Guild Wars 2

Elricht Kaltwind.8796:

Long-term, fine, it would definitely impact things. But we’re talking about very short-term, like as in, the next two weeks.

Since the beginning i was talking about permanent destruction of LA. In fact, this whole topic was a spinoff from discussion about whether LA will be gone or rebuilt after the Scarlet LS ends, and started from an argument that permanent destruction of LA would require too much changes to the zones to make it a viable option.
I agree, that short-term no changes are necessary. Lot of the outlying keeps may not even know yet that something bad has happened. On the other hand there really should be visible longterm consequences even if LA end up being rebuilt. Not that i think there will be any (regardless of what devs will decide on in the end).

ZudetGambeous.9573:

There are really only two options.

1. The living story is in fact living and makes permanent changes to the world. LA is blown up and reduced to a pile of rubble and becomes a very different zone forever.

2. The living story is not actually living, and just a few buildings are burned down and the city is repaired in a few months. LS is a failure and the game is screwed.

Yeah, because noone ever bothers to fix destroyed cities.

Dresden, Germany:
http://www.city-connect.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Dresden.jpg

Stalingrad, Russia:
http://www.histdoc.net/viipuri/view3.jpg

Hiroshima, Japan:
http://travelurbia.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/hiroshima-today-japan.jpg

I find your logic somewhat lacking.