You are reading the article Who Are The Hidden Characters In Darkest Dungeons 2? updated in November 2023 on the website Cancandonuts.com. We hope that the information we have shared is helpful to you. If you find the content interesting and meaningful, please share it with your friends and continue to follow and support us for the latest updates. Suggested December 2023 Who Are The Hidden Characters In Darkest Dungeons 2?Who are the hidden characters in Darkest Dungeons 2?
One of the greatest appeals of Darkest Dungeons 2 is the variety of character classes the game allows you to choose from. However, Darkest Dungeons 2 also has five hidden character classes you can unlock as you progress through your playthrough. As each character class practices a different skill set, you can pick your hero based on the type of run you want to complete or lean towards a particular skill set you enjoy.
Darkest Dungeon 2 – What are the hidden character classes?
The five hidden characters you can unlock as you progress through Darkest Dungeon 2 are The Hellion, The Runaway, The Jester, The Leper, and The Occultist. You start off the game with 4 hero classes, and as you progress through the levels, you unlock more characters that randomly get added to your party at the Altar of Hope if you lose a hero during your expedition.
Your characters can move up the levels in Darkest Dungeon 2 by collecting Candles of Hope. Candles of Hope are earned through completing runs efficiently, and you’ll gain more Hope depending on your performance and the difficulty of the level.
That said, let’s look at what all the hidden heroes in Darkest Dungeon 2 have to offer:
The Hellion (Level 3)
As for the character’s attributes, the Hellion is the ideal frontliner, and they can hold back the initial wave of attack through their Barbaric YAWP at the expense of some damage and dodge. However, you can quickly recover through Adrenaline Rush and inflict prolonged damage through If It Bleeds alongside Wicked Hack.
The Runaway (Level 6)
The Runaway is a master of the element of fire. She can deliver attacks that afflict burning Damage Over Time on enemy monsters, and most of her strikes rely on inflicting low damage but assured burns. As you level her up, she provides added utility to the team aside from being a reliable second.
The Jester(Level 9)
The Jester is a jack of all trades that you can slot in pretty much anywhere on your team, as he can comfortably handle the frontlines while also offering support from the back. His sharp blade gives him ample melee skills, and he can lift up his comrade’s spirits and health bars through his merry songs.
The Leper (Level 12)
The Leperis best described as a tank. His armored frame can absorb the toughest of hits while your support characters damage the enemy through their ranged attacks. His own combat capabilities are also nothing to joke about, as he can comfortably push back monsters through his Purge and Bash abilities.
The Occultist (Level 15)
Finally, The Occultist is a bit of a puppet master, for lack of a better term. His ideal position is in the third or fourth rank as he’s the ideal support character. While some of his abilities do buff his own team’s attributes, his best use is in disorienting and debuffing the enemy through hexes and curses, as well as swapping their ranks to completely destroy their strategic lineup.
You're reading Who Are The Hidden Characters In Darkest Dungeons 2?
Who’s the cutest? A and C, while B and D are less cute, according to St. Andrews University researchers. Psychological Science, Volume 20 number 2
I’ve heard the claim plenty of times from friends. “Why send out baby pictures?” one asked. “All newborns look exactly the same. They barely even look human.” Having a baby has made me more sensitive to the subtle differences in smushy-faced features, but the question remains: do babies actually look different? Can face-recognition tech work on tiny babies.
As it turns out, scientists have had these same questions, and found that if you’re a man, babies might look the same. Researchers at St. Andrews University showed pictures of babies to men and women of different ages. Can you pick out the cute one among the not-so-cute cohort?
Who’s the cutest? A and C, while B and D are less cute, according to St. Andrews University researchers. Psychological Science, Volume 20 number 2
Cuteness is described by the researchers as: “protruding cheeks, a large forehead, and large eyes below the horizontal midline of the skull.” Turns out that men aren’t as astute at picking the cute baby.
The researchers surmise hormones rule women’s ability to notice the finer details of a newborn’s pudgy face. Women taking birth control pills, which raise hormone levels, were more likely to pick out the cute baby. Young and middle-aged women were able to pick out cute babies from bunch, while women aged 53-60 were just as unlikely to notice differences in the babies as men.
The researchers told a newspaper that their next studies would examine whether or not cuteness sensitivity is implicated in post-natal depression.Is that my baby, all grown up?
Non-hormonally-charged people aren’t the only ones who have trouble distinguishing baby faces – computers also struggle to understand who’s a baby. When I added photos to Facebook recently, the website tagged my 7-month old as a middle-aged neighbor from Seattle. I don’t blame Facebook: I see that my little guy’s chubby cheeks and crinkly grin could be mistaken for adult faces.
So why are baby faces so difficult for computers to recognize? “There are a lot of shape changes between babies and adults, like nose changes, eyes shape, and mouth shape,” says Ira Kemelmacher-Schlizerman, a computer scientist at the University of Washington. With her colleagues, Kemelmacher-Schlizerman created a way to progressive age photos, starting with photos of babies just a few months old. Using thousands of photos of children and adults at many ages from the Internet, the researchers showed how to create average images from old sources.“We started from these photos since they were identified as the most challenging ones for current methods,” she says.
The new method was able to age real-life photos taken in all kinds of lighting, and this kind of work could help in recovering abducted children. Says Kemelmacher-Schlizerman, “It’s remarkable that we were able to achieve high quality results by applying average transformations estimated from internet photos. We didn’t include any craniofacial studies, change due to ethnicities, artificial addition of wrinkles, gray hair — all these can be added on top of the results we achieved automatically. The key idea of the work is to be able to automatically analyze large amounts of uncalibrated photos.” The research, funded by Google and Intel, led to a paper that will be presented at a Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition conference in Columbus, Ohio, this June.
Psychol Sci. 2009 Feb;20(2):149-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02272.x. Epub 2009 Jan 17. The cutest little baby face: a hormonal link to sensitivity to cuteness in infant faces. Sprengelmeyer R1, Perrett DI, Fagan EC, Cornwell RE, Lobmaier JS, Sprengelmeyer A, Aasheim HB, Black IM, Cameron LM, Crow S, Milne N, Rhodes EC, Young AW.
As handheld devices flood into corporate networks, a study released this week shows that each device is draining about $3,000 from a company’s IT budget every year.
A study by the Gartner Group, an analyst firm based in Stamford, Conn., shows that the total cost of ownership for a handheld device, such as a Palm Pilot, smart phone or Blackberry, is higher than that for a laptop. Phil Redman, a research director at Gartner, blames the higher PDA costs on a mixture of reasons, ranging from evaluation costs, administration, training and maintenance.
“If you think about $3,000 per device and multiply that out by a lot of individual users, it gets costly,” says Redman, who adds that the costs associated with handhelds will go up as the devices and the jobs they perform become more sophisticated. “Individual users are still buying a lot of the handheld technology. It’s still not a standard, like a mobile PC, so I don’t think a lot of people are looking at the overall cost…It’s important to evaluate what that actually means to the enterprise.”
Personal digital assistants (PDAs) are no longer just the geek’s favorite gadget. In an era when real-time information is the lifeblood of business, and everyone from the sales rep to the CEO is virtually useless unless they’re connected, the PDA is fast becoming a necessary tool for enterprise.
Millions of employees have rushed out and bought the latest PDAs. Some companies are joining the rush, buying and distributing them to employees, but that trend has been fairly slow to pick up speed in the corporate IT world. Souped up with wireless connections, increased power and enhanced Web capabilities, the devices are quickly becoming part of what analysts are calling a worker’s personal computer network — a seamless web of desktops, laptops, handhelds and smart phones.
Mike Riley, chief scientist for emerging technologies at R.R. Donnelley & Sons in Chicago, says many companies still are not distributing and officially supporting handheld devices. But that doesn’t mean the devices aren’t working their way into corporate networks. And it also doesn’t mean they’re not taking a toll — both on finances and workers’ time — in IT shops.
“They’re coming into the enterprise because they’re so available on the consumer end,” says Riley, who adds that his company supports some users’ PDAs. “Employees are fairly involved in purchasing them on their own accounts and using them for simple management tasks. That’s how they’re creeping into the enterprise.”
Gartner’s Redman says a lot of IT managers are caving in and maintaining employees’ PDAs, even if the company didn’t buy them, simply because it’s easier to deal with the device than with an employee freaking out that he’s lost the information he stored on one.
“If an individual spends a lot of time supporting his own device, he’s not doing his own work,” says Redman. “The smarter [IT managers] support them because of security…and so the employee can use it as a productivity tool and not just as a toy.”
Handheld Management Strategies Needed
Since handheld are creeping into the enterprise — officially invited or not — industry watchers say IT managers need to think about how the devices affect their workers’ time, their budgets and their training.
“They need a strategy around managing those devices,” says Riley, who notes that he thinks Gartner’s cost estimate is on the high side. “It’s hard to escape the fact that a lot of folks are saying that in the future this is where a lot of data will reside and where data will be interacted with. Progressive companies should think of them as part of their enterprise and plan them into their budgets. They’re now part of the network.”
David Kerr, vice president of wireless practice at Boston-based Strategy Analytics Inc., says he too thinks Gartner’s estimate is high, but that PDAs are a costly venture for companies right now because the technology is just ramping up when it comes to the enterprise. He adds that today handhelds incur high support costs, along with costs associated with linking them in with legacy systems, new application development and increased security.
“The average PDA this year is only running around $240,” says Kerr. “That’s not where you’re getting hit. The real issues come down to linking it in, corporate scheduling, inventorying them, and making sure the security aspects are covered…IT people have very little time available. It’s a labor cost and a resource drain more than a dollar cost.”
One thing that will lower the total cost of ownership for IT shops is to provide IT workers with the training to support them, according to Kerr.
“I think support for PDAs is really being handled on the second page of priorities for IT managers, and their knowledge base is quite limited at this point,” he says. “There needs to be training, particularly in terms of synchronization and security. The actual upfront time will have to be spent on training and to approve devices and applications — to keep tight control on what will be allowed into the network.”
With the change in administration and authority, the socio-economic condition of people changed, but their social status was the same as the caste system was dominant in the medieval age. People in certain caste were obliged to follow certain occupations. The class hierarchy grew further in the Delhi sultanate and during the Mughal empire. The section of society which did not follow such social hierarchies was the tribes. They did not follow the caste system and social rituals as prescribed by Brahmans.
They had their own culture and they were not divided into multiple unequal classes. Tribes are a group of people, who are bounded by kinship and linked with a common legendary ancestor. Tribes are considered indigenous as they have been residing here for thousands of years and following the same customs and livelihood. Many tribes practised agriculture for their livelihood; some were hunter-gatherers and often did both agriculture and hunting jointly.Who Were The Tribals?
Tribals were scattered throughout the sub-continent and they even ruled some areas. Punjab was ruled by the Khokhar tribe in the 13th century, later the Gakkhars became dominant. The Gakkhar chief was made a Mansabdar in Akbar’s court. Before the Mughals, Arghuns and Langahs were the dominant tribes in Multan and Sindh area. Another dominant tribe in the Northwest was Baloch, this community is still present. Balochs were a strong community and they were further divided into clans. Gaddis were the shepherd tribe in the western Himalayas. In the northeastern region of India, the Nagas, Ahoms and many other tribes were dominant.
Zubanthung, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons
Chero Chiefdoms emerged in the 12th century in present-day Bihar. Cheros came with conflict with the Mughals and during the time of Akbar, they were defeated by Raja Mansingh in 1591, and a heavy sum was taken from them. In Aurangzeb’s time, they also had conflicts and many Chero fortresses were captured by the Mughals. Santhals and Mundas were other dominant tribes living in these areas.How Nomad Peoples Lived?
The Banjaras were the most famous and dominant Nomad Tribes of Medieval India. They move with their Caravan which was called Tanda. Sultan Alauddin Khalji used them to transport grains to the city market and in Jhangir’s time, they were assigned the duty to supply food grains to the Mughal army in the military campaigns.
Many pastoral tribes sold animals such as horses and cattle to prosperous peoples. they often sold the animal products like wool. Different castes of peddlers moved from village to village, selling ropes, straw mats, reeds and coarse sacks.
John Hill, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia CommonsConclusion FAQs
Q1. What was the main occupation of tribes in India?
Ans. Tribes in India were mostly pastoral. They used to do agriculture in forest clearings and had cattle. Some tribes like bhils, were Hunter and gatherers.
Q3. How the Banjaras were important to the economy?
Ans. The Bnjaras plate an important role in the economy. They transported food grains to the towns. They also worked for the Mughals, as they supplied the food grains to the Mughal army during conflict.
Q4. What were the basic features of tribal society?
Ans. The basic features of tribal societies were −
They did not followed the Brahmanical rituals and practices.
No class division.
Members were united by Kinship.
Q5. How do Rajputs set an example for tribal people?
Ans. Rajput clan became one of the most dominant classes and they had ancestral linkage with tribal clans like Hunas, Chandelas, Chalukyas and other communities.
The Engineer Who Rebuilt BU President Brown has made the future part of everybody’s job
Since Robert A. Brown became president, the University has seen four years of record surpluses, making it possible to build new dorms and renovate old ones and to modernize classrooms and labs, among other accomplishments. Photos by Webb Chappell and BU Photography
There were two things Robert Brown promised himself he would not get caught up in when he was considering taking the job of president of Boston University. “One was what the Globe had written about the University and John Silber,” says Brown. “The other was trying to understand the place before I had to commit. It was too complicated for that.”
The first item, Brown knew, was a requirement for anyone hoping to shepherd BU into the 21st century. Silber (Hon.’95), the University’s president from 1971 to 1996 and later chancellor, had been a walking lightning rod for the Globe, and seemed to revel in the philosophical clashes with the press and political opponents, not to mention his faculty. And when Silber stepped out of firing range, the Board of Trustees stepped in and gave the press something else to take potshots at: in 2003, the board paid former NASA director Daniel Goldin, whom they had signed on as president, $1.8 million to walk away just before he was set to begin the job. By the time a new presidential search committee started talking to Brown in spring 2005, many observers of higher education were not looking at Boston University as a model of executive leadership.
The second item on Brown’s short list of things to steer clear of presented a curious personal anomaly. Because while most leaders of billion-dollar enterprises want to avoid complexity, Brown, a provost and former chemical engineer and applied mathematician at MIT, is in love with it. An organization with 17 schools and colleges, 32,000 students, more than 8,600 employees, and a budget of $1.7 billion offered an irresistible opportunity for analysis and synergies.
“I have always enjoyed dealing with the complexity,” says Brown. “I made the transition from complicated physical systems to the complexity of the academic organization.”
At BU, however, there was more than physical complexity to deal with. There were politics, and the shards of unresolved issues were likely to pop up anytime, anywhere, like targets in a Whack-A-Mole game.
“There were dead cats everywhere,” Brown recalls. “And nobody wanted to bury them.”
It worked. Today, five and a half years into Brown’s tenure, the University has seen four years of record surpluses, money that has made it possible to put $172 million into building new dorms and renovating old ones, and $100 million into modernizing classrooms and labs. The University has increased financial aid to students by $32.8 million, bringing the total allocated to financial aid to $277.4 million annually. And his commitment to research and his efforts to build an infrastructure to support that research helped increase sponsored program awards by 33 percent from the time of his arrival, to $407.8 million in 2010. Alumni gifts have also set new records: prior to Brown’s presidency, the University had had only one gift of more than $10 million. Since he took office, six large gifts account for more than $60 million.
In September 2010, the many positive changes that Brown has brought to BU were officially recognized when the Board of Trustees expressed the hope that he would continue doing what he had been doing for another five years.
Brown said yes.
Julie Sandell, Faculty Council chair from 2006 to 2008, says Brown’s first major move accomplished two important things. It yielded the outlines of a useful strategic plan, and “it showed that this was going to be a new era of cooperative efforts.”
“Dr. Brown realized very quickly that a plan that grows from the bottom up serves a number of purposes,” says Sandell, a School of Medicine professor of anatomy and neurobiology and associate provost for faculty development. “It would engage the faculty in thinking in a forward-looking way about how to take BU to the next step. It was a novel idea, that the faculty would have a collective responsibility in determining the direction of the institution. It was more of a partnership than many faculty had experienced.”
“I knew it was going to be hard,” he says. “But I also knew that if you don’t start moving forward, you spend so much time wringing your hands over the past. You have to tweak or manage the process as it goes. You had to fix it as it moved.”
In September 2007, Brown unveiled Forging Our Future by Choosing To Be Great. The plan was unabashedly ambitious. It outlined ways to make it easier for students enrolled in one college to study in another; it called for improvements to dorms and classrooms and for the recruitment of 100 new faculty for the College of Arts & Sciences. Several of the professional schools were targeted for growth. The School of Management was slated to hire 20 new faculty, the School of Law would begin a capital campaign for an expanded and fully renovated facility, with a dollar-for-dollar match in funding from the University, and the College of Fine Arts would expand and renovate. The plan also established that undergraduate student financial aid would keep Boston University accessible to qualified students regardless of their economic status, and it cited as a priority an effort to make faculty salaries and benefits competitive to attract the best teachers, scholars, and researchers. It included new opportunities for alumni, such as mentoring programs to connect students to the professional world and a revamped career counseling system to provide broader resources for BU graduates.
The price tag was as impressive as the plan: $1.8 billion over 10 years, with annual commitments growing to $225 million per year. But during the many months that the faculty had been honing the plan, Brown and BU’s executive leadership had been exploring ways to pay for it.
“Bob was an instant expert in financial matters,” says Joseph Mercurio, the University’s executive vice president. “In a very short time he had a thorough understanding of our financial operating model.”
Most of the funding of the plan—60 percent, it was decided—would come from operations and from debt financing. Mercurio says Brown’s modifications to finances, which include a greater reliance on data-driven financial analytics, have allowed the University to double—to $100 million a year—the money transferred to academic programs, student services, and building.
“Some of the money we were able to transfer came from the elimination of units that were not core to the University, like the Tyngsboro campus,” says Mercurio, “and some of it came from fine-tuning things.”
Savings from those efforts, Mercurio says, will pay for projects such as a new $52 million business management system, making wireless internet access available all across campus, creating a new $65 million student services center on East Campus, and a renovation of the School of Law tower. Alumni giving also is playing important new roles, such as in the development of the $38 million residence for students at the School of Medicine.
At the beginning of the 2008 fall semester, three years into the new era of Bob Brown, BU had completed the two best fiscal operating years in its history. University leadership seemed comfortable with the new president, who, to the relief of many, had made no substantial personnel changes.
“Brown had carte blanche from the board to replace anyone he wanted,” says trustee David D’Alessandro, a former Board of Trustees chair and the chair of the search committee that recruited Brown. “But he didn’t do that. He recognized the enormous talent from previous administrations and didn’t bring in any of his own people.”
Beverly Brown is the unpaid director of development for BU’s Center for Global Health & Development. They have two grown sons and live in the 160-year-old Gothic revival mansion known as Sloane House. On summer weekends, Brown says, the two head to their house on the Cape, and as often as possible, to the Ocean Edge golf course in Brewster. “We’re blessed,” he says. “Bev and I have a lot of things we like to do together.”
By mid-September 2008, the University leadership was confronted with something that hadn’t been factored in to the strategic plan: the economy, threatened by an ocean of bad mortgages and dangerously leveraged banks, was about to fall off a cliff. Most university presidents watched nervously, unwilling to make any move that might signal doubt about the fiscal soundness of their institution. Brown didn’t wait. On October 1, he announced that the University would put a freeze on the hiring of new employees and on commitments to capital projects whose construction contracts had not been nailed down.
Less than two weeks later, the Dow Jones industrial average tumbled 18 percent and the Standard & Poor’s 500 fell more than 30 percent in five days of trading.
“That was a case where Bob was a real visionary,” says Robert Knox (CAS’74, GSM’75), a 13-year veteran and current chair of the Board of Trustees. “He managed the crisis better than most, if not all, peer institutions.”
“When you look at Bob’s tenure,” says Knox, “you see truly astute financial management. I think BU is the only major university that has received a ratings upgrade in that time by both major rating agencies, Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s.”
That astute financial management comes to Brown painstakingly, and as he says, painfully. “The most depressed I get annually is the time of year I see the budget proposals,” he says. “Everybody comes in and says, ‘If I had this incremental amount of resource, I could do X, and I could be better.’ And they’re all right. The question is how to prioritize things.”
One of Brown’s most visible—to prospective students—priorities has been a limit on tuition increases. In the last two years, he has kept the rise to 3.73 percent, the lowest increase in three decades, and a likely influence on the increasing number of applicants for slots in the freshman class. During his tenure, applications for undergraduate admission have jumped about 30 percent, from 31,851 to 41,509, an all-time record. That matters, says Brown, because tuition and fees account for about 46.6 percent of the University’s total revenue, while auxiliary services such as dining and housing bring in about 16.1 percent. Sponsored research contributes about 23.9 percent.
“I’m a great fan of private higher education,” Brown says. “I love the self-containment of it. I love the idea of working between the leadership of the University and the faculty and the board. There’s no governor, there’s no legislature, there’s nobody else. If you can figure out a financial model that can get you where you want to go within those constituencies, you go.”
In fact, Brown has done more than figure out a financial model within those constituencies; he’s reconstituted the most influential of them, the Board of Trustees, working closely with longtime members, such as Knox, D’Alessandro, and Alan Leventhal (Hon.’09), another former board chair, to identify and recruit new trustees.
“Today more than half of the 41 members are new to the board,” says Brown. “We have a lot of people who have had past associations with the school and some who were not involved at all. Commercial real estate developer Steve Karp, one of the most successful businessmen in New England, is now the chair of the budget and finance committee. I can say I have the privilege of being a president with one of the best boards in the country, because they put the time and energy into it and they are aligned in trying to making the University better.”
Brown has put similar energy and discernment into his search for deans, appointing 14 of 19 deans, and bringing in such highly regarded leaders as Kenneth Freeman to the School of Management and Benjamin Juarez to the College of Fine Arts. Last fall,he recruited Jean Morrison as provost, luring her away from the University of Southern California, where she had been executive vice provost for academic affairs and graduate programs, as well as director of the USC Women in Science and Engineering program.
“Hiring Jean Morrison says a lot about where the University has come under Bob’s leadership,” says Knox. “I don’t think there’s a chance in the world that someone of her caliber would come here if she were not fully convinced that we have an amazing organization, and an ability to become an even greater organization in a reasonable period of time.”
Working with deans and the Faculty Council, Brown has also made progress narrowing the historic gap between the salaries of men and women. Faculty Council chair Adam Sweeting, a College of General Studies associate professor of humanities, says Brown’s willingness to share all data on salary ranks and gender has helped to reform the relationship between the faculty and administration.
“There is a transparency and a sharing of information that is greatly appreciated,” says Sweeting, lauding Brown’s launch of joint initiatives between the Charles River and Medical Campuses, such as the Center for Global Health & Development, the Center for Neuroscience, and the University Honors College. “He thinks very strategically about academic programs and how to make the University an even better private research university.”
Brown also recognized a few governance holes that had never been filled. And so, for the first time in BU’s history, the University hired a vice president for research, a chief investment officer, and a chief information officer.
D’Alessandro, a longtime observer of BU, former chair, CEO, and president of John Hancock Financial Services, and the author of three books on executive leadership, says Brown’s achievements in his first five years cover the waterfront: he’s worked in impressively collaborative ways with the faculty, he’s diversified the Board of Trustees, he’s expanded the University’s footprint both physically and academically, and he’s made BU a more desirable destination for incoming freshmen. Most notably, he says, in economically uncertain times, Brown has set the University on a sound financial course.
Brown is more modest. He insists that the DNA needed for much of the progress made was here long before his arrival. “My sense of BU, and that hasn’t changed at all since I arrived, is that the faculty have always had a great desire to have the institution be more recognized than it is,” he says. “They have always wanted to be recognized for the quality of this institution and the quality of what we do. My bringing that alignment together was really trivial.”
In the wood-paneled office where Brown will map out BU’s journey for the next five years, a stuffed toy cat sprawls on a windowsill, facing out across the Charles River. The cat, he says, was a gift from a colleague who heard Brown remark shortly after his arrival on the dead cats everywhere that no one wanted tobury. Today, with this one floppy exception, the dead cats are buried.
Art Jahnke can be reached at [email protected].
Explore Related Topics:
What is Local Search Engine Optimization and Who Are Your Relatives?
The first rule we all like is ‘keep it simple”. So start off modestly and test the waters as you go. Identify your market. Do your customers come from all over the country, or mostly from nearby areas? For most brick and mortar businesses on the Internet, your bread and butter still comes from the local neighborhoods and adjoining states.
So try this: After developing a strong list of keywords related to your specific business, look for other attractions that are geographically near your business as well.
For instance, is there a state park near you? If you sell hiking boots and there is a state park near you, wouldn’t it make sense to target those people looking for the state park? Won’t they need hiking boots? Add some ‘state parks in your area’ related keywords to your list.
You won’t need to use really specific keywords like ‘The Fish and Bones Marina in Jamestown’ for instance, just add something general like ‘marinas near Jamestown’ in your keyword list. Fishermen (and fisherwomen), who are planning to come to your area to fish, are more likely type in ‘marinas in Jamestown’ than a specific marina name anyway if they are new to the area. Their results will not only show the marinas in Jamestown, but your fishing gear business as well, under the same keywords. Later, when they need fishing gear, they will already be familiar with your business name. Target more attractions and they will see your name again and again.
If you are a restaurant who depends on the tourist trade, you might want to consider just what other things your potential diner might be in your town for. Consider the attractions in your area. Museums, theme parks, entertainment centers, camping, are all destinations your potential customer might be looking for as well as a place to dine. Include those attractions and local products in your keyword list and expand your visibility exponentially.
Remember, most travelers won’t be looking for your particular business name unless they are already familiar with you. But your business name will pop up again and again whenever they search for those popular attractions near you.
You don’t need to pay big bucks for your search engine results, just brainstorm a little bit and consider all those ‘relatives’ in your area.
You may also find that some keywords are really expensive, but for the most part you won’t need them. There are plenty of inexpensive and related keywords that will bring you exactly the same results if you use them creatively.
And be nice to your relatives.
Update the detailed information about Who Are The Hidden Characters In Darkest Dungeons 2? on the Cancandonuts.com website. We hope the article's content will meet your needs, and we will regularly update the information to provide you with the fastest and most accurate information. Have a great day!