Talk:Renown Heart

From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


Completetion rewards table (xp,karma, coin)[edit]

From what i've seen the xp and coin rewards given by hearts on completion are the same and are based on the recommend level they all seem to follow a geometric progression. Maybe we should create a table of the rewards given by hearts based on the level? --Dr.Mobius 21:09, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

last renown heart[edit]

so where is heart number 301?--Relyk 15:25, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Should these two pages be combined?[edit]

I saw that there is also a page Renown heart NPC, they seem redundant and some of the NPC pages link to that one, some point to this one. CranSnap 00:00, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

No, this page is about the 'task' and the one you reffered to is about the 'task givers'. As the pages are comming to an existence–with the right infobox/template–these pages will be automatically be in the right category. Have al look at Caledon Forest or Metrica Province their renown heart and npc being listed correctly. – Trolloli "I wasn't born, I spawned" 00:21, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Carrier Pigeon[edit]

I really want to just add something to this page, but I'll ask before doing anything, a long time ago I noticed that when you complete a renown heart and the NPC sends you mail, its delivered instantaneously by a carrier pigeon flying across the UI. I'm sure other people have noticed this too, but I just want it added to the trivia maybe, since its directly related to completing the heart, it IS trivial, and well.. its cute. Puk 07:54, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

You get that pigeon everytime you get a mail.

My bad, I finished quite a few hearts before I ever got my first mail from another source. Puk 02:39, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
You also get that "pigeon" when selling or listing items on the trading post. 32.212.104.223 18:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

I would like streamlined access to SPECIFICS[edit]

It puzzles me that the front page links to this explanation of what Renown Hearts are, rather than directly to a list of Renown Hearts (that might start with this explanation). IMO, most people who come to this wiki are looking for SPECIFICS. (Agree/disagree?). Also, I was not familiar with the wiki lingo (that "Category:xxx" provided a list of "xxx"). What I would like is to have the main page have a link that says "List of Renown Hearts". At the very least, I would like the link at the bottom of this page to use the plain English "List of Renown Hearts". So, I will attempt that change, and see what people think... Ssquester 08:46, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah, never mind. My "skimming" skipped over the table that lists regions, which contains links to the renown hearts per region. I think this is why: I had previously seen such a table, on the regions page or somewhere. I subconsciously thought "I'm not looking for a list of regions, I'm looking for a list of NPCs or heart events". I will ponder if there is any way to help someone else who has a similar blindspot. Ssquester 08:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Another reason I had a blindspot re this table: it is way down at the bottom. Even after "references"!! IMHO, this is incorrect prioritization. What percentage of newbies who come to this page are looking for this table? (My guess: 99%+). Moving the table earlier in the page, so that it will be seen more quickly. Ssquester 09:31, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
I'll add a link to main page editcopy to Category:Lists of hearts by region but the navi table on this article should remain at the bottom as is custom for all navi tables. Mediggo 09:55, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
That is not a table it is a navigation bar. That is a diffrence! Navigation bars belong always to the bottom. I also think that it is unneccessay to link to articles on the main page which are reachable by the main article. The nav allows you to get to the hearts by region, so linking to the category which does the same, doesn't even save you clicks. - Yandere Talk to me... 10:03, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
OK, I understand. However, this does not address my primary concern. A newbie (such as me) coming to this page won't even see that nav bar, unless they scroll past a lot of information that (I bet) they don't really care about. If I am correct, then there is a prioritization problem here. Fundamental principle: what most people are looking for, they should see right away, BEFORE wading through a lot of stuff they aren't looking for. Am I wrong about what most people are looking for when they come here, or am I right? If I am right, then how can we address this concern? Ssquester 10:11, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
And to make my point again: I failed to even SEE that nav table the first time I came to this page. That's why I have been harping on this topic of SPECIFICS COME EARLY. Sure, it would have been better if I had been more thorough in examining what was here before moving on. But I bet I'm not the only stupid newbie, who sees a bunch of technical details that overwhelm them and they don't care about, and give up and look elsewhere... Ssquester 10:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Re "I also think that it is unneccessay to link to articles on the main page which are reachable by the main article. The nav allows you to get to the hearts by region, so linking to the category which does the same, doesn't even save you clicks." No, you misunderstand the benefit. It isn't about saving clicks. Its about the well documented fact that the vast majority of readers of any web page have in mind some specific fact they are looking for, and don't have the patience to read through a bunch of stuff. What people do is "skim": they glance around the page looking for a link that sounds like it might be close to what they want. Therefore, the way to serve the widest audience, is to make sure that regardless of what phrase is in their head, they quickly notice a link that takes them closer to where they want to be. It isn't about saving clicks. It is about each click having a good probability of getting someone closer to where they are going. However, because each person is different, what each person is looking for is a bit different. If someone isn't on the page that has the information they were hoping to find, then having a few "See Also" links to the correct pages is the fastest way to help those specific people. Understand this: clicks are cheap. Comprehending a page full of information is expensive. Ssquester 10:26, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
That is an interesting problem. The all location sections - and reknown hearts belong to this to a degree - gets a general make over. If you are interested in this we have the Project Cartography which has a lot of motivated people there who want to adress these problems and try to give the whole location part of the wiki a goos structure so that is easy for most people to use this part of the wiki.
At the moment I do not understand your problem. I didn't encounter such a problem, when I was new to the whole wiki thing. So I am not really sure what we have to fix. The first sentence and the bottom of the page should have a good structure imo, because mos people read the first sentence and scroll to the bottom of the page. Tables and lists are usually eye catcher so if you want to highlight some information, listing these things usually does the trick. Did that help you? - Yandere Talk to me... 10:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Oi, you are editing very fast. On the thing with the reachability. You are mostly right, that's why we use nav bars. Usually people scroll down to the bottom of the page, and find naviagtion help there including the categorisation. I don't now why, but navigation is usually on the bottom in wikis. I actually never thought about that before. The nav is not harder to read than the category, a good made nav is in fact easier to read than a category page. But as far as I understand you have problems with the nav bar being on the bottom of the page? - Yandere Talk to me... 10:35, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, the bottom. Apparently I browse the web differently than what you just described. I only use links at the bottom of a page as a last resort. Almost never. I've been to thousands of web pages, and I'm used to nav bars at top or an edge, not scrolling to the bottom of a page. What's referred to as "below the fold": web designers are taught that information that is not visible when a reader first sees a page, is likely to be missed by half (or more) of the readers of a page. So apparently I'm not the only reader with this blindspot... However, I agree that tables leap out. So consider it a random brain glitch that I missed this table... Ssquester 10:42, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) A kind of a list or table could (should!) be created on the article, but the navigation table should stay where it belongs, at the bottom of the page. Categories aren't truly purposed to navigate between the pages in search of information (they can be used for viewing pages but their actual purpose is for editing purposes), so linking to them is only a temporary solution. I'm not sure what's the deal with [[List of hearts in Ascalon]] and other region lists but there's only four of those so there could be a small table with links to those regions and lists of their hearts as well as some quick facts like the number of hearts in a region or something else more relevant. Mediggo
I personally never scroll to the bottom of a page instinctively. I find it rather annoying on this wiki that the useful links are at the bottom of the pages and would personally prefer them at the top for quick navigation among pages. Bluestone 10:45, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
I actually never said, that it is good to have the navigation on the bottom. It is usually on the bottom on many wikis. I never thought about this why or if this is a good thing or not. But that topic is probably something for the community page. The whole list of x in y pages should get a general update. A far was I know there will be e technical solution for this problem. - Yandere Talk to me... 10:53, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) A wiki (especially GW2W) is not your standard database webpage. The contents of the article and detailing its subject take priority over navigation. If you want to look for a list of mesmer skills, you don't want to have an eyeful of huge navi table listing links to all "list of profession skills" articles. Mediggo 10:54, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Not what I meant by my comment at all but I'm not going to get into that here. Bluestone 10:55, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
IF I was already ON one of the pages that list hearts, THEN having that nav table (whether at top or bottom) would make sense to me. When I clicked on "Renown Hearts" on the Main Page, what I was expecting was a "Table of Contents" of the Renown Hearts". If the main page had taken me straight to that "Nav table" I would have been thrilled. With maybe a couple of sentences explaining what Renown Hearts were. Then I would have known were I was. I wasn't expecting a lengthy technical explanation. I had given up on the page as useless, before realizing the table was there.
I don't care what the convention is: I believe that 99% of the people who click on the main page link are looking for those per-region list pages, or something similar. The current page design has the wrong emphasis. IMHO, getting to lists of events should be the PRIMARY purpose of this page, not just what is in a Nav table at the bottom.
See what I mean? ONCE you are on one of those pages, the nav table makes sense as a nav table. But on the FIRST page you see, somehow that information needs to be CENTRAL to the page. Am I making sense? Ssquester 11:02, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Yeah I think I get what you mean. I've done a little rewrite of the article, I think now everything should be better to find. Thoughts? - Yandere Talk to me... 11:14, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) Yeah, I'm totally not saying there wasn't a problem (now fixed by Yandere right there!) that the article lacked proper navigational links to the lists. However, AFAIK, you're the first one to have this kind problem with this article, so I wouldn't bet on that 99%. :P I hope the solution put forth by Yandere is satisfying you. Mediggo 11:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
I like it -- works for impatient link-clickers like me. P.S. the other 98% probably managed to find the table DESPITE it being at the bottom, but I bet they still clicked on it once they found it :P Ssquester 11:26, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Bear in mind that the first to comment on something is rarely the first to notice. So it shouldn't be a reason to bench the concept (not that it was benched here, just a thought to consider for future topics). Bluestone 19:55, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Limited mail box space[edit]

Added note to page about limit of these messages that the game will keep in the mail box. It is verifiable information, so if you have problems with the wording, fix the wording, don't remove a valid entry as seems to be the tendency. 69.177.224.31 20:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Does anyone know if there is a way to see for sure if the game also deletes the gold reward from completing a gold heart? I tried to see, but could not verify if that was the case or not. 69.182.134.5 04:22, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Adding renown heart nav to page[edit]

I feel like it might be useful to add the renown heart nav to the bottom of the page. Yes there is a navigation panel to the right, but given that the 'title' of the nav links back to here; I feel it would be more 'complete' to also have the nav present here.

Are there any strong oppositions to this? -Darqam (talk)

Contributing events format question[edit]

I've seen a couple different formatting ways for them - is there a consensus for which is preferred/accurate? I've seen a bullet point and then the event symbol and hyperlink, and then other pages where there is no bullet point before them. Which is the preferred format? — Muirellthe Moon

It should look like this:
===Contributing events===
:{{event|event name here}}
That's the formatting for event inclusion on articles such as NPCs or hearts. —Ventriloquist 11:34, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you so much! — Muirellthe Moon

Regions[edit]

It looks like the list is becoming inconsistent. We have some areas from LW episodes being given their own small domains (Ring of Fire) but others that have different map regions are lumped together (Vabbi, Kourna, Isle of Istan). Ring of Fire counts at Heart of Maguuma for daily purposes, so which way do you want it? SarielV 20 x 20px 08:13, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Mounting Tips[edit]

With the arrival of the mounts it is possible to transport the objects of a task without fear of losing them when damage is received.