Talk:Prefix/Archive 1

Archive

---

• Archive 1

Prefixes and suffixes, origins...

So prefixes come from insignia (apologies, poached the table I found here for that page).

Has anyone crafting-wise discovered where suffixes come from? Torrenal 01:27, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I think they might be the same thing - the difference is in the base item itself. Some of them have prefixes (Mighty Bronze Hammer) and others have suffixes (Garnet Stud of Might). Have we seen any item that has more than 1 upgrade slot? I don't think so. —Dr Ishmael 01:33, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I rearranged the tables here to be more concise. The prefix "Mighty" and suffix "of Might" both improve Power, so they're basically the same stat boost, just in a different position on the item's name; thus, the format of 1 table for prefixes and 1 for suffixes was inefficient. Instead, I split into affixes that boost 1 attribute and affixes that boost 2 attributes. This way, the attributes only have to be defined in the first table, and the second can simply list them both on a single row, making the layout more efficient.

There are a lot of gaps, of course, since I couldn't find the other form of some affixes we already had listed, like the suffix form of "Healing" or "Honed" or the prefix form of "of Rejuvenation". I also haven't seen either form for a single-attribute affix that boosts Magic Find, and that type of upgrade may not even exist, but I've left it in there for now. —Dr Ishmael 03:53, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Might we be able to link these to their insignias? Redshift 12:05, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

There's a different insignia/inscription for each material (jute, wool, iron, etc.). And the affixes themselves, like Mighty and of Might, are redirects to this page. Were you thinking of something else? —Dr Ishmael 15:08, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Ah, if there's a different insignia per material then that makes it a bit more complicated. I just thought it odd that insignias weren't mentioned or linked to here. Redshift 16:27, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

We can mention them, sure, and link to Insignia and Inscription (whoop, looks like that will need to be moved) (and maybe Gemstone? I'm not sure what things like Garnet Pebble are called). —Dr Ishmael 16:31, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Inscriptions break down two ways: by type (ravaging, strong, etc) and by material (jute, embroidered jute, wool, cotton, etc). Since the material only appears to play a role in the crafting system, I'd omitting from this table here. I'd also keep a summary table on the insignia page that omits it. I am inclined to think that the list of prefixes/suffixes is incomplete. I'll need to dig through my screenshots, but during BWE2 I managed to lay hands on a lvl 60 gold dagger, something like 'shaman norn dagger of water', I'll bet the shaman part is another prefix. Torrenal 18:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

A small example of Accessory prefixes and suffixes, include, but are not limited to :

Prefix: Copper, Silver, Gold, Platinum, ...

Prefix and/or Additional Prefix Adorned, Intricate, Exquisite, Ornate, ...

Prefix and or Yet Additional Prefix to those above or not: Amber, Turquoise, Garnet, Tiger's Eye, Malachite, Sunstone, Topaz, Carnelian, Spinel, Amethyst, Peridot, Lapis, Beryl, Chrysocola, Coral, Opal, Emerald, Ruby, Pearl, Sapphire, ...

Suffixes not always shown: (simple), (Masterwork), ...

Combination prefixes and suffixes but not always displayed together, can include above Prefixes AND Suffixes or not:

• Turquoise … of Vitality
• Garnet … of Might
• Tiger's Eye … of Precision
• Malachite … of Resilience
• Sunstone … of Pillaging
• Topaz … of Ravaging
• Carnelian … of Strength
• Spinel … of Rejuvenation
• Amethyst … of Vigor
• Peridot … of Honing
• Amber … of Festering
• .
• .
• .

Just a few examples at low level. These are usually wrapped around a base item but not always they can be used in conjunction with themselves in various combinations as well as other prefixes and other suffixes. Rudhraighe 19:57, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

This page has, so far, been concerned with affixes that related to stat boosts only. Most of the others that you list there are specific to how the item was crafted - the materials used and the discipline level of the recipe. While that could certainly fall under "item nomenclature", I'm not sure if it's really necessary to document that e.g a "Silver" prefix indicates the item was crafted from silver ore. Unless the base material is directly related to stat boosts of the item? —Dr Ishmael 00:24, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

the base material/s IS/ARE directly related to stat boosts of the item. Rudhraighe 00:46, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

... could you give us a table of how they relate, please? —Dr Ishmael 00:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Shaman's dagger...

After feeding in 4 level 60 green items into the mystic forge, I got out one gold level 60 item:

Shaman's Norn Dagger of Water

Weapon Strength: 576-611

+52 Vitality

+37 Healing Power

+37 Condition Damage

Major Sigil of Water: +30% chance to heal nearby allies. (This effect cannot trigger more than once every 10s)

Value: 1  56 

I might take this to mean that the Shaman's afix provides 3 boosts, but am not quite ready to commit to that decision. -Torrenal 01:00, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

For the time being, I added it. If we get more info from BWE3, we can update the table or remove it if it's not affix related. Gnarf 08:58, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Page Name

Is there any better name for this page, or a way to get to it easier. I stumbled across it totally on accident looking through "Recent Changes". This is information I've been wondering since crafting tables came out. I see the names of inscriptions but there aren't always details as to what stats the inscription actually benefits. I've never heard of the word nomenclature before in my life, and would never have thought to look for that word to find this information. Is there a way to make this... a normal word? Or link it in the right places so people can find it? Just a thought. ~Ao Allusir 01:23, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

The article's name itself is okay, I guess. But you're right in terms of redirects. Any suggestions for redirect names? "Item prefixes" might be a good one. Gnarf 12:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

I added "Item name", "Item names", "Item naming", "Item prefix" and "Item prefixes". Is that alright or do we need additional redirects? Gnarf 09:00, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Out of date?

Since runes and sigils now provide the suffix, is this page out of date? (But since no-one comes here I can assume it is?) 87.195.101.155 00:15, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey, I noticed this page is finally being updated and I got some info that may help. Currently Shaman's lists condition damage as primary, when I saw it with Vitality primary in game. Also, since jewelry is now being listing, I should point out the weirdness of emerald. When looking at my emerald jewelry the other day I noticed an inconsistency (and bug reported). The item (amulet or such) had Toughness primary like Knight, but the jewel in the upgrade slot had Precision primary. Since emerald is the only jewelry that changes primary from gem/jewel, it may be worth noting. Also, as I mentioned in the Inscription Talk, I think there should be a place that lists which stat combinations are craftable and where you can obtain them. Also, Sapphire is missing a p. BioMasterZap 03:17, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I see the table has been updated to include locations of the armors from dungeons and orders. I have a few other notes that may help. First, if it is decided that this page isn't the right place to list this stuff, I suggest that the table be added to "Armor Stat Combinations" instead. The difference between this table and the one there is that this one sorts by the boosts, which in my opinion is much more helpful. Second, the Order armors are rare, not exotic, which may be worth noting since they aren’t maxed stats. I also know that the cultural armors are rare like order armor and may be worth listing too (I never bothered to track them though since I've been focused on exotics). Third, there are some of the locations I have listed that weren’t on the page.

• Berserker: Crafting, Devona's (Heavy), Nika's (Medium), Zhed's (Light)
• Solder: Invader (WvW), God Sets (Karma)
• Valkyrie: Crafting
• Rampager's: Crafting, Aiden's (Medium), Koss' (Heavy), Norgu's (Light), Nobleman (CM)
• Knights: Crafting
• Shamans: Jalis' (Heavy), Reyna's (Medium), Tahlkora's (Light)
• Carrion: Crafting, Brutus'/Sheena's (Heavy), Ogden's (Light), Shiro's (Medium)
• Rabid: Galrath's (Heavy), Khilbron's (Light), Vatlaaw's (Medium), God Sets (Karma)
• Cleric's: Crafting, Mhenlo's (Light), Rurik's (Heavy), Zho's (Medium)
• Magi: God Sets (Karma)
• Explorer's: Crafting
• Travelers: Errol's (Medium), Jatoro's (Light), Yakkington's (Heavy)

A few more notes on the above. I listed the NPC/Hero armors and their armor classes (aka, Mhenlo's (Light)). I also listed the 7 craftable one. The craftable and NPC/Hero armors are tradable. Invader armor from WvW and Rampager's CM were also missing. God Set (Karma) refers to the 6 human god armors from Arah, but they are mixed all over Orr and from my research based on wiki listing (which may have been wrong), some of the stat combinations didn't have full sets. Also, Invader does have jewelry that follows the Soldier's stats, but no gemstone/jewel. There are also the Mystic Forge Pendants I noticed recently, some of which have rare stat combinations. The Emerald Pendant has soldier's stats, the Sapphire has Shaman's Stats, and the Ruby has Berserker. Then the Triforge pendent has same stat pattern as the Hero's Band (no idea how to list that). Hope this helps with future revision. BioMasterZap 01:59, 9 October 2012 (UTC) P.S.- Page still says Saphire =P

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Game_updates
Updated Knight's Jewel so that it appropriately grants Power rather than Toughness.

I believe the "Knight's Jewel" only appears in sPvP. I don't think it's currently documented anywhere on the wiki. According to this, the Knight's PvP Amulet boosts vitality, power, and precision, so...maybe the corresponding jewel used to boost vitality, precision, and toughness and they changed it to match the amulet? I don't do sPvP much.

The PvE jewels that give the "...of the Knight" suffix are Emerald jewels. Emeralds kind of look like they're bugged, as this page currently notes, but based on a quick look at the trading post in-game, they haven't been touched by this patch. (ArenaNet may be reluctant to change them since PvE items cost money, and some may have already bought them based on the current stats...or they may just not have gotten around to them, I don't know.)

Also, please sign your posts. --Felbryn 21:19, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect total amount of stat points

I think that the total amount of stat points gained from a full exotic/rare/masterwork/... equipment is wrong. You can put on 2x Rings, 2x Accessory and 1x 2h-Weapon OR 2x 1h-Weapon in PvE. So the correct numbers should be:

Equipment Slot	Exotic		Rare		Masterwork		Fine
Total	830	592	731	520	677	485	627	446

Room for temple armor?

I've really appreciated this page for a long time now, it covers all the important stuff on stat distribution, and even points you in the right direction for getting yourself the desired stat set. I'm wondering, does it seem plausible to incorporate the last major source of stat-selection, temple armors? That would pretty much complete this article as a final destination for identifying stat goals, but I wouldn't know the most organized way to handle the mixed stat groups of temple armor. The parallels are simple enough, (Balthazar) Armageddon armor has "Magi" stats helm, "Magi" shoulders, "Magi" chest, "Rabid" gloves, "Soldier" legs, and "Rabid" feet. If someone has the ability to incorporate them, the info to work from is already nicely organized on Dulfy: http://dulfy.net/2012/09/08/gw2-templegod-karma-armor-sets/ --76.120.46.145 08:14, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

I've started a new subsection called "acquisition". It's not done yet, but I'm not sure when I'll have time to finish it, so feel free to expand it. --Felbryn 09:15, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

The rune icons are very difficult to differentiate at that size (purple with a white blob), so unfortunately that table is difficult to use. —Dr Ishmael 14:46, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Care to suggest something else, then? Are there other appropriate pictures that would be easier to distinguish? (I originally thought there might be an icon for each god, but couldn't find any.) We could use the first letter of each, but that's probably not much more meaningful to a typical user (if they have to look up the letter in the legend to know what it means, then we haven't gained much compared to reading the mouse-over of an indistinguishable picture, IMO). We could stack the light/medium/heavy vertically to free up horizontal space and make the pictures bigger (or substitute actual names), though then this comparatively minor table will take up much more real estate on the page. --Felbryn 17:56, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Page is coming along nicely. Just to mention, you can get Soldier's Trinkets. It is noted that there is a Mystic Forge Pendent, but it neglects to mention that all jewelry is also available in WvW (Invader Jewelry). Also, the Mystic Forge amulets are called pendent, so maybe it should show a Pendent Icon or say Pendent instead of Amulet? BioMasterZap 21:39, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Is there any wiki page describing invader's jewelry? (Or invader's weapons, for that matter; they're referenced on the Badge of Honor page but the link is broken.) So far I've just been compiling references to equipment that is already listed on the wiki (because it's already a lot of work without doing primary research), but if you have additional information to add, feel free. --Felbryn 04:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Acquisition: Mystic Forge

I've created a table with the items listed at Mystic_Forge/Other_Items and Mystic weapon, but I have some concerns...

Item Type	Berserker's	Soldier's	Rampager's	Shaman's	Carrion	Rabid	Cleric's	Explorer's	Traveler's
	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
Axe	Mystic Battleaxe Dreadwing Phoenix Talon			Kryta's Salvation	Reaver of the Mists
Dagger			Tear of Grenth		Mystic Spike Jormag's Needle
Focus	Mystic Artifact Flux Matrix Heart of Mellaggan Song of the Numberless Pack The Anomaly		Accursed Chains Godswalk Enchiridion Spirit Links	Courage	Gaze Malice	Glint's Scale Squeedily Spooch	Ambrosia Goblet of Kings	Cooguloosh
Greatsword	Mystic Claymore Naegling Vision of the Mists				Volcanus		Foefire's Essence
Hammer					Mystic Battlehammer Mjölnir		Foefire's Power
Longbow				Mystic Hornbow			Wintersbite
Mace	Mystic Cudgel
Pistol	Mystic Pistol Ilya Lyss
Rifle	Mystic Rifle
Scepter	Abyssal					Mystic Wand Eye of Rodgort Lidless Eye		Immobulus
Shield	Mystic Barricade Wall of the Mists				Cragstone				The Mad Moon
Shortbow			Mystic Crescent Aether				Wintersbark		Arachnophobia
Spear			Mystic Spear Illusion
Speargun	Mystic Speargun
Staff				Mystic Staff Melandru's Gaze					The Crossing
Sword	Stygian Blade	Unspoken Curse	Whisperblade		Mystic Sword Firebringer Icy Dragon Sword Rusttooth			Infinite Light
Torch	Mystic Torch		The Fate of Menzies
Trident	Mystic Trident
Warhorn	Mystic Caller
Amulet	Ruby Pendant	Emerald Pendant		Sapphire Pendant

Note: I've left out the Triforge Pendant because it would require another column all to itself, and the Azureflame because I suspect the stats listed on the wiki are in error (they don't match any of the known prefixes), but it wasn't listed on the trading post so I couldn't easily check the stats in-game.

First, this table is huge. I broke my convention of listing the prefixes in rows and put them in columns instead, because otherwise this table would be ridiculously wide, but it's still pretty wide and takes up a lot of screen real estate. Is this worth worrying about, and if so, what do we do about it? Is there a way we can make it initially hidden, with a click-to-reveal option? Or maybe it should get its own page and just be linked?

Secondly, should the halloween event weapons be included? They're still craftable, as far as I know, but they require ingredients that are no longer obtainable (except from other players who have stockpiled them). Maybe "event items" should get their own acquisition subsection?

Thirdly, there's a bunch of named exotic weapons that are probably Mystic-Forge-craftable but don't have recipes listed on the wiki (e.g. Faithful). Do we list them anywhere?

Is this table even useful? Most of the mystic forge recipes seem to be very expensive compared to other acquisition methods, and so would presumably be used for the look of the weapon rather than the stats.

I'm also not sure what the "Mystic Forge" column in the general acquisition table should say to be useful, since each of these prefixes seems to have a different subset of weapons available. (Maybe that's just because we haven't discovered/documented the other ones yet?)

And, not necessarily directly related to this table but relevant to this section of the article, I'm a bit unclear on the four-weapons-for-a-random-one thing. Can this produce literally any exotic weapon in the entire game? Does anyone know? A note about creating gems and crests in the Mystic Forge would also probably be appropriate, except that I have no idea what the rules are.

Any thoughts on how to manage this section would be appreciated. --Felbryn 08:26, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

New Stat Combination: Cavalier's

I believe a new triple stat combo has been added with recent update. I've gotten a Cavalier's Spineguard (Masterwork Level 80 Back Slot) and it has Toughness Main, Power and Critical Damage Minor. There is nothing in upgrade slot. Also, when looking at stats on the Ascended Back Slots and Exotic Back Slots (from FotM reward shop) I believe it also listed this stat combination. So I think we got a new combo for table. BioMasterZap 18:28, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

The Prototype Fractal Capacitors include two new stat combinations--Toughness/Power/Critical Damage, as you noted, and also Magic Find/Precision/Toughness. And just to make things interesting, if the currently-posted stats are correct, at least one of the ascended back items uses a different stat combination for its "included jewel stats" than it does for its "basic" stats (and the jewel stats are yet another previously-unseen stat combination, Magic Find/Toughness/Vitality).

How did you obtain this Cavalier's Spineguard? Both because I'd like to know where the new stat combination shows up, and also because there are (or were, before this patch) vanishingly few known ways to acquire a back item, so a new source would be interesting even apart from the new prefix. Also, has anyone seen these stats on anything other than a back item yet?

If it turns out that there are a bunch of new stat combinations but only for back items, then we may want to list them in a separate table so they don't get in the way when looking up information about other item types; that separate table may even want to be on the back item page and just linked (or transcluded?) from here. But if the patch has caused new prefixes to start dropping on all item types all over the world, that would obviously demand a different approach... --Felbryn 18:55, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I found a LOT more! I got it from new dungeon I think, off a boss or such. All dungeons seem to have back slot items now. Search Spine on TP, tons pop up, even for level 80, but only masterwork and rare. I myself have gotten Cavalier's, and Magi's Masterwork, and Soldier's Rare back drops in Fractals.

I found stats for non-back items too. Search in TP under Rare the following: for Light Armor- Strong Conjurer, for Medium- Strong Pirate/Rouge (mask and boots are Pirate, rest Rogue), for Heavy- Strong Branded. These are level 80 rares with stat combinations never before made in armor! There are 5 different stat for each set (and you can get all 6 parts for each of 3 armor classes in each set). One is Condition Damage main with Precision and Toughness minor (aka Rapid, previously Dungeon and Unique Exotic Set only). Next is Soldier, which was previously only Dungeon. Next is Magic Find main with Toughness and Vitality minor, a new one that I got a back item of (called Wayfarer I believe). Next is Magi, which like Soldier was previously only Dungeon. And last is Cavalier's, which as I said before is new.

For Masterwork, the gear is called Light/Medium/Heavy Armageddon. And as I type this, I remember I got an Exotic Armageddon drop earlier, but it was Account Bound (*runs to bank*). Yup, an Exotic Level 80 Medium Armageddon Gloves, with Rabid Stats (Account Bound, doesn’t say Soulbind on use, but adding to unused upgrade slot should soulbind).

So it seems those 5 stat combinations- Soldier, Rapid, Magi, Wayfarer (New), Cavalier's (New)- are now in drops in, at least, Fractals dungeon. The Masterwork and Rare versions are tradable, but the Exotic versions are Account Bound. I remember seeing weapons too, like a Masterwork Soldier Shield drop (just called "Shield") from dungeon too, so assume it is weapons and armor.

I just searched jewelry too. I found Passiflora Orichalum Ring of the Apothecary. I remember seeing other Apothecary named armor too, it is Healing Power main with Toughness and Condition Damage minor. The ring has these stats in both slots and is level 80 exotic. There are also rings for Cavalier's, Magi, Soldier, Wayfarer, and Rapid as level 80 Rares and Masterwork (named [Stat]'s Ring, e.g. Soldier's Ring). As for Apothecary, I found it as Masterwork Level 80 (Apothecary's Feathered/Prowler/Barbaric). Judging by names, I think it may be craftable with a new Insignia (using new crafting materials, since it also makes jewelry). Apothecary is also in Exotic and Rare.

Well this is certainly a big update! 3 new armor stat combinations and 3 limited one now in tradable forms (and account bound exotics). There may be more new stat combinations as well that I missed. BioMasterZap 22:17, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, hopefully this wiki page gets updated soon with all the new triple attribute combinations from The Lost Shores content update.

But just to confirm: are level 80 Exotic Soldier's trinkets/jewelry dropping as soulbound loot now? (And in Fractals only?) --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.186.18.236 (talk).

Can anyone confirm whether the above is true or false?

I've added Apothecary's, Cavalier's, and Wayfarer's prefixes to the tables. Also added mentions of the Prototype Fractal Capacitors and the Ancient Karka Shell. I'm writing down that Passifloria jewelry is crafted from Passion Flowers without personally confirming it, but it seems like a safe assumption (unless someone knows otherwise?).

There's lots of masterwork and rare equipment on the trading post with Cavalier's or Wayfarer's stats, but so far I can't find any exotics (except for the Fractal Capacitors); possibly because exotics dropping in the fractals were bind-on-acquire until yesterday's patch. But in any case, if they exist, we still need information on them (and where to acquire them). --Felbryn 02:10, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I am not 100% certain on this, but I did get an Exotic Rabid Gloves (Medium Armageddon Gloves) from Fractals. It was Account Bound originally, but after update, it also got Soulbound on use. So unless they removed the Account Bound feature, I assume the 5 Fractal Stat Combinations (Soldiers, Magi, Rapid, Wayfarer, and Cavalier's) drop in Exotic as Account Bound items with Soulbound on Use. I assume this also applies to back items and jewelry as well, but I have yet to see enough to confirm this past assumption. There are also many other new back item (e.g. Ghost Eater's Hide; which lists soulbound on use but is not tradable last I saw, so it may also be an Account Bound/Soulbound on Use item). BioMasterZap 18:26, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

New Jewelry

The trading post is showing new exotic rings and amulets (but not accessories or back items) that are simply called "Prefix's Amulet" or "Prefix's Ring", with the prefixes: Berserker's, Rampager's, Shaman's, Carrion, Cleric's, and Travelers. But I can't add them to the acquisition section unless someone can share where they're coming from.

I also saw several new named exotic trinkets:

• Ashes of the Effigy (Shaman's accessory)
• Claw of the Howling King (Magi's ring)
• Colossus Fang (Rabid amulet)
• Eternal Flame (Carrion amulet)
• Ring of Blood (Traveler's ring)

As of the time of this writing, the only one of these to be documented on the wiki is the Claw of the Howling King, which is apparently crafted from Ascalonian Tears using a non-discoverable recipe that drops in the dungeon. It may be that there's now craftable trinkets of all types for all the same stat combinations that dungeon weapons/armor have, but I'm going to wait for more info before trying to incorporate these into the article... --Felbryn 02:10, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I got a Shaman's Amulet from the Ancient Karka Chest. It could be that there is a chance to get them in the new zone. It could also be that there were added all over the game. I haven't seen any in new dungeon yet, but they could be on deeper floors. Since the Chest I for it from was a 1-time thing, I'd wait for more sources before adding it. Also, nice find on the new Dungeon Jewelry. I knew of some of it, but I thought they were drops (like I assume the back slot items are) and not craftable. This update certainly added a lot of new things to keep track of >~< BioMasterZap 18:33, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

More stuff seen on trading post:

• Alpha Conduit (Traveler's amulet)
• Husk of the Destroyer (Carrion ring)
• Infinity Loop (Shaman's ring)
• Koda's Gift (Carrion accessory)
• Nightmare Coil (Soldier's ring)
• Operative's Creed (Magi's accessory)
• Plague (Rabid ring)
• The Replicator (Magi's amulet)
• The Zealot's Amulet (Shaman's amulet)
• Tortured Root (Rabid accessory)
• Vallog's Demise (Traveler's accessory)

Combined with the 5 I noted earlier, that adds up to complete sets of trinkets with Shaman's, Carrion, Rabid, Magi's, and Traveler's stats...plus a Soldier's ring. Note: I can't currently search for back items on the trading post because the category is bugged, so it's possible some have shown up and I just can't find them. --Felbryn 07:49, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

So, I made a little txt-file with all the new jewelry which uses dungeon Tokens. Hopefully it can be implemented into this wiki page. --134.109.88.32 11:14, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Page Getting Large

The editor is giving me a warning about the page reaching 32KB. I'm considering splitting the "acquisition" stuff into a separate page. Approve/disapprove? What should the other page be called? Alternate suggestions? --Felbryn 02:10, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree. Especially because Exotic gear is no longer the best in stat with Ascended Gear being released. So maybe it should be moved to a page called Acquisition of Exotic Gear. This would also allow a similar page for Ascended Gear in the future. This page could mention/link to acquisition pages as well. It may even be worthwhile to make one for rare items, since the Rare Soldier's Armor is tradable, but the Exotic (assuming it does exist) is Account Bound. BioMasterZap 18:29, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. I was going to suggest plain "Gear Acquisition". 178.203.251.117 19:40, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

"Gear" isn't really a proper term, everything you can equip is called equipment. Manifold 19:48, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the split. This page should deal only with the nomenclature, not with the acquisition. —Dr Ishmael 22:23, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Yup, the Acquisition is important for specifically getting certain stats, but this page is too long. I would think the question is whether to make a separate page for each prefix and list means of acquiring each individually, or moving the current section. I'd be inclined to say the current graphs are helpful, and it'd be nice to just move them as-is to a 2nd page. What that page would be named, who knows? --Starfleck 21:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

The current tables above Aquisition are really helpful, Everything below that could probably do with being factored into more easily readable pages. Illiander 13:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I have split off the acquisition section to Equipment acquisition by stats (on the theory that someone might eventually want to create, say, [[Equipment acquisition by skins]]). I reworked and expanded it a little to try to help it stand better as its own page. However, after that reworking, it is now by itself large enough to trigger edit warnings (35KB). And I suspect it's likely to grow larger. I don't see an obvious way to split it further; open to suggestions. --Felbryn 22:53, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

32 kB is somewhat outdated, it's a default MediaWiki threshold that hasn't changed since 2005. Browsers are much more stable and powerful, and PCs have much more memory, than 7 years ago. In short: don't worry about the 32 kB warning. —Dr Ishmael 23:03, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Triple Attribute: Best Back Item, Ascended Rings

I feel that the columns in the triple attribute table labeled "Best Back Item" and "Ascended Rings" are now covered better by Equipment acquisition by stats#Back Items and List of ascended equipment, and that they should be removed from this page to reduce clutter. Any objections? --Felbryn 06:36, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I would say the same for the dungeon and order columns, as well as the back item column in the dual attribute table. —Dr Ishmael 14:40, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I could get behind removing the dungeon column. I have mixed feelings about the order column; it's kind of like an alternate prefix (there are a variety of (e.g.) "vigil" items, all of which have common attributes and which have no other prefix to indicate this).

If we remove the order column, why not remove the gemstone column, too?

Of course...if there's an order column, should there be a cultural armor column?

In any event, this table is currently too wide for my monitor, so I'd like to do something to make it narrower. --Felbryn 03:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

How about: decrease the main table to only the main prefix names (and maybe gems) for a clear mapping of prefix to attributes. Then, add a correspondence table to show how non-prefixed things like Order and cultural armor map into the standard prefixes. —Dr Ishmael 04:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

You're suggesting we have two consecutive tables with exactly the same rows and row headings, just different columns? That is really obviously just one table that we've arbitrarily split into two pieces. (Especially if we duplicate the attribute columns—which is really obligatory, since some combinations don't actually have names, and would mean that roughly half the columns of the two tables are exact matches.)

If you're worried about too many columns between the prefixes and the attributes, we should just reorder the columns. And if you're worried about the table being too wide, then after we remove the back item, dungeon, and ascended columns, I bet we could add cultural armor and still be significantly narrower than the current version. For example:

Attributes			Standard Prefix	Gemstone	Order	Cultural Armor	Craftable	Crest
Main	Minor	Minor
Power	Precision	Critical Damage	Berserker's	Ruby	-	Charr	1
Power	Toughness	Vitality	Soldier's		Vigil	Norn		1
Power	Vitality	Critical Damage	Valkyrie	Beryl	-	-	1
Precision	Power	Toughness	-	Emerald	-	-
Precision	Power	Condition Damage	Rampager's	Coral	-	Human	1
Toughness	Power	Precision	Knight's	Emerald	-	-	1
Toughness	Power	Critical Damage	Cavalier's	-	-	-
Toughness	Boon Duration	Healing Power	Giver's (armor)	-	-	-	armor
Vitality	Power	Healing Power	-	-	-	-		1
Vitality	Condition Damage	Healing Power	Shaman's		-	-
Boon Duration	Healing Power	Magic Find	Winter	Snowflake	-	-	trinkets
Condition Damage	Power	Vitality	Carrion	Chrysocola	-	Asura	1
Condition Damage	Precision	Toughness	Rabid	-	Whispers	Sylvari		1
Condition Duration	Precision	Vitality	Giver's (weapon)	-	-	-	weapons
Healing Power	Power	Toughness	Cleric's	Sapphire	-	-	1
Healing Power	Precision	Vitality	Magi's	-	Priory	-		1
Healing Power	Toughness	Condition Damage	Apothecary's	Passiflora	-	-	1
Magic Find	Power	Precision	Explorer's	Opal	-	-	1	1
Magic Find	Power	Condition Damage	Traveler's	-	-	-
Magic Find	Toughness	Vitality	Wayfarer's	-	-	-
Small Bonus to:			Celestial	-	-	-

How's that? (We'd make similar changes to the single- and double-attribute tables, naturally.) We could add a sentence in the intro somewhere saying that some attribute combinations have alternate names depending on the source of the equipment (explaining the presence of what are effectively four different "name" columns), and maybe exhorting the reader to check Equipment acquisition by stats to find more gear with the same attributes. We could probably even fit a "suffix" column, if you wanted (the suffixes are usually simple grammatical transforms of the prefixes, but I think there's a couple of exceptions). --Felbryn 05:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Now that the dungeon columns are gone, I would also argue the order and cultural columns should go as well. Like dungeon armour, they aren't prefixed or suffixed, and worse even, neither are of exotic (current maximum) rarity. They deserve to be in that table even less than the removed dungeon column (which is covered by the linked article). The best and most effective set-up we could use for this table is as seen in the dual attribute section. Similarly, the "Increases" column in the single attribute section should also be ditched.

Had I felt fit enough to discuss of late, I would've interjected with this before the change, but this works, too. - Infinite - talk 13:39, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

What does being exotic or not have to do with it? It isn't a table of exotic gear, it's a table of names that indicate specific attribute combinations.

I don't feel strongly about the orders and cultural armors, but the rule I'm trying to apply is this: if a name is used on several different items, and every item with that name boosts the same set of attributes (and those items don't have a more-common prefix that already indicates the attributes), then that name can be interpreted as an alternate name for the attribute-granting prefix.

The first part of that rule excludes unique items that don't share a prefix with anything else in the game, and the second part of the rule excludes dungeon armors, because you can find dungeon armors with identical names but different attributes (if I tell you I'm wearing "Galvanic (Asuran cultural) armor", you can deduce I've got Carrion stats; if I tell you I'm wearing "Ascalonian Catacombs armor", you still don't know which attributes it has). --Felbryn 17:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

That last argument is somewhat invalidated by transmutation. By listing cultural/order armor in the table you are able to notate an additional source of the prefix, but you can't assume that everyone wearing Galvanic armor still has the original Carrion stats. —Dr Ishmael 17:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

But you can transmute anything. By that argument, none of the names in the table are valid, including the name "Carrion" itself. --Felbryn 05:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

The dungeon column made this table a useful place to see all (or most) of one's options to obtain a given stat combination. Its removal may have reduced redundancy site-wide, but it also reduced utility. -skool.pigeon

Have you seen Equipment acquisition by stats#Level 80 Exotic Equipment? --Felbryn 04:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

I have. The first chart on that page indicates that certain stat combos are available from dungeons, but doesn't indicate which dungeons. The "Dungeons" section farther down the page contains that info, but doesn't have for comparison which stat combos can be crafted, for instance. There's value in having all this info in one table, which the original Item Nomenclature Triple Attribute table did. -skool.pigeon

The previous triple attribute table didn't indicate which stat combos were purchasable with karma, or obtainable as loot, or craftable in the mystic forge. Why is seeing which stuff is craftable and which exact dungeons tokens buy it (at the same time) more valuable than the numerous other possible permutations of the data on Equipment acquisition by stats? --Felbryn 17:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

I have to side with Felbryn on this one. You check the first table on the aqcuisition site to see where you can get your stat combinations. That one shows that you can get it, for example, out of a dungeon. Then you can scroll down, or use the quicklink on top, to check which dungeons would give you the attribute you want. There should be no need for another page that shows exactly the same thing as another, if all the work that has to be done to get the information there, is to scroll up and down on a exisiting page. This is the nomenclature page, not the Aqcuisition site, and tbh there should be no discussion of where you can get the stats. Where you can obtain gear with it is, in my opinion, better written on the Acquisition page as the nomenclature page should just show which stats are available in which combination on what kind of armor (weapon/armor/gemstone).

And if you read our discussion down the page, where i suggest that crafting should vanish from the list as well, you will see how that further strengthens the point why the dungeon table was removed. Magistrella 18:31, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

This was a stupid change for usability. It doesn't look any nicer now, it just has less information. — Skakid 13:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

/agree. If I have to go to the discussion page to find out what the hell happened to the info I'm looking for that used to be there, then there is something really wrong with the page. If I want to know where to get a set with Berserker's stats specifically, for instance, I will search for "Berserker's" and would expect an article containing all relevant information to that item. That page (and others of its kind) redirects here... which was fine when the page actually had at least most of the relevant information. However, this butchering has rendered the page (and all redirects leading to it) completely worthless.

Ease of access > anything else. If your argument for finding the information includes reasoning along the lines of "first, then, and then..." then you have already failed miserably. That's just not how people do their queries. The information needs to be clearly accessible in the place or places where people are most likely to look for it, i.e. on an article with a directly related name or, failing that, one with an appropriate redirect. As it stands this article simply does not meet that very basic standard, nor do any of the others referred to above. So either the table needs to be fixed to include the information people are actually looking for, or the redirects need serious rethinking. -- Elv 23:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

"Ease of access" is not maximized by simply dumping every possible scrap of useful information into a single table; that actually makes the information very hard to access, because it makes the table difficult to use (and yes, the previous table was becoming noticeably difficult to use, at least for me—I found myself going to other pages just to figure out which attributes a particular prefix gave because the table here was such an eyesore). Access is made easier by partitioning the information into logical, bite-sized chunks, and linking them together so that users can easily navigate between them. Maybe you've heard of HTML and the world-wide web?

If we could have a single table that was easy to use and fit on the screen and contained all of "the information people are actually looking for", I'd be all in favor of that. But you seem to be implicitly assuming that people are looking for which dungeons' tokens can be exchanged for gear with "soldier's" stats and NOT looking for where they can get it with karma, or as loot, or in other ways, and that assumption strikes me as highly implausible. Given that we can't reasonably condense all data on the entire wiki down to a single table, what criteria do you propose for deciding what to include and what not to include? --Felbryn 00:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Any information that someone would want (within reason) about that armor stat when they search for it. I'd wager a very common use of this page is to /wiki Rampager's or /wiki Explorer's to see what your options are for that armor type. Not to look at that table, lack the information, search elsewhere on the page, and get led to another page dedicated to something that could've been a column or two in the table on this page. — Skakid 18:26, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

What other page do you think could be turned into "a column or two in the table on this page?" --Felbryn 18:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

The tables should only be information on prefixes and suffixes, instead your indexing it by attribute bonuses provided by the prefix. This is the purpose of the Equipment acquisition by stats page. Using the prefix to navigate to attribute sets is just a hack, which is made obvious by a couple attribute sets not having a corresponding prefix. The other page should actually have the table that matches all equipment, armor sets, and upgrade components corresponding to an attribute set.--Relyk ~ talk > 19:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

The original purpose of this page was to explain what each of the prefixes mean in terms of which attributes they affect. That's kinda the whole point of naming the page "nomenclature". Somehow, it has grown into a massive cross-reference of prefixes to attributes to acquisition to quality.

Perhaps it's time some people sat down and started over from scratch. Maybe redirects need to be adjusted and information consolidated in different ways. If you want a cross-reference between attributes and acquisition, that's fine, but don't call it nomenclature; similarly, if you want to tabulate how the numbers scale over level or quality, that's fine too, but don't call it nomenclature. —Dr Ishmael 19:47, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

It's a cross reference between the nomenclature and where to obtain it. It's not unreasonable to add information that doesn't follow a strict definition of the page title. — Skakid 04:02, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Felbryn, I think you may have misunderstood (part of) the point I was making, or maybe I didn't phrase it right. Also... please don't make assumptions about what I may or may not be implicitly assuming! It completely derails the discussion. ;)

So with that said:

I am not in favour of dumping any and all information in a single table on a random wiki page that vaguely relates to the topic (as was the case before), but I am even less in favour of having the information scattered across various pages, in comparative / secondary articles, or nowhere at all. None of these score well on an "ease of access" rating, but in the original setting at least you could find more or less what you were looking for. It was an absolute eyesore, I agree, but at least it was visible.

Now as to how I would handle the data... I would consider having individual pages for all these prefixes, much the same way that a unique item has its own page. I know they're not technically items as such, but all these varieties of weapon/armour mods don't work well together if you try to cram them all into a single page any more than if you tried to cram all the info into a single table. Why separate pages? Probably the main reason is exactly because there's no way to know exactly what aspect of this mod a person is looking for!

I've sandboxed a very rough draft of what such a page could look like, food for thought here. It's not perfect and it would be quite some work to have it implemented, but I think it would be useful and provide easy access to whatever specific information someone is looking for regarding that particular mod. Any big, ugly comparative tables can then be moved out of the way to pages like "equipment acquisition by stats" or whatever, where they will only be viewed by people who are actually interested in the comparison rather than the general info. -- Elv 18:44, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I was contemplating a similar idea, though I'm not yet convinced that's the way to go. Some points to consider:

• Your example has "craftable yes/no, drops yes/no". Does a "yes" in these mean that at least 1 piece of equipment with that stat combination is craftable or drops, of any quality/level/item type? If so, drops is going to say "yes" on every single stat line (even the ones that don't have names because they seem to be the result of isolated bugs), and craftable isn't going to be much more useful (Soldier's is craftable...only rings, amulets, and accessories, and with recipes that only appear as rare drops from dungeons and require 200 dungeon tokens, but something with those stats is craftable).
• This seems like a lot of duplicated info—for example, the "acquisition by crafting" sections on many prefixes are going to be virtually identical, right? What's the advantage to all that duplication, compared to linking or transcluding a general page that looks something like Equipment acquisition by stats#Crafting?
• Do you intend to handle all levels and qualities? Some item type/stat combinations have weird holes; for example, there's a universal upgrade with Apothecary's stats, but not a maximum-level one.

I'm having a hard time coming up with a way to organize individual prefix pages that will make them more useful than a redirect to Equipment acquisition by stats without making them very bloated, but I'm open to suggestions. --Felbryn 20:25, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I really only started with the general idea I sandboxed just as some place to start from- the fine points, of course, are open for discussion. As an alternative to really bloated pages or hideous table I think we're on the right track.

• The "craftable" and "drops" were examples of what could be included in the item box, and you're right, a simple true/false for those values would be almost pointless (except possibly for Giver's items?). The true/false values could instead be replaced with slightly more detailed or useful ones to specify the category (weapons/armour/accessory/all) and rarity available... or those specifications can be left out of the box entirely if they're unhelpful.
• It is a lot of duplicate information if you created all the tables manually on each individual page, which is not what I had in mind. Again, I mostly had an overall look and feel for the articles in mind- get all relevant information easily available and visible in one place. Whichever option achieves that effect with the least clutter/duplication/page bloating works for me. So transcluding from a general page that has the right details... sounds just fine. :)
• I think I would stick with only the best quality and highest available level and how to acquire those. If people are looking for ways to get a specific stat for their gear, they're most likely looking for level 80 and highest available rarity anyway. If an upgrade has weird gaps, the article could make special note of that.

My personal preference is individual pages, possibly with some transclusion. My main issue with a page like Equipment acquisition by stats is that at a glance it mostly just throws a lot of info at me that I'm not interested in, and I have to go dig through the article here and there to find out about the specific stat I want. It just doesn't have that at-a-glance overview of my options that I'm looking for, and a well set up page would do that.

My Sandbox is open for mucking around and trying out page formats... we can move the discussion that way as well if we want to work out details that way? We may or may not be cluttering this talk page at this point. I'll see if I have some spare time this week to actually make a better draft than what I have up right now. :) -- Elv 22:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I guess I'm not clear on what an "at-a-glance overview of your options" would actually include in order to provide a representative overview while still being "at-a-glance". Maybe it will become clear to me if you can find the time to do a complete example. --Felbryn 00:45, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Did some more thinking. Here's another idea for formatting. --Felbryn 03:39, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

That's starting to look a lot like what I have in mind! By at-a-glance I mean something along the lines of providing enough detail to give a good overview of your options, without it getting lost in the clutter of unnecessary, less relevant, or vaguely related detail, and making it so that this information is visible from simply loading the page... so avoiding a long page with lots of scrolling (or counter with good navigation), tables with too much content, and hiding relevant information away in sub-pages and other articles that you need to click through to reach. At-a-glance is more a feeling / guideline than a set in stone concept, and it's completely subjective to what we define as relevant vs. secondary. Having said that I'm not sure it was really helpful to you. Sorry. :)

Fingers crossed I'll have some time tomorrow to work this into another draft article.

Made some adjustments in my sandbox, with edited notes here and there. I think I would move your prefix/suffix stuff to the infobox instead, that would probably look tidier and suit the at-a-glance style that an infobox is designed to serve. As to tables, I've been considering a collapsible format for it that would help to quickly get to / get rid of the information someone might want to see. I've we're considering multiple tables on one page, I think that might be better. (Note I borrowed and adjusted one of yours to give a quick idea of what I mean, it's not perfect but you get the gist.)

I like the way you set up your tables for the most part (especially the Examples!), although perhaps the details of what to put there need some more thinking. For example, I would list the dungeon and related token, but not the dungeon location or level (that is secondary information also available on the dungeon page, and perhaps better left there for the people who choose that method). If incorporated in a general purchase table, I would go with the vendor name and possibly their location instead. (Duh obvious for dungeon vendors perhaps, but not karma merchants.) I would personally prefer a general purchase table with vendor, vendor location, currency required, and related dungeon (if applicable). -- Elv 10:09, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't have any principled objection to using an infobox, though I'm concerned that an infobox containing all of the information in the blue box here and/or all the info you listed on your sandbox page is going to be very tall and likely result in a lot of wasted space considering there doesn't seem to be much to put in the intro next to it. And I think you need a way of listing the attributes that makes their relative sizes clearer.

At this point I have to ask who exactly is going to make complete pages for every single prefix? Because I'm not planning to do it, and if the only person campaigning for it has taken a week and still not found the time to create an example with enough detail to serve as a template, I question whether anyone cares enough about this to justify the work involved. --Felbryn 08:29, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

I've been trying to work out ways to deal with the information, since I saw something broken and wanted to help think of ways to fix it. I just don't have the time to create a proper template and every individual page due to real life constraints... but that doesn't stop me from pitching in and adding my $0.02 if I think it may help. I guess not enough people do care enough to do more than just complaining. Maybe this needs to be put on ice for now. -- Elv 09:05, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Why do these things have to be on two separate pages? please combine the two tables. The old table was incredibly useful, and now this page has less information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.87.235.160 (talk • contribs).

Yeah, this overview just suck now... replace it with the old pls... --Jora Jorasdottir 20:26, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, this table is now less useful than it was before. Also, if you're including colomns for Cultural and Order, where's the Colomn for Invaders? My standard use of the page was: I want to put together a combined set mixing these stat combos, how are each of them available on different bits of gear? It now doesn't let me do that, and "Equipment Acquisition by Stats" is a totaly useless mess.

If there's something wrong with Equipment acquisition by stats, let's fix it. Turning Item nomenclature into a messy and incomplete substitute for it makes no sense. And I don't see why you think there would/should be a column for Invader's equipment. --Felbryn 08:29, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Invader's is another prefix/suffix that behaves similarly to the Racial and Order ones. If we are singling those out, why are we *not* also mentioning Invader's? For that matter, the Dungeon armours are also similar. So for consistiancy, we should remove hose coloumns as well, or put the table back the way it was.Illiander 18:43, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

This has already been discussed above: the order and cultural sets have prefixes that unambiguously identify the attribute combination of the equipment; the dungeon sets do not (there are items with identical names but different attributes, which means nothing in the name indicates the attributes). Invader's uniquely identifies the attributes, and perhaps it would be appropriate to work it into the Soldier's row somehow, but giving it its own column is not particularly consistent with the current table; Invader's is the name of a single equipment set, while all the other columns are sets of sets. If we're doing that, why not have an entire column devoted to Legionnaire weapons, or Etched weapons, or Lionguard weapons? --Felbryn 19:08, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

That was the point I'm making, for consistiancy, we should have all of those listed as well, as they are named sets that uniquely identify the stats of the item. Why are we making an exception for ONLY Cultural and Order. They aren'teven best-in-slot. Making an exception for Cultural and Order seems like a sop to the people who want this table to actually be useful, without making it actually useful. For those of us who want a useful table, I put one on my user page (yes, it's just the old table that I pulled out of the archives. That table was useful). Illiander 12:35, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

OK, I've replaced orders and cultural armors with an "other names" column, where I suppose we can put anything that could reasonably be construed as a prefix or suffix. I suggest the following criteria:

• The prefix/suffix must appear as a substring in the names of at least 2 items (one-of-a-kind uniques do not establish a pattern)
• All the items (within a given level range) in which that substring appears must raise the same attributes (e.g. "Sword" does not qualify because there are many different attribute combinations raised by different "swords")
• The item names must not also include a more common substring that is already recognized as a prefix/suffix for those attributes (e.g. "Orrian" does not qualify because Orrian weapons also include the word "Traveler's" in the name)

--Felbryn 02:44, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Craftable Column

Magistrella (talk • contribs • logs • block log) just replaced all the "craftable" entries that listed specific types of equipment (e.g. weapons, trinkets) with a generic 1. I already had a discussion about this once at User_talk:NilePenguin#Craftable. Did the last update actually change these stat combinations to be craftable on all types of equipment, and if not, what is your reasoning for making this change? --Felbryn 19:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I took the 1 rather as a "Yes, this can be crafted as a givers stat on a Giver's(Weapon)" And not as a, "Yes this can be crafted on every item." Isn't that why you added the (weapon) and (armor) to the Giver's in general. I know that they have different status sets and need different colums, but still this doesnt make them "not craftable" which meant for me: Yeah make it a hook, i know it can be crafted i got the recipes myself. I didnt take this as 0, this can not be crafted rather as a "What the hell does that armor/weapon/trinket in that column mean? I know that those are armor/weapon/trinket pieces i want to get as i found them in the AH, but are they craftable?". We would need kind of a "Middle thing" to get that confuzzling away. Something like a template icon which clearly states: You can not put this status combination on every kind of equip - with a link to a special event weapon/armor/trinket page where we can clarify: These stats are event stats on a weapon, those are event stats on armor and those are the stats made by a jeweler on event trinkets. You need <insert event item name here> to make those. Would that be a way to solve this? If more special event stats come up in the game later on we would have a way to deal with those as well. Magistrella 17:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

As I mentioned in the discussion linked above, the "(weapon)" and "(armor)" are not there to indicate what's craftable, they are there because there are two different stat combinations that are both called "Giver's" and I didn't want that to look like an error. Notice that the "Winter" prefix does not say "Winter (trinket)". Are you arguing that it should? If the next patch added a prefix that could appear on all types of equipment as a loot drop, but was only craftable on weapons, how would you want that displayed?

IMO, the prefix column is most definitely NOT where we should record what kinds of things are craftable.

Now, we could hypothetically change these entries back to 1 and clarify somewhere that that means that something with that prefix is craftable. But that would be removing accurate and relevant information from the table, and I don't see what the upside is. I don't think it makes the table any smaller or easier to understand.

We could also hypothetically use a row of icons to indicate what things are craftable, like in this table. I don't think that's a terrible idea, it lets us fit in more information in the same space, but it requires adding a legend and perhaps makes it a little harder to understand.

Or we could just remove the crafting column entirely because it's not technically part of the item's nomenclature... --Felbryn 04:52, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

In my view, Winter should not need a (trinket), as there is nothing else that has those stats with the same prefix except the crafted Winter equipment. Now that you linked that Acquisition page and i took a better look i'd suggest to remove the craftable colum, because it is already shown on the acquisition page how you can obtain them. If we would want to show all the information here about how it can be obtained we would clutter the whole thing unnecessarily up. But i'd leave a direct link to the Acquisition page so that you can easily find how you can obtain certain stats.

Something popped in my mind tho: How about making a colum (or an entire new table) instead that shows which stat can be obtained in which highest rarity? I know that sounds pretty complicated as there are, for example, Berserker Ascended Rings with berserker pre and suffix but then there are some Berserker Rings with Valkyrie suffix (see: List of ascended equipment). But at least we could show that there are full berserker/cavalier/Soldier ascended rings but then none for Magi with healing property. At the moment it wouldn't clutter up that much because you just would have 3 icons in the Ascended tab: ring/neck/back, but as ANET already announced these wont be the only items, so im not really show if it would be a good idea at all.

To make that idea clearer: Basically it would be the same tablet as Equipment acquisition by stats#Level 80 Exotic Equipment. But instead of Crafting/Forge/WvW etc. in the top line it would be showing Rare/Exotic/Ascended (if you want masterwork fine and normal as well) and the Symbols in the downdrop would be, at the moment just those three, a ring, a necklace, and a backpiece icon for the Ascended. In the Exotic you could fill in something like "Available as Exotic on level xx+ gear" for triple stats for example).

Maybe this idea is, as well, not made for the nomenclature page but better for the acquisition page, because all it does show is which stats you can get on which item but then im pretty worn out from the carneval, maybe i can come up with something better in a few days... Magistrella 18:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Missing Info

The 07:11, 9 February 2013 table update removed the dungeon column which was useful info. It should probably be brought back.

Yes, it should. 93.201.83.93 17:54, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

There is already a discussion about this two topics up. --Felbryn 18:19, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't make his point any less valid. there was still plenty of sapce for this information and it was in a handy location 118.209.29.44 23:01, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm not saying it makes his point invalid, I'm saying he should make his point in an appropriate venue and with due consideration of other points that have been made before. --Felbryn 23:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Missing Unnamed Combination

One stat combination of extremely limited available isn't on the Triple Attribute Table yet. It is currently only found on Ascended Items like Ralena's Band. It is like Soldier's, only Condition Damage instead of Power (the "Upgrade Slot" stats is always Rabid with these items). Considering the Shaman's 2 and Emerald are listed, I don't see any reason why this one should be excluded. BioMasterZap 04:56, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Highest Rarity Table

Magistrella suggested a few topics up (in Talk:Item nomenclature#Craftable Column) having a table somewhere that would show what equipment types were available for a particular stat-combination at multiply quality levels. That seemed sufficiently tangential to warrant getting split into another discussion.

I think it's an interesting idea, but once someone looks at the table and sees that, say, there's a rare shaman's back item (but no exotic or ascended equivalent), they're going to want to know what that rare shaman's back item is called and how to get one. So you need some way of representing that information (either in the table or in some easily cross-referencable place). Furthermore, there's a lot more "qualities" than you think, because sometimes the best item for a particular stat/slot combination is actually, say, a level 77 masterwork item (which actually has lower attributes but higher defense than a level 80 fine item, apparently).

So I think the way you'd want to present this is actually to have the columns not be qualities, but item types, and the cell contents shows the highest quality available for a particular stat/slot combination, with links to details on the item and how to acquire it.

The problem, of course, being that this table would have 46 columns (19 weapon types + 21 armor types + 4 trinket types + jewel + universal upgrade) and you'd have many-way ties for "highest quality" in many of the cells, meaning the table would be gigantic. If I were building it in Excel, it would scroll both vertically and horizontally, with the row/column headers frozen so that they're always visible; I'm not sure if you can do anything like that on a wiki. You could maybe split it into a bunch of smaller tables (e.g. one for light armor, one for two-handed weapons...). Or maybe just a giant matrix for each prefix, since people are likely to use it by choosing their favorite prefix and then looking to see what's available in that prefix—which, incidentally, might also satisfy the people who are complaining that they want to type "/wiki berserker's" and go directly to acquisition information...

In fact, here's a sketch of for that last idea: User:Felbryn/Soldier's. Might need some layout tweaks. Does that seem useful? --Felbryn 23:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

That table IS enormous, got to say. Instead of Listing all the dungeon weapons in it why dont we take that one column out of the dungeon table on the acquisition page and make it like this: (for the example of soldiers)

Major	Minor	Prefix	Ascalonian Catacombs	Sorrow's Embrace	Honor of the Waves
		Soldier's	1	1	1
Token

How about that? There are always three different stat combos in each dungeon and each dungeon would have armor and weapons with it. The table would be considerably cranked down in size if we add proper links in the small dungeon tables Magistrella 23:58, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

That small blue table at the top of the page already lists the dungeons. That's great if you only care about dungeons and you already know that dungeons follow a simple formula (i.e. they have all types of weapons and armor except aqua breathers). But not everything in the game follows that formula—mystic forge weaponry, karma armor, and a few other random things don't follow normal patterns.

I suppose you could address those on an ad-hoc basis and otherwise collapse all weapons to one row and all armor (except aqua breathers) to another row, and that would leave you with only 11 equipment rows instead of 46... --Felbryn 00:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Craftable PVE Rabid Weapons

I wasn't sure where to put it since the table has no room and it's only craftable weapons. Beaded weapons --BarGamer 08:59, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

And only level 60 rare, so not best-in-slot. I guess this is further evidence that "craftable?" is not a simple question, which I suppose argues that we should remove that column... --Felbryn 09:25, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Finding Page is Difficult

This page is rather hard to find. I tried searching Weapon Stats, Weapon types, Weapon Attributes, etc, and had no luck. In a flash of insight I searched "Knight", and finally found it. Any way to make this page easier to find? I have a feeling I am not the only one. 173.65.156.92 10:58, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Make some redirects from one or two of those terms you searched for. Also don't use Title Case, we don't use that for article names for non-official terms. —Dr Ishmael 12:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Triple attribute dungeon locations

Please add the dungeon locations back to the triple attribute table. Whoever removed them has eliminated a useful resource used by the community. As things stand, users are forced to browse multiple pages to obtain the same information previously contained in a single chart. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.9.151.27 (talk • contribs) at 19:05, 16 April 2013 (UTC).

There's a link to the table right below the triple attribute table. --JonTheMon 20:03, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

total CritDmg confusion: explanation

I think the IP who edited the total CritDmg to 72% forgot that you can't equip both a 2H weapon and two 1H weapons at the same time. —Dr Ishmael 21:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

No, that would make the total 71%, not 72% (the 2h weapon adds less than 2x 1h weapons; don't ask me why). I think they just added wrong (or maybe checked their critical damage in-game and forgot they were getting 10% from traits or something). --Felbryn (talk) 23:11, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Ascended gear.

Are data in table in ascended equipment section correct? E.g. major stat for asc. amulet holds 126 points, not 94.

Ascended items were recently updated to show only 1 entry per attribute; previously, they showed the "infix" attributes and the "upgrade" attributes separately. 126 is the sum of 94 from the infix attribute and 32 from the upgrade (see the Jewel columns in the table). —Dr Ishmael 14:09, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Proposed overhaul to remove fluff

It was brought up here that this page needs to be simplified and condensed. Here is my attempt at boiling it down to the required information. Information about stat numbers should be moved to another page and we should discuss where that should go as well. Aqua (talk) 00:01, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Focusing this page down to just naming would be fine, I'd think. But where would the existing tables with attribute numbers go? --JonTheMon (talk) 19:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking maybe [[inherent modifiers]]? When you type in "stats," the disambig page provides you with "attributes or 'inherent modifiers'". Inherent modifiers currently links here, but I think it would serve well the new purpose of explaining equipment stat values and distributions. Aqua (talk) 19:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm a bit leery of making a third page for this, but it might be necessary. One to define the prefix, one to obtain based on the prefix, and one to..... define... the value of the prefixes. So, yeah. Crap. Anyhow, any third page might be better as "Equipment value by prefix" or something like that? --JonTheMon (talk) 19:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Everything after the single/dual/triple-attribute tables is mostly analysis of max-level stats, so I'd call it "Item stat analysis" or something like that. —Dr Ishmael 20:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Continued...

So, is this going to be allowed to happen? What was wrong with my edits?

• The attribute set tables were put into one. The ways to acquire each was removed, because they do not belong on this page.
  • Equipment acquisition by stats#Universal upgrade components — has the top tier items because most people will be looking for max items. I created this subpage for people looking for lower level equipment.
  • Equipment acquisition by stats#Crafting — again, has the top tiers, exotic and ascended, items. It also has a subpage.
• The other tables where moved here and was linked on the page. This page already had outdated information of the same type, showing the breakdown of attribute values found on equipment. •••Mora 05:10, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Ah, you didn't leave a note in the summary that the information was moved.--Relyk ~ talk < 05:18, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposing individual prefix pages

Yesterday I was in the position of wanting to get a full set of Soldier's armor and trinkets. I knew that it couldn't be crafted, and so I was left in a situation of not knowing where it could actually come from. Was it avaliable in exotic karma armor? Which dungeons, if any, gave armor and weapons with this prefix? Not to mention miscellaneous exotic trinkets and weapons from various sources, and even mystic forge recipes. If there were a page, tenatively [[Soldier (nomenclature)]], which contained a full list of items which came with the "soldier's" prefix and the "of the soldier" suffix, and any named equipment which has equivalent stats, it would have been made much easier. Therefore, I say we should do this. I figure the list could be automatically made in most cases, since the equipment infobox already has equipment prefixes generated based on the stats, and crafted armor is structured in such a way that it'd be easy to pull that info out. It'd be really useful for players looking to gear themselves up because it would not only let them compare prices of various gear with equivalent stats, but it'd let them see what skins are avaliable so they can pick which they like best. Sarcastically, Psycho Robot (talk) 17:44, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Isn't all that info found here? Wombatt (talk) 01:13, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but the format is pretty horrible when you just want to know where/how to get a specific prefix. In other words, it's trying too hard to do everything. —Dr Ishmael 01:42, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I forgot about that page when I made this proposal, and I suppose instead of making individual pages, that page could be reorganized to be broken into stat headers, but then the page would be quite long and, in the long run, essentially the same as if they were made into individual pages. Psycho Robot (talk) 01:29, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Ascended equivalency

Here's an equivalency table between the Ascended names and the prefixes. Based on the descriptions of the Weapon Chest items in the API.

Ascended	Prefix
Angchu	Cavalier
Beigarth's	Knight
Chorben's	Soldier
Coalforge's	Rampager
Ebonmane's	Apothecary
Grizzlemouth's	Rabid
Hronk's	Magi
Leftpaw's	Settler
Mathilde's	Dire
Occam's	Carrion
Soros's	Assassin
Stonecleaver's	Valkyrie
Theodosus's	Cleric
Tonn's	Sentinel
Wupwup	Celestial
Zintl	Shaman
Zojja's	Berserker

This covers all 3-attribute prefixes except for Giver's, which I'm not seeing as either a weapon chest, ascended inscription, or ascended weapon. —Dr Ishmael 20:44, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Ascended celestial backpack stats

Anyone with magic find ascended backpacks prior to the magic find removal date was allowed to change them to any stats, including celestial... which cannot be obtained normally.

Stats are:

+22 Power
+22 Precision
+22 Toughness
+22 Vitality
+3% Critical Damage
+22 Healing Power
+22 Condition Damage

For proof, pic is here https://dviw3bl0enbyw.cloudfront.net/uploads/forum_attachment/file/101125/gw162.jpg, which was on the forums.

IceBlink (talk) 20:14, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Table Layout

The table layout for someone who wasn't involved in making it is confusing as hell. Me and a whole group of people were trying to debate some stats and the 20 so of us just basically walked away scratching out head on exactly what the Tables meant. Very confusing design and layout on whats craft-able, not craft-able etc. All the details and columns and check marks. We ended up just looking the stats up on the trading post. My Wiki skills are all about summed up right here. BUT, If someone could come up with a better layout that was less confusing it would be awesome. I will work on something, a better more precise way and submit it here later and then maybe some of you able bodies could work on it? I am not criticizing persey just giving an honest experience. 66.169.34.101 09:03, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Would you be willing to give us an example or two of what you went through? What were you looking for, what you saw, and what that meant to you? --JonTheMon (talk) 12:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree completely, and I've been arguing for some time now that a page about nomenclature shouldn't be concerned with acquisition or statistical analyses. —Dr Ishmael 13:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Then please put it somewhere else, don't just get rid of it. Not a nice surprise to be about to use it and find it just GONE. 38.108.156.123 02:39, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

What information are you searching for that isn't already linked on the page that it has been moved to?

• Equipment#Attribute bonuses — has the tables with the statistics that had nothing to do with item naming and attribute bonuses granted
• Equipment acquisition by stats — has an updated table with information on acquisition, such as the triple attribute craftable column and upgrade components

Only the craftable and upgrade component for single and dual attribute, and "Other Names" columns have been removed, unless I accidentally deleted something else in the process of reformatting the page. If you are looking for that information, you can view it in the history logs seen here. •••Mora 03:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

If you're going to redesign the page, you should probably also go through and fix the redirects that you break in the process. Thrain | contribs 19:51, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

k redirects link to same "sections" that they previously did. whether we fix the redirects to point to the appropriate line instead of the section of the table is still for discussion. -Chieftain Alex 00:16, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Right, they link to sections that no longer exist. Which is sloppy. Thrain | contribs 16:48, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Recent destruction of good content

The recent destruction of good content looks like a badly thought out move and I have restored or intend to restore a previous version. The old page gave clear and well structured information on what equipment bonuses went which each prefix and how they could be obtained, as well as some useful stat comparisons. The current tables are crude, poorly structured and incomplete. If the page is unsatisfactory, create the new one(s) first, then replace this on. I'm happy to help with that but in my experience it is better to create your new tool before dumping your old. Amy Awien (talk) 07:14, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

As I have stated numerous times on this talk page, this article should be about the nomenclature only. I applaud Mora for taking the initiative to finally do something about this. The "useful stat comparisons" don't belong on this page, and that content has not been "destroyed", it has been moved to Equipment#Attribute bonuses. Acquisition information, again, should not be on this page; rather, it belongs on Equipment acquisition by stats, and if any information previously on this page is not on that one, then it should be added there, not here.

Regarding information about nomenclature, this page is complete as far as I can tell. —Dr Ishmael 17:32, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

It's a lot better now, with the headings and links to the other pages. Amy Awien (talk) 20:48, 21 December 2013 (UTC)