Talk:Achievement

PvP and PvE dungeon achievements
Yea these entire categories don't show up and i've been trying to figure out some titles ingame my friends have that I have no idea where they came from. Some investigating shows headhunter and bloodthirsty are most likely from pvp (I play with uber rogues too often to get these fast on my guardian, tho I have blood I, so thats verified)..

I know theres achievements and titles for no deaths in X pvp matches, probably one for most points, or just highest ranked in X matches, etc.. But not sure exactly.

But the pve ones I dunno for sure.

00eyes I'm guessing you have access to the game data based on your edits.. Can you clear some of these up?

--Axer128 (talk) 17:44, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I checked out the latest patch on the preview server which fixes the journal bug. I updated the page with info gained from there. The PvP and PvP dungeon achievements are actually in a category together called versus. Dardove (talk) 19:11, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Should We Correct the Dev's Work, and how?
This is a recurrent topic on several pages (my personal favorites are the major problems in Fashion item tooltips). The devs make an obvious mistake producing a misleading result, which they may or may not ever fix. Now for complete information purposes we should obviously call the discrepancy out, but the question is how. From the "Documentary" perspective, we should put exactly the text the devs did, and then have a comment or footnote indicating what it should have been (in our opinion). From a "How to Guide" viewpoint, we should put what the text should have been (once again in our opinion), and then have a note about what it is. As an example in the current issue with the Orc Raid achievement, it is of note that the header is "Description", not "Procedure". That could imply that when we edit the description we are creating a fiction of what is in game. On the other hand, I can see where incorrect data can be frustrating: How many people may have searched for an "Orc Raid" event fruitlessly or tried to unsuccessfully salvage the blue items that were labeled Salvageable prior to this patch? It is a tough issue... - Serpinecoh (talk) 08:00, 1 September 2013 (UTC)


 * This absolutely isn't about correcting the devs work, it's about doing good work ourselves.
 * I mean: A wiki that serves as pure verbatim copy of the game data is one thing.. (Serves some purpose, but to the general masses: Not of much interest - they will play the game to see for themselves.)
 * However a wiki that instead strives to inform the reader absolutely, clearly and to the point about the games mechanics in the most concise and clear manner - thats something thats very useful to pretty much everyone.


 * So yea, absolutely we should 100% correct wrong descriptions. They serve no purpose here but to confuse the player. Sure it's helpful to denote that the in game descriptions are wrong in some cases, but in simple ones like this where the skirmish was misnamed is a pretty minor detail that isn't particularly of high value. It doesn't hurt to include it, just doesn't have much priority to me.


 * and no this is not opinion, this is not fiction, this is not a guide. The player who wants to run a skirmish brings up the landing page/queue page and select his skirmish. It's simple as that. If he's searching for a specific achievement and wants to run a skirmish, he will be mislead if the names don't match. So in this case - it's a simple correction, nothing more.


 * However beyond that case, I do believe we have no important need to even include the verbatim descriptions or simple corrections. The important part of what should be included in the 2nd column is what most be done to gain the achievement.
 * --Axer128 (talk) 14:53, 1 September 2013 (UTC)


 * If we're going to be prescriptive rather than descriptive, then change the dungeon section, the quest section, and the rest of the skirmish section. Personally, I think the existing page which copies the text, but points the reader to the correct dungeon/quest/skirmish is less confusing for the reader.  However, none of us has actual evidence of what helps the reader, we're just guessing according to our own biases. -- Two30 (talk) 19:13, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Can someone add the general description of the Achievements?
I am missing the general description. What are they? What are they good for? Are there any rewards? The list is good, but it doesn't say much about the impact in the game. Thanks in advance.