Template talk:Prophecies regions

Order of regions

→ moved from User talk:JonTheMon

[1] - I think it should be done alphabetically, as how Template:Eye of the North regions is currently done. I say this for two reasons: 1) Your argument, or rather the reason it and the respective templates for Factions and Nightfall are done this way, is fallible. It's fallible because that's the order one encounters them if they were to originate from that campaign, but you very clearly do not start in pre-Searing if you came from Factions or Nightfall. The only campaign where the first region entered is the same for both foreign and local characters is Nightfall. Thus, with your argument - order based on how one "should encounter them in" it falls into a debate of whether it should be via local or in general? Naturally, one would go for local, but still there's too much room for loopholes as using your argument I could list the Proph one as "Kryta, Maguuma Jungle, Crystal Desert, Southern Shiverpeaks, Ring of Fire Island Chain, Ascalon" and remove pre-Searing and Northern Shiverpeaks, or list them last.
2) As mentioned, the EN one lists alphabetically, rather than "should encounter" - this is supposedly done because there's no proper placement for Depths of Tyria. On one hand, it can be right after Far Shiverpeaks, in another argument, it can be placed last (depends on if you'd consider the missions taking place in the 4 dungeons to be in Depths or their respective region they're begun in - if the latter, then you won't be expected to go there until Heart of the Shiverpeaks). Thus, another placement where alphabetically is just that much more easier. Likewise Template:Core regions cannot be given a "should encounter" as they can both be encountered first equally for every character.
3) Most importantly, doing it alphabetically reduces size for the Proph one, as currently the word "Ascalon" is stated twice. How I had that helped reduce that part - and even when I added Shiverpeak Mountain (which is arguable to be either a cross-game "region" that's split into 3 sub-regions or a solely Prophecies region), it remained the same length with how I reworked it.
So why, I ask, should we continue to have those three ordered based on "should encounter" rather than alphabetizing, especially when it's already not a full-time placement? Konig/talk 05:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Even if you start in the middle of a storyline sequence, you're still following it, (Kryta, Jungle, Desert, SS, RoF), so the storyline order is still useful for foreign characters. Listing things alphabetically is useful b/c it puts things in a similar order, but if there is another order that also makes sense, why not use that? Why not use a sequence that is familiar to players and also gives them an idea of what follows next? --JonTheMon 14:40, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Jon, in-game order where possible makes more sense. This is how storybooks are arranged (EoTN the exception), and creatures encountered in multiple regions are listed with the regions in game order, rather than alphabetical order on the wiki. Manifold 15:44, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

This is tangental, but the reason the GW:EN one is alphabetized isn't just based on where to put Depths, but that there is no order. While you obviously wind up in Far Shiverpeaks first (unless you count What Lies Beneath and other campaign equivalents as Depths, which would certainly have a valid case), you can easily skip those missions and do them last, and it's entirely up to the player whether to go to Charr Homelands or Tarnished Coast from there. Nothing in the Vanguard or Asura missions assumes you've even done the Norn ones yet, let alone each other. There's simply no 'chronological' order to those that isn't arbitrary. This is entirely different from the campaigns, which are clearly designed to be experienced in native order, even if non-natives skip over the first parts. - Tanetris 16:16, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

i think for eotn you could go with the story book order...- Zesbeer 19:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually first timers (as it was for my ranger - last one to do this) are "suppose" to do it in the story book order, before you do the last few missions. 72.148.31.114 19:51, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

"This is how storybooks are arranged" Storybooks merely state the missions and go by storyline, so obviously they'd hold this "order." Fun fact: Northern and Southern Shiverpeaks are only split by the quest log. Technically, you merely return to the Shiverpeak Mountains just like you return to Kryta (for 2 missions) during the storyline, yet "Shiverpeak Mountains" never gets linked for these kinds of things just because of the quest log (and later the introduction of Far Shiverpeaks bringing us to turn what's technically a Prophecies region name into a cross-game "overlapping" region). I still hold that it should be done alphabetically, as that feels more orderly to me and, for a non-semantical argument, it can be made smaller. Konig/talk 21:48, 24 July 2011 (UTC)