How viable Lion Arch is as a port city? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

How viable Lion Arch is as a port city?

ugrakarma.9416ugrakarma.9416 Member ✭✭✭✭
edited October 28, 2019 in Lore
  • Lions Arch's position is intriguing, the city's aesthetics emphasizes his role as a port city, when I suppose its trade is actually mostly terrestrial.
  • Their nearest neighbors (Norm, humans) seems had no sea ports around sea of sorrows.
  • The path to reach the port is full of narrows passages and NGZ(non go zones, due to hostile wildlife, dragon corruption or hostile factions(ex: inquest) )
  • The Sea of Elona seems landlocked, by the Straits of devastation bridges/islands linking Orr to Tyria on "shark teeth archipelago", i dont remember at top head that bridges height if is enough to ship pass. And the "link" between Orr and Scavenger Causeway(but like all unexplored area this one can be retconed). How a Krytan Ship can reach Amnon Port?
  • more towards south more "non go zones"(i didnt marked all map) appear like Ring of Fire, Orr, Joko controlled areas.
  • most 'civilizations' of Tyria had access to Lion Arch by land.
  • its stated they lost contact to Cantha, so the only relevant know port toward south is the Rata Sum one.

i posted a Map to ilustrate the points i made.

main pvp: Khel the Undead(power reaper).

Comments

  • ugrakarma.9416ugrakarma.9416 Member ✭✭✭✭

    as side note, we take a 'ship' to istan from Amnon Harbor, but look how long is that travel by sea.

    main pvp: Khel the Undead(power reaper).

  • Hannelore.8153Hannelore.8153 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 28, 2019

    The important thing to remember is that most of these are recent developments, Lion's Arch has existed for far longer than even the Sea of Sorrows being blocked off, and we know from the Southsun Cove discovery that due to all the newfound dangers that have arisen in the last hundred years or so, ships rarely even leave Lion's Arch and that Claw Island is pretty much a defensive against all those threats, namely Zhaitan, which shows how far north they had spread by the time the game starts during the Personal Story, which takes one year before the first Dragon Bash.

    Lion's Arch is mostly a port city for legacy purposes from 100-250 years ago when Tyria was alot more open than now. This fact is not hidden: We couldn't even reconnect with Elona until we had airships, some refugees were making it through but only in small numbers.

    SPOILERS? Now that Zhaitan, Kralkatorrik and Joko are eliminated, and the Karka are mostly pushed back, these areas will likely become alot more open in the years to come, but this won't be reflected on the world map because maps are stuck in time. It is unknown whether we'll be able to reverse the damage that the rising of Orr did to the Straight of Malchor, or the damage that Joko did by rerouting the Elon river.


    There are a few things to consider though, first of all that bridges don't have to be high enough for ships fit under, alot of them can just be raised to one side, or split in the middle and raised to both sides, which is common in real life. Also unexplored areas often end up looking quite different once explored, so you can't go by the artistically drawn map for areas we haven't been to either (like the neck of the Orr pennisula).

    Also, I believe that Sparkfly Fen and Bloodtide Cost do have open sea paths that are not blocked in any way. And lastly to consider that most merchant ships will just be small boats that can easily fit through all these areas, we only see large freight ships in Rata Sum and the freight ship off the coast of Siren's Landing is also Asura owned, though there's a few of them derelict in the other areas of Orr that may have belonged to Humans in the past, the vast majority of even derelict ships shown are just small sailboats.

    Hannah | Daisuki[SUKI] Founder | Mains Mariyuuna, Tempest, Water mage | Also Bappy Pawbeans, Soulbeast | ♀♥♀
    Sorry if I seem annoying or harsh, I'm just bad at communicating properly. ><
    /"Love me, hate me, but always love me" - Unknown/

  • kasoki.5180kasoki.5180 Member ✭✭✭

    I was never under the impression that it was a port city. And honestly, the existance of so many pirates in the game where traveling by sea meant almost certain death always seemed very off to me.

    Also, if I am not mistaken, most dialogues with NPCs implies trade is mostly going via land, thus we have Lionguard outposts in many regions, connecting roads between capital cities and Lion's Arch

    So I would say that aesthetics is mostly tied to the heritage of the city since it was founded and has a history of being a pirate haven/pirate-city

  • I would probably compare it to New Orleans or Houston, maybe Chicago or Toronto. Used to be VERY important historically because of its central location to the recourses inland around it, mostly functioning as the on-ramp to the freeway that was water. These days? Maybe a bit awkwardly placed for long-distance ground transit like cars and trains, a nice stepping stone for air travel, but not necessarily less important in the grander scheme.

    With Tyria seeing a rise in popularity in air travel, it's nicely central to the major home cities of the mainland; goods sent there can be easily distributed from there.

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    @kasoki.5180 said:
    I was never under the impression that it was a port city. And honestly, the existance of so many pirates in the game where traveling by sea meant almost certain death always seemed very off to me.

    Also, if I am not mistaken, most dialogues with NPCs implies trade is mostly going via land, thus we have Lionguard outposts in many regions, connecting roads between capital cities and Lion's Arch

    So I would say that aesthetics is mostly tied to the heritage of the city since it was founded and has a history of being a pirate haven/pirate-city

    Pirates operate on the rivers and lakes. The big groups of Pirates are mostly based off the larger lakes of Kryta/Shiverpeaks, or setup in abandoned coastal towns of Kryta from Zhaitan's awakening.

    As for Sea-travel, It's mostly the open waters toward Cantha that are hostile now. Sea-travel between LA, Amnoon, and Rata Sum still happens. And between Amnoon, Gandara (formerly) and Istan. The Corsair fleet was entirely water-based until Recently after all.

  • ehm, do not look at the game map. Look at the whole Tyria map. There are many islands with cities on them, besides Cantha. Just because we, as players, never saw them, does not mean that there is no trade going on.

  • kasoki.5180kasoki.5180 Member ✭✭✭

    @Kalavier.1097 said:

    @kasoki.5180 said:
    I was never under the impression that it was a port city. And honestly, the existance of so many pirates in the game where traveling by sea meant almost certain death always seemed very off to me.

    Also, if I am not mistaken, most dialogues with NPCs implies trade is mostly going via land, thus we have Lionguard outposts in many regions, connecting roads between capital cities and Lion's Arch

    So I would say that aesthetics is mostly tied to the heritage of the city since it was founded and has a history of being a pirate haven/pirate-city

    Pirates operate on the rivers and lakes. The big groups of Pirates are mostly based off the larger lakes of Kryta/Shiverpeaks, or setup in abandoned coastal towns of Kryta from Zhaitan's awakening.

    As for Sea-travel, It's mostly the open waters toward Cantha that are hostile now. Sea-travel between LA, Amnoon, and Rata Sum still happens. And between Amnoon, Gandara (formerly) and Istan. The Corsair fleet was entirely water-based until Recently after all.

    Most pirates in the game are "stuck" in the past, before the time we fought Zhaitan and undead plagued Sea of Sorrows. If there is any sea trade (and thus piracy) going off from LA it only started recently, not before.
    This is why i said they seem a bit odd. Their locations seem extremely un-pirate like. Pirates don't operate where there is no bounty. And as far as we know, there is no trade and commerce going via lakes. What we see in the game are mostly pirate hideouts, but we don't actually see pirates doing "pirate stuff"- which is raiding ships for treasure and hostages because Sea of Sorrows wasn't used for trade since Zhaitan (AFAIK). On top of that we have Asura gates which easily transport people and goods across far locations. Simply put, maritime transportation in Core Tyria makes little to no sense, and thus existance of pirates makes little to no sense. I do agree its different in Elonian regions

  • eh, after Zhaitan's rise the Sea of Sorrows was still used for trade. The books tell us that. Yes, it got more dangerous and there were plenty places where a ship should/would/must not go, but we read a lot about trade going in and out of LA in the books.

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2019

    @kasoki.5180 said:
    Most pirates in the game are "stuck" in the past, before the time we fought Zhaitan and undead plagued Sea of Sorrows. If there is any sea trade (and thus piracy) going off from LA it only started recently, not before.
    This is why i said they seem a bit odd. Their locations seem extremely un-pirate like. Pirates don't operate where there is no bounty. And as far as we know, there is no trade and commerce going via lakes. What we see in the game are mostly pirate hideouts, but we don't actually see pirates doing "pirate stuff"- which is raiding ships for treasure and hostages because Sea of Sorrows wasn't used for trade since Zhaitan (AFAIK). On top of that we have Asura gates which easily transport people and goods across far locations. Simply put, maritime transportation in Core Tyria makes little to no sense, and thus existance of pirates makes little to no sense. I do agree its different in Elonian regions

    A: Sea trade was still happening. It just was between Garenhoff (The Wizard's tower), Lion's Arch, Rata Sum, and a few other places. It was trade with CANTHA that was cut off. Up until Zhaitan rose, Kryta was engaged with active trade with Cantha.
    B: Pirates have been shown to be raiding and robbing locations.
    C; We know there is travel by river, As Harathi Hinterlands was connected to the docks at Divinity's Reach by river.
    D : The big one, that isn't shown ingame. It costs big money to ship freight by Asura Gate. The original LA you could see a Charr trying to haggle the price down to ship crates of rifles through for trade. In DR, you can still see two humans complaining about the cost of using it (Near Rurikton). Ingame, there is no fee, but in universe you have to pay to use the Asura gates, and pay more to ship cargo. That's why overland trade between LA and DR is still very much a thing, and the Lionguard setup the network of Havens (and even had a non-aggression pact with the Centaur, though the centaurs would raid merchants still.)

  • ugrakarma.9416ugrakarma.9416 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Thanks for feedback folks, this turned into a really interesting discussion about GW2 geography.

    main pvp: Khel the Undead(power reaper).

  • draxynnic.3719draxynnic.3719 Member ✭✭✭✭

    With respect to the Shark's Teeth Archipelago:

    I get the impression myself that the bridges there could have been designed to allow ships to pass, and there's a good chance that the metal bridges we see there now were made by the Pact in order to facilitate the southern invasion route, rather than having been there historically. If the worst came to the worst, there might be a portage route across the Squall Cusps or through the Scavenger's Causeway.

  • ugrakarma.9416ugrakarma.9416 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @draxynnic.3719 said:
    With respect to the Shark's Teeth Archipelago:

    I get the impression myself that the bridges there could have been designed to allow ships to pass, and there's a good chance that the metal bridges we see there now were made by the Pact in order to facilitate the southern invasion route, rather than having been there historically. If the worst came to the worst, there might be a portage route across the Squall Cusps or through the Scavenger's Causeway.

    i got to there to refresh my memory, yeah they had mechanical features and ilumination suggestion pact made stuff and that they can be "opened" to allow ships pass, all the 3 bridges,

    main pvp: Khel the Undead(power reaper).

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2019

    @ugrakarma.9416 said:

    • Lions Arch's position is intriguing, the city's aesthetics emphasizes his role as a port city, when I suppose its trade is actually mostly terrestrial.
    • Their nearest neighbors (Norm, humans) seems had no sea ports around sea of sorrows.

    Humans have several ports. Garrenhoff is one we can actively visit, but until recently there was also Port Stalwart and Port Noble (the latter being Laughing Gull Island now), and there is likely still one or two along the D'Alessio Seaboard coast.

    • The Sea of Elona seems landlocked, by the Straits of devastation bridges/islands linking Orr to Tyria on "shark teeth archipelago", i dont remember at top head that bridges height if is enough to ship pass. And the "link" between Orr and Scavenger Causeway(but like all unexplored area this one can be retconed). How a Krytan Ship can reach Amnon Port?

    The Sea of Elon is not landlocked, as we traverse it twice: Once to get to Labyrinthine Cliffs (and from there back to Lion's Arch) via this generically named NPC (formerly this other generically named NPC in earlier versions of the festival), and once for Season 4 Episode 1 when we go from Amnoon to Istan during Under the Stars (I suppose it's possible that had us go down and through the Elon River instead, but that would take us shipping through Dragonbrand which seems unlikely, and would require us to suspend disbelief about the eastern waterfall edge in Elon Riverlands). And while we do not take the transport at the time, during Seized we meet a ship that traveled from Lion's Arch via the Sea of Elon.

    Odd as it may seem given the design of the zone, traversal through the Sea of Elon is possible. We have to keep in mind that pretty much every zone is condensed for the sake of gameplay, and not an entirely lore accurate depiction of the maps. Everything in the game is much larger overall.

    • its stated they lost contact to Cantha, so the only relevant know port toward south is the Rata Sum one.

    Prior to the personal story, and after the fall of Port Noble, the trading ports of note that we know about were:

    • Rata Sum
    • Lion's Arch
    • Garrenhoff
    • Divinity's Reach (via Doric's Landing and river travel through Gendarran Fields and Harathi Hinterlands)

    This is because Zhaitan had gained a slowly increasing foothold in the Sea of Sorrows making sea travels harder (which is why Southsun Cove went undiscovered for however long it existed).

    During Zhaitan's reign, Tyrians had lost at least two ports of note: Port Stalwart and then Port Noble.

    Through Zhaitan's rise, Tyrians had lost even more ports of note, including access to Cantha and a charr port in the Southern Shiverpeaks (likely where the dredge have taken up in southern Thunderhead Peaks).

    Now, as Lion's Arch's importance as a port - obviously it decreased over time. But if we look at before Zhaitan's rise, especially before GW1, there were trade between Lion's Arch and the following naval ports:

    • Cantha (Canthan Empire)
    • Elona (Kourna and Istan provinces)
    • Deldrimor (via Droknar's Forge and Port Sledge)
    • Ascalon (while landlocked, they did have expeditions south and likely had a trade route going through southern Ascalon to modern Sea of Elon to avoid traversing the Shiverpeaks and Kryta for trade with Orr and other nations, and likely did so for trade with Kryta during times of peace)
    • The Battle Isles
    • Other Krytan Ports (Garrenhoff, Port Stalwart, Sanctum Cay's monestary before its collapse, Fort Cadence before its collapse)

    Over the centuries, Lion's Arch had a lot of trade partners come and go. But Lion's Arch alone remained the entire time (bar a decade or two after Zhaitan's rise).

    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2019

    @kasoki.5180 said:

    @Kalavier.1097 said:

    @kasoki.5180 said:
    I was never under the impression that it was a port city. And honestly, the existance of so many pirates in the game where traveling by sea meant almost certain death always seemed very off to me.

    Also, if I am not mistaken, most dialogues with NPCs implies trade is mostly going via land, thus we have Lionguard outposts in many regions, connecting roads between capital cities and Lion's Arch

    So I would say that aesthetics is mostly tied to the heritage of the city since it was founded and has a history of being a pirate haven/pirate-city

    Pirates operate on the rivers and lakes. The big groups of Pirates are mostly based off the larger lakes of Kryta/Shiverpeaks, or setup in abandoned coastal towns of Kryta from Zhaitan's awakening.

    As for Sea-travel, It's mostly the open waters toward Cantha that are hostile now. Sea-travel between LA, Amnoon, and Rata Sum still happens. And between Amnoon, Gandara (formerly) and Istan. The Corsair fleet was entirely water-based until Recently after all.

    Most pirates in the game are "stuck" in the past, before the time we fought Zhaitan and undead plagued Sea of Sorrows. If there is any sea trade (and thus piracy) going off from LA it only started recently, not before.
    This is why i said they seem a bit odd. Their locations seem extremely un-pirate like. Pirates don't operate where there is no bounty. And as far as we know, there is no trade and commerce going via lakes. What we see in the game are mostly pirate hideouts, but we don't actually see pirates doing "pirate stuff"- which is raiding ships for treasure and hostages because Sea of Sorrows wasn't used for trade since Zhaitan (AFAIK). On top of that we have Asura gates which easily transport people and goods across far locations. Simply put, maritime transportation in Core Tyria makes little to no sense, and thus existance of pirates makes little to no sense. I do agree its different in Elonian regions

    While Zhaitan reigned, there was still sea trade. Sea of Sorrows book focuses pretty heavily on this. Sea trade became increasingly more dangerous between Zhaitan's rise and GW2, where for the past 50 or so years the only trade routes was really between Rata Sum, Garrenhoff, Divinity's Reach (via Doric's Landing), and Lion's Arch.

    You have to keep in mind that Zhaitan didn't control the full sea of sorrows, nor was its grasp on the sea complete from day 1. It had slowly encroached on sea trade since its rise, intentionally hunting down ships little at a time to build its own fleet. For the first few decades, the mere idea of a "dead fleet" was mere rumor and widely disbelieved; even the destruction of Port Stalwart merely confirmed the simple existence of dead ships, and not the notion that there was a full on fleet of them that was steadily growing.

    Pirates like Taidha would have operated in the open seas, and there would have been bounty in those seas. It wasn't monopolized by dead ships even during the personal story.

    As for asura gates: Lore implies that asura gates, and waypoints, are expensive. And merchants trying to make a profit would avoid them if possible. it's a "money versus time and safety" situation. Though on top of that, pack animals seem incapable of using waypoints efficiently (or are even more expensive). It's free/cheap for players, but that's pure mechanics alone - lore that gets waved for the sake of mechanics and gameplay.

    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.

  • kasoki.5180kasoki.5180 Member ✭✭✭

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

    You have to keep in mind that Zhaitan didn't control the full sea of sorrows, nor was its grasp on the sea complete from day 1. It had slowly encroached on sea trade since its rise, intentionally hunting down ships little at a time to build its own fleet. For the first few decades, the mere idea of a "dead fleet" was mere rumor and widely disbelieved; even the destruction of Port Stalwart merely confirmed the simple existence of dead ships, and not the notion that there was a full on fleet of them that was steadily growing.

    Port Stalwart was hundred years ago. I am not sure how does that prove how much sea Zhaitain controlled in the timespan of the core game and years directly before the game. There is simply way to long of a passage in time to take it as a referral point for claiming he had "small" control in more recent times

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    Pirates like Taidha would have operated in the open seas, and there would have been bounty in those seas. It wasn't monopolized by dead ships even during the personal story.

    Can you elaborate on what do you base both of these assumptions? I don't remember anything in the game implying this. Also, sea doesn't need to be "monopolized" in order for it to be stopped using for trade

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    As for asura gates: Lore implies that asura gates, and waypoints, are expensive. And merchants trying to make a profit would avoid them if possible. it's a "money versus time and safety" situation. Though on top of that, pack animals seem incapable of using waypoints efficiently (or are even more expensive). It's free/cheap for players, but that's pure mechanics alone - lore that gets waved for the sake of mechanics and gameplay.

    Ehmm... not to be that person, but shipping via sea is actually extremely expensive, not to mention has way less of guarantee that good will actually be delivered (unlike portal) which even further increases cost of insurance and other non-transport costs. Cost of insurance alone to travel a sea where there is a risk of undead attack would essentially bankrupt a trader

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2019

    @kasoki.5180 said:
    Port Stalwart was hundred years ago. I am not sure how does that prove how much sea Zhaitain controlled in the timespan of the core game and years directly before the game. There is simply way to long of a passage in time to take it as a referral point for claiming he had "small" control in more recent times

    Port Stalwart was the first port destroyed by Zhaitan. It took Zhaitan 10 years to get enough forces to destroy it, and it wasn't until 1256 AE - 27 years after Stalwart's destruction - that the fleet was seen again in force.

    It might have been 96 years between Stalwart's destruction and the personal story, but in that 96 years, Zhaitan only made two major assaults (once in 1256 AE on the Krytan fleet, and once more at an unknown time against Port Noble).

    This goes to show that in the 106 years since Zhaitan's rise, Zhaitan did not have complete control over the Sea of Sorrows. Even 37 years after it rose, it was largely thought to be a non-threat on the sea except when you go too close to Orr. The slowness of Zhaitan's expansion goes a lot to show how much sea control Zhaitan had in the timespan of the core game and the years directly before it.

    More so when you add there being at least two ports Lion's Arch traded with via sea travel.

    Can you elaborate on what do you base both of these assumptions? I don't remember anything in the game implying this. Also, sea doesn't need to be "monopolized" in order for it to be stopped using for trade

    Edge of Destiny novel brings it up, which takes place 6 years before the core game, that the seas are dangerous with not just risen threats but pirate threats. It's also brought up throughout Bloodtide Coast. Sea of Sorrows novel also brings it up, though that's more historical than you seem to care about despite still being post-Zhaitan. And in all honesty, the sea would need to be monopolized to prevent all sea travel and fishing.

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    As for asura gates: Lore implies that asura gates, and waypoints, are expensive. And merchants trying to make a profit would avoid them if possible. it's a "money versus time and safety" situation. Though on top of that, pack animals seem incapable of using waypoints efficiently (or are even more expensive). It's free/cheap for players, but that's pure mechanics alone - lore that gets waved for the sake of mechanics and gameplay.

    Ehmm... not to be that person, but shipping via sea is actually extremely expensive, not to mention has way less of guarantee that good will actually be delivered (unlike portal) which even further increases cost of insurance and other non-transport costs. Cost of insurance alone to travel a sea where there is a risk of undead attack would essentially bankrupt a trader

    Shipping is always expensive regardless of method, the point is that shipping via asura gate is more expensive. Exponentially so; enough that it's worth the risk of sending a ship along the coastline than using a gate.

    The Arcane Council is just that greedy with their monopolized use of asura gates. And because they're the only group to have a gate network (besides Inquest who don't share their gate network), they can afford to be so. Because the only alternative is risking centaur, icebrood, or risen assaults on convoys.

    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.

  • kasoki.5180kasoki.5180 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2019

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

    It might have been 96 years between Stalwart's destruction and the personal story, but in that 96 years, Zhaitan only made two major assaults (once in 1256 AE on the Krytan fleet, and once more at an unknown time against Port Noble).

    This goes to show that in the 106 years since Zhaitan's rise, Zhaitan did not have complete control over the Sea of Sorrows. Even 37 years after it rose, it was largely thought to be a non-threat on the sea except when you go too close to Orr. The slowness of Zhaitan's expansion goes a lot to show how much sea control Zhaitan had in the timespan of the core game and the years directly before it.

    I am not sure how does number of assaults on Ports count towards what happens at high seas. Thats apple and oranges. Zhaitain attacking ports is not representative of his control of the seas. Doesn matter if attacks happens once per week or once per century. There is no causation between the two.

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

    Edge of Destiny novel brings it up, which takes place 6 years before the core game, that the seas are dangerous with not just risen threats but pirate threats. It's also brought up throughout Bloodtide Coast. Sea of Sorrows novel also brings it up, though that's more historical than you seem to care about despite still being post-Zhaitan. And in all honesty, the sea would need to be monopolized to prevent all sea travel and fishing.

    I don't remember any NPC in Bloodtide Coast ever bringing it up but i could remember it incorrectly. And again, no, sea wouldn't need to be monopolized in order for trade to stop. Thats not how trade works, and thats not how shipping companies and actual traders operate when they factor in risks of transportation. Even in real world when transport of goods stops due to a conflict in the area its not necessary that somebody monopolized the trade route (actually, most functioning trade routes are "monopolized" as they go through territory of sovereign nations)

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

    Shipping is always expensive regardless of method, the point is that shipping via asura gate is more expensive. Exponentially so; enough that it's worth the risk of sending a ship along the coastline than using a gate.

    The Arcane Council is just that greedy with their monopolized use of asura gates. And because they're the only group to have a gate network (besides Inquest who don't share their gate network), they can afford to be so. Because the only alternative is risking centaur, icebrood, or risen assaults on convoys.

    Don't get me wrong. but I don't think you understand how much MORE expensive it would be to ship goods through a region with undead. For ship owner, risk is not just small damage, it is loss of ship and most likely entire crew. This would make costs for merchant so high that Asura gates would have to be basically unafordable to anyone in order for sea transport to be viable alternative. And yes, we know that gates are expensive, but there is absolutely no way they are so expensive. You yourself have mentioned people use them because they are alternative to centaur, icebrood or risen assault on convoys - all of which are lesser financial liability than ship full of cargo, manned with crew, on high seas, attacked by undead. Sunken ship was literally one the biggest possible financial losses in late medieval-early modern times. So much so, that ship owners would organize ships into into pseudo-corporations with parts of ships functioning as pseudo shares. All in order to minimize their exposure to potential loss. There is simply no way, even in theory, that for merchants sea shipping is financially cheaper than Asura gates.

    I cannot argue with what the books say, and have no reason not to believe your presentation of them. But from what you have said, the books mention pirate activity, not trade. Which goes to my original statement, that the way pirates are presented makes little to no sense, but I have never claimed there are no pirates.

    Edit: Also, only viable location for trade via Sea would be Rata Sum and Grove. Divinity's Reach and Hoelbrak fall off due to their locations while Elona due to political reasons (in core game). This means that only those who wish to trade with Asura and Sylvari would even have to use the ship, and only Asura and Sylvari would have to use ships instead of gates . It seems very odd that Rata Sum would actively try to hinder its own trade by financially "forcing" its own merchants to travel via Sea of Sorrows

  • ugrakarma.9416ugrakarma.9416 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2019

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    This goes to show that in the 106 years since Zhaitan's rise, Zhaitan did not have complete control over the Sea of Sorrows. Even 37 years after it rose, it was largely thought to be a non-threat on the sea except when you go too close to Orr. The slowness of Zhaitan's expansion goes a lot to show how much sea control Zhaitan had in the timespan of the core game and the years directly before it.

    also, disbelief in a Zaithan attack is well demonstrated in personal history until the Claw Island episode. is part of our PC journey to prove that Zhaithan it was a threat

    main pvp: Khel the Undead(power reaper).

  • kasoki.5180kasoki.5180 Member ✭✭✭

    @ugrakarma.9416 said:

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    This goes to show that in the 106 years since Zhaitan's rise, Zhaitan did not have complete control over the Sea of Sorrows. Even 37 years after it rose, it was largely thought to be a non-threat on the sea except when you go too close to Orr. The slowness of Zhaitan's expansion goes a lot to show how much sea control Zhaitan had in the timespan of the core game and the years directly before it.

    also, disbelief in a Zaithan attack is well demonstrated in personal history until the Claw Island episode. is part of our PC journey to prove that Zhaithan it was a threat

    Disbelief was at the idea that there would be a substantial undead attack that can actually endanger the city. Not that undead attacks happen.

    From "Battle at Claw Island" story mission:

    Watch Commander Talon: Inspect our defenses. Look at our munitions. I tell you, we're ready for anything. There's no need to worry.
    PC: What's the history of this island?
    Talon: It was in 1237, just after the city was rebuilt, that Commodore Cobiah Marriner and his first mate, Sykox, turned the island into a fortress.
    PC: Why did they do that?
    Talon: They saw what Orrian invasions did to Port Noble and Port Stalwart. Someone had to stand their ground.
    PC: And it's worked ever since?
    Talon: Absolutely. These defenses are virtually impenetrable. Nothing more than an undead shark or the occasional zombie gets past us.
    PC: I have another question.

    PC: How many times has the fortress been attacked?
    Talon: Countless. We've had six major attacks under my watch, and that's only in the last four years.
    PC: What kinds of creatures are you trained to handle?
    Talon: Anything Risen. Anything from Orr. Zombies, abominations, rotted flesh-beasts... we even take on Dead Ships!
    PC: But not dragons, right?
    Talon: Dragons? You mean like Zhaitan or one of his champions? No, no, they don't come to Lion's Arch.
    PC: Let's hope it stays this way.

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    One thing being ignored here...

    Until recently, the Grove didn't exist. Even then, to ship by Asura gate means doing overland travel to Rata Sum, Grove, or DR (assuming Kryta/tarnished coast), as opposed to say, hiking to Garenhoff or any small dock (Most ships we see are shallow bottomed, capable of navigating the rivers with relative ease).

    The Asura gates are fixed points, that not only cost to use, but would cost to reach. And they only go to LA and back. With a boat, you could launch from one port, stop at every single location possible, selling wares. And if you need to go anywhere besides LA/major city, and Asura gate won't help you.

    Plus, IIRC Asura gate crews inspect all cargo coming in and out. Using a boat would allow you to perhaps smuggle goods. IIRC, Kiel even brings up in the rebuilt LA that they need stricter inspectors on the docks.

    As for "Why would they make gates more expensive then boats for the Asura crews/dockworkers at Rata Sum", that's simple. The guys up top who control the gates don't give a carp about the Asura working the docks. Infact, given how we see a large amount of ships at the Rata Sum dock, with a LOT of cargo, we can still infer that ship based cargo hauling is viable, if not cheaper then simply using the Asura gate. Course, it could also be an aspect of size, crates too big for the gates or awkward to try to carry.

    We do see Elementals unloading cargo in Garenhoff from the ship, so sea trade/travel does occur to that location.

    Asura gates are like IRL airplanes. Faster? Hell yes. But far more expensive and unless the location you want to go to is right near an airport, and you are near an airport yourself, you are better off driving there, or shipping by land/water. A merchant in Kessex hills would have an easier time reaching Garenhoff, hiring a ship to LA, and returning the same way then trying to navigate all the way to DR or Rata Sum/Grove (modern day), paying any tolls, paying the Asura gate operators for travel to and from and hiking back. Not to mention paying for pack animal/mount housing, guards, housing for guards, etc.

  • Daniel Handler.4816Daniel Handler.4816 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2019

    It is certainly a very viable telePort city. Even if there was lost water trade the Asura gates would have made up for it. AFAIK they have a captive market for Mist War stuff and the highest density of transcontinental Asura gates.

    The expenses of boat vs gate works in their favour regardless as they have the infrastructure for both.

  • Danikat.8537Danikat.8537 Member ✭✭✭✭

    One point I've not seen yet: Many real-life ports are as far inland as possible. For example Savannah, GA in the USA was established as a port city in 1733 and is still an important port to this day, in spite of being 20 miles inland (up a river which has to be dredged regularly to allow large container ships to pass through). London, England, which at one time was one of the busiest ports in the world is 50 miles from the sea.

    Even today it's often easier and cheaper to transport goods by ship as far as possible and only shift them to another form of transport when necessary, especially if you have to have them on a ship for part of the journey. That's also why people went to so much trouble to create, maintain and fight over ownership of the Suez and Panama canals. (Before those were created ships would sail all the way around Africa or the Americas to make the same trip - because even though there were land routes available it was still economically worthwhile to go by sea.)

    I think Lion's Arch is the same - it's advantage as a port is actually that it's as far from the open ocean as a ship can get, so goods can make as much of their journey as possible by ship before having to be offloaded to go further. (That would also explain why it's a hub for asura gates - if anyone's likely to be willing to pay the apparently high prices of sending freight through them they'll be in LA.)

    Danielle Aurorel - Desolation EU. Mini Collector.

    "In this town, we call home, everyone hail to the pumpkin song! In this town, don't we love it now? Everyone's waiting for the next surprise!"

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2019

    @kasoki.5180 said:
    I am not sure how does number of assaults on Ports count towards what happens at high seas. Thats apple and oranges. Zhaitain attacking ports is not representative of his control of the seas. Doesn matter if attacks happens once per week or once per century. There is no causation between the two.

    Two things:

    First, it shows that prior to the destruction of these ports, there was active water traffic because without such, the ports would be defunct.

    Second, the timespan between these assaults show that Zhaitan had to build up forces over time in order to have a fleet to assault the ports in the first place, indicating that Zhaitan didn't have enough forces to maintain a strangehold on water traffic.

    I don't remember any NPC in Bloodtide Coast ever bringing it up but i could remember it incorrectly. And again, no, sea wouldn't need to be monopolized in order for trade to stop. Thats not how trade works, and thats not how shipping companies and actual traders operate when they factor in risks of transportation. Even in real world when transport of goods stops due to a conflict in the area its not necessary that somebody monopolized the trade route (actually, most functioning trade routes are "monopolized" as they go through territory of sovereign nations)

    Strawman argument there. In the case of your example, a third party is prevented sea trade because a first and second party's conflict. In this situation, there are only two parties: Zhaitan's fleet, and everyone else. The only way for Zhaitan to prevent sea traffic in the Sea of Sorrows is by having a significant amount of force and coverage so as to prevent that sea travel - maybe not a perfect monopoly, but enough control to be considered such.

    Don't get me wrong. but I don't think you understand how much MORE expensive it would be to ship goods through a region with undead. [...]

    I cannot argue with what the books say, and have no reason not to believe your presentation of them. But from what you have said, the books mention pirate activity, not trade. Which goes to my original statement, that the way pirates are presented makes little to no sense, but I have never claimed there are no pirates.

    I think you're overestimating, especially since this is a fictional world where ArenaNet deems the prices and the level of undead threat, and ArenaNet's established lore is literally telling us "it's more expensive to frequently use asura gates than to ship it by sea or land" and this is shown by the fact there is active sea trade during the beginning of the game.

    And the books do mention sea trade. Which is the target for pirate activity.

    Edit: Also, only viable location for trade via Sea would be Rata Sum and Grove. Divinity's Reach and Hoelbrak fall off due to their locations while Elona due to political reasons (in core game). This means that only those who wish to trade with Asura and Sylvari would even have to use the ship, and only Asura and Sylvari would have to use ships instead of gates . It seems very odd that Rata Sum would actively try to hinder its own trade by financially "forcing" its own merchants to travel via Sea of Sorrows

    Divinity's Reach actually has trade via the riverways (which are, incidentally, a target for pirates); there's also Garrenhoff. Notably, Garrenhoff doesn't have an asura gate (that's another thing about trade and asura gates - while the major capitals all have asura gates now, other places do not). There's likely other harbors that got omitted from the game for gameplay space reasons.

    There's also some more inland ports, such as Triskell Quay and the recently-before-core-game destroyed Auld Red Warf. There's also some ports in Mount Maelstrom, which would be eastern sea trade; Sea of Sorrows does repeatedly mentions a port the charr use in the Shiverpeak Mountains, which would no doubt trade with these and travel through the rivers in Timberline Falls (or if they're brave/willing/risking enough, skirtting along the outskirts of Orr).

    There's also likely to be some ports in the maps that were planned-and-scrapped for the core game: D'Alessio Seaboard/east of the Dominion of Winds (accessed via Lion's Arch and Garrenhoff), where Southsun Cove is now (accessed west of Sparkfly Fen), and south of Mount Maelstrom (accessed via Judgment Rock), which were to be largely water-based zones.

    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.

  • kasoki.5180kasoki.5180 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 30, 2019

    @Kalavier.1097 said:
    As for "Why would they make gates more expensive then boats for the Asura crews/dockworkers at Rata Sum", that's simple. The guys up top who control the gates don't give a carp about the Asura working the docks. Infact, given how we see a large amount of ships at the Rata Sum dock, with a LOT of cargo, we can still infer that ship based cargo hauling is viable, if not cheaper then simply using the Asura gate. Course, it could also be an aspect of size, crates too big for the gates or awkward to try to carry.

    The issue are not Asuran dockworkers but Asuran merchants and businesses. By infering higher operative costs to your own economy you are making your own economy weaker. It has nothing to do with dockworkers. Its basically like imposing higher taxes, but only on your own businesses.

    @Danikat.8537 said:
    Even today it's often easier and cheaper to transport goods by ship as far as possible and only shift them to another form of transport when necessary, especially if you have to have them on a ship for part of the journey. That's also why people went to so much trouble to create, maintain and fight over ownership of the Suez and Panama canals. (Before those were created ships would sail all the way around Africa or the Americas to make the same trip - because even though there were land routes available it was still economically worthwhile to go by sea.)

    Because real world doesn't have teleportation portals and seas aren't plagued by undead. Also, ships are the ONLY reliable transport for large cargo from continent to continent at the moment. Planes cannot transport large cargo in large quanitites at once at this moment. At least not at the level ships can. For many "everyday" and smaller cargos planes are used more often. For example, when I am ordering stuff from USA, it always goes via plane as far as I know

    Also, Suez and Panama essentially shortened a journey by an entire continent as you no longer had to circle around Africa/South America. Saying it was economically cheaper to go via sea than land is kind of misleading as to what is and was problem of land travel, especially if you are forced to move goods between continents, like for example from Britain to India

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    Two things:

    First, it shows that prior to the destruction of these ports, there was active water traffic because without such, the ports would be defunct.

    Second, the timespan between these assaults show that Zhaitan had to build up forces over time in order to have a fleet to assault the ports in the first place, indicating that Zhaitan didn't have enough forces to maintain a strangehold on water traffic.

    I completely agree that it took him time to build up forces. And that doesn't in any way invalidate my point as we don't have alot of information on the timeline, and or pacing of how this process went. You cant just say "it took him time" and claim it means "it happend only very, very recently"

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    Strawman argument there. In the case of your example, a third party is prevented sea trade because a first and second party's conflict. In this situation, there are only two parties: Zhaitan's fleet, and everyone else. The only way for Zhaitan to prevent sea traffic in the Sea of Sorrows is by having a significant amount of force and coverage so as to prevent that sea travel - maybe not a perfect monopoly, but enough control to be considered such.

    Its not a strawman since you don't seem to understand what I have said (or I have expressed myself poorly). There is no "first or second or third party". Thats not how commerce functions. It doesnt have to be any party in order for merchants to stop their trade if they think risk is to large. It doesnt matter if its Zhaitan fighting with himself, with only one another entity or with entire universe. Number of "parties" has nothing to with it.
    I agree on the second part completely, and every in game region you can visit in the game that is on Sea of Sorrows quite clearly shows that undead do control it (except maybe southern Kessex hills)
    As a mater of fact, by your own argumentation and reasoning, Commander Talon openly confirms this.

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    I think you're overestimating, especially since this is a fictional world where ArenaNet deems the prices and the level of undead threat, and ArenaNet's established lore is literally telling us "it's more expensive to frequently use asura gates than to ship it by sea or land" and this is shown by the fact there is active sea trade during the beginning of the game.

    This would be very exteme suspension of disbelief. And yes, it is quite possible that we should just accept that this is fictional world and everything can pass as viable story. But that only furthers my original argument - "it doesn't make sense", not that it isn't in the game.

    Also, please can you quote me which NPC explicitly states that asura gates are more expansive than ships? I completely agree that asura gates are expensive, but this idea that they are more expansive than a voyage across Sea of Sorrows seems like personal interpretation.

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    Divinity's Reach actually has trade via the riverways (which are, incidentally, a target for pirates); there's also Garrenhoff. Notably, Garrenhoff doesn't have an asura gate (that's another thing about trade and asura gates - while the major capitals all have asura gates now, other places do not). There's likely other harbors that got omitted from the game for gameplay space reasons.

    How does Divinity's reach have river ports for trade with south if both southern sides and eastern side of DR are CLOSED OFF BY DAMS?? There is nothing that even remotely looks like cargo Ship in Quuensdale and ports in Lake Doric are used for military effort, not for actual trade. As a matter of fact, in human personal storyline we have an example of paper maker going from LA to DR for business purposes, and he is going by land.
    This leaves only Seraph's Landing as a possible location for trade into DR via rivers. But I don't remember anyone ever mentioning something like this.As a matter of fact I don't remember ever anyone mentioning that pirates are attacking rivers near DR or even mentioning that rivers are used for trade into DR. Is it possible you link those location's/NPCs? (I am currently re-reading NPC dialogues from Gandarran fields and will post if I find any)

    Garrenhoff is a fair example but there are few things. First, nothing implies it is trading with LA or with any major city or that is even trading in any significant volume. Second due to its position, there is no need to move via Sea of Sorrows. It is definitely an example of somebody using ships to trade, but I am not sure if this is the kind of maritime trade we are talking about. But fair is fair and I agree that its a fair point in your favour.

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    There's also some more inland ports, such as Triskell Quay and the recently-before-core-game destroyed Auld Red Warf. There's also some ports in Mount Maelstrom, which would be eastern sea trade; Sea of Sorrows does repeatedly mentions a port the charr use in the Shiverpeak Mountains, which would no doubt trade with these and travel through the rivers in Timberline Falls (or if they're brave/willing/risking enough, skirtting along the outskirts of Orr).

    Triskell Quay is not a port town but a fishery town.
    Mount Maelstrom has "remants" of ports that are obviously out of function, and have been for some time.
    Do note that I am not trying to say that sea was NEVER used for trade. I am arguing that it most likely hasn't been dominant form of trade for long enough that it makes little sense to currently have pirates around. I feel like this is something that is being ignored in this discussion.

    If i am not mistaken, story of book "Sea of Sorrows" is placed back in history. Not in present day. I am not arguing that sea was never historically used for trade. Fact that book set cca 100 years in the past says there was a Charr port in Shiverpeaks is completely compatible with the point I am trying to make.

  • Since the rest of this is going nowhere, I'll ignore those.

    @kasoki.5180 said:
    How does Divinity's reach have river ports for trade with south if both southern sides and eastern side of DR are CLOSED OFF BY DAMS??

    Who do you think Doric's Landing, Saidra's Haven, and New Loamhurst traded with? Just each other and Seraph's Landing?

    The travel route was through Harathi Hinterlands which, fun fact, is not dammed off. There's a wooden gate, yes, one that swings open and lets boats through. Prior to the very recent centaur invasion, and the even more recent destruction of the dam, that route was used for trade. And guess which major city they'd pass through first? Lion's Arch.

    Lake Doric is dammed from Queensdale and Lake Regent, but not from Harathi Hinterlands - and thus not from Gendarran Fields or Lion's Arch or the Sea of Sorrows.

    It's also mentioned that the dam destroyed (between Lake Doric and Lake Regent) had locks, implying that ship passage was possible through that dam before its destruction.

    @kasoki.5180 said:
    There is nothing that even remotely looks like cargo Ship in Quuensdale and ports in Lake Doric are used for military effort, not for actual trade. As a matter of fact, in human personal storyline we have an example of paper maker going from LA to DR for business purposes, and he is going by land.

    Not talking about Queensdale, and Cin Fursarai wasn't coming from Lion's Arch - you misremember, the only mention of Lion's Arch is that Cin is a citizen of Lion's Arch. Besides, going through Altar Brook Trading Post to reach Divinity's Reach from Lion's Arch is an idiotic detour route. There's no mention of where Cin was coming from.

    This leaves only Seraph's Landing as a possible location for trade into DR via rivers. But I don't remember anyone ever mentioning something like this. As a matter of fact I don't remember ever anyone mentioning that pirates are attacking rivers near DR or even mentioning that rivers are used for trade into DR. Is it possible you link those location's/NPCs? (I am currently re-reading NPC dialogues from Gandarran fields and will post if I find any)

    First off, no one mentioned pirates attacking rivers near DR. Obviously I was referring to Lake Gendar that would need to be passed to reach Divinity's Reach to reach the Sea of Sorrows.

    Secondly, if you don't remember why not do a quick wiki search? I literally just looked up Seraph's Landing, then went through the NPCs right there in the list. Took no more than two minutes.

    Triskell Quay is not a port town but a fishery town.
    Mount Maelstrom has "remants" of ports that are obviously out of function, and have been for some time.
    Do note that I am not trying to say that sea was NEVER used for trade. I am arguing that it most likely hasn't been dominant form of trade for long enough that it makes little sense to currently have pirates around. I feel like this is something that is being ignored in this discussion.

    If i am not mistaken, story of book "Sea of Sorrows" is placed back in history. Not in present day. I am not arguing that sea was never historically used for trade. Fact that book set cca 100 years in the past says there was a Charr port in Shiverpeaks is completely compatible with the point I am trying to make.

    There's no reason for the charr port to disappear, since it was functional both before and after Zhaitan's rise. And Oxbow Isle is very much still functional - hard to say whether it was before the pact moved in though. But given we have known humans who grew up in the area it seems likely it was around before.

    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    To quote the Seraph linked by Konig.

    "We use these rivers to move supplies and troops in from Divinity's Reach. The bandit's hang out by the docks, stealing supplies and causing trouble for the ships. Yeah, I'd call that a major problem." Seraph's Landing in Harathi hinterlands, the focus point of Seraph deployments against the Centaurs, used the waterway to get troops and supplies from DR directly.

  • draxynnic.3719draxynnic.3719 Member ✭✭✭✭

    As an observation:

    Historically, water travel wasn't just preferred for crossing seas. River travel was the preferred mode of trade even inland when there was a suitable river to do so up until the invention of railways. As expensive as a boat and crew is, it's still cheaper per ton of cargo than the porters, wagons, and/or pack animals you'd need to transport the same cargo, and often faster and safer (even with the existence of river pirates) as well.

  • ugrakarma.9416ugrakarma.9416 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 30, 2019

    @kasoki.5180 said:
    Its not a strawman since you don't seem to understand what I have said (or I have expressed myself poorly). There is no "first or second or third party". Thats not how commerce functions. It doesnt have to be any party in order for merchants to stop their trade if they think risk is to large. It doesnt matter if its Zhaitan fighting with himself, with only one another entity or with entire universe. Number of "parties" has nothing to with it.

    Historically great risk is associated with great rewards.

    when the Portugueses started the great navigations the common belief is that was impossible to get around Africa due to "sea monsters" or even a "world precipice".

    for example whe had the Circus guys in Ember Bay, they was searching for "exotic creatures" overseas.

    Orr maps are plenty of wrecked ships pointing to a heavy sea traffic.

    main pvp: Khel the Undead(power reaper).

  • Yannir.4132Yannir.4132 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Historically speaking, long distance sea trade used to be extremely risky for merchants roughly until we started building ships from steel, and shipping companies became a thing. Losing a ship and whatever the ship contained(to piracy, an incompetent captain or most likely bad weather) would likely mean the end of your merchant career, and possibly your life as well if you owed someone money. On the other hand, reaping the benefits would make you a rich man for a while.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.