Talk:Ring of Fire

Untitled

Me thinks island would be flooded. Canidate for deletion...--24.47.41.80 01:16, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

We don't know whether its flooded or not, and since it seems o have been taken over by the orrian dragon, it would make sense that its still on the surface. But meh, what do I know these days about GW2? not much. Sensical Measures 22:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

If the island has been taken over by undead and a flaming sword lies there, I doubt it's been totally flooded. It might be one of those areas in which the aim is to clear out the undead and get the sword back to Ascalon. It's likely that it will be the last stage of the game (similar to the structure of Prophecies). Of course, that's just speculation. -- Pling \ talk 00:57, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Only for humans, though. I doubt a Charr would bring the sword back to Ascalon. Cress Arvein 21:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Well...if a player's character is a Charr...it could end up being part of the plot...ya know...like Pyre joining our side in GWEN.-- Shew 16:13, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

chances are that each race will have their own storyline to follow that intertwines at different points. but back to the point i reckon that a huge volcano with a bloodstone and a gateway to a tormented realm might have some significance.

Shards of Orr are underwater caves. You never know if are ever going underwater. There could be even a blessing allowing people to breath underwater for a long time given by Grenth, to let people go to underwater areas for days. We know we are going to be able to swim. So things to do underwater are in order. 91.117.187.8 09:46, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Uhm.

"On the largest island there is a bloodstone, the Door of Komalie, and is also the last known location of the sword Sohothin. It is unknown what role, if any, this area will play in Guild Wars 2."

Isent that like saying "xxxxx is the president,but probly wont have any effect on the future"? --Neil2250 , The Zoologist 12:37, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Lemme Re-phrase this.im meaning that of corse its going to have something to do with GW2,being that 3 major points(not including dragon/undead) are there >_> --Neil2250 , The Zoologist 12:37, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Nothing says the bloodstone, nor the Door of Komalie, will be part of the storyline in GW2. Nothing says the islands still exist due to the rise of orr (it could of flooded/sunk, and thus no longer be a ring of fire). Nothing says that Sohothin will be playing a part in the game, as it could either be taken care of in a book (dull but plausible), or the players may focus on Magdaer instead of Sohothin. As such, it very much is unknown to be part of GW2 - too many variables. All we know of Zhaitan's forces is that they patrol the Strait of Malchor, which is more likely to be the point between Orr and the Shards of Orr instead of Orr and the Ring of Fire, due to it being a strait (and not a series of straits). -- Konig/talk 16:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

It has been said that the bloodstones will play a role in GW2. Even if partially submerged (they won't be completely underwater), GW2 is, conveniently, integrating under water play. It will still be the ring of fire if it's under water. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 19:20, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Where was it said that the bloodstones will play a role in GW2? I have never heard of this. Edit: And even then, there are four other bloodstones, so it doesn't necessarily mean that this bloodstone will be in playing a part in GW2. -- Konig/talk 20:23, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

But the Bloodstones were first one Bloodstone, so I think if one plays are role, all will play a role ;D VihoSA 18:34, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that your argument is past experience. In Prophecies, there are two bloodstones that play a role, not five. In Eye of the North, there is one bloodstone that plays a role, not five. In GW1 as a whole, it's just three bloodstones. -- Konig/talk 20:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Suggested move

To start this off, as of now I'm fairly certain that the only reason this page has the name it does is because of GWW. I don't think we have any legitimate reason to keep the name the same. Especially since, because of Zhaitan's raising, most people probably don't even know if it exists anymore. Eive 18:06, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

The map names it "Ring of Fire" so ye. It's also not really an island chain anymore. - Infinite - talk 18:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree, the only reason for its current name was consistency with the gw1 article which isn't necessary because this doesn't exist in gw2. -- Konig/talk 18:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

BTW, it's still an island chain. Those words just aren't part of the name. -- Konig/talk 18:52, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

No it's not. :P - Infinite - talk 18:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't even know if there was a reason to call it the "Ring of Fire Island Chain" in GW1 either. The manuscripts say "Ring of Fire" and I don't recall (although I am usually wrong on these things) any mention of it with that specific name. Eive 18:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

"neighboring islands which are roughly aligned" that's what the Ring of Fire is. A group of neightboring islands which are roughly aligned. Not as much as most islands in rl, but enough. In gw2, there's fewer islandss, but it's still an island chain... With three main islands. And Eive, as I mentioned above, the reason why gww calls it Ring of Fire Island Chain is due to the conflict with the mission called "Ring of Fire" (and its outpost). Though technically, over there it should be called "Ring of Fire (islands)" or something, for consistency. -- Konig/talk 23:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Either way, the name still doesn't fit, here nor on GWW. I don't much care for GWW so I don't care what happens to it over there, but we should move the page here. Eive 05:30, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Regardless of how scattered the Ring of Fire islands are now, I suppose it's trivial so I agree with the move. - Infinite - talk 11:26, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Name 2.0

Apparently at PAX East it was called "Ring of Fire Archipelago." May be a better name than "Ring of Fire (location)" but instead of slapping a move tag, I just figured to bring it up. It also won't be explorable in the initial release (along with the Crystal Desert) - this I'm putting on the article. [1] -- Konig/talk 19:59, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

delete?

i vote no - its still part of the lore and it's featured on the maps on the maps in the books - it's like deleting the domain of winds, cantha or elona for not being part of the initial release Getefix 22:53, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Since it is on the GW2 maps, I also disagree with deletion. A GW2 player would not know to visit GWW for something seen on his GW2 map. The area isn't playable, but it is still present in the game. pling 23:28, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I also disagree with a delete. Though little we know of this area, we know that Zhaitan's minions have overrun it and that a massive change has occured due to the rising of Orr. Furthermore we have the lore from GW1 carrying over. We know that it's a landmark and we know its current state, it's just not explorabe during the initial release. If only for a user wanting to territory-check, this page contains vital information. - Infinite - talk 23:29, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I also vote no, as per Drakkar Lake, Grothmar Wardowns, gw1:Dzalana, gw1:Orr, and so forth. Just because we can't visit a place doesn't mean it holds no value to the game. It exists in the game, it exists in the lore, we can see it, we just can't virtually step on it. -- Konig/talk 23:53, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

The lore by itself is IMO no reason to keep this page; we could link to the same article on GW1W. My doubt is if the Ring of Fire will even be mentioned at all in GW2. I haven't tagged the Crystal Desert for deletion since it has been said we will be able to see the desert from a distance in GW2, so I'm guessing it will eventually be mentioned, but as far as we know the Ring of Fire won't be part of the new game. Erasculio 00:12, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

What Konig said. (Xu Davella 00:40, 26 March 2011 (UTC))

To expand, the information on this page is GW2 related. You wont get mention of Zhaitan's forces taking and reshaping that area if it was in GW1. Everything else on that page states that it is a mass of land that one can see if they were to look at a map of GW2, where it is so named.(Xu Davella 00:44, 26 March 2011 (UTC))

(Edit conflict) For the records, both Drakkar Lake and Grothmar Wardowns are within the "Articles possibly not relevant to GW2" category. Erasculio 00:45, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like a compromise. :) --Xu Davella 00:51, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

TBH, I was going to put that category on this article. That's a much better situation than deleting. As Xu Davella said, there is information that can only be found on this wiki because it's unrelated to the gww. It still exists, we can see it - just on the map rather than from a character's view - and it is a part of GW2's lore (hence why I didn't put the category on). The articles within that category are those which we don't even know will exist in GW2. The Ring of Fire still does exist. -- Konig/talk 00:59, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Needs to be moved to Regions

Since Ember Bay from the upcoming September 20th patch is in the Ring Of Fire, maybe you should move it from Other Regions to Regions ahead of time? --68.83.160.10 01:01, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Given that this hasn't been confirmed by anet directly; I don't think this will be done yet. Granted the article is probably genuine but unless it is official, the wiki usually doesn't reflect it. -Darqam (talk) 01:32, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Developer responses in the reddit thread for that article have pretty much confirmed it. https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/51fx02/news_guild_wars_2_episode_2_drops_sept_20_takes/ --68.83.160.10 02:23, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Depends on what region Ember Bay will mechanically be a part of, though. If actions taken in it count for a certain region for dailies, then it's part of that region, not a new one. We'll have to wait and see --Gimmethegepgun (talk) 04:30, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

It's not a new Region it's in the Ring Of Fire Islands. Currently the navigation bar at the bottom of this page has them in "Other Regions". I suggested that they be moved to "Regions" in preparation for the patch. It's a small pre-emptive fix. --68.83.160.10 15:20, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

What I mean is, we don't actually know what region it will be in. Yes, it's in the Ring of Fire, but will it mechanically be a new zone, or will the new map, as far as the game is concerned, be in an existing zone like HoM or Maguuma Jungle? We won't know that until it's released --Gimmethegepgun (talk) 23:13, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

How it shows up in infoboxes

Currently it shows up as "Ring of Fire (location)" and that's not very pretty. However, there are 4 things named Ring of Fire, so it's not as simple as just switching it and as such "Ring of Fire" should probably be a disambiguation(wait I can spell that word?!) page. Is it possible to fix the area infobox to not show "location" or is the only way to just move whatever is currently there to another name and moving this page to "Ring of Fire"? - Do_odleplex 23:23, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

It should, and indeed previously did, show up as Ring of Fire. I'm not entirely sure what happened but this page suddenly lost all properties (as opposed to say Kryta; the important property in question is Has canonical name), despite no apparent changes to this page or the infobox which sets the property values, so unfortunately my knowledge for fixing it is insufficient. Whatever the case, it is definitely technically possible to show like that without moving the page. 23:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Edit: So, a random edit to the page seems to have fixed it (I guess it was some sort of caching issue), hopefully it won't break again. ^^ 23:55, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Awesome! Probably should still make a disambiguation page, but eh, things to do after I'm done eating dinner heh. - Do_odleplex 00:00, 21 September 2016 (UTC)