User talk:Regina Buenaobra/Archive Game Related Topics/Sept 2008

Archives by Topic
Random Chatter Wiki Topics Game Related Topics Community & Website Product Information Misplaced Topics, Etc.

Server issues

This is the second weekend in a row that I get continuous disconnections and a variation of error messages. Support says last weekend's issue were resolved but they're flaring up again... so... Whats up? 000.00.00.00 07:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Same Ghosst talk 07:39, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear... I knew I shouldn't have risked using my survivor... >.< ... seemed fine after a few minutes so I thought "hey, seems good, green lighting, maybe it was just a minor glitch..." [inserts a flurry of swear words] 000.00.00.00 07:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Then you have my condolences. At what lvl did it happen? Kali The Devourer

Hero battles has been fun today. at best u actually get 1 round in 10 where the opponent loads --Wild 08:37, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I've been experiencing some pretty severe connection problems today: I got err7'd a couple of hours ago and haven't been able to get back in since. :/ For what it's worth, I'm in Europe. --Mme. Donelle 08:51, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

i've been fine--Sum Mesmer Guy contribs 09:02, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Same here, I'm in Europe and have the same problems. It took me around 30 mins to login and 5 mins to connect to the guild server. After that we (as a guild) had terrible delay on the guild channel (All European). --MageMontu 09:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

try maybe going to an american district--Sum Mesmer Guy contribs 09:08, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't even get into the game to switch districts! :/ --Mme. Donelle 09:50, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

No probs from Germany, so far. But I noticed in the "Wintersday in July" PvPs that some chars loaded terribly late. Kali The Devourer

(Reset indent) For what it's worth, I was in a group that entered Ooze Pit just a while ago from the European District, and we had bad, bad lag. Two people even got DCed. When I went to go to the American District, I got booted off with an error saying something about my connection being lost and then my transaction not being able to be completed. It took a good 15 mins before I could get back into the American districts, and even then, I still had lag spikes. I'm in Vancouver, Canada, if that makes any difference. Kokuou 10:00, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol, played some RA and most games there were at least two players who didn't load. I am having no problems, though. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 10:06, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I get Code 13 error when switching district [from Europe to America] but then also from America anywhere else... but then again I'm experiencing bad lag and stuff in America too. Sent a ticket to support. Probably not going to play anything important/or play Guild Wars tonight. Ohhhh... and here's the best part, when the server experienced lag out and disconnection it managed to disconnect me at just the right time... after 30 minutes of waiting I managed to checked my character and deaths = 0 WWWWOOOOOOTTTTTT! 000.00.00.00 11:02, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

yea I had DCing issues yesterday pretty bad, kept getting crazy lagg, and then getting DC'd every 10-20 min. I tried to search the wiki and forums to find if ANet was doing any type of maintenance, but I found nothing :(. I had to give up on a non-ursan FoW HM run. Hope they get this fixed. --The Cyphero 19:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I wish Arenanet would get far more proactive and have a Network Status Page or something. Only place I know to look is Network News but that says nothing and issues seem to be ongoing. I thought it was more the Europe servers but after being adjusted to stupid amounts of lag and 'issues' on American servers I just shut off and went and play Dawn of War. 000.00.00.00 21:25, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I doubt it's on Anet's end; been having wonky connections outside of GW. --24.179.144.91 06:53, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, since everyone today in Gunnar's Hold felt a 'lag spike' that started a decent sized conversation in American English District 1, I'd say its server side. People from around the world getting kicked at the same time kinda screams an issue at Server end. 000.00.00.00 09:59, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Someone was using one of the servers for teh pron. Ghosst • Talk • 12:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Thats what someone thought... it got many laughs. lol 000.00.00.00 13:08, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

getting worse, people can't log on to the game for hours. --Silverleaf 14:49, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

{reset indent}

If you can post the IP address of the servers with bad lag (when you can get in) try doing a traceroute to see where the slowdown is. Might be ArenaNet, or it might be a backbone router somewhere along the path. For example I see a huge spike after the following:

ve6.fr3.lax.llnw.net [69.28.171.205]

That router is owned by "Limelight Networks, Inc.", based in Arizona.

Ghosst • Talk • 15:19, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

On Friday and Saturday, there were network problems between the data centers in LA and Germany. We were not doing any scheduled maintenance on our game servers. The Error 40 is caused when game servers in Europe are unable to connect to the database cache in the US and the routes that server traffic takes between the data centers are congested or have high packet loss. This was affecting players in Europe. We did not have any scheduled maintenance during the weekend. We are investigating whether the problem was on the side of our network providers/ISPs. Apparently, City of Heroes experienced similar problems over the weekend as well. --Regina Buenaobra 15:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

That would explain, location wise at any rate, why that router is labelled as LAX. It was also affecting players in the North American Realm, including a few I was chatting with in SoCal. Normally the backbone routers should have used OSPF to find another path, which may have been why the lag was intermittent for some players. That is unfortunately all the help I can offer right now, but I hope it helps track down where the problem was. Ghosst • Talk • 15:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Related to this incident, at around 12.50pm, 25 July 2008 I experienced a bug that won't allow me to join or create a guild.

The error first occurred upon attempting to join a guild where the invite would not allow me to click accept or decline. This happened upon my Monk character in Shing Jea Monastry. After which I disconnected and received several error 040 messages before eventually being able to connect again.

Since this happened people who have tried to send me invites have reported that it says I am in a guild yet when have seen me in game have also reported that I have no guild tag or cape. The guild status box shows up completely blank.

Also I am not able to create a guild either, getting a message stating there has been a technical error and I am refunded the gold from the guild registrar.

I have attempted several things that others have suggested to see if it was something that I could resolve such as changing districts, creating new characters, deleting my DAT file and re-downloading it, but to no avail.

I flagged PlayNC about it but got little response over it other than it was a known problem and that they were working to try and fix it, but three days later communication from them has ben limited.

Regina can you shed more light as to what exactly has happened here? It's my understanding it has also happened to other players too though for many the problem seems to have remedied itself. I can accept that technical issues happen, however the lack of communication towards the subject from PlayNC is what's more annoying. 86.1.181.73 16:28, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

What do you know...13 hops untill i reached the same server with tracert...but then again i could play reasonable all weekend long. --Silverleaf 18:06, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, Regina, you forgot to mention that these issues completely annihilated the July Monthly AT and no proactive action was taken by ANet, except Izzy logging on later at the elimination stages and partially fixing it (errors and slow performance still occour now). Just thought I'd chime in and complete the announcement; also, the PvP community -- you know, those guys you were told to stay away from because they rob old women and eat babies -- could use at least an apology for the inconvenience. --Akaraxle 09:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Regina, if there is stil no update on the situation and no obvious source of the problem itself the issue may have solely been caused by a lack of bandwidth. I've seen mass-disconnects before when the routers get overloaded, much like DDOS attack. The players did come up with a good suggestion of adding a small announcent message when and if there are maintenance or known issues next time so they can be made aware before trying to login. Ghosst • Talk • 10:38, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

What happened in the July Monthly Automated Tournament was a network problem caused by high congestion on the network, not a problem with the Guild Wars servers. Again, there was no scheduled maintenance that weekend, and if there is any scheduled maintenance, it is posted on the Network News page. We are working on ways to mitigate these problems as much as we can on our end, but there are a lot of things that are not under our control -- such as network issues by the network provider/ISP. Isaiah did all he could that weekend. --Regina Buenaobra 01:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Rats and Ooze in Port Cities

I was wondering if there are plans to get rid of these little critters from the port cities of Tyria? When I see them now it feels like Christmas in July or like someone left the Canthan decorations up for 6 months. Will they be leaving any time soon? 122.104.167.139 15:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

You mean, they haven't just been there forever? Also, how are you going to move that ooze? ^_^. --Star Weaver 16:20, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Vacuum it.75.146.48.190 16:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Spoon. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 16:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Trap it in a box. Napalm Flame 21:49, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I also would love seeing these removed, the rats make the cities look dirty, and the ooze, well, if i see a moving jelly in town, I'm sure scientist would grab it and examine it, but in gw lore, oozes are enemies, so y would ppl allow to roam freely in town? --MageMontu 21:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

What's funny is that they WERE removed about a week or two after EotN was released; people begged on Gaile's page for them to be put back, and Anet obliged :) -- MrSmiles 02:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

You know, Arenanet could get a little creative and switch them out for abit, we all now about Eye of the North but why not have a few travelling Norns or Asurans every now and then? We can freely travel to GWEN and back now, and I'm sure a few clever Asurans could work it out too. Mix it up a bit.

• Add a travelling golemancer or something to a main centre or popular outpost, have him going on about his golem, how great he/she is and that we lowly bookah wouldn't understand. And, no it wouldn't take that long to do it either. Something more than a rat and ooze.

You're not adding new content in the way of missions packs or anything, but you could at least liven up the place a bit.

There could be quite a bit of stuff they could do, but I'm sick of the rat and ooze, just makes the place look cheap and nasty. Add more life not vermin. 000.00.00.00 02:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe travelers from other continents aswell (Tengu, Canthans, Sunspears, Elonians, Centaurs etc...). They can be added with the monthly update so that they won't have to release an update only for them. --MageMontu 09:12, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, they would be so cool. Not hard to do but could liven up the place a little :) 000.00.00.00 11:06, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, they were removed when the Halloween decoration came in and they did not get restored afterward when the cities came back to their original designs. I was one of the several people who asked Gaile to restore them on her page, and I am VERY HAPPY they did it. Those critters are cute, they add some street animations to the somewhat static cities of GW and they actually fit the GWEN storyline. Thus I am fine with them and I'd prefer them to stay. Jaxom 03:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but there's more to Guild Wars than just GWEN. GWEN is ages past, just like the other campaigns, could easily impliment MageMontu's suggestion to had street/local animations. 000.00.00.00 03:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Though his suggestion is interresting, I still fail to see the reason to remove the cutties from town. They were pushed to the surface because of the earhquakes, they ARE supposed to be here ; they also fit the dialogue of some of the NPCs that give quests to GWEN. period.

As for travellers from other places, well their sandbox design (standalone) design for each of the previous campaign seems to have always blinded/prevented them for doing similar ideas except maybe during the pre-Factions release event (I miss having the Luxons and Kurzick quests and feud in Kryta) and adding 1~2 NPCs from time to time when a new campaign/pack is released (the go to Kaineng, go to Kamadan, go to Boreal Station and Bonus pack NPCs). Same for the cross-continent quests, we have only a handful of them when users who own multiple campaigns had expected to be able to do alot of such intercontinental/multichapter quests.

Again, it is just a matter of having the will, money, time and human resources to do that and there are some more interresting things they could do first such as adding greeting speech to all 3 campaign NPCs, having mercenaries animations like in GWEN, support for Hi-Res armors in town in graphics options,... and many other thinks like that. Let's be realistic a minute: as those requirements are harder to meet with GW2 in full development, I do not see any of that coming anytime soon. Jaxom 08:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

When there is heavy rain where I live rats, snakes and bilbies rush out of the bushes and into our yards and houses if they can. After the rain is gone they return. It made sense they left the underground and came into port cities at first but by now something in the GW world should have done something about it. At this rate the same rats will be in Lion's Arch 3 years from now. 122.104.167.139 13:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It's true that they were pushed to the surface by the earthquakes, but by now the great destroyer and his minions has been defeated and the earthquakes are no more, I don't see the reason for these in staying. On a side note, another idea I had is, they could fill Lion's Arch or Kamadan with Canthan soldiers saying that the emperor is there for official business (we won't see the Emperor though, just his soldiers) --MageMontu 14:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

These things are rather annoying, but intersting at the same time. If they were replaced by things that made more sense to have in a city (a caravan, a noble's carriage, foreigners, etc.), it would make the cities seem more like the bustling cities they're supposed to be. It might also help remove some of the flatness in the game. Sarifael 02:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I too would appreciate if the rats and ooze vanished form the GW cities! They just do not belong there anymore since their initially appearance was to prep us for the GWEN release and build up excitement. GWEN has long been released, in fact is getting old already, but still rats and ooze roam the port cities. So please free the cities of them. Regards ~Garbaron~ ; 22 July 2008

There are enough people out there to create quite a fuss (including Gaile) if they vanished again. Maybe swap them out with some different critters every once in a while? --Wolf 13:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Whereas you see them as "cutties," I see them as an ugly, annoying, and nonsensical ad for GWEN. A city that allows wild animals/monsters roam unhindered does not compute rationally. Denizen Zero 16:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, not that the 'last edition' of GW is out, they could replace them with an NPC under the effects of the tonic of the month walking around. That would also force the download and load of the model so when people use the tonic, it gets show right away. MithTalk 13:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) If your opinion is that it's not rational to have animals/monsters in towns...then I suppose you also think it's not rational to have Pyre and Margrid as heroes? Those rats and oozes are harmless, they don't attack anyone. So I think it's wrong to deny them access just because their species normally tends to fight us ;) (I like them, let them stay!) -- Pepper - Dewdrop talk 14:04, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm passing this question along to the design team. --Regina Buenaobra 00:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

We're taking them out today. --Regina Buenaobra 20:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) oh now that's good to hear. --MageMontu 20:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

That's too bad. It would be much more fun for them to react to a player in some fashion, like having the rats scurry when you get close, or have the ooze dance (wobble?) if they get too close to a dancer. 206.193.192.26 23:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Imbalance in Hero Battles

Ever since it was first introduced with Nightfall, Hero Battles has been the most imbalanced and bugged PvP format in Guild wars. Despite that, the format hasn't received a single update over the past year. Every time I talked to Izzy about this, he said they were working on updates for the format but things were progressing slowly because of other projects (EotN, and after that it was GW 2). Unfortunately we never got to see those updates and the result of that can be seen on observer: the metagame consist of build wars between overpowered gimmicks that focus on exploiting the imbalanced shrine capping mechanics and AI flaws. By now it should be obvious to anyone that the only way to try and repair the format is to change the morale meter mechanic and objectives, but so far ArenaNet hasn't even tried to do that. I have some hope of seeing more AI updates now that QA has reported most of the AI problems posted on the wiki, but those updates won't make much difference for HB if the format itself remains the same. At this point any change at all would be a good thing. --Draikin 18:46, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I second this. When HB came out, I was really excited because I like the tactical aspect of heroes. HB has the potential to be a very good format, but it needs some major work. -- NUKLEAR IIV 19:04, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

hero battles does need format changes and everyone who actually has invested time into hb knows their are numerous bugs and the tactics that involve exploiting hero AI like body blocking heros to cap shrines. All the bugs can be seen on any time on observe yet anet has not bothered to change anything. things need to be changed or fixed up. 68.41.160.15 00:46, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

agreed HB is a sad excuse for a arena. i would rather see the costume brawl in its place for now until they fix it.75.165.124.46 07:38, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Costume Brawl is based on the same objectives as Hero Battles, but the random aspect of it makes it difficult to exploit that. Let people use their own builds and teams in that arena and you'd see the exact same problems appear there as well. As much as I realize HB can't be fixed, there's still a lot of room for improvement. Even just changing the metagame a bit would already bring some people back to the format. Izzy was discussing possible changes with the community back in August 2007 which were supposed to be implemented after EotN was released, but that didn't happen. Since then I just can't seem to get a real answer from anyone at ArenaNet anymore concerning changes for HB. --Draikin 17:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

first off if you let people use there own builds it would be team arenas remix. secondly that is the draw of the costume brawl. its a place where you can learn how to play a ch and not worry about buildcraft and it would focus more on skill then time playing, also body blocking can be done in any part of the game.75.165.124.46 21:43, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Costume Brawl is to Hero Battles what RA is to TA. I don't see how CB is relevant to this discussion since we don't need a random format replacing HB, they can just implement changes to HB directly. Like I've said before HB is in beta now, you can't exactly "break" the format since there's no balance there to begin with. --Draikin 13:47, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I've passed your feedback along to the design team. --Regina Buenaobra 00:59, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

PVP Buttion spike?!

why is this still in the game? i know this syncing problem has been in the game for a wile. i have lost may wining streaks to it. i bleave it is cheating so i report them as botting. but the biggest question still remains and that is why has this been left in the game for so long??? a simple fix would be not allowing people in the same guild to do anything random together. 75.165.124.46 23:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you mean Sync entering? That's a problem yes, but is reporting it as "botting" the right thing to do? There isn't anything explicitly written in the rules that you can't sync enter, but it's often realized as griefing.--People of Antioch 23:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Not allowing people in the same guild to do anything random together will not fix the problem... because of 2 things... for one, just because people are not in the same guild does not mean they may not be sync entering... they could be a group of friends or a group of people from there own alliance. Two, not allowing certain situation means its no longer random, otherwise we may as well call RA "random but no one from the same guild may be in the same team-arena". OblivionDanny 23:35, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

random arena isn't the only thing i was also referring to the snowball arena. the possible solution was just that possible. and it may not be against the rules but it isn't fare eather, or random. 75.165.124.46 01:41, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I dont see how its griefing to want to play with your mates? It's only griefing when if they dont get their mates, they leave, which is already sorted through dishonor points. -- Salome 09:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello. What is this? Vael Victus 11:15, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

No, please don't change sync entering. It's my primary source of glad point and balthasar points farming (selling Z-Keys from this brought me a fortune). Anybody who ever faced a TA team build in RA knows you will insta-win in 30 seconds, no matter how hard the random team tries. Well, since Arena Net promotes this behaviour there is only one solution for you: go to TA, get some people, get them on vent, use this Build and get approximatly 15 to 20 glad points an hour without any effort, like everyone that has a brain. Just sync enter. I made hundreds of glad points this way in few weeks and sold so many Z-Keys I dunno what to buy with all the gold. And believe me, there's nothing more fun to see those poor losers of the RA team instagibbed and cursing my team for losing in a blink. Very satisfying. --91.121.96.138 14:08, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. Why play with idiots in RA who don't know how to play the game to save their life when you could just sync with your guild and farm the poor hapless idiots for the easiest glads you've ever gotten? Napalm Flame 14:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

What does sync entering mean? Ninjas In The Sky 14:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

It means to use a flaw in the system that makes random teams to be able to enter as 'synergyzed' teams that have more chances to beat random teams than other random teams. Why? Because the system puts people in a queue and picks them as they enter to form teams, instead of waiting to have a 'pool' of player to randomize. They should require at least 8 people waiting to form teams. Then shuffle those players before making the teams, ensuring that those that entered next to another won't get in next to each other. MithTalk 15:14, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

@original poster: QQ moa! If you're too dumb to sync yourself then you just deserve to be pwned. Ascalon --> this way. --204.13.236.244 16:16, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

@204.13.236.244 its cheating. and i never said i dont know how to do it or that i havent done it. if they want random arenas to be random then they need to fix it to something close to what mith said.75.165.124.46 19:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

LMAO.... of course it is not "cheating". It is an intended behaviour known for ages now. As Napalm Flame states it is a shortcut for brilliant players to have a lot of fun with some whining newbies like you. Get over it... you're just a bad player kicked in the ass by some pr0s. Better go play PvE and let the real gamerz play PvP. OTOH... just stay in RA... our guild team will beat the bejeezus out of you. And there is not a single thing you can do against this. QQ me a river, n00b. --210.22.83.146 19:51, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

If brilliant players need to do that to have fun then 'brilliant' wouldn't be the word I would use to describe them. I like Mith's idea, syncing needs to be addressed. 000.00.00.00 20:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

The only people that are complaining are just butthurt that they are either not good at GW or are butthurt because they don't have good players to sync with. I, for one, excel at pretty much everything in GW, thanks to years of experience, so to me RA is trivial. RA is not serious, so no need to moan about it. Napalm Flame 21:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

If Anet didn't want us to be able to do this, it would not still be doable. I've been doing this with friends in RA and other events since I started playing GW, and people have been whining about it since then and Anet STILL has not done anything about it. I have also faced off with many other synced in teams and lost some, won some, but never made a big deal about it. The whole idea of RA is that you DON'T know what you will be facing or how well they are organized, ect. 90% of what I run across in RA is a whole bunch of people that bring their crappy AB 1vs1 builds and expect to be good b/c it works in AB, and maybe a monk thrown in the mix every once in a while. I have also beaten a synced in team with a random team. Syncing in is one of the oldest tricks in the book. --Wolf 21:14, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Syncing is one of the oldest tricks.

The question: Regina, did you want people to abuse this, even when you should've forseen the abuse this would cause with the implementaion of glad title?

Seriously, just remove glad from RA everything is fix'd. -- NUKLEAR IIV 21:21, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, no-one did it until a friend and I decided to about this time 2005 (as far as I can tell), and then it caught on rather quickly. None of us that did it were in the same guild. I know other figured it out, we never told we did it, and it seemed liek one of the best kept secrets, ike the chests in dreadnaught's drift, until someone let the cat outa the bag. --Wolf 21:25, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

you guys don't want to see it go because thats how you make money and your abuseing it. also there is nothing random about to people trying to get in a team together. if anet wanted you to do it then they would have called random arenas team arenas. for the last time i am not "butt hurt" because i my self have done it and still do it and i think its cheep.75.165.124.46 22:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

(reseting Indent) Dude, I have't made squat off of syncing in. I just like to keep my balth faction bar rather full for unlocking skills, and its just too much fun. If Anet see's fit to disable this, then I will just take my antics elsewhere. --Wolf 22:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with IP. I want it because I'm tired of a challenge in RA. I'm serious. Vael Victus 22:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Again, not allowing people from the same guild to play in the same team in anything random(random arenas in this case) will not fix the problem. People from different guilds could sync with each other, and that does not solve your problem. The best suggestion so far was miths idea. OblivionDanny 22:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

we agreed with miths.........75.165.124.46 01:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I think its obvious RA is called RANDOM arenas, not SYNCHRONIZED arenas. To those who say people who can't sync enter RA should QQ somewhere else, do kindly brush up on your english. Lamentable how you attempt to make your poor english augment your equally poor arguments.152.226.7.211 02:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

@wolf i am 99% sure that you were not the first person to do it. you can say that now but you real have no way of proving that you where. 75.165.124.46 06:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I never saw or heard of anyone doing it before myself and my friends started doing it. And your right, I don't have any way to prove it, and niether does anyone else. What does it matter whether we were first or not? We have still been doing it for quite some time. --Wolf 17:04, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

my point is don't say things like that because it makes you look like a dick and was unessisary to bring to the discussion at hand. i would love to hear what Anet has to say about the matter....75.165.124.46 19:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Gotta admit, Wolf, he's got a point. These areas are supposed to be random, adding to the excitement. Arenanet should have addressed such an issue from the get go, it can be abuse and is becoming more common place. I agree with the suggestion Mith made above. 000.00.00.00 23:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

As do I. It was fun while it wasn't abused, but now it's just, lame. My friends and I did it mostly b/c we found it slighty amusing to by-pass the system, and get some quick faction. This was mostly before titles or anything. It's kinda funny when you hit a synced teAm every once in a great while and know you've done it too, and enjoyed it, especialy when no-one is goign for titles. Now it's gotten out of hand. --Wolf 00:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. I have a job, a wife and children. I cannot spent hours every day in RA to get somewhere. That wasn't a problem before Dishonor was introduced. Prior to that I could chose which random teams I wanted to play with simply by leaving. Now I would be forced to play 90% of the time with infunctional teams. Syncing is a legitimate way of circumventing the broken Dishonor system. My synced team is always exactly how I want it. I cannot afford to play useless games, I have a life beyond Guild Wars. --88.191.25.27 02:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

If you want to choose which team you want to play with, you can play in Team Arenas, or resign whenever you get a bad team setup and hope they agree. -- Gordon Ecker 02:16, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The same idiotic arguments by people that don't do any PvP as always. If you don't know the difference between both and why playing TA is no alternative to RA for most of the people, just STFU. Really, STFU. --66.49.222.120 02:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

"People who want to choose their teammates should not play in random team formats." is a rational arguement, unlike the deeply flawed "Syching gives me and my team an advantage, but it's fair and doesn't count as cheating because I'm busy." arguement. And throwing around personal attacks only undermines your own credibility. As for having a 90% chance of being stuck with a bad team, if you have a 90% chance of a bad team when you don't synch then so will every other non-syncher, so the only real problem is losing to other teams who synch, which means that synching exacerbates the problem and reducing synching (such as by using a longer interval between team formation or temporarily banning confrimed synchers from RA) would mitigate the problem. Anyway, could we get an official statement on whether ArenaNet considers this cheating? -- Gordon Ecker 03:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Gordon, resigning is not a solution. You will inevitably get reported for leeching most of the time if you resign in RA. This is why Dishonor is flawed. By the way, syncing or not is a technical question, not an ethical one. --149.20.54.204 04:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

agreed with gordon ecker, im the op my internet reset it self who knows why but any way i am r8 in ha r6 luxon i have played many pvp games and have synced my self if you have read any of my other comments you would know that. so L2R.@149.20.54.204 how is it not a technical qustion? 75.165.101.71 04:09, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

149 wrote it is a technical question. @Gordon: there are various degrees of randomness. E.g. playing only in teams with a dedicated healer and leaving malformed teams is a legitimate form of randomness as well. At least from a mathematical point of view. Chosing to play only with 10% of the teams doesn't make the team itself less random. TA is something completely different. --134.76.63.98 04:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

If you end up on a bad team, try to resign and the other team members are too stupid to realize it's a bad team and spiteful enough to abuse the report system, you can use support to report them for abusing the report command, which is a bannable offense. As for leaving bad teams, I wasn't comparing leaving bad teams to playing in Team Arenas, I was comparing synching to playing in Team Arenas. -- Gordon Ecker 05:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but this suggestion is pure fiction. Support will tell me to play if my team mates don't resign. This is why they included the dishonor system after all. If someone could enter /resign and ceases to play without punishment then this would be the very same as having no dishonor at all. Because leaving and resigning/leeching would be basically the same. You see? --85.25.151.22 05:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

• People complained a million times about synchronized entering. However ArenaNet didn't ever react to this. They just ignore this issue and they will do so forever. May we stop this futile discussion now pls? --217.114.211.20 06:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The resign command is not a license to leech, it's intended to allow a team that knows they've lost or wants to quit for some other reason to quickly end a match. If you type /resign then stand around while the rest of the party fights then you are technically leeching and their use of the /report command against you is legitimate. If you type /resign then the other team members report you for leeching specifically because you tried to resign, they are clearly abusing the report system and you have a legitimate greivance against them which can be taken to support. If support mistakes the latter situation for the former, you can explain the situation more clearly in your reply. -- Gordon Ecker 06:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Ya know what? Ppl won't do ArenaNet's work. They sync instead. 'Tis easier and less hassle for them. --217.114.211.20 07:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Which will likely continue until ArenaNet implements better anti-synching measures, such as a synch checkbox in the report window or longer matchup intervals. Preventing leech reporting until 30 seconds after the match starts might reduce the frequency of leech reporting abuse. -- Gordon Ecker 08:10, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

lolz... howdya wanna tell? pls b seriouz dude. --210.22.83.146 08:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Or you could just randomise the team after every match. Even if people sync, that would only affect the first one. Sadie2k 11:35, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Regina, are you guys even looking at this? do you have any info you can provide?75.165.101.71 23:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Random arenas should be random, but as for pvp arenas where everyone has the same bar (snowball, dragon, etc), why is synching a problem? You either get a dodgeball partner or you get a dodgeball partner. ~Shard 00:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

yet again i think anet intended those even arenas to be random as well if they didn't then, i think they would have allowed for people to make a party. Regina have anything you can tell us that can clear up some of this? 75.165.101.71 06:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

It is very unlikely that A-Net will change its "firmly ignore the matter, people will stop complaining if they never get an answer"-policy. --85.214.73.63 06:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

firstly thats sooo true but secondly i for one wouldn't put up with that BS. if she dose end up archiving it then i will just repost it until i get some sort of reply. 75.165.101.71 05:41, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Sync entering does more damage than good. Why? Because there is no way for unexperienced pvp'ers to learn when they face a fully sync'd team. A lone noob enters RA hoping to gain some experience on how to play their character (because, after all, it's supposed to be RANDOM arena) but because the elitist PvP community finds it funny to "screw with the noobs" and make the battles last "longer than 30 seconds". How are you supposed to gain any experience as a player when RA isn't random? It's the only nope for noobs; TA is full of structured teams that know what they are doing, so good like lasting more than a few seconds there. AB is fun, yes, but as far a PvP goes, it's outclasses by pretty much every other form of PvP. What else is there? There is currently no way to get into structured PvP, because rather than help the new guys out, the older, more experienced players will exploit loopholes like this one, then tell the new players to "quit QQing and learn to play" when they get owned in less than a minute. If RA becomes random, I will try to PvP, first learning how to use my character, then moving on to TA and learning how my team operates. Until then, PvP will be under a complete lockout to most all of the newer PvP players. That is my 2 cents. - 206.193.238.32 08:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The team is aware of the problems with synch entering, and I will again pass along the feedback, however it is up to the designers to decide what they think is the best course of action. --Regina Buenaobra 01:00, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

M.O.X armor upgrades

Ok i just read the other page, this hero is still under development but is there a chance there will be armor upgrades or displayed by default? (Blood) 06:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC))

Based on the discussion on the talk page for M.O.X., I assume that "displayed by default" means "can be displayed in the Hall of Monuments without an armor upgrade". -- Gordon Ecker 08:47, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

MOX has no armor upgrades. To display it in the Hall of Monuments, you just need to go there, and it will appear automatically. --Regina Buenaobra 01:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Monastery Overlook and Missing Cinematics

I just recently created a Factions Mesmer and I noticed something about the Monastery Overlook I didn't know before. There are some locations there which you are unable to access without the starter quest, so if you skip them or are not a Factions character you can't go back and see it. I know during the Boardwalk events this area is open but quite a bit of the mountain trail is still closed off. Would it be possible to re-open this area for explorers or people who wish to enjoy the scenery similair to how Churrhir Fields is open through an NPC dialogue?

I also remember there were winning and losing cinematics for the arena Fort Aspenwood which have since been removed from the game, (probably to speed things up). The opening cinematics can still be seen from the dialogue in the respective allegiance outposts but not the winning/losing ones. Would it be possible to add these two cinematics to the dialogue options? I know it doesn't make sense lore wise but I would like to be able to see them again. Thank you for your time. 122.104.167.139 18:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

What you can get to in the Monestary Overlook during New Years/Dragon Festival is enough for any cartographer, native or not. Also remember that Factions came out before titles, so Anet wasn't thinking about having people wanting to get into areas for mapping, or just being obsessive about getting into every nook and cranny. 75.146.48.190 18:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Monastery Overlook IS completely open during the festival. I've had to convince two people of this and led them both up the mountain trail. The opening is past the Dragon's Den. (Not sure I have an account, so this will have to do for a sig:) 71.127.80.132 18:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Cartographer isn't the only reason. Many Guild Wars players like to explore areas simply for the joy of seeing new places or enjoying the views. Some of the best views in Guild Wars can only be seen from the cut off mountain trail on the overlook. 122.104.167.139 19:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Reset indent. For the second thing mentioned, Jade Quarry had the cinematics kept in place I believe. The double faction in CMs a while back showed me that, if I'm not mistaken. Mango 02:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I played there an hour ago and over 100 times this year. Not once did the cinematic play in Fort Aspenwood. 122.104.167.139 04:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, definitely bring back FA cinematics. At least have a NPC showing winning and losing cinematics. – Barinthus 05:39, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

You can see the old cinematics on Youtube.--Yankeefan984 04:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Not the victory ones. 122.104.167.139 22:20, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think they are going to make any changes to the way Monastary Overlook functions right now, but I will ask about the missing cinematics. --Regina Buenaobra 00:49, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Monastary Overlook: It is possible to give access to Monastary Overlook, Jade Quarry, and Fort Aspenwood, the latter two without being in a match, however the team currently does not know when they would have time to implement this. It's something they would like, but at the moment their priorities are focused on other features.

Missing Cinematics: At this time, it's unclear whether it would be possible to add the cinematics to the dialogue options, but the team will look into it when they have time. --Regina Buenaobra 18:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Pet info

1 thing that has been severely lacking since the start of this wiki is the absence of official pet evolution information. Now this has been asked before to Gaile back when she was still Community Manager (as evidenced by the pet talk page talk item #9 "Pet Evolution").I had also asked even earlier then that but with no official results. I am wondering if we could finally get some official info on pet evolution. This would be very appreciated Mashav 14:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll pass your question along to the team. Thanks! --Regina Buenaobra 00:49, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

While we're talking pets, how about the possibility of assigning keys to the 3 buttons in the pet control panel? Pet Attack (my target), Pet Heel, all at the stroke of a button! Ralmon the Gen 00:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

This question was on Pet Evolution. If you have a suggestion for the game, please place your suggestion in the correct location on the wiki. Thanks. --Regina Buenaobra 18:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Pet Evolution Information: The team will look into it, however we do not have a timeframe for this, as they're focused on other features. --Regina Buenaobra 18:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Mad King Thorn & Halloween

Ever since the first GW Halloween event, I have had an almost fanatical obsession with Mad King Thorn, and even was lucky enough to get a mini of him for my first 3rd birthday. But being 3 years old, and Halloween comming in about 3 and 1/2 months, (long time I know), But I couldn;t help but think, The Mad King needs a new set of Jokes. While they made me laugh quite a lot first year, giggle second year, and smirk 3rd year, the same jokes 4 years in a row would be over kill. Considering he now has the asura and norn to poke fun at. If you have any joke ideas, drop em here, would be a fun thing for Anet to pull on the community for. And Regina, if given enough good jokes, would be possible for The Mad King to geta new set for this year? Cheers! --Wolf 14:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I presume you know there was a Norn/Asura joke last time, you just want more of them? -- Sirius (talk) 14:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, why not? Besides, he didn't have a very large repository of jokes, I would always attend the events multiple times, and I heard all the jokes every time. Add some variety. --Wolf 14:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Got a Joke. "So the other day, I saw a God Walking Amongst Mere Mortals and I couldn't help but think, Man, I'm a good lookin guy!" --Wolf 14:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol. XD --Mme. Donelle 18:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

That god me thinking, other than laughing my ass off is why not create a contest? a player submitted joke for the Mad King Thorn? Renin 18:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Could be like the "Brand the Boss Contest", winners get a cool mini or two. Would be fun, and I'm sure everyone would enjoy it, heck, just reading through all the entries along would be HOURS upon hours of entertainment. --Wolf 18:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

An In game scribe that reads out the top 30 jokes would be nice! It would be nice to read it in-game as opposed to in wiki. At least that's another great way to spend more countless of hours in-game! So what do you say Regina? Would aNet be up for a new player submitted funnies contest? Or would "jokes" be too subjective for it to have a contest of it's own? Renin 18:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Why did the Charr crossed the wall? To BURN the other side! MithTalk 21:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL! Thats a good one =D --Wolf 22:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

(not really Mad King Thorn material, but...) How many PvPers does it take to change a lightbulb? None, they'd just wait for Anet to nerf darkness. --Mme. Donelle 17:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Why do the dwarves sell their ale? Because they don't need it anymore, they are already STONED. MithTalk 19:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh LOL, that's a good one XDD — Poki#3 20:55, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

This is one of the best ideas for a contest ever. It should totally run. Easy to judge. They either make you laugh or not! I'd love it.24.250.6.191 07:23, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

What do you do after a night of drinking too much Dwarven Ale? Yak's Bend. -Jacin Nomin --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:71.120.129.51 (talk).

What is the total amount of Albino Rats charmed by Asuran rangers? Rat-a Sum.

What is bruter than driving fives nagas in a tree? Driving one naga in five trees.

How many asuras do you need to change a light bulb? Just one. First he invents it, and then he fools a bunch of humans to change the bulb for him.

What is the first thing that all dwarves ask for when they enter a tavern? A higher stool.

Two Ascalonian at the cementery.

- Here lies my father.

- How he did die?

- A horrible breath attack.

- A dragon?

- No, a charr.

A skeleton enters a tavern:

- One beer, please. Ah, and a mop.

How many bog skales does a warrior need to paint a wall green? It depends of his rank on Strength.

Do you know what happens to the intelligence of a troll when you cut its head? Absolutely nothing.

How many heket are needed to kidnap a kid? 30. One to kidnap it and 29 to write the ransom note.

MithTalk 18:00, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

LOL! --Wolf 21:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll pass your suggestion along. Thanks. --Regina Buenaobra 00:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

It's uncertain whether we will be able to add new jokes this year. It would be cool, but that doesn't necessarily mean they will be able to fit it into their schedules. We'll see what happens. --Regina Buenaobra 18:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

PVP and PvE skill split

I am wondering since PVP and PvE now have different skill effects and all that, isn't it possible for PvE to make the Minion Master be able to have more then 10 minions, becuase i liked it in the beginning of guild wars when u could summon an entire army to kill enemy's. Mr Haxx

I suspect that the minion cap works different from the PvE/PvP split, but I second the request. I miss my Army Worthy of Mordor. -- MrSmiles 15:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Same, besides, max health of the caster and Blood of the Master are already good enough caps for PvE on number of minions. --Wolf 15:16, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Selfless self promnotion right here. Can be applied to both pvp and pve. -- NUKLEAR IIV 21:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. MM's are almost useless everywhere but AB and PvE. They put the cap in place with good reason and it wasn't just to make them less useful in PvP. NUKLEAR has a brilliant idea though. Better than deleting System 32 files anyway... Seriously though... brilliant. Spawnlegacy 17:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

If I were you, I would think again about those propositions before ANet implement it in elite areas, you know, with lvl32 necros making lvl21 minions. Because otherwise it wouldnt be fair, wouldnt it ? Yseron - 90.28.86.150 02:21, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I honestly don't think that this is something that the team would be considering, but I will pass along the feedback all the same. --Regina Buenaobra 01:03, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I was correct. It's unlikely this will change because of the PvP/PvE skill split. --Regina Buenaobra 18:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Rainbow Phoenix

This isn't really an issue, more of a question that's been bugging me for some time now. Around 20 minutes go I got Legendary Cartographer [big ups to the people who helped in the Quarry] and that gave me my 10th title on one of my characters. Now, I went to put the titles in the Honor Monument and noticed the Rainbow Phoenix. Now this character is a Dervish and my play style for him he has no need for a pet personally, but I would have loved something like the Rainbow Phoenix for one of my Heroes [gets all starry eyed over imagining Acolyte Jin with the Rainbow Phoenix] but we can't bring a Hero in with us to get the pet. I was wondering why this is the case? Not really an issue per se, but it would be nice to be able to use the reward for getting the titles without having to rework my Dervish to be an Dervish/Ranger to appreciate the coolness that is the Rainbow Phoenix. 000.00.00.00 06:37, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I always assumed it was cause they either couldn't be bothered or weren't able to program the difference between a Hero and another player into the on/off switch for the phoenix. As obviously you wouldn't want to be able to just get people with 10 titles to run those without the titles into their HoM to charm the pet, as it would make the pet worthless. I agree though, it would be nice for me to cap this pet with my heroes. On a side note, the thing that has ALWAYS bugged me about the rainbow phoenix, is that its not HoM-able. Spiders, Imperial Phoenix and Black Moa's are, because they are considered elite pets, but the rainbow phoenix takes more work than the 3 combined to cap and yet still you aren't able to put it in your HoM. Makes 0 sense to me. I just hope this gets reworked during the HoM haul over they are doing. -- Salome 11:43, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Uggghh :/..i would have to level that noisy bird again. :). Charming the rainbow phoenix with/for a hero would be nice...but for just one hero only to keep it exclusive. --Silverleaf 11:57, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I'd say it needs to be available for one hero and the player, and something just clicked. When the HoM goes account wide, if ONE of our characters gets People Know Me, can any character on our account charm the Phoenix? b/c that would be totaly awsome. My warrior is the closest to having People Know Me, and probably going to be the only one that gets there, yet I would LOVE to be able to get this on my ranger. --Wolf 13:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Salome, The reason the rainbow phoenix doesn't have a unique statue in the HoM is because it's a reward for an achievement. As HoM statues are also rewards for achievements, it makes no sense to give a reward for a reward. Besides, there's already a statue for the KoaBD title in the HoM. --Mme. Donelle 15:50, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

There is a statue for KoaBD??? Thought it was just text and that beam i got. --Silverleaf 16:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Psh, close enough. --Mme. Donelle 16:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I had to get rid of my rainbow phoenix because when it was fully evolved it was just too big and filled the screen. I hate to think what would happen if I had 1 and my heroes had another 3. Sadie2k 17:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC) Do what I did, I run with my rainbow phoenix, and I have phoenixes for all my heros......quite impressive 209.200.197.11 18:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC) MedLuvin

The KoaBD statue is in fact the giant thing that slowly comes out of the fog as you advance in KoaBD. -- Alaris 19:08, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I saw the chat where gaile said getting an award for an award was silly etc.... However it always felt a a kinda tacked on answer. As imperial phoenix are an award for finishing factions, however they are hom-able. Black moas are an award for a quest chain and spiders are an award for doing certain quests in UW. In short all the elite pets are just rewards for doing something else in game, so why not the rainbow phoenix? Just seems odd that you can just own factions and get access to 2 of the elite pets by playing through it in NM without getting any titles. However gaining 10 titles to gain a pet isn't considered elite enough. If the reward in gw2 for the rainbow phoenix is truly an issue, balance it by making the reward something crappy because as it stands, it's just stupid. -- Salome 22:21, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

There's no real reason a statue couldn't be put up for the Rainbow Phoenix, its a reward, yes, but the amount of hardwork you have to put into getting to the point to get it they could have thought it out a lot better. the Black Moa, Phoenix and Black Widow are rewards too, and not really as difficult to get to as the Rainbow Phoenix, they get a statue and Heroes can charm them as well.

Its a nice thing to get something for getting to People Know Me, but for me its kind of a slap in the face "here, have a reward for your hard work, but it doesn't apply to you." Yes, that sounds pity but I busted my hump trying to get my titles done [cartographer is such a pain, legendary even more >.<] and to get to the point to get the Rainbow Phoenix, and seeing it flap around me was nice, but if they let your heroes be able to charm it, or even only letting you get it once if Heroes come along, I'd be more in line to consider it a 'reward', at the moment its just a above average slap to the face. [I'm sick and bitchy, so if thats bitchy ... meh [shrugs] ] 000.00.00.00 21:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Your concerns are valid. Also, don;t forget to sign --Wolf 21:31, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, my bad. >.< I should really stop posting in the morning >.< 000.00.00.00 21:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Naw, it's all good. We'd rathe have you posting tired, half asleep, amking mistakes than not posting at all =D --Wolf 21:33, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll pass your suggestion along. Thanks. --Regina Buenaobra 01:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

The situation with the Rainbow Phoenix was designed this way. If Heroes were allowed to have Rainbow Phoenixes, it wouldn't feel as much of an accomplishment to have one. There are no plans to change this right now. --Regina Buenaobra 18:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Different/New weekend events

I enjoyed the Wintersday in July thing last weekend. It was nice to have new weekend event for the first time in what feels like forever. Unfortunately, this weekend we're stuck with another Hero Battles weekend. We've seen a lot of the same repeat event weekends lately.

I was wondering if you'd be willing to post a new thread on Guru/Incgamers asking for new feasible weekend event suggestions that the folks incharge of the events would consider. Thanks for your time Regina. - Marisa 22:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Let me ask the person in charge of special events first whether it's possible to re-consider the current event weekend format, before asking for suggestions on what other sorts of events you'd like to see. I think it'd be better to be sure that this option is actually open to us first. --Regina Buenaobra 00:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

i would love to see a pve in pvp weekend where we get to use pve skills in pvp. this would take place after the neffing of ursan preferably.75.165.101.71 06:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no need to ask for suggestions on the forums since numerous threads regarding new weekend events are around allready. This just gives me the feeling again that no Anet-employee ever read them? Ate (85.146.61.243 16:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC))

Forgive me if I misinterpreted the original question, but I belive Marisa asked me to create a new thread/topic on the subject, regardless of the existence of current forums topics. --Regina Buenaobra 16:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

You didn't misinterpret anything. The idea is to have an official thread that the designers would look over and consider implementing ideas from. - Marisa 19:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I already have an event in mind that i think ppl would like. --MageMontu 19:32, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Give the players FUN events!! Not another heros accent double! PLEASE!!!!^^

So...Its been almost a month. Any word, Regina? ._. ~ Marisa 18:49, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

There's pretty much a set schedule of weekend events. I don't think new types of events is currently planned, but I pass your feedback along to the team. --Regina Buenaobra 01:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Seven Heroes, revisited

A little over a month and a half ago I brought up whether it would be unreasonable to implement the ability to control a full team of Heroes. You responded with: "There are some questions on the programming side as to the technical feasibility of implementing a seven Hero party. We don't currently have dedicated resources to expand on existing GW1 features such as this. However, there is good news in that GW1 will be getting a game designer and a programmer who will be completely dedicated to working on GW1. We don't have a timeframe on when this will happen, because it all depends on when we can find replacements for them so they can move from the GW2 team without impacting GW2 development. I will raise this issue again when there is the possibility of actually implementing it (or at least looking seriously at implementing it) with regard to staff resources." Now that the designer and programmer has been hired, I was wondering if you had an update on this issue. Thanks, — Teh Uber Pwnzer 02:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Sssh! Linsey's busy nerfing Ursan, don't get in the way! :P 218.214.126.215 03:12, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Also wouldn't it be more expedient to ask Linsey? -- Salome 03:53, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Seven heroes would make individuals way too overpowered and completely remove the social aspect of the game. I mightn't talk to strangers in game much anymore but on the oft occasion I need to and that's how it should remain. Spawnlegacy 11:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

For the record, the only reason I don't play PvE anymore is because I'd have to play with humans to do the hard areas. I would come back with the force of 1,000 eagles descending upon lunch if they allowed us to have more heroes. I'm tired of needing to use humans instead of wanting to. Vael Victus 11:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Seven heroes are no more powerful than seven players. In fact, they are much less powerful thanks to the inability to use PvE skills. Also, how would me not having to play with you (not that I would be playing with you anyway, I don't think I've PuGed in over a year) negatively affect your gameplay? If all the non-social players like me just used heroes, what would be left is the social ones, meaning that your PuGs would be more social than ever. I actually don't get the big deal about PuGs having to be social anyway. I've always thought of missions as a place to concentrate on fighting, not idle chit chat. Towns and outposts are a much better place for that. On the other hand, the inability to use seven heroes hugely gimps my preferred gameplay type. I have less control in my team's build (one of the most fun things in Guild Wars, to me, is tweaking builds) and I am much slower than any competent player group.

Handy links that you may want to read some of: [1], [2] [3]. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 12:05, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I would like the option to have 7 heroes instead of 3. It wouldn't stop me from PUGging, quite frankly I was just doing that in game in NM, helping random people out, something I do for fun, I like to help people out. [today I was H/H in HM and stopped what I was doing to aid those who were struggling.] It also wouldn't stop me from forming teams with Guildies and Alliance members either, or their friends, that's also something I do to help others or just to 'kill stuff' with friends.

What I do not find fun is how Arenanet 'encourages' people to do mission together, because not everyone is of the same level of skill, sportsmanship, knowledge of skills and understand of the mechanics of the game. I've been kicked from teams because my MM didn't have Animated Flesh Golem it was using Jagged Bones. Players can actually be more trouble than they're worth, I don't mind having to repeat missions a hundred times over because of mistakes I have made, but what really gets me wanting to throw my computer at Arenanet staff is when I have to do it time and time again because a player things its a positive thing to lure 2-3 mobs into our team, or runs off out of range of the monks and then gets abusive because 'you're monks suck' then quits. Heroes can be controlled, in terms of their AI, Henchmen have far more crippling limitations, they're also not as flexible as players or Heroes. Players, on the other hand, can be a double ended sword that can hurt everyone.

This is something I would like, it would not stop me PUGging, it would greatly help me when experimenting in game with builds and skills, would give me 'my time' as a player doing the things I want to do the way I want them done, but also leave me the option to not use the larger number of heroes. 000.00.00.00 12:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Concerns with 7 heroes:

• User interface. Arena Net would have to adapt the user interface in order to give us seven flags, plus having 7 skill bar opens would clutter the screen. Ways to adress this: ignore the problem with 7 skill bars since no one has to keep those open all the time (that works, but IMO it's not an elegant solution). Make the 4 last heroes to be "henchmen-like", in other words without flags and without skill bars under the player's direct control, but still with the equipment and skill set decided by the player (would work? Maybe, but it feels like a half attempt).

You can also have a drop-down list with heroes to move. Vael Victus 11:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• It would make the game easier. It is easier to play the game with seven heroes than to rely on PUGs, and it's faster to play with seven heroes than to coordinate friends/guild/girlfriend/boyfriend/talking cat/whatever into making groups all the time. An easier (and/or faster) game allows players to reach the end of content quicker, and therefore they would lead more people to asking Arena Net for more content, and the kind of content that is easiest and fastest to make is grind. Therefore, IMO, a game that may be beaten in one game would likely rely on grind alone to keep players around.

What? o.o; Oh balthazar, they'll ask for more content? And ANet will give it to us and surely people will just reach the end so fast that it becomes a grind game that's completely not fun at all to do anything in. Like faction/rep farming, or even PvP already is? O.o Vael Victus 11:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• The players who right now would rather play by themselves than with PUGs but feel like they have to PUG in order to do hard missions/areas/quests would stop PUGing, and therefore PUGers would have less people to play with. IMO this does not matter - I doubt there are many players in this situation, and I know I would not like to PUG with someone who feels like he's being forced to play with me.
• It would increase the complexity of the game. Imagine a new player suddenly facing the idea of controlling seven characters - he would be overwhelmed with choices. IMO, this could be fixed by only allowing seven heroes for those accounts in which at least one character has finished one campaign, so completely new players would not have this problem. Other option would be to keep the "Allow seven heroes" option to be an user setting under the Menu, half-hidden so new players would not trigger it and therefore would not have to worry about it.

If they're scared of complexity, GW wasn't the game for them anyway. Vael Victus 11:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

...And I think that's all of the ones I have heard so far. I'm not against the idea myself, as long as Arena Net finds a way to make it work. Erasculio 14:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

HM anyone? Seriously, make it like that. You have to be level 20 and have a character that has beaten that campaign atleast once in order to use 7 heros durring that campaign. Also, on a personal note, I will pretty much always H/H or with friends, I never pick up a PuG unless they are my source of income (i.e. runs, solos ect). I PuGed through most of proph, and factions for missions only, henched it for every quest, and H/Hed all of NF and EotN, and have H/Hed every run through proph and factions since. The only time I pick up othe rhuman players is wiuth guildies, alliance members and friends. Heck, I have even H/Hed petty much all the HM missions and vanquishing I have done. For better or for worse, I stick with H/H and friends/guildies/alliance members. & heros for me juts means a more affective party, and I can loose the henchmen with sub-par builds for a lot of situations. --Wolf 14:41, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Letting the additional heroes act like henchmen is the most reasonable implementation of 7 heroes in my opinion. There's no need to rework the interface and the functionality is basically already in the game. I understand the concern that this would make players less inclined to join PuGs, but to be honest I think anyone that would prefer not to join PuGs is already using H/H teams anyway. When it comes to 7 heroes making the game easier, I point to the PvE only skills and the various consumables which already make it virtually impossible for teams to fail no matter how bad they are at playing the game. --Draikin 19:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

How would seven heroes be overpowered? Heroes are stupid and don't get PvE skills. As for the social aspect, what about unpopular areas? What about casual players? What about the declining player population after the release of Guild Wars 2? -- Gordon Ecker 10:47, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Or for that matter the declining player population now. Vael Victus 11:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Yea, really quiet in certain places. The whole "social aspect" with not going with PuGs was pretty much screwed the moment they introduced heroes. And since they've already introduced it, with the declining playerbase, 7 heroes is about the only way to go to keep people interested and still wanting to play (read: grind). -- ab.er.rant 12:08, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Meh but how is it that grindy? Because you have to use money to make them good? My money is already so, so useless... I don't want to buy superfluous armor sets. ;____; ANet doesn't support my play style. Vael Victus 00:21, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

That, or give us something new to do like some of those ideas on the Suggestions page that someone hijacked because he's more interested in nerfing skills. It's hard for Anet though, they want the new GW2 pushed out and feel that investing resources in GW1 is a loosing battle. But that's how you extend a product's life cycle folks. That and give your distributor chain a kick in the butt just before you release some new content...

7 heroes ... even if they were were forced to use the henchmen flag and lack of an interface panel would be still be good. ~Crazy Canuck 13:23, 25 July 2008 (UTC)~

I refuse to pug because all it leads to is fustration and I did not buy this game to be fustrated. Most of the people on my friends list don't even play anymore so getting groups together to do elite areas is not an option. Combine that with the required builds (doesn't matter if UB get nerfed or not you will still have to fit the meta build to get in a group) and I am left with only one option, use 3 heroes from a second account. The recent hack that allowed player to add more then 3 heroes has shown it can be done as for controlling hero directly that is optional, my wife whom is the ultimate casual player doesn't even open up the Hero skill bar so cluttering up the screen is not a problem. Flagging induvial heroes is not a requirement since they can be flagged with the party.--Shayne123 12:12, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Bump. Hoping for comment. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 03:55, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, not much to comment but my two cents, but.....meh. I'd personally love 7 hero teams. I'm not one to use gimmicky builds or one-step rich farming runs. Hell, I love experimenting with heroes (I.E. martyr on a warrior, Gift of Health on a mesmer, Interrupts on my prot monk, necromancer frontliner, etc). To get 7 heroes would literally throw in thousands of new strategies, build combinations, and micro-managing strategy into the mix. Considering the fact that I avoid PUG groups like the plague, this would be a blessing. These days people don't seem to get what to do. (I.E. a monk that doesnt know about max armor tanking about 5 mobs. KIA, anyone?). 7 heroes would put the fun back into the game. Hell, I only use about 5 heroes anyways. giving us 7 would let us use heroes we may have left in the dust! (Norgu, anyone?) ;) -- Wandering Traveler 04:09, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Were I a game designer, I wouldn't want seven heroes on one team because, well, it's a team game, which means you should be making teams with other people. The flaw in that logic, however, is that the playerbase sucks at guild wars. -- Armond Warblade 04:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

WT, I feel the same way. I personally love creating (and running) different builds. However, the chances of getting somebody to run my builds with me? Practically none at all.

Armond, another flaw is that even though your with heroes, your still in a team. If I was ANet, the main reason I wouldn't want a full AI team is that it would likely take more resources to house eight instances with one player + 7 AI than it would to house one instance with 8 players. However, seven heroes alone would hardly affect this due to the massive amount of people who already H/H. But, I really don't know. I'm no programmer and I could even be wrong about eight instances taking more power than one being sent to eight players. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 09:52, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

i herd ppl already h/h, so the "Y_Y but ppl shuld plai in teamz!!!1one" is a pretty invalid reason not take off the 3 hero limitation. 71.230.145.170 05:02, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

People already H&H, for sure, but H&H is just good enough to do most things alone, but not good enough to do them efficiently or to do everything. The more difficult things do *encourage* you to team up with at least one other person, so you have 2 players and 6 heroes. I usually H&H, but because the henchs are not that good, I sometimes find myself teaming up for those more difficult tasks. -- Alaris 13:43, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

The other day, as a expirement, I took 3 heros, and 4 henchmen into Thunderhead Keep (mission) with myself having a running build, got all the way to defending the keep, went of mapping, and sat back, and the Heros/Hench won the mission without me (and bonus mind you). Now, 5 times I tried to PuG the mission and failed every single one. I can think of no good reason (except UI limitations) to not allow players 7 heros. --Wolf 13:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Sry, that proves nothing, except that you have a good H&H team build, and perhaps that the PuGs you got were not up to par for the mission. Skill levels really differ between players, not just in builds, but in tactics. In my experience across HM missions, HM dungeons, vanquishes, etc, it is on average faster and easier when playing with other non-ursan skilled people than with H&H. 7 heroes will reduce that incentive, as well as allow too much team customization for a single player. -- Alaris 14:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

HM is not a good place for H/H or 7 heros, they just arent smart enough. Heck, Zhed hardly even uses glyphs. Also, Heros/Hench do a fairly good job of attacking calls, goign where I need the to, and not agroing half the freakin map. Also, every time I pick up a PuG, there is one person that we end up never ezing when they die, as theyrefuse to listen, and over-agro, dont attack the right target, and such. This arguement has been brought up many times, but I'm going to use it again. People that don;t want to PuG already don't. I highly doubt your goign to change anyone's habits bt allowing 7 heros and worrying about people not picking up a PuG anymore. However, PvP should not get the use of 7 heros for the likes of GvG and HA, and I'm not 100% sure whether Elite areas should or not. The only time I will only pick up a PuG when I need to get something done in an Elite area. People that want to PuG do, and those that don't H/H. I do believe that the use of 7 heros should be unlocked, and not just something everyone gets flat out, such as you much beat that campaign on NM to unlock the use of 7 heros in that campaign, or do a series of quests, ect. --Wolf 15:02, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

@Alaris. Too much for what? Are you suggesting that a player with 7 heroes would be better than a team of 8 coordinated players, or just that the players working together for a team build should have an advantage over the single player with heroes? -- Inspired to ____ 15:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

@Wolf. The real point of Heroes is that you control them. Zhed will use the glyphs if you tell him to, etc. To the extent that you are lazy and treat heroes as henchmen who care if it heroes & henchmen or just henchmen except that heroes can better bars. And if that's all, then just ask for better bars and an update to the H/H AI, not 4 more heroes that you're not planning to control anyway. -- Inspired to ____ 15:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

The point wasn't whether or not I can micro-manage my hero's, it was that Hero AI is somewhat flawed, and they will nto always use skills correctly. I knwo you can control them, but that manual over-ride should be purely currcumstancial, and not something I have to do every time. --Wolf 15:31, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Understood, but this whole desire to have 7 heroes mainly comes down to either being able to run team gimmicks in PvE without having to be part of a coordinated team. Or it's about having improved skill bars that heroes can have over henchmen, which while it would be nice, wouldn't be that big a deal. After all, if you start building your team with henchman, and then use heroes and yourself to fill in your team skills you can already accomplish anything in the game that allows you to use henchmen. -- Inspired to ____ 15:49, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, mainly for better builds, and being able to bring what I want. On my warrior, my prefered set-up would be myself (of course), 2 healers, 1 MM (if not in EotN) 2 SF (good build for Hero AI), a Good mez or SS, and a a prot, or something else, depending on what I'm doing. This cannot eb accomplished with henchmen, especialy the SS. Most henchmen builds are not anything special, and almost nto worth running. --Wolf 16:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be better to add a few better choices of henchies. What I'd like is to take maybe 1-2 of each profession, give them decent builds, and allow players to use them in any location. Some builds would include a standard SS, MM, prot monk, heal monk, resto rit, SF, prot paragon, battery paragon, etc. That way you could still get pretty much what you want in a team without needing to customize the whole team. -- Alaris 16:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

There is an Idea. --Wolf 17:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

While a larger selection of henchies (with better builds) would be better than what we have now, it really doesn't help people like me and WT who like lots of customization. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 18:23, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that a fully customized group opens up for abusive team builds, hence new farms like dungeon chests. -- Alaris 18:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

The henchmen suggestion would create more work for the developers since ever update they would have to change or review builds for 70+ henchmen. I don’t think seven heroes are needed in areas where henchmen are available but elite areas lack of henchmen combined with a declining number of players and plus farming pug (that dominate these areas) require a certain build to join there is a need for seven heroes. I don’t see end chest farming pugs replacing actually players with heroes especially on the speed teams.--Shayne123 15:34, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it is time for seven heroes. [4] And I believe others feel the same.--Shayne123 18:35, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Pls don't talk as though everybody wants that. The issue is debated. -- Alaris 18:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Didn't say everbody wants it, learn to read.--Shayne123 19:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

By "others", do you mean too few to matter, or enough people that I am right in pointing out the debate? -- Alaris 15:45, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I can see this plausible only after the release of GW2, when many players would leave GW1 and would be even harder to form parties in GWO. MithTalk 19:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I've raised the issue, and it looks like the answer is "No". Despite player opinions, they strongly believe that it would discourage people from playing with other people. --Regina Buenaobra 01:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Not that it's going to change anything, but I'd like to leave one comment. I was talking a bit with (I'm pretty sure it was) Joe Kimmes at PAX about this, and I commented that I generaly only find myself playing wiht H/H or alliance and guild members (all my friends are in ym alliance). They only times I meet new people are in Elite areas and during runs. I don't PuG for missions or hard mode. And, generaly, after a small time, the few people I meet get recruited into said guild/alliance, and I'm, back down to Guild and Alliance members. If the design team doesn't want us to have 7 hero's, I'll live with it, as I'm sure they have plenty of valid reasons. — Wolf 01:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I've raised the issue, and it looks like the answer is "No". Despite player opinions, they strongly believe that it would discourage people from playing with other people. --Regina Buenaobra 01:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

People sometimes discourage other people from playing with them. Personnaly, I never rejected someone for not playing the game my way. But the more you are gentle with people the more they tend to abuse of you. I even ended with people asking me with anger to equip the exact build they were giving me when, in fact, i was the leader who gently invited them. I no longer have something to proove. Still i stay open to newcomers as long as they behave like gentlemen. Yseron - 90.28.82.224 01:42, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Seven Heroes would pretty much make the whole game a cake walk.--24.84.120.201 15:26, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Regina, the issue is debated, with many players arguing the game would be too easy with 7 heroes. I've mostly H&H'ed my titles with rare uses of consumables, as many others have, attesting to the feasibility. -- Alaris 15:45, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

It's more about fun than about easiness. "The more the merries" applies to human players, not to Heroes. Hero pun, jokes and mistakes are always the same. Players' pun jokes and mistakes differ quite a lot over time. MithTalk 17:55, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I know that the topic is contentious amongst playes; I was addressing the idea's proponents in my comment. The bottom line is that, for the moment, the designers are not going to consider any changes to the number of Heroes you can take with you. --Regina Buenaobra 19:53, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Thats your opinion on what is fun. Mine is totally different. I personally hate PuGing, because 80% of players who PuG are retarded in some way or another (examples include drawing penises on the minimap, charging in without a thought and getting everybody killed from overaggroing, spamming chat during a fight and not contributing at all, bringing builds that dont work at all, etc). PuGs are what discourages players from playing with PuGs. On the other hand, for me at least, playing with heroes is a lot of fun. I am a person who enjoys lots of customization. I like to create and use different builds. Or even better: create and use different team builds. You simply can't do that with PuGs and the chance that your entire guild group will comply with whatever you want to do every time you want to try something is very low. Can you do that with heroes? Yes, but customization is limited a ton and your team is gimped by four henchmen with horribad bars.

One final thought: games are supposed to be fun. If player interaction isn't fun for some, why punish them? Why not let the players who do not enjoy very much interaction have their fun? You would think that those who enjoy interacting with others would still do so, because, like I said above, games are for fun and players do what they think is the most fun. If there are so many players that enjoy playing with only heroes that PuGs nearly die, oh well. You would still be pleasing a much more massive crowd (the ones who enjoy using Heroes). — Teh Uber Pwnzer 20:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

The design team is aware of the debate and varying opinions about this, however their decision has been made, and at this time there are no plans to allow more than three Heroes in your party. --Regina Buenaobra 18:20, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Foes and emotes

I did hesitate quite a long time before writing this because that's not the kind of thing you can easely trust until you experience it yourself. Some years ago (Sorrow Furnace was not yet released), I was at the Dunes Of Despair and on an occcasion a foe failed to pathfind his spawn location. I was having fun standing next to him, seeing he wouldnt fight back, hiting him from time to time when I saw him perform the "/no" emote. I have never seen it again since. Am I the only one who ever witnessed a foe performing an emote in this context ? Yseron - 90.48.0.71 02:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

lol Sounds fun Sit by a enemy monster and drink beer by him and it not caring until u EXTREMELY make it mad. Did such a thing ever happened? Seeing i wasnt playing for that long. --რiɫՒ¤§ 02:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it's in context, but I do have a screenshot of Auri the Skull Wand doing the warrior dance. Whoops, dumb comment. --Ezekial Riddle 15:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Humanoids often have the same emotes as players do, so it is possible that you saw the enemy emote at you. --Regina Buenaobra 18:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

HoM armor upgrades

Sorry If i've missed this somewhere but currently to show a hero's statue in the HoM you have to upgrade its armour and then it will show you a rather poor statue of the original armour. Is there any plan to change the HoM to actually show the upgraded armours instead? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:80.195.132.244 (talk).

There are currently no plans for this. --Regina Buenaobra 18:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

An update for Pre-Searing.

Hey, Regina. I thought I'd come on over to your talk page and say Hey and that there is something I'd like you to check out, http://www.presearing.com/forum2/index.php?topic=20413.0 If you could check out that thread and maybe post your ideas or thoughts on those subjects I would appreciated it. :) Thanks! Naru 10:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, but come on, a charr-slaying title? Legendary Defender of Ascalon? Do you realize GW has one coder and even then... another title just for pre-searing... mm. I can't see that happening. Vael Victus 14:02, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

the other title thing is just stupid. However the addition of a head piece collector and maybe uping the lvl of the charr bosses, I do think is a good thing. -- Salome 20:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I mainly added the Charr Slayer title because Perma Pre players such as myself would enjoy earning towards a title while charr hunting, this title would have no effect at all on post but would allow players in pre searing to have bigger goals to obtain KoaBD rank 2 in Pre-Searing. (LDoA+Charr Slayer+Drunkard+Sweetooth+Party Animal which makes rank 1 without having to enter post at all) or you could do (LDoA+Charr Slayer+Drunkard+Sweetooth+Party Animal+lucky+unlucky+lux+kurz+zashian or other account wide title. which makes rank 2 of the title.)

Thanks! - Naru 21:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

there is no other title however which disapeers once a person has gained that title and im not even sure if the ability to remove granted titles is even present. Although I do think its a nice Idea to have another title which helps with pre searing,I just don't think your idea is the way to go about it. -- Salome 01:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I could see just simply removing the effect of the title, like how you only get Norn bonuses in Norn areas. Vael Victus 01:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah Vael,good idea. I can see how that would work. -- Salome 01:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Good idea Vael, but the concern I had was if Pre-Searing had another maxable title then so would post searing. Due to the fact that pre searing would allow LDoA + (whatever title here)versus post searing (nightfall/factions) which can only obtain survivor. I cannot think of a better idea for another title in Pre-Searing, if you guys can please feel free to comment. :) Naru 02:43, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Anet did state....or Gaile said that once a player earns a title they are not allowed to take the title away no matter what. @Naru - Post does have more maxable titles that pre can't get that is not account based. The Pre-searing Charr title could be like the tittles in Nightfall and EotN where when u talk to someone they give u promotion points on how much things they require you to kill. So that would balance it out eh? --რiɫՒ¤§ 03:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

That is very true, the question is would Anet go for this kind of thing or even hold it as a possibility? Naru 07:36, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

wouldn't mind LOAD buff/hunt so when you went out you could get extra xp.... 75.172.47.109 07:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

That made no since, sorry. Also please sign. Naru 07:36, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Besides the fact that Mithos said, LDoA was intensively mutually exclusive to the Survivor title, hence getting a second pre-related title which cannot be taken would be a problem...unless they make it possible to post-searing characters to re-enter pre under various circumstances and the Survivor title redoable after dieing. But that's rather unlikely.
Yet that head piece thing could be possibly implemented. —ZerphaThe Improver 08:34, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Make it so that you have to kill 7,500,000 Charr for rank 1; pre people like ridiculous grinding for silly titles, right? 68.51.83.92 12:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

i did sign my comment sorry for it not making since it was 3am.75.172.43.90 21:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

<reset indent> Pre-Searing already has had a very large disproportionate amount of attention given to it considering it is not supposed to played in above lvl and the community, while considerable, represents an incredibly small amount of the player base. Most of the stuff added, title, bags, salvage kits, were programming time that could have been spent on the rest of the community, which is A LOT more people. Be grateful for what you were already given, spending any more time on pre defeats the purpose of pre and cheats the majority of players. 122.104.161.96 22:59, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

There are no plans to add that kind of content to Pre-Searing right now as the team's resources are focused on other upcoming features. --Regina Buenaobra 18:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

An unlinked storage for pre-only would be nice.- Vanguard 18:40, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Tonic and MOX

Hi regina, Will ANet release the new monthly tonic with the new hero?

Thanks, Deathly.

nope she posted on guru that this week on the 4th will only be mox, and next week we will get the new tonic and skill updates.75.165.102.102 22:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Amazing how many people are called Regina these day's. 'giggles'. Thanks! --Silverleaf 13:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Regina Victus 15:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

September 11th to be exact for tonic and regular update --O Frost O File:User-O Frost O Sig.GIF 16:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

HoM update;

Regina.. Quote "Because the Hall of Monuments displays accomplishments on a character-by-character basis, many players have felt strongly discouraged from playing multiple characters" End Quote.

Why would i (many more) now be more encouraged playing multiple characters? If i would switch "on" the account based option i would be a GWAMM. Did the Dev team think about Long-term-players at all? I can now pick my Main Favourite character and leave the others behind. No more need to play the others. They already did everything too. --Silverleaf 08:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

That's why they're giving you a choice: per character or per account. It lets veteran players keep their individual achievements for each character while allowing newer players the freedom of having a "collective" HoM, if you will, that gives them (us) the freedom to play whichever character we want rather than feeling obligated to have to always play one so we can get a full HoM. And seriously, I think that more players will benefit from the change than those that won't benefit. In any case, the change will give all players a choice, so I don't see what's so bad about it. Kokuou 08:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I (many) do not need to play GW no more. More leavers till GW2.--Silverleaf 08:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure I follow you. The changes to the HoM are meant for players that are still playing GW. o_O Kokuou 08:58, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

@ Kokuou.

• 1) I still play.
• 2) You are encouraged to read what i wrote. The question to Regina (not Kokuou) is why i would be encouraged to play multiple characters after the HoM update?
• 3) No where did i state the update is Bad.

--Silverleaf 09:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Exactly why is it bad that they give you more options instead of less? You did just as much as any GWAMM, yet you chose to spread it out over all of your characters. Why shouldn't you be allowed to display the title, just because you chose not to focus on a single character? You did all the work, so you get the reward. The only thing I don't understand is why you quit GW because you get rewarded for your efforts. Unless you're really a GWAMM who thinks his title gets degraded, in which case I have no pity for you. 145.94.74.23 09:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Sigh....reading skills please..where does it say i quit the game? Where did i state the update is bad? --Silverleaf 09:13, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I did read your post, Silverleaf, but I had a really hard time understanding what you're trying to say. I realize that English isn't your first language, but I wasn't sure what you meant by some things, like "They already did every too." Do you mean that you think that you'll get GWAMM if you turn on the option? I'm pretty sure you won't because the changes aren't going to affect the individual titles (as far as we know, anyway); you'll merely have a full HoM. And as this is a wiki, anyone is allowed to offer any information or reply to any thread, so I don't understand your second point. If any incorrect information has been presented, Regina has every right (as does any user) to let us know. As for my assumptions, generally when someone says "did you take X into consideration at all?" they are showing disapproval, at least in English, and "I do not need to play GW no more" generally means you're quitting or have already quit. Kokuou 09:16, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Double sigh...it's impossible to ask a question here without assumptions from users that only read half of what is written or focus on network-time-out-spelling-errors. The question directed to Regina (This is her talk page) is;

• Why does Anet/the Dev team feel that making the HoM account based would be more encouraging to play multiple characters?

(as a new player i can make x number of characters and keep them at low level while i aquire every thing on my main character? Since all will be transferred account based to GW2) --Silverleaf 09:27, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll try one last time, but please be aware that I wasn't trying to lash back at you, just trying to help. :D Anyway, I think the whole idea is that many players don't want to use a main character for everything. They want to be able to get an elite armor set for their monk, and maybe one for their necro, too, rather than having to get two sets on one character. They want to be able to dedicate their Destroyer Axe to their warrior's HoM, while maybe dedicating their Destroyer Bow to their ranger's instead of dedicating both to one. They want to be able to work on their Lucky title on their elementalist, while working on their Party Animal title on their dervish. At least, I think that's what the changes are meant to promote. If not, then I'll just leave it open for Regina to answer. :D Kokuou 09:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate help after you have read what is written without assuming. Sleep well and i'll wait for the insights Regina will be able to provide.--Silverleaf 09:42, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure you'll get GWAMM just because you have enough titles across all chars. I imagine you'll just get the highest title rank for each. SO you're maxed titles rank in the HoM will be based on whichever single char has most titles. (Separate from that, I see Lindsey isl ooking at making more titles eg drunkard account based, but that is simply giving the title to each char). So, for example, I have currently 26 maxed titles on my main so I'd need 4 more on either that char or account wide to get GWAMM. My legendary survivor title (on different char, not too surprisingly...) won't help me.Cassie 09:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

(RI) One problem the HoM update is going to introduce is how players who have earned the same thing with multiple characters are likely going to receive only as many GW2 rewards as those who have earned one thing with a single character. For example, say one player has earned all heroes with upgraded armor, and therefore completed the "Fellowship" monument, with two characters. When the HoM becomes account based, that player is likely going to end with the same rewards as someone who has completed the "Fellowship" monument with only a single character, given how both accounts would have completed the monument.

That's more or less the same problem with, for example, making the Treasure Hunter title account based. Right now, it's possible for a player to max the Treasure Hunter title with as many characters as he/she has; this gives people extra goals to play the game for. If the title were made account based, though, a player who has maxed the title with one character would have no incentive to max the same title with other characters, as his entire account would register as having the title maxed. This would remove a goal from players.

That's a problem...But IMO, it's something Arena Net should ignore. Making the HoM account based has plenty of benefits; making the Treasure Hunter title to be account based also has plenty of benefits. While both of those changes would hurt the few players who have done the same things with multiple characters, I believe the benefits outweight the problems. Erasculio 20:23, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Almost agree but slightly off topic.

• Why does Anet/the Dev team feel that making the HoM account based would be more encouraging to play multiple characters? --Silverleaf 05:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd say "to make your HoM look cool.". With it going Account Based as well as Character Based one can assume in the Account Mode you can view items by character, allowing you to mix and match, making a visual appealing Hall. If I can have Ele Armor, if my two secondary characters, alongside that of my Warrior, Monk and my main character, the Dervish, that would make me want to advance the secondary characters.

Its too earlier to say why they're thinking having it Account Based would encourage people, the last Update on it was purely words, no indication that the Update had gone past a list of "What to Do's". Part of the problem with opening your mouth before anything's started/finished. 000.00.00.00 08:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Well as one example, I'm currently working on Legendary Defender of Ascalon. I'm only doing this because I'll be able to show that in the same hall as my other achievements. Sadie2k 10:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Lots of people want to be able to collect achievements while not being forced to do so on a single character. It also means that once I collect these achievements, I don't have to redo all of it just to get rewards in GW2 over multiple characters. I'm very happy that they announced the change, and I'm happy to wait for the implementation. Now if they just could get the Treasure Hunter and Wisdom account-based *hint* *hint* Linsey. -- Alaris 13:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Silverleaf, nay offence, but this is a public page and as such is privy to the suggestions of all users. If you wish a one on one chat with Regina and the devs you can always use the "send email" option. It's just you seem to be getting a wee bit defensive and aggressive with people who honestly are only trying to help. As to help answer your query,(and please note i have read fully everything you have written), It has not been stated that the KoaBD title track is going account based with the HoM update, thus no one nows how its going to add up all of ones titles and accomplishments (although it does seem somewhat likely as otherwise the update would be counter intuitive as peoplewould still focus play on their main character just to max out KoaBD). If however it does add all the unique titles together to make the KoaBD title account based like you seem to fear, then personally i think that is a good thing. However it is of note that anet have stated that the HoM will have some kind of switch where one can switch between account based and charecter based. Thus if you feel that in some way the account based HoM is preventing you from completing things, then you have the option simply not to turn it on and continue on as before. However for those of us who enjoy a range of varied play styles but who dont enjoy trying to max out the same titles over and over again on multiple characters, then this update is a blessing. To answer your question above, it seems somewhat obvious, in an effort to max out ones titles people have been focusing their efforts solely on one charecter, forcing many people to choose a "main charecter", as people in general seem not to want to try and max out KoaBD on multiple characters across their account. This in essence gives everyone the choice now to get the titles they want to fill up their hom, with any charecter they wish to play as, which IMHO will indeed increase play time on peoples other characters. I think a problem only arises where you have ALL the titles already just scattered across your characters on your account and then when the HoM goes account wide it would mean the person would have nothing left to do. However I think these people are in the minority and not to dismiss them but they are not losing anything with this update and if they wish to get the titles on other characters on their account they can still do so, it just wont add anything to the account wide HoM, but it would still add something to that individuals HoM and as we still don't know how the HoM is going to award rewards to individuals in GW2, it is still open for debate as to how useful getting multiples of the same title will be. In short i suppose a person should play to enjoy the game, if you feel that having all the titles in your HoM would lead you to no longer enjoy the game then it would seem you have a choice, either stop playing or find a different focus in the game to enjoy. I'm not being glib here, it's just the only options I can see available to you really. As the public support for this update seems to far outweigh any criticism about it. -- Salome 13:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

My View of why the change of HoM from charcter based to Account based helps people who have a character that has missed some titles (i.e. Survivor, Legendary Defender of Ascalon) on the main character that they have all their titles on. Though most of the PvP titles are out of reach this makes it more possible to have every title in your HoM in GW2. -- Blitz 04:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

@all contributers,

• Double kurzick/luxon armors have been "a waiste of time & in-game money/materials"
• Double Obsidian armors have been "a waiste of time & in-game money/materials"
• Double dedicated weapons have been "a waiste of time & in-game money"

*Double Minipets have been "a waiste of time & in-game money" and limits acces for newer users to fill their minipet shrine.

• Double upgrade for Hero Armor has been "a waiste of time & in-game money/materials"
• Double titles on multiple characters has been "a waiste of time*

Many players (except the few wikipedian and other forum contributers) are unaware of the HoM update. And what it means for all the effort and time invested in the development of their characters. I am extremely happy for all players that invested time in many different characters. No where did i state i feel the HoM update is bad in any way. But i still have not a solid answer to why we would be more motivated to play multiple characters. << For that would only count if all the titles spanned accros our characters would accumilate to a GWAMM. And if that would be the case I feel many players are wronged by the lack of implementation and lack of information.

@Salome to much information without interpunction. --Silverleaf 12:10, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

LOL, At times my thought processes take a rambley turn. Sorry for the wall of text. Basically all I said was:

• The update balance play time across your characters as it means that people no longer have to focus solely on their main character and can instead diversify through all of their characters and get what they want with who they want.
• I agree that this balance will only occur if they make KoaBD account based as otherwise people will still focus on one character.
• I also agree for those of us who focused on more than 1 char, this is a bit of a blow, but I think that we are in the minority and that the majority of the players are casual gamers who only focused on one character.
• In regards to it being a waste to get the same stuff on 2 chars, well I do agree as I have about 3 sets of FoW armour and 3 sets of Vabbian armour, all for different characters and I bought vabbian armour for my ranger even though I don't like it, just so that she would have it for her HoM. However even though I'm a wee bit miffed at this, the possible benefits for the community at large outweighs my concerns.

Hope that helps breakdown my massive wall of text above. I really shouldn't start typing when i haven't been to bed. ;) -- Salome 12:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Didn't the mention that you will be able to choose to view your accomplishments by character or by account? --MageMontu 12:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Yup i did indeed, but that's where my thought processes got a tad rambley last time, so I was avoiding trying to state it again until I had some proper sleep. Although you seemed to have condensed that information nicely into a short and sassy one liner, so no need for me to do it. yay for Montu! -- Salome 12:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

@Salome. So while many words were twisted, misinterpreted etc we feel the same. We play this game because WE LOVE IT! but are equally miffed about the effort that we put into our characters for naught. :). If max KOABD doesn't come with the combination of all the titles with the next HoM update players will still focus on one character to attain the title.

Switching between Character or Account based HoM can only work if there will be additional Cantha & Prophesies armor for the Dervisch and Paragon.

Switching between Character or Account based HoM can only work if there will be additional Prophesies armor for the Ritualist and Asassin.--Silverleaf 12:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

P.s. and indeed, mucho yuk about the Vabbian Ranger. --Silverleaf 13:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeh,although it didnt seem like it, in essence i was agreeing with you, my way of expressing that was just some what garbled due to lack of sleep over the past 5 days. I think the point where we differ is that I dont really mind as I know it effects me negatively but it will affect most of my friends and guildies in a positive manner, so I'm happy for them. -- Salome 13:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Even in that we do not differ, since i have one friend who lost everything due to a hack and many many more friends that i am so happy for. "slaps Elite Sleeping Spell on Salome". p.s.2. Copycat ;-). --Silverleaf 13:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

What if players became able to "Undedicated" something placed in HoM? That would atleast remedy double placed minipets and weapons. --Silverleaf 13:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

YAY! *tries to look innocent* Copycat? Moi??? I liked your "S", it's perty and you're never getting it back. *runs and hides*. Anyway thanks for the elite sleep spe... ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz... -- Salome 13:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Well personally I was hoping that all the HoM's were just going to start afresh with everything undedicated again,so thatyou could then choose to redidcate the stuff you wanted to and needed to. However the problem then arises concerning dedicated minipets which have been sold which all of a sudden become undedicated and weapons which have been boughtfor the HoM but scrapped due to their useless nature on the profession they were bought for. So its going to be a really trcky area. Anyhoo back to ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz... -- Salome 13:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Copying tis the best form of Flattery. "Suggests a ban for Salome from her ISP connection for three day's and hands a white-belted-jacket to force her to sleep in accordance with the Elite-Sleeping-Spell-Slapped-On-Her".

The HoM update is still giving me concerns. And i still do not agree with the statement "to encourage playing with more characters". It is more like "to de-L33T players that worked hard for it and reward a wider audience with some implementation for the rewards-system we are currently try to solve in gw2". --Silverleaf 13:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

De-leet? (1) In most cases, if you can do it on one character, you can do it on just about any character. You're leet because of what you achieved, not what you re-achieved. (2) The time required to actually do many of those tasks is huge, having to repeat it across 5+ characters is just uneccessary. I estimate 200 hours on vanquishing the 3 campaigns alone. I'd side with you if you could fill the HoM & achieve the titles fairly quickly. (3) The number of players who complete HoMs on several characters is probably *much* too small to matter in a democratic vote. It's not that they don't count, but we are talking about what those players want vs. what all other players want. -- Alaris 15:01, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) @Alaris? puzzled by your responce????????? De-L33t is meant as a devaluation of achieved acomplishments. --Silverleaf 17:04, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I understood what you meant. I just disagree with it. In my opinion, I don't think anyone is leeter because they can repeat the same achievements across several characters. I also don't think it should be rewarded given the time and resources involved. Achieving everything once is enough. I'm also happy that they gave us advance warning rather than wait until the update or worse, until GW2 comes out. -- Alaris 18:03, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

well i for one have put a hold on all my HOM related goals i am still trying to get titles but adding weapons heros, minipets, and armor (with the exception if that ch needs armor) has all stopped. i think all of this is way to subjective and the bottom line is we need more info. we do know that you will be able to chouse between acount based or ch, i dont think it will make much change to whom can wear wut title but i think that if you go acount based you should be able to wear any title that you have maxed. 75.165.102.102 20:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

@Alaris. Thank you for your continuous misunderstanding of what i am trying to write here and the change of topic. Many have played three years to build their characters and it is thrown aside by one update. --Silverleaf 20:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

omg...exaggerate much? Then again, I'm pretty sure almost everyone is significantly overestimated what the significance of anything in the HoM will be in GW2. I'm pretty sure ANet will regret ever saying they'll be doing anything at all to carry anything over to GW2. You can bet they won't want to be doing anything that will discourage nonGW players from buying GW2 because they feel they won't be getting significantly the same thing as everyone else. Anyway, that's my bet and I'll have to wait and see if and/or when I get GW2 if I regret not having spent more time filling the HoM. -- Inspired to ____ 21:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Sigh...all these guesses and opinions just because i ask a simple question;

Why does Anet/the Dev team feel that making the HoM account based would be more encouraging to play multiple characters? I already knew different opinions from different lvl players. --Silverleaf 21:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

So people can use mini-pets, heros, titles, armor and weapons from across multiple characters to fill their HoM and not just from one charcter. --Wolf 21:51, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Stopping many players from feeling "strongly discouraged from playing multiple characters" is not the same as encouraging them to play multiple characters so your question was kind of misleading. -- Inspired to ____ 22:03, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Look, all the character building you did in 3 years is thrown away with GW2, not just that one update. What you worked for will not result in anything but cosmetics. It will not give you gameplay advantages. That much is known. I'm sorry if you feel you have lost time, or if you feel at this point that your investment is not worth it given the uncertainty. But understand this, I am not putting down your opinion or feelings by stating mine. Such updates will have different effects on different people. It helps me. It hinders you. Again, sorry for you. -- Alaris 22:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

@all..i am getting very very tired from the endless annoying assumptions people start here after reading half a question and then start to attack the person that asked it. The inquisition, what a show....

Amazed at how many are part of the Dev team and work for Anet since my question was; Why does Anet/the Dev team....

@Alaris..Not just me..Many friends that doubled everything. It's not a personal question but a community one.--Silverleaf 08:59, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

The feeling of the development team is that a character-based Hall of Monuments would make many players feel as if they should concentrate their play only on one character. A lot of players have multiple characters. It was felt by the team that players who want a maxed out Hall would feel forced to use just one character against their preferences. They do realize that the eventual change to account-based accomplishments would upset a core number of players who have multiple maxed characters, however they also feel that this change is beneficial for the game as a whole. --Regina Buenaobra 20:38, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Regina does this mean that the "kind of a big deal" title track is also going account based as otherwise people will continue to focus on just 1 charecter. -- Salome 20:47, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

They're still working on the specifics of the changes. It requires coding in GW2 and getting that new to play nicely with GW1. Since GE2 is being built from scratch, getting everything to work together takes some time. --Regina Buenaobra 20:52, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

One would have thought since its in both games they'd allow for room to move. [shrugs] Anywoo... is there any word of there is going to be work down on structure the Hall of Monuments statues and the such? How it is now is so unsatifying and could be so much better. Better = Cooler. 118.92.163.210 06:13, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I do hope the details the dev's are working on are a bit like;

• how to undedicate double collected minipet's/weapons.
• adding asassin (in P)/ritualist (in P)/paragon (in P/F)/dervish armor (in P/F)
• adding a single-title reward shrine for when a HoM is combined
• Maybe even an addiditional award for the double titles on multiple characters...(you have achieved legendary HoM filler for the 7 x sunspear/lightbringer/protector/guardian/vanquish/cartographer title) --Silverleaf 06:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

According to the June 24th 2008 developer update, after the HoM update it will be possible to display monuments on either a per-character or per-account basis (at least in GW1, it isn't clear if this will also apply GW2). As for armour sets, the GW1 team no longer has any full-time artists. I don't know whether the NC West merger would make it more or less likely for an artist to be available. -- Gordon Ecker 07:10, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Bottle of Grog. ?

Would be nice if this was an accidental update that was here for the weekend. Like.. "Oi! we didn't want that to happen but enjoy all for the weekend!"--Silverleaf Don't assume, ask! 19:49, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Nice Corsairs in Kamadan, aswell. :) Why 19:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Do we have official word on how long this lasts? --Nkuvu 04:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

"September 19th is Talk Like A Pirate Day, and this item's random drop may be designed to coincide with that celebration." Reminds me of Gaile :). --Silverleaf Don't assume, ask! 08:49, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

To answer my own question:

"Grog will drop till end of day Sunday (11:5 PM PST, 21 September)

Pirates go away at the end of the day tomorrow (11:59 PM, 19 September)."

(source)

Seems a little odd that this information isn't on the official website or the wiki anywhere (or at least, anywhere that I could find). --Nkuvu 16:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I rather like it. An added surprise and much fun this weekend. And i wouldn't mind this kind of surprise each weekend. Anyone heard on any of the forums from Regina? --Silverleaf Don't assume, ask! 13:41, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

The live team wanted it to be a surprise for players. It was kind of a last-minute thing, as we had only decided to move forward with this at the end of August, so it was a little rush to get everything prepared for it. --Regina Buenaobra 20:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy with the surprise aspect of this. What I was commenting on was the lack of information on the wiki and website after the event had started. There were a few posts on forums that didn't make it to the wiki, when I would have expected the opposite. --Nkuvu 15:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

pre searing title

My friend said that there was a title that if you made it to lvl 20 in pre searing you got a title. 1st of all can you get 2 lvl 20 in pre searing? 2nd is there such title? Simpaklimp 18:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes there is. Click here ;-) -- (Tribina / talk) 18:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

ok thx¨Simpaklimp 14:25, 18 September 2008 (UTC)