From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


Weapon Quick References[edit]

I was wondering if people thought it would be worth while to provide quick references for the level 80 exotic weapons of each type, thus making it easier for players to find out which weapons they should get for the stats they want. I've compiled a mock-up in my sandbox in the style of the list of ascended equipment. What do people think? Aqua (talk) 15:47, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I like the idea, but we already have this: Equipment acquisition by stats, and not sure if they would overlap or not.--Lon-ami (talk) 10:24, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Personally I think that "Equipment acquisition by stats" is incredibly vague on how to actually acquire items with certain stats, and it completely ignores random drop items that cannot be obtained through crafting, the Mystic Forge or with dungeon tokens.
Let's say I was looking an L80 exotic shield with Condition Damage, Power and Vitality. Using the existing set-up:
  1. I would have to consult (and know to consult) Item nomenclature to find out that I was looking for a Carrion item.
  2. I would then go to [Equipment acquisition by stats] where I would see from the "Level 80 exotic equipment" section that such an item is available from crafting, other merchants, dungeons or loot.
  3. The respective sections would tell me that I needed Ancient Bones and 400 Weaponsmithing (crafting), that is it is available from Sorrow's Embrace or Citadel of Flame (dungeons) and that Legionnaire and Tribal weapons can come with a Carrion prefix.
While this information is nice, it is not particularly helpful in explaining exactly what I would need to obtain the weapon and it does not discuss in the slightest other opportunities (such as purchasing it off the trading post).
Now if we also utilized the lists I'm proposing, you would simply go to the "List of level 80 exotic shields", sort by Condition Damage on both tables, see that Condition Damage with Power and Vitality is called Carrion, sort the tables by prefix and look through the Carrion sections. You could then assess your options and pick the method that appeals the most to you.
tl;dr Equipment acquisition by stats is a start but it is not thorough or exhaustive enough to stand on its own. Aqua (talk) 18:26, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Regarding point 1, there's a table on EABS that shows every stat combination and its prefix. You wouldn't need to consult Item nomenclature to find that out. Manifold User Manifold Neptune.jpg 18:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Sorry didn't notice that; the other points still stand. Aqua (talk) 19:31, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
The advantage of your version is, aside from stats, it shows skins and how to get them in detail, which is pretty nice if you ask me, and better than EABS which is just too generic.--Lon-ami (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
EABS and Item nomenclature are both overly complicated. IN especially needs to be stripped down to just the tables that define the prefixes; all the extra fluff should be moved somewhere else.
Your table idea is pretty nice, although I would argue that there's no need to show the attribute numbers - all exotic 80 shields have 90/64 attributes. Instead of 1 column/attribute, condense that to Major/Minor1/Minor2 and show the attribute names. —Dr Ishmael User Dr ishmael Diablo the chicken.png 20:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I personally think that the numerical sorting would work better in this case. If we just stripped it down to "major-minor-minor" format, not only would it not allow for celestial easily, but it would also just be a copy-paste of the item nomenclature table. Beyond that, I don't feel that you should have to go to the respective weapon page just to see its stats (even if you know that they are generally 90/64/40). The goal with these is to provide all data (except for specific acquisition and recipes) on one page so that you don't have to go rummaging across the wiki to make comparisons of items.
I also agree that IN and EABS are both way too complicated to be usable. Aqua (talk) 20:17, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I've thrown a new thread up on Talk:Item nomenclature but it hasn't garnered any responses. I've also begun work on a new, exhaustive list of all non-top tier (not level 80 exotic) shields. Opinions on that would also be greatly appreciated. Aqua (talk) 18:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
I'll ask the obvious question: why? Non-level 80 equipment just needs to be "good enough" to keep you alive until you reach level 80. —Dr Ishmael User Dr ishmael Diablo the chicken.png 19:12, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
I guess it boils down to a "where do we want to draw the line?" kind of discussion. The usefulness of my "list of level 80 exotics" is evident and apparent, but would people not also find use in a list of shields that lets you compare stats between all non top tier shields? If people don't believe that there is use in such a list, then that's fine, and if they do believe it could be useful, that works too.
Perhaps more importantly, regardless of whether we choose to provide a list of lower tier weapons or not, the state of our weapons section is abysmal. Some weapons have their own pages, some are grouped together, some pages present information on a specific level or tier of the item, others don't, etc. Should we do a grouped by skin, grouped by name or just avoid it entirely like GWW did and have the weapons section just be skin listings? Aqua (talk) 21:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't know what I'd use it for, but I'd like tables detailing the stats of every possible level/quality for every weapon. Manifold User Manifold Neptune.jpg 22:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
[1] Already did that, strength/defense/attributes. It doesn't have ascended, but they're only at level 80 and only on trinkets, wouldn't be too hard to add. —Dr Ishmael User Dr ishmael Diablo the chicken.png 22:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Weapon tiers[edit]

Now that we have Ascended weapons is it worth including a section here which details the tiers of gear? Like there is here Item#Quality. Or perhaps even just a link to this table? The reason I suggest this change is because now that Ascended weapons have better stats than Exotic weapons, it's worth players knowing this I think. By including a table or information which shows players about the tiers it can be made clearer that Exotic isn't the highest tier now, but Ascended and Legendary are. Neon (talk) 08:33, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree that something on weapon rarity would be good. I've added Weapon#Strength relative to rarity, but perhaps a rewritten version of "Item#Quality" would be better. -Chieftain AlexUser Chieftain Alex sig.png 11:40, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Haven't legendaries been upgraded to ascended stats? --JonTheMon (talk) 12:38, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Fixed. —Dr Ishmael User Dr ishmael Diablo the chicken.png 12:55, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

On the topic of weapon tiers, does anyone else think it would be useful to add a nice table to each subtype of weapon to show min/max damage, the way sword is shown on the main article of this page? I would like to refer to the Shield page as an example, whoever made that page has included a very basic example of (legendary I think??) stats for max/min damage. It seems to me to be a reasonable consideration. Puk (talk) 10:48, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

New Weapons[edit]

I think it's safe to add Sword/Sword and Staff for Revenant based on these two sources:

  1. FB Post
  2. YouTube @ 11:20

However it's not clear whether one of the above will be through a specialization or from it's core profession. Will there be a new check mark color for specialization specific weapons added? In which case we can probably go ahead and add Staff and Greatsword to Ranger and Necro respectively as well as a strong chance for Shield on Mesmer and Hammer on Engineer. 14:45, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't think we should be adding anything HoT-related to this article until HoT is released. —Dr Ishmael User Dr ishmael Diablo the chicken.png 15:51, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Feedback 2015/08/20[edit]

The row on the profession/weapon table showing how many total weapon skills each profession has has not been updated to include HoT weapons - perhaps a new row should be added to the table.

While I'm on that table as well, the green and yellow check marks are very similar in my opinion, and to my eye nearly indistinguishable. Making those more disparate colors would be greatly appreciated.

-- 20:34, 20 August 2015 (UTC)