User talk:Joe Kimmes/Archive June 2009

FOV?

→ moved from User talk:Linsey Murdock

Not totally sure where to ask this, but I'd like to know what the game's Field of View arc is (and is it the same for e.g. 1920x1200 type widescreen formats?). I'm guessing it's somewhere around 90 degrees, but, I don't know how to tell from this end myself. (I was trying to put together a panorama from screenshots and having all kinds of problems, figuring this out might help with one of them. Probably not the part where it tries to make a moebius strip out of the eye of the north's interior, but, hey. :)) --Star Weaver 22:36, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't know what the exact FOV is, but the game is both Vert- and Hor+ when changing aspect ratios, so it's maintaining total FOV. Here's a screenshot of the game at 1600x1200 and 1920x1200 mixed together: [1]. The HUD of course doesn't stretch ^^. But that probably wasn't the exact answer you where looking for. I'd also like to know what the FOV is (because I'm just curious like that :P) — Poki#3 (talk) 01:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea. Maybe Joe would know? - Linsey talk 23:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't know off the top of my head, but I'll ask around and see if I can get an answer for you. - Joe Kimmes 16:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

According to the illustrious Austin Spafford, the Field of View is 75 degrees. Hope that helps! - Joe Kimmes 16:27, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Hall of Monuments "Honor" Statue

→ moved from User talk:Linsey Murdock

Hi Linsey, I appreciate all your work for Guild Wars, and enjoyed the April update, however I am wondering about two things.

As far as I can tell, on the Monument of Honor, you can display all of your titles you earned on your account, however, the blue backdrop and the text on the honor statue (like your story, "All hail the great ___ who conquered the UW!" doesn't change to account based. That part only changes based on that character you enter with.

Are there any plans to make these also account based?

Thanks, and keep up the good work! Slayer essence 03:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

That part is controlled by the KoaBD title, which is character based, and Linsey has already indicated it will not be made account based. -- Wyn 03:23, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. Sorry, I haven't kept up to date with that information. Thanks for the answer. Slayer essence 03:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Right. It would also be kind of silly if you enter with a level 5 character and have it say "All hail the mighty Xx Cute Ele Xx, who conquered the Underworld and bested Abaddon, etc. etc." when really it was a different character that did it. Because the text uses the character's name in reference to specific accomplishments, it makes sense that it stays personal. Though, the Honor floating statue WILL update if your account HoM is "full," making the statue appear 1 rank higher than your KOABD would dictate. Most of my characters have just the empty blue surface (no titles), but see the first rank statue in account view. Rose Of Kali 04:46, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand it makes sense in that aspect to keep it character based, but still, I think it would be nice if it was fully account based, even if that honor text had different sections or tabs to view each of your characters storys, etc. But, I understand why it's not like that. Slayer essence 21:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, its doubtful they will make any changes. But once in a blue moon changes do happen. Dero Ahmonati 22:21, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

There is a technical limitation to having the monument say which character you got the achievement on. The HoM doesn't know which chars you got what on, just that the account has it. This isn't something that we can change. I'm not sure if we could have the backdrop reflect the highest level of KoaBD on the account, that would be a question for Joe. - Linsey talk 23:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Er, pardon me for butting in, but I thought Honor already displayed the highest level of KoaBD on your account in the account-based version. Maybe I'm misreading this, but I have an ele who has 4 max titles and a monk with 14 and The HoM displays the tier two of KoaBD backdrop when I enter in the account-based version with my ele. Now, if this is asking to make every max title plugged in count towards the backdrop of Honor, it's essentially asking to make every title ever made account-based: something I have heard repeatedly is not going to happen. -- Timeoffire45 19:34, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I will take a wild guess and say that your account HoM is filled. If that is the case, your backdrop statue will upgrade its look by one level. However, once you hit 15 titles on your main, you will see no further change on other characters' statues until you actually earn titles by the current viewing character. Right now, all my characters see a 5-title statue in the account view, even without any titles. That's just a feature of the "full" HoM. Rose Of Kali 18:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

They should all be account based. *I* earned them, I don't care about role playing continuity. This is a difference in design opinions which means I'm out of luck. 75.143.89.238 07:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Half of the things in this game are poorly designed. No real consequences of your choices aside from alliances' allegiance. Most professions can play all roles (Excluded: Warrior, Assassin). EoTN is plain bad. The way Arenanet tried to make pve challenging is plain wrong, as they never knew how to make pve gameplay challenging. RA (which is queue arena instead of random arena as there is no randomness in it), FA, JQ, TA, HB, and AB go there too. I don't think that I have to continue. Boro 12:04, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

No real consequences in your choices are one of the best features of the game. Most of the profession being able to fit different roles are one of the best features of the game. If it was: "warrior just tanks", "Ele just damages", "monk just heals", it would be just one more short-lived game. As for the HoM, since the account name can be checked, the HoM could use the account name defined in Tolkano (if set) instead the current character's name. MithTalk 13:19, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

(resetting indent) Sorry it took a few days to respond on this, I took some vacation time over the last couple days. This seems like an easy thing to address - if we got some new generic text for the Honor monument (ie, 'Hail the hero who conquered the Fissure') and changed the blue-statue-thing to appropriately use your account's KoaBD rank, would that fix everyone's concerns?

RE: Boro - my talk page isn't for rants about GW's design. If your own user page isn't enough for you to vent your frustration, there are probably other places for you to complain. - Joe Kimmes 16:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I already guessed it was too much, but it was too late to delete. Sorry for the inconvenience. Boro 18:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes Joe, it sounds like you've got the exact right idea. 75.143.89.238 15:48, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Hold on, I'm still slightly confused on the whole idea of "your account's KoaBD rank"... Is this the summation of ALL (different) max titles your account has earned (like, say, you earned two differnt max titles on each of five characters, it would display KoaBD r2), or is it simply showing the highest rank KoaBD that one of your characters has? (same situation as before, (5 with 2 each), except now it shows nothing on the backdrop because it registers as two maxed titles, not ten) -- Timeoffire45 16:36, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

At no point would any titles be cumulative when it comes to the Honor Monument floating statue. The statue is fully dependend on the KOABD rank of the character viewing the hall. The only time other characters even come into play is IF your account-view HoM becomes full (20 minis, 5 heroes, 5 achievements, 5 armors, 11 weapons). If your account view HoM is full, then your Honor statue will appear 1 rank higher than your character's KOABD title track suggests. This statue rank upgrade also works for personal view, if your personal HoM is full. This also implies (haven't tested myself yet, but heard from others) that if you only have 5 max titles and a full HoM, you get to see the Rainbow Phoenix appear in your HoM without having 10 max titles. I hope this clears up your confusion. Rose Of Kali 05:28, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Why not let titles be cumulative? My title hunter is at 28 maxed, I hate the idea of buying points for sweet-tooth and party animal. I have two characters on my account with their own maxed single title. One survivor, one LDoA. My title hunter is over 4 years old... I never even had a chance to Survivor or LDoA with him. My account is MY account, not a character's account, not a group of people on the same account. I HAVE EARNED 30 max titles. I should get credit (to the account). 75.143.89.238 00:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

This is not something Joe has any input on. And most people will call you cry-baby, though I'm in the same boat with 26 max and LDoA/Survivor on other characters. But oh well, GWAMM is not an account title, it was never meant to be, so go farm candy canes on Xmas like everyone else. Rose Of Kali 03:30, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Why wasn't it ever meant to be? Design choice. I very much disagree with that choice. 75.143.89.238 04:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Ask the game designers. (e.g. linsey) Boro 07:40, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

As noted this was a design decision, but would it be enough if your titles were cumulative for Hall of Monuments purposes only, not for displaying your title to other players? - Joe Kimmes 16:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

That would be cool for those who split up different titles on different characters. And I'm not saying just the LDoA/Survivor, but I've known people who chose a different title track to pursue for each of their characters a while back, so they may have 10 or more maxed titles, but they're all spread out, so they don't even have a single KOABD. They would probably be most happy to see that fancy Honor statue they rightfully earned. Rose Of Kali 01:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

GWAMM should not be account based, some titles are easier to obtain than others, and it's not fair for those that have gone through the feat of survivor or vanquisher if someone can have the same KOABD rank by getting Protector eight times or more. (Satanael 03:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC))

lol easier than others thats funny because i found all the titles i have gotten thus far to be rather easy. survivor (which i got twice) and vanquisher to be rather easy. i have yet to find a title that isnt just grind. OH WAIT. -- Zesbeer 03:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

The really amusing and slightly saddening thing is that people don't seem to be able to follow the very simple solution joe is proposing. In response to joe, yes I do think making the blue glowey statue, at the back of the HoM, account wide would be great and many people would appreciate it. As for how that works, from what you've said I'm assuming it can work in 1 of 2 ways, either it can just directly work from the highest KoaBD title on any character on your account or instead it can tally the individual (and distinct) titles maxed across your account and show the relative statue for that number of maxed titles. For those having difficulty, this would not count the same title maxed twice, it would simply count 1 of each unique title as I'm assuming it would be a simple Boolean yes/no check for each title across the account, rather than it actually counting each individual maxed title. IMHO I think the latter option, that of a tally of uniquely maxed titles across the account, would be the best way forward for the big floaty statue. As it stands people are still focusing on 1 main character due to the way that the statue works currently, so a change like this would motivate people to open up their play style a bit more, which is why the HoM was made account wide in the first place. -- Salome 03:54, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

(reset indent) I have to agree with Salome here, unique titles are obviously the only thing anyone is proposing, Satanael is way off the mark with his assessment of what we are saying. Although, if the statue can be made account wide, I completely and seriously pose the question: why not KoaBD? Again, only count unique titles. There's a very real possibility that people can already have r1 of KoaBD across every character (Luxon, Kurzick, Lucky, Unlucky, Treasure, Wisdom). When the maxed titles title gives no advantage besides some e-peen, why restrict it? I'd agree with people saying you need all 3 vanquisher titles on a single character to get the bonus 4th title, but after that, why not let a max title be a point across the entire account? Again, my stance is that I earned them, I should get the recognition. 75.143.89.238 05:02, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Although i heartily agree with the IP, I will say that i have raised this before to linsey and from what i could gather at the time, it seems they do not want the KoaBD title to work in that manner (I also think it might be incredibly hard to code). It seems the point of the KoaBD title is that you achieved all those titles with THAT char. This reduces the versatility of options available to you as a player in doing every task (and prevents you from picking the easiest profs to do each title with) and thus increases the difficulty of the overall achievement thus I can see the logic behind keeping it character based, even though personally I would prefer it to be account based. -- Salome 05:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Completely agreed with Salome's both recent comments. It is much easier to get cartography with a running character, and switch to a monk for your guardian, and elementalist for farming rep/using sweets/alchohol to boost your skills at the same time, and your favorite cryer or invinci-sin for group vanquishing, etc. This is why I think KOABD title itself should stay character based, as it currently is, because it means that yes, you did all those things with the very character standing before you, which has its own strengths and weaknesses when it comes to different title tracks. This makes GWAMM more of an achievement for that character, and for you as a player, because you figured out how to do those things with one character, instead of picking the easiest way out every time. Rose Of Kali 20:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Lines of code?

I'm curious...from an interview done with the founders exactly 2 years ago there was 4.5 million lines of code in Guild Wars, I was wondering if you could share roughly how many lines of code Guild Wars has now, 2 years later? It'd be an interesting thing to see. Thanks! :) DarkNecrid 18:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

You might need to hope for another founder interview for that - I only handle certain parts of the code compared to their all-encompassing viewpoint. It's certainly an interesting question though; I'll let you know if I can get ahold of that information. - Joe Kimmes 17:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

4.5 million lines of code, and about 3 million are buggy or break the game in some other way? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.43.62.68 (talk).

There's no reason to troll Joe's page so don't.~>Sins WDB 17:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah don't troll Joe's page, he's cool. Thanks for the reply Joe, I'm hoping you can get that info, I'm very curious to see how much the game has grown line wise over 2 years and many many updates. :) DarkNecrid 18:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey IP, it only takes 1 line to mess it all up. The few bugs that guild wars does have are probably caused by stuff missing, rather than buggy code - that is, there is no code to handle certain relatively obscure situations. Ashes Of Doom This user grants Arenanet full permission to use any of his suggestions. 21:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Anomaly of Expert Focus

Is there any chance you can explain why Expert Focus works as the notes state and why Deft Strike has sucha strange behaviour? Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 21:12, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

i think its because they wanted that attack to be usable by casters?-- Zesbeer 21:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Deft Strike looks like it's bugged - the concept of a ranged non weapon-specific attack skill was, I believe, a new one, so it's clearly got some odd interactions.

For Expert Focus, were you wondering about the interaction with Deft Strike, or something else? It reduces energy cost before Expertise because that's the order of operations in the engine, and it not affecting non-attacks is either a bug or incorrect description. - Joe Kimmes 21:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I am humble. I just want to know... everything >:D Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 21:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Am I correct in thinking Deft Strike has the same skill type as the skills used by attacking spirits? Backsword 22:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that seems to be the case. Attacking spirits tend to be another odd case though, so it's possible that I've missed something. - Joe Kimmes 22:29, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

By the way, why can't you disable a spirit's skills? ôO Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 22:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I haven't checked the code on this, but my hunch would be that Spirits play by their own rules a little and ignore it if their attack skill is disabled. - Joe Kimmes 23:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Cursor

Hey Joe. This one's a bit out of left field, so I want to say upfront that I absolutely understand if you don't want to touch it with a 10 foot pole.

I run GW in Linux through Crossover (a program for running Windows programs on Linux and Mac. I see you about to bolt already, but hear me out). One of the persistent problems with it is that the cursor disappears during extended play sessions. There's a thread about it on Crossover's forum. In particular I'd like to direct your attention to where a staff member posts "Guild Wars is doing something weird (destroying the active cursor icon) and CrossOver/Wine doesn't handle it properly. ... I can say that the problem is one which 'accumulates'. Effectively, every time Guild Wars changes the cursor, it uses up a limited resource."

So what I'd like to ask is what is the cursor code doing when it switches cursors? Is there any insight you can offer to the guys over there on how whatever code is supposed to be handled properly? Is the cursor code something you might consider changing to make less destructive, or is it the sort of thing that you Just Don't Mess With? Or would you prefer not to deal with something that, considering GW isn't a Linux/Mac game, is pretty much outside your job? No hard feelings if so, but if you can either fix it on GW's end or offer anything that helps them fix it on Crossover's end, I'd be quite grateful. I figure it doesn't hurt to ask. - Tanetris 01:08, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Interesting. The cursor code isn't something I've ever had to change or familiarize myself with, so I don't have a quick answer, but I'll take a look at this and see if there's anything strange going on. - Joe Kimmes 16:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Is it also possible that you look into the code why GW doesn't support moving the cursor in fullscreen mode into a second (or third) extended desktop monitor without switching to window mode? In games like Runes of Magic it's possible. Design decision? No extended desktop enviroments in anet offices? How long is your lunch break every day? BigBluetalk 08:03, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I found that quite annoying. And also how it 'hijacks' DirectX while in fullscreen, so I can't have a video player while GW is in fullscreen. But that's probabl because how DirectX works, not just the client. MithTalk 10:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, for the original question: I talked with one of the original UI programmers, who says that the cursor is indeed recreating itself (allocating/deallocating memory) when it changes icons. I'm not experienced enough with that level of the engine to mess around with it much, but maybe that will help put you in the right direction. I'll keep looking at it when I get the chance and let you know if I come up with anything interesting.

Re: fullscreen: Unfortunately I don't know the answer to this - that level of engine code is beyond what I work with. It's likely not a design decision, though, and could just be a relic of the way the game uses DirectX. We do develop on extended desktops, for the curious. - Joe Kimmes 16:16, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Follow-up on the original issue. I asked the Crossover guys if they could formulate a question of what exactly, if anything, they needed to know and I got the following response:

"The problem for us is not that they keep recreating their cursors. The problem is that they destroy the current cursor. Their code is calling DestroyCursor, DestroyIcon, or DestroyIcon32 on the cursor which is currently active. Windows handles this fine, but CrossOver/Wine does not. That's our bug, and we'll eventually solve it, but it's surprisingly complicated, so the solution is not coming soon. If they're willing to change their code to first set a different cursor before destroying the old one, that would be great!"

So, my follow-up question to you is can you make the code change the cursor first before destroying the old one? I'm guessing this is more complicated than it sounds, but again, worth asking. Eternal gratitude and whatnot if you can! - Tanetris 17:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I can see the problem a little better now, thanks for getting that clarification. Looking at the code involved, this may still be a little beyond what I'd want to tamper with, but I'll talk with the UI programmers and see if we can come up with something. - Joe Kimmes 17:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

About fullscreen - I actually like that it keeps the cursor locked into the window. I use click to move when I warrior in PvP and it's frustrating to play in Windowed mode and trigger a resize or have whatever app on my other monitor grab focus due to a wide misclick. @ Mith:I can have a fullscreen vid playing on one monitor and have GW in fullscreen on the other with no problems. Media Player Classic if you're curious.74.181.200.229 05:05, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I use MPC too, but I must disable directdraw in the ffdshow options in order to have both. Otherwise, I get the sound, but the video goes black, and that's a bit annoying. MithTalk 15:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

From One Programmer to Another

I have a question or two for you, you being a programmer, I figured you would be the one to ask. What languages are used to code anything at Arena Net? Would any of them be Java, C++, Actionscript, or XML? I've done some work with Java, will be picking up C++ and I'm currently working on learning Actionscript, flash, and XML. — Jon Lupen 14:27, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

On their job application page (not sure if this even exists anymore) it listed Visual Studio (guessing the game started around VS.NET or even 6.0 but may have been updated to a more recent version like 2005) which most likely means Visual C++ and potentially backend work in other languages. Java is most certainly not in the game and most likely not on their sites. It's crap for all but the most obscure uses of cross platforming. Flash is on the main website and XML is hiding in plain sight. 75.143.89.238 15:57, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

It's Java all the way down. Kidding, but seriously, almost all of the work I do is in C++. There's a little XML and other languages are probably used by some of the other teams (I do very little network coding and can't speak for them, for example). - Joe Kimmes 16:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

In this case I might be able to read gw. Boro 17:32, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Java for a PC videogame would be... well... I've seen working games with reasonable requirements made with as much as C# or Python. But Java? That think is better for things like 2D in mobile phones and toasters. Most PC games go C++&DirectX right now. You get decent results and there are a lot of solutions for many things already done to use as examples or starting points. MithTalk 00:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I saw a while back they were asking for C++ programmers, actually, it was a year ago this time. There was an ad on the login page asking for C++ programmers for GW2 and made me annoyed for a week because I hadn't started my C++ classes yet. ^^" Katherinezoltin 01:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Java is very good for non-commercial games and projects (see Pokemon World Online), but it simply lacks the capability for high-quality graphical games. C++ is typically easier to work with anyway. Felix Omni 01:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Web developement anyone? I asked about Java, ActionScript, Flash, and XML in regards to the web end. — Jon Lupen 04:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

XML is just a language to describe other document languages. It's the reason XHTML is the latest standard over HTML. I said it was hiding in plain sight because any wiki runs Strict XHTML as it's doctype because that's just how the wiki backend works. Flash is clearly visible on the main Guild Wars page, Java is (as stated before) not used and terrible, as far as actionscript goes, I'm not familiar enough with it to know how it differs from javascript. My guess is that it's a sub-component of something larger like AJAX but there aren't too many dynamic pages on the guild wars space besides the XTH where it may be used. 75.143.89.238 06:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind, it's part of Flash and Adobe stuff. I'm assuming you'd find it being used anywhere you see Flash being used. 75.143.89.238 06:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Java lacks the capability for high-quality graphical games? ~Shard 07:10, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, cool! I've never seen that before. Thanks, Shard. Felix Omni 07:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, you CAN do almost anything with Java. The problem it's the machine you'll need to run the things you make with it, load times, virtual machine versions... all quite annoying. GW prgram it's just a gw.exe and a gw.dat. That's as simple as it gets. MithTalk 08:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

You forgot about DirectX and the operating system. Those are kind of necessary... I don't like Java for various reasons, JIT compilers make me very sad, but Java is... hypothetically viable. It's used pretty widely as a teaching language. Misery 08:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Most of you seem to forget (or never knew) that Java *can* be compiled to a native executable instead of running through the JIT alone. The whole discussion is really that yes, you can do it in Java, but why bother? 75.143.89.238 08:57, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

If you want to know about the website stuff as opposed to the game stuff, you might want to talk to Emily as that is her department. -- Wyn 09:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I can't think of any reason to use Java at all if you aren't taking advantage of the virtual machine =/ Misery 09:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

From my work with Java, it's just too slow of a language for use in higher end applications were speed matters, like video games. The goal of the topic is to gauge which languages are used anywhere within Arena net for anything.

Lets throw Emily a pointer here and see what she has to say about the web end. — Jon Lupen 15:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Most of what makes Java slow can easily be avoided. The only thing you can't do much about is the garbage collector, and even that isn't a very huge time waster. I can clock 60 FPS on a moderately sized exterior scene graph without obstruction culling in JME. ~Shard 23:02, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

In which computer? MithTalk 23:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Intel Q6600, ATI Radeon HD4800. Java Hotspot VM, graphics engine running on 64-bit LWJGL. I haven't noticed a huge difference between the different video cards I've used (my old machine ran 45-50 fps with a 4-year-old card). ~Shard 00:02, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

There you are. The current GW runs in my old PIII700 with an nVidia 5200 at 15..30FPS when you reduce all settings to lower. Making a program with the lowest possible requirements is VERY good. Why? To reach as many people as possible. That's not precisely easy to do with Java. MithTalk 20:33, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

<reset indent> Maybe they use AOT compilers for the stuff they write in Java ? One thing I'am sure is that the client is not totally written in Java if i remember correctly a discussion I had in Paris with a former employee. Yseron - 81.251.150.117 20:58, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Scaling with attribute for skills

People have been critical in the past of where breakpoints have been placed, but looking at skill templates I'm not convinced the engine allows breakpoints to be precisely placed, so I have a few questions about how scaling on skills work. On this wiki the templates use two points for every scaling attribute. For example the duration of the KD on Backbreaker is 2 seconds at 0 and 4 seconds at 15 and just scales linearly in between. A lot of people thought it was silly that the 4 second breakpoint wasn't at 13 Hammer Mastery, but that would requite a KD duration of 3.7 seconds at 15 Hammer Mastery. My questions are these: Is scaling controlled in game exactly the same as it is on the wiki with only two point set and linear scaling in between? Can the values at these points be set only to whole numbers? If the answer is yes to both of these questions it would help explain a lot of decisions that have been made in the past. I'd like to stress that I am not suggesting that the scaling on BB gets changed, I was merely using it as an example to try and understand the underlying mechanics. Misery 09:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Your explanation is indeed correct. The designers can specify two (whole) numbers for a skill's attribute-based variables - the number at 0 attrib, and the number at 15 attrib, with other values scaled based on those. - Joe Kimmes 16:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, that explains some past decisions that I have considered questionable. While unideal from a balance perspective, I can see why that would be done from a programming perspective. Thanks Joe. Misery 16:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

That's very intriguing, good question! Makes sense, too. DarkNecrid 22:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Heroes on Guard.

Joe perhaps you can answer this. I routinely have my heroes set to 'Guard', so they don't rush off to attack something and thereby draw in unwanted aggro. Something I've been noticing recently thought is even though a Hero is set to Guard (ie they shouldn't attack anything until they are attacked, or I tell them to attack), they will go out of their way to attack any spirits, and thereby drawing in aggro. This is fairly easy to check, just load up a team in Eye Of The North and run towards Battledepths. On the way you will come accross a spirit of Contaigen. For me the heroes will automatically attack this spirit as soon as they 'aggro' it, even though they are set to guard. Is the spirit attacking the heroes with menacing looks or something to cause them to attack. Anon-e-mouse 15:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

This does sound like a problem. The reason I think this happens is that the AI has a few ways to prioritize a target when they don't have one - if a player called it, if it attacked them, and so on. Attackless spirits are something that should be attacked in battle, but since they're never attacking, they tend to rank lower than other targets. My hunch is that there's a small boost to their rank to compensate for this, and that that's causing Heroes to attack them even when combat hasn't started.

I'm actually currently working on the AI (first up is skill AI), so hopefully this will be addressed sooner rather than later. - Joe Kimmes 16:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Please take Hero Battles into account when making a change. Spiritway, like R/P pet builds, exploit the fact that heroes don't prioritize taking down enemy spirits to drastically increase the amount of actions the opponent has to make. The most frustrating part is that heroes (using martial weapons) don't prioritize taking down offensive spirits over enemy players, meaning in a 1v1 against a ritualist (set to Guard) they'll let it set up spirits and eventually be overwhelmed unless you're close enough to constantly target lock the hero. It's basically the exact opposite problem as with pets in HB: spirits go down easily so should be prioritized (Shadowsong is a bit of an exception in a 1v1), while pets are basically invincible so attacking them should never be prioritized. However, when you're fighting against pet/spirit builds the effect is pretty much the same: you constantly have to set target locks and your opponent doesn't. That's not even considering the guaranteed body blocks from spirits/pets which make it all the more frustrating to play against. The only thing that's holding back Sway in HB are AoE attacks, but those are exploiting the AI just as much. Regarding the problem described here: in HB spirits should also be attacked outside of combat seeing how that's crucial to prevent the AI from setting up their identical copies of automated turrets on every shrine, which is unfortunately exactly what's causing overaggro in PvE. Personally I didn't really see this as much of an issue since I just flag my heroes past them. Wouldn't it just be possible to stop spirits from triggering aggro? It always seemed odd to me that attacking a spirit can aggro a group standing on the other side of the map. --Draikin 16:46, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm hesitant to make PvP-only changes to the AI, but this seems like a good place for one. Heroes should probably be aggressive about taking spirits down in PvP and less so in PvE (until combat starts), since 'aggroing' isn't an issue PvP side. I'll think about this some more and see if I can't come up with a solution that makes everyone happy without having AI differences between PvE and PvP.

For what it's worth, when I'm updating the AI it's usually 95% with Hero Battles in mind. I appreciate hearing if a change is going to negatively affect it. - Joe Kimmes 17:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Joe, personally I would have thought the simplist solution would be that if a hero is on 'guard' that they didn't attack anything until a target is pinged or they are attacked. Having a target pinged and being attacked should be the only two reasons for a hero to start attacking whilst in 'guard' mode. In PvE it's the act of attacking the spirit that draws the spirit layer's mob into aggro, so if a hero was actually to obey the contraints of 'guard' mode there wouldn't be this issue in PvE. PvP is an entirely different arena with which I'm totally unfamiliar. Anon-e-mouse 22:14, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

something I've wanted to know for a while

What is the character limits for the chat text? I've been experimenting and it seems that individual characters make it shorter and longer, so what is the real limit according to the code? I figure since you might have access to that info, you can solve my puzzle before I start counting characters of a's and i's, etc. Katherinezoltin 06:15, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Might be a size limit instead of a character limit. So shorter letters like i can probably be used more than character's like m which are way thicker. DarkNecrid 08:23, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

That's what I would like to know! Therefore, I'd love for Joe to spill on that. ^^ Katherinezoltin 00:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't have the exact limit, but I can tell you that as DarkNecrid speculates it's based on the message length when displayed, not just the character count. - Joe Kimmes 17:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, coolies. That explains a lot, I've just wondered about it ever since I started learning about coding. First thing they teach you is how to enter and display text. ^^" Katherinezoltin 20:06, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually I have to retract my previous claim; the noteworthy master of UI Austin Spafford says that it is in fact a character limit, but there are other factors that affect the limit based on the actual message size - for example, whispering another player allows fewer characters in the message. - Joe Kimmes 16:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Would I be correct in saying some characters are actually a character combination when you get down to the code end? — Jon Lupen 16:13, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Whispering allows fewer messages because the literal string sent is "/whisper player name, message you want to send" so you've taken up 11 characters for the requirements of the command (with spaces) + the length of the player's name out of your alloted character amount. I'm also assuming the ! and @ and # and $ and % are also pegged on the front of your string so the server knows how to sort and forward the message. After that, I don't think it's based on pixel width, just that you may not be aware of everything behind the scenes of that string with a (very rough guess, in no way supported by testing or evidence, just gut feeling: 128 char?) cap. 75.143.89.238 18:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I just did the testing. Hold down Shift + I in all/guild/team/trade/alliance chat and keep holding it until you're sure it stops. Copy and paste your string into notepad with stats showing. You're able to print to column 121 which means you can have 120 characters in chat (121 includes the symbol used to preface the message as stated above). Do the same thing but use M or X or any other large capital letter. Same length limit. Do the same thing but using a whisper to yourself. You will find you can only fit as many characters as are left over after your target's name + the " that whisper uses for it's channel. The /whisper name, format I mentioned earlier is just another way, but it seems to be even more limited than the " the interface provides because you've taken up more of your 120 characters to write out the command string. 120 characters of any shape or size is your answer for Latin-based letters. Did not test in other languages but I'm assuming they'll also be the same as a char is a char if they're using Unicode for all languages. If they're swapping ASCII and Unicode... ew. I guess it could save some bandwidth to do the swaps. 75.143.89.238 18:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow, so there is a limit. Thanks everyone for looking into it, as I said, it's just something I've wanted to know for a while, one of those details that pass by you as you are talking with someone on GW. Personally I hope its extended for GW2, the current limit seems a bit on the short side. Katherinezoltin 19:02, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Heroes and AoE attacks

Hi Joe. You already explained how pathing checks are expensive on the server which means improving the way heroes get out of AoE attacks might not be possible, but another problem with heroes standing in AoE attacks is that they often stop using skills while trying to get out of AoE. This can be seen in the video I already showed you some time ago (here), the Ritualist had several heals but just didn't use them at all, even if it means he's about to die (he did drop Protective Was Kaolai though). This is particularly devastating when the AoE hits more than one of your heroes, since if means the player has to not only flag heroes out of the AoE attacks but micro the heals as well. I was wondering if this is intentional behavior or more of a side effect from the path checks? --Draikin 16:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The AI for heroes getting out of AoE is pretty suboptimal in general, as this reflects. It's not a pathing issue; the note with pathing regarding AoE is that no check is made, which is why heroes can get stuck on objects when they try to run out of AoE.

It's not intentional for heroes to stop casting heals if they can save themselves from the AoE. This is something I want to improve. - Joe Kimmes 17:54, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I see, the fact that no check is made explains a lot. Thanks for the answer, Joe, I hope you can find the time to improve this part of the AI :) --Draikin 18:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

UA AI

Hey Joe, I noticed that you said earlier that you were currently working on an AI update, so I figured that this was as good a time as any to bring this issue to light. I don't know if anyone else has noticed this, but if you runa hero with Unyielding Aura on it, the second anyone in the party dies, they use UA. That is to say, no matter where they are, they will instantly cancel UA. They don't attmpt to get into range, they don't move to get into range later (except in short bursts of movement), and I have actually seen someone waste about a minute trying to bludgeon their hero into getting close enough to actually rez the party with UA. I don't know if this is just bad luck on my part or if anyone else has seen this, but it's really annoying. It seems as if the code that originally told a hero "party member is dead --> you are maintaing UA --> UA rezes anywhere on cancel --> cancel UA" hasn't been modded to be "party member is dead --> you are maintaing UA --> UA rezes anywhere within cast range on cancel --> move into casting range --> cancel UA" Any help/feedback would be great! -- Timeoffire45 04:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Interesting, it sounds like UA isn't properly waiting to be sure the hero is in range of a corpse. As a stopgap to prevent wasting time getting your hero into range, try disabling UA on the hero's bar (shift-click the skill icon) - that will prevent them from automatically canceling the skill while you're moving them into range. That's not a permanent solution of course.

I recommend that you post this bug on ArenaNet_talk:AI_bugs - QA regularly makes passes through the bugs sections of the wiki and posts them in our internal bug lists, so that can be the most effective way to make sure that I'll remember the issue. - Joe Kimmes 16:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Nice work again

Thanks for your work on the latest AI updates. I was particularly impressed that you managed to implement the change to Frenzy and Rush I mentioned. I didn't believe it would actually be possible for the AI to cancel Frenzy with a different stance based on their health but sure enough it works perfectly. The funny thing is I was trying to use a Primal Rage hero in Hero Battles and had to disable PR and Rush and micro the skills constantly, with this change I can actually leave the skills active. Hero builds built around Glyph of Immolation went from unplayable to exceptional with the update as well. That said, and this isn't a complaint, I've noticed the changes seemed to be skill specific and global AI problems such as heroes targeting pets, pathfinding issues, skill canceling and nearby spirits preventing the AI from using certain skills haven't been resolved. Most if not all of those are of course more difficult to solve, but unfortunately they're also having the biggest impact on Hero Battles and in many ways dumb down the gameplay there. I'm just wondering if there's going to be an update for these issues specifically at some point or if this is just something that you don't have the time to work on at the moment and will have to wait? --Draikin 16:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, you're completely right that this update ignored the larger issues of targeting/pathfinding/etc. Since those issues generally have farther reaching effects than skill AI changes, I intentionally held off on them - the more AI we change in a single update the larger the chances of problems, so it was safer to try to fix as many small issues as possible for now. The larger stuff is all still on my task list and will definitely be addressed in a future build.

I can speak specifically to at least one problem, which is heroes skill canceling versus spirits. This occurs with skills that can't actually target spirits (ie hexes) that have AI that incorrectly reports the spirit as a valid target. The hero tries to cast a hex on the spirit and the skill immediately fails. Unfortunately, the fix for this has to be done individually for all hex skills that get cast off-target, so we didn't have time to fix them all for this build.

Anyway, glad to hear that you're enjoying the update even if it's not as far-reaching as it could be. Most of the changes made were based on AI feedback from the wiki, so you all deserve some thanks as well. - Joe Kimmes 16:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Good point about the larger issues, I forgot about how the fixes to targeting/pathfinding introduced new problems in the previous large AI update. Concerning the skill canceling against spirits, can you easily verify which skills are used incorrectly or do you need specific bug reports from the community for each skill? Is this problem also what's causing the odd "hiccup" when heroes wand an opponent with spirits nearby? --Draikin 17:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it causes the wand hiccup as well. We shouldn't need specific bug reports; once we've got the new and exciting bugs from the current update locked down, I'll be going through the affected hexes and fixing them. - Joe Kimmes 17:56, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

A possible new bug after the June 18th update

Joe, I was informed about a problem with heroes no longer responding when manually ordered to use a skill after the update (in HB). Teutonic Paladin mentioned it happens after heroes get resurrected so I tried reproducing the bug with success: what I did was to let a monk hero run towards a shrine and let my opponent kill it, but I didn't remove the flag. When the monk resurrected I let it walk halfway towards the flag and then ordered it to use Word of Healing on me but it refused to use the skill and continued walking towards the flag. It didn't always happen, I think it won't trigger if they get resurrected almost immediately after they died. --Draikin 20:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Another bug I've noticed (though this is more general... I don't know if it deserves a bug report) is with ritualists: in pve, they won't cast offensive spirits near enough to enemies to do any good. Also, if there's another group that gets pulled back and the hero is still in range of his spirits-even if the enemies are not-they won't recast the spirits then either. Is there some way to prioritize spirit placement based on a defensive/offensive designation? -- Timeoffire45 20:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

(double post >_<) Oh, and to have them recast spirits if their old ones get out of range of enemies? (still thinking of offensive, mostly) -- Timeoffire45 20:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Draikin: I don't believe this is new, unfortunately. I have a bug on my list involving hero resurrection that has similar symptoms to what you describe. I'll take a look at this though, thanks for the report.

Timeoffire45: Positioning in battle is one of the AI's weakest areas, unfortunately - the system is barely able to handle the concept of running into range for PBAoE. I'll take a look at this though, it should be possible for heroes to at least determine if their offensive spirits are in range of the enemy. - Joe Kimmes 20:25, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Joe, I've never seen it happen before and given the frequency at which its occurring I'm reasonably certain it has to be new. I did report a different resurrection bug before where heroes cancel-cast skills upon resurrecting that they were ordered to use just before they died, I'm not sure if that's the one you're referring to. --Draikin 20:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

If you need a video of the bug I can provide one, it's easy enough to reproduce. We just noticed a different problem with the update as well: the updates that increase the priority for Glyph of Immolation, Attacker's Insight and the Attunements don't seem to be working in PvP where they still don't prioritize the skills. --Draikin 13:41, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Joe!

@Draikin, I think he's referring to the AI bug here. I could be wrong though.... -- Timeoffire45 13:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Draikin, are you sure about the priority on those skills? Heroes have identical AI in PvE/PvP, except in the case of skills that have a PvP version. It should be impossible for them to have drastically different results, all other things equal. - Joe Kimmes 15:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I checked it again and you're probably right, but it's weird that some people reported the skills worked perfectly (this was my first impression as well) and then other people reporting the AI was still exactly the same. The way these skills works now there's still a chance that they might not always prioritize them over other skills, right? If that's the case then I guess it must have been a coincidence and they just happen to use it perfectly at times. --Draikin 22:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

That sounds about right; for reference, the AI has 4 tiers of 'this skill is useful right now' and does a random tiebreak if multiple skills claim to be very useful. Depending on the bar and situation, a hero can sometimes have a lot of skills that are (correctly or otherwise) reporting themselves as highly useful, which can mean that they won't always use certain skills first. This is particularly visible if a hero has healing skills, since they tend to start being heavily prioritized when party members are low on health. - Joe Kimmes 22:28, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, Joe. Does that mean if a skill is in a higher tier it will always be prioritized over skills in a lower tier? From what I'm seeing I assume that's not the case. For example Dervish attack skills are now sometimes used before the hero uses Attacker's Insight, but they do seem to favor using Attacker's Insight. So I'd imagine Attacker's Insight is in a higher tier than the attack skills and that makes it more likely that the AI will use the skill, but it doesn't prevent them from choosing an attack skill. --Draikin 22:54, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

The important thing to note is that a lot of Dervish attack skills are likely to rate as equal priority to Attacker's Insight even with its increased priority. A skill with a special condition for getting a bonus (target below 50%, multiple targets hit, etc) rates as high as almost anything else in the game - out of the 4 tiers I mentioned, the highest is reserved for life-or-death situations, and the lowest is reserved for special case low-priority skills, such as Glowing Gaze when the condition isn't met. This means that a lot of skills can end up in the same tier at a given time, even when some of them are technically more/less useful. - Joe Kimmes 23:22, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, I understand what's going on now. If the Dervish uses any other enchantments besides Attacker's Insight, those will increase the priority on attack skills that benefit from enchantments like Wounding Strike and bring them on the same level. That explains the mixed reports, builds that use skills like Faithful Intervention who are maintained 100% of the time will cause Attacker's Insight to be used a lot less than it would in a build without any other enchantments. --Draikin 16:31, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

How does the game round numbers?

→ moved from User talk:Linsey Murdock

If I have an Enchantment that lasts 3 seconds and +50% duration, will it last 4.5 seconds exactly or will the game round it up/down? Cheers --SkyHiRider 20:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Linsey is not a programmer. Maybe Joe Kimmes would know. ~Shard 21:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I would say exactly since I calculated some skill and it was exactly in your case 4.5sec.Death Sligher 21:43, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, she can always ask them ;) But I'll try asking Joe, thanks. --SkyHiRider 21:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

If its like spawning powers times, it states that time is rounded down. --Robot 23:12, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Well I tied it out by casting a 5 sec Weapon spell(0 Spawning power) and Aegis at the same time, and it seemed Aegis lasted 5 seconds on +50% enchants, but it even lasted 5 secs on less then 50. So either the game counts milliseconds or it just rounds enchantments up. --SkyHiRider 23:52, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

AFAIK, the game always rounds up when possible, except I think if something is .5 it rounds down. DarkNecrid 03:04, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

(reset indent) SkyHiRider, weapons spells are not enchantments, thats why the +50% didnt change the time on that --Robot 09:56, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Attunements round the energy gain down, so I'd say everything gets rounded down. 145.94.74.23 12:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Patient Spirit lasts 3 seconds with a +20% enchantment mod, so I would say you are wrong and it's pretty bloody complicated and inconsistent. We've already seen that hexes and enchantments behave differently with Patient Spirit not even healing when the target is under Mark of Instability while Spirit Barbs triggered multiple times when used with pre-fix Recurring Insecurity and Peace and Harmony. Wastrel's Worry is a beast when a target is enchanted with Peace and Harmony. Misery 12:16, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I think PS going up to 3 seconds isn't really a rounding error, but might be a design choice since that's what it used to be. The rest of what you said is easy to explain, Enchantments are allowed to last 0 seconds, Hexes can't go below 1 second duration. No clue why, but it's not anything to do with rounding, just restrictions on the durations related to those skill types. DarkNecrid 12:27, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not actually sure about the rounding on effect times; the internal workings of the game's math aren't something I touch very often. It does seem like something that you could test fairly easily, though. - Joe Kimmes 15:59, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

It can be seen in all page showing 'breakpoints' For example, the Expertise or Spaning Power pages. MithTalk 22:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

You can see the breakpoints, but there is no breakpoint ending 0.5 so I can't tell if it rounds up or down.--SkyHiRider 20:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

No love for old historians?

Recently, especially with Nicholas the Traveler, the only historian in Guild Wars being mentioned is Durmand. What happened to Loremaster Ermenred, Thadeus Lamount, and Symon the Scribe? Where is their love? And, to add onto the historian thing, it seems that only new NPCs get repeated mention as of late, older NPCs don't aside from the special additions meant for them, such as M.O.X.'s quests and when the Prophecies end-game area were added over half a year ago. So, why are you guys favoring the newbies (so to speak)? -- Azazel the Assassin/talk 17:52, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I don't write the text; you'd be better served to ask Linsey. But, from my uninformed armchair designer perspective, I think that the old NPCs get mentioned fairly frequently - as you yourself note, the MOX quests and Proph Endgame are full of older characters. Nicholas the Traveler is very new, to the point that not all of his locations/text have been seen yet, so I imagine that he has dialogue related to older characters at some point. And actually, looking at his text so far on the wiki - Nicholas_the_Traveler/Dialogue- it looks like he's got a pretty good crop of references; Mary, Gwen, Yileng, Prince Bokka. He's mention Zinn once and Durmand twice, so I think things seem pretty even right now. - Joe Kimmes 18:11, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

First, super fast response. Second, was going to ask Linsey, but her talk page is swamped so, I figured best ask someone else. >_> Third, I was mainly talking about the older historians. Of those I mentioned (which is not all), only one gets mentioned in game more than once - that is Symon. Ermenred is just credited for the Prima Guide lore titled "An Empire Divided" and Thadeus for History of Tyria. From all previous events, Ermenred is in LA (which is only mentioned via his work and the April Fool's update from 08) while Thadeus is only mentioned by a contemporaries - Orrian Historian McClain and Archivist Mijir.

It has also just occurred to me that I posted this on the wrong user talk. Meant to post it on John Hargrove's user page. xD I must be still out of it. -- Azazel the Assassin/talk 18:38, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I've linked John here if he has anything he can add. — Jon Lupen 18:48, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I think Joe said most everything I would think to say, although I guess I could add that Durmand likely won this particular battle of the historian tug of war because he was arguably the most prominent across all continents. This was of course desirable to the core of Nicholas' character since he too was fairly likely to be well known across all of the continents, and it made sense for the two of them to have crossed paths in a port town, on a boat ride, or somewhere like that! :) [John Hargrove] talk 17:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Guess I'll have to settle for that. Aw well. (still hopes that the older NPCs don't get completely outshone by the new ones) -- Azazel the Assassin/talk 18:11, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Map-travel question

→ moved from User talk:Linsey Murdock

Big page, I'll keep this brief. With the map-travel system that Guild Wars has is it possible to set up a map marker on the player's map (that you can click and travel to as standard) that would put you into an explorable area as opposed to Outposts and Cities? ~~000.00.00.00~~ 00:38, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I know you want a Dev response first, but I've submitted a Theory and possible Evidence that our Travel maps aren't always Accurate or even the same proportions. Therefore attempting to use them as a reliable pin-point "portal" into that specific location in an instanced area would be flawed and might even cause players to get "stuck in the geometry". So no I don't believe it would be possible unless they were to break every section up into having it's own spawn-points and that would an OBSCENE amount of work to undertake for almost no benefit (or more likely, a total-negative by making Speed-Farming WORSE) --ilr 01:31, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't mind others adding such as yourself, Ilr, that is an interesting read but I don't believe it relates to this. An example of what I'm asking: say you're in Nightfall and there's a quest to clear all Corsairs out of the central area of the Issnur Isles so some workers can get back to work on the ruins in the centre of the explorable. Once the requirements of the quest is completed there's a map marker added to the player's map that allows him/her to map-travel to the ruins in the explorable area. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 01:44, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah well why didn't ya say that then, heh. Yeah as long as the game engine is the "entity" saving/recording those exact Coordinates as Spawn Locations, then some simple code could be written to generate them as "clickables" and the "Scaling" issue of translating exact coordinates on our "picture Maps" could be totally sidestepped. (in other words: it was a U.I. issue, but this would bypass any issues with scaling the "UI") --ilr 02:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

This is definitely a question for Joe. - Linsey talk 06:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

[talks in my less annoying voice] Hello Joe ^_^ ~~000.00.00.00~~ 08:36, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Assuming it's possible, why would you want this feature? - Joe Kimmes 16:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

This does sound interesting. And, I'd assume it would be wanted for quick access to non-outpost towns, similar reason to why outposts like Ventari's Refuge and Bergen Hot Springs is liked. They are hardly visited but have worthy reasons to be outposts, just as the Ascalon Settlement does - but isn't an outpost. IMO, this feature would have been a better use than a majority of the outposts that are there (talking about the outposts that are seldom visited) as you'd have access there, but it would be in the explorable area so no hooking up with teams, but still serves the purpose of having a spawn point nearby harder-to-reach locations. They would, essencially, act like either Bokka Amphitheatre or the explorables you enter after a mission (which usually only happens in EN missions, iirc) except that you can get there from any location. Though not needed - and imo... never mind, going any further would probably put this into a suggestion instead of "how this would work" (from a purpose prospective) and "why would people want this". -- Azazel the Assassin/talk 16:40, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Why would I want this feature? [shifty eyes] I want many things, purely this was more a question if it's possible within the current engine (without modifications), if the mechanics for the maps required you be ported into an area like an outpost or, as Azazel goes into, areas of interest within an explorable. The map has been something I've been interested in for a while, how it works and such, so this was a question that got me thinking. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 20:53, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

From a technical standpoint, the game can easily port you into an explorable area, so long as you aren't picky about which entrance you turn up at. - Joe Kimmes 21:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

That last bit threw me. So, as for my example to Ilr, is that possible? A map marker in a specific point on the map, with a specific spawning point in the explorable? ~~000.00.00.00~~ 21:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

The game can send you anywhere and to any position from any location if needed. This is not hard to see occurring all over the place in the game already - you appear at varying points in outposts, you can be sent from an explorable area into a mission, groups start missions in different places for cooperative missions, etcetera. - Joe Kimmes 21:17, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Joe. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 21:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Right, umm... Not to stretch this out any longer than it already is, but Joe's Example where your whole party is automatically moved to the same spot in an explorable area (usually following a Cinematic) is a "Scripted Event". In other words the Quest/World-builder placed a Spawn Flag at that exact point maunally. And what you're basically inquiring about is for the Game to start recording the point you were standing at when you exited that explorable area, or when a Quest updated. Which is quite easy to do assuming they have the database space to add those sets of Coordinates to every character's data file on their Server. Actually marking that location on your Map-Picture might be trickier from a U.I. standpoint but it could definitely be done without risking any major Voodoo bugs re-occurring.
And yeah, as for Why... well let's flash back to one of the things Anet said itself that it regretted about this game and wanted to improve upon in GW2: Which is that the setting the Player is "thrust into" immediately upon arriving in Post-Searing, is Barren Harsh and Unlivable. Infact it's downright depressing and doesn't really improve until we've reached the end of that character's "career", only then do we get that "favorite Spot" to log-out in or just to idle at. And unfortunately many of the most breath-taking Spots are all out in explorable areas and take too long to get to. (Certain Guildhalls, and the Menagerie aside). The point of this feature in question, would be to access those places instantly and remedy to-some degree that Oversight Anet also admits it seeks to remedy. HTH. --ilr 23:37, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

That's an impressive leap to link the sentiment 'Post-Sear is initially depressing and you can't go back to Pre-Sear' to 'you should be able to save a point and travel there instantly'. Anyway, I've answered the technical side of this, so further discussion can probably take place on a design suggestion page. - Joe Kimmes 23:48, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Hm... but such a thing would require to clean the party spawn point of hostile NPCs, and deactivate any possible enemy spaw point, otherwise you'll end up appearing in the middle of various creatures. Hm... I remember a suggestion about a 'sightseen' mode, that would be activated after getting carthographe, and that would allow you you enter explorables with no enemies (Much like Zen Daijun after cleaning it, but without Vanquish by killing an animal, of course). The a feature like this could make a bit more sense, if it's for roleplaying purposes. Otherwise it could be used, for example, to instantly teleport to farming spots, and that won't be really good. MithTalk 14:44, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

This is a Pandora's Box when it comes to farming, unless it is done like the suggested sightseeing mode, with no enemies, after Cartographer title is complete. It would be like a reward for earning the title, now you can go look at all the breathtaking envorinments Anet created without anything wanting to eat you. Environment speed boost effect would be in order for that. And as Joe said, this should now be moved to designers, but the suggestion issues aren't resolved just yet. Rose Of Kali 16:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Guilty as charged! But ya did ask "Why", heh. ...And those are some great points Mith/Rose. Someone please move all the better details of this discussion to the Sugg pages as soon as the new wording is in place. Thx Joe! --ilr 00:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Discussions, love them but:

1. The question was answered.
2. The suggestion part, which was not mine, can go on to a suggestion page later because the original question had nothing to do with a suggestion more the capability of the engine in regards to the map. Perhaps if people wanted to move that part of this topic on to their user talk-page to continue the discussion it might be better.
3. Mith, "but such a thing would require to clean the party spawn point of hostile NPCs, and deactivate any possible enemy spaw point, otherwise you'll end up appearing in the middle of various creatures.", well that's not exactly true. Arenanet has portal spawn points that are within enemy spawn points or their patrol routes at least; a quick example would be portalling between Norrhart Domains to Bjora Marches, there is a chance you're dead or under attack by enemies even before you fully load (remembers my assassin dying here when keg farming, quite a few times) and there's also a similar occurance of this on the Droks run also and other places where patrols come dangerously close, if not within immediate aggro range of the portal and/or res-shrine spawn points. If such a map point was created it wouldn't necessarily be required to be a clean point.

Thank you, have a nice day. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 01:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I never got any of those encounters after entrance, but that's precisely the reason to clean around. Not everyone has a fast loading computer, and the stances load in the always before the client. Those spots you mention are exceptions. MithTalk 01:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I have copied this topic to my talk page if people wish to continue, and this topic therefore can be moved into archive. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 02:08, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Guild Capes

Not sure if this is even the right person to ask this, but it does seem technical soooo. Using TexMod we can find out that for some reason or another, we load 2 different textures for Guild Capes, one for ourselves and (if another member of the guild is present) one for the rest of the guild. Was wondering if you (or another programmer you knowww) could provide insight into why this was originally done. Thanks Joe! DarkNecrid 08:35, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't know. My guess would be that it's an artifact from the differences between textures used for the player's character and for other players in the world. - Joe Kimmes 17:32, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Probably. If you're wearing Elementalist Luxon armor and stand next to another Elementalist wearing Luxon armor, their armor looks like crap, while yours is in full quality, even though it's the exact same armor. Rose Of Kali 17:45, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Ooh, that actually makes sense and I forgot about that since I use the mod that fixes it. Thanks for pointing that out, that is pretty likely. :P DarkNecrid 21:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)