Talk:Twilight Arbor (explorable)

From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Just exactly how many different paths are there?[edit]

This is important for knowing the maximum number of tokens (Deadly Blooms) that can be obtained per day from this dungeon. Unlike the other dungeons, this one is confusing; it's difficult to know exactly which paths to take per day in order not to end up with just 20 tokens (instead of the maximum 60). --The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Interesting. The walkthrough indicates three paths (Up or Forward/Up or Forward/Forward) yet the explorer achievement is given for four. Why am I even responding, I've only ever been in one dungeon apart from Arah :D — snogratUser Snograt signature.png 10:39, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
The explorer achievement includes story mode. There are 3 explorable paths for all dungeons except Arah, which has 4. —Dr Ishmael User Dr ishmael Diablo the chicken.png 14:21, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Ah, makes sense. Now I just need to find me some guild mates who don't mind dragging a noobie warrior around dungeons with them. — snogratUser Snograt signature.png 16:58, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Nope, still not clear. According to the page right now, both "forward" and "forward/forward" exist (in addition to "story", "Aetherpath", "up/up" and the now defunct "forward/up") - so that would still make 5... -Laale Kuningatar (talk) 01:57, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm going to edit the objectives section as it seems to confuse you, but... How did you get up/up for Aetherpath. Makes no sense. Aertherpath replaced forward/up path but it's not literally in it's place i.e. you don't choose forward and then up and end up in aetherpath. And there never was an up/up path. You choose between Aetherblade and Nighmare court at the very start. Now I'm confused.. Rakuin (talk) 09:11, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Well, you continued an old discussion and with the current changes it couldn't make much sense. But to explain: Before the change: Start -> Common part -> first spit:Up or Forward -> when Up no more split and when Foreward -> second split: continue Forward or Up. This had created the three pathes: Up and Forward/Up and Forward/Forward. But this is all OLD. NOW: Start by choosing between Aetherblade or Nightmare court -> Aetherblade don't split further but Nightmare court will later split: Up or Forward. This creates the current three pathes: Atherblade and (Nightmare-)Up and (Nightmare-)Foreward. Hope this helps. Balwin (talk) 13:08, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Need Paths explained[edit]

Is there a graphic of the dungeon map that marks the paths and where the bosses are? I've only done this dungeon in Story Mode and found it very confusing.

Path 1 is Up, path 2 is forward/forward, path 3 is forward/up. --MushaUser Musha Sigc.png 19:47, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


Added a tip about remaining poisoned during the Malrona fight to do quadruple damage. Not many people seem to know about this.brosa parks 12:08, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Undergrownth Recluse.[edit]

During the fight with the tree and the million spiders, I believe the recluses respawn baby spiders endlessly..... would it be wise to see if the recluses are the source of the waves? I tried to get my group tto test this theory, but too many balls hanging below thier belts and noone wanted to do anything but wand the tree from a distance.

Fwd/Up Path[edit]

Well tried this path last night..everything's ok...before final boss...c'mon it's INSANE!!! 00:25, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

No idea what ANet were thinking... TheLastHobbit (talk) 01:23, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Fwd/Up Path Nightmare Tree via Ranging[edit]

In the page, it lists down a few strategies. While strategy 1 is universally accepted, and I've heard people running stategy 3, is strategy 2 working? It seems sketchy the way it is written currently. And before this was patched, we have been doing a similar strategy to #2, minus the 1 person, 8 steps in front of the 1500 rangers. Anyone know if this strat is still working? It's hard to find a group to go out there and try it - Decollete (talk) 13:02, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Twilight Assault and path articles[edit]

Added ton of dialogue and scenes and still have more to add. It's messy and need's work but it's there at least. But, every path needs it's own page, badly. This page is a mess and hard to follow. Dilemma: What to call them. The paths don't usually have verified names. What should we do?

I don't know, if we should create seperate pages, but at least we have to overhaul the dialogue section, because with the new content all pathes now starts by talking to Caithe and so this is the new "Initial dialogue". Balwin (talk) 14:04, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, overhaul is inevitable, but I thought how I personally would want to read this type stuff and separating the paths seemed most comfortable way. Heeeyyy. Just noticed, at least [[Twilight Arbor (explorable)/Forward/Up path (path 3)|Forward/Up path]] has it's own page. Also is that path permanently gone? And the previous lobby? That's sad if so. (And look at me not signing my comments.. I started the this conversation) Rakuin (talk) 15:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Why not just have this page (Twilight Arbor (explorable)) be about the hub area (The Arboretum) as it pertains to the dungeon, since info on the area itself would go on its page? Things like Caithe's dialogue, what NPC's are here, links to the pages for each path, etc. Then we could split each path into something like [[Path 1 (TA)]] or [[Path 1 (twilight arbor)]]. If a numbering system (path 1, 2, 3) is too vague, there are certainly ways to distinguish them from one another even if they're not given direct names.
  1. Honor of the Waves - [[Butcher's Path (honor of the waves)]] ● [[Zealot's Path (honor of the waves)]] ● [[Plunderer's Path (honor of the waves)]]
  2. Twilight Arbor - [[Leurent's Path (twilight arbor)]] ● [[Vevina's Path (twilight arbor)]] ● [[Aetherpath (twilight arbor)]]
  3. Caudecus's Manor - [[Asura Path (caudecus's manor)]] ● [[Seraph Path (caudecus's manor)]] ● [[Butler Path (caudecus's manor)]]
There's no need to add (explorable mode) either because separate paths only exist in explorable mode dungeons.
-Somohexual (talk) 16:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! <3 I was so hoping someone would use those names of the TA paths. They are most commonly known as Up, Forward/Up and Forward/Forward and I was thinking about using those but using the main enemy's name is so much better. The TAs paths are a bit complicated as the paths are chosen when you are already deep in the dungeon and has second choice too even deeper so the explorable page is going to have a little more into it than most dungeons but I'll try to make this as neat and simple as possible. Rakuin (talk) 16:33, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
The paths can be navigated from Twilight Arbor if we split to individual pages:
  1. [[Twilight Arbor (Leurent's Path)]]
  2. [[Twilight Arbor (Vevina's Path)]]
  3. [[Twilight Arbor (Aetherpath)]]
--Relyk ~ talk < 17:41, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Wouldnt it be less confusing to have [[Path Name (Dungeon Name)]]? It seems like pages use that basic method for naming already and people would be able to clearly tell that those pages are just sub-sections of Twilight Arbor rather than a "mode" like Story/Exp. You'd also be able to leave the page for exp mode as Twilight Arbor (explorable), since it looks a bit confusing/inconsistent as...
  1. Twilight Arbor
  2. Twilight Arbor (story)
  3. [[Twilight Arbor explorable]]
-Somohexual (talk) 20:16, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Way ahead of you. I made pages with [[Path Name (Dungeon Name)]] naming format, and we need the explorable page for reasons I skimmed over already. I also broke things and fixed them. Now I'm tired and this mess is only somewhat solved. More later bye. Rakuin (talk) 20:24, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
The only reason to make path pages is because there's too much content on the explorable page. That's the reason story and explorable mode were split. The (Dungeon Name) qualifier portion of the title is redundant, it would be [[Leurent's Path]] and so on. These are subpages rather than new articles as it's all content for explorable mode. If you want to give path subpages their own pages, they need to include the initial portion. That makes the explorable mode disambiguation for the dungeon page redundant.--Relyk ~ talk < 20:45, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Personally, I would like to see dungeon paths get their own article. I would agree that it should be just “Path name” instead of “Dungeon name (Path name)” or “Path name (Dungeon name)” then though. poke | talk 14:58, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I'm more than happy if we use only the path name for path articles. Rakuin (talk) 15:34, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

So, do we basically agree to split the explorable articles up into individual path articles? poke | talk 19:58, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Since the split was left incomplete for 3 years (objectives, rewards, NPCs, and Objects never split), as it stands its a mess, and the other dungeons are still all combined (and splitting doesn't reduce that much space in all honesty, while repeating a lot of information), I've re-merged the articles. I left the historical Fyonna's Path, but moved the page to Twilight Arbor (explorable)/Fyonna's Path as I feel the old path naming convention was insufficient (I'd agree with Relyk's old comment if this were a current discussion). Konig (talk) 18:05, 23 April 2017 (UTC)