GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.



Okay. It's just kidding. Well, I'm sry, but it seems as I'm too silly to just fill in a new line - the editor shows for me the right quests and the right source, but the page doesn't. I'm sorry. Kaede 16:25, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

These are cool Zenus1 04:40, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

This new 4th year anniversary update is all a bunch of garbage, basically what ArenaNet has done here is take recycled gameplay and packaged it in a brand new cardboard box. It sucks, guild wars sucks, arenanet REALLY sucks, i mean come on how hard is it to come up with something new once and a while? People need to wake up and realize how crappy this game is, i know i did.

Then would you kindly go elsewhere? --- Ohaider! -- (contribs) (talk) 19:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
I personally enjoy the additions, and they have actually made me start playing Guild Wars much more actively again. However, they could've done a lot better with the free storage. Currently my account is locked from getting it because I "used the coupon too many times." -Phazor 19:46, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Lol, I just tried again right now and the website was 100x faster (literally) and it worked. -Phazor 19:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
It's actually great to see ANet adding some kind of incentive to take part in old content. That is one of my biggest problems with WoW, once a new expansion arrives all old content is forever ignored by the majority of players. There's probably more content new player will not see than they actually WILL see now. 15:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Zaishen Challenge Quest = daily guild event. :) --◄mendel► 20:48, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Are we adding each day's quests as their own article? If so, where do they go? N Segick Sig.jpg Segick 21:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

That would seem pretty insane. I know that I did see a chart that had a history of the quests, which I think is a lot more efficient. Plus, the daily quests are basically missions/PvP/bosses that already have articles of their own with instructions on how to complete them.-Phazor 21:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Maybe we should add little notes to those articles detailing what some of the "bonuses" are? I mean, I know that one of the bonuses for the Blacktide Den thing was the actual bonus, but I have no idea what the other one was. Qing Guang 00:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
The pattern so far is that the Bounty has one Bonus (kill in HM), and the Mission has 2 bonus objectives (get Masters/Bonus, and play in HM). I do however not know wether the HM quest bonus requires Masters in HM... I think not. Mr J 19:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I myself think that the Zaisen quests was a great idea. Yeah, it maay be a way of "re-packaging" old quests. But it gives people another goal, another activity. It gives a player a reason to progress through a campaign; to get to that mission or boss. It also gives runners another means of making money; though I myself have never been a runner.Charlie Stoneskin 12:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Archive past quests[]

Since the history of the quests will get long, why not start a past quests page and place all the info there? --Jimp.jpg WhiteAsIce 23:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I suggest that the Zaishen Challenge article should be remade to a generic description of what the challenges involve (play a mission, hunt a boss, fight some PvP) along with some generic tips on getting Zaishen Bonuses (mission bonus and hard mode completion can be done on seperate runs). The history of which missions/bosses/PvP arenas were targetted by Zaishen Challenges can then be distributed among the trivia sections of the articles for each individual target. (Blacktide Den - On Apr24 2009, this mission was a Zaishen Challenge, offering XYZ rewards) Do we really NEED to collect the history of EVERY daily Zaishen Challenge change into an archive that will just become larger and larger over time? Mujaki 23:57, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Preparing for Many ZCQs[]

I'm hoping a power-wikian can design a set of condition templates that helps us keep consistent and professional track of the various Zaishen Challenge Quests (ZCQs). The required features might include:

  • Add an entry 1x to populate both by-date, by-type tables, and a /Research table (for determining patterns);
  • Alphabetical sorts within tables;
  • Auto wiki-links (if you spell the quest names correctly);
  • Calculate max rewards per day and per ZCQ;
  • Auto distribution counts to the research table.

Maybe something like,

{ { ZCQ Entry | Title= | Type= | Date= | RewardXP= | RewardGold= | RewardFactionAmt= | RewardFactionType= | ZoinBase = | ZoinBonus1= | ZoinBonus2= | RequiredGame= } }

This would also allow to keep the main article current without additional edits, if we decided (for example) to only display a week's worth of ZCQs (in case there are dozens or hundreds of permutations). Feel free to amend the feature list above if you like the idea and prefer a different implementation.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 01:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I've been thinking about that as well. If the info that is now in the tables is the one we deem essential (i.e. is that final?), there's going to be an infobox for use on the /Zaishen Quest pages, and its contents can be collected and tabulated by DPL, which would keep some of these tables current automatically, and also allow to only display, say, the 7 latest ones. People knowledgeable in the ways of DPL could then craft queries over larger sets of data. --◄mendel► 10:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Bonus icon[]

I'd like to have a nice icon for the bonus rewards (in place of *) that could also be used for teh quest pages. Suggestions? --◄mendel► 10:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I suggest a mudkip icon.--Darksyde 03:58, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I second that notion. Ladies, Gentlemen... Let it be done. -MAL wiki sig.PNG 23:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Quest time switch over[]

Here it states that they switch over at 12 pacific and I'm im sure that this might be wrong. I watch all the quest switch over at 12 EST which is 9am Pacific. I'll watch it again today and reply back with what I have.-- 11:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok I wasn't crazy the Quests switch over at 9am PST 12 EST the table needs to be fixed. -- 16:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Updated this page to correct information that daily quests were updated at noon pst to noon est.

I have verified this information.

Quest switchover time at 16:00 UTC. Verified. So timetable is wrong. 14:33, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Is this really true? If so, the switchover time varies? Does it depend on district? Weekday? --◄mendel► 20:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Noon Eastern is currently accurate, but it would be better to say "9am Pacific" since Guild Wars announces its times in Pacific Time. Gets confusing to see GWiki starting to use Eastern Time Zones as well. Galkraft 16:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

tomorrow is the day[]

where we will find out if it's a weekly repeat. Leaning towards it, there's not many PVP modes left. --Viruzzz 10:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I think and very much hope like hell that it's a weekly repeated thing. Because a everlasting Fireworks is 50 -- F4Sig.jpg † F1© Talk 10:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
That's still 10 weeks :) Viruzzz 10:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
PVP will have to repeat at some time, and so will the missions; eventually all of them will have been completed and either they stop, or they repeat. It's also possible that they will repeat, but not be in the same order.


It strikes me that at some point this page will grow much too large, and be rather impossible to handle, what with the "new row to every chart every day" thing going on. Wouldn't it be best to separate the charts into a different page, linked here, and have this page only store the current day's challenges? It would be a much more efficient way to organize this page. 16:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Very much agreed. With close to 100 missions is the 4 campaigns, this will grow quite large (not to even mention the number of bosses in the game...) RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Can we please cross that bridge when we come to it? For now, the way we usually do it (e.g. on game updates, news and such) is to archive when things get too big; there are also technical features under discussion that, if implemented, do away with the need to update this page at all because it'll be automated (from the quest pages). If it's not broken, why fix it? --◄mendel► 22:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
There's nothing wrong with discussing a fix for a problem that is likely to come, nobody's changing anything yet. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 22:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Totals ?[]

Do we really want the total copper you can get in the tables ? Getting Headaches from calculating/searching awards. Unless someone can make a template out of it, I don't want too recalculate/puzzle everyday-- Merty sign.gif-- ( talk )

I don't see it being very useful, either, more like a trivial statistic, since most people play on more than 1 character, and do many of the quests selectively. The total for the day is ok, but the grand totals are kind of useless. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Somebody found them useful. Put a date on the line somewhere to show when they were last updated and let who wants to keep them current. I think once the totals have reached 7500 it'll become pointless, or when (if) we automated it. --◄mendel► 22:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
This was more important when the coins were not tradeable between characters. Automating the calculation and possibly separating it from the main list into a note like "So far a single character could have earned a maximum of X copper coins, which translates to Y silver coins or Z gold coins" would probably be better. Right now it has to be recalculated manually every day, and is losing its informational value with multiple characters consolidating their coins. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 22:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Another thing that would make it easier (and less susceptible to errors) is making a template the calculates the conversion for you, and all you have to put in is the copper coin total. I think that's within your realm of expertise, no? RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 22:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I think the total is marginally useful in that so many people have been complaining about how long it might take to earn an Elite Equipment Pack. So, I agree with Mendel: let's wait until it reaches at least 7500 (per category?).
I also agree with Rose that it would be helpful to have a Zoin converter, akin to Template:Cost. (I'm willing to give it a whack, however I'm sure someone could do it faster. The syntax gives me headaches, so it could be a while.)   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 23:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
imo track to 7500 for people who cba to play multiple characters for a little trivia :P-- 14:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
and show relation of PvE vs. PvP Zoins ;-) --◄mendel► 20:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
PvP: Always more Zoins, much easilier repeatable. PvE: One run-through is enough to get it over with. Something like that? ;) --- Ohaider! -- (contribs) (talk) 21:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Apart from being a headache, I think the total is somewhat meaningless, as players are in no way capped to that number when farming coins. You can, after all, do each PvE quest once per characted and each PvP quest as many times as you'd like. Owoc 20:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Template:Cost gave me headaches as well, that's why I rewrote it, see User:M.mendel/Templates/cost. --◄mendel► 22:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Current total of the totals: 31,061Copper Zaishen Coin.png. If we planned to remove the totals after 7500, we are long past due. If we have a zoin number, I'd prefer to see it listed as the max or base next to the challenge, e.g. The Frost Gate (126Copper Zaishen Coin.png).   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

That's kind of what we're doing now anyway, just listing the daily totals. Per quest totals would be more useful to me personally, but they can be found easily just by following the link, so I don't care either way. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 22:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Obvious Question[]

So this might be a stupid question, but I've noticed that if you obtain a quest and don't do it on the day that it is assigned, it stays in your quest log after the quest switches on the next day. So if you do the quest that was assigned say, 2 days ago, would you still be able to get the rewards for it? 20:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)Razaac

Yes. You can have up to 3 quests in each category in your quest log, and do them whenever you like. You will not be able to obtain a 4th quest of the same type until you complete or abandon an older one. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Tip for the Day: If you notice a Zaishen Challenge which you are likely to complete without making a special effort to do so, or are likely to enjoy, remember to take it on each of your characters, who can then complete it at their leisure.
Eh? Eh? A F K sig 2.jpg A F K When Needed 20:28, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
That's what I used to do... Each of my chars has 3 of each quest type in their log, and when I saw an easier one, I'd abandon one and take the new one. But so far I don't think I'll be doing any of them except on my necro and ele, because the rewards are puny without HM or bonuses, and it's not even worth my time to login as each character and take the quest for some unknown time in the future for a measly 10 coins, unless it's the Great Northern Wall or Chahbek Village... I've given up on the idea for now. :P Maybe later when I feel like playing those chars again. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:40, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
o.O So... it should or should not be a tip of the day? *shrugs* *backs away* A F K sig 2.jpg A F K When Needed 20:43, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Don't see why you can't put it there, anyway. I just said what I do. :P Someone else may find this interesting/useful. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:45, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
The casual PvP quests (RA, AB, Jade Quarry, Fort Aspenwood) are all worth taking on a bunch of characters for later completion. Felix Omni Signature.png 20:47, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
But also don't worry too much about missing them, as they are bound to repeat frequently due to limited number of PvP modes. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
I'll take that as a no. A F K sig 2.jpg A F K When Needed 20:58, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


Let's say I have both GvG quests, which are exactly the same, and I go into a GvG. If I win, do I get both quests filled out or just one? 04:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

It is the same quest. So, if you have the first one, you can't take a second one, it does not offer you a quest for that day. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 07:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Actually, that's wrong. Based on my experience with the Heroes' Ascent quest, if you leave the first in your log and then pick up the quest again when it repeats (after it cycles through the 6-9 quest types for Combat, for example), you get both quests in your log. Upon completing part of an objective for the quest - say, winning 1 Heroes' Ascent battle - it applies to both quests. Thus, you can get up to 3 copies of the same quest, then fulfill the primary and bonus objectives. Then, talking to the rewards NPC three times, you can get the rewards for each copy of the quest. Entropic.png (Talk) 04:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Then how do you explain the combat poster not giving me the second HA quest when I had the old one in my quest log and only 2 combat quests total, with room for a third? It didn't even have the exclamation point. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 04:46, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
dunno, he offered me two HA quests at the same time. It may be a bug or something.--IkimonoNeeds more ParagonMonk-Paragon-icon.png 15:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't able to get a repeat quest today with the JQ quest, just to confirm. Mlandry 01:57, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

The last update fixed the "two identical quests" bug. Can't do it anymore. Felix Omni Signature.png 02:22, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, the May 7 update that made the combat quests repeatable disabled the ability to have 2 identical quests in the log that update simultaneously. It's a shame. Entropic.png (Talk) 17:57, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Missing entries on 3/05/09[]

The Zaishen Mission and Bounty are missing for this date. Any particular reason why? Also, what are the question marks next to the total copper coins count for the same date?AMFan 10:12, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Zaishen Challenge Missions were introduced towards the end of April so they didn't exist on that date. --Kirbman sig.png Kirbman 21:02, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
The question marks were instead of leaving the total fields blank, the person put question marks instead of just adding up the totals. Callisto Von Drake 15:13, 17 Oct 2009 (UTC)

Calculating totals sucks[]

I updated the totals, but it took forever because you have to visit each quest page in order to add up the totals. so I made a page for tracking it a little bit quicker, feel free to use it: Link - Viruzzz 13:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, these numbers are already available in the "history" tables in the lower half of the page, from where they could be copied into a spreadsheet. But yeah, I hear your pain. --◄mendel► 19:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I told y... err... *cough* :) RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 21:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
You told me to do away with those tables? --◄mendel► 21:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I remember mentioning this calculation stuffs is too much of a pain (with lots of room for errors) for its usefulness, which will run out as soon as that number hits 7.5k anyway. Anything beyond that will be extremely tedious. Or are we tracking it until it hits the El. fireworks box? And where's my zcoins converter? XD (I don't know the code enough to do it myself, or I would have - it needs divisions and remainders maths.) RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 22:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Why don't we seetup auto-calcs? (both for the table(s) and the non-existent {Template:zoincost|goldzoins=|silverzoins=|copperzoins=}).   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 22:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
'cause autocalcs for tables are hard. Rose and/or TEF (or anybody else), make me a table like on User:M.mendel/Templates/cost (with "code" and "display") on Template:Zcost/doc, and I'll make you the template if it is extensive enough. --◄mendel► 22:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Maybe I'll give it a shot, though I'd be more inclined to just write the template itself based on the cost one. I'll have a look at it later, that table of yours looks like a headache. ^_^ The only thing different is that it's not a decimal system all the time, it's pentadecimal to convert from copper to silver, which makes it harder, as I'm not familiar with this type of code and the functions available, a way to divide and save the remainder is needed. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 02:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Not sure how good this is for now (code is a bit ugly, imo), but Template:Zoincost --JonTheMon 04:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Zoins # without doing bonus[]

...14? great, now i'm gonna have 4 sitting in my inventory for all eternity taunting me.--IkimonoNeeds more ParagonMonk-Paragon-icon.png 15:35, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Just do it 5 times. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 18:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Um... Time[]

Okay, you have Noon (Eastern Time) at the top. And 14:00 Eastern time at the bottom. And the time difference from UTC are wrong. And there are 3 hours between PST and EST, so how does -7 and -5 equal 3 hours? So why don't you learn time zones and leave it how i fixed it?


Bored of the missions, quests game? here have a shiny coin. feel better now? No! 2 weeks of Z quests to get 1 Zaishen Key? are you kidding? Give us some real new content. dont try to bribe us into playing the same things for 3 more years. gonna need a bigger bribe. 22:54, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

They are not forcing you to replay the game. I personally enjoy this update. If you don't like the Zaishen Quests, don't do them. Mlandry 01:55, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Considering the size of the Live Team, I'm impressed. They didn't have to do anything at all, other than the 4th year mini series. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 07:22, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I personally think it was a great way to spur interest from the established player base, and breathes life into a game that was going stale. The only problem/criticism that i have is the rewards are completely biased towards PvP. The big prize is the Huge equ pack, which is mostly desired by the PvE crowd who needs room for armor sets and hoarding stuff. The 2 PvE challenges rarely (if ever) equal the zcoins from the Combat challenge, and the vast majority of PvE players do not (and will not) PvP, severely restricting their ability to gain zcoins. Why give such a bias against the PvE crowd when the big prize is meant to answer one of their biggest demands? Tzalaran 21:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Simple. PvP takes only skill balances and an occasional map to maintain, so attracting people to PvP makes sense for them. PvE crowd is very demanding, and PvE has much more unique content, so it requires more resources to make and maintain, and to keep the PvE crowd interested. People play more PvP - Anet doesn't need to work as hard to maintain it. Also, apparently PvE players outnumber PvP about 9:1, meaning that PvP, the initial intention of this game, is dying. They had to do something to attract PvE into PvP. The solution wasn't perfect, it wasn't even great, but then again, there isn't much else they can do at this point. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 07:06, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Good point. I saw the motivation in these challenges to concentrate the PvE player base to recreate a feel that was there when the game was new: that you can get to an outpost and always find a party ready to do your quest without the waiting. M.O.X. proved that was feasible, and removing the motivation for people (by increasing rewards) to keep doing that doesn't make sense.
PvP though is pretty concentrated to begin with as there aren't that many venues, so attracting players to PvP does make in sense in that respect, too. --◄mendel► 04:29, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Campaign Indicator?[]

Is it perhaps worth entering some kind of indicator as to what campaign the quests require (eg, whether they are core/proph/factions/nightfall)? Perhaps a coloured bar, just a few pixels wide, on the left side of each entry would be enough (with different colours for each of course). I believe it would be useful for both players with only certain campaigns and for players whom have characters that have not completed all campaigns. -arual 12:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

That's a good idea. I myself have only 1 character that completed all campaigns, so I usually just check wether whatever has to be done is accessible by other chars and if not, I only do it on my Derv. I have no idea however how to add something like that.--TalkpageEl_Nazgir 14:45, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Um, in the sections below with the information for the individual sections and quests, it gives the campaigns. --JonTheMon 15:22, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Whoops, I forgot to check the page before replying >.< --TalkpageEl_Nazgir 15:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Noted. --◄mendel► 16:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Yeah... RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 19:31, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Heh, I did notice those but with the increasing size of those tables they are becoming more and more bland. That is why I think some colour indicaters would serve the dual purpose of sprucing the page up a bit and more importantly then users will also be able to easily tell the campaign from the top overview box rather than having to scroll down (the indicator could be applied to all the current tables afterall). arual 09:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
But... wat about teh colorblind peoples? Personally I think small strips of color will also get confusing, as there is no direct correlation between campaigns and colors. It may get a bit rainbowy, and users would have to reference the legend every time they forget what color is what. A letter might work better, as in (P), (F), (N), (E). RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 09:08, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Very true about the colours! I never really realised before how the campaigns never had a specific colour (not that there is a reason why they should). The brackets with the letter in bold makes it look ok-ish (P), (F), (N), (E) and of course (C). It all depends on whether it is possible to get the identifiers in there without making the table harder to read - if it is not easily doable then there is no point. arual 11:00, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
I'd probably just add them after the quest name, and have a note at the top of the table explaining what they are. I would also not do this until the "history" tables are moved to a separate history article (once they get too large), because until then you are duplicating information that is better presented in the history list. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Just noticed the Sandbox. Looks better than I thought it would, so it's not a big deal if information is duplicated. I only have one problem: Hero Battles aren't really core. You must have Nightfall or Eye to play them; Factions and/or Prophecies without one of the other two cannot access them. I would label these as (N/E), unless this was already discussed somewhere and I missed it. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:31, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Sounds fair enough to me, the only reason they were labelled as core was because I couldn't remember what the conditions were (since I never partake in that form of PvP). Might be worth waiting till nearer the time when the old information gets archived to see what it looks like in a table with ~25-30 rows (assuming it gets archived monthly). arual 11:24, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Monthly would make the most sense. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 18:27, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Removal total coins[]

There is really no point of keeping the total. In fact it haven't even been updated for a while. For example, total currently show 4960 coins when in fact the correct number is 5915, to and including May 9 2009. Sure I could update it but I don't fancy opening 50+ pages recalculating all the individual coin rewards for quests/bounty/pvp when I think it's not really needed. Anyone who agrees? Thoose who disagree should at least try keep the values accurate or there's *really no point in keeping it. --Lexxor 16:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

If you would look a little further down the page, it'll give you all the coin values of each quest, so it's not as hard as you're making it out to be. See, I already did it. --JonTheMon 17:25, 10 May 2009 (UTC)


Is there any way to predict the pattern for the coins it rates (the difficulty)? It it based on how far along in the campaign the mission is, the boss is, etc? I know we have a table with examples on the pages for Z bounty and Z mission (not updated for a while on the latter...) but surely we can tell somehow? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) 19:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC).

I think the missions rate pretty much with difficulty, yes; I assuem we haven't seen teh highest prices yet? For the bosses, I had looked up levels when I made the list; but it is not easy to figure out, it is not just their level. I think if one also figures in the area where they are, maybe some sort of prediction could be possible. --◄mendel► 21:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

difficulty rating[]

just for fun and convenience, let's add a difficulty rating either for the day (or for the quest, more complicated if you observe the suggested method). It could be extremely simple code, simply taking the total coins value and assigning a difficulty; .

< 200 = 1...

200-325 = 2...

325-450 = 3...

450-575 = 4...

> 575 = 5 . Or something like that, and then sticking it on the right side of the chart

Observe the "tiers" listed on Zaishen Bounty and Zaishen Mission, and that's your diffculty rating right there. --◄mendel► 00:39, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

ignore this. sorry. stupid me.


As of May 29th, summing the "Total" column gives 13005 copper, which includes 2700 (20.76%) for missions and 2835 (21.8%) for bounties. For 8 characters, this would amount to 104040 copper, or 208 Gold Zaishen Coin 0 Silver Zaishen Coin 40 Copper Zaishen Coin. --◄mendel► 03:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC) apparently did them (?) and got 109440 copper. --◄mendel► 03:50, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

As of May 31st, 2009, summing the "Total" column gives 13565 copper, which includes 2860 (21.1%) for missions and 2975 (21.9%) for bounties. For 8 characters, this would amount to 108520 copper, or 217 Gold Zaishen Coin 0 Silver Zaishen Coin 20 Copper Zaishen Coin.

Next totals at the end of June? ;-) --◄mendel► 08:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Holy cow, that's like 14 HEPs! O_O RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 09:54, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Separate bonuses?[]

The Zaishen missions for Prophecies have a bonus to do the mission in hard mode, and another bonus to do the usual mission bonus. Can these be done in two separate runs, and the one where the player does the bonus done in easy mode rather than hard mode? That would probably be easier than doing the bonus for The Frost Gate in hard mode. It would probably make things easier for a lot of players in Sanctum Cay and Dunes of Despair, too. Quizzical 16:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

You can do this as elaborately as you want, really. Anwyays, once in NM+bonus and once in HM will get you the whole quest. --- Ohaider! -- (contribs) (talk) 16:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I thought the first entry in the "Notes" section was clear enough? Maybe rephrase? --◄mendel► 17:23, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Whoa, there's more text down there after scrolling past the long list of Zaishen missions. I guess I should have read the page more carefully.
This page will eventually get awkwardly long. It will simplify the listings if it goes through all of the missions once and then repeats the list in the same order, so that we can stop lengthening the list. It hasn't yet repeated any mission, so it's certainly not just picking a random mission chosen independently every day. Quizzical 18:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Maybe put that note on Zaishen Mission? --◄mendel► 19:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Kill the page creation box?[]

Some Zaishen missions have a (mission) on the end, and some do not. If someone puts the correct link to a day's page, and someone else later creates the page from the page creation box, the second person is may well get the page name wrong. Even if someone creates the page with the right page name, having a box inviting someone to create another page with the wrong name can easily lead to the creation of the wrong page. It's easiest to get the page name correct when one is editing the Zaishen Challenge Quest page, so that there are lots of other examples sitting there to which to compare it. As such, I think the page creation box makes it harder to get the page name right, not easier, and should therefore be removed from the page. Quizzical 18:34, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

EotN missions don't have (mission) in the page name, while all the others do, so that's an inconsistency that hasn't been addressed in the page creation box, otherwise I like it. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 18:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I consider the box to be a success, since many different people (even anons) have used it to created pages, and there've not been more wrong names than there used to be. The common mistakes before the box were to leave off the (mission) on quests that need it, and if it wasn't left off, to omit the space (I am considering checking for this in the editing tips, because it still happens). If creating EotN (mission) pages is unacceptable, I could make two buttons, one for campaign missions, and one for EotN missions. Since they have different rewards, that would simplify some things. --◄mendel► 19:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
That sounds easier that my idea of creating a 69-line switch to validate the name... assuming I calculated the number of missions correctly. Of course, I haven't had a chance to think out what to do when a invalid name is supplied anyway, so there's that too. Nwash 19:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, I thought that the idea of the current format was so that the subpage has an automatic link to the parent page, and in case of the EotN quests it will be mismatched with the (mission) part. I like the idea of a separate tool for EotN quests. Another option would be to pre-create all the mission pages and only leave the dialogue/rewards to be filled in. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 19:22, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Assuming there have been no repeats yet that I missed, 42 of these pages are already created. So, yeah, either creating them now or just accepting the flaws for the time being seems like it'd be alright... we'll be reusing them in about a month anyway. Nwash 19:34, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Also something to note: it appears there are only four EotN missions that have not yet been featured in one of these quests. Nwash 19:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Creating them now means killing the box with the preload and editing tips. And it doesn't protect against people creating misnamed pages. --◄mendel► 20:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Hmmm... I haven't played with InputBox yet... I assume that's what is being used here, anyway. If we did create the mission pages now, could we just kick the input to Special:Search or something? I'm a little tired right now to think of a way to preserve the editing tips. Nwash 20:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
We probably could. I just hate for you to break my toy. ;-) --◄mendel► 20:21, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
It is a nice toy indeed. Just create a separate page with a list of the zquests by campaign progression to make them easy to find and edit. That way, the articles already exist and have the basic layout and template in them, all that needs to be filled in is the exact dialogue, rewards, and date. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Do it yourself. Use the page creation box to create a page for a quest that doe not exist yet. DO NOT SAVE. Copy the URL and make a [link] for that URL. Make links like it for all other quests that are missing. Put them on the page instead of the button (use a showhide). That way, to create a new page for a current mission, open the showhide, click the correct quest, everything including tips will get preloaded, and you just have to edit the campaign and fill the rest in. (If I get a list of extant missions, I can do it, but I'm lazy.We can actually pretty much even predict the order they'll be in.) --◄mendel► 21:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Creating all of the mission pages ahead of time sounds like it should work. The rewards are, for the most part, pretty predictable. That obviously isn't viable for the bounties, since we don't know which bosses will have bounties, but the page names there are much easier to get right. Quizzical 23:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Last mission of the campaign[]

Hell's Precipice hasn't yet shown up as a Zaishen mission. Neither has Imperial Sanctum. Nor have Abaddon's Gate or A Time for Heroes. The probability that this would happen with 48 of 69 missions having shown up is less than 0.7%. Quizzical 19:03, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Could indicate some kind of weight to the random selection. But, yeah, maybe they aren't even included. Anet may been thinking access to the endgame areas is sufficient reward or inducement to play them. And even though 0.7% is unlikely, it is still possible, and with only 48 results... not necessarily enough to make one assume the law of large numbers must have come into effect yet. Some missions had to be last, after all, and the chances of any four of those being last is also 0.7% at this point. Nwash 19:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
If one knows nothing about the mission order except that all appear, the probability that a given mission would be the last one is about 1.45%. Regardless, all hard mode missions intrinsically give about the same rewards, so they don't open up new areas. By the time you've got access to hard mode, you've already opened up all the possible areas. Quizzical 19:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Second char, lv20 before Vizunah Square. Oot. --- Ohaider! -- (contribs) (talk) 19:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Zaishen Combat Rotation table[]

Added a Zaishen Combat rotation table. I do NOT take credit for the discovery of this rotation, I'm just making a table for it. Just so we all understand each other :-) I'm leaving Zaishen Combat in original table for now, until we're all sure the new table is a good replacement. --Lexxor 19:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you think this table design is good, or do you suggest a different kind. If it's good, how many months ahead do you think we should add dates? On a side note, I created this table in Excel so it's easy to add additional dates/columns if needed. --Lexxor 19:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
I think the current format and the amount of data is fine. There isn't a whole lot of point in projecting it further, just stay 2 columns ahead of the current. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 19:46, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
I suggest putting this table on Zaishen Combat, not here. I can also modify it so it works like the table on Nicholas Sandford, listing the next date that a specific mission will be available. What do you think? --◄mendel► 22:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Sure, why not. Automating the date using a script would help like it was done on the Nicholas Sandford page. I do think it's good if it's still on main page as it gives a quick overview, just doesn't have to have so many days ahead like it have now. --Lexxor 22:29, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, I made Zaishen Combat/Schedule and related templates, but the problem is that because the switchover occurs so late in the UTC day, the dates will seem off by one to Americans most of the time. (I.e. the table tells you what UTC date the quest will next be available at the current time). I'm not sure how to solve it (and too tired now to think clearly), maybe by adding a column with dates/times in EST? --◄mendel► 01:34, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
I think it's fine as it is. Put it on the main page for an easy overview, there's already a timzzone table present there as well. Once Zaishen Quest/Bounty had their rotations there could be similar tables as well, although slight different. I don't think the "days to wait" column is really needed, the date is clear enough. Instead you could add a ZCopper Total. --Lexxor 10:45, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm glad you like it. "Days to wait" is needed to sort the table because sorting by date doesn't always work well. Why don't you add the copper totals yourself? It's not hard. :) You can use {{[[Template::Zaishen Combat/Schedule|:Zaishen Combat/Schedule]]}} to put it wherever you want. --◄mendel► 11:01, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
You're right, added the totals now :-) As for issue with sorting by date, I think it can easily be solved having the same date format as mainpage, ie. YYYY-MM-DD --Lexxor 11:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
That's true, but it looks ugly. :) --◄mendel► 11:14, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
True, but sometimes you can't have both :/ --Lexxor 11:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Update glitch[]

Today's update changed the Zaishen mission and bounty to ones that had previously shown up on other days. Hopefully ArenaNet will notice and fix it soon. Quizzical 00:36, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Doubt it. But it does throw off our PvP predicted schedule table thingy. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 03:46, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
what if not bug ??Spikeicon.png Tenetke Mekko My Talk 05:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Maybe they changed the time at which the quests change. I always thought 9am PST was kinda weird, for Anet. Pure speculation of course, we won't know until tomorrow. --Macros 05:28, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
After the patch, someone said in alliance chat that the Zaishen quests had changed. I went and checked on my own character after getting out of the vanquish I was in, and they had not changed. I then logged out, downloaded the patch, and logged back in, and found that the Zaishen quests had, indeed, changed.
They have the ability to change the quests without applying a patch, as happens at 9 am ArenaNet time every day. It doesn't take logging in and out to do it. I've been standing there just before the time hit, checked a quest, waited until the time passed, and then had it refuse to give me the quest when I tried to accept it, because it was no longer available and a new quest was out. That isn't the sort of behavior that it displayed today. Quizzical 05:37, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
"the ability to change the quests without applying a patch" is slightly misleading, because I'm sure previous updates contained the patch schedule, and this schedule can't be changed without patching. --◄mendel► 08:32, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The ZCombat table might look a bit ugly trying to add in this "glitch" (if that's what it is), so I suggest that either we move previous dates into Z/History and adjust the table, or we wait a couple of days and see if Anet release a second fix. --Lexxor 08:38, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
What I was getting at is that maybe they changed the random factor used to determine which missions are next. If they did, it likely removed the ones that have already been completed. This could mean that potentially every quest is not available as a zaishen mission, this was previously theorized above. Of course with out more information we have no way of knowing, but the next change over should give a hint. If it is one that has already been done we can assume it has been reset. We could end up doing all of the same ones, or a mixture of new ones/old ones. The problem is that if it does start doing ones that are already repeated, you have to wonder if this was intentional. If it is then the code could be setup so that it runs through a list per say 2 months of mission activity. Then starts at the bottom and works its way to the top. I doubt that though because some of the other missions would have already been included. I do not think it is completely random though because of the lack of the final missions from any campaign/eotn. Maybe a precompiled list? Sorry I know I am a bit off topic, but I can't help wondering about the method used to decide the next mission. I guess we will find out soon enough if it was a bug, or "feature". Spikeicon.png Tenetke Mekko My Talk 16:41, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I think it is pretty obvious now what has happened. So it looks like all of the prediction tables are going to be changed every so often. The good news is that like any automated system it should get back to a somewhat predictable pattern in a week or so. At least till it is updated again. I wonder if it could be an automatically updated, like with a script. Spikeicon.png Tenetke Mekko My Talk 06:10, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Anet is aware of this and they "are looking into it". This was posted by Lindsey: We are aware of the shuffle that occurred with the available Zquests after the build. This one was my fault, I fixed a couple bugs in ones that had not come up yet and what I did has the side effect of restarting the whole system. I should have then had Joe instruct me in the special-coder-math that is needed to force the Zquests which are active the day of the build to be the first set available after the system reset, but I overlooked that step. I apologize for the inconvenience, but don't worry, those same quests will all come up again eventually. Since the issue would go away after half a day, I didn't feel it was necessary to put the team through the whole emergency build process just for this. Again, I'm sorry about all the confusion it has caused, I hope you all forgive me. =/ - Linsey 21:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC) . Should clear things up a bit. Lยкץ๒๏ץ talk 08:03, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
"restarting the whole system" apparently means "making new cycles", because teh recent combat quest we've had don't fit anywhere into the repeating order we used to have. --◄mendel► 09:37, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah it was just like we all thought. When they changed things it completely resets the list of what zaishen missions have been used by the system. Wonder whats going to happen next update Spikeicon.png Tenetke Mekko My Talk 11:32, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The affect of Zaishen Challenges on the Economy[]

I noticed a thread on Nicholas the Traveler about how his presence affects the value of items at any given time. I tend to feel that Z-Quests do much the same at times. Case example; when Murakai, Lady of the Night was the Z-Bounty, some runners began charging 5K to do a Cathedral of Flames run in Hard Mode, while the usual going rate is 2K. Obviously the real answer is to store the quest in your log for a later date :-P Anyways, any thoughts on this? Lord Twitchiopolis 17:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

It also revives Elona Reach, for example, the good old runners come back (like me) and earn the usually annual cash. So it obviously has an economical effect. Btw it's just in time, GW has a brutal deflation, and this gives a nice boost. Vincent 14:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
And when there's no zq then you hardly find any runners for such forgotten missions nowadays. I still have ER open and don't find anybody *sigh* While CoF is always well visited. --Birchwooda Treehug 08:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


Listing the daily Zaishen Quest will eventually make the page extremely long eventually, so I was thinking (well procrastinating) and thought maybe instead of just having all the Z-Quests smack bang on the page maybe we can divide them up into smaller pages (like past collections for Nicholas the Traveler). I came up with a mock up (please excuse my poor wiki coding skills) (see User:Khazad_Guard/Sandbox). Basically it uses the hide box to lists the quests per monthly basis. It was just a basic idea but obviously it could be just as easy to make "Zaishen Challenge Quest/Jan_June_2009" and "Zaishen Challenge Quest/July_Dec_2009" (I know it only started in April, but then it gets all complicated). I'm just throwing the idea out there.... Khazad Guard 15:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Not a bad idea, but it's better to put the most recent on top. It's also better to have the most recent one open by default, since that is probably what people usually want to see. Quizzical 16:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
The quests in the boxes would be like archiving the quests from previous months. The current quests (and say the last week or so) would stay on the article page for easy reference. The others are just put into little boxes so they don't take up so much space. If for some reason you do need to look at previous months, you can just 'show' the box and have a browse. Whilst I did consider having them from most recent to oldest, it just seemed weird (like on the article page atm is fine, but when I was typing it up it just seemed weird to do it like that :S). Khazad Guard 17:53, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Added a collapsible table for older challenges, what do you think? Might need some tweaking on colors/borders, otherwise I think it suits it's purpose --Lexxor 19:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
I think that makes it a lot better. Great work Lexxor! Now people can actually see the article continues ;) Khazad Guard 01:20, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
In the words of Borat, VERY NICE! 21:13, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure what happened, but after the zaishen quests were updated, the tables no longer collapse... Callisot Von Drake 18:25, 20 August 2009

(Reset indent) Everything is working fine for me. (collapse on page-view, open with "show;" collapse again on "hide.")   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 16:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

June 18th Update[]

Well, the June 18th Update has altered the values of all the zoins given out for every z-quest. It also occurred retroactively, which means all quests currently in a persons quest log were changed. With this, that means every z-quest page for a repeat quest will now need new numbers entered in for the zoin reward for each quest page. It also kinda creates an interesting problem for how to calculate the totals tab (or even raises the question of whether that feature should be removed from this page). The old "totals" are with the old values for the z-quests. That means as each quest page gets altered as it repeats, the old totals will no longer add up with the current quests (ie May 20s totals will be "wrong" if you go to the 3 quests on that day and add up the zoin rewards since the zoin rewards have changed). Should we now make sure to apply the June 18th totals from now on and have a footnote noting the reason for the point discrepancy? To what extent should we archive the old zoin rewards, if at all? Should we split each z-quest page into a "Fenir's Bounty Z-quest (old)" and "Fenir's Bounty Z-quest (new)"? or just put notes on there for historical purposes, or just replace the values completely. Etc etc etc. Tk Hawkins

My strong opinions are:
  • remove totals - few ppls are going to do all 3 types each day
  • replace old zoin rewards with new zoin rewards in main section and add historical that it changed (I don't think it matters what the values used to be, so a simple template could be used)
  • no need to split - this is entirely historical information; no longer relevant to current players
  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 20:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Agreed, especially since the quests already in people's quest logs were updated, so no old quest copies exist anymore. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Now is teh time to switch the quests over to a tier system, much like I already listed on ethe 3 quest type pages. We can make the template have one parameter, tier=<number>, and have the rewards be listed accordingly. --◄mendel► 23:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead. I've already listed the tier rewards on the Zaishen Mission page. Quizzical 07:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I should probably mention that D'Alessio Seaboard, Ice Caves of Sorrow, and Warband of Brothers have not appeared as a Zaishen mission, so I had to guess on the tier. My guess was that D'Alessio Seaboard went with Divinity Coast in tier 2 rather than Gates of Kryta in tier 1, as where foreign characters pick up is a natural break point for tiers. Factions uses that as a break point, though Nightfall does not, as it is off by 1, putting Consulate Docks in tier 1 rather than tier 2. I guessed that Ice Caves of Sorrow is in tier 3 with Iron Mines of Moladune, rather than tier 2 with The Dragon's Lair. Arriving in Southern Shiverpeaks and getting max armor seems like a natural break point. Also, I stuck Warband of Brothers with Against the Charr in the lower tier rather than Assault on the Stronghold in the higher tier, as the Asura and Norn regions each had only one mission in the higher tier and two in the lower. We can check and correct these if necessary as they show up. The rest of the missions that haven't appeared had an obvious tier, such as Bloodstone Fen being tier 2, since it appears between The Wilds and Aurora Glade, both of which are also tier 2. Quizzical 10:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
The nice thing is if you guessed wrong, all it takes is changing one number now, the bot is on the last dozen quests as I write this. I'll do the bounties later, just in case. --◄mendel► 10:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

New Quests Pls[]

Will there ever be new quests? Or was that it and the known ones will rotate till eternity? :S --Birchwooda Treehug 08:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

They got reset in one of the update because Linsey f*ed up and didn't make sure to preserve the rotation. She apologized and said that they will eventually go through all the missions, don't know about bosses, only a portion of them may have zquests coded. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 14:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
That isn't entirely correct. She did mess up the rotation, but it was the rotation for that day only. It was made clear in the wording that the problem was one that occurred with that day. It hasn't been stated, to my knowledge, that they will go through all missions or bosses. I would wager we have seen the majority already. I do not like that, and I hope that something will be done to address it. The problem is that since the update we have had repeats. Now one repeat alone isn't statistical of much, but a few with virtually no new missions being chosen hints at something. Spikeicon.png Tenetke Mekko My Talk 18:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
It was my understanding that the update in question sort of reset the quest tracks, which is why we are seeing so many repeats now where there were zero before the update. And since that update each quest has repeated at most once. You are correct that we have seen most of the missions already, which is why only few were new after the reset. However, considering that we've had missions from Fort Ranik and Minister Cho's to Raisu Palace and Destruction's Depths hints that every mission is fair game for zquests, except maybe final mission of each campaign, which we haven't seen yet. So I would say that eventually there will be a zquest for every mission, except maybe the finals. The algorithm that decides the order may be to blame that so many missions have repeated while others haven't appeared at all yet, because it may have a peculiar prioritization to ensure that a bunch of missions don't appear in order of storyline from the same campaign, but that the rotation stays more spread out and "all over the place". This would be the algorithm that got reset by Linsey's oversight. In the end, we may never know the exact mechanics of this. As far as bosses, it's harder to say. It seems to me like they may have chosen a small group to represent each area of the game, including all dungeon semi-bosses, and not every boss in existence would get their own quest. This makes sense, to be honest, as many bosses only appear when certain conditions are met, and would make it a nightmare/impossible to complete the bounty for them for a lot of players. Many bosses appear only before a certain event or quest is completed on a character, and will never be seen again, making themselves unfit for bounty quests. And trying to only exclude those would be a pain for the designers, so choosing a limited group of bounty possibilities makes perfect sense. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 19:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
No Zaishen mission appeared twice before that fateful update. No Zaishen mission has appeared twice since that update, either. The "repeats" are merely missions that appeared both before and after the update. No mission that is the last of a campaign had appeared before the update, but Hell's Precipice is up today, so presumably they can appear now.
The complete list of missions to never have appeared as a Zaishen mission isn't terribly long: The Great Northern Wall, Ruins of Surmia, D'Alessio Seaboard, Bloodstone Fen, Augury Rock, Ice Caves of Sorrow, Abaddon's Mouth, Imperial Sanctum, Pogahn Passage, Rilohn Refuge, Gate of Desolation, Abaddon's Gate, Warband of Brothers, and A Time for Heroes. I don't see any obvious pattern there, so it's probably just randomness. Quizzical 20:56, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
@Birchwooda: were you asking whether the Zaishen challenges would ever include quests that are completely new to the game? The answer appears to be: no. If you view the talk pages of various ANet employees, it's clear that the powers-that-be intended the zish, zounties, and zombats to target existing content. So, existing ones will rotate until eternity (defined as the day GW3 comes out).   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 01:12, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't think it is completely at random. If it was then we would not have seen as many repeats after it was reset. Sure we would have seen several repeats, but not as many. Think about it, the reset was on the 11th I think, and there haven't been that many new ones. So it is a complex array. I hope it goes through all of them, but it might not. Assuming there are 68 missions possible it looks like it checkes something along the lines of
int zmissionfortoday() 
{ int zmis,good; 
  rin = (rand()%68)+1; 
  good = checkpreviouszmis(zmis);  //compares current zmis to see if it has been selected before
  return zmis};

That isn't anywhere near structured right, but hey its a long day and you get the point. The above would allow it to select any one of the missions with the only stipulation that it hasn't selected one before. That doesn't seem to be the way it is working. It more likely works by saying select one of these missions, once they are all full, start on this array, once those are all full start on this array etc. Spikeicon.png Tenetke Mekko My Talk 17:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

That's too inefficient. If you've got the quests neatly numbered and there are 69 of them, then make the quest number for one day that of the previous day plus 20 (mod 69), or any other number that is relatively prime to 69 in place of 20. Such as 1, for example. That way, you're guaranteed to hit every single quest once before you repeat any. Quizzical 18:25, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
There has been new ones after the reset? Which ones? --Birchwooda Treehug 19:56, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
A Gate Too Far, Dunes of Despair, Vizunah Square, Gate of Madness, Hell's Precipice, and Ruins of Surmia have all appeared since the reset, but none of them appeared before it. Quizzical 20:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

They could also generate a list of all missions, press the Randomize button and let it loop (Pre-Nick has a loop too), right? --- Ohaider! -- (contribs) (talk) 16:30, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

What "randomize" button? The question of how the list is generated is equivalent to a question of how the "randomize" button is set up. Quizzical 02:01, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
The problem with simple iteration is that it, is well simple. It is also easy to figure out. If you pregenerate the array it is much easier. As for the inefficiency, well it is something that needs to run once a day. Also like I said that code isn't great, but Im not going to go through the trouble of writing code for something like this that will actually compile and work properly. Also I don't think its written in c/c++. I do wonder what their program is written in though. Probably using lua script, interacting, the db though who knows. Back to the topic though. It would just be more efficient to run a rand() on the array, and save the list. Then just go through it one by one. That way they don't need to check, and the code is in place if they ever need to do it again. If I were going to write it then I would just do it like that. That way if I ever need to redo the rand() its an easy call. Spikeicon.png Tenetke Mekko My Talk 08:53, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I think when Viper said the random button he meant whatever randomization they are using, simple array etc. Man I would really like to look under the hood at gw. Soooo many questions, so few answers. Spikeicon.png Tenetke Mekko My Talk 08:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm pretty positive, if they are as good as I hope they are, they've done it this way. It is THE best way to make sure there are no repeats (you can just dump the list into a small db, or even append an old db). Otherwise, it wastes time and processes, which probably is in high demand at GW-HQ.
This would also explain the whole reset. When the list/script/whatever was reset, it would have just auto-generated an entirely new list, which just happened to spit out some similar missions (depends on how they randomize it... rand() is not a true randomization).
As for the language they use, I'm pretty sure it's Windows specific coding (there's no true Linux version). Could be very possible it is C#. I definitely would like to take a look at their systems, though! ^_^ Tasiden Klath 21:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
No true linux version?? Spikeicon.pngTenetke 17:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Total coins for 7-15-2009 ARE correct[]

When I checked each one the total came to 675 coins for me. Mission=150 Bounty=175 GvG=350 Total=675 ???? This then changes the highest amount of coins for a single day also.

No, you're not correct... the bounty was 210, not 175... changing the total to 710.
Total=710 NOT 675
50+160 doesn't equal 175. Take a look at the quest log if you still have it
that's why the discrepency. There is no tier 5, which the 210 would fall under Callisto Von Drake
If the bounty was 210, then the template should be altered to make that a listed option. Quizzical 17:15, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I agree... I'm not the one who can do that though. It's also not the first that has a reward of 210... the only other option I can think of until they add another tier is to manually do it like before the tier system was introduced.Callisto Von Drake
Please do. I had no idea that the bounty article had the wrong reward listed, and I did not have the quests myself to check (wrong reward listed didn't even cross my mind as a possibility, being a few days old). RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 18:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Which others have a reward of 210? Is it all of tier 4? Quizzical 18:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Hard to say at this point, until they repeat, or someone happens to have one still in the log. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 21:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Here's the explanation: copper rewards have been raised in a recent update, and when I updated them, tier 4 info was not yet available. The fact that experience and gold align with the former tier 4 point strongly to the copper amounts having been updated, meaning the tier 4 got more valuable, as did the other tiers (which has already been noted). There is (so far) no tier 5, and I have adjusted the template to reflect this. --◄mendel► 21:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Makes sense. To confirm, Kanaxai/Zaishen Quest has been upped to 60+150 Copper Zaishen Coin in my log, 15k XP, 2k Gold, 7.5k Lux. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 22:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
210 Gold Zoins? That would be epic. --- Ohaider! -- (contribs) (talk) 16:53, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Bahaha, oops. :P RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 19:55, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

keeping quests[]

I still had Murkai's quest on my warrior from the first time, and when I completed it this morning, I was unable to take the quest again from today's zbounty.--TalkpageEl_Nazgir 10:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Did you claim the reward first? You can only have one log entry for each challenge; in order to accept a challenge that repeats, you must first complete the mission and claim the reward for your current entry. Are you experiencing something else?   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 10:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Yup I did. I went to the GToB first, noticed i couldn't take the quest and saw that I still had it from the previous time, then I did it, took the reward and it wasn't available when I switched districts.--TalkpageEl_Nazgir 10:45, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Yuck. I'd report it as a bug and see if anyone else comments. (Well, of course, someone is going to comment. I mean if someone has something useful to offer.) Sorry it happened.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 10:52, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
The official site's oddly phrased note is: You cannot take a quest if you already have that quest, and it will no longer become available again if you already had the same quest from an earlier date (except Combat Quests), which is consistent with your experience. I believe the notes were identical at one point; I'm not sure when they diverged. (I also don't remember that a recent update changed the behavior.) → Short version: I suspect GWW is correct and we need to fix our note. (I apologize: I should have checked GWW's version before recommending you report a bug.)   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 16:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
El Nazgir's experience is how it's been for a long time since the initial bug fixes. Only the Combat quests can be taken again. If you complete a previous quest on the day that it's available again, it can't tell that your quest was "old," so it basically thinks that you completed the quest and thus can't take it again. It doesn't track when you took it. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 18:13, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
The most probable explanation is that there is only one Murakai Zaishen quest, and when the quest shows up on a new day, it wipes all quest completion progress to allow people to do the quest again. Quizzical 19:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
@RoK: since you seem to understand the bug better than I, perhaps you could update our note? (I don't like GWW's note; it's odd phrasing only made sense to me after El Nazgir reported his experience.)
And, for the record, this provides another endorsement of RoseOfKali's sound advice about zests: do 'em (and grab reward) sooner rather than later, lest ye be hit by a known or new bug reducing your zoin income.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:43, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Which note are you talking about, exactly? I can try to make it more clear/accurate. And no, it does not wipe anything as Quizzical suggested. If a quest in your log has partial completion, and appears again on the zaishen post, it will simply act like you took it that same day and already completed a part of it that same day. It has absolutely no memory of when something was taken or completed, only when you took the reward for it for the purpose of not being able to take the quest that same day again. This, of course, only applies to mission and bounty, not the combat quest, which is always repeatable. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 21:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
I meant wiping the record of who has turned it in, and is therefore ineligible to acquire the quest again. It has to keep a record of that for normal non-repeatable quests, so it probably does the same with Zaishen quests. Partial progress on quests in your quest log is most likely stored separately, so that it only has to store a record of partial progress on at most 20 quests. That way, it can store which quests have been turned in as a boolean data type to save space. If it doesn't do something vaguely like that, then capping the number of quests in your quest log would be a rather peculiar thing to do, as would resetting partial progress on a quest when you abandon it. Quizzical 02:04, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Currently, the two wikis have notes about what happens when challenges repeat. Neither quite tells the story so that (a) ppl can avoid losing a potential reward and (b) understand why they might be unable to get a second one. Here are the texts as they appeared last night (when El N first reported):

  • GWiki note: You can only have one log entry for each challenge; in order to accept a challenge that repeats, you must first complete the mission and claim the reward for your current entry.
  • GWW Note: You cannot take a quest if you already have that quest, and it will no longer become available again if you already had the same quest from an earlier date (except Combat Quests)

The first note is true only for zombats; the second is true generally, but confusing. What about...

  • You should generally try to complete challenges close to their original offer date:
    • If you delay completing a challenge mission or bounty until it re-appears, you will only be able to get credit for the original request. The notice board will not reset after you accept the reward (from whassisname).
    • You may have one log entry for each challenge combat; to accept a repeating challenge, you must first complete the combat requirements and claim the reward for your current entry.

I'm sure someone can improve upon the above (please!).   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 03:10, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I think it not worth noting that you can have each quests only once in your log; that's how all quests in Guild Wars have always worked, repeatable or not. I have clarified the status of the mission and bounty quests, calling them "semi-repeatable". --◄mendel► 18:29, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Much better than my longer-winded attempt. Well done!   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 20:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Well, I cribbed from whoever came up with calling it recharge on the quest article. ;) Shoulders of giants and so forth. --◄mendel► 22:07, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Repeats since last known reset(s)[]

The zoin-value change to the zaishen challenges was on 18 June. Since then, we have seen at least four repeats from each campaign. However, each campaign has at least one mish that hasn't been seen since the zoin values were updated:

  • Proph: Fort Ranik, Thunderhead Keep
  • Factions: Minister Cho's...
  • NF: Venta C, Pogahn Passage, Tihark Orchard
  • EotN: A Gate Too Far

Each of these, except for Pogahn, has been seen since the accidental reset on 11 June. In fact, as Quizzical notes in his update notes, Pogahn hasn't been seen at all since the introduction of the challenges.

Also noteworthy: Arborstone appeared on the 17th and again on the 25th. (Suggesting that the last reset was on the 18th rather than the 11th.) And Destruction Depths has appeared 4 times (15 missions have appeared 3 times). Perhaps DDepth's gets an extra appearance at the expense of Pogahn, as, in the Nick Sanford requests, E-stones appear 5 times to Fins 3.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 16:40, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Counting Bounties[]

For those interested, here's the break down of the unique bounties to-date, by campaign and by zoin value.

By Campaign Total Bounties 20Copper Zaishen Coin 30Copper Zaishen Coin 40Copper Zaishen Coin 60Copper Zaishen Coin
Core 6 0 3 2 1
EotN 32 5 5 21 1
Factions 12 10 0 0 2
Nightfall 11 6 1 1 3
Prophecies 5 3 1 1 0
Totals 66 24 10 25 7


  • If bounties follow the Nick Sanford and Zombat precedents (4 complete random sets), then it would take 264 days for us to see the full pattern (assuming no resets in between).
  • EotN is home to just under half of the bounties. (Seems sensible since, in some ways, completing dungeons naturally aligns with this type of quest.)
  • Prophecies is underrepresented (fitting with its easier reputatation). (Although, some could argue that the Core bounties count as Prophecies, bringing its total in line with Factions and Nightfall.)
  • So far, ANet doesn't seem to think that Factions has any bosses that are that tough (none earn more than 20 base zoins).

It might also be interesting to compare the difficulty and/or time spent relative to the rewards. Prophecies might come out even worse, as it generally takes longer to reach its bosses than it takes to crush some of the similarly valued targets of other campaigns.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:27, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The bounties have already repeated. The last four have been the same, in order, as the first four immediately after the reset. Quizzical 02:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
In which case, it's Frontis tomorrow. And perhaps Fort Ranik?   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 02:54, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a reset at some point, though, as Pogahn Passage got left out. Quizzical 03:02, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
And so, it repeats... RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 17:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Yea, it does look like it hit the end of the list and just circled round again. But why? There are so many other bosses that deserve their own bounty. Of course, I would rather they spend less time on ZQuests and more time on GW2, so I'm not complaining. ^_^ Tasiden Klath 21:29, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Predicting Mish & Bounties[]

Based on Quizzical's observation...

Date Mish Bounty Yes.png
8/21/2009 A Gate Too Far Urgoz Yes.png
8/22/2009 Minister Cho's Estate Fenrir Yes.png
8/23/2009 Thunderhead Keep Selvetarm Yes.png
8/24/2009 Tihark Orchard Mohby Windbeak Yes.png
8/25/2009 Finding the Bloodstone Charged Blackness Yes.png
8/26/2009 Dunes of Despair Rotscale Yes.png
8/27/2009 Vizunah Square Zoldark the Unholy Yes.png
8/28/2009 Jokanur Diggings Korshek the Immolated Gray X.png
8/29/2009 Iron Mines of Moladune Myish, Lady of the Lake Gray X.png

  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 21:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

August 24 should be Tihark Orchard, not Arborstone. Quizzical 18:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Fixed. And argh! My spreadsheet has been carrying the wrong mish for the 17th June for 2 months. Thanks. (Also, feel free to adjust the table above even though it's technically my discussion text.)   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:19, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Bounty creation widget moved from article[]

Icon-add-48x48.png <createbox>

default=boss/Zaishen Quest buttonlabel=Create a new Zaishen Bounty page width=34 break=no align=left preload=Template:ZquestInfo/Create Bounty/preload editintro=Template:ZquestInfo/Create Bounty/editintro </createbox>

I've removed the above Bounty creation widget, as it appears that we have an established, repeating pattern. If we need to create new ones (b/c ANet did something more clever and fun than we thought), people can come here and/or we can replace the widget. I've updated the relevant text on the main article accordingly.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 16:19, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with ya. Since it's repeating, we don't need it there anymore. On that note, since we know all the cycles, is there a way to automate the page, so that one doesn't have to update it? I'm off next week, so I might take a stab or two at it... Need a programming challenge before college starts again! Tasiden Klath 22:10, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
You can follow the pattern used for Nick's requests in pre. The most flexible solution probably uses 3 pairs of template/data pages (so if only one of the patterns change, it's easier to adjust).   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 00:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
That's what I was thinking, too. Thanks for the suggestion :) I'll try to figure it out. Tasiden Klath 03:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
LOL. Looks like someone was way ahead of my thinking! There's already templates for them. Tasiden Klath 03:47, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, Kirbman did them based off mine, and announced them on the admin noticeboard. I haven't looked at them yet to figure out whether he solved the issue of dating the switchover, which was what kept me from integrating my Zaishen combat forecats into the site -- yes, we now have two of those! Mine's making Zaishen Combat/Schedule. --◄mendel► 06:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Zaishen Combat Cycle[]

I have determined a 32 day cycle with Zaishen Challenges, the June 11th update changed it however the cycle has since repeated in a new order, posting this Sep 9th, by my predictions the quest should be as follows going forward.

9/9/2009 Fort Aspenwood
9/10/2009 Guild versus guild
9/11/2009 Random Arena
9/12/2009 Alliance Battle
9/13/2009 Jade Quarry
9/14/2009 Heroes' Ascent
9/15/2009 Team Arenas
9/16/2009 Hero Battles
9/17/2009 Guild versus guild
9/18/2009 Random Arena
9/19/2009 Jade Quarry
9/20/2009 Alliance Battle
9/21/2009 Team Arenas
9/22/2009 Fort Aspenwood
9/23/2009 Hero Battles
9/24/2009 Heroes' Ascent
9/25/2009 Jade Quarry
9/26/2009 Guild versus guild
9/27/2009 Fort Aspenwood
9/28/2009 Random Arena

Just to put foot in mouth if I am wrong.

The 32 day cycle I have determined is as follows

Current Old

1 Alliance Battle
2 Hero Battles
3 Team Arenas
4 Random Arena
5 Heroes' Ascent
6 Fort Aspenwood
7 Guild versus guild
8 Alliance Battle
9 Heroes' Ascent
10 Jade Quarry
11 Hero Battles
12 Team Arenas
13 Fort Aspenwood
14 Guild versus guild
15 Random Arena
16 Alliance Battle
17 Jade Quarry
18 Heroes' Ascent
19 Team Arenas
20 Hero Battles
21 Guild versus guild
22 Random Arena
23 Jade Quarry
24 Alliance Battle
25 Team Arenas
26 Fort Aspenwood
27 Hero Battles
28 Heroes' Ascent
29 Jade Quarry
30 Guild versus guild
31 Fort Aspenwood
32 Random Arena

1 Guild versus guild
2 Alliance Battle
3 Team Arenas
4 Jade Quarry
5 Heroes' Ascent
6 Hero Battles
7 Random Arena
8 Heroes' Ascent
9 Fort Aspenwood
10 Hero Battles
11 Guild versus guild
12 Alliance Battle
13 Team Arenas
14 Jade Quarry
15 Hero Battles
16 Alliance Battle
17 Guild versus guild
18 Heroes' Ascent
19 Random Arena
20 Jade Quarry
21 Team Arenas
22 Fort Aspenwood
23 Hero Battles
24 Random Arena
25 Fort Aspenwood
26 Guild versus guild
27 Alliance Battle
28 Jade Quarry
29 Team Arenas
30 Heroes' Ascent
31 Fort Aspenwood
32 Random Arena

The update that caused 2 different quests to appear on the same day caused the change in cycle. you can check this by simply running the zaishen combat quests in 32 quest blocks, the second block(where the update occurred) there is a discrepancy, however the first 18 entries match the first 18 entries of the old cycle and the last 14 entries match for the following 2 cycles. The current cycle appears to be on it's third repeat. Useful information if you want to save the Z quests for double faction weekends.

I suck at formatting, I welcome edits The preceding unsigned comment was added by (contribs) .

Wow, nice find. Now we just need to find someone brave and adept enough at wikicode to put it in the article in a nice lay-out. :P --TalkpageEl_Nazgir 18:47, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
We already have a template for that - two of them, in fact. See Zaishen Combat/Schedule to see one of them at work. The problem I have is how to determine the date properly respective to the switchover. --◄mendel► 19:59, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
I saw that previous chart a while ago and it appeared to show today was random arena so I thought it was using out dated or experimental data. I also saw no chart for data, thought that people had noticed a pattern but where unsure how it repeated. I thought showing the cycle as it occurs would be better. - dude that made the chart-

Day After Tomorrow?[]

Really? You might as well list them week by week. 03:45, September 15, 2009 (UTC)

I thought 'tomorrow' was enough, which is why I originally only had the three. 21:03, September 15, 2009 (UTC)
I don't really even care much for the 'tomorrow' thing. If somebody is organized enough to plan what days they'll be on to coincide with the Zquests, then they're gonna be planned out long before 'tomorrow'. For the rest of us (at least myself), I could care less what it's going to be tomorrow, it just looks like someone showing off that they can predict the pattern. Knowing tomorrow's Zquest is of no use. At the very least, put the 'at a glance' at the bottom, under the one that lists what the current one is. Yggdrasil 22:51, September 15, 2009 (UTC)
For planning ahead purposes, I'd think it would be useful to have it list a month ahead somewhere. It doesn't necessarily have to be on this page, though. Quizzical 03:04, September 16, 2009 (UTC)
I find it incredibly useful to know even one day in advance: when I have 3 challenges, it helps to know today whether it's worth tackling an annoying one in order to make room.
Since this page currently includes every z-challenge since they began, I don't see a problem with including 30 days in advance. We could auto show the initial 3-4 days and auto-hide the rest. (On the main page, I think we should do the same as with Nick requests: today + two days.)   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 03:33, September 16, 2009 (UTC)
Space on the main page is too precious to fill up that much space with three separate lines about Nicholas Sandford. On side pages, there's far more room for such things. Quizzical 04:22, September 16, 2009 (UTC)
I added it because I find it useful, mostly for the 'today.' So I don't have to wait for someone else to update the page, or log on to go check myself. I added 'tomorrow' because if nobody updates the 'today' at least I know what it is. 'Yesterday' I put on there to help provide a frame of reference. I had to fiddle with the wiki code a few gazillion more tries (wiki noob) to figure out how to put the date on there at all. Knowing what they are in advance is handy for me (I planned out my title/NM book finishing based on which ones were coming up before I expect to hit r8), but not enough to make it worth cluttering the page up months in advance -- I can expand the old months and look at it that way. 04:34, September 16, 2009 (UTC)
re: Space on the main page is too precious — take a look at this proposal.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 08:04, September 16, 2009 (UTC)
Well, thank you for at least making more readable, my wiki-fu is weak. Yggdrasil 23:26, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

Someone's added back the 2 days from now. I think a more appropriate place if people want more than the today/yesterday/tomorrow on that page would be to put it on a separate page. Hmm, maybe I'll go try that. 02:20, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Missions without a Zaishen challenge.[]

Is Pogahn Passage the only mission not to have an associated Zmission quest? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (contribs) 13:31, 21 September 2009.

Yes, it is the only mission that the Zaishen have yet to offer as a challenge.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 01:10, September 22, 2009 (UTC)
Yep, my friend and I noticed that while making the templates to predict the ZMissions, and I left a note about it on Regina's talk page, which seems to have lead to a thread on Guild Wars Guru. I expect Pogahn Passage to be added to the ZMission cycle in the next update since they have to remove TA and HB from the combat cycle anyway. --Kirbman sig.png Kirbman 21:02, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Automated Prediction Calendar[]

I created this about a month ago for use by myself and my friends, but everyone is welcome to use it. --Kirbman sig.png Kirbman 21:02, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of automation, the front page is not updating correctly. It's currently 6:05 pm Eastern Daylight Time 9/25 and the calendar is still showing yesterday's mission. I've noticed it's laggy recently but I didn't realize it was over 6 hours behind the time.[ETA: and now it's updated. I hit refresh twice before leaving this comment, too.]--Alessar 22:06, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

Click the word "update" where it states the time. --◄mendel► 22:32, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
There's no clickable word "update" anywhere on the page--Alessar 15:31, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
I made the purge link a little less obscure. --- VipermagiSig.JPG -- (contribs) (talk) 16:28, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
On the Main Page in the Currently: box in the lower rigth corner it states the time of the last update, and the word "update" is a link that lets you update the page. --◄mendel► 18:08, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
AH. When I said 'front' page I meant the article proper not the Main Page because, obviously, this is not the discussion area of the main page. However, I see someone has added an update link to this article, which is great because it didn't have one when I brought this up.--Alessar 00:48, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
There was. I'd made the 'Date' clickable to purge the cache. It wasn't very obvious, as noted previously.

An Update that will Invalidate the prediction?[]

What does that red text mean? I've heard rumor that they plan to remove hero battles, but I haven't seen anything concrete. Or do you expect an update that will reboot the cycle? Whoever added that could you possibly explain the rationale for it?

Well, I'm not the one who added it, but HB and TA will be removed from the game, this much has Linsey made clear. This of course means they will have to remove the z-quests for those two formats, as well as add a quest for the new format. This will most likely change the cycle for all the quests, not just the combat ones. Mr J 19:23, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
I figured that's what it was. And I've since found the post from Linsey's Journal. I just wanted to know if it was something happening today. But since there's already been an update today, I suppose they won't remove HB and TA tonight (at least I hope) 19:52, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
That's just it, we won't know when it happens until it did. Since an anon removed the forecast, I inferred that this had been the concern; as a reaction, I restored the forecast and added the warning note. If you think it can be clarified, please do so. --◄mendel► 21:40, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
They've been talking about removing HB/TA for months (ever since Red Resign Day became popular). And given the various notices about focus on henchbar contest, illness, etc, it seems doubtful that the changes are imminent. That said, it's worth having the warning, as I suspect that, as soon as the relevant changes pass QA, they will release the update without further adieu. It's within the realm of possibility that updating zombats will not affect zish or zounty; it seems more likely, though, that ANet will take the same opportunity to include Pogahn Passage and possibly tweak the bosses (eliminating some of the trivial ones and/or some of the why-bother foes).   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 22:58, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
For those who don't read the talk pages and don't want to search for Linsey's comments, I've added a section explaining why there's a warning; it's linked via a footnote from the slightly rephrased note.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 23:17, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
Also, it's worth noting that an update like this would never happen on a Friday, only Monday through Thursday (maybe not even on Thursday), due to the fact that potential bugs would go untouched over the weekend. We all know how effective their QA has been in the past, and they know it too, they have admitted to it in the past that the reason they release things on Thursdays is so that they have the Friday to fix crap if it hits the fan. Thus, it might be worth including in TEF's explanation that Fri Sat and Su are safe from the "potential" scramble update. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 09:16, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
I don't think it's worth it to add a bullet about Fr/Sa/Su: (1) there's still some chance that they will decide to push this as-soon-as-avail, asking staff to work the weekend and (2) the point is that peeps should be vigilant and not accept the predictions without caveat.
For what it's worth, I don't think ANet's QA is crap (although I would not offer them any awards either). (a) any reasonably good software firm knows better than to release software without staff on hand to monitor and respond; it's standard operating procedure. (b) despite visible gotchas, we deal with relatively little crap. That said, they miss some ridiculously easy stuff that ruins their reputation (e.g. Nick, who probably get's QA'd by live team directly, as his text updates and location are content at this point. Also Hanyu localization, probably also live team not QA). And they screwed up beyond measure on a non-critical, but popular feature (Xth — worse, how do you lose the old code?)   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 02:26, October 10, 2009 (UTC)
So because of a journal comment in August, we need to add a warning in October that the schedule could change soon? Why not just leave a generic "unless an update changes the schedule" warning? Quizzical 03:06, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

It's not because of the August comment alone.
(1) any scheduled activity could change at any time; a generic warning probably makes sense for any of the relevant articles. (2) ANet hasn't changed little Nick's 52-day schedule since introduction, so I think there's a difference between could change and is likely to change in the near future. (3) I'm also going by Linsey, Regina, and Gaile's recent comments that suggest imminence, specifically: a reduction in the number of things that had delayed implementation of the August-announced change (those would be: swine flu, travel/conventions, overly-ambitious schedules, specific updates, staff vacancies, and some other things I have forgotten). (4) I think it's worth addressing the rumors by providing the specific facts in Notes.
In September, I didn't buy the "coming soon to an MMO near you" argument b/c of the track record of promise:release-date. In October, I believe that soon means either right before Halloween or right afterwards (I wouldn't put it past them to try both together, tho.) If you want, I'll track down the various comments where folks are talking about what was/is in QA and what's been slowing down Live-team generally.
Above notwithstanding, it's not crazy to change the Code Red type of warning (beware!) to a Code Green generic warning (caveat lector).   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 03:28, October 10, 2009 (UTC)
An additional factor is that the new hench bars have been chosen. We don't know how the "AI tweaking" is going to take, though. If you think green is a better color for the note, go ahead and change it. (Or maybe green normally, and red on Tue/Wed/Thu? ;) --◄mendel► 11:12, October 10, 2009 (UTC)
D'oh! the color reference was a tongue-in-check satire on the US Government's 5-color terrorist threat assessment (the one that never actually was allowed to be at its lowest level, green). What I meant was that I support Quizzical's point that a general warning is appropriate; any of these predictions could change b/c of an ANet whim or (as happened once before) a mistake. Since I personally believe there's evidence to suggest Zombat will change soon, I think it also makes sense to include specific details in this article; that's compatible with a generic note. (I don't have any particular feeling about the color, tho.) I prefer the page-top note to sound imminent, but I don't have an issue if someone else strongly disagrees.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 11:46, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

ANet has stated an update would likely invalidate these forecasts[]

I agree that the original phrasing of the warning was too dramatic and I like the tenor and direction of the last edit. Unfortunately, the more objective phrasing also made the statement untrue: ANet hasn't said anything at all about anyone's forecast. (AFAIK, the only comment they ever made, was when the rotation was accidentally changed; they apologized for accidentally re-ordering.) So, our forecasts and our prediction that the forecasts are going to be scrambled are simply speculation on our part (well-reasoned and reliable speculation, to be sure).

I've tried to rephrase using active voice and non-subjective language, but it looks awkward at best. I hope someone else can improve upon this.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 09:02, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

"Hero Battles and Team Arena will be removed in this week's build. "
source:Gaile Gray   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:43, October 19, 2009 (UTC)
Also Regina's Journal. I'm glad I got my c3 last Sunday. ^_^ Ended with 500 won/500 lost. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 14:28, October 20, 2009 (UTC)
I find it interesting that Regina (community relations) didn't address the topic at all until after Gaile (support) had done so.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:30, October 20, 2009 (UTC)
Tells you who's the boss. :P RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 12:26, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
The update changed today's Zaishen combat, but not the mission or bounty. We'll see how it goes tomorrow, but those predictions might still hold. Quizzical 02:37, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
I would suspect that there is a separate list they are using for each type of Z-Quest, so that they _could_ do something like this, and not affect everything. Planning for future changes, FTW? Of course, we still don't know if they thought to include Pogahn Passage or not. Or any changes to bosses. It's too soon to tell. Tasiden Klath 13:14, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) It was all speculation by wiki contributors exactly how/when any updates would affect the schedule. So, I am paring down the verbose warning, since (a) it's clear that Codex didn't directly impact the other two Z-quests and (b) the immediacy of the HB/TA removal and Codex introduction have passed.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 23:13, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good! I guess the good thing about Zombats being changed is that there aren't that many of them, so getting the rotation shouldn't take too long. ^_^ Thanks to all you guys keeping the forecasting thing going. I use this quite often! :) Tasiden Klath 01:29, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

What happened????? My edits yesterday were removed???[]

Can someone please explain why my edits were removed from yesterday??? If they were wrong, why didn't you put in the RIGHT zounty and z-quest??? Today's I know for sure are correct, as I just verified them!!!! Callisto Von Drake 21:26, 28 Oct 2009 (UTC)

I think there was a misunderstanding/bug of some sort... I made an edit that removed a line somewhere in the 1200-line range that contained "Venta Cemetery Urgoz Alliance Battle" all by itself, unformatted and unlinked to anything, just before the next header. Somehow, that also removed an entry in the table in line 70-something. I don't know why this happened and why that random extra line appeared all the way in the bottom of the article, and why removing it also removed an entry in the table way in the beginning. O_o RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 22:37, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
See this. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 22:38, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks... I thought I somehow did something wrong. I fixed it, and put in the current stuff, anyways... Callisto Von Drake 8:26, 29 Oct 2009 (UTC)
<silliness> Uh-oh: Rose, you might have changed the outcome of the next election :-/ (Be careful of those butterflies when stepping off the path.) </silliness>   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 08:58, October 29, 2009 (UTC)
Uh oh... :O RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 12:45, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Updating the Table[]

I don't know how to fill in new info on the automatic table. 11/7/09's new combat is Random Arena.--Alessar 19:08, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

For future reference: [Template:Zaishen forecast/Combat/data]. Cress Arvein Cress sig.JPG 21:00, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
Great, that'll be easy to fill in, thanks! --Alessar 06:12, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Currently unknown alternative?[]

For the combat cycle, we use currently unknown, which looks good on this page. However, it seems awkward on the main page in the Currently... section. For example,

"Today's Challenges are Ruins of Surmia, Rragar Maneater, & Random Arena. Coming up: Curse of the Nornbear, Chung, the Attuned, & currently unknown, followed by Sunjiang District, Lord Jadoth, & currently unknown."

I don't think it's worth making the prediction templates uglier by using distinct phrasing for this page's table and the main page's text, so I'll spam a couple of alternatives below. With luck, one of these will spark a better idea from someone else. (Then again, perhaps no one else sees a problem.)

Description/Note ZCQ Table, e.g. Main page, e.g.
Current phrasing currently unknown Coming up: Curse of the Nornbear, Chung, the Attuned, & currently unknown
tbd an additional tbd challenge Coming up: Curse of the Nornbear, Chung, the Attuned, & an additional tbd challenge
Long-winded a combat challenge to be determined Coming up: Curse of the Nornbear, Chung, the Attuned, & a combat challenge to be determined
Unpredictable an unpredicted combat challenge Coming up: Curse of the Nornbear, Chung, the Attuned, & an unpredicted combat challenge

Thoughts?   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 09:39, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

I predict that we won't be seeing this anymore after tomorrow today's quest, anyway. Every quest has been seen exactly 4 times except for Alliance Battles and Fort Aspenwood, and the pre-Codex cycle had every quest 4 times. So if today's quest is AB or FA, I say we go ahead and put the other one on day 28 and remove the placeholders in the data template. There's a small chance we may be wrong, true, but it would at least get rid of this message.
As for your alternatives, though, I don't like any of them because they're all longer than what we have. Keep it short and simple. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 14:35, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
Agreed with short and simple. Worst case, the mainpage template can temporarily drop the challenge altogether until it's predictable. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 14:49, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
Yep, today's is FA. That leaves AB as the only Zombat without 4 appearances, making it extremely likely that it will be tomorrow's quest, and that that will be the end of the cycle. I've updated the templates to reflect this. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 16:13, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

retaining daily quest lists[]

We've been maintaining and archiving a list of the ZQuests availabe every single day, and I'd like to bring that up for re-evaluation. Is there really any value to it? Why would anyone ever want to look back and find out which quests were available on, say, October 3 2009? Or how many ZCoins you could get from them? I've never understood the point of the Total ZCoin column in any case, especially since they made the ZCombats repeatable.

I'm not saying that archiving historical information is bad, but this seems to be a case of overzealous data retention. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 22:27, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

I've said something to that regard back when people first started doing it, and the response was along the lines of "if people do it, then someone finds it useful" or something like that. I guess now it's a bit more obvious, with the sheer size of the lists, and the recurring lapses in updates, especially with the availability of automated tables to show recent and predicted ones. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 03:43, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
Inded, I had no complaints while we had Callisto taking care of it every day, but since she seems to have disappeared, we've had lapses of over a week at some points. It seems obvious that no one else cares about it very much, otherwise someone would've picked up the slack by now. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 04:03, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
I noticed her IP updated the coin totals for a few days, but other than that, she and her IP have had no recent edits on the wiki. I find it marginally useful when looking at "which of these quests should I dump first as it will come up again soon" or "when is X coming up" (find the last, add roughly 2 months plus a week or two) and could just as easily be served by automatically projecting the future further, or by having the "past history" be automatically generated for the previous 2-3 months, rather than a manual process. (p.s. I see from the page history that you started this discussion before I updated the main page (without seeing the discussion). I think it's funny that we both had similar thoughts at the same time. 21:59, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
For those situations ("which should I drop"/"when will X come up again"), we have /Schedule pages for all three ZQuest types, e.g. Zaishen Bounty/Schedule. ...Actually, we don't have it for that one. Guess I'll get that done right quick.
AFAIK, there isn't any way to make pages automatically add content to themselves, which is what would be required for this (add a new row each day, or add a whole table each month), so it's going to require manual updates if we decide to keep it. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 22:33, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
Can't we do like a dynamic history for the last 7 days using the same method the forecast page uses? Just in the other direction of time. The monthly histories can be maintained separately after the month passes, but I don't see why they should be included on this page, a link would be enough. The 7-day history "at a glance" would update itself like the forecast and wouldn't need manual edits on this page. Personally, I'd even like to see the 7-day forecast included here, as that's the only thing I ever check, and I use the link from the main page, so I have to click twice to get there. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 23:12, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
That's along the lines of what I was thinking. When I added the forecasts to the page, I left it at the 3 days because with the history, it was getting to be rather long and busy. If the month's history wasn't there, I'd totally support a 7-day forecast on there. If we had a Forecast of 7 days in the future on the main page, and a link to a /Forecast of 30, and a /History that went back 90 days, I'm think that would cover 99% of the uses. That sortable table on Zaishen*/Schedule would suit my needs as well (but as Rose points out, is a few extra clicks away ;)) 02:48, February 16, 2010 (UTC)
Converted to a 7-day prediction and added direct links to the /Schedule pages. Are there any compelling reasons left for keeping the history around at all? —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 05:01, February 16, 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't mind seeing a short 7-day "recent quests" a-la-forecast style, but don't see a reason for having more than that on this page. Also, monthly history is ok to keep as a linked archive if anyone cares, but drop the totals column in it. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 05:53, February 16, 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I've completely removed the manually-updated history tables, and placed 7-day prediction and history tables on the article along with links to the full schedules for each ZQuest. Are the longer /Forecast and /History pages really necessary? What function do they serve that the /Schedule pages don't? They're all 1 click away from this page now, so there's no reason to keep them if they're redundant. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 18:56, February 16, 2010 (UTC)

Me likey. Longer forecast is redundant with the schedule pages. Longer history only serves the curious eyes that want to see the last time a quest appeared, but I personally don't see a use for it. A manual history is useful for researching the pattern when it's not known, but the automated version is based on the known pattern, and becomes worthless if the pattern changes anyway (like if they add Pogahn Passage maybe ever ffs...) RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 13:55, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

If we ever need to consult the history again, it's been moved to User:M.mendel/Zaishen Challenge Quest/archive for safekeeping. --◄mendel► 22:08, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

I stopped doing the manual pages mostly because I haven't been playing much anymore, and was frustrated by me being the only one doing it at this point. Also, like Rose of Kali, I didn't see why it couldn't be automated somehow, so if anyone actually looked at the table, they wouldn't be depending on someone running in to update. By the way, I'm NOT male, I don't know how a female name like Callisto comes off as male, but I'm not, and I corrected the posts referring to me as such. Thanks Callisto Von Drake 16:59, March 10, 2010
Unless proven otherwise, everyone on the internet is male. I thought Callisto refered to a character or somesuch. --- VipermagiSig.JPG -- (contribs) (talk) 15:22, March 10, 2010 (UTC)
You chauvinistic pig! :O RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 15:58, March 10, 2010 (UTC)
Hahahaha! Jink 16:51, March 10, 2010 (UTC)
LOLOLOL it does refer to a character, who is also female... the name came from the series Xena, and Callisto was definitely female. Sorry about the other day, was in a bad mood and when everyone referred to me as male, it pissed me off royally.Callisto Von Drake 07:00, March 17, 2010
Wasn't she kind of... ahem? And yeah, I kind of cringe when people call me "dude," which happens surprisingly often - how do you get a dude out of Rose? o_O RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 13:10, March 17, 2010 (UTC)
I agree fully with Viper. Except with Entropy. We all believe Entropy is a female, and have willful amnesia of any evidence otherwise :P --Gimmethegepgun 13:52, March 17, 2010 (UTC)
My apologies Callisto... to my unknowing ear, Callisto sounds male... and Callista sounds female. I am grateful for your work in maintaining the lists. You usually beat me to it, but I tried to help keep it up to date whenever possible. I think it lost much of its value once we had the auto-predictor (which I guess shows what part it was other people actually cared about). It was a lot of work to maintain, (which is why I'd tried to at least auto-generate the stuff to copy/paste) and I wanted to say thank you for your effort on it these last few months. 04:50, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
p.s. I'm going to hide behind the "when gender is not known, use the masculine pronouns" defense. yea... that's it.... 04:57, April 7, 2010 (UTC)

you would be amazed how many people think that the internet is only male....I too am female! Cosyfiep 12:53, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

4th quest mini-bug[]

Fourth zaishen quest.jpg

So the old HB quests don't count for the quest limit of 3, but they're still in the logs of some of my chars. :P Anet did something right! :O RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 15:27, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

Can't repeat quests in some cases[]

I have a 12th level character working towards Survivor that I only occasionally play, and found that she wasn't able to repeat either of the quests she has done (Chabek Village Mission and Fenrir Bounty). My other characters repeated without problems, so I know I'm not doing anything wrong.

It looks like there's some unknown condition that can prevent repeating... perhaps you can only do each quest once until you hit 20th level? It's also possible that it only happens when you're working towards the Survivor title since otherwise you could farm easy missions (which was, in fact, exactly what I was trying to do). Tomanak 03:44, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and now that I see the actual post, I want it to be known that in my time zone (PST) it is NOT April 1st yet! This did really happen. Tomanak 03:47, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

Did you turn the quest in on the same day that it was available again? You can't take the quest again on the same day if it was in your quest log when the turnover occurred. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 04:18, April 1, 2010 (UTC)
I've noticed this behavior too, because I have a lot of characters that I barely ever play anymore. It has been my experience that, if you do a zaishen quest on a character, turn it in, and then log off and don't log back onto that character until the same zaishen quest is available again, you will not be able to receive it. It happened to several of my characters that I did not play at all between two occurrences of the Tihark Orchard z-quest. Felix Omni Signature.png 06:32, April 1, 2010 (UTC)
The login idea makes a lot of sense. I knew better than to turn in the quest the same day, but I'm generally trying not to accept quest rewards with this character until I make level 20... I'm sure I turned in the quest at most a few days before it came up again. I'll keep an eye out for quests and characters I'm willing to experiment with to figure out the details. Tomanak 05:04, April 2, 2010 (UTC)