User talk:Linsey Murdock/Questions13

All Titles Account Based?

The reason for this inquiry is that when the HoM changes become effective all will be visible for all characters if i understood correctly and in Gw2 the small-spoils will be for All characters any way's? --Silverleaf Don't assume, ask! 17:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

That doesn't make all titles account based. Linsey has also made if pretty clear there are no plans to change any of the others to account based. The HoM is simply a place to display accomplishments. It doesn't determine the functionality of any title based skills, it doesn't convey any benefit to characters in Guild Wars (meeting the rank requirement for armor in EotN, etc). It will determine some, as of yet, undefined unlocks in GW2, but until those are announced it's pointless to speculate on how they are going to work. Even once the HoM has the option to be viewed as account based, each individual character will still have to earn titles. Personally, I don't understand why they are even giving an account based view, since for me, it's much easier to track who needs what (armor, hero armor, etc) by visiting each of their halls individually, but since enough people seem to want it, they are going to do it. -- Wyn 17:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Good insights as ever Wyn. I do believe it merits the inquiry? Since GW should be for all players? It would even turn down some of the still needed grinding? --Silverleaf Don't assume, ask! 17:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I guess I don't understand what your inquiry actually is then Silverleaf. -- Wyn 19:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Afaik the HoM changes will be optional, Wyn. That is, you can decide whether you want your HoM to be account wide or if you want to keep HoMs for individual characters. I think Silverleaf wants to know if, should you opt for an account wide HoM, the benefits of the cumulative HoM will count for all GW2 characters linked to it instead of just for the character linked to the character that earned a certain title. -- Elv 19:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Elv for your assistance. It is not what I meant though. My inquiry is, if all accomplishments in GW will be (combined) available for all characters in GW2, then why not make all current character titles account wide? Logic is that if everything you gain in way's of titlepoints is account wide and accumilated from the single character titles now..the grind for everything will be lowered and it's not as if it is lost in preparation for GW2. It would help a lot of players the same way it helped with the wisdom title. Less grind, more fun and obtainable titles for all. That way even "younger" accounts can obtain the wonderfull little surprises that await us all who will buy GW2? And make current box sales more more wanted? --Silverleaf Don't assume, ask! 20:38, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Linsey has already said that she will not change other titles, and here's what I think are some valid reasons why not. (1) It may be technically more difficult. For example, skill hunter needs to compare over the account which characters have what skills, which is a more complex implementation than just adding points. (2) Many people feel that many titles should remain character-based. Like survivor, protector, guardian. (3) Although I agree that grind-based titles like Asura or Sunspear could be account-based, they are easy and fast enough to max on one character, so the point here is that it's not necessary. (4) Finally, if you make titles too easy to max, then you'll find yourself in GW2 with everyone having the special items, making them not so special. Elitists want some things to be just theirs, and while not being elitist myself, I can at least understand their point of view. -- Alaris 20:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for clarifying there, Silverleaf. Alaris is right, Linsey has said she won't be touching other titles, presumably for many of the reasons stated above. Titles need to maintain some measure of difficulty or challenge, if only to stop them being worthless (some might argue that things like Ursan alreadyhavedone that). While this does sound vaguely elitist, it makes sense if you look at the point of a title. If everyone could get every title really easily, it becomes worthless. You might as well give it to people the moment they generate a character. The titles that now remain character-based are not so insanely difficult to obtain, although they are pretty pricy. If you're wealthy enough, you could get Sweet Tooth maxed in a day. The only title I'd like to see account wide now is Drunkard, because unless if you macro it, it takes an immense amount of your time to complete and you'd be forced to focus that time on a single character. 10k minutes is almost a full week in time! Assuming that most people don't play GW 24/7, that's a ridiculous amount of time...

Don't think that particular change will be made though. Linsey's probably had enough of title changes by now. The other titles are fine as they are, I think. The big update has already made many of them significantly more easy to obtain. :) -- Elv 21:39, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

For me, making all the titles account based would end the game for me. I have maxed all the playing titles on my primary character, and now have started working on them on my other characters. If maxing them once was all I had to do, I would have no other reason to play. -- Wyn 01:53, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

You play GW only to get titles? Grind much? --118.90.52.107 02:59, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

If you gained all the titles on a main Character (not specifically Wyn) why would you need to gain them on another character? HoM account based and the general transfer for all characters in GW2 makes that a waist of time imho.--Silverleaf Don't assume, ask! 11:23, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Titles will not become account based in the sense that all you characters will get the same titles. The HOM will become account based, in that you can choose to view it with all achievement from all individual HOM's combibed. You can also choose to view them for each seperate character as it is now. This choice is not permanent. You can switch your preferred view at any time. The game will remember what titles and achievements each individual character has gotten. The only change that's going to happen is that at any time you can opt to view your seperate HOM's or view one combined account-wide HOM, showing all you achievements and titles. That's all. So it won't affect your characters titles, it will only see that all your combined achievements and titles will carry over account-wide to GW2. That's what they stated anyway, if I understood it correctly, and I believe I did. Sjeng 11:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I think so too Sjeng. But that makes my point at the same time. Why need an Account Based HoM view? My inquiry is as to "Why not make the titles account based Now" so all can enjoy the game, less grind, and all can transfer more easily to GW2? --Silverleaf Don't assume, ask! 12:21, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Because most titles were never meant to be account wide. Example: reputation titles that give you PvE skills would break the game if a newbie character started with max reputation. And I think people would like an account based HoM now just to see what the total will look like, and to be certain that it all adds up (like Tormented/Destroyer weapons in seperate HoM's). It's a reassurement of how it will work in GW2. Sjeng 15:24, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

As I have said before, I have no plans to change any other titles to be account based for a number of reasons, many of which have already been stated here. - Linsey talk 19:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Dishonour for Reporting Leechers

For some reason the number of leechers in FA has increased dramatically. Along with this increase is the incredibly unfortunate side effect of bans for reporting them all. I think if you play the game you will notice that most matches even when someone is an undeniable leecher, most people will not report them. If you have 3+ leechers in one game not only are there a lot less people to report so you need everyone to do it, but you also have 6 dishonour if you report 3 people and the others don't. This has led to the player mentality "I won't report until 3 other people do it first," which obviously won't work because if the other three people think the same, no-one will report. The report system is severely flawed and I have now received dishonourable twice in an hour from reporting large numbers of leechers when no-one else did. More severe punishments for leechers are needed and a better anti-leeching system is also needed. If buying gold was met with a 1 week ban but you got to keep the gold you bought everyone would do it happily. The consequences need to be enough to prevent the action, not make it mildly less effecting sometimes. 58.106.43.94 11:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

My answer on this subject will be in the FA/JQ Leeching subject already listed on my page. In the future, instead of starting a new section, please check to see if your subject it has already be posed on the page or been answered before. Thanks! - Linsey talk 20:27, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Tolkano / PvP Weapon and Armour Unlocks

Hi Linsey. I use a PvP-only account. I like the flexibility of making PvP-only weapons/armour skins for my characters without the need to have to buy all of them in PvE. Having character-specific weapons/armour from Tolkano makes all the work required to unlock these pretty useless if you want to delete the character or make another weapon with the same skin. I was expecting these to be account-wide unlocks that I could then use multiple times across all my PvP characters. Is there are reason why it has been created like this? Biscuits 15:17, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

i inquired about this before and got the responce "they would lose there Uniqueness" what that means i dont know because most if not all the skins are not unique and if you were to unlock armor apon creation in pve (for that profession only) you actuality would be doing more work then some one who just when in and guested for a year (xunlai tournament house) so yea.75.165.101.64 09:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

From Isaiah's archive: "Yeah the problem is this is a tech limitation, it's really hard because in order to make it work we have to record a HUGE amount of data, and so this isn't really a design choice as much as it is a limitation of the system". He talks more about it, but making it short, they also think an account wide unlock system would be better, but couldn't find a way to implement it. Erasculio 09:30, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks Erasculio. :) I suspected this would have been asked before but failed to find anything. I guess I'll just have to live with it. Biscuits 13:55, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to Erasculio for finding that answer! - Linsey talk 20:34, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion to help vanquish

i was wondering if in hardmode, when your vanquishing can there be a bar added like the experience bar added which fills up when you kill enemies, that way it can be extended and so you have more of an idea of how many enemies you have left to kill. thanks --Robot 15:27, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

The little bar on the bottom of the hard mode icon already shows this. Sadie2k 15:37, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

yes but u can hardly see how many enemies you have left as the bar is so small, thats why i asked, so it can be more clearer--Robot 15:40, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Also it's a little broken in some zones, like Raisu Palace. -Kherec 15:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Broken how? I've never had trouble with it, and I've done a LOT of vanquishing... -- Elv 16:45, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

It's not so much broken as simply reflective of the currently spawned monsters. If there are not many spawned then the meter will show good progress near the start of the vanquish and in some places present the illusion that the vanquish is half way complete after numbers like 20 kills. As you progress further into the instance more mobs will spawn and the meter appears to sink back again. The effect is very noticeable in most Kaineng explorable zones. -- WarBlade 20:46, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Which is also the reason why they can't add a maximum number to it: it's dynamic, not static. For example, if you defeat a pet, the maximum suddenly increases by 1. 145.94.74.23 10:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

As other have said, that little bar is the best we can do because the spawns are dynamic and the numbers for vanquishing can change as you play through the zone. - Linsey talk 20:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Hero AI Question

I had a conversation in my Guild about hero AI and some people seem to think different heroes from the same class have different AI. I always assumed they were the same as each other but I heard claims that Dunkoro was a better healer than Tahlkora but she can protect better than he can. Is there an AI difference between heroes of the same class? Thanks for your time. 122.111.12.40 20:17, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

That is not the case. Most AI is done on a skill by skill basis and all heroes have access to the same database of skill considers. - Linsey talk 20:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Rot Wallows

Hey Linsey, are the Rot Wallows meant to have a base chance of knockdown? They seem to cause it randomly with basic melee attacks since the latest update. I'm unsure whether this is intended or not. Can you confirm? Thanks! -- Wandering Traveler 16:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

As far as I can remember this has always been the case. I remember having a good laugh when I noticed that Weaken Knees (before the update) was completely useless on their skillbar, since their attacks already caused knockdown anyway. Like Wandering Traveler, I wonder if this was intended. Zophar 16:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Like Giants in the Shiverpeaks, Rot Wallows have an inherent ability to knockdown on critical hits. This is intended. When we changed Weaken Knees, we checked the Rot Wallows to make sure their spec would still function properly and found that they were attacking with an unattrib'd weapon so we fixed that thereby very slightly increasing their chance to critical hit. That is probably why you didn't notice until the update, but yes they have always done this. - Linsey talk 18:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Thank you Linsey! -- Wandering Traveler 23:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Some guys will be highly annoyed. ^__^ Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 23:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I guess that means they cause knockdown with their critical hits. By the way, is the knockdown effect a passive skill like Undead sensitivity to Light and Titans get plus Health regen and set enemies on fire each time he is hit.? -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 08:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

(reset indent):Does this mean Brutus and Sheena do this? ~Seef II <◈|۞> 09:27, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Backsword has identified the skill: Stun on Critical Hit. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

It is a passive skill on the creatures species but it is something we can add through spawn as well. Brutus and Sheena do not have this skill. - Linsey talk 20:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Unlucky Points

Dear Linsey, I'd very much like to be more lucky than unlucky (I don't want that second one at all, actually) but the recent change in points gained has made it impossible for me. I have spent months farming low level chests and in just a few days the difference has been stolen from me. Unlucky has always been easier to get, during the festival especially, but even when just opening chests, so I find this really unfair. Especially since the Polar Bear droprate has been confirmed to depend on you being more lucky than unlucky. Why don't we get extra lucky points too? For those that want to farm those points so badly, let them play hard mode or something and even if they fail, they still get an item drop and another chance. When I fail to retain however, I get punished 5 unlucky to 1 lucky point, AND I lose my lockpick too. That's extremely unfair. 145.94.74.23 13:25, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I would like you to post a link to where it's been confirmed that your lucky points has any correlation to any sort of drop rate, most specifically the Mini Polar Bear drop rate. Also, I'd like to know where it is stated that the Unlucky title has any negative affect on anything at all. Please stop posting unfounded (or at least unsubstantiated) information on the wiki. -- Wyn 18:40, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Several people are claiming that it affects drop rates, so unless an official statement is issued by Anet saying that they don't, I have little reason to doubt them. Such a statement would be much appreciated. By the way, this page is getting extremely hard to edit. I can only edit the full version now, not the subsections anymore. 145.94.74.23 10:00, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

There are not "several people" who even have the MPB in order to make a statistically significant hypothesis. It's just one random rumor, the likes of which the community loves to create when there's something hard to farm. Erasculio 10:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, these days my drop rates are better than I'm used to. I've not gotten so many golds as I get now. And my lucky title is way below my unlucky title. So, maybe a high unlucky title gives a better drop rate /sarcasm. And unlucky was never easy to get, only during two weekend events. And those are, well, only one weekend. --Lady Rhonwyn 16:22, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I'm finding the unlucky title considerably easier to attain these days. While I wont provide any specifics until I've complete the title due to fear of aNet nerfing, I have been seeing much easier unlucky title progress than lucky. Given the way the system now works, though, the original poster should perhaps concentrate on HM instead of nm since the number of unlucky points is directly tied to drop rate. As for aNet, please leave the luck titles alone! 24.188.207.20 04:37, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to add that... Thanks to the update it's actually possible to max your unlucky title without waiting years for those few weekend events that have a nine-rings. You needed to break 20.000 lockpicks otherwise... (thanks again, Linsey!) And HM doesn't help. I made a calculation. If I were to open all my chests in HM, instead of NM, I'd get 10.000 less unlucky points when I reach treasure hunter max rank. Which would be 540.000 instead of 550.000. And I started at 1.000 chests opened (and 64.000 unlucky points). So, I think they go up more evenly now. Remember you need a whole extra level on the unlucky points... --Lady Rhonwyn 05:44, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

The addition of higher unlucky points for breaking lockpicks is great! Thank for that Linsey. Even with that additon, it would still take a long time to complete. Any chance that the unlucky points for losing games on the boardwalk will be increased, even if just by a little?--209.194.208.116 19:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Please, don't! It's the last way I have of becoming more lucky than unlucky and I really want to keep that! 145.94.74.23 21:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I personally don't see why you would care to be more lucky than unlucky when it comes to the points, at least. To the best of my knowledge, unlucky points don't have any affect on anything in the game. Only lucky points affect lockpick rentention. --209.194.208.116 20:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

First, please don't post the same subject on multiple Anet talk pages. It really does waste our time to have to answer or even look at these things more than once and guess what, Regina forwards questions she doesn't have an answer for to me. So I've already spent development time answering this for her and I get cranky when I have to do these things more than once without good reason.

Second, the drop rate for the MPB does not, has not and never will be based off of the Unlucky title nor will ANY drop rates of ANY items which drop anywhere in the game. We DO NOT base drop rates off of titles and for as long as I have any say in Guild Wars, we will not. I do not think it is fair for players to have to get ranks in a title track just to have a decent change of getting a special drop.

Third, the Unlucky title does not have any effect on game play anywhere in the game other than to gather points and sit in your list of titles. I understand the want to only be lucky, but having unlucky points doesn't have any effect on game play.

Last, I have no plans to change any aspect of the Lucky or Unlucky title tracks at this time. - Linsey talk 00:36, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Abandoning "Against the Destoryers"

Hey Lynsey, I recently tried the trial EotN code on my mule account just to run about for a bit etc... However while taking part in this I took the quest "Against the Destroyers". I now wish to abandon this quest, but it wont let me. Thus meaning I have no way of taking this quest off my quest log as I have no intention of getting EotN for my Mule account as I already have it on my main account. Please could you add some option for those who dont have EotN to be able to abandon a quest they have no way of completing as it's kinda annoying just having it sat there on my quest screen. -- Salome 21:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

This has already been answered. Somewhere. Please don't make me look up where. IIRC, since it's an automaticlly obtained quest you can't regain it, thus abandoning it would be forever. So they basically had to choose to screw over those that bought EotN or those that didn't. And choose to go with the first. Backsword 09:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Backsword has it right. We can't allow people to abandon the quest as they won't have a way to regain it. This was the design, so I don't want to change it. - Linsey talk 00:54, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Advanced Function

Linsey do you know the purpose of the Shift+F10 graph? (If any). Also when was the Sounds/Streams/Scripts/Memory/Cache Misses added to it? Thanks. Dominator Matrix 03:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

You can use it to see how awesome is the GW network code, with intense battles or towns full of people using less than 1kB/s of bandwidth. Other than that it's for testing and debugging stuff, for example Frame Time display can be used to measure your machine's performance in different game situations (1000/your frame time = your fps). And the Sounds graph with all the different sound effect types has always been there, as long as I can remember and that's many years.--Yawg 11:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Yawg's got it right, it is for testing. - Linsey talk 02:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Henchmen in Factions

Dear Linsey,

until a few days ago, I could beat any mission except the Eternal Grove on Hard Mode with heroes and henchmen. Now however, without switching my builds or tactics, I can't anymore. I believe that there must be somethign wrong with the AI, especially when they suddenly stop fighting in the middle of a fight. I hope this is the right place to report this. 145.94.74.23 15:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

We haven't made any changes so I'm not sure why you can't seem to do it anymore. - Linsey talk 18:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Mmm...I made a small mistake. It wasn't a few days, more like a few weeks. Time flies during the holidays. Anyways, it might have something to do with the afflicted elite skills that got buffed. I'll just have to retry I suppose. 145.94.74.23 18:54, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Everything but the elite missions are certainly doable the H/H way - even if it costs some time or specific builds. Rethink some of the builds to what you are going to expect in the area or mission. If you are killed fast - try to spread out your heroes and fight groups seperatly and prepared. Otherwise, just look around for another player that can help you ;-) good luck -- Karasu (talk) 19:00, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Afflicted carry a lot of the Elites that were recently buffed, Ray Of Judgment being one of them. KStarfire 20:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

I have a related comment. First, I will say that I loved the change in elites that made places (such as Hell's Precipice) harder, in both Normal Mode and Hard Mode. But I have noticed that some builds no longer function like how they did in the past due to the elite changes. I've mostly noticed this in Titan builds (Risen Ashen Hulk and Madness Titans), as those are the enemies I go out of my way to fight because, well, I love how they are made. But there are other builds, both of hostile and allied NPCs, even some of the "tutorial" quests in Factions (such as Disenchantment Course) no longer work as they did. This is just something that occurs when functions of skills change, and it is a small issue, but sometimes it makes enemies too easy or too hard (again, no saying hard is bad). I have been meaning to look around at monsters with recently changed elite functions (including from the August changes) in order to list the NPCs who's builds no longer work with the elite, but I either forget, or don't have time. -- Konig Des Todes 20:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Kelvin Greyheart reporting in to derail another topic. *salutes* (I really need to figure out how to stop doing this) Harpies in Nightfall with Charge and Incoming. Completely redundant now. Kelvin Greyheart 22:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, I have something to add to this discussion. While I was doing the mission (I finally managed to get masters btw) with heroes and henchmen, I noticed some odd behaviour on my heroes. On one occasion, I locked Gwen on a target within her range, and target called a different target for the rest of my team, and she did absolutely nothing. Only when I unlocked the target 2 minutes later did she start fighting again. Another odd incident was when I flagged my entire team somewhere, and order Dunkoro to ressurrect someone, he didn't move, but the henchmen, who were standing at the exact same location, started ressing instead. What also happened was that some Ranger enemies could attack flagged heroes with a longbow and they wouldn't fight back. Finally, it happened several times, during a fight, that my heroes and henchmen simply stopped fighting in the middle of a fight, and wouldn't continue fighting unless I called the target again. These truly are AI issues, so I thought I'd mention them to you. 145.94.74.23 22:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

One other thing, is it a bug that pets don't attack when you use a spell on an enemy, or is it intentional that they only react on attack (skills)? 145.94.74.23 22:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

While off-topic a bit, I guess, I had the same issues as 145.94.74.23 with the resurrect and Ranger enemies. The Ranger enemies were Destroyer of Hordes in the G.O.L.E.M. mission, they were just out of aggro and all three heroes were on defend and flagged, they did nothing but heal. And in Destruction's Depths, I commanded Livia to use Death Pact Signet on Ogden, and for a few minutes, nothing happened, not even Mhenlo tried resurrecting (he was nearby too). -- Konig Des Todes 08:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the AI issue (people, don't discuss two different problems in the same section : P): all those issues have already happened before. I have no idea why, but some times, when Arena Net makes an update that has nothing to do with hero AI, some old problems like that one reappear. Erasculio 11:45, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, Linsey said she wanted reports of all AI issues, so I'm only trying to be a helpful player here. 145.94.74.23 07:17, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

If you guys want to make a list of monsters whose skill bars got screwed up due to skill changes, I will take a look at it and attempt to correct the issue. We do make passes on monster skill bars when changing a skill but things slip through the cracks. So make a page, put together a list and I'll fix them. Since I don't work on AI, it is hard for me to discuss these kinds of reports, but I collect them all to be passed on to Joe who does work on AI. - Linsey talk 06:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Luxon Assassins and Ilidus of the Empty Palm

Since the change to the skill Black Lotus Strike from off-hand to lead, the Luxon Assassin, Ilidus of the Empty Palm and Senkai, Lord of the 1,000 Daggers Guild no longer have an off hand attack. They have two dual attacks and an elite which makes off hand attacks and dual attacks cost no energy, but no way to use their dual attacks without an off-hand attack. 122.111.17.191 07:53, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

you mean from lead attack to off-hand. :) --Johnnyrodrigues 03:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

...no, read the skill. Black Lotus Strike is now a lead attack, before it was an off-hand. -Auron 03:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Now would be the time to cap that elite, I see. Lord Belar 04:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

You guys should hook up with those other people and work on a big list of stuff like this for me. It's a lot more likely to happen if I can do a lot of it at once. - Linsey talk 06:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The infamous stealth updates *Ominous music*

Mostly just in reference to this, it would be lovely if a quick note could be added to update notes when things like skill descriptions get fixed. Even if the list isn't a complete list of all changes it just lets people know that it is something to check for and makes documenting the game a bit easier. I realise it's probably not high on the list of priorities when a new update is going live, but it does just make things a bit easier on the wiki-side if it's possible. It might also reduce paranoia and conspiracy theories that are so abundant on the internet. Thanks for your consideration and keep up the good work. Misery 12:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

We very very very rarely purposefully "stealth update" something. There are any number of reasons a change like this could make it into the game without being in the update notes. We do our best to remember everything but sometimes things slip through the cracks. - Linsey talk 06:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC)