Talk:Elemental Attunement

From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Does this stack with all the adept minor traits from all lines, seeing as those are exactly the same for each attunement as this trait. Else this would be pretty useless imo. Can anyone please confirm or burst this one, perhaps in the upcoming server stress test? Thx in advance.

The minor traits aren't the same, as they don't provide boons. This trait does. Gnarf 11:26, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
For a more general answer: This trait grants "standard" boons, all of which have stacking mechanics, so it will stack with every other source of those effects. Might stacks in intensity, while Regeneration, Swiftness and Protection stack in duration. So if you (or anyone else affected) already have Might, this will make you even mightier. If you already have Regeneration, Swiftness or Protection from another source, this will add to the duration. - Alltat 10:36, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


Do we know the added duration of these? 20:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC) Kupek

Durations have been added to notes Diorexity 11:34, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


Does anyone know why the areas aren't the same size? 21:49, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


I think that the API itself is wrong (beta after all), the % reduction on attunement recharge + boon duration are stronger, therefore the anomaly lies in the API, not in the wiki. – Valento msg 11:42, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

yeah the wiki is here to document the game first and foremost, so document it how the trait window is. -Chieftain AlexUser Chieftain Alex sig.png 11:46, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Although I love the API and what guys have been doing with it, I trust muuuuch more on in-game texts. We should add a practice of not going by the API when tagging things as anomalies or bugs, specially when it's so hard to verify if that anomaly/bug is true (can't be proven). – Valento msg 11:56, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Uh... what? This trait doesn't do anything about attunement recharge or boon duration.
The "beta" part of the API is only with the API itself - the data is pulled straight from the game. —Dr Ishmael User Dr ishmael Diablo the chicken.png 12:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I phrased awkwardly, but what I meant is that Elemental Enchantment is much more worth a grandmaster than Elemental Attunement, so it's more likely their in-game texts describe what they really are (or should be). – Valento msg 12:38, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I see... that is strange. Still, like I said, the API pulls its data directly from the game data, so it can't be "wrong" - but maybe the game doesn't utilize it the way we would expect. For example, the game may not pay any attention to a trait's "tier" value, and it uses something else (that isn't exposed in the API) to determine the layout of traits within a specialization. —Dr Ishmael User Dr ishmael Diablo the chicken.png 13:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
When considering tier, that's only true for minor traits. The game must know exactly what major adept, master, and grandmaster traits are for balancing purposes, what it can neglect is ordering from within a tier, which is inexistant for minor traits. – Valento msg 13:48, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, even the game window has conflicting data: (using the numbering from the API as reference), the traits list on the left side is in the order of 1,2,3 (top to bottom), while the specialization order is 1,3,2 (left to right), and training panel is 1,3,2. --BryghtShadow (talk) 14:20, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Well, guys, just remember it may become difficult to document all anomalies/bugs in such a low level, and you may turn several articles into some sort of bug-report clusters due to the amount of inconsistency between in-game texts and the API. – Valento msg 14:44, 11 August 2015 (UTC)