User talk:Quizzical12571

Hi there, just letting you know, the general practice on GuildWiki when adding stuff to talk pages is to add to the bottom. Usually the higher soemthing is it means it's older so it doesn't really get noticed by the regulars (in reference to http://gw.gamewikis.org/index.php?title=Talk:Guide_to_defeating_Magni_the_Bison&curid=129708&diff=1072691&oldid=1072690&rcid=1122074 ) -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 00:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Aurora Glade
You rewrote a portion of the bonus to say "...don't kill the runner. That mames another White Mantle become the runner, and shortens your distance advantage over them" (or something like that). Previously, there had been a strategy where you simply killed only the runners, and eventually that let you kill off all the White Mantle (or have someone sneak around and steal a crystal/assassinate Demagogue).

In your testing, did you find that this no longer works...or is it simply too inefficient? (T/C) 20:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * It has always worked for me. Although I just nuked the living hell out of them all, rather than 'just' the runners... Savannah Heat owns so hard in the Jungle --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG]]-- (s)talkpage 20:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * If the party stays back and you never kill a runner, you should never have to fight more than three white mantle at a time, and the runner will also be able to help out with the fighting quite a bit. Henchmen (not even heroes) can handle that just fine on their own.  If you kill a runner, another party comes out sooner, and you could have to fight more mobs at once or (if the runner is killed after capturing placing his crystal) have less time to run crystals.  I'm not entirely sure how the AI works when runners are killed, but my experience is that unless there are only a few white mantle left, killing the runner tends to make bad things happen.  In easy mode, you can get away with it, but in hard mode with just henchmen and heroes, it could be trouble.


 * Some have advocated killing the runner to prevent it from capturing the thorn pedestal in the first place. If you're relying on killing the runner to prevent a thorn pedestal from being captured and then don't quite kill it in time, that could lead to outright mission failure.  If the thorn pedestal you're defending is not the only one you hold, then it's one closer to the white mantle base, giving you far less time to kill each group.  This also tends to draw the extra abbots out to come heal sooner, which can be a problem for just henchmen even in easy mode.  Furthermore, if you're attacking the runner, you're effectively fighting four mobs at once rather than only three.


 * The white mantle running AI certainly changed between when I originally did the mission back with my Prophecies characters around last February and when I did it with my Factions and Nightfall characters and in hard mode last month. Back then, the white mantle would pick their target when they picked up a crystal, so if they were heading to the northwest capture point, you could capture the northeast one immediately after they picked up their crystal and they would still run all the way to the northwest capture point.  Now they can change their decision on where to run when in the center of the region.  I don't know exactly when the change was made.


 * The mission was reputedly a very hard one. One person in my alliance said that he had done every other mission in the game with henchmen and heroes, and needed only that one to finish his legendary guardian title.  With the strategy I posted, I only had one failure in my last ten attempts in hard mode (about half of them with only henchmen and heroes), and that one came because someone else was the runner and got confused about where to go.  Furthermore, I was able to do the mission in hard mode with just henchmen and heroes (so I had to be the crystal runner) with no running skills whatsoever.


 * I don't doubt that there could be some other strategy that works just as well. If someone else finds such a strategy and wants to post an additional strategy, that's fine with me.  But anything that involves killing the runner before nearly all of the white mantle are dead would have to be a very different strategy from mine, and would require additional precautions to guarantee that you can kill the runner and deal with more mobs coming out and attacking sooner.  In hard mode, even without killing the runner, the 1:30 that henchmen and heroes get to kill the rest of the group isn't always enough if some extra abbots come early.  Quizzical 22:08, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That's... a... lot... of... text RT | Talk  22:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comprehensive response. It confirms what I always suspected...killing a runner is what draws out those additional "Guard" groups. That is the only way I've ever done the mission, and yep, it was always a tough fight...you'd get massive backlogs and the runner would almost slip through. When I read your strategy I was confused because you said you only fight 3 or so Mantle at once, whereas I usually fought more like 5 or 6.


 * On the other hand, using a snare like, uh, Snare is still useful for slowing down the runner and giving you much additional time. White Mantle have no condition removal...If they also had no hex removal, then Crippling Anguish under Mantra of Persistence is also good since it's ranged. I suppose you could take Extend Conditions. Iron Mist / Binding Chains work too.


 * By the way, having two runners makes this very easy as well. One person takes a crystal and runs to the northwest; the other waits right next to your pedestal. Once the White Mantle capture the northwest one, the waiting person takes the new crystal and heads northeast, while the first runner comes back. After you take the northeast, the second runner captures the close pedestal, and you win. You may need speedbuffs for this, I'm not sure. But it is very safe. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 22:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Dzagonur Bastion
Thanks for cleaning it up yourself. I've been too slow, I know...I did a bit more Wikifying of links and capitalizing (margonite -> Margonite for instance) and it looks very nice now. (T/C) 20:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

THK
Great work on the cleanup for this article. :D That must have taken you quite some time. -- Aggro  Sk8  22:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, though it's much quicker to delete text than to add it. This was much quicker than coming up with working strategies for Aurora Glade, Sanctum Cay, Dunes of Despair, or Dzagonur Bastion.  Quizzical 22:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You've done a very nice job indeed. --Organism X 22:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

And to think...
I thought I typed a lot. I see people with their one or two line responses, so I get a bit confused when I try to reply with a five line paragraph...but you. You give a friggin' essay (good thing not bad :D)! Devil's in the details m8, and so few people pay attention to either of them. Nice to know someone does.

And ty for the help on Sanctum Cay, after looking I saw ur userpage and looked at ur articles, and both them and ur response help a lot. -- Marin  Bloodbane  20:09, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Magni the Bison builds
I'm sorry to have added my build in your page. Indeed, I did not realize that this page was somewhat like a personal page, and that you maintained most of the builds personaly. I'm sorry for that.

As far as the build failing against some oppopents, yes, there's little doubt about this ; blinding is one such case ; some hexes another. And indeed, I've not been doing such a testing as to draw out most opponents.

As for the 55 monk build, yes, he fails the exotic gear requirement by far (4 major rune and a rare cestus... well...) ; however, it is likely a popular build among monks, and I beleive that most monks out there have a 55 build hidden in their sleeves ; so yes, the requirements are steep, but yet I think common enough that you might mention that kind of pecular build.

I do not recall adding anything about runes ; still, other rune should not be out of scope : it should mostly depend on price. Some major runes are quite cheeper than some minor ones... But yes, this is tricky.

I know that this build would fail against Gwen ; Argo, I did not meet (with that character), so I don't know why that build fails against him. Bison is another matter : I would believe than that time, you had a fluke, but maybe you're right and I got the fluke...

I may test that build some more to provide you with better feedback ; seeing that you have no solid assassin build makes this worthwhile...Yves 10:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

You should blog
Some of your stuff (User:Quizzical/Mesmer Hero) is crying out to be a blog. GJ RT | Talk  10:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * If I were to blog, it would probably end up mostly being about politics, and Guild Wars players wouldn't care to read it. Anyone looking for comments on politics and finding an occasional Guild Wars post would probably be like, what is this here for?  But I'm glad you like the essays.  Quizzical 20:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Politics dont belong here :) And I never leave port without Gwen as a general tick-off-mobs-mesmer :)--[[Image:AlariSig.jpg]] 20:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * See, that's why I don't blog here. Quizzical 20:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Woops, meant to say "without gwen" :/--[[Image:AlariSig.jpg]] 20:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

:]
I just wanted to compliment, and thank, you for your cleanup work on Eternal Grove and Gyala. It's been needed for a while. :] 22:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The Gyala Hatchery page was all right before my changes, though I'm still planning on trying it the direct approach and possibly making some changes to that part. (I took the back way because I tend to find careful pulling missions easier than point defense ones.)  Eternal Grove seemed to be the start of the "it's late in the campaign, so the mission needs a really cluttered page" portion of Factions.  Quizzical 22:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Ursans
Ah... the section you never wanted on your discussion page. But genius comment under Ursan Blessing Talk! Very well worded points. --Mooseyfate 16:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

random opinion question
I don't think I've ever heard you talk before on certain subject: farming. What is your take on it? It ruins the economy, but it's the only way to get ahead, everyone does it, but there's gold farmers and bots and...etc. Not a topic that you often get a voice of reason on. I'd be interested in what you think. (T/C) 04:21, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It depends on what you're farming for. Farming for title tracks with linked skills is a problem, but the problem is that there are skills linked to title tracks, not that people farm for them.  That sort of painful grinding in lieu of content is terrible game design, and it is a shame that ArenaNet apparently ran out of good gameplay ideas and had to resort to that.
 * I'm guessing that you're talking more about farming for gold. My view on that is that if it matters, the rational thing to do is to quit the game and go play some other game where you don't have to spend time farming for gold.
 * Fortunately, here, it doesn't matter. I've never spent any time at all farming for gold (or for materials to sell for gold, or selling runs to outposts or through missions, etc.)  Well, that's not quite true; on two occasions, I let people pay to tag along for a mission I was going to do anyway (and for one of them, I'd let him come for free, but if he offered to pay, why refuse?).  I don't know which weapon are the "rare" ones, so I usually just vendor drops I get rather than trying to sell them to other players, with the exception of some event items.  More to the point, the cash I have doesn't come from powertrading (let alone Ebay).  Neither have I ever set foot in Fissure of Woe, Underworld, Domain of Anguish (excluding the town area for the Razah quest), Sorrow's Furnace, Tombs of the Primeval Kings, or any GWEN dungeons other than to pass through them to continue the storyline.
 * And still I have well over 1 million gold on hand, with all skills unlocked, ten sets of prestige armor (one for each character, except that I don't buy head pieces), all 250 heroes fully outfitted with runes and insignias (albeit with minor vigor rather than superior), 30 armor sets fully outfitted with exactly the runes and insignias I'd choose if they were free (including superior vigor), and all the perfect weapons I think I might plausibly have use for. The only things I could might still buy even if I had infinite money are better weapon mods for hero weapons (and better base weapons for some of my assassins, though I'll buy those very soon; I just need another 40 or so pulsating growths), better vigor runes than minor for heroes, and replacing some sets of non-prestige armor with prestige armor (which incidentally, I will do as soon as I get around to finishing GWEN to have the needed title track ranks).
 * Just the normal course of playing through the game gets you all the gold you need and a lot you don't. Clearing Factions in easy mode with one character gets you about 50k, not counting any gold or items that mobs drop.  For Nightfall, it's more like 100k.  Both of those count quest rewards, selling the monastery credits, etc. from them to vendors, mission rewards, and in the case of Nightfall, treasure chests, though not the end of game greens.  Add in that mobs actually drop stuff for you and in practice, you'll get a lot more than that.
 * What puzzles me is why so many people do spend time farming for gold. Some people, it seems, like to spend money for the sake of spending money.  They'll buy fancy weapon skins and equip them with worse mods than I put on my collector weapons, they'll go for the money sink title tracks (treasure hunter, sweet tooth, etc.), and so forth.  Whatever money they get, they spend as if the goal is to be broke.
 * If you always spend all the money you get as soon as you get it, you'll always be broke. This would happen whether your income is 1k per day or 1000k per day.  It works like that in real-life, too.  Such people win the lottery and get many millions of dollars, then years later manage to be penniless and deep in debt.
 * As to your assertions in asking the question, I'd disagree with most of them. Not everyone farms for gold, as I don't.  Farming doesn't ruin the economy, as there isn't a meaningful economy to ruin.  For a game to have a meaningful economy, the game really has to be built around it, which really restricts what else the company can do with the game.  Puzzle Pirates, EVE Online, and Pirates of the Burning Sea are the only MMORPGs I'm aware of to take that tack, and of those, I've only ever played Puzzle Pirates.
 * As far as gold farmers and bots, they're pretty harmless here. They get their own separate instances, so they can't steal the quest or mission mobs that you're trying to kill.  As I said above, they can't do much to the economy.  In fact, it was partially because of gold farmers (or rather, powerlevelers) that I decided to try this game in the first place.  If one wishes to know how much grinding a game entails, finding out how long it takes to get to the max level is a pretty good proxy.  Powerlevelers who have been paid to get many characters to the max level are great experts on this topic, so they're the ones to ask for a comparison between games.  They conveniently list prices of how much they'll charge to powerlevel you.  When I saw that they charged several hundred dollars to get a character to max level in some other games, or in some cases, even thousands of dollars, but only $40 or so for Guild Wars, I figured that the game must not have that much grinding for levels, so I should try it.  No, I didn't actually pay to get my characters powerleveled.  I just checked their price lists wanting the information on the relative amount of grinding between various games.  Quizzical 05:22, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks! That was exactly the kind of intelligible and comprehensive response I was looking for. You give some unconventional ideas and also manage to impress me again (250 outfitted Heroes is...wow). Although I would argue that you'll only make 50k/100k etc if you "do everything completely", it is refreshing to meet another person who thinks that normal PvE gives all the funds you can use practically. The main issue I have isn't lack of money, it is boredom from repetition of the same stuff eleven times over...if nothing else, the skill-based titles and other such grinds can at least give an easy "sense of accomplishment", though of course since you "bought the title" it does not really mean anything. Still, let those people with such illusions live the fantasy, right? Makes money for ANet...
 * I think you hit the nail on the head when you say the only rational thing to do is move on if you feel the need to farm for gold. That's probably big part of why I have pretty much left Guild Wars...it seems that to get anything of value to me takes too much money investment, which equals time. To get money without playing through PvE completely, I'd need to sell "rare" stuff or other such measures, but that hardly feels rewarding either. Guild Wars no longer encourages "playing the game for the sake of playing", at least not for me anymore...which makes me sad since there is still so much good in it. Ah well. You've made me think and that cheers me up a bit at least. It is always enlightening and entertaining to read an informed response. Thank you again. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 05:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * But that's the wonderful thing about playing different classes. Play through a mission as an elementalist, then come back as an assassin for a very different experience from the same mission, at least if you only use skills linked to your primary profession.  That's a lot more variety than you'd get even by playing a different mission every time if you did them all ursanway.  ArenaNet may not encourage doing content for the sake of doing content anymore, but they do at least allow it, which is more than can be said of a lot of other MMORPGs.  Quizzical 05:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * That is true enough, I suppose...up to a point. When you end up doing a mission a very, very different way because of what class you are playing, that is certainly exciting and well worth the trouble. However, with the advent of heroes, I believe that it is only the very difficult missions (those where a one-player change actually makes a huge difference) where such an effect can be found. Anything below approximately the endgame becomes the same old repetition, with slight variations based on if you're helping kill foes or buffing the party. Ursanway is an extreme example of cookie-cutting it. But still, I don't see much thrill in completing Sanctum Cay as the team's LoD healer compared to mass AoE nuker, for example...it is easy either way, and in the end it boils down to if you do a better job than a similarly set up hero or not. Maybe it would be more interesting if I played with real people, or if I could appreciate minute differences like that...Hard mode is not the answer for me since that is really a toss-up between "barely affects gameplay" to "makes mission nearly impossible". [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 05:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I can find a lot of agreement in the statements spoken here. I never (well barely) farm for gold... the only farming I do is materials (usually feathers) to craft cons for HM usage.  The game has gotten slightly trying for me as well as you Entropy, though I think my biggest problem is that my guilds activity is limited to usually 3 or 4 hours a day.  Doing the same thing over and over again with heroes and henchmen is just unbelievably boring, and I have all but given up on pugs lately.  Playing with guildies, and helping each other accomplish mission/quests/dungeons, is the only thing that seems to keep me playing the game, and I even find myself going back to Diablo2 every once and a while when the game gets dull.  I couldn't even fathom having all 10 of my characters as equipped as you do Quiz... Though I doubt I put in as much play time as you do.
 * Hard mode is not the answer for me since that is really a toss-up between "barely affects gameplay" to "makes mission nearly impossible". I do rather like that statement, and I agree with it mostly, but as my main character is my Monk, I do rather like the challenge at times... though the inability to react to 1 hit kills does erk me somewhat. -- [[Image:Isk8.png]] User:Isk8 (T / C)  22:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * New quote about farmers: A good player adapts his build to the situation at hand. A bad player adapts his situation to his preferred build. This is how the latter ends up farming a few small areas so much.
 * There aren't many (if any) true one hit kills, unless you're pretty weak coming in. I haven't done Nightfall hard mode yet, but no Factions mission mob is capable of taking 500 HP off a 70 AL character in a single hit.  Some can perhaps take down a henchman in one shot if you don't take any defensive precautions, but true one hit kills against players or heroes should be pretty rare unless you're improperly equipped.  Quizzical 23:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

D'Alessio seaboard
I'd up the level to 4 stars (or three and a half ?) for that mission in Hard Mode. Most mobs are amangeable, but you may end up doing it several times just because of sheer bad luck when you get about to reach confessor Dorian. In my case, he twice died before I could reach him (despite reading your guide) ; I once had a wipe before I could reach the fountain (Dorian was badly stuck and dying near the bridge) and waves of opponents seemed to be coming at an alarming rate. I had another wipe when 3 skeletton sorcerers arrived simultaneously with another wave on the other side and all decided to cast seism + aftershock (a sure recipe for a wipe!). All this to say that this mission is very volatile ; having done two third of the prophecies missions, I feel that your rating is not appropriate in that case.GW-Yves 22:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh cool, so someone actually looks at my ratings. :D
 * My ratings are based on a combination of statistical success (how many failures it took me to get all 10 characters through) and how much it vaguely felt like I might wipe. I only had two failures, both of which felt like non-repeatable flukes.  One was due to mobs oddly disappearing and reappearing a lot (which could lead to a wipe in a lot of missions), and the other because the henchmen/heroes went on their "I'm busy standing here doing nothing" bit as they do about one run in a hundred, and it happened at a time-sensitive time when defending Dorian.  On no other occasions in those ten runs did things ever come even remotely near a wipe, or even a "that was really hard" moment.  But don't take the ratings too seriously; they're just my personal opinion.
 * I'm aware that some people do have trouble with the part right before Confessor Dorian. In ten successful runs in easy mode and ten more in hard mode, I've never gotten stuck there, so I'm not entirely sure what people are doing wrong.  Quizzical 22:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * oh well... why not ? you're sort of an authority on GW, aren't you ?
 * Now, about the mission itself, I feel something wrong in your rating because I've been doing all of the five stars and more than half the four star ones, and never have I had such a failure rate ; usually the second go would be good. Actually, on five attempts, I failed four times because of the way the mission works : once because I let Malaka run around after saving him but then not watching him like a mother (easy to avoid once you know this), three times because Dorian could not reach the fountain. The last time I can attribute to myself (wipe by the skelettons), even though I don't see what I could have done with all my team engaged on the other side and not responding fast enough to calls... I now know that passing this point will require a different build (likely an elemental protection) ; that last wipe is something to be expected in HM, when you don't exactly know what can/will turn wrong. But the first four failures are really frustrating, especially since it takes some time to reach Dorian. Maybe Anet did some changes since you last got there ?GW-Yves 08:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Perhaps I should explain the implicit assumptions that go into my difficulty ratings. I typically assume
 * that you group with only heroes and henchmen, not other players
 * that you and your heroes are reasonably well equipped
 * that you have all skills unlocked (for use on heroes)
 * that you play a class that doesn't really match up that well with the mission
 * that you do not put any attribute points into a secondary profession
 * that you do not use consumables
 * that you do not use pve-only skills not linked to your primary profession (with the exception of Sunspear Rebirth Signet)
 * that you are a reasonably competent player
 * that you have some idea of what you're supposed to do
 * I'm not saying that you should always play under those conditions. In order to have ratings that mean anything at all, it is necessary to have some standard by which to compare missions.
 * Drop those assumptions and you can change the relative difficulty of a lot of missions. For example, Vizunah Square hard mode with 3 heroes and 12 henchmen can be pretty hard.  Make it four players and twelve heroes and it's not hard at all.  In contrast, Divinity Coast and Unwaking Waters are harder, not easier if you bring other players.
 * If you're heavily relying on pve-only skills or consumables, that can make the straight up fighting missions seem relatively easier as compared to things that require complicated tactics.
 * So what about saving Confessor Dorian in particular? In ten characters, I never failed at that part.  That may be partially because I expected to have trouble there, and planned around getting to him quickly to save him.  My usual routine was to have two or three characters in the group that could do holy damage, which typically included at least one dervish hero with Heart of Holy Flame.  Once I got near leaving the bonus area, I'd flag henchmen and heroes way ahead.  They would thus be near the first group of four grasping ghouls that spawned, and could destroy them quickly with holy damage.  It might well have made a difference that I used dervish heroes that could hit multiple mobs with each attack, though I don't recall exactly how that went.  I'd then rush to catch up to Dorian, and sometimes flag a healer hero ahead of the group while the rest of the group was still fighting the first group of grasping ghouls.  I wasn't that good at flagging the hero around while fighting, so this probably made no difference.
 * As for your team being engaged on the other side, it sounds like you're doing something wrong. The whole party should stay near Dorian and the fountain, rather than splitting up.  In particular, flag henchmen and heroes next to the fountain (well, use all your flags to spread out slightly, due to Earthquake) and put them on guard, as they can be fond of running off and grabbing more mobs before they're supposed to come.  Kill the monks fast, as they can rez.  With a couple characters doing holy damage, the mobs die fast, and you should end up spending quite a bit of time waiting for more mobs to come.
 * It is, I guess, possible that the mission has changed. It has been several months since I did it.  I do record how many tries it takes each character to get through, but don't necessarily remember all the things that went wrong (including near wipes that make me judge a mission as hard in spite of success). Quizzical 08:42, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Easily succeeded by using a second dervish (!) and flagging the group well ahead of me, before it even seemed necessary. I think that that part really made a difference since all ghouls were finished when the first wave arrived. I also equipped heroes with some sort of interrupt (in contrast with you, my heroes usually have a secondary profession, usually mesmer, usually inspiration) with one or two interrupts, which may serve as energy management as well as prevent party damage).GW-Yves 09:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Heart of Holy Flame;
 * Glass Arrows;
 * Dual Shot + Triple Shot OR Point Blank Shot + Zojun's Shot;
 * Needling Shot.
 * And you win, bonus and all. This mission is really, really easy in HM. I'd give it 1 star. :( [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 02:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * You're assuming a ranger primary, and rangers fit the mission quite nicely. If you're a necromancer primary and not using a secondary, for example, it's a little harder.  Not hard, mind you, but just harder.  Glass arrows may not be the best idea with mobs immune to bleeding, though.
 * As I rate mission difficulty, one star basically means you can be distracted and not entirely paying attention and it doesn't matter because you'll win anyway. I put easy mode and hard mode on the same rating scale, and while several easy mode missions get a one star rating, I haven't given that to any hard mode mission yet.  Chahbek Village might earn it.  Quizzical 03:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Chahbek Village...hah...can you even lose that in any mode? Not talking of Masters, but I don't think it is even possible to lose the mission unless you told Koss to do nothing and/or unequipped him.
 * The point of Glass Arrows was that it gives significant bonus damage; the bleeding is just extra fluff. Conjures work similarly except that you are using /D already. Anyway, for D'Alessio Seaboard, I think that it comes about as close as you can get to one star since as long as you have healing and Holy damage, any profession combination for the team works. Two Monks/Ritualists gives the healing (Smite Healers using Smiter's Boon are especially powerful here); everyone else should carry either Heart of Holy Flame (Dervish secondary, not hard to get) or convert to Monk secondary and Smite. For casters this is probably a bit more difficult, as having the appropriate and useful smite skills is unlikely. Still, most professions can find some other workaround: Empathy, Spiteful Spirit, and other skills that punish HM mobs for fast actions always work, Necros can try to MM, do BiP battery, etc. Elementalist as Full Warder is useful here to counter Skeleton Sorcerer's Earthquake damage and KD, and also reduce melee pressure - Dorian appreciated it much. Mesmer is probably one of the most difficult to find something useful here, at least as a human player; almost all mobs will be too fast to interrupt, and other than Mantra of Persistence + Shared Burden there aren't much widespread chaos you can cause. Probably would want to focus on total shutdown to the Skeleton Monks, since they form the core of the undead assault - without them the rest are cannon fodder really. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 03:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't forget that very few mobs in the mission leave a corpse, which is why I cited necromancer. Rating a mission two or three stars doesn't mean it's hard, but is only to give some gradiation in the missions that I think are fairly easy.  Do you really think D'Alessio Seaboard hard mode is about on par in difficulty with Borlis Pass, Iron Mines of Moladune, Jokanur Diggings, or Venta Cemetary easy mode (assuming that you're at henchmen level)?  I don't.  Quizzical 03:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * You still get Soul Reaping, though, and a really skilled Necromancer could use Jagged Bones. I get the point though. I suppose I misunderstood two things: one, the star rating system, and two, the "henchmen" requirement. I was assuming Heroes or other assisting and competent players. You've got a much stricter standard so I won't contest that - unless you pulled Judge's Insight or such, the hench can't do Holy damage, they are poor healers, etc. Although I must say, some of those missions have such a large time requirement for full completion that they may as well be on par anyways. Full Bonus for Iron Mines and Venta is especially long, regardless of mode. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 03:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * In hard mode or in Nightfall, I do assume henchmen and heroes, but not other players, secondary professions on heroes, etc. I also grade partly by statistical results.  In ten successful runs in easy mode and ten more in hard mode, I never failed Riverside Province, The Dragon's Lair, or Iron Mines of Moladune.  For comparison, I failed D'Alessio Seaboard once in easy mode and twice in hard mode.  Quizzical 04:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * If you're counting the Bonus, I can always understand a failure of D'Alessio - no one has yet found a foolproof way to 100% always save Benji. The other common mistake is to forget that there is almost always one final group that will attack Dorian after the undead assault ends and he sends you on your merry way; players ought to wait around for some more minutes every time, just in case. Other than that though, I am not sure how one would fail in HM, much less in "easy mode". [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 04:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * In easy mode, I was fairly new at the game and playing my warrior. The skeleton sorcerers spammed blinding flash on me so I couldn't do much, and killed my henchmen with earthquake.  In hard mode, the two failures are described above.  Quizzical 04:22, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Gamer literacy
You write: I think there is a statement here somewhere about the literacy of the average WoW player, referring to the fact that your WoW essay with the front chopped off found more resonance. Were you more inclined to self-criticism, you might have found a statement there about the importance of crafting introductions to capture the audience and maybe to come to the point more quickly. "Too long", offered as criticism, often means "stopped reading because I was bored", which points to possible faults in the opening section. (But you'll probably reply that if WoW players were more literate, they'd not have found the introduction boring.) I read and enjoyed a few of your articles here, but then I'm literate. ;) mendel 01:18, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Entertainment was not the point of the essay. Hence, it is rather silly to claim "didn't read, too long, got bored" as an excuse for not getting the point. I don't know if it relates to literacy so much as the typical age of the WoW playerbase (and any MMORPG-type game, for that matter). [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 01:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The point wasn't merely that a lot of people didn't read it because it was too long. The point was that, once someone removed all the paragraph divisions (which, as you know, makes it harder to read), and in some cases, made it all caps or removed all spaces between words, that was the version that got passed all around the Internet.  If the initial version was too hard to read, then the mutilated version was only that much harder to read.  Quizzical 02:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * My point is that even though the changes you mention made it harder to read typographically, "chopp(ing) off about the first ten paragraphs" made it so much easier to read that people actually did. insert slur on your literacy for not getting my point mendel 07:34, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You say that as though you expect that people read the big block of text. Do a Google search for "unless readily accessible new" (with quotes) and see what comes up.  You'll probably have to click the option to repeat the search with the omitted results included, and even then, some of them will be dead links.  Some forum thread gets some posts, and then someone comes along and copy/pastes a substantial part of my essay as a reply.  It's usually completely off-topic and nothing more than a way of filling up space and trolling the forum.  Quizzical 07:53, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, yeah, that is one part of the phenomenon, it is obvious when you include "wall of text" in the search. But you yourself write on your user page: "Some people commented that the post had some good points, ..." - which, from your text, no-one had done before. But that probably doesn't count. mendel 08:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

o_O
I've been watching the mission articles lately, and I have constantly seen you adding huge amounts of missing dialogues. I am impressed! But more importantly, I am thankful that someone is finally taking the time to make them complete. I appreciate your continued concern for the accuracy and completeness of the Wiki. Keep up the good work, as always! :) (T/C) 23:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I've been recording dialogues as I go in Nightfall. I mostly didn't in Factions, as I wasn't aware that so many of the pages were missing them.  It takes a few times watching a cutscene to catch everything that is said, and the mission-ending cutscenes are a bit of a pain to trigger just to see dialogues.
 * I might as well ask here if you're reading this: where should the mission-entry cutscene dialogues go?  Some Factions and Nightfall missions have them on the mission page, and some have them on the quest page for the primary quest that immediately precedes the mission.  It makes sense to have them on one or the other, but probably not both.  So which one should have the dialogues?  Quizzical 01:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, there are two ways to approach this. The first way says: if it doesn't happen after you "enter mission" (Factions) or tall to the NPC ("We are ready"), it's not in the mission article, and who wants to see it can click on the quest listed as requirement. The second says, make a Pseudo-Namespace Cutscene:, populate it with Cutscene:Mission name articles, and link or include them in both. You could then also link them on the cutscene replay NPC whereever there is an article for one. mendel 02:37, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The former works best. Creating bunches of new articles in a whole new namespace is senseless... [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 21:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The article you've never written?
I find nothing at User:Quizzical/Never. --mendel 09:11, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * "A few articles about the game that I either have written or am planning on writing:" Some articles are the latter for a while.  Quizzical 10:24, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * How... Quizzical Random Time 10:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I see three more articles in the making. Could someone (perhaps the author himself) post here when they go life so I get alerted via my watchlist, please? --mendel 16:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Prophecies Easy Mode
Ruins of Surmia: Just a thought, they keep walking, I kill the Shamans then go after them. You can easily get them by themselves before the temple thing (or at least use a bow to get them after you by themselves). Hope this helps -->Suicidal Tendencie 09:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * That part was accurate as of February 2007, but is obsolete. Or at least in hard mode, the ember bearers now stop when they open the gate.  I don't keep my guides up to date, but largely use them as a rough draft when I go to carve up an article later.  For now, before I go do a mission in hard mode, I check what my thoughts on the mission were in easy mode, as well as the wiki article (and the official wiki, too, though there usually isn't much there).  After I get several characters through a mission in hard mode, I add it to the hard mode guide on my user page.  Once all of my characters are through, I add a hard mode section to the mission, checking what I wrote earlier, and sometimes copying part or all of it verbatim, but often changing various things.  A hard mode section of a mainspace article needs to fit in with the rest of the article, while my userpage guides are meant more to stand alone.  But it's late, so what I just wrote might be incoherent.  Quizzical 09:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Project Wonderful
Just a thought that came to me this morning: we had been talking about better ads, I think over on Wikia's new look forum, and I had suggested Project Wonderful because the ads seemed more interesting and relevant than google's. You countered that Project Wonderful seemed to require much micromanagement to be used effectively.

I now realized that for the ad viewers, that is a good thing. An advertiser who micromanages the ads (or has someone micromanage them) is not as likely to place ads that are "wrong" for the community because they won't be effective there. I submit that advertisers look to the cost of the ads vs. the impressions and clickthroughs it gets, and if that ratio is satisfactory even without micromanagement, they won't micromanage. Going over Project Wonderful's website, I also believe that setting up an approval system (which we would as we don't want to support gold ads) reduces the ability of advertisers to order less than a full day and thereby game the system because the approval process introduces delay.

Oh, and kudos to you for your essays, your additions to the missions, your well-reasoned position on Auron/R.Phalange, and for being a great editor overall! (But you already knew that, right?) --◄mendel► 05:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Cutscene formatting
I managed to delete another 450 bytes from Tihark Orchard (mission). I did that by using a CSS table class that defines the vertical alignment for the table rows, which meant that I could drop the ugly valign from all of the lines. Unfortunately, that also turned the rows gray - maybe one of the CSS admins can pick (or make) a class that doesn't do that? I also had to insert actual empty table rows between segments.

I got rid of the width setting for the first column by inserting non-breaking space (&amp;nbsp;) into one of the widest names; the browser now automatically sizes the column to fit, regardless of the window width the reader may be using. --◄mendel► 10:59, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The way I initially did formatting was to just copy and paste from one that was already done, and change the text. The reason I was later able to reduce the size of Tihark Orchard is that in doing later dialogues, I figured out that some of the formatting that I had taken from elsewhere was unnecessary--so that I could make the page display exactly as before, but take less space.


 * Removing the valign=top bit should be able to save more space, I guess. I don't like the format of removing the width setting, as that makes it so that different dialog sections on the same mission have different widths for the name column, which I think looks dumb.  If setting it to 17% looks wrong in low resolutions, then it's easy enough to increase the 17% to something that looks fine.


 * Regardless, if we're going to be experimenting with dialog formats, Tihark Orchard is the wrong place to do it, because it takes so many edits to see how it looks. Quizzical 19:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Tihark Orchard is ok, because it has 3 tables, and we don't need to edit individual lines. Any other example might be too simple. I have tried using a fixed width: . However, that leaves an awful lot of space between the short names and the dialog. If we shorten the long names to "Prince Bokka", "Prince Ahmtur" and "Prince Mehtu", that would work better.


 * But my aim is to have the formatting done completely differently, so that it looks like this:

Prince Ahmtur the Mighty: ''The flaw in Palawa Joko's invasion of Vabbi was that he outran his supply lines. Once Turai Ossa flanked him Palawa's forces were doomed.'' Prince Ahmtur the Mighty: What's that? Goren: ''Sounds like harpies. Skree Harpies!'' <p style="text-indent:-4em;margin-left:4em;">Prince Bokka the Magnificent: ''Don't be a fool, Goren. There are no harpies anywhere near here!'' <p style="text-indent:-4em;margin-left:4em;">Norgu: Of course, you have been wrong before. <p style="text-indent:-4em;margin-left:4em;">Prince Mehtu the Wise: ''Everyone move to the exists in an orderly fashion! There is only one of them! This is not the time to panic!''
 * Of course the formatting would be hidden in the stylesheet, and the wikitext would just be this:

<pre style="width:40em; margin-left:4em; padding:1em;"> Prince Ahmtur the Mighty: What's that?

Goren: ''Sounds like harpies. Skree Harpies!''

...
 * You can even put section headers inside that without any problem. What do you think? --◄mendel► 21:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * That looks nice, and would be an upgrade over what we have. You'd need to edit some stuff to make the formatting on that work?  Quizzical 22:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I need to get an admin to edit the common.css file. --◄mendel► 04:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe we could use a template instead of edited CSS files. When I did all the dialogue for the GW:EN missions, went near mad with all that table formatting stuff.  A template would cut down on the fiddly bits and provide a uniformal look across all mission articles (once converted).  Thoughts? --Wolfie [[Image:Wolfie_sig.jpg|19px]] (talk|contribs) 05:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see any advantage in using a template over CSS. You cannot do this easily with templates (i.e. if you want the dialog to be unbroken by extraneous formatting, you need to parse the template input for lines), and it is unlikely the wikitext would look as clean as it does with the CSS I am proposing. All we need to do is edit one single CSS file (Mediawiki:Common.css, as far as I know) to have this feature available site-wide, for everybody. --◄mendel► 05:47, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've been poking around with some ideas and have created a test template (see here), the idea is that it replaces the need for the editor to bother with the table formatting themselves, they just provide the text, the template does the formatting. I've also mocked up an example of how it would be used here so you can see it in action.  There's been more discussion below, so will have a read through all that before commented about the various pro/cons etc, meanwhile have a look at what I've come up with, see what you think. --Wolfie [[Image:Wolfie_sig.jpg|19px]] (talk|contribs) 01:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

A template looks fine to me. Quizzical 07:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Template style wikitext:
 * CSS style wikitext:
 * I see no reason to prefer the former. With CSS, as an added bonus we can automatically put in typographically correct quotation marks, so that the same wikitext looks like

<p style="text-indent:-4em;margin-left:6em;">Vabbi Noble: ''“Hmmph. Obviously you don't appreciate true art.”''
 * What do see as advantage of the template solution? The CSS style has no "fiddly bits" at all, and would also "provide a uniformal look". Oh, and do you want the quotation marks or not? --◄mendel► 11:33, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * So I made the template more efficient, as is appropriate if it's going to be used a zillion times. The advantage of a template is that we don't have to get a mod to go tweak something every time we decide it needs to be changed.  With a shorter template name, is that really any messier than the wiki formatting you'd propose?  To clean up your comparison, it's a difference of six characters per line:


 * Template style wikitext:
 * CSS style wikitext:


 * Quizzical 22:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Since this template is likely to be used on many pages, it is possible that it would be made protected, and then the admin argument is moot. Actually, I don't expect many tweaks, and I'm confident that I can get an admin to immediately implement any changes as soon as we have consensus - that is what is taking the time, not the change per se - and you need consensus for templates, too.
 * Your template code version wins little in the "fiddly bits" department over the current table-based layout.
 * Template style wikitext reads like programming. CSS style wikitext reads like written English. ;) What about the quotation marks? --◄mendel► 23:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It's awfully legible for written English. Or maybe your handwriting is just better than mine.


 * Would it be possible to have the CSS automatically pick out what to bold and what to italicize, the way a template can? If you're going to standardize the format to make things simpler, marking italics on every single line will be a pain.


 * I'd probably prefer to drop the quotation marks. Bolding and italics make the separation between the name and the chat line perfectly clear.  The only reason I've been putting them in that that's what others did before I got here.  Quizzical 00:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Neither your nor Wolfie's templates can do that (they require a | as separator), and to code a template so that colons can appear in the italicized speech and not throw everything off is not trivial. (Pray that no character ever uses the equal sign in her speech).
 * For CSS to recognize a section of text, it has to be "marked up", and the easiest way to do that in wikitext is the double single quote. You can mark the text with your mouse and click the "italics" button, or you can use a "search & replace" in a text editor if you need to convert " to ' '. Or you can use a small program that does it automatically. If you care to mark the end of each line somehow (e.g. with a *), I can make you a template you can subst: on a complete section of dialog that will properly italicize it by seeking the first colon and that final marker on several lines of text. (Unless I find a way to match a newline). --◄mendel► 01:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

How about CSS like this? See my css and my sandbox. It uses a definition list, putting the speaker in the "term" spot (and formatting as bold) and putting the dialog in the "definition" spot (formatting as italics). You can use :before and :after to insert colons or quotes or anything else. Extra colons or semicolons in the dialog won't affect this, as MediaWiki only recognizes a new definition term when the semicolon comes at the start of a new line. &mdash;Dr Ishmael 01:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, some questions re using CSS (Note, do not take this as anything more than me trying to get a greater understanding of the implications of using it):
 * Would this require the editor to include &  codes around their lines of text?
 * Would these be universal?, so regardless of what skin the user selects in their preferences, or whatever skin changes Wikia apply to this wiki, the text would still have the same expected look?
 * Some mission dialogue sections have a grey-background title line, some do not, how would this be handled with the CSS?
 * I've created an example using a template here, is there a similar example using just stylesheet formatting? --Wolfie [[Image:Wolfie_sig.jpg|19px]] (talk|contribs) 01:47, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, the div tags are required, but only once around the whole dialogue section. You can put any type of headings/titles inside that, they are not affected by the formatting in any way.
 * Yes, they are as universal as our infoboxes.
 * The title line formatting is not affected at all; only paragraph text is, and any formatting on a paragraph itself (via style) overrides the central CSS format.
 * See User_talk:M.mendel/global.css . The copying is only necessary as long as we don't have these two lines in our wiki's common.css. --◄mendel► 02:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * To do a title bar in my version, you can code it exactly as you would normally. Only the definition lists inside the div.dialog are affected by the css.  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 02:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * We have extensively researched the technical alternatives. Are we now ready to move forward with this proposal? --◄mendel► 02:05, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm in favor of trying the css approach. Do get something going, as it would be a waste to have done nothing about it a month from now.  If things take too long, I may just give up and go the template route.  Quizzical 04:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Dr Ishmael has implemented the change, so you can start using the feature now. (It took 10 days to get this change through the process.) I'm soon going to present a template that aids in converting existing conversation tables - it still needs some finishing touches, testing, and documentation. In short, I'd hold off converting lengthy conversations until that is out. --◄mendel► 14:01, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Good articles
Hi, I stumbled by accident on your userpage. Just wanted to say I liked the articles you wrote on your userpage. They give a good and sometimes funny insight in this game. Whatever you want to do in future, don't stop writing these articles :) -- -- ( talk ) 08:45, 8 July 2008 (UTC)