don't have max uniques. --La Visiteuse 10:40, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Diff page

Many players wish to get at least 1 green weapon. They sometimes have to make (in the extreme cases) hundreds of runs to find out they dont get anything. I would suggest making a separate page on which to list all suggestions about increasing the odds of dropping and how are they calculated. Respectfully Magnum 09:07, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Are they actually Unique?

Are these items actually unique? ie can you only get one of each Item or can you have one say, on your character and another of the same item on a Hero? --92.18.157.91 15:14, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Answered my own question here, coz I just looted a 2nd Totem Axe on the same account but different character within about 2 hours of each other.--92.18.157.91 17:57, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Checklist

Having failed to find a good checklist of Unique weapons/off-hands I went and made my own. It can be found at http://echoland.co.uk It's only a basic outline at the moment so any feedback would be appreciated.Dakota 09:52, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Does HM affect the droprate?

I've been farming greens for a long time, and managed to farm up weapons for all my heroes across all of my characters. I'm a bit perplexed by the Hard mode page, stating that Greens drop more often in Hard Mode. I find this not the case. So, I was wondering: does hard mode influence the drop rate positively? If so, does anyone have a forum thread they could direct me to verify this claim? Thanks. 128.119.169.164 17:56, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Outdated & missing pages

I need someone to double check these to make sure nothing is missing, broken, or outdated please.--Falconeye (talk) 05:39, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Permission to add screenshots of the item description like in the German Wiki for green items

The German Guild Wiki has screenshots of the description for green items. There is a thread in GW Legacy (link) where we were talking regarding the pre-nerf color/descriptions and the current ones, because some items were changed with an update. So my petition for conservative purposes, please, is if we can do the same in this English Wiki (only with green/unique items), below the page or below the main table of each green weapon. —Scribeton (talk) 19:16, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't see why you'd need to ask for permission here. You'd add some relevant stuff without removing anything. Go for it.

What would be good is an agreement where to place the screenshot. I'd add it to the Stats section, below the text info. Steve1 (talk) 21:55, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I wanted to ask first because each wiki for each product or thing has its own "unwritten rules", and I have already encountered problems of this type in the past, to edit something and have it reverted because they do not consider it necessary to add it. In this case each green item has the description written in the page already, and since there are no screenshots of the descriptions in the whole wiki, I thought that simply with the text was enough. But now that I have discovered this thing thanks to the GWLegacy's thread, I thought it would be a good idea to start adding it, so I wanted to know if there would be a problem or not before doing something, because I don't want to spend hours taking screenshots for nothing, I prefer asking first xD —Scribeton (talk) 07:00, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Chances are, people won't react to your request. If that's the case, wait until the middle of next week and make the changes you propose on 1-3 items. And then wait if you elicit a reaction that way. The wiki has become noticably more dormant in the course of 2020. Steve1 (talk) 13:12, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

My only concern is that this may become yet another unfinished project on the stack we already have. horrible | contribs 14:54, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Well, I can't do it alone, that's for sure. I will do what I can with the items in my posession and with the help of some members of the forum, but I don't think I can fulfill the entire green list simply because I don't have them all nor space in my account to storage so many stuff. Better a 5% of updated content than nothing, imo. —Scribeton (talk) 18:56, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

We do also have {{Item info}}, which is used on some pages already like Vampiric Dragon Sword. Not sure if that suits the reason you want to do this, though. horrible | contribs 03:31, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

That looks like quite a bit of work, and prone to error compared to taking a screenshot. Steve1 (talk) 18:23, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

I agree, good feature but taking a screenshot is easier xD —Scribeton (talk) 12:08, 19 January 2021 (UTC)