Talk:The Jade Quarry (mission)

I'm a bit confused, doesn't the Jade Quarry fall under the same circumstances as Fort Aspenwood, hence lose the (Mission) designation? I don't see the difference.--Chrono traveller 10:12, 1 June 2006 (CDT)


 * The Fort Aspenwood article is atypical and currently undergoing discussion in its talk page. I believe we should base the pages on the scheme laid out in well established mission articles such as Thunderhead Keep, (redirect to Thunderhead Keep (Mission)) and Thunderhead Keep (Location). Koyashi 10:15, 1 June 2006 (CDT)


 * I would hardly consider it under discussion, guidelines that Karlos posted 2 months ago, and which noone disagreed with. I have no problem changing the standard, but shouldn't another discussion be held before changing it? --Chrono traveller 10:22, 1 June 2006 (CDT)


 * The discusson on Talk:Fort Aspenwood had a different conclusion that what you seemed to think it did. Most participants agreed that the mission page should be in the standard "Page (Mission)" format. Koyashi 10:28, 1 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Ok, now you're really confusing me, I see the following guideline being applicable:
 * a) If a mission and alocation share the same name, the mission gets the unparenthesized (is this english?) name. Location gets the (Location) qualifier. The mission gets no parentheses because the name is shared with a location (2 locations actually). Furthermore, it seems that Draygo interpreted the discussion in the same way I did.  How did you interpret this? --Chrono traveller 10:40, 1 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Again, see the precedent of Thunderhead Keep. The name without a parenthesized suffix is redirected to the (Mission) suffix. This is true for every mission in the game, including PvP missions such as Heroes' Ascent. I don't see a pressing need to make an exception for The Jade Quarry and Fort Aspenwood. Koyashi 10:44, 1 June 2006 (CDT)


 * To resolve the conflict, the unparenthesized name points to the XYZ (Mission) article. It does not contain the article itself. That's how all the missions in Prophecies are done. --Karlos 03:10, 2 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Sorry, I guess I misinterpreted your guidelines in Talk:Fort Aspenwood (Mission). --Chrono traveller 10:34, 5 June 2006 (CDT)

To-do
Still some things missing before it can be unstubbed...


 * NPC data.
 * NPC data on Luxon/Kurzick NPC guards.
 * Luxon Longbow (these also appear at Fort Aspenwood)
 * Luxon Wizard
 * Luxon Storm Caller
 * Kurzick Thunder
 * Kurzick Illusionist
 * Kurzick Far Shot

Since I play this mission almost everyday, I can help confirm their Elites (as a start.) --Xiu Kuro 11:24, 18 August 2006 (CDT)


 * The NPC's for both sides are the same. I played the Luxon side this weekend and I can confirm that the Thunder and the Illusionist have the same skills as the Storm Caller and Wizard.  Both sides are the same; the same advantages, disadvantages and exploits. :) --Aspectacle 17:54, 20 August 2006 (CDT)

As of now, due to a recent update (can't tell which one), the corpse Exploit has been (partially) fixed; the guard post nearest to the Luxon base is now pre-owned by Luxons. The Kurzick side, however, is -not- fixed. --Xiu Kuro 08:44, 19 September 2006 (CDT)

Ranger NPCs
They've got fairly low health totals, I've killed them with one casting of Rotting Flesh and one or two castings of Deathly Swarm. I haven't been there in a while, so I don't remember if I was able to kill them with only a single casting of Rotting Flesh. I'm also not sure about the health totals of the other NPCs. -- Gordon Ecker 22:49, 24 October 2006 (CDT)

Empty
Should we mention the significance of the vacancy of this place? There is a small line in the article at the bottom but it should be much more prominent as there is no use for the article if this mission can never get started! I have been there many times and if I am lucky I may see one other player in the area. --DragonWR12LB 01:02, 9 January 2007 (CST)
 * Indeed, only once have I seen any more than 2 players in Jade Quarry. We had enough Kurzick players to start a game but there were no Luxon opponents around. It's a shame, as Aspenwood has started to get a little too easy for me. Napalm Flame 20:44, 26 January 2007 (CST)

Yes, I only have unlocked this area with several characters in the last couple of months, but have yet been able to get a mission started. Even during peak playing times (nights & weekends, both sides of the JQ are fairly deserted). Ironically, the only time I was able to access this mission was during Factions BWE. I would suggest (assuming that it hasn't been done already) that everyone start or post on threads in the various fan forums with suggestions on how to improve this situation. HanokOdbrook 12:14, 6 March 2007 (CST)


 * There, there is now a big, bold sign that says "This mission sucks!" Much clearer than that little notice at the bottom of the page. Entrea Sumatae 23:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Fort Aspenwood is just more fun!
Having finally played Jade Quarry a couple times I just do not buy the "Luxons have an advantage" Fort Aspenwood theory. Trying to protect slow moving NPCs carrying jade is just not that interesting, especially given there is nothing that can be done to e.g. speed them up. In Aspen it comes down to putting up a really good defense or pushing hard to break that defense (at least when both teams are good). I think because of the much more direct involvement of the players on both sides it just feels more satisfying when victory is achieved. In Jade Quarry I think it feels more like baby sitting the very slow NPCs. The cut scene at the end doesn't help but I have been told Aspen used to have one (which means ANet has given up on JQ). Argel 19:54, 10 March 2007 (CST). Edit: Cleaned this up. Argel 11:57, 11 March 2007 (CDT)

Recently there was a last attempt by Anet to make this game more playable by the extra faction update in the competitive mission. This lead to about a day of moderate activity before it returned to its ghost town state. I totally agree with you, Fort Aspenwood is just more fun, the fact that there is actually an advantage for the Kurzicks in the Jade Quarry in the form of the Luxon-contoled guardpost next to the Kurzicks thus leaving room for the Consume Corpse or Necrotic Traversal exploit to take place while the luxons are unable to do this makes it even less fun for luxons and Kurzicks alike (Luxons will hardly ever win and Kurzick don't get any competition). If Anet are to make this more playable they will have to change the whole system of play, (not likely) reinforcing your belief that theyhave probably given up on this. A big shame.Mortsu 12:10, 26 June 2007 (CDT)
 * The Kurzick exploit got fixed in today's patch. Not that it means much; there's other factors that make this mission not very fun. --Xiu Kuro 22:41, 28 June 2007 (CDT)
 * People dislike balance apparently. If you think FA is balanced, let kurz npcs vs. lux npcs (no player involvement). The lux will destroy all the kurz npcs except the last 3 mains. There's no trigger to get the lux wars to run in, other than player aggro. --8765 22:46, 28 June 2007 (CDT)
 * small note, not that it matters, but I think you can put windborn speed or one of the paragon shouts(lead the way I think) and speed the carriers up.70.124.126.83 14:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Just another small note, i've only done this twice (once on each side) ... well it was after the patch fix but I was on winning teams both times. Granted I used a barrager which has been my default elite ever since my first ranger. 156.12.150.147 16:19, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Dead mission. - Okay. Now how do I explore?
This is really frustrating... Not that the mission is dead and nobody wanna do it. Now I'm trying to get the explorer title and I can't uncover the mission's area because I can't enter it... I need 8 people on each side to enter it while the maximum I can see in each side is usually 2 or less.
 * Check the gwguru forums, there's usually someone organizing groups to map it on the Explorer forum. You don't have to map it to get max carto, but it really helps. -Malcheior Sveth 05:07, 20 October 2007 (UTC)