Talk:Kessex Hills

Freezes at 95% loading in the current open Beta, locking out your character from further play. Be wary.82.11.226.30 08:09, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

That's just a loading error where the connection froze up - restart GW2 to fix it. Kessex Hills has worked fine for me, but sometimes due to lag the loading can be stalled at 95%. Konig/talk 09:32, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Nah, it's more than that. Alot of people are having the same problem, and relogging, restarting, etc, don't help. Apparently a temporary fix is to server transfer to a USA server, unstick yourself, then transfer back to your original server, which suggests the problem could be exclusive to those playing on European servers. 82.11.226.30 09:56, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Anet say they've fixed it now, so. 82.11.226.30 21:17, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Old and New

Maybe we should make a different page or something fo KEssex Hills pe tower of nightmares, during and after.

-wouw

Isgarren's View

Pretty sure the map has changed as of BWE2... the area is called Wizard's... something. Fief? And Isgarren's View was changed to a Point of Interest. I should've taken a screen, darnit. Redshift 13:00, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I just saw some map shot of Wizard's Fief somewhere on this wiki. ;p So that's changed. Mediggo 13:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Lynchcroft Mere

this map indicates a point of interest in this sylvari village, there is not a point of interest there as of 8/29/12. it also doesn't show a point of interest just south of Cereboth Canyon

Wierd, seems that if you dont get the lynchcroft POI this shows up instead. This is as of 10-20-1272.253.181.235 06:08, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

anywho thats Mafic Core which is access via the destroyer cave in the destroyer pit. Special:Contributions/192.168.104.82

Wizard's Fief

People in game are saying we can reach Wizard's Fief, i dont think so, but could not hurt to add some info about this on the page. TulipVorlax 00:54, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Wizard's Fief is the southeastern-most area of this zone, it contains 2 points of interest and a skill point. You can definitely reach it. What you can't reach is the floating Wizard's Tower. —Dr Ishmael 14:40, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Is there any reference in GW2 to Galrath? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.186.18.236 (talk).

Old Kessex Hills?

This - and Lion's Arch - really need interactable maps. Emphasis being on interactible, since the old map is shown in the Gallery section. If I know GW2 wiki editors, there used to be one. We probably can't get an interactable version anymore, but if there used to be one on the wiki (one that hasn't been deleted yet) we could put it on something like Old Kessex Hills if it's too troublesome to put it on the main page. Has this already been done somewhere, because somebody did mention this farther up the talk page. ~~TiffanySmith.8216 02:16, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

I agree completely. There already exist pages for two of the many versions of Lion's Arch:

• Lion's Arch (Under Attack!)
• Lion's Arch (Enemy Controlled)

We should have pages for the rest as well, specially those with different events and NPCs:

• [[Kessex Hills (Original)]]
• [[Kessex Hills (Tower of Nightmares)]]
• [[Lion's Arch (Original)]]
• [[Lion's Arch (Aftermath)]]
• [[Southsun Cove (The Lost Shores)]]

Full support.--Lon-ami (talk) 17:03, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

The LA maps from the S1 finales were more of open world instances, so they are more deserving of their own articles, while the others were just alterations to the actual open world map. The changes for Southsun are beyond minimal to be worthwhile. And only a third of Kessex ever changed, so I'm unsure that'd be worthwhile. Most of the time, when we had managed to make the documentations of major changes, we have the old stuff on a /historical subpage. Rather than creating twenty+ new pages for all the open world changes at every turn, it might be more worthwhile to create a better navigation to Season 1 changes/content. I had tried beginning such by restructuring The Lost Shores/Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3 pages, but ended up being distracted by real life to carry on into Flame and Frost and on. Would that be enough to your liking, Lon-ami? Konig (talk) 18:07, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

They don't need to be fully-fledged pages, just some kind of log for the events would suffice. Somewhere we can see the whole set of things before they changed.

LA original and LA aftermath are a must, since they have tons of NPCs and dialogues, and the landscape changed significantly enough. I would make pages for the areas as well, instead of leaving them in some subsection like Farshore Ward/historical. Minor changes like the Mad King's entrance, the lighthouse destroyed by the karka, the construction barrages with the karka hatchlings, etc, can be noted under the closest version in time, they don't need standalone pages.

The other three, I'm not sure if there's enough content, depends on what we find while we look around. And of course, really minor stuff like the Molten Alliance raids during Flame and Frost and Twisted Marionette don't deserve their own zone pages, since the events themselves should cover everything there is to them. In these cases, maybe duplicate the areas, instead of the whole zone.

Maybe the best approach is this:

• New zone pages for [[Lion's Arch (original)]], [[Lion's Arch (Aftermath)]], and [[Labyrinthine Cliffs (Bazaar of the Four Winds)]] with new area pages for the whole zone.
• For everything else (including Southsun Cove, Wayfarer's Foothills, Diessa Plateau, Kessex Hills, Lornar's Pass, etc), new area pages, but no new zone pages. After all, only parts of the zones changed. If the changes weren't too huge (Flame and Frost only added some minor towns), it can be noted in the current page. For example, [[False River Valley]] would have two other versions: [[False River Valley (original)]] and [[False River Valley (Origins of Madness)]].
• Points of interest don't have a lot of information inside anyway, so they don't need a split.

Then each current zone/area would have a link where we can easily access past versions of it.--Lon-ami (talk) 19:37, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Those subpages are "pages for the areas" that "log for the events [...] where we can see the whole set of things before they changed." Whether or not they're fully documented is another matter. And honestly, there's zero difference between a Farshore Ward/historical and [[Farshore Ward (original)]]. Or "False River Valley (original)" and "False River Valley/historical".

I'd disagree with new area pages, though. One singular page would suffice, and it'd be best to document alongside the releases imo, since the changes were always story-correlated. You'd just be making a flood of small articles that are hard to navigate and correlate between each other and the whole, if you went area by area. Which is a huge problem for trying to navigate S1 stuff as it is. IMO, only LA deserves area articles because of how much content existed and changed, and that's for pre-EfLA stuff only. No need for area-by-area of the invaded version unless it's to document enemy NPCs (which is not possible to accurately do anymore). Konig (talk) 21:55, 23 June 2019 (UTC)