Curse

Yawgmoth · Apr 02, 2008, 08:23 PM // 20:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by N1ghtstalker

as much as i would love to see signs of my tormented shield in GW2 a destroyer weapon is still easier to get
even tho torment weapons > destroyers in looks and prestige

/notsigned

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleikki

/notsigned why not at same add all skins r8 there..

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccruzp

/notsigned
Torment weapons are NF, and HoM is for all campaigns so it would be unfair to those 6 guys who dont have NF, (zaichen n HoH would take 10 lifetimes to fill a hall w/ tormented IF they drop from those chests.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordheinous

The last thing I need is more pointless things to acquire to get a "complete" hall of monuments.
/notsigned

Wow...
People don't get it how it should work? Having any trouble with understanding what an OPTION is ??

How comes just a few months ago EVERYONE was agreeing that the monument sucks and should accept much more highend weapons, how comes the Tormented weapons were the most often mentioned ones in all discusions on this?
And so terrible responses to this thread... maybe the OP isn't clearly pointing out how this should be done?

What's wrong with having an OPTION to display another, more "elite", harder to get weapon in a spot of a lame destroyer weapon, if someone only wants and can afford that??

The monument should remain max'able with just 11 destroyer weapons!

This should remain the easiest way to max it - other options should all be more rare / expensive / elite.
Example: Tormented weapons, or req8-9 max insc rare golds, or req8-9 perf inherent rare golds.

A monument filled with for example 11 Tormented weapons instead shouldn't provide better rewards in GW2, shouldn't count as something done 'better'.

Unlike the minipets monument this should retain fixed 11 slots, so you can't add more and more but only REPLACE. Monument will remain maxed if has all 11 slots filled.

/SIGNED (again), this is a great and superobvious idea, the monument as it is not is a complete utter joke.

MMSDome · Apr 02, 2008, 09:44 PM // 21:44

/notsigned

As someone who has tormented weapons and someone who has completely filled their HoM (yes this includes all 11 destroyer weapons) I would not want to have to be required to put more weapons in my HoM. Its bad enough that you need all 11 destroyer weapons to fill out your monument and most of those weapons which will be used by heroes and we don't need to make it worse by making tormented weapons a requirement as well.

Yawgmoth · Apr 02, 2008, 10:28 PM // 22:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by MMSDome

/notsigned

As someone who has tormented weapons and someone who has completely filled their HoM (yes this includes all 11 destroyer weapons) I would not want to have to be required to put more weapons in my HoM. Its bad enough that you need all 11 destroyer weapons to fill out your monument and most of those weapons which will be used by heroes and we don't need to make it worse by making tormented weapons a requirement as well.

L O L

seriously lol

where does it say they should be REQUIRED?

of course they shouldn't!
that would be bad,

but what's wrong with having them as an OPTION? What's wrong with giving players the FREEDOM to put in a tormented sword instead of that fugly destroyer, if the player wants it and can afford?
...
bleh, everything should already be in my above post...

I strongly suggest the OP to edit his first post and clarify things, clearly state that more weapons should be an uption NOT requirement and that the monument should remain max'able with 11 destroyer weapons, that this proposed change IS NOT about making anything harder.

Sethellington · Apr 29, 2008, 01:49 PM // 13:49

if you need both i /not signed this.

if you can use tormented in place of destroyer. sure go for it. i'd be more impressed by a full torm set than destroyer.