Talk:Upcoming changes and features

I'm slightly confused

I'm slightly confused - the automated changes detailed here are upcoming, rather than existing? I thought my daily achievements were already resetting at midnight UTC. — snograt 15:57, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

They are upcoming changes that happen regularly, automatically. Is the wording unclear? It's modeled it after GW1W's automated changes section. Manifold 17:08, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, it is a bit confusing having them listed on the "Upcoming changes" page. Like Snog pointed out, it implies that they are not yet implemented. —Dr Ishmael 19:01, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Like said, they are copied right now as they are in GW1W but GW1W!=GW2W, especially since there was no "reset" things in GW1 that happened on regular basis, just "changes", though following a certain automated pattern. I'm fine moving them somewhere else. They just need to be properly linked and not hard to find.
—Faalagorn☎/✓ 22:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC).

I'm not sure about the resets, but I'm not sure they reset at a given time. Especially stuff like JP chests and rich ore veins, seem to reset based on the time they were opened/mined rather than at a fixed time. 80.112.181.245 12:27, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

I know for sure that the chests in the borderlands jumping puzzles reset 24 hours after the last time you opened the chest with that character since I do this everyday. They don't reset at 12 midnight like many other things. So I assume this is the same for all daily available chests but idk for sure.--86.28.147.193 22:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Just checked with chest in LA and they don't take 24 hours to respawn. It resets at 4.--Muesli‎ 07:37, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I recall the chests resetting in 24 hours after opening them in the past. But nowdays they seem to reset along with other daily activities. - J.P.Talk 15:48, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Splitting out "Automated changes" section into a different page

I was the one implementing them originally, following the design of GW1W, however in GW1 things does not simply reset like they do here, they change. The only thing that changes in GW2 is monthly achievements, and yet again it's not automated. Each month there are new achievements related to the new game release.

That's why I think it's wise to move out the "Automated changes" section out to the separate page, for example "Reset times" or something like that - this way we could link to this page from appropriate articles (Daily, Monthly, World vs World, jumping puzzle and so on, linking the word "reset" for example.

If anyone have something to say - disagrees with it, have a suggestion or something, please say so. If there will be noone disagreeing with this, I'm going to move it to "Reset times" page.
—Faalagorn☎/✓ 00:20, 24 December 2012 (UTC).

Automated changes aren't "Upcoming changes and features", so I agree that much. Reset times isn't a very strong name, "Recurring activities" or similar would be a better term.--Relyk 00:50, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the name for the page is what get me puzzled as well... Recurring activities isn't much a great choice too, since the first thing that came to my mind was activities.
—Faalagorn☎/✓ 03:23, 24 December 2012 (UTC).

I'm more for calling it (Reset) Timers or something like that, since that's what they are. Even leaves room for general information about World Events (like Dragon timers, not updated for each server, just a list of how many hours until the next window starts after the event is over). I don't like Recurring activities either, because I wouldn't call the resetting of daily achievements an activity. Let's just go with (Reset) Timers/Times and if we find a better name later on we can always move the page, but this isn't a logical place so it's really time to move it. — 08Ray 20:37, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

whats about timed resets?

Graphical fixes

What happened to ANet fixing Graphics bugs they caused with their updates? 3x1 Portrait surround doesn't work anymore with the game, and it was part of their demonstrations of GW2 at events. Rolain2 22:58, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Housing & Guild Halls

...can be removed from the list. Izzy just mentioned in a German interview that they're not working on them. 80.112.181.245 16:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Link? —Dr Ishmael 16:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

We've known for a while that they aren't actively working on them right now, but that doesn't mean they won't in the future, and it's still upcoming content that has been mentioned until they say they will not ever work on it. Manifold 17:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't that mean we should also add 'increase level cap', 'expansions' and other, vague notions like that? At the moment, it only exists as a possible idea for the future and there's plenty more like them that are not on this list. 80.112.181.245 10:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

"Upcoming" implies that the change IS COMING sometime in the near-to-not-so-near future. Since they are not currently working on guild halls and don't know when they will, then we have no guarantee that they will ever be implemented at all. I agree with removing them. —Dr Ishmael 13:50, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah plus if it is abandoned we should still leave it on here just to force them to implement it! So far the "Guild" part of Guild Wars 2 isn't all it's cracked up to be. Those first half of 2013 updates update from Colin sounds promising though. Sadly no word on guild housing... Anyone going to summarize that post for the page btw? Pretty long, maybe just list the topics and add the link to the post unless someone really feels like typing. — 08Ray 20:37, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

The purpose of this article is to inform the community about the things that ANet has said they are working on. It's then divided into things that have an implied release cycle (e.g. first third of 2012, as described this week, such as guesting) and things that devs have recently stated/reconfirmed are somewhere on their radar, e.g. TP improvements.

We could also add a third section for things that aren't on the radar -- features that are in other MMOs and/or that are requested frequently on the forums/reddit/guru; we could also restrict them to ideas that haven't been mentioned in six months and/or have been recently confirmed to be off the table. What we should not do is give anyone the impression that formal Guild Halls are at the same level as updates to Commander: we know they have people "thinking" about commander in tangible ways, but management hasn't authorized development time. That contrasts with halls, which don't have any confirmation since last summer. 75.37.19.179 21:37, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Lol I was joking about leaving it on even if they abandoned the project, but so far we at least know it's something they would like to add someday so I see no point in removing this until we get a definit "no housing" from ANet. Don't think we need the wiki for frequently requested stuff, we can use the forum for that. — 08Ray 22:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

We can have a section named "Vaporware" and stick it there.--Relyk ~ talk > 22:51, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

At any rate, we should add a note to things that are planned but not actively worked on. Like the housing...Anet admitted as much. 80.112.180.46 11:57, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Notices

Shouldn't the notices on the top of this page, Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Projects/Skill animations and Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Projects/Category reorganization be updated? I believe they still talk about the game as if it's not released yet or am I misinterpreting them? — 08Ray 13:24, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

The one here is talking about "on release" of the features in question, not release of the game itself. The other pages, yeah, but those projects are out-of-date anyway. —Dr Ishmael 13:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

"Update to existing Legendary weapons" has been made

Under the Mentioned category, subcategory Loot & gear, Legendary weapons have already (recently) been improved, and thus that part of the comment should probably be removed from this page. See: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/info/news/Game-Update-Notes-January-28-2013/first#post1307971 Timebomb 00:16, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

so should the stuff about march and april...66.58.180.73 04:50, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Read the news post that is linked in the reference on that line. The update mentioned there is specifically an update to the stats of legendary weapons to make them equivalent with Ascended quality, instead of the current Exotic equivalence. That change has not happened yet. —Dr Ishmael 05:30, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Siege Weapons Account Bound

Siege Weapons are no longer soul bound according to the 30th April update notes: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Game_updates/2013-04-30#Structured_Player_vs._Player_2 -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by HarrisonLewis (talk • contribs) at 11:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC).

Removed (feel free to edit the page yourself in future though, it isn't protected). -- Dagger 11:24, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Personal Story changes

Anyone else wishes Anet would make the following changes?

- local events/effects in maps based on consequences of personal story choices (for example, Caudecus sending a bandit after you after "stealing his daughter")

- beefing up the final fight against Zhaitan. It is boring.

- better branching of the story: I know it is supposed to converge with the creation of the Pact and the assault on Arah, but your choices should have more effects late-game.

- NPC interaction: why do my personalities(charisma/ferocity/dignity) not affect other NPCs that much, and why does interaction with major NPCs (Destiny's Edge included) seem so generic late-game?

If they add in new playable races, then those are the opportunities to create much better personal stories.

This is not a forum, please use the "FORUMS" link at the top of the page for discussions like this. —Dr Ishmael 15:27, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

One Time Dynamic event

Hasnt that already happened (the south sun one last year) or is that referring to another one? If not someone should remove it.

Expansions

The article says there are no plans for an expansion quite definitively, but all three articles referenced quote arenanet as saying they ARE actively working on an expeansion as well as living story updates. Que? --Ph03n1x (talk) 03:59, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

That's not how I interpret any of the quotes. ANet says they won't rule anything out and that they are committed to making the current model as successful as possible. That system is based on using 2 week updates and living stories, not expansions. 75.37.23.157 05:09, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Berserker's gear changes

We should mention that someone of Anet responded to a forum post about the current Berserker Meta, and they are discussing this and planning changes. I'll add this under 'mentioned' if that's OK. Qiff (talk) 11:22, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

we will know more in a few hours lets wait until then.- Zesbeer 13:02, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Valid point, forgot about the livestream. Qiff (talk) 17:10, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I would have added it my self but twitch and youtube dost have the stream up yet... QQ- Zesbeer 05:44, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

found it.- Zesbeer 06:24, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Basically the information was: Crit Dmg will change to Ferocity, scaling just like other stats, balancing it. Full DPS builds will look at a ~10% DPS reduction, but will still be the hardest hitting builds out there. This is the first of a set of changes that are planned/discussed to balance out damage and make other build options more viable. Other things they mentioned were changes to conditions, toughness on foes, and the evasion system. Two-handed weapons will get two sigil slots, and sigils of the same type ('on crit' ,'on swap', etc.) now work together. The same sigils do not work together (e.g. 2 energy sigils) and combinations of stacking sigils will also not work. Runes and sigils will be reworked to make the system easier to understand, fix a lot of bugs and make the 4, 5 and 6th bonuses more rewarding. I am reluctant to update this page with this info, because most of these changes are implemented in a few days. I think it is useful to say under 'mentioned' that they are working on balancing overall PvE gameplay to make other option besides raw damage more viable. Thoughts? Qiff (talk) 12:18, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

So is this happening or not? Curious why this isn't on the main page. Pasta (talk) 21:03, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

yes it should be happening I just couldn't be bothered to update the page feel free to do so.- Zesbeer 22:34, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Dueling (and Other Features Mentioned "Back in the Day")

I've restored a note that said in-world Dueling was mentioned as something the devs were interested in supporting. It's as well supported as several other items in the "mentioned" section.

Even though the article is titled "upcoming changes," there are several reasons for including ideas that aren't likely to be implemented in 2014:

• We already have two sections devoted to ideas that are more likely to release soon (those with specific dates and the CDI, which at least drives the internal conversations at ANet).
• Devs sometimes indicate personal support for an idea and that makes it somewhat more likely that the idea has and will continue to get some attention, even if we don't hear about it.
• There are ideas that are important to a certain segment of the fan base and I think the wiki owes it to them to document how much (or how little) interest ANet has shown in supporting or implementing the idea.

"Dueling" falls into the latter two categories: we have a specific quote indicating that ANet wants (or wanted) to add support for it and a lot of fans would like to see this feature. By including the bullet in the article, those interested can see that the idea isn't getting significant attention and they can act accordingly.

For that matter, devs haven't said anything much since launch about player housing, Guild Halls, new regions, or polymock. To be consistent, if we remove ideas for being 'old," we should also remove those. Alternatively, we could instead add a section for ideas that are popular among fans, but are getting ix-nayed by the devs directly or through inattention. Besides the above ideas, this might also include gear-checks (ANet has said "no"), expansions (ANet has said, "not anytime soon"), and direct player-to-player trading (ANet has said, "never"). – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 10:22, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp/Is-pvp-dead-You-decide/first#post807399 "Dueling is not currently in development." if its not in development then it shouldn't be on this page. imho- Zesbeer 10:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

My apologies if I wasn't clear: I'm not sure "being in development" is the only measure of whether something belongs on this page. The goal of this article is, in part, to inform players about what to expect from the game and that includes things that fans (and some devs) want, but aren't being worked on today or tomorrow. I'm okay with segregating ideas that are extremely unlikely to be seen within the next 12 months, but regardless of the criteria used, we should be consistent. In the last 12 months, there's been no mention of Guild Halls, player housing, or polymock — if we remove dueling, let's remove those, too. (Or, as I've suggested, let's move them all into a "unlikely to be seen in 12 months" section.) – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:43, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

The title specifies "upcoming," which in my mind implies that it is something that "will be seen within the next 12 months." Speculation, wishes, and shuttered projects really shouldn't be on this page because they are definitely not "upcoming." —Dr Ishmael 18:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

reference 9

Ref 9 needs to be reworked as the site appears to no longer have the page. - Endeavor 03:02, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Heart of Thorns Expansion

Let's put this in order before adding it. MithTalk 17:09, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Heart of Thorns expansion pack

Including:

• New story involving the battle against Mordremoth.
• At least one new area with 3 distinct layers: ground, roots and canopy.
• PvE Mastery system.
  • New combat skills that will help within specific content.
  • New lore-related abilities such as learning new languages.
  • New exploration and movement abilities such as hand-gliding.
• Profession specializations, including the ranger's Druid specialization and Necro greatsword specialization (unnamed).
• The revenant profession, the third profession of the soldier class.
  • This profession is able to channel the legends of the past from The Mists to use them in battle.
• Changes to World vs World.
  • New Borderlands map.
• Additions to PvP
  • Stronghold game mode.
• Guild Halls

Updated

I've removed many of the entries to this page. Each was either added in a released update or will be included with the Heart of Thorns expansion:

• General Content — Specializations, mastery system, revenant and others are a part of Heart of Thorns.
  • New weapon types and expansion of current weapon types to more professions
  • Precursors, and legendaries, including new legendary weapons, new types of legendary equipment (possibly a trinket), and new precursor acquisition methods.
  • Character progression, new professions and races.
  • New regions and dragons.
• Activities: Includes bar brawl, polymock and a shooting range. (5 year old source)
• Foes: More variations to creatures.
• Housing: Guild Halls will be available in Heart of Thorns. Player housing is not currently being worked on.
• Structured PvP — New maps and Team Deathmatch were added. Stronghold is part of Heart of Thorns.
  • Objectives other than conquest
  • New maps.

—Mora 02:45, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Fractal of the Mists/and or other dungeons

Any upcoming change to this map? nowadays is quite empty. I've a suggestion: -Made this a solo

For the other dungeons, is quite difficult to get partys to some dungeons, why not made them solos?

• _* cheers

—Maxi 81.38.149.209 | 12:30, 25 May 2015‎

I don't quite understand what you mean by "quite empty". Most LFGs are dungeons and fractals, people have been doing them on a regular basis since long when ascended boxes were added to loot table. There is, however, no information about changes to these instances right now, but it's likely they'll add something as it's a very popular demand and a nice framework to add harder instanced content to the game. – Valento ^msg 12:18, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Winter 2016 Update

It feels kinda like we should be treating the seasonal releases, such as the incoming Winter 2016 update, like the previous feature packs as they seem pretty similar albeit smaller. Am I alone in thinking this? Vahkris (talk) 00:35, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Feedback 2016/03/26

--HiddenRage (talk) 02:39, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

WvW reset timers need updating.

Reference link for SAB dead

A reference for SAB returned a 404 error. The link was https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/livingworld/sab/Things-to-improve Spadabear (talk)

WvW overhaul

Given the recent big updates to WvW, do we want to remove "WvW resurgence" as a future thing and call it live, despite not having this specific name? I don't see any massive future overhaul incoming to WvW. They do still have more plans according to posts but nothing as big as an 'overhaul' as far as I understand. -Darqam (talk) 20:30, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

• I came here to see if anyone discussed this too, because it seems to me like the overhaul is released.

" General content Living World season 1 available from the Story Journal.[1]"

Isn't this already the case? Or am I mistaken with what they meant?

The key word is 'content' - the Story Journal only mentions what happened, there isn't anything to play. —Ventriloquist 13:09, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Feedback 2017/06/17

Replace with feedback text. --Zenkhir (talk) 15:14, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Dear ArenaNet.

I have noticed that every proffesion in the game has at least one ability to reduce recharge of the specific class mechanic (e.g. Steal for Thief or Virtues for Guardian). The question is why Revenant hasn't got this? He also should have the ability to reduce recharge of his legengs invoking. I propose to give him in "Invocation" specialization in "Invoker's Rage" a description "Gain fury when you invoke a legend. Invoking a legend reduces cooldown on the previous legend by 10%" OR "Gain fury when you invoke a legend. Invoking a legend recharge 10% faster".

Would you like to add this in further game update? Of course you can change values if you are going to add this in the next update/updates. In my personal opinion it should be equality for each profession and not for the selected ones.

Heya, glad you enjoy the game enough to leave feedback. Unfortunately this isn't the right place as it is highly unlikely any dev will come to this talk page. The wiki is mainly run by regular other players just like you. For a better chance at catching a dev's eye, I recommend you suggest this on the official forum. -Darqam 15:19, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Feedback 2017/09/18

A full set of legendary trinkets has been confirmed [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.86.173.221 (talk) at 21:22, 18 September 2017‎ (UTC).

Ooo thanks! - Do_odleplex 21:28, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Shadow of the Mad King

I removed Shadow of the Mad King as it is current and not upcoming. Dragon Hunter (talk) 13:49, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Linking to Anet personal pages from references

Does anyone know the full names of "mattp" and "AndrewM" so we can link to their wiki pages or create new ones? ~ Fishrock ^(talk) 16:05, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

I believe AndrewM is Andrew McLeod. Not sure about mattp though.--Rain Spell (talk) 17:38, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Matt Pennebaker? Inculpatus cedo (talk)

About Season 1 being available in the Story journal

In the "Mentioned" section it stands that LWS1 might be available from the Story Journal. However:

a) In a sense that's already the case with the recap and ANet has stated multiple times, that they won't go much further.

b) The quoted article (from 2014) states this with no word. It only talks about how future LW content will be delivered from S2 onrward, as we see in game today.

As much as many players (myself included) wish for repeatable LWS1 content, this is simply unfounded hearsay at this point, that doesn't fit on the wiki.

I have to agree, Mike O'Brien (I believe) has stated that there are no plans to introduce Season One, again. It should be removed. Inculpatus cedo (talk) 18:05, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Can you cite those statements which you mentioned in your latest edit, Inculpatus cedo? Not that I would not believe you, more like to have (f)actual references. - Ray Koopa (talk) 13:09, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/6pj6wm/one_path_ends_devs_here_ask_us_anything/dkprv68/ Inculpatus cedo (talk) 18:52, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

TBH, over the years I've heard some devs say they want to / plan to, some devs say there's no plans, and it goes back and forth, even with the same devs. I think the state is - and always was - that "there are no current plans, but it is something some/most devs want to do." The main thing that seems to stop them from doing it seems, to me, to be MO's desire to just produce new content and never go back to fixing/remaking old content no matter how dated or ignored it is and no matter how much players want it to be fixed/reworked/etc.

I'm unsure whether "no plans but devs want to do it someday" is grounds for removal, however. Konig (talk) 19:45, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

At this point I doubt they'd invest the resources to get LWS1 instanced. I support removal of this feature from the Mentioned section. -Chieftain Alex 21:50, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Feedback 2018/08/28

Not sure if this would fit with the mention of season 1, but here's a more recent interview with Mike Z where they briefly mention it. https://www.mmorpg.com/mobile/features.cfm?read=12975&page=2 67.168.54.135 16:56, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

"New Mount"

The new mount stuff is from this article—https://www.shacknews.com/article/107195/guild-wars-2-sixth-birthday-interview-mike-zadorojny-talks-the-living-world—but I think may be incorrect. Here is the paragraph that contains "mount":

"Mike Z: We are starting to ratchet things up, bigger threats, bigger villains, if you can imagine that on top of what we've done just recently. The promise that we're making players right now is that this season, we are planning to release a new mount that players weren't expecting. And the thing we're saying right now is, Living World is working."

These tenses here are a bit mixed up in this paragraph and don't make proper sense. Maybe that was transcribed wrong and was intended to talk about the roller beetle in past tense? ~ Fishrock ^(talk) 22:19, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Exactly what I was thinking, but idk. It certainly doesn't make sense to me that they'll release two mounts in one season ~~Trevor95251 02:56, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Looks like it turned out to be the Warclaw. =P Inculpatus cedo (talk) 18:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Upcoming changes

As a "fairly" dedicated player, something I would like to see is an addition to the "exploration" aspect of this game. There are HUGE sections of Tyria that are "known" to exist, but cannot be explored by anyone. Currently, each new release adds to the "known and explored" areas of this world. How about "creating" the rest of the planet and allowing it ALL to be explored with something like the following provisos: 1) Only L80 characters would be "strong" enough to handle the "unknown". 2) ANY exploration would be limited to areas accessible (with difficulty) from ALREADY defined and known areas (CHARACTER and NOT Account-based for these "new" dangers). 3) ALL of these "explorable" areas would be separate from "new" territories located through the story line 4) New achievements (ala "Marco Polo" or "Eric the Red") would be available to the "intrepid" (aka "crazed nuts") who assay this endeavor 5) New "critters" (friend and foe alike) can be found, returned to Lion's Arch, and exhibited (usually stuffed) for the enjoyment and edification of the residents. 6) Each "new" area would ONLY be available once the access points have been found (after complete exploration of the adjacent and known region(s). 7) One "may" even re-discover Cantha--------------with a "slight possibility" of surviving the experience!!!!

Joel Thomas "undouble" 75.110.0.119 18:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

As the Wiki is player-written and -maintained, you would be best served by posting suggestions in the Official Forums (link above); the Devs are unlikely to read this Talk page. Good luck. Inculpatus cedo (talk) 18:42, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Feedback 2019/07/27

One REALLY interesting idea to consider?? Complete the ENTIRE map of the world of Tyria, populate it, and make it available to L-80 characters INDIVIDUALLY (each character has to "discover" the world for themselves). Progress should be "gated" based on what areas the character has already "discovered and mapped" and should exclude areas planned for "Living Story" episodes. (Or have this content "for sale" as an expansion, then integrate LW stories into these new maps). Most of us PvE players LOVE the idea of finding and exploring new territory and meeting the challenges within. (Personally, I've ALWAYS hated maps that include "here be monsters"----------after all, not all monsters LIKE the "taste" of adventurers!!! And most don't carry a can opener to get at the "good stuff"!!! No matter how many episodes of GW2 will be released, there will ALWAYS be considerable areas defined as "who knows?" in the world

"Gating" can be as simple (or complex) as desired. One concept would be for a character to "find" an non-operating Asura Gate, "hire" an Asura technical team to analyze and repair it, then explore what's on the other side. Once the new area has been "tamed", the Asura team can seek and find other "broken" gate(s) in the new area and schedule "fix and repair" to open yet another "new" zone. Once hired, the team can be used to check other "known" areas for "hidden" gates. (The NE side of Brisban Wildlands is known to have such a gate--although where it goes??)

As mentioned above, the Wiki is player-written and -maintained; you would be best served by posting suggestions in the Official Forums (link above); the Devs are unlikely to read this Talk page. Good luck. Inculpatus cedo (talk) 16:43, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Feedback 2022/10/27

Maybe a good idea to look at the "Mentioned" section of this? It's mostly just things that have been suggested by the devs at some point rather than confirmed to be happening. An idea would be to have a "Confirmed" and a "Suggested" section instead. Something like the 4th expac has been confirmed, while new effects for Kraitkin were just an off-hand comment by a dev years ago. Would be better not to lump them together I'd say.

Laevateinn's comment on SAB W3 and W4

Their comment is now 3 years old and Laevateinn.6289 (who never posted again on the ArenaNet forum) did not even explicitly state the "larger addition" to SAB would explicitly be W3 or W4 (these were mentioned in a sentence separate to that). In fact, the Test Zone released this year might've already been the "larger addition". The wording "within the next year or two (as of 2020)" is also incorrect as a time frame (for the "large addition") was given by Laevateinn only as "[not] this year (2020) or the next (2021)" (and nothing happened in 2022). Maybe the comment on W3 and W4 should be toned down a lot, or completely removed. - Ray Koopa (talk) 10:28, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I do not think we should necessarily remove the section, but I do agree that perhaps we should reword it to better reflect the forum comment. ~Sime 20:13, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Jeweler 500

What happened to this? Did they say something about it, or is it just extended lack of any comments implying that this would ever be happening? Rose Of Kali 04:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Yup, lack of comments (and the last comment was made in 2019, by a previous-previous Game director), so I pruned these old mentions. ~Sime 14:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Disappointing, but makes sense at this point. Relics were the perfect opportunity for some jeweler love, and they didn't do it. It's not happening. :/ Rose Of Kali 18:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback 2024/05/25

The "Adding Next Lockout Deadline timer to in-game UI." has been implemented with the 24/5/21 patch