User talk:Knighthonor/Archive 1

I like Crusader Classes. Both Holy Crusader Classes and Dark Crusader Classes.

hope GW2 will have both--Knighthonor 12:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Welcome

Or at least hey. Behave, so you don't get banned here too ok? ;) --Talk 11:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Well GW2G is just like the KKK in the early 90s, By this I mean, When the Enforcers are currupted, then the community is allowed to be currupted and abusive. The reason I was banned was silly. I was Banned because I reported somebody for Trolling my ideas and harassing me. Many people there dont know that though.But its done already. Iam sure once Anet comes out with info, And if any of it matches my ideas (the same ideas people there enraged on) iam sure they will turn their anger into excitment (LOL)Just watch.--Knighthonor 22:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The only thing I noticed that seemed a little... unusual was the fact that almost all of your suggestions are directly copying WoW.... :P It's a little... unoriginal. I honestly don't mean to sound cruel or picky, and I'm sure you are a creative individual. It's just that so often your ideas are basically "how can we turned GW into a WoW Hybrid?" :P or at least that's how they tend to come across... :( -Amannelle 01:37, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Well most ideas can have backgrounds from older sources. Just look at LoTR for example. Sure Tokigin made lots of new ideas, but even they have backgroups from older myths. My ideas may seem like a copy, but ually thats to people that have either never played a MMORPG before, or have only started play MMORPGs since WoW came out. Many of my Class Ideas can be traced back to games much older then WoW. For example, Many people enraged at my Druid idea, stateing that I copy/Pasted WoW, but my idea was far different from WoW's Druid. My Druid idea is a healer with Bow skills. Druids in WoW cant even use Bows. Many people get caught up in the Name of the Idea or the Archetype of the idea to even sit down and try to read and understand the ideas. As I pointed out to the community at GW2G, that just because a Class has the same name doesnt in anyway mean it functions the same way. Yes they may share the same Archetype, but they will always have different Gameplay and Mechanics. Exampled of this include, a Everquest Druid is much different than a WoW Druid, but yet they still share similar ideas and archetype charateritics. Paladin are in WoW, but in RoM the Knight class functions very different, the Templar in Aion doesnt function anything at all like a WoW Paladin, yet its the same archetype. Each has its own Mechanics but are all still Holy Warriors. So I believe the whole argument that this and that is making GW2 into a WoW clone is silly. Anet has already stated things like Cross Class wearing Gear, Crafting Jobs, Persistant World, and other things in which WoW also has, does that mean GW2 will be bad? I believe adoupting ideas doesnt make a game bad or not. its all with how the developers handle the idea. Anet is strong WoW fans themselfs. I can already see similar lore paths in GW2 barrowed from WoW's Lore. Is that bad? No, cause most GW fans who dont know anything about Warcraft lore cant spot the similarities between both stories.--Knighthonor 01:54, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, I see what you mean. :D Yes, I too have played many different kinds of MMOs, ranging from simplistic like Runescape, to complex like Mabinogi, Perfect World, and WoW. I agree that it is nearly impossible to be "original" when nearly every idea has been done now; what we need to do now is make it unique, which is why it is good to look at WoW, Mabinogi, Everquest, etc and collect information so that GW2 can be unique while still maintaining some good aspects from each of those. One thing I like about WoW and Perfect World is that they have mounts, which come in handy very often. It would be amazing if GW2 could take that even farther, so as to make forms of drivable transportation including chariots, carriages, skyships of various sorts, etc. Also one thing I WAS impressed with in WoW, Runescape, and Mabinogi were buildings you could go inside, which can really add a sense of realism. After all, buildings were built to go INSIDE, so making a building that is just for decoration, although adding to the environment, does tend to take away from the realism. I do hope GW2 will incorporate these ideas in a unique fashion from WoW, Mabinogi, Runescape, Everquest, etc. :) Thanks for responding! ^_^ --Amannelle 03:41, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry Knighthonor, but you weren't banned from GW2Guru because of "corrupt mods" - no, you were flaming the moderators who closed your threads because of the constant trolls, and yes you were trolling there as well, even if you weren't the first troll you still trolled in response. You were given multiple chances and warnings, and thus you were reasonably banned. So please stop saying they are corrupted moderators when you're the one at fault there. Please be a little less annoying over here. Also, regarding your constant comments on image talks, they're concept art thus won't be necessarily in the game, so don't act like they will be. We saw horses and other mounts, and dual wielded weapons in GW1 concept art but they never went into the game, it's possible the same will occur for many concept art pieces here. -- Konig/talk 17:07, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

How will gameplay and mechanics change to adjust to persistant world?

How will gameplay and mechanics change to adjust to persistant world?

In the Mist, will lower populated server players get a buff that increase their HP and Damage, like WoW doesn in Lake Wintergrasp?

in PvE zones, will players have a new way of changing action bar to fit into a pug group that doesnt support their original build?

How will gameplay be Balanced to fit random event PvE? --Knighthonor 23:21, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Images

Hey, Knighthonor. Please upload images intended for personal use with "User Knighthonor" at the beginning of the filename.-- Shew 23:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC) Do I use the : between the name and user?--Knighthonor 23:56, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Nah, just put a space or underscore.-- Shew 00:05, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Image discussions

Hey, a lot of the images you're commenting on are just concept art, meaning it's unlikely what you see will go directly into the game. Someone wielding an axe or something in art doesn't automatically mean there'll be warriors/crusaders/knights, it's just something that looks pretty for the other Anet guys to draw inspiration from.

Also, you don't really need to go round commenting on all the individual images. If you wish to speculate about what an image could mean, I think you'll find it more appropriate (and get quicker responses) on a fansite forum. However, you could also make a page in your userspace (e.g. User:Knighthonor/Images) to list a collection of images and related discussion so it's kept on one page instead of across every discussion page.

That said, if what Konig said here is correct and you were banned from Guru for trolling, then I would strongly suggest you refrain from doing the same here. Considering both sites' aims (we are an encyclopaedic wiki, Guru is a forum), trolling here may be dealt with more swiftly as it can be more disruptive.

Finally, can I ask where you got :File:User Knighthonor PaladinBlackLady.jpg and the images on :File:User Knighthonor Crusader Knight Banner.jpg from? They don't look like ArenaNet-made images to me, so it's likely they're copyright violations. Thanks. -- pling 16:44, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Define Trolling? Because what happen at GW2G wasnt Trolling. The Was nothing more then Corrupted Mods, banning the wrong people.--Knighthonor 16:54, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

See wikipedia:Troll (Internet) for a loose definition. I don't really know what you did on Guru, so I'm not giving it much thought, but I mentioned it so that whatever you did that made them ban you there doesn't occur here as well. Going by Konig's comment in the link and Huginn's at the top of this page, it seems you did something that required banning, so it calls into question whether you're here in good faith or here to repeat whatever offences you may have caused. As I said, it's a suggestion and some advice that can benefit the both of us. -- pling 16:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I told you, I was banned because I reported somebody else for Trolling my idea threads. I dont like When people hate on a idea. Disliking it is ok, but to hate and call you for a ban is silly, So I reported them. As Usual, the Mods there are very courrpted and trolls themselfs. So how do expect the Community there to behave? I did like the Site rules Suggested. I reported people that Troll and Harasss my idea threads. Konig is one of the many TRUE TROLLs on that site, which is why I have no respect for him/her. Konig once banned me for discussing the art in the forum, just like you suggested. So I dont see that as a reasonable reason to go to a forum to discuss concept art. There is a section here to dicuss the art for a reason. and I have been using it. Is that Wrong? because if it is, then clearly you need to be hammering down the rules on the many other people that post on the Art Dicussion tab. Concept Art can change but they sitll give off little infomation on the developer's mindset for the game. And I discuss those ideas in the panel. is that Wrong? Have I done something Wrong? Is that Trolling? Again I ask that, because many people throw out the Troll Name calling card alot even when its not. Just because I dont agree with somebody, does that make me a Troll?--Knighthonor 17:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, that was not why you were banned, you were banned for insulting moderators multiple times even after being told to take such things to PM and was given multiple warnings, and as said above you trolled people who disagreed with your ideas which you thought who were trolling you (some were, but none of them are constant trolls), causing constant flaming and just plain ol' annoyance. Secondly, I didn't ban you, I left that all to JR and the others. And I most certainly do not troll there, so sorry that giving actual discussion for why your idea isn't a good idea is not to your agreement, I guess that's what you meant by trolling? I might be aggressive, but I don't troll. Don't blame the wrong people like you did on GW2Guru. -- Konig/talk 17:16, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

LOL Silly Konig. You are a Troll, please dont post here anymore. Clearly I was Banned because of Corrupted Mods like yourself. JR included. In the Email, he clearly stated why he banned me. For reporting Course(whatever his name is.) People there were allowed to Troll my threads with Silly Pictures and post that had nothign to do with my ideas. That would be trolling. I always got called out for it by Mods, yet never do you Corupted Mods ever say a damn thing to the same repeated Trolls on that site who continue to troll my Ideas. Not like my idea is one thing, and giving feedback on my idea is another, but clearly Trolling because you hate Idea is still TROLLING. Just go back and relook at my Druid Thread. Clearly trolls are visable there. All Reported, but didnt leave a scratch. my thread was closed by a Mod becuase they didnt understand the idea's fit into GW2. Thats a Silly arugument, since its suppose to have been a New Class. Even there is a Druid Art here on the Wiki. So please stop posting here. You are a Troll Mod. Like I said before. GW2G's Mods are like the KKK, When the people the enforce the Rules are Corrupted, then the Community is allowed to get away with being Courrpted and Abusive. I guess it was Hunt Knighthonor season there. Just like Arghore said. Arghore and Sweetzoid were some of the few people on that site not as corrupted as you and Jr. Even both of them called you Mods bad habbits. You want a True Troll, then look yourself in a Mirror. Now please never post to me again. I done with you.--Knighthonor 17:35, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Pushing aside this issue for the moment, my main objection was to you commenting on a large majority of the file discussion pages in a manner that suits a forum better than it does a wiki. I kinda regret bringing the Guru issue into this, so let's just move on. -- pling 17:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Umm.. Knighthonor, I honestly don't know what all happened between you and the mods on that site, but is it really best to try to prove your "innocence" by just insulting Konig...? Isn't that a teeensy bit hypocritical? I mean, you could be totally right, but it seems like name-calling and insulting people on a personal level isn't the best way to prove that you're the victim in this situation... o_o --Amannelle 19:00, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok Pling, but what is the problem with the Discussion tab? I been commenting on what I think about the art, and details I pick up from the art. How is that different from what others here are doing in the same tabs?--Knighthonor 17:38, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

It's the number and type of comments you're making that I have an issue with, not necessarily just the fact you're commenting. However, the more important issue here is where you got the images on your userpage from. -- pling 18:03, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The first one is from this site (Somewere down the page) ( --Talk 18:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

That means that one will have to be deleted from the Wiki due to Copyright; "By clicking the upload file button below, you agree to license your contribution pursuant to the GNU Free Documentation License (1.2 or any later version) and you represent that your contribution is original and does not infringe upon the intellectual property rights of any third party.". If the one of the other two images in the MSPaint creation are also located, I reckon that banner will have to be redesigned as well. - Infinite - talk 23:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't matter so much whether they can be located as whether Knighthonor was the original creator of those images, and thus has the right to upload them here and release them under the GFDL. 03:06, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, i know for a fact the banner is using Warhammer Online concept art, so it might as well be deleted. Also, i think Knighthonor has been banned for flaming/trolling etc, so thank god for that :) --aut (t) 15:53, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

So I heard...

You want GW2 to be a free WoW?--/ u /nendingfear 16:53, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

lolRunesOfMagic - Infinite - talk 18:47, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Guys, let's not go there - you'll either aggravate him or feed his trolling, or just troll him back. -- pling 21:42, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd rather not have the forum drama of GW2G continue here. This place was so quiet and peaceful for meh 'till I stumbled upon this guy's page. Hehe. --Naoroji 15:11, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

This guy is banned so why are we talking about him? -- Konig/talk 16:09, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

"07:57, 10 March 2010 Pling (Talk | contribs) blocked Knighthonor (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 3 days (account creation disabled) ‎ (disruption: excessive spam, trolling)" ORLY?--/ u /nendingfear 16:11, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Didn't notice the three days, but he probably thinks it's a perma, so let's just say it is. -- Konig/talk 16:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Awhhh, but I like toying with the WoWfanbois 3:--/ u /nendingfear 16:34, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Since when did u toy with me...? --Neil2250 , The Zoologist 16:44, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Since whenever you go to sleep ;o--/ u /nendingfear 16:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Shut up. -- pling 16:46, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

wow but I was called for trolling? lol--Knighthonor 17:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I Mean Not to Offend But

Stop saying everything like you Know it, Becuase its Just sounding Like your refering to types of World Of Warcraft weapons.--Neil2250 , The Zoologist 16:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

are you trolling, cause I dont know what you are talking about--Knighthonor 18:36, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Translation of neil's comment "<NPA> Stop putting WoW shit.</NPA>"--/ u /nendingfear 19:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

What are you talking about??? The only thing I did was list the new weapon types seen in the trailer, and listing some from the first game on the weapon page. What else did I do? What WoW thing you talking about?--Knighthonor 19:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

They mean the weapons might not be classified under "1-handed" and "2-handed" - i.e., your contributions to the Weapon page was pure speculation in terms of name, and that because we don't know with certainty what they are called, it is best to keep it generalized. Like "sword" instead of "two-handed sword, one-handed sword" or "hammer" instead of "one-handed mace, two-handed mace" (which is most likely to simply be called "mace" and "hammer"). Guild Wars 1 didn't have "two-handed" in front of names, so it is unlikely that will be how they are named in GW2. It is more likely to be "short swords" "sword" and "great sword" (translation: daggers, one-handed sword, two-handed sword). -- Konig/talk 20:45, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Dagger? Hammer? Bows werent 2hander? --Knighthonor 20:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

"Guild Wars 1 didn't have "two-handed" in front of names". They were two-handed, but they were not called two-handed. -- Konig/talk 03:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Now you just acting stupid. You excused me of trolling and said I was using WoW terms for the weapons, and I clearly showed you that Anet also use those terms in GW1. These are new Features to have new weapon types. I listed some of the new weapons seen from the trailer. New comers would like to no the things like that. Since the first game had no 1hander maces or 2hander swords.--Knighthonor 13:59, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I think Konig and Neil are trying to say that until we KNOW these things will be 2 hander or other specifics, we should probably leave it as simple as possible. ^_^ That and it sorta sounded like you were listing WoW weaponry, but you say you weren't, so I'll take your word for it. :) --Amannelle 14:05, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Well thats the point. WHich is why I pointed out that this is seen in the trailer but could change at any moment. Those two are the real trolls. Cause clearly Anet uses those same terms. WoW didnt invent them. So stop it with all the silly WoW hatred fro every damn thing. Seriously. Konig, if you want a troll, look in the mirror. Iam getting tired of your bull. You know nothing other then bashing WoW. Again, so stop posting here and leave me alone. I asked nicely, you got me ban from GW2G before, so please, just leave me alone. Is that too much to ask? Because clearly you are blinded by WoW hate, and cant see past the fog.--Knighthonor 14:12, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I Can asure you my fine fellow im not a troll! --Neil2250 , The Zoologist 14:38, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I Have an idea, Insted of us moaning at you because your saying and sudgesting things Scarely close To World Of Warcraft and Other Games, How about you Sudgest something Original? --Neil2250 , The Zoologist 10:50, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

For the record, I was arguing against naming them something we don't know what they will be named and are unlikely to be named. Hence 2-handed swords won't be what they are called, but rather they could be called a variety of other names like Great Swords or Long Swords, etc. They might be 2-handed but, again, they are not called by their name such. -- Konig/talk 12:25, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Pardon me for just suddenly jumping in here, but I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding. ^_^ I mean, from what I can tell KnightHonor was basing the categories on what they WERE, rather than what they were to be called. Konig must have thought he was indicating these names would be the same as the ones in other MMOs, and felt that KnightHonor was just making an attempt to make GW more like WoW. However, repeatedly calling them trolls isn't going to help your case, KnightHonor. It can get bothersome when someone "plays the troll card" every few minutes, if you know what I mean. :P It's like the little boy who cried wolf, essentially; it makes it lose importance, and can encourage people to ignore you, which typically isn't what one would want. :) Perhaps in your case you feel like they really are trolls. If you do feel this way, perhaps it's better just to avoid contact with them than to flat out insult them each time they have an opposing opinion. ^_^ Sorry about having to be so blunt, but honestly, this whole "elephant in the room" deal is getting a bit much lol. --Amannelle 13:02, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh btw I think Konig is relating your ideas back to WoW because those classes you "said" were going to be in game and your suggestions for GW2 are more of a WoW or other MMO type of class, when the majority of people who are from GW1 and say they will be going to GW2 want the original professions or some of them wont play GW2. Also with your ideas kinda relating to WoW, Arenanet has said that they will avoid GW2 being like a free WoW. - Giant Nuker 14:58, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

@ Amannelle, name calling is what they have been doing as well. I have asked them multiple times to leave me alone, yet they continue to come here provoke flames. @ Giant Nuker, that is not a valid excuse to flame somebody. All Class ideas in GW univers can be traced to another game or IP somewhere. For example. People got mad at my Druid Class idea because they said it was a copy of WoW. Nobody even tried to read it and see that it is nothing like WoW druid. And Druids were in RPG genre all the way back to DnD, which is way older then WoW. Even Anet has a picture of a GW2 Druid in the concept art. So is that a valid reason to also Bash Anet? Also people Bashed my Cleric class. Well now that the new art came out, people are more open to the idea of a Cleric class. Yet when I made the class on the forum, people bashed me. For what? I guess its ok for the community if Anet makes a new class, but not ok when I do it. And your comment about a "FREE WOW",, what does that even mean? ANET stated the GW2 will be a Traditional MMORPG this time. Does that mean WoW is what a MMORPG is defined to? Last time I checked, there were MMORPG out before World of Warcraft. Ever here of the game called Everquest? Ring any bells? There will be similarities in GW2 to World of Warcraft. I believe that is something the community has to get over. Anet has already stated idea concepts for GW2 that are different from GW1. And many of them already are similar to things World of Warcraft have. Examples- Crafting system, Class Restrictions on Weapons, new Gear system unbound to classes, jumping, persistant world just to name a few. Does that mean it will be similar to World of Warcraft? Yes! but doest other MMORPG have the same things? YES!!! So get over this WoW hatred that anything similar to WoW must be Free WoW.--Knighthonor 23:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

@ Konig - as I pointed out. You seem to be blinded by WoW hatred to see that you are being stupid and trolling. ANET categorized the weapons by type called 2hander as well. If you would stop trolling for a sec and load up the GW1 you would see that. I was just stating the new choices in the weapon category compared to GW1, so new comers could have a idea of the NEW weapon options. When somebody says 2hander hammer in GW1, would they think of WoW? Hammers them self were 2 hander in the first game only, anyway. So how would you describe a 1hander mace and a 2hander sword, and other weapons that wernt in GW1, to somebody new to GW2 information?

Call it Greatweapon? How would somebody from GW1 community who doesnt know anything about GW2 information, know what what a Greatweapon is? That could be a Powerful LEET weapon or something based on the name. Why not use the term 2hander which was already used in GW1 as a term to describe weapons that you use two hands to wield? So stop your Trolling and WoW Hatred for a sec and think about that--Knighthonor 23:29, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I think the personal attacks here need to stop - calling people stupid isn't really acceptable. I don't think either party are going to agree with each other; also, if people are trolling, they need to stop, as do the thrown-about accusations that seem to be only attacks. -- pling 23:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

@ Pling, can you then please tell Neil and Kogin to stop their harassing and bad words at me then. Flaming me for using the term 2hander seems silly wouldnt you agree?--Knighthonor 23:37, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

If you think they're flaming you, the best thing to do is not respond in a similar way - I'm not going to play the parent in this discussion. -- pling 23:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

@ Ping, so why did you come at me and ban me for posting on the pictures then? Seems to me, you to know that they are wrong, but refuse to jump down on them so you wouldnt take the heat. You are being bias as well then. --Knighthonor 23:50, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I believe my first comment in this discussion addressed everyone, not just you. -- pling 00:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

@Pling well my comment was addressing you. You got on my case and said I was trolling. Well what do you call what Neil and Konig are doing, cause clearer by your own terms these people are trolling. Yet you ban me, but done nothing to them. Clearly you are bias. I have nothing more to say to you as well then. Peace.--Knighthonor 00:05, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

May i add i havent exactly said anything Rude,Harasfull, nor offending to you, ive only said to come up with original things and not say stuff like you Know it.--Neil2250 , The Zoologist 01:07, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

See Neil you continue to Troll. Where did I say I know the stuff? I clearly stated that those weapons are things seen in the trailer which could change at any giving moment. Where in there did I say I know it? Cause that seem to be enraging you so much, cause Iam not seeing that. Or maybe you just trolling--Knighthonor 01:21, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Im Just Saying Your Implying you know.which no-one does(apart from the designers), THAT is whats realy raging me.--Neil2250 , The Zoologist 01:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Its called Observation. Know were in my statement did I say I know anything. I pointed out that these are weapons SEEN in the trailer. Anet hasnt announced any weapons other then Guns. So clearly you too are victim of you own arguement. Whos to say the original weapons will return? Wouldnt that also be YOU IMPLYING THAT YOU KNOW SOMETHING? So why arent you enraging at your self for doing the same thing then?--Knighthonor 01:42, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I'd like to state that I never said in this discussion that KH was using WoW terms. I didn't even say "other games" - that was all Neil. I also never called KH anything, so I never "played the name card" in this discussion. @KH: We don't know how Anet categorizes weapons. In GW1 there was no 1-handed and 1-handed of the same weapon type (read: no 2-handed swords/axes/spears, 1-handed daggers/scythes/hammers/bows), so they didn't have the need to classify weapons by 1-handed or 2-handed. They just had them. In GW2, this seems to be different, but we still don't know how they classify weapons like you claim to know. I used "Great Sword" as an example of what the weapon type might be called, not what to put up. And once we have information of the weapons and put up their actual names, one can follow a link to a page on that weapon which would then state that the weapon is a 2-handed weapon. But we don't even know if the larger swords are 2-handed, do we? No.
To reiterate: I never called anyone a troll or stupid, I never used the term WoW - And just to throw a cog in KH's gears, I think KH is in fact "blinded by WoW" - specifically, blinded by the response he got from GW2Guru when he took too many ideas from WoW without altering them to fit GW2, and along with that arguing that GW2 should take things from WoW but that every game that takes things from WoW ends up failing. The only time I have "insulted" (and I hardly think that I ever did) KH was when I said that his profession suggestions on Guru did not fit existing lore and that they in fact contradicted it. I even said his ideas were good if he just tweaked them a little and made them into enemies instead of a playable profession. But he never did and instead raged at me, most likely, in my opinion, due to everyone else saying that he shouldn't copy WoW so much, which in a way he was doing. These are facts, not insults, not calling him a troll, at all. -- Konig/talk 01:55, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Guild Wars 1 does cata weapons into 1hander 2hander. Its on the PvP gear creator. Also this could all easily change with some editing. Thats why they call them Place Holders. Like I asked before, how would you describe a new weapon option to somebody that doesnt know anything about GW2 information? Does 2hander weapon not fit, seeing that its a term used in the first game. Since the trailer shows 1 hander and 2 hander swords, how would somebody that doesnt no this info supose to get informed to the additional weapon type if all you say is Sword?--Knighthonor 02:08, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

They are not called "2-handed Hammer" - they are 2-handed, they are separate from 1-handed weapons, but they are not called such. As such, the list on Weapon should not have "2-handed sword" when it could, officially, be called "Great Sword" or "Long Sword" or whatever. The "1-handed hammer" may be called a "mace" and the "2-handed hammer" may be called a hammer. Point is we don't know what they're called. We know that there will be 2-handed weapons, and the larger sword may very well be a 2-handed weapon, but that's not what they are called. -- Konig/talk 03:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Again you still aint getting it. 2hander is a category that describes the weapon. Nobody is saying anything about what they are called sonce we dont know that. But as I put it, its a descriptive place holder title for people who dont know anything about GW2 information. How else would you describe a 2hander sword to somebody that dont know about GW2 info? Answer that.--Knighthonor 04:18, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

The list in which you edited and placed "2-handed sword" and the like is for the names, not the "category." As for how I would do it, I would put the name on the Weapons page, with a link to a page about the weapon (much like gw1:bow), and in that page have it state that it is a 2-handed or 1-handed weapon. -- Konig/talk 05:04, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

But again you not thinking. How would that describe GW2 Weapons? How would somebody know that there are 2hander swords from that info? in GW1 there were only 1hander swords, so how would somebody know the new weapon option from the info you suggested?--Knighthonor 07:05, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Let me make this as simple as possible: The Weapon page does not list descriptions. It lists names. The descriptions will go on pages like Sword, Axe, Pistol, etc. When we know that those are the names of the weapons and have enough information to warrant a page. -- Konig/talk 07:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

ok Iam fine with that--Knighthonor 08:21, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

(Btw, Konig; I wasn't implying you called anyone names. xD KnightHonor was the one who called people trolls, and I was just saying that it typically isn't a good thing to do often) ^_^ --Amannelle 13:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

• Reads*...Do not fart in the guildhall... ...The Heck!? --Neil2250 , The Zoologist 13:59, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Both, stop gathering wood, the fire is extinguished. -- Cyan 15:12, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Whoa, Cyan... harsh. :( I was only trying to fix a misunderstanding, I'm a little surprised (and hurt) that you'd assume I would by some stretch of the imagination TRY to start conflicts...  :( bye --Amannelle 16:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Maybe it's not your intention, but the line "ok I am fine with that--Knighthonor 08:21, 5 April 2010 (UTC)" was a clear end to this topic (praise god). Its good to fix misunderstanding, but sometimes its better to leave it, the risk for another discussion (with (un)intentionel flaming) is high. Im not saying you are searching for conflicts, I believe your intentions are positive, but even positive things can give a negative effect. And, at last, please don't jump in conclusions with minimum input =) -- Cyan 17:33, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

That was there from the Guild Leader before. Most people quit the guild and I was left with it, but never left since I only do the PvE and Faction battles.--Knighthonor 18:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Dear God

The amount of drama on this page is unbelievable. --Naoroji 14:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey KH,

Thanks for creating pages and uploading images. But, you don't have to capitalize 'Two-Handed' and 'One-Handed'. Proper English is proper :p. --Naoroji 22:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

That was me. Copy/paste ftw (the categories were capitalized...I copied and pasted them into the info).-- Shew 22:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh? Shame on you, Shew! ;o j/k. Sorry then, KH :). --Naoroji 22:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

While this is on the topic, should "mace," "pistol," etc., be capitalized or lowercase? Taros 22:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Lowercase, though I know I capitalized them. :P-- Shew 22:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Also, KH, you don't have to suddenly go on an image uploading spree. We have time :P. --Naoroji 23:09, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Ahem.

Fyi, copy+pasting a sudgestion that happend to be programmed already wont get you recognition. --Neil2250 , The Zoologist 14:47, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

No Neil, they would. My idea already got put in. Isnt that cool!!!! But I guess you are just never happy are you Neil? LOL--Knighthonor 14:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I Must agree. im an unhappy sod, However: (song:) My scarecrows much better than yours, Big fright, its still better than yours...(/song) --Neil2250 , The Zoologist 14:52, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

How do you know they took the idea from you? Also, there is really no need to spam everybodys talk pages, you just asking to get flamed... Also Niel, just don't get involved :3. --aut (t) 14:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Because clearly it got used. Thats why I posted it on the suggestion page <(*.*)> LOL--Knighthonor 14:54, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Just like me asking Anet to nerf SF in a suggestion? :3 --Neil2250 , The Zoologist 15:12, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Guess you just have too much attitude. LOL--Knighthonor 15:14, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Lol Kt' that doesn't even make sense. xD 173.190.17.186 15:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Wasnt suppose to. LOL--Knighthonor 15:19, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Death To all those who Stand in the way of my Crusader!!!LOL--Knighthonor 15:33, 29 April 2010 (UTC) I see.... So, is there any point in putting "LOL" after every post of yours? It's rather pointless, and makes you seem rather... insane. o_o 173.190.17.186 15:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

No, he's trying to be like Nuke with "Thanks" =p--/ u /nendingfear 15:56, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Remind me to send my army of crusaders to destroy the two of you. LOL--Knighthonor 16:23, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Heh, nothing can kill me. :3

I've killed armies :3--Unending ♥ fear 17:03, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Kids, please go play in the fire and stop chit-chatting... Be constructive =) -- Cyan 17:04, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

You're very annoying.

Just to be blunt. And please don't go spamming "omg anet used my idea!11!!1!" on dozens of talk pages, it's pointless and rather annoying. Especially on mine. I don't like you, you annoy me - a lot - I've tried to be nice, but you insult me in response, I tried to be reasonable, but you flamed me. If the only time you're going to act civil, which is even a stretch, is when you're bragging about something that's more than likely incorrect, don't post it on my talk space, please. I'm asking nicely with this. Also: Your "LOL" at the end makes you seem even more immature. (Note: Nothing here was an insult, but fact, advice, and a request). -- Konig/talk 21:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey Konig, nope, sorry I wont. Hey remember you did the same to me, both here and on guru. But anyway thats besides the point. Iam willing to forgive you and get over it like I have done for Neil and the other person. You flamed me before, but thats normal. Even people of WoW flame my ideas, even when they get added. So its not too surprising to find hatred towards my ideas before people can get a visual understanding of it.Would be nice if some of my class suggestions would be used. Seem like the community is more open to the idea of a Crusader profession and a Cleric and Druid profession. Stay tune Konig, I get back in touch with you. LOL <--just to annoy you more :P --Knighthonor 22:26, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Um.. Kt', I don't think he's apologizing. :P How you interpreted an apology from that I do not know. But... furthermore I don't think he's apologizing, mainly because he shouldn't have to. I haven't seen Konig do anything wrong, period. I guess I'm sorta envious of that quality; he tends to be correct about near everything, and when there may be a chance he is mistaken he makes a point of clarifying he isn't 100% sure. I don't quite understand what happened between you guys, but from what I've seen, I don't think Konig is the one who should be apologizing... o_o... 173.190.17.186 22:31, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not going to get into this again, but I never insulted you. I said your ideas were better off as enemies than professions, I said you should change your ideas and not copy right from WoW (that's not an insult, that's advice), and I said that your ideas conflicted with existing lore. I didn't flame you at all, I don't know why you continuously think I did. You, on the other hand, flamed me repeatedly.

@IP: What happened can be seen above, for what Kt means for on here. For on Guru, what happened was that he took a lot of ideas which were for the most part 90%-ish based off of WoW and D&D (and all image examples were from there), and he go flamed for it. I contributed to the discussion, in which I said that his ideas went against pre-existing lore and that they do not work out for professions (but instead do for enemies, very much so in fact; i.e., I was saying "Good ideas, but you're going in the wrong direct"). I never flamed him, except after he repeatedly ignored my key points to what's wrong about his ideas (every idea has faults, I was trying to help him fix his ideas' faults). I told him to alter the lore, to edit the numbers of skill examples so that they are not copy pasted from the WoW wiki (which many were - to Kt: NOT AN INSULT!), and to think about his ideas more instead of just posting whatever, which it seemed to do, and to actually edit his ideas instead of just saying he would while doing nothing but insulting people back. I did nothing wrong, but Kt has overused my patience, which is damn hard to do. -- Konig/talk 22:40, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

My apoligies @ Konig. Again, people flame my ideas on WoW also. No big deal. Some of my ideas got used there, and those same people who bashed them, now praise them. Same will come from my GW2 ideas. Soon it will all come out. But who cares. I just want a Crusader Class. And it seem like we are getting it. No more Warrior/Monk or Warrior/Necro since Dual Classes are gone. This tells me that the new Soldier class can likely be a crusader of some kind.--Knighthonor 22:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Just to be a little nasty here: And if they (Arena Net) add a 'crusader class' to GW2, how much likely is it that they based it on your idea? Little change if I may say so. -- Cyan 22:52, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, I think this second soldier class will just be a gw1:Paragon that got buffed in the support department. Most likely will be called the same as well. -- Konig/talk 22:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Come now Cyan, a Crusader is a Crusader, no matter how the spells are. Paragon is based on the DnD Cleric Paragon from the new edition. So I dont see it that hard to make a Holy Crusader from this. To bad no Dual Classess, cause now I wont likely be able to make a Dark Crusader tho.--Knighthonor 23:00, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Hold up, Iam going to try to find the art also for it. I seen what looks like the Charr version and Norn version. And of course the Human version.--Knighthonor 23:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

You don't answer my question at all (what a suprise). How likely is it that IF they implent it that it is based on specefic YOUR idea? -- Cyan 23:06, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

How do you want me to answer that? Its Anet's game, they can use the idea if they like. Thats why I posted it on the suggestion boards. What you want me to say? I dont work for them, so how would I know the chance of them using my ideas?--Knighthonor 23:22, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Charr knight--Knighthonor 03:11, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Just one quickie,... Your idea wasn't implemented. Your idea looked nothing like what got actually implemented. There, I've said it. You didn't have a good idea. --Naoroji 08:19, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

You behave like they do, that if they implent something you suggested (although your suggestions are very fogged) they did it because you suggested it. And that, my little fellow, is with no doubt not true. -- Cyan 09:20, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

we will see--Knighthonor 14:19, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, we won't. Simply because Anet won't ever say "we took this idea from that." And as I said before, 2 months is not long enough to make a valid skill system, they've probably been working on that since 2008. They said in an interview that at first they wanted to have the dual professions, but they couldn't due to the new skill system, so the dual professions was removed early on. Early on, to me, implies 2007/2008, not "February 2010" which is when you made your suggestion. -- Konig/talk 18:54, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Is this really worth arguing over? :p-- Shew ♠♠♠ 18:56, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, yes it is. Konig actually made a really argument there :p --Talk 19:02, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I never intended it to become an argument, I was merely asking Knighthonor to not post on my talk page again. That was all I wanted originally. -- Konig/talk 19:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

If he posts on your talk page, just archive him straight away? Problem solved. Reaper of Scythes** 21:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Konig, I believe, is in the right here. He came and asked fairly civilly for someone with the history he has with KnightHonor. He chose to do this semi-face to face. Basically it was a simple request to not post on his talk page, especially to brag about something. This was all resolved basically some 4-5 replies in, and was made worse by others weighing in on it. The simple fix? Since its resolved, stop replying!--Corsair 22:09, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Templates

Hey, Knighthonor. Templates that you use for your user page should be in subpages of your user page, so I moved Template:My Classes to User:Knighthonor/Template/My Classes.-- Shew ♠♠♠ 18:07, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey how do I move it, so I know in future reference?--Knighthonor 19:11, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

There should be a "move" tab at the top of the page (next to "history").-- Shew ♠♠♠ 19:12, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

And I make all templates like so. [,[,User:Knighthonor/Template/<insert Name>]] --Knighthonor 19:14, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

You just create pages in your directory...they can be called anything (e.g. User:Knighthonor/asdfjkl or User:Knighthonor/Templates/asdfjkl).-- Shew ♠♠♠ 19:21, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

By the why, Kh, you can put <nowiki></nowiki> around links you don't want linked, like where you did the [,[, above. I.e., type <nowiki>[[User:Knighthonor/Template/<insert Name>]]</nowiki>. -- Konig/talk 19:42, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

ok thx--Knighthonor 22:28, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Cool Down?

Why did you add it, exactly? GW has recharge, not cool down. And don't bring the argument 'It's Guild Wars 2~! It might be Cool Down~!', sure, it might be, but we don't know, so don't add it yet :P (PS. these are the kinds of things that make people go 'WoW-tard!'). --Naoroji I need help! 20:19, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

ok, my bad--Knighthonor 20:22, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Fail.

i think hes refering to an argument. " OMFG YOUR SUCH A NOOB " - " CD mate.CD. " see what i mean? --Neil2250 , The Zoologist 20:24, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey, that could be ;o. KH, is that what you meant? If so, it should be added, I guess. --Naoroji I need help! 08:41, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from removing the Deletion tag

The only reason it's there is to start discussion. A Deletion tag doesn't mean it will ACTUALLY be deleted. It just means there should be a discussion WHETHER OR NOT it should be deleted. So, as such, please go to the page's talkpage and discuss for or against the deletion =). --Naoroji I need help! 20:42, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

(playable)

You should stop adding these, they are redundant and unnecessary. The only case where we might need this is if there is another race of Charr or Asura, completely different from what we know of. Such as the Enchanted in GW, the armor and the floating weapons.--Corsair

There are npc of the same race we will have to fight. Just look at the Slyvari lore--Knighthonor 02:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

And there is an article on them.-- Shew ♠♠♠ 02:51, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Agreed with Corsair, as stated in Talk:Asura_(playable). Having a seperate page is an unneeded distinction. The main race page is more than capable of covering the entire subject of that race and all of its facets. Arshay Duskbrow 02:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Corsair and Arshay are right, Knighthonor. It was a very thoughtful gesture to want to help by adjusting categorization, but the pages we already have seem to work splendidly. However, I admire your enthusiasm to help out on this site, and encourage you to continue contributing in the future (just not making "playable" sections anymore, please). Thanks! :) --Amannelle 02:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I see you created a "Sylvari (playable)" page as well even after this unresolved discussion began. That's not the way things work, KH.-- Shew ♠♠♠ 02:59, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

And now Human (playable)? Again, stop it.-- Shew ♠♠♠ 03:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

KH, please stop this, they will only be taken down at this rate. You would have a better chance talking it over on one of the current pages, instead of making new ones. Doing it like this is no way to be a part of the wiki.--Corsair 03:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

o_o I don't think he's checked the RC yet... --Amannelle 03:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Surely he's seen the notification at the top of his page. :S-- Shew ♠♠♠ 03:14, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, true; good point. ^^ --Amannelle 03:15, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree, these pages are not necessary - the asura, norn, et al pages are enough. If you want to compare it to GW1, we only had one human page with pages for the separate armies/factions, even though humans still fought humans. pling 11:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Redirects

Could you stop making these if we still discuss the need of the page its existance? -- Cyan 15:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

yeh, please check them out or i'll have to keep slamming delete templates on 'em.--Neil2250 15:54, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

How else would you link to a article?--Knighthonor 16:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Since when do we need redirects for a page which is qualified for a deletion? -- Cyan 16:03, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Why are to requesting a page for delete that benefit users? Thats why I dont see that as a valid argument for not creating links to them--Knighthonor 16:05, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Common information like Role playing game belongs on wikipedia, not here. -- Cyan 16:06, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I dont see why, when this is a RPG game after all--Knighthonor 16:08, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but people generally know what type of game is it before checking out its wiki... Just a pointless page that isn't needed. --aut /(t) 16:09, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

And not everybody know GW2 will be a MMORPG this time around. And this makes a great wiki to explain the genre of its own game--Knighthonor 16:11, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Are you kidding? Like, serious? Thereby, GWW didn't need such a page, so GW2W also don't need it. -- Cyan 16:13, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

SO your point? GW wasnt a MMO--Knighthonor 16:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

True, GW was a CORPG, but it didnt have a page for that ;)--aut /(t) 16:16, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

you must of shit yourself when you found out 6mil players is comonly called massive.-- Neil2250 , The Deleter 16:16, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes it has, redirected to Guild Wars page. 91.82.70.93 16:17, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

And thats still not a reason not to explain the game's genre to viewers.--Knighthonor 16:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

They can check wikipedia for that. -- Cyan 16:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

And they can check this Wiki for it as well. Now stop--Knighthonor 16:20, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

how about no? it is uneeded when we can just link it to wikipedia.totaly pointless.--Neil2250 , The Deleter 16:21, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I see no harm in having it; however, KH, if not everyone agrees, then it should be discussed.-- Shew ♠♠♠ 16:22, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Pling's idea is also a good one, I hope you can find yourself in that. -- Cyan 16:24, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

"It would be better to link to wikipedia:Massively multiplayer online role-playing game instead of having our own article - the Wikipedia article has a lot more information and links to other relevant subjects.pling" Taken from Pling.--Neil2250 , The Deleter 16:25, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Mind not...

Copy+Pasting from WoWiki? Copyright prohibits it.carry on and you will be banned.(at least bother to reword it.)--Neil2250, The Deleter 17:44, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, please do not copy content from other, incompatible wikis. It might be even more appropriate to use GWW as the source for articles that apply on GW2 as well. poke | talk 17:58, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I had changed the AoE page--Knighthonor 17:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Why

Do you want GW2 to be like WoW? And please stop copying from WowW =-=. (Also see above). Reaper of Scythes** 21:57, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Why do you try to start trouble with trolling comments? Answer that, and you got your own answer to your question--Knighthonor 01:54, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

He wasn't trolling... Honestly, Kt, you have your times of being good, but you always seem to relapse into being a jerk who constantly calls others trolls when you're acting more like a troll than others (note: I did not call you a troll, but said that you're closer to one than others). -- Konig/talk 03:00, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

So how was his/her statement not a direct attack? And flame bait? Thats not trolling?--Knighthonor 03:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

It sounded to me like a real question, but maybe I'm just too naive lol. There ARE some aspects of WoW that I think should be accepted into GW2, namely because these aspects are not unique to WoW and existed before it. One of these aspects is the ability to go inside buildings; incorporated in MANY games aside from WoW, but I'm sure WoWtards will say "they stole that from us!" when it's implemented into GW2 (which I'm very glad it IS being implemented, since it adds much more realism and can make for more fluid transitions as well). KnightHonor, what aspects do you like about WoW? :) --Amannelle 03:22, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

How can anybody say they stole it from WoW, when it was in EQ, DnD, UO, so on so on, all of which are older than WoW. That doesnt make much sense, and seem pointless to try to avoid something, just because WoW does it. Iam going to redo the pages that were deleted, but this time use my own wording for most things.--Knighthonor 03:28, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's so much the fact that WoW has it, as much as it is that their fanbase will consider anything similar to WoW a "copy" of it. This has caused MANY MMOs to fail because any idea that is implemented (whether unique or not) will either be stolen by WoW and considered original, or simply dominated by WoW. :) Fortunately, GW1 was so unique that WoW couldn't mimic it (unless they were to change their entire graphics system and gameplay style, which they wouldn't). As to your second comment... I don't know if it was the wording of those terms as much as the terminology itself: These terms either aren't used in GW or are already found on Wikipedia, where they can be more beneficial than if they were on here. :) It was a nice gesture, but those pages really aren't needed on here. Thank you though. ^_^ --Amannelle 03:33, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

The main beef, is not that WoW has these features, but that you literally stole large portions of said articles from the WoW Wiki. Putting them in your own words is a good first step, but make sure the pages are relevant before you put them up. Some of the ones deleted could have been relevant, but that you stole them automatically slated them for deletion. Just be careful what kind of pages you put up in the future. And remember, no copy+paste from non-ANet sources. ^.^--Corsair@Yarrr 03:37, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Hmm.. yes, good advice, Corsair. :) --Amannelle 03:38, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Dude

WoW fails. It's grinding, it's level based and everything that was outdated before the game even came out. The meaning of GW is to be as different from that as possible(=as much better as possible)so I would be happy if you stopped posting suggestions and stuff where you want GW2 to be like WoW. And copy-pasting from WoW-wiki was just too much. The day ANet makes a WoW clone is the day after the day when everyone in the whole world thinks runescape is good(=never) Yeah, sure, flame me, insult me, I don't care. The Slayer 08:19, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I dont care if Anet made a WoW clone, you would still play it, even if all it had was a GW2 name tag on it. Anet already showing us that they are ready to through out old GW1 concepts, and replace them with traditional MMORPG concepts that may be similar to WoW. thats something, many of you will have to get over. Yes it was wrong to copy paste from another wiki, but it was formatted well, and explained the concepts of the new mechanics pretty well. All I had to do was remove what was in the WoWwiki, that wasnt known in the GW2 info. Terms like Stun apply to many games, not just WoW, which is why I do not feel that was copyrighted term. WoW has other terms used in GW1 also, does that mean, we shouldnt use them ether? And like I said before. Just a few weeks back, GW1wiki had a main page article on Snares. Check back on the history of that site to find it. Maybe that will please you. Like I said, time to get over this fear that Anet is making a WoW clone and you people so call it. Because Anet is going a make GW2 into a MMO similar to WoW, as shown in many of the info provided this far. The game is look more and more closer to WoW than to GW1. I wonder why (sarcasm). What many of you dont realize is that GW1 wasnt a MMORPG. Its more of a Diablo type game. GW2 will be in a completely different genre then GW1. What this means, is gameplay will change, and concepts will change, but the Background Lore will be the same. Iam sure Warcraft fans didnt scream at the differences between Warcraft 3 and World of Warcraft. Why? Because they two different game genres, following the same background lore. Asking for the new genre game to be the same/clone of the different genre game in the series is just silly, wither you want to believe that or not.--Knighthonor 09:38, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Guild Wars wasn't a Diablo-type game. A Diablo-type game would imply that it has a single-player and that the multi-player(/online) is completely optional. Guild Wars is online, you can't play it offline. It's also, actually, an MMORPG. The only argument otherwise would be that it utilizes too many instances and the game can be played like a single-player. That still doesn't make it an online solo-RPG, though. The game's idea was for people to play together (hence the ABILITY to even party). Other than that ('that', being Multiplayer), it's Massive, it's Online, and it's an RPG. Also, GW1 concepts weren't old. The traditional ideas are old. The concepts we had in GW1 were original, fresh. And that is why everyone hopes they keep at least a few of those concepts. And I don't think ANet wants to get rid of them all, either. --Naoroji 09:54, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Also, just a little FYI, even if GW wasn't an MMORPG (which it actually is, but, hypothetically), the jump from CORPG to MMORPG is considerably smaller than from RTS to MMORPG. So your analogy sucks, really. --Naoroji 09:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Thereby, GW2 has more from the original Guild Wars then from WoW... You are clearly the only one who sees it on another way. So where is the problem? Right, at your side. -- Cyan 10:08, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Iam sorry, but its pointless to get into this argument as to GW1 being a MMO or not. You two are fanboys, so ofc you are going to deny the truth. The Majority of MMORPG fanbase, knows and agrees that GW1 is not a MMORPG. Just head on over to MMORPG.com if you dont believe me. GW2 is a mmo. And even if you want to deny all the truth there, that in no way disproves, that Anet is head farther and farther away from the GW1 concepts. check it out now. Dual Class system got removed, is one example of a major concept drop. Preset action bar is another major example. Persistent world, is another example. The list goes on. Its getting more and more closer to traditional mmos like WoW, and farther away from old GW1 concepts.--Knighthonor 10:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Thats your opinion. It seems a lot don't agree with you. -- Cyan 10:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry, but you seem to have a thick skull,... As I demonstrated earlier, GW1 already fits the definition of MMORPG to a tee. Doesn't matter what the rest of the world thinks. If the rest of the world says that blue is green,... What would you say? 'No, blue is blue and green is green!', exactly. --Naoroji 10:38, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

No actually the majority agrees with me. even Anet themselves. So iam not sure what kinda game you pulling. go to MMORPG.com and have them tell ya then.--Knighthonor 10:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

@Naor thats a fail logic. If the world says a color is a certain color, then its that color. The Majority (Including Anet) agrees that GW1 is NOT a MMORPG. Its a CORPG like Diablo and Demon Soul. Nothing more. You seem to be the thick skull here. Because its not sinking in. When even the creators of the game agree thats its not a MMO, then its not a MMO. Get over it. Like I said, its pointless to argue over this, since you are a fanboy. You will never see past fanboism.--Knighthonor 10:43, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Go ahead and ask Arena Net if they use WoW mechanics like you want us to believe.. I think we all know the answer on that. -- Cyan 10:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry, but you apperntly haven't read the ANet interviews lately. Nor have you any idea of what ANet are acually trying to do here. But I'm going to tell you that. All MMORPGs except GW and soon GW2 are from one point of view more or less WoW-clones. They are built almost the same way, most of them have fees and they all fail. And don't tell me I don't know that, I've tried a whole bunch of them and they all suck. And you apparently don't see all the new conepts that ANet are putting in GW2, concepts that you and all other WoW-noobs probably don't like because your favorite game doesn't have them. Oh and I would be endlessly suprised if you have played more GW than you have played WoW. Stop trying to make a good game into another WoW-clone and STOP telling people that ANet are doing so. Sorry if you take any of this as flaming or trolling, which it isn't, but you need to understand it.The Slayer 11:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Keep it nice please. -- Cyan 11:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but he has to realise it sooner or later.The Slayer 11:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I can answer that now. YES!! We have ground targeting spells, which GW1 didnt have, but WoW has had from the start. You denying that? They have Channeling spells now which GW1 didnt have, but WoW has had from the start. GW2 is having multiple races and racials, which WoW had from the start. They are going to have World PvP, which GW1 didnt have, but WoW had from start. Do I really need to go on? Come now, you can think for yourself from here right?--Knighthonor 11:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

LOL @ SLAYER!!! Have you played GW2 yet? NOO!!!! So you have no right to confirm it as a failure or success. That same stuff you mumbling, is the same thing each and every developer of a MMORPG has said before. Did you follow Warhammer back when it was in hype phase and closed beta? Look familiar? All MMORPG developers do this. Its a marketing tactic. BTW did you also Follow Darkfall since you seem to be such the MMORPG fan/ expert? That game too flopped even with all the hype it had. AION? AOC? do I really need to continue? They all had interest, but once played the reality came out. So until you play the game, dont go using that shit as a argument in a discussion, just makes yourself look silly--Knighthonor 11:19, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

tbh you didn't play gw2 either did you KH? So you have no right to make GW2 the so much WoW-clone which is probebly going to fail. you do not know how far GW2 looks like WoW. Ofcourse there are things in GW2 which were you used in WoW. But do you really think WoW came up with those things? that WoW was the first? i doubt it. so wait for the game actually being playable before you make yourself look silly. Fox007 12:38, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I have nothing to add anymore. You are just not reasonable, you keep thinking your opinion is the only right one, any everybody who deny it is wrong. You are just extremely shortminded. And go ahead, react again on this and say how stupid I am and others are that we don't agree with you. You actually say we don't look at the facts. Well, you have also some problems with that. Leer eens in te staan voor iemand anders zijn of haar mening. -- Cyan 12:47, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Um... Cyan... Ik denk niet dat hij weet dat het Nederlands is ... ^^; --Amannelle 12:51, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't mind, I hope he will get my point. =) -- Cyan 12:53, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

@Cyan, lol play victim card. Guess you have no argument left for discussion. @fox, when did I ever say anything about WoW being first? The other posters like Cyan and Slayers, are people here generalizing that. Statements like "Stop using WoW terms" for example, is this flawed mentality that WoW created that terms. Same thing is going on with the fanboys here like Cyan and Slayer. No where did I say WoW invented anything. What I said, was Anet is making GW2 closer to a tradional MMO like WoW, and farther away from GW1. This a evident from the info shown so far. Key GW1 features have been removed and moved on. Like said before, Anet is moving away from old GW1 concepts, because this is a new game in a new genre.--Knighthonor 12:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Same genre. Other new ideas that qualify GW2 as a 'not-traditional MMORPG' = PvP hot-joining, no primary healer class, no important racials that make certain race/class combos better, events, limited skill bar (unlike, per example like you mentioned, WoW), confirmed map-travel, skill>time philosophy instead of just trying to get as much cash as possible by having subscriptions and then keeping people busy for as long as possible (not letting them have fun for as long as possible, but keeping them busy for as long as possible). --Naoroji 12:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

So you now start to qualify me as fanboy? And in your eyes I play a victim? Grow up. -- Cyan 13:03, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

@Naoro LOL thats list is a Non traditional MMO? LOL really? Sorry to burst your bubble, but PvP joins are in WoW. WoW also doesnt have Healer only professions. It once did back in vanilla WoW, but that way older then both GW1 and GW2.That same kind of Map Travel is in Warhammer, so whats your point? Load Screen Zone to Zone transfer points aka the Asura Portals. Iam not getting why thats a Non traditional MMO feature. Skill>Time as in a sandbox MMO? How is that new feature? No subscription? Ever here of the term F2P? Google it. LOL ^.^ and Balanced Racials is something most MMO also has, so whats your point.And btw, they will not be 100% balanced unless every race had the same racial spells, which they wont, and basically nullify the point of having racials. So I dont get your argument here with that statement. And your comment about not having fun as long as possible. I dont get what you mean. These are Subscription games. If players wasnt having fun, they wouldnt pay to play. Ever think of that? Didnt think so.--Knighthonor 13:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Nice response there again Cyan. /rolleyes guess you ran out of useful arguments in your discussion. Time to demoralize huh?--Knighthonor 13:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

GW being a MMORPG is discusable but aslong there is a community feeling i call it a MMORPG i found that feeling in GW1 and for the info we have had so far i am sure i can find that info back in GW2. And yes GW1 is different then GW2, yes i am sad they removed secondary proffessions. Yes i am sad the made Partially predetermined skill bars. Yes i am sad that a dedicated healer is unlikely to be in GW2 (though not 100% sure). But on the other side i am really excited about what they plan to do the traditional qeust system. It's the difference's in GW2 from traditional MMO's that makes GW2 something different. we could compare it with a different genre. Shooters like BF:BC2 and CoD:MW2 really look the same they have the same objective (killing people with your gun) but why would someone by them both? Because of the difference's they have. How small they are people like these. It's what a game makes unique. You can't make a game 100% unique you just can't even when you are the first. Fox007 13:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Well what do you want then Knighthonor? What for reaction do you want? It doesn't mind what I say, how strong or weak my arguments are, because you aren't willing to listen (to anybody). It make no sense. Sure, I could find some more arguments to discuss further, but I don't have the feeling this will go anywhere. -- Cyan 13:22, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

@Cyan, so what was your point originally than? @FoX, I agree, there will always be differences that make a game special. But trying to Ignore the similarities with hatred, as if it was some sort of plague, is just silly, and I wont tolerate it. And Many games can have communities and still not be a MMO. FPS have community, so did Diablo and Demon Soul. Even RTS had community. That doesnt change the genre of the game into a MMORPG. Now I had enough of this discussion. Cyan's flawed argument arent any fun anymore. Want more enticement then go to MMORPG.com boards and make your claims. Maybe they can the facts into your head better than I could. And before Naoro, come responding again, I suggest you to go make your claims on MMORPG.com.Let them explain it to you. The Majority of the MMORPG fanbase community knows GW1 isnt a MMO --Knighthonor 13:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

then why all the bitching about simalarities (almost fox almost wrote it correctly)? We should watch to the difference's because that's what actually counts. you buy the game because of it difference's from other games not because of it simalarities. Fox007 13:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

My point is: Learn to listen to others. People bring valuable and good formulated arguments, and you just say they are wrong. Your arguments are also not always right, but you act like they are. Many people here dislike you because of that. And that brought you in an uncomfortable situation. Many people will take all what you say with some salt now.. -- Cyan 13:49, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Cyan, many people will not listen to you, if they ever did. Some things you say are right, but you hide the other side of it. Ever heard of the event system and that kind of stuff? And I am not saying that I've played GW2, but you haven't either. But I know what ANet's instention is. They want to make, as said, a game that is different from WoW. And they did with GW1. What would say that don't do that with GW2? But because you apparently have big problems with accepting that other people are right and that you are wrong, I will leave this disscussion as it will lead nowhere until you learn what people here tell you to learn: listen to other people!The Slayer 13:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

@Slayer, Warhammer's developers, you know Mystic, said the same thing. LOL, So I dont buy that as a reasonable excuse. Until I play the game, I wont buy hype. And the Event system was also similar to Public Quest in Warhammer. BTW, read up on Darkfall. The GW2 event system is basically similar to their npc encampment. But you're the expert on MMOs remember, so I guess you knew that--Knighthonor 14:04, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

@Cyan, and thats suppose to be my problem?--Knighthonor 14:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, thats your problem. You want to spend te rest of your wiki time here with discussions about who is right? I doubt that. If you could listen to others and agree with them sometimes, you will get some more respect. If you are not capable to do that sometimes, I'll wish you luck with writing new articles here. I wonder how many pages will be tagged for deletion. -- Cyan 14:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Why should I have to agree with any of you, when many of your are delusional, and blinded by fanboyism? Marking page, who cares, I can always make another. And Why should I or anybody care about earning your respect? You been rude here. Who started this whole argument in the first place? You did. And Iam finishing it!! Dont like that, Tuff, Deal with it!--Knighthonor 14:20, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I hope you like bans then, because if you create pages over and over again in your terminology, you will get one (especially if you copy thing, that was not really a clever move). Its not my respect (that is something you will never get), its the respect from other wiki users. And I did not start this argument, you did it by yourself actually: "@Cyan, so what was your point originally than?" <--- (needs to be then) And for your last desperate shout: problems with your temper? -- Cyan 14:28, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Well if you have nothing more to discuss other then demoralizing tactics, I have nothing more to say to you. I dont need your respect, nor anybody here on this site. And yes you stated this whole argument.Why you even come here? Now leave and dont post here again.I had enough of you.--Knighthonor 14:33, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) All this bickering is really starting to get annoying --hnzdvn 15:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Tell me bout it--Knighthonor 15:34, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

just read all of that and i have concluded something: Your an Anoying little kid who doesent know when to shut thier mouth.--Neil2250, The Deleter 15:52, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Interesting Neil, I came to the same conclusion about you.--Knighthonor 16:36, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) People, seriously, I know there's no mute button here, but if somebody is pissing you off or whatever, learn to ignore.--Unending ♥ fear 16:40, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

its hard to ignor when thier constantly being Anoying.--Neil2250, The Deleter 16:41, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes and Neil is a annoying. Why are you even here? Are you trying to start more trouble?I have enough of your ass! Now GTFO! --Knighthonor 17:06, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Good god, stop starting something that only leads to a conflict. GW2 =/=GW=/=WoW. GW2 is a new game with familiar gameplay from GW in a more standard MMO setting. Yes, KH is a WoW fanboy, and many concepts found in such games have been incorporated into GW2, but that does not mean its a WoWclone. Jesus people, just stop. This is unnecessary. So stop, drop the far from civil conversation going on here.--Corsair@Yarrr 17:15, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I heard there were lots of flames around here, so I've come to put them out. :3 hehe --Amannelle 17:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Good call Amannelle, Also KH, NPA.--Neil2250, The Deleter 17:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

MORE than KH needs to look at the NPA.--Corsair@Yarrr 17:28, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

... Who...? D: --Naoroji 17:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

---

Hello - speaking in admin capacity here. Personal attacks from any user are unacceptable, and I've blocked two of the most explicit offenders and who are likely to continue (Knighthonor and Neil2250). However, I've also seen personal/ad hominem attacks (albeit less excessive) from Cyan Light, The Slayer and Naoroji, and for now I'm giving you three a clear warning against making more. Also, it's generally advised not to start GW-WoW discussions, troll, or bait. The first generally tends to invite the latter two. I strongly suggest that no comments are made in this discussion after this one. pling 17:38, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

God Damn it pling. The raging was so entertaining. :D 69.107.74.43 00:46, 24 May 2010 (UTC)