Talk:Polearm (weapon type)

From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Weapon set concept from GDC 2010 slideshow.

HOLY SHIT. How come I've never seen this page? --Naoroji User Naoroji Golem - Green.jpg 22:21, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

No one was particularly upset when it got scrapped. EiveTalk 22:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
You've probably seen these weapons already in another picture: -- Arduin talk 22:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I was upset when I found out polearms weren't going to be go in the game! D: --Naoroji User Naoroji Golem - Green.jpg 11:53, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Damn' i like the polearm weapon. --NeilUser Neil2250 sig icon5 Anti.png 20:11, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

"Might make an appearance later"? They already are in the game, they're called spears! It's an underwater weapon. -- 15:13, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

(Hooray for comment necromancy!) Not really. There are chat codes, such as [&AgFoWAAA] that show that polearms were in fact a completely separate class of weapon. 21:56, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Whispering Polearm[edit]

See preview code [&AgGPcgAA] ~ Sanna 18:52, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

It (kinda) exists[edit]

It's called Unimplemented Content, yet the polearm does exist in-game as a skin. Should something be done about this? The preceding unsigned comment was added by Trevor95251 (talkcontribs) at 16:31, 30 August 2018 (UTC).

Fixed by moving this to another name, and moving the existing on to the main 'Polearm' article. Thanks for bringing it to our attention! —Ventriloquist 12:36, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
No problem! Thank you for the fix, I know not many people care about underwater content since there's not a lot about it but I felt it was worth mentioning ~ Trevor95251 15:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Woops, missed this conversation. I'm vouching for a revert of the move because "Polearm (skin)" itself is referenced as "something" and not an actual ingame item a few times in both the wiki and the game. The skin itself should be fine at Polearm, just like Speargun (skin) doesn't actually use Speargun.--Lon-ami (talk) 22:14, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
The wiki usually reserves the "main" name for content that is still in game(example Wynn and Wynn (historical)), and as this isn't in game, it's named correctly. I'll move "Polearm (skin)" to Polearm after I eat since it should be using the "main" name. - Doodleplex 00:49, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
What about "non weapon type" references to the term? Like the flavor text in Lionguard Polearm.--Lon-ami (talk) 00:54, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
That's not flavor text, that dialogue is referring to the item the player is interacting with. - Doodleplex 00:57, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Still think it's a bad idea, someone looking for Polearm doesn't want to get some obscure skin. Yes, polearms are an old unimplemented thing, but that's the information readers should be getting after their first search. It was like that since 2010, and it was changed to what we have now just this August.--Lon-ami (talk) 01:49, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
So you think it is more likely that someone that uses the wiki and is searching for "Polearm" is looking for something that wasn't implemented into the game? I don't think so, because most players don't even know about this unimplemented weapon category and are searching for the skin instead. If someone is searching for the unimplemented polearms weapon category and lands on the skins page with a note that links to this article, they still get to what they were looking for without an additional search. Almdudler (talk) 02:03, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
And you think it's more likely they're searching for some obscure skin, that isn't even called the same as the items you unlock it with?
Type "Guild Wars 2 polearm" in any browser, and see what the term is popular for. The polearm skin doesn't even appear. You can try "Guild Wars 2 polearm skin" too, it doesn't appear either. I wonder which is more relevant?
If someone is searching for the polearm skin and lands on the polearm page containing a link to the skin, they still get to what they were looking for without an additional search.--Lon-ami (talk) 02:44, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
The skin is called Polearm (ingame) even if the weapon you unlock it with is not, if you see the skin inside of the wardrobe and you search for it you don't want to find an article about something that was never implemented. Also I did search for both and both times Polearm (the skin) was higher than Polearm (unimplemented content). For the game the Skin is more relevant than something that didn't make it into the game hence the skin gets the "main" name. Almdudler (talk) 03:35, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Search again and look the image gallery and the related links, the skin is nowhere to be seen.
Anyway, I'm clearly outnumbered so further discussion is pointless. Polearm for the skin, and Polearm (weapon type) for the weapon (the current page name is terrible either way).--Lon-ami (talk) 16:48, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Polearm skins converted into spear skins[edit]

Here's a list of what look like former polearm skins, which were later converted into spear skins:

Generally speaking, weapon sets follow three distribution models:

Note that most weapon set concept art dates back from when neither the aquatic weapons nor the short bow had yet been implemented.--Lon-ami (talk) 13:24, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the very thorough overview! G R E E N E R 15:34, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Updated the three distribution models with their respective weapon sets, and included an additional section with three anomalies. Note that only release weapon sets were included, since every set released afterwards falls into the first model, or has no aquatic weapon skins at all.
As an interesting note, many spear skins from the third model (unique spear skin, but duplicates for harpoon gun and trident) use dagger icons, that don't match the weapon skin models in any way whatsoever.--Lon-ami (talk) 12:02, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Gave links a new formatting, and added a few new entries.--Lon-ami (talk) 16:32, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Updated the dead links.--Lon-ami (talk) 13:12, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Reworking the article[edit]

In an attempt to stick with what we can prove, I've reworked the article a bit. I ended up removing the following two bits since they seem to be, whilst probably good guesses, still guesses.

* Multiple polearms have been introduced as [[staff]] skins since release, including [[Bo (skin)|Bo]], [[Lightward's Battlestaff]], [[Destroyer Scythe]], [[Forged Staff (skin)|Forged Staff]], [[Darkspear (skin)|Darkspear]], [[Sunscythe (skin)|Sunscythe]], and [[Sunspear (skin)|Sunspear]], among many others.
* It's likely many former polearm skins were converted into [[spear]] skins, including [[Polearm]], [[Ebon Vanguard Spear]], [[Flame Spear (skin)|Flame Spear]], [[Krytan Spear (skin)|Krytan Spear]], [[Legionnaire Spear (skin)|Legionnaire Spear]], [[Lionguard Spear (skin)|Lionguard Spear]], and [[Wolfborn Harpoon (skin)|Wolfborn Harpoon]], among many others.

-Chieftain AlexUser Chieftain Alex sig.png 16:02, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't think we need a section that's a full list of NPCs that appear to be wielding pole weapons; a brief note in trivia would be better. Additionally a polearm/pole weapon is technically any weapon on a pole, so a link to to gallery of tridents should probably be added as well. Otherwise I like the rework. - Doodleplex 16:11, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Technically any arms on a pole would be a polearm I guess...
But for the moment I think we've correctly neglected links to tridents as the "Polearm" concept art (on the right of page) is of skins that we know were used for spears. None of the weapon set concept art is nominally of tridents. Imo tridents + staves don't belong here. -Chieftain AlexUser Chieftain Alex sig.png 16:24, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Ah, okay, I'll remove the link to gallery of staves then. - Doodleplex 16:27, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
I think the list is fine, it's not like the article is excessively long in the first place.
I also think it should cover any kind of polearms which don't match the four existing polearm subtypes: Hammer, Staff, Spear, and Trident. Both one-handed and two-handed.
Only linking the spear gallery is fine with me too, it's the only one with confirmed former polearm skins anyway.--Lon-ami (talk) 13:24, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
The old list includes multiple types of weapons from a mechanical perspective, and we know from the few previewable polearms - which you provided I will add - that the weapon type is two-handed. So adding in the one-handed variants as "polearm weapon wielding NPCs" is lying to the reader from the (albeit few) facts we know. Covering "any kind of polearm" is pointless, since it's so widespread, doing so is just pure 100% speculation at that point and the wiki avoids speculation in the mainspace. We keep to what we can verify, and atm, our verification - again using the sources you provided - is that the mechanical weapon type labeled as "polearm" in this game is a two-handed weapon. Konig (talk) 00:27, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
I have a simple request, that no further edits be made on the page and that all the edits are planned and discussed here until a general consensus is reached. I have a feeling we'll get better results this way. - Doodleplex 00:42, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Okay why have we removed the notes from the gallery images that identified which weapons are land-based weapons which didn't make it into the game? -Chieftain AlexUser Chieftain Alex sig.png 07:00, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
I removed it because it kind of seems self-explanatory which of the weapon set is the spear/polearm, and as such felt like needless filler that just added characters for the sake of adding words. Since this isn't a school paper, I saw no need to expand our word count. Konig (talk) 07:22, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
To note: every weapon in those weapon set concept arts are land-based, and only one each got removed. The exception is the last two images. Konig (talk) 07:25, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
We don't know whether polearms are one-handed or two-handed. There's multiple examples of NPCs wielding them on one hand only, some even carrying shields in their off-hand.
Deleting the links to the specific weapon skins pretty much invalidates the whole point of having a concept art gallery, when you can't even reference the specific skins.
The "polearm were converted to skins" line belongs at the concept art section, not the first paragraph, and shouldn't be presented as fact.
Your wording is less than adequate. You removed phrases like "polearm weapons are no longer available for players" and replaced them with "polearms were cut as a player-accessible weapon type".
The page was perfectly fine after the edits made by Doodle and Alex, you just came with pretentious comments such as "well these are by general definition polearms even though they are completely not the polearm weapon type at all but we're still mentioning it for absolutely no reason besides an editor wants to even though they're wrong to do so", well after lying multiple times about the issue, while not bothering to check any of the given proof, not once, but multiple times, until other users started calling you out. Yet you go around calling other people "wrong".
I say the page was fine before your edits, and I say it should be reverted back.--Lon-ami (talk) 15:58, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
"We don't know whether polearms are one-handed or two-handed." Preview the weapons of those that you leaked, the ones you used to prove "Polearm" was the name. You'll find every single one was two-handed weapons. NPCs are well known on using bundles for weapons (for example, the Nightmare Courtiers that have whips for weapons). NPCs with one-handed spears/polearms are no doubt the same.
"Deleting the links to the specific weapon skins pretty much invalidates the whole point of having a concept art gallery" People can still see them. Readers are not retarded and need others to point out "okay which one's the unimplemented land weapon?" It should be sufficient to say "here's some weapon set concept art, which includes the scrapped polearm weapon". Are you really expecting that people won't know what a polearm is? And sure we can reference specific skins, but do we need to? and should we? If folks think we should, I'll easily concede on that, but IMO we don't need to, and it could be shorter than "the weapon cut is the nth from the left in this image, and it is the [[spear skin here]]." that it was.
"The "polearm were converted to skins" line belongs at the concept art section" It doesn't matter where it goes, tbh, but typically galleries are left wordless except for subtitles and image descriptions. IMO, it looks better at the top, where it's more likely to be read.
"you just came with pretentious comments" The wiki is based on fact. The article was in the beginning, and even after Alex cleaned it up, still heavily reliant on baseless speculation. You want to fan-theory, go to the userspace. And for the record, I did go check the provided proofs, but when you "provided proofs" you gave a link to this page and its talk page, and 90% of the article was "these are spears and other general polearms used above land by NPCs" and 90% of the talk page links were "these are spears which look like they were once polearms." I.e., not facts; I had gone through over half of the stuff before giving up, not finding a single source or proof of your prior claims. It wasn't until you specified the 4-or-so links out of the multi-dozen previously-provided links that I was able to find your "proof". And that proof just tells us the following:
  1. A weapon type was planned but scrapped, and we can see concept art for it in the weapon set concept arts; players called it polearm and dev did not correct name. This proves the spears in weapon set concept art were originally intended for a different use than known in-game.
  2. A couple of said weapon type still exists in the dat and (presumably) nowhere else, labeling it as "polearm", confirming weapon type name.
  3. When previewed, said weapons show two-handed idle stance and stowing on the back; for reference, Spears, Tridents, and Spearguns when previewed are held with one hand in idle stance and stowed on back, while Hammers and Greatswords, and Staves (for non-casters) are held with two hands in idle stance and stowing on the back. This proves that polearms were two-handed (primarily non-caster) land weapons.
That is all we have for facts. Everything else is similarities and player conclusions, theories, and suppositions. And while similarities can be argued to belong on mainspace, non-decisive conclusions should be left for the reader to reach, and theories and suppositions shouldn't be on the mainspace at all. Konig (talk) 17:20, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
""you just came with pretentious comments" The wiki is based on fact. " - sorry Konig but you're coming across as a complete arse here over a page that shouldn't be complex to agree on. -Chieftain AlexUser Chieftain Alex sig.png 18:23, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Erm well even if worded perhaps not the best, he's not wrong, the wiki should be based off of fact. I still don't think we need a section for "NPC's wielding pointy objects", I think that would fit better as a brief summary in the notes "a few examples are X, Y and Z", but I won't lose any sleep if everybody wants that as section either. - Doodleplex 01:24, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Wield animations don't really indicate anything. There's hammers wielded as rifles and stuff like that, and there's one-handed polearms as well. It was never implemented, so we'll never know if it was 1h, 2h, or both at once, unless a developer comes and confirms it by himself. Do I think it was 2h? Yes, but I also think there were plans for 1h terrestrial spears at some point too. I can't prove any of that, so I'm not posting it.
There's an alternative solution: Put 1h polearm trivia inside the spear article, and stick to the strict polearm weapon type in this article.--Lon-ami (talk) 20:56, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
I cleaned the whole article, and only left strict polearm information. All five mentions of NPC polearms are actual polearms, and the rest were removed since they couldn't be properly verified. Since the section is pretty small, I just moved it back to notes.
I didn't find any Risen Hylek wielding polearms of any kind, so I removed that too.--Lon-ami (talk) 21:33, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I'd like to remove the Krytan weapons from the gallery. The image that has been on this page for years is from that set, and it's repetitive imo. - Doodleplex 21:39, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

I would rather remove the Krytan Spear itself, it's low quality and it doesn't fit the page layout too well. In fact, I would remove all Krytan weapons concept art from the weapon pages anyway.--Lon-ami (talk) 22:23, 14 December 2018 (UTC)