Talk:Waypoint/Archive 1

Archive

---

• 2010-2014

omfgsrsly? "for a small fee

omfgsrsly? "for a small fee"??1? ,,"Klumpeet",, 20:05, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh hello Wyverns and griffons.havent seen you in a while.--Neil • 20:07, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I honestly don't see a problem, as I've mentioned before, it'll help keeping the economy stable. --Sirrush 20:09, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah that makes sense, but this is changing one of the things I loved about gw1 =( ,,"Klumpeet",, 20:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Its GW2, not GW1.2 >.> --Neil • 20:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, don't you worry, the asura gate network will still be in use, and that'll be free. You'll just have to travel on foot more. ;P --Sirrush 20:17, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

So one city is free, why don't you just do city per city then? just alittle longer, but for free XD --Sierra84.196.119.203 20:27, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Now my character will always have to remember to carry cash with her Venom20 20:50, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

"So one city is free, why don't you just do city per city then? just alittle longer, but for free XD"

"Travel within a city is free, ..." As in, you can travel from one point in the city to another free of charge. It doesn't mean you can travel from city to city for free. :] - Infinite - talk 23:00, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I think charging is a horrible idea. Anet should not be discouraging travel.Ramei Arashi 00:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

And charging 100g for Identification Kits discourages identifying items, amirite? --Kyoshi (Talk) 00:51, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The people who benefit most from mapping are those who don't have a lot of time to play (i.e. run around from one place to another). They're likely to have less money, so every bit of gold counts. Mapping has an effect in "the real world" - how much extra time you spend playing, how bored you get, etc - identifying objects isn't necessary to just have a good time, and mapping helps get to fun things quickly. Even for those who like playing for longer time periods, no-strings-attached mapping is convenient - it's one of the best things about GW. pling 01:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Personally I always hated the map travel. I mean, it really takes away any realism that the game has. Honestly, if a forest filled with dark creatures stood between a knight and a castle, he wouldn't just go to his google map and instantly travel to the city, that's just a cheap excuse. I know, I'm probably alone on this, since so many people have become biased towards the convenience factor it gives, but IMO adding a fee is a good thing, since finally people wont just spam map travel everywhere, or at least will be deterred. v_v Asura gates are much better, and will allow you to maintain the in-game feel without completely eliminating fast travel. --Amannelle 02:59, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) @Pling: Fair enough, but I still don't see why this discourages travel. Those who need to get somewhere quickly because they have limited time to play will pay to get there quickly. It's just a gold sink, and I doubt travel will cost the GW1 equivalent of 10k per trip.

Those with more time to play will earn more gold because they play more, and those with less time to play will get less gold because they play less. That's how it works in any game with some kind of currency. Both "rich" and "poor" will travel using this system because it's convenient. The rich will travel more (spending more money on it) because they have more time to play, and the poor will travel less (spending less money on it) because they have less time to play. Again, works the same in any game with an economy. Those who play more will always be another step ahead in terms of game currency, simply because they play (on average) at the same rate as those who play less, except that they move ahead on their play-span in longer jumps. Again, the same.

I just don't think there should be so much concern over this yet. --Kyoshi (Talk) 03:02, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

(reset indent) As with everything in the game, then, we just need to hope that ANet do it well. ,,"Klumpeet",, 07:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

And we do not know the value of gold in-game just yet. You could be making enough gold to travel half-way across the world in 1 or 2 quests (or less). - Infinite - talk 14:02, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Not sure why it's such a big deal. 'Small fee' probably means the GW1 equivalent of a few gold. About as much as customizing a weapon, which isn't exactly something I've ever heard anyone complain about. Even if it does cost a little bit, travel in a lot of other games is more than a 'small fee'. Traveling across Silkroad Online or Rappelz is more along the lines of a 'freaking mint'. Besides, with the dynamic events system... who knows, deciding to go on foot may lead to stumbling upon something awesome. 165.29.184.7 17:26, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

"who knows, deciding to go on foot may lead to stumbling upon something awesome." This has been confirmed to be Events, taking place whilst exploring and travelling. :) - Infinite - talk 17:39, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Only other MMO I've played extensively is LOTRO, not only does that have a travel fee, it has a repair fee. (speculation alert!) The fees are marginal and scale with the area (travel), I see no reason ANET would not adopt a similar model; it's affect on your pocket book is marginal, and like 165.29.184.7 said (and Infinite confirmed) exploring and travelling is going to result in awesomeness. My guess is the concern over waypoint fees will end up being much ado about nothing: a minor gold sink mechanic and a little extra motivation to go on foot and discover a new event. PixelMatt

Minor Quibble: While I don't mind the 'pay gold to go to a waypoint when you're downed', I'm wondering how much of an in-game mechanic this is going to be. A resurrection shrine in GW1 is a location -- a sacred object which allows you to be resurrected, and to some extent this can be seen as an in-game mechanic, you have gone near a shrine, it recognizes you, and if it senses your death, it brings you to the location to be restored. A bit of a hand-wave, but yeah, you can kind of see that in-game. The waypoint thing, I'm hoping is similar in style: It is a sacred object / location that you can pass by or approach (to activate), and if you're downed, it 'catches' you and allows you to recover. The gold cost could be a donation you make upon getting up (so to speak), but everything syncs with being an in-game experience. If it isn't 'in game', if it is strictly an OOC hand-wave with no in-game explanation, I'm going to be annoyed. I can accept it exists, fine, but I won't like it as much as if it has an in-game parallel you can recognize. That's the thing I hate with most MMOs, the 'yeah, you somehow survived, but you're all the way the hell over here, no explanation'. I want my In-Game explanations! Tashiro 13:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Well I see my self having to run all the way to places which will suck hopefully they will get rid of it, if ppl complain xD --Angelkiss 10:13, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD (scene from Natural Born Killers going through my mind). Come on ANet, don't do this. It's counter productive to your philosophy of removing annoyances of other MMO's. There's many times in GW1 where I town hopped just for the fun of it. Or I town hopped because I knew the location of a vendor in one town. I never felt like "oh, the immersion is so bad because I could do this", I though "I'm so grateful I can do this." Travel through way points should be able to be done because you feel like it. If you feel like doing something in game to reduce a hassle, there should not be a system in place that makes you pause to consider if it's worth it. This is a step backwards from one of the best practical aspects of GW1. You'd taken so many steps forward, please avoid this step backwards. --Mooseyfate 16:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Gold sinks are necessary in any MMO, but tagging them onto essential services (and let's be honest, waypoints ARE an essential service, whatever people say about Asura Gates) makes it essentially a tax on gameplay, which also makes it a tax on my time. I tend to equate 10 silver to about 1 platinum from GW1, so at Lv.80 you're paying the equivalent of between 150 and 600 gold for map travel. If ANet patched this into GW1, there'd be a riot, so why accept it here? Given that waypoints act as res shrines as well, this is also a tax on death (cost more or less doubled with armour repairs as well). ANet, I get enough tax IRL, so please ditch this punitive and malaise-causing mechanic, and focus your gold sinks onto semi-essential items and prestige items like you did in GW1. Virtually every player I've asked about this system hates it, pretty much to a man I think. Andran Steel 15:21, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) this has nothing to do with the page please post this sort of stuff on the official forums.- Zesbeer 23:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Greifers

The only way i can see this being a negative, is if greifers begin to say "50g and ill revive you" or whatever half the cost of traveling to the waypoint is. Vald [Citation Needed] 14:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

i see what you mean, but this will probably be a uncommon thing. starter zones maybe because that's where this kind of griefing usualy is, but end game i'm hoping you would already have planned to have team-mates assist you, also you need to be alive to pay the revive fee to them, and would you really pay someone for being a jerk? --AlbinoAce 14:25, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Also it isn't certain that one can trade while dead. ,,"Klumpeet",, 14:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Nearest waypoint when you're dead is free, I guess..

Nearer waypoints are cheaper, we've learned from the open beta weekend. Not free, but definitely a very small amount of coin, in the realm of less that 25 copper to travel to any waypoint in the same region as you in lowlevel areas. That's like maybe 1-5 minutes worth of fighting. --Starfleck 14:59, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

AIONisation?

I absolutly HATE the "small" waypoint fee in AION and am not looking forward to this feature in gw2. By the time you have collected or farmed some gold you are subject to fee's for waypoint use ><. To me it resulted in a "bb AION" by sheer annoyance (amongst other things). GRINDFEST! --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 14:13, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

you don't have to use this system if you don't want to, you do have feet :P but there are fee's in many games that have fast-travel systems, i've never played AION so i'm not sure how that rates to other games, but generally players just adapt to it. it's just a money sink for players who decide to go from one side of the game to the other all in one go. remember: we also get asura gates which i'm guessing will connect all major cities anyway. --AlbinoAce 14:33, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

This is not "other" games. The travel system was unique for GW and gave a sense of freedom. I see no point in paying NPC's for services because humanity is like that. To me it is a unique feature to be lost. While I understand not everything can be transferred nor stay the same I hate to loose the Unique Identity that pulled & kept so many playing for years. --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 08:34, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

While I understand your disdain for the waypoint fee, understand that it is a (somewhat) necessary evil. Without gold sinks like these, inflation would run rampant in GW2 like it did, and does, in GW1. Besides, if the fees weren't applied to waypoints, it would've been applied to something equally as important. --Sirrush 10:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I think this is different from city-to-city teleporting. I think this is more the spots between zones on the map -- you know, the things you normally have to run across the landscape to get to? So this is a step up, not a step down. Tashiro 02:14, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Going Solo

What exactly happened to GW2 being soloable? Apparently when playing by yourself you either have to pay to be revived.....or.....Is there even another option? All I see is: "pay when you die." I'm fairly sure in the Death/Healing article they mentioned something about " Defeat is intended to be an experience, not a punishment." right? Personally, I see a fee as "punishment." Not sure if I'm alone in that regard. I'd rather be a ghost for five minutes than lose some of the cash I just earned killing the things that killed me. Another favorite part is " The cherry on top of all of this: Guild Wars 2 will have a much milder death penalty." Yes, instead of losing 15% of your health and energy, you get fined. Great sense of value. Then of course the article continues on to explain the unfairness of debuffing you. I really hope this waypoint crap gets scrapped just like companions. Eive 09:47, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

"oh yes, some jerk is pulling mobs of enemies into the waypoint forcing me to either respawn and die while loosing gold everytime, or pay even more to respawn somewhere else" i'd really much rather a death penalty with a short timer on it, will give me time to think of a plan then use all my gold up trying. also the or your looking for is waiting for 30mins for some one to show up and revive you --AlbinoAce 09:55, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

It's really not going to cost that much, ANet are cleverer than that. It's just another small gold-sink and benefits the economy, and thus the game as a whole. It's nothing to get worked up about. --Odal talk 10:17, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Eive remember in that article they mentioned a defeated mode where you can still attack somewhat, so that is your other option, either pay to be revived or continue to fight while down and rally yourself. If you were talking about after that nevermind. - Giant Nuker 14:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

They said that when the devs were playing the game, they often flocked together to complete stuff. They say that they want you to be happy to see another player, no matter what profession they are. Well, here's your motivation! -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 17:14, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Giant Nuker, I was aware of the downed state before defeat, but let's be realistic. You're immobile, you have weaker skills (Hell, Warriors throw rocks!) and you probably have a much shorter lifespan. I can't imagine many people actually rallying when fighting an enemy mob. Eive 23:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I know that this thread is about a year old now, but from what I've seen it's not impossible to rally - not easy, but very doable. By the time you get downed, at least one of the monsters that you were fighting should be at low health (if they're not, then you've got bigger problems than a bad resurrection mechanic). In all the demo videos that I've seen, even the no-cooldown basic attacks can kill a weakened enemy, and I've never seen someone get downed without dealing considerable damage to the monster first. --Thunderduck 3:59 28 May (UTC)

Perhaps, but that is the demo, which isn't designed to be difficult. It could be that the game will keep that difficulty level once it's finalized, but I would still imagine that the higher level the area you're in, the more likely you'll be forced to group up to survive. - 04:08, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

GW2 is definitely not "solo-able", not even close. And the waypoint fees are not calculated by distance. I could be standing right next to one and it wants me to pay to use it. The asurans that built those stupid things are running a toll bridge scam. Dirty smelly gophers...grumble grumble...Wraitheria 21:38, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

It's a base amount that scales with level, plus an amount that scales with distance. —Dr Ishmael 04:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, reminds me of...

Well, this does reminds me alot of WoW (Played private servers once). At first, I dont like this kinda thing. But do I always have to pay to travel from place to city or city to city? The travel system from 'GW1' was epic then... --Sqwyt 12:08, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I think Asura gates are free, but waypoints cost. Besides, with the dynamic events, it might be fun to walk everywhere :D ShadowRunner 12:09, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Maybe there is inside city events. City is missing or has broken Asuran gate and once you've completed the chain between 2 cities, you can travel free. If that's not done in city, you'll use money. Besides yeah, walking and finding yourself in random event will be fun. Also seeing beautiful GW2 scenery. Wapakalypse 09:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

A Different Solution

Trains, Caravan, etc is the solution. However, if it has the same fee, then it will also help take gold out of the economy. That way, when I need to get on a train to go to the next town or get off midway, I can just get off. It still have the immersive quality, the same fast travel(Maybe not as fast as map traveling), and money is drained from the economy. --173.66.189.216 00:01, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Possible exploit?

By travelling to very nearby waypoints couldn't you work your way from one side of the map to the other for free? Jackster 07:23, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I think you have to physically unlock them like you would a res shrine in GW1, although I have no sources to back up what I just said. Also, it would cost a small amount of coin to travel, not that it's a significant amount. (Xu Davella 07:31, 6 March 2011 (UTC))

I suppose if I actually read the article, it would have explained that all for me... (Xu Davella 07:32, 6 March 2011 (UTC))

Travel within a city is free, travel via asura gates *may* be free, but travelling to any other waypoint charges a small fee. So teleporting to the nearest city costs you a small fee, after which you can use an asura gate to travel to a city closer to where you wish to zone to and travel to the zone you need from there *does* save you a bit of coin.

Though the fee isn't big enough to merit such a work-around. - Infinite - talk 07:36, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree with infinite, the waypoint traveling system worked very well during the beta weekend. I think that the very minor travel fee (or fee-less if you're broke) does take this possible workaround into consideration, traveling to "nearby waypoints" is not free unless in town. "Walking" saves you a meager amount of coin but takes more time than it's worth in my honest opinion. --Starfleck 15:08, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Activation range

As of SDCC 2011, it looks as if the range of activation was significantly shortened, from merely being within compass range to something that looks like GW1's 'earshot/aggro bubble'. However, with no 'aggro bubble' visible on the compass in GW2, this is an imprecise measurement at best. Redshift 20:05, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm confused

Wait, so when we die we have to map travel to a waypoint unless there is someone around to resurrect us? If that's what it is, then I didn't make it sound as bad as I thought, lol Fabian 02:48, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Early Bug

A bug was discovered near the end of this video [[1]] that if you activate a waypoint while crying it freezes you in place. John was "present" at the time and immediately wrote it down, so it will be fixed before release. Fun to catch the discovery of a bug in a clip though. Lysander 18:50, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

A little late reply, but I also found a Waypoint bug in the April Beta; if you are defeated and and click "Yes" to go to a Waypoint and are redirected into an overflow server, you are revived and can hit "Cancel" to stay exactly where you were, with no Waypoint charge. I submitted a bug report, but I didn't think to catch a video of it. Thanks for that. ;P - AdarkTheCoder 00:31, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

World map completion. All waypoints?

Anybody happen to catch the total number of waypoints on their hero tab? I think it was somewhere in the 250-ish range for the whole world. --Starfleck 15:18, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

I think it was 252, but that number means nothing. It's the total for all of the currently "active" areas, and even those are subject to change. - AdarkTheCoder 00:31, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

No XP from first waypoint on map

As the subject says.. Every time I get on a new map where the waypoint isn't on the spawn location (and thus, still locked), I only get the area XP. When I run to said waypoint to unlock it, it just changes to unlocked before I reach it and doesn't give a single xp. Bugged? Intended? Karuro 14:24, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

You get it upon loading, just like with city areas. Take note of your experience bar before zoning into a new zone, and immediately after - compare to just uncovering an area. It should be more when you first enter a zone. Konig/talk 21:02, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Odd that it isn't mentioned in the chatlog then Karuro 23:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Cost

Cost is Level Cost plus Distance cost. Maybe this isn't the right place, but we should collect data; stand on a waypoint and see how much it costs to travel there; noting your level. Level 26: 15c llandale 01:45, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I've collected a bit more data, namely the costs between the following three waypoints.

• Hoelbrak, Eastern Watchpost
• Lion's Arch, Gate Hub Plaza
• Rata Sum, Magicat Court

Those WPs are pretty far apart and they should be easy to reach for anyone even at level 2, so they make good data points.

Feel free to add to the table below - more data between lvl 20 and 70 is important, and lvl 80-data would be useful just for having the maximum-values.

One obvious result is that - even after substracting the "level cost" - the costs cannot be truly linear, since they violate the triangle inequation. Also, the distance costs scale with level, too, but they're following a different scaling formula. Tub 14:39, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Level	to self	H to LA	H to RS	RS to LA
1	3	9	23	17
2	4	11	28	21
3	0	0	0	0
4	0	0	0	0
5	5	15	39	29
6	6	17	45	33
7	6	17	45	33
8	0	0	0	0
9	8	0	0	0
10	0	0	0	0
11	9	24	62	46
12	9	24	62	46
13	0	0	0	0
14	0	0	0	0
15	10	0	0	0
16	11	0	0	0
17	11	30	79	58
18	12	32	84	63
19	12	32	84	63
20	12	34	90	67
21	0	0	0	0
22	0	0	0	0
23	0	0	0	0
24	0	0	0	0
25	15	41	1  7	79
26	15	0	0	0
27	0	0	0	0
28	0	0	0	0
29	0	0	0	0
30	0	0	0	0
31	0	0	0	0
32	22	53	1  33	1
33	0	0	0	0
34	0	0	0	0
35	0	0	0	0
36	0	0	0	0
37	34	0	0	0
38	0	0	0	0
39	0	0	0	0
40	0	0	0	0
41	44	82	1  80	1  39
42	46	1  41	0	84
43	49	88	0	1  48
44	0	0	0	0
45	0	0	0	0
46	0	0	0	0
47	0	0	0	0
48	61	0	0	0
49	0	0	0	0
50	0	0	0	0
51	0	0	0	0
52	0	0	0	0
53	0	0	0	0
54	0	0	0	0
55	0	0	0	0
56	0	0	0	0
57	0	0	0	0
58	0	0	0	0
59	0	0	0	0
60	0	0	0	0
61	0	0	0	0
62	94	0	0	0
63	0	0	0	0
64	0	0	0	0
65	1  2	1  58	3  1	2  41
66	0	1  62	3  8	2  47
67	0	0	0	0
68	0	0	0	0
69	0	0	0	0
70	1  14	0	0	0
71	0	1  78	0	2  63
72	0	0	0	0
73	1  22	1  84	3  45	2  78
74	0	0	0	0
75	0	0	0	0
76	1  29	1  93	3  57	2  88
77	0	0	0	0
78	0	0	0	0
79	0	0	0	0
80	1  39	2  7	3  81	3  8

Added data for 5, 6, 7, 17, 18, 32, and 80. Definitely not linear level scaling. —Dr Ishmael 15:42, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I can see a level penalty but it should be scaled per distance; so high level folks can go short distances reasonably. llandale 01:50, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

In relative terms, it already does that: at level 2, it costs 7x as much to travel from Hoelbrak to Rata Sum as it does for the waypoint you're standing at; at level 80, this is reduced to ~2.75x. So the distance "tax", if you will, gradually reduces from 700% to 275%, even though the actual amount increases from 24 to 242. Since the amount of coins you earn for doing things at level 80 vs. level 2 scales in a relative fashion, the percentage is a more apt comparison than the raw amount. —Dr Ishmael 02:32, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I have to disagree with you Dr Ishmael. Though you are correct in your statements, what is more important is the cost of using the waypoint relative to the money earned while playing. Using the price of a basic sword with different level requirements as a baseline you will see that they are almost 1:1 until lvl 30, but at lvl 80 it takes 4 swords to pay for that same waypoint. If you then consider that it takes longer to kill the mobs that drop lvl 80 gear, you are looking at 8-20x as much time spent earning money to use a waypoint at lvl 80 as you would spend at lvl 30. Also, I added some data. DigitalScience 04:02, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

After collecting some more data I plotted base price for travelling 0 distance against level, and for reference added the vendor worth of the basic sword with different required levels. You can see these plots , , and . The takeaway is that for characters level 2-30, the base cost is 0.5*lvl+3 cp, which follows linear scaling and matches the cost of vendoring a piece of mob trash about 1:1. After level 30 the base cost is 2.4*lvl-56 cp, which also follows linear scaling, but at a much steeper rate of increase, while the reward for vendoring mob trash remains on it's original scaling. DigitalScience 04:31, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Someone on reddit asked me to throw some info your way from my thread concerning this there. While you could see it as a distance "Tax" being reduced over time, we have asura gates which bring us within close range of most zones so people shouldn't hit that tax in the first place.

The distance at which the base cost hits as hard as a multiplicative cost scaled up is about the far end of 2 zones. Since most zones are within '2 zones' of an asura gate, it becomes more expensive to waypoint to these zones than to further ones over time.

The end result is that asura gate use is disincentivised, in fact the pact asura gates to orr are never used because despite the short distance to waypoint to one, the base cost makes it more expensive than just waypointing straight to orr.

If you were to use a multiplicative method instead of this base cost it would:

• Make short range teleports seem reasonable. (To a neighbouring waypoint is more like 20c instead of 150c, to other side of the zone is more like 80c instead of 200c)
• Make the order asura gates more useful (Reduces cost to go to orr zones by about 1s if you are willing to put the effort into using them)
• Make long range teleports more expensive (I'm talking the kind of teleports you should be using LA asura gates for, say metrica to black citadel) doubling or more in price (Once more incentivising asura gate use)

The problem isn't that prices are just too high, also not that prices escalate quicker than rewards from playing (Although they do at that), but that short-range prices (which are what any efficient player will strive for), are relatively much more expensive than long range ones. 87.195.101.155 09:43, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Filled out table with levels to give a better idea of the gaps between data points. BurnHavoc 13:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, guess I should have read this discussion before I put my partial data table on the live page. Jimmgrogan 04:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Lore

So I've been looking around but I haven't gotten to understand much lore of the waypoints besides that they're an asuran invention. What I'm most interested in is how they revive people lore-wise, for the little bit of GW1 I've played they explained revives with special shrines. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.163.157.15 (talk • contribs) at 18:22, December 14, 2012 (UTC).

I suppose wp's have something to do with intersecting with the mists, thus allowing us to pop about all over the place. In this case I suppose the lore would be that we travel back from the mists to revive at waypoints due to them being connected to the mists 94.173.27.136 15:13, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think so. As the Gods abandoned Tyria there is currently no know resurrection lore-wise, and death has been re-labelled as "defeat". I believe the technology could originate from the asura beacons used in the G.O.L.E.M mission in Guild wars 1 where it says "we've miniaturized the magic of an Asura Gate into handy, portable beacons." Jyenh (talk) 05:47, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Asura tech or game mechanic without lore

In August 2012, someone added the line, "In lore, it is an asuran creation." I cannot find any reference for this. Following the lead of another anon, I've removed the note from the top of the article and added a trivia note that there is no known explanation for waypoints in terms of game lore.

Normally, I would think that something that was written 9 months ago should probably remain, but in this case, there's no source for the idea that waypoints have anything to do with asurans or Asura Gates. The closest dev comment I can find was at the anet blog, which is archived at on RPG. John Stumme and Ben Miller comment about waypoints as a mechanic, without reference to any lore. 75.37.23.153 07:41, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I was surprised to see it added 9 months ago, as I had the same impression. I think I recall threads about this pre-release, too. Manifold 07:52, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Found it. Technician Penn says, "...you'll encounter our magical matter-transportive devices, more commonly known as waypoints. They're mini-gates that - for a minimal fee - transport you across great distances. They're the second most convenient way to travel, next to our gates." Discounting the fact that asura believe they invented everything, perhaps that is sufficient, even if it is just one NPC making the claim. The only reason I found it is that the history of the German wiki's article on Wegmarke has an edit summary mentioning Penn. I'll restore the note to the trivia section. It doesn't seem critical to understanding WPs. 75.37.23.153 08:15, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

its the first thing you hear when you interact with the asura scout in metrica Provence. I added the note after the first beta weekend event with playable asrua. Edit: also its a in game source so it really dosnt matter if there is only one. in game/ from jeff grub = king- Zesbeer 09:00, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

It'd have been nice if the developers had expanded background of these devices, especially in relation to full-sized asura gates, since there used to be some hefty limitations to the use of gates. Mediggo (talk) 09:18, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I just assumed its a adaptation of snaffs personal gate from the book- Zesbeer 09:25, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, it's quite similiar. They probably cannot transport large number of people or cargo like proper gates can, and are probably more costly to maintain. But yeah, would definitely love some more lore on them. :/ Mediggo (talk) 10:29, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Just wanted to point this interview out that i just saw a few days ago: http://esprits-dorr.fr/node/261 and to quote it directly: "Angel McCoy : Absolutely! Waypoints are asuran devices, and all the money you spend to use them goes straight into the coffers at Rata Sum. The asura have been developing these magi-matter-transportive devices for centuries and have seeded them across the world. They’re often contested if creatures or bad guys disrupt the traffic coming through them, but the asura work hard to maintain this money-making web of mini-gates. The fee, in case you wondered, is automatically separated from your person and transported directly into a guarded room in Rata Sum. The coins drop in and pile up there, and workers put them in carts and carry them to the vaults."- Zesbeer 07:48, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Kiel's Discount

The base price for L80 WPs pre-kiel was 1  39 , according to this article. It now seems to be a minimum of 1  11 , a 25% discount. There's not much data on the wiki to evaluate how this might scale and whether the discount is better for longer distances. 75.37.20.69 19:16, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Kind of a joke

Why even have waypoints in this game if they constantly are being contested and you can't map there. You never had that kind of problem in the original GW if you wanted to map somewhere. Once you access a waypoint you should be able to travel, if not then they are useless. And why is there a cost just to go to a waypoint? Especially when you die? You are being forced to go to a waypoint after death, you don't get to choose it. When you die you shouldn't have to pay to start back where you came from on the map. It's just silly. This is a very disappointing part of the game.65.60.224.166 19:13, 11 September 2013 (UTC)Rage Kainen

The wiki is not the place for feedback/complaints like this. Please take it to the official forums. —Dr Ishmael 19:51, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Waypoints vs Way Ports

Suggest renaming the original Waypoint wiki page to "Way Port" and creating a new page for "Waypoints". The information on the original Waypoint page should be moved to the newly created Way Port page and the New Layout and Example shown below should be entered for the Waypoint page.

Reasoning

With the introduction of the new Guild Wars 2 Living World Atlas which is an "Interactive Map Atlas of Tyria" precise "waypoints" are now possible.

The map atlas (reading from top to bottom ~ left to right) is based on an N-S-W-E grid which uses a five digit set of dual numbers to specify any particular point on the map in the format of "012345 x 012345".

New Layout

Map Coordinates range maximum from:

North Axis = 8336

West Axis = 7168       ~~         East Axis = 32752

South Axis = 17520

---

or

---

Northwest Corner of the Map    to    Northeast Corner of the Map

(W) 7168 x 8336 (N)                  (E) 32752 x 8336 (N)

 ↑

 up

down

 ↓

(W) 7168 x 17520 (S)                 (E) 32752 x 17520 (S)

Southwest Corner of Map      to      Southeast Corner of Map

Example

And therefore, using the example of: 11316 x 11316 You can now specify a fairly precise location for the Divinity Reach Bank. These codes may now be used in conjunction with descriptive in-game map directions of "North East of the Minister's Wayport".

I understand that this requires new thinking regarding how we play the game, but it seems to make greater sense to me
to use this new tool in a beneficial way when helping others reach specific places in the game. Councellor (talk) 22:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Unless I am missing something, the current interactive objects are called "Waypoint"s in game and familiarly. What you're describing are coordinates or "coords". I see no reason no to rename the structures. --Claret (talk) 23:08, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Waypoint is the official in-game name for the map objectives with the icon. That can't be changed.

Also, there's no way to correlate the coordinates on the atlas to anything in-game. There's not even any guarantee that the corrdinates aren't simply arbitrary based on the mapping software the atlas uses. So it feels somewhat shoe-horned to try and use the atlas to describe in-game locations. —Dr Ishmael 23:10, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Until and unless many players start using atlas coordinates in-game to refer to locations, I don't see any logical reason to invent a new term and confuse everyone. (Or Anet stops using "waypoint" as a term in-game.) Vili 点 23:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I laughed at the illogical conclusion made above that leaps to wayport, but on a serious note, perhaps we might consider adding a masthead link to the Atlas if the support forum adds a link to it? -Chieftain Alex 00:46, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

In any case, the wiki is most definitely not a good place to discuss this, because the active wiki community is extremely small compared to the communities at Reddit or the official forums. The only discussions that happen here are generally limited to things that affect the wiki itself. —Dr Ishmael 03:20, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Living story

A lot of story/lore happening with waypoints. Anyone have all the notes to edit this page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Turbo404 (talk • contribs) at 07:06, 25 August 2014 (UTC).