Talk:Temple armor

→ moved from Talk:Temple armor

Not really a fan of the fact that you can't get a full set of any Heavy armour with the same stats. Do we really need 5 Helms with Magi prefix? Magua 13:17, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree 100%. I think the armor mods should match the exotic trinkets the vendor carries. For example, Dwayna could carry Rabid armor. --Kristofferus (talk) 04:52, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Collective name

Can't we call these specific like God armor sets instead of an arbitrary name...--Relyk ~ talk > 01:20, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

God armor is just as arbitrary as this is. And the Whispering armor isn't related on any god. —Dr Ishmael 01:22, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

...Shards of Orr armor--Relyk ~ talk > 01:25, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

It's not that arbitrary: is there another source of exotic armor via karma? People in-game refer to it as exotic karma armor or temple armor. I don't think I've seen other terms used. 75.36.182.128 01:27, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

temple armor would be better.--Relyk ~ talk > 01:35, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Whispering armor isn't sold at a temple, so that name is also 17% inaccurate. This is the only exotic armor available for karma, so Exotic karma armor is honestly the best fit. —Dr Ishmael 02:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Whether accurate or not, in-game, people call it temple armor. I don't care which name the wiki uses as long as it doesn't invent a new one. "God Armor" is logical, but I've never heard of anyone using it. For what it's worth, dulfy calls it exotic karma armor. Or at least, she calls it "karma armor" under the "exotic" category of her gearing guide. 75.36.182.128 03:23, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Temple armor already exists, I just realized. We should probably merge. —Dr Ishmael 14:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

(Reset indent) your latest merge lost information. Specifically: one of the pages had a simple table that showed just the temples, vendors, and the armor name, which made it easy to find them. 75.37.21.155 19:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Merge

→ moved from Talk:Temple armor

I think the article that is suggested to be merged with this one is VERY convoluted. Often people aren't looking for full stats, and just for basics. Perhaps if the stats were at the bottom of the page, and collapsible, it wouldn't look so messy. --Kristofferus (talk) 04:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Rune suffix (of <god>)

There seems to be some disparity between the pages listed here.

• Arcon armor of Dwayna - currently has suffix
• Armageddon armor of Balthazar - currently has suffix
• Aurora armor of Melandru - doesn't have suffix
• Mortal armor of Grenth - currently has suffix
• Rubicon armor of Lyssa - doesn't have suffix
• Whispering armor of Infiltration - currently has suffix

I personally think that these items should be listed without the rune suffix, I just want confirmation before thinking about moving them.

Also, since the icons for all sets are the same we should probably use the generic icons currently used for "Whispering armor of Infiltration" on all of the pages. In which case I'll tag the files for deletion after moving the pages above. -Chieftain Alex 16:10, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, rune/sigil/jewel suffixes should never be included in pagenames. They are not inherent to the item; they are derived from the upgrade component, which can be replaced. —Dr Ishmael 14:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

My eyes hurt, but I've moved + updated 3 sets, including using generalised icons. -Chieftain Alex 00:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Armageddon armor a good name

Some pieces of this armor, with the upgrade slot empty, drop from Fractals of the Mists, account bound, with various different stat combinations. They are called "Light Armageddon", "Medium Armageddon" and "Heavy Armageddon". Considering the PvP armor is called PvP Armageddon for Light and Heavy, I think it's pretty obvious this should be the official name from now on.

I'll wait a bit for any possible discussion before moving the gallery images.--Lon-ami (talk) 17:18, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the armor which drops from fractals with these names are masterwork, and they DON'T use the same skins as these. Instead, they use the default masterwork armor appearance which drops at level 68-80. I want to know if you meant "This armor is available as loot drops, too." as referring to the exact appearance as the exotic Armageddon armor (or Temple/Exotic Karma/whatever). If you did, then the statement is false and should be removed. IceBlink (talk) 20:25, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

If it's not the same skin, then the name "Armageddon armor" is indeed wrong, as you say. Lon-ami, you probably should've waited a bit longer before moving the images. —Dr Ishmael 20:45, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Want screenshots? It does drop, exotic. I have the shoulders without any rune inside. I can't prove I got them from FotM, however (maybe if I lurked through all my screenshots for chance I got a shot).--Lon-ami (talk) 00:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

By the way: http://www.gw2db.com/search?search=armageddon :).--Lon-ami (talk) 00:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Just because it's on GW2DB is no proof that it actually drops anywhere. By counterpoint: http://www.gw2spidy.com/search/armageddon?rarity_filter=5 —Dr Ishmael 00:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Chest exotic drops on FotM are usually account bound, as is this case (as I stated above), and thus don't appear at any website listing stuff from the trading post.--Lon-ami (talk) 00:25, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I've seen exotic and masterwork with the word Armageddon. I don't think they are the same skin. Also, I don't agree that because there are a few sets of non-temple armor with the same name that this means there's an official name for the skin. ANet is among the worst sources for attempting to determine a consistent and official naming convention. Remember how long we had loadstones and lodestones, the number of misclassified armor items, the still existing rare minor runes. I'm not saying we shouldn't use anet, but let's not rely on them to establish clarity. Let's do some verification on our own first.

Regardless of this specific case, no one on the wiki should rename a lot of articles or images without working with the community. It's always easier to discuss things before a move and everyone trusts the results better. Moving before a consensus puts everyone in a bad mood, including the person who first had the idea. 75.37.18.52 00:40, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I did miss the account-bound note in your OP. Still, the fact that both exotic and masterwork versions drop with the same name makes the name at best ambiguous and at worst meaningless; additionally, one variant of the temple/karma armor also uses that name (Balthazar), and using one out of 6 variant names as the overall name for the skin just makes it more ambiguous.

"Temple armor" and "(Exotic) Karma armor" are the names that nearly everyone uses to refer to this skin, so in light of the ambiguities around the "Armageddon armor" name, I recommend we move this back to where it was. —Dr Ishmael 02:12, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Let's wait for more opinions. Still, my arguments:

• All the sets availabe in temples have their runeless Armageddon variant, together with an extra variant
• Most of the karma armors never follow a good enough pattern for naming
• PvP Armor is called Armageddon, too

And the promised screenshots: 1 2 3 4.

I think it's pretty obvious the name is Armageddon.--Lon-ami (talk) 10:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

You're ignoring my points about ambiguity and confusion. —Dr Ishmael 13:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Many existing sets have repeated names. Rogue, Duelist, Acolyte, Pit Fighter... Also, the masterwork armageddon drops have already another stablished name (Cabalist / Pirate / Reinforced Scale). We can't be talking about ambiguity for this case while ignoring the others, some with worse situations.

Maybe we should make this bigger and focus giving each skin a name.--Lon-ami (talk) 13:59, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

This was a poor choice for an article name. Each set still has its own proper name, while Armageddon is specific to Balthazar. The fact that there are also fractal drops using this name means you need further disambiguation for the name Armageddon, since the fractal drops are clearly unrelated to the temple vendor items. What you've done here is taken an overloaded name and then added even more items under it, which don't even share that name. This topic should have remained at a generic title. Please undo these changes until there is a consensus for a new naming convention. 76.253.2.43 00:47, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree with him. It's true that all the armors use the Armageddon skin, but these are a unique subset of the common skin. Seeing as this page deals specifically with that subset, it seems strange to have it take the name of the skin. Also, no one actually refers to them as Armageddon armor. When they use that name, they're just talking about the drops.98.237.78.12 16:24, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Not salvageable

Since someone added a note on Rune of Lyssa that Rubicon armor cannot be salvaged, I assume none of this can be salvaged. We might have it noted somewhere that "all karma rewards cannot be salvaged," but since this page in particular lists things that people would generally want to salvage, it should be noted here. So I added a note. 16:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

page name

so, given that there was a lot of wind above about the page title being poorly chosen, shall we move this to Temple armor? -Chieftain Alex 19:00, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes please. —Dr Ishmael 19:09, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Why was it ever here in the first place? Temple armor is the only rational page name. The only solution to the great question based on reason. Psycho Robot (talk) 00:18, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

just call this place chieftainalexwiki. x.X all those moves n deletes. -Chieftain Alex 10:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Prefix availability table

I've just changed it such that:

• that the icons are a bit larger
• borders between different piece types
• variables instead of fully typed out things (just for ease of editing, no real reason.

I'm thinking that if I went back and replaced the variables with the full wikicode, I could make each of the icons link to the correct item, and then we wouldn't need any of the tables that follow it!

I'm going to go make dinner now with the intention of doing this when I return. if anyone wants to stop me/change something/comment, a good time would be before I spend ages hunting down the items :P -Chieftain Alex 21:24, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it's worth it. There's no need to mush prefix availability for all three weights into one table. Players looking for a light armor set don't care about the prefixes for other weights. Trying to combine them together just makes the table more complicated and harder to understand. My intent in separating the mega article into pages for the different weights was so that there didn't need to be a table like this. If a player wants to get a light set of temple armor, then they would go to the aurora armor page and be presented with info about just the light prefixes avaliable. That being said, the table you've created is a huge improvement on the other one. Psycho Robot (talk) 21:33, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

I hate those icons. I think I've mentioned that before. I'd like to kill them with fire. —Dr Ishmael 21:40, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

The table now has links as planned + template removed at relyk's request. I've rebalanced the colours on the runes of Dwayna + Grenth ( + ) to be slightly less pixellated. I would have done the rune of Melandru too, but I couldn't get the colour quite right. -Chieftain Alex 11:11, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

All merchant items renamed

Just a heads-up from Germany: Earlier today I noticed that all the karma armor pieces of this set have been renamed to their corresponding skin names in one of the recent patches. All light armor pieces are now Aurora, all medium Rubicon and all heavy pieces Armageddon. The other names have been eliminated completely. Have fun moving "some" pages around. --Tera (talk) 20:06, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

oh god freaking damn. -Chieftain Alex 21:33, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I've got this. I'll give it priority over the rest of the loot armor. —Dr Ishmael 21:53, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Complete:

• Created 18 pages - 1 for each of 6 pieces in the 3 weight sets.
• Redirected 108 pages - 1 for each of 6 pieces in 3 weights in the 6 defunct "sets", now pointing to one of the above 18 new pages.
• Deleted 18 pages - 1 for each of 3 weight "subsets" from the 6 defunct "sets".
• Redirected 6 pages - 1 for each of the 6 defunct "set" overviews, now all pointing to Temple armor.
• Edited 3 pages - 1 for each of the 3 weight sets.

Remaining to-dos:

• Update all of the temple vendors to point at the new item objects. Done!
• Either de-link or re-link all the 108 icons in the ugly, ugly table on this page. I'm not sure which would be most useful, and the table is too fugly for me to deal with. Obsolete!

—Dr Ishmael 02:06, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll do the table, its my creation even if I ceded ownership upon pressing save. -Chieftain Alex 18:38, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

I heard you guys like to do triple work, so I present you: "Updated the karma vendors at the Orrian temples to each sell armor sets with a single stat combination." :) --Tera (talk) 19:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

*inarticulate strangling noises* —Dr Ishmael 19:30, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Waitwaitwait..... that means... THE HORRIBLE UGLY TABLE OF NASTINESS CAN FINALLY DIE! Huzzah! —Dr Ishmael 19:31, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Apparently, this was Scarlet's doing. In the same way that she got the Dredge to work with the Flame Legion, she was able to convince the devs that if even the wiki community had trouble figuring out which armor stat belonged to which armor name belonged to which rune belonged to which temple belonged to which event... then Dwayna help those who just reached Orr for the first time on a new L80.

I am, however, sorry for all of the time that so many of us (especially Ish and Alex) have put into these articles. It's really hard to fathom what they were thinking back before headstart. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

This actually made it extremely easy to update everything, including the vendors - which makes me glad that I hadn't yet updated them for my initial renaming spree. —Dr Ishmael 02:05, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Aw drat, I loved the appearance of that table >.> oh well at least its accurate now. -Chieftain Alex 22:12, 3 August 2014 (UTC)