User talk:Charlie Stoneskin

Hey, and welcome to Gwiki, hope you enjoy yourself here.--El_Nazgir 09:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) Thank you...

Perma-Pre Discussion
Ok, I enjoy solice from time-to-time, and I aslo enjoy the beautiful landscaping of Pre-Searing Ascalon, and I often find myself creating a Pre-Searing character, telling myself that the character was to be a "Perma-Pre.' However, I also later findmyself bored with the whole aspect of Pre-Searing Ascalon, or more-so with the incredibly slow leveling and ultimately find myself deleting that character. The slow leveling effect if incredibly paralyzing to the gaming experience; or maybe I am just spoiled by the much faster leveling of Factions and Nightfall. Maybe I'll rec-create another "Perma-Pre,' I do enjoy the solice and Pre-Searing Ascalon is (to the best of my knowledge) one of the most secluded places that players can access regardless of alliance affiliation. Explorable areas are extremely excluded as well, as soon as you enter one you have your own area where nobody else can bother you, and this has been part of my grounds for terminating previous perma-pre's in the past. And then there are guild halls which are slightly less exclusive with only members of your alliance and guests being able to access that guild hall, but anybody from that alliance can access the guild hall, so thus the chances of running into another player are infinitely greater than in an explorable area. But Pre-Searing Ascalon holds something different to it. Players from another expansion, and those that have crossed over to present day Post-Searing Ascalon can not access pre-Searing Ascalon. So you have here a sort of secluded glade; a place that you know exists because you can still communicate with others, but a place under everybody's radars.

On an RPG'ing level, how is it possible for one character to contact Nicholas Sandford who exists in pre-searing Ascalon, while another contacts Nicholas The Traveler who survived The Searing? The two seem to somewhat contradicts each other while creating a sort of time loop continum effect, know?

I totally welcome and encourage anybody and everybody to add any and all of there comments and dispute any and all parts of my statement... Charlie Stoneskin 08:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hehe, I know that "Let's make a perma-pre" and then "getting bored, delete" feeling. I've tried it twice now (I know, it's not that much), but each time, I got to about lvl 13, and then it just became too slow to level, and I got bored. I did get into a (then) great guild/alliance on the last one, but the allience died out :/ --[[Image:El Nazgir sig.png|Talkpage]]El_Nazgir 10:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * So my question is; should anet try to revive Pre-Searing Ascalon, or have the left it to die for the newer projects such as Factions, NF, and GW2. If they wanted to revive it they could add more quests for my exp and/or up the amount of exp per quest. They could give perma-pre's they same abilities as toons from other expansions such as xunlai storage and GH access. Then again, would making these said changes diminish the uniqueness of Pre-Searing?

From an RPG p.o.v., if they wanted to outright revive Ascalon, returning it to its original form in modern-day cannon, they could do a whole diminnsional rift plot. I also read were there are signs of grass growing again in Post-Searing...Charlie Stoneskin


 * Well, upping the quest reward Exp a bit would be nice, and would be nice for the rest of proph too, but xunlai and stuff would get abused again, and kinda goes against the spirit of pre... Think of the guildhall glitch (if you ever heard of it).--[[Image:El Nazgir sig.png|Talkpage]]El_Nazgir 12:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Cautery Signet
"Concise: All party members lose all conditions. You begin Burning (one second for each condition removed)."

My question is: Does "all party members" include npc's? Charlie Stoneskin 08:47, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope; NPCs are considered mere allies. It also won't affect pets. Martyr, on the other hand, does affect all allies within compass range, which includes NPCs. [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 08:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you Felix. Charlie Stoneskin 08:47, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Offense v. Defense
So I was in the Random Arena trying to complete a Zaishen challenge and all my other teammates were killed leaving me alone. This is normal however as I do, in fact, have four defensive health-increasing skills currently equipped include Endure Pain, Defy Pain, Signet of Strength, and some other skill which I currently can not recall. One of my teams observing how I was doing a half-way decent job staying alive made the comment to the effect of, "You're tough, but hardly dealing any damage." I currently am wielding a sword and shield, have weilded a hammer in the past, and am thinking of returning to my hammer-wielding roots and incorporating an almost, if not, entirely offensive damage-dealing skill set. My current offensive sword skills include condition inflicting skills such as Gash. My concern is that by switching to an offensive damage-dealing hammer skillset, that I'll die a lot more often. But if I remain with the weapons and skill set I currently have, I may stay alive, but deaal little actual damage; and what my teammate said was more-or-less true. And adding any defensive skills to my hammer set would more-than-likely water-down my ability to deal damage. Up until now my in-game philoosophy had been more-or-less, "Yeah, you can deal a lot of damage, but how much damage can you deal when you are dead." And when my teammate made that comment to me, I realized the the opposite is true as well; staying alive is more-or-less irrelevant when you can deal no damage. So what do you think? Is it more important to deal damage and let healers keep you alive or what? One more point I would like to address is the fact that in pvp there is no death penalty and ressurrection is automatic, so dying is more-or-less of no real concern there. Charlie Stoneskin 08:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This question has a different answer for each arena you are in, or PvE vs. PvP, and also your personal playing style. In PvE defense is critical for a warrior because they are going to be at the front, constantly being attacked and targeted by mobs, and they can easily soak up the damage because mobs aren't smart enough to tab over to the monks.  However damage soaking doesn't work when the opponents are smart enough to tab over to your monks, which is PvP.  However having some defense is still useful, in RA because you aren't assured a monk or ritualist, in AB because you are going to be wandering off from the group at some time or other, and in other PvP arenas sometimes just so your monks don't get a empty blue bar trying to stop you from dying while standing in AoE (ninth skill slot works too).  To answer your original question, having a balance favoring offense as a warrior is probably the a happy medium between dying and killing.  In reference to your hammer build, Lion's Comfort should be in there.  Why?  Because it's adrenaline charging, the health boost is a fun little bonus that can soak up some damage from random wanding or AoE.  Lastly:  Because you are a warrior you have 100 armor vs. physical with a hammer, and in RA, so most people won't switch to an ele weapon against you, so you don't need to bother with blocking, this also applies if your using your shield and sword.  Although if the meta is favoring assassins or warriors, consider taking some blocking, but usually don't run it if it's balanced or you don't know what's going on currently.  In conclusion:  Offense is more important then defense in PvP on warriors, but don't neglect it entirely.--Łô√ë [[Image:Gigathrash_sig_G.jpg|Roar.]]îğá†ħŕášħ  08:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Duely noted: Lion's Comfort. The other defensive skill which I forgot to mention was "I Shall Survive!!" This skill can often prove extremely useful; it counteracts conditions with degenerative pips such as bleeding and proves even more useful when conditions without degenrative pips are applied such as cripple. I am thinking having that skill and Lion's Comfort and the rest be hammer attacks and the likes. I do like the fact that Lion's Comfor creates adrenaline. My warrior has a strength of 14 and a sword/hammer attribute of 12. I am seriously contemplating downgrading the strength rune to a minor strength rune to eliminate the negative health effect (which is why I do not have a super rune or even a major sword/hammer rune applied. Once again, your advice is greatly appreciated.Charlie Stoneskin 11:41, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Nobody ever uses major runes in pvp, only minor ones. Health is important. You should have as much of it as you can. Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 12:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Duely noted: Minor runes only. I would assume however; that you do not refer to skills as well for the multiple health-increasing skills I currently have in my skill set are what is more-or-less diminishing my capacity for damage dealing. True, I can up my health to approximately 1400 Hp, but half the time I need somebody else to help me off an opponent...Charlie Stoneskin 12:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No I meant runes only. I wasn't talking about skills. I am a purely offence person, although I sometimes lineback to keep my monk from getting chopped to bits. Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 13:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, that is what I thought. I just wanted to verify. Thank you for your advice.Charlie Stoneskin 13:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, plenty people (esp Warriors and Rangers) use majors, and Defy Pain trains use sups. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]] -- (contribs) &emsp;(talk)  14:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

(RI) Sorry, I know I'm late to the party 'n' all, but one thing I don't understand... ...four defensive health-increasing skills currently equipped include Endure Pain, Defy Pain, Signet of Strength... A F K When Needed 12:11, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Dunno what all the bold lettering is about, but just a note: I have recently replaced Signet of Strength for Lion's Comfort. But that was of my own volition and not because anybody wanted to heckle me about it. I never have been one to do what other's thought was cool. For a while I had Mending on my warriors, may go back to it one day if I so choose to... Charlie Stoneskin 13:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Signet of Strength
 * Full: Your next 1...13 attacks deal +5 damage.
 * Concise: Your attacks deal +5 damage. Ends after 1...13 attacks.
 * Health-increasing skills
 * Hope that helps you see my point. A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 13:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, my bad. I meant Signet of Stanima. Can a person make a mistake every now and then? Charlie Stoneskin 13:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Full: You have +50...250 maximum Health. This signet ends if you successfully hit with an attack.
 * Concise: You have +50...250 maximum Health. Ends if you hit with an attack.
 * Your Warrior never attacks? A mistake indeed. A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 13:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

In Theory
Would it work for a warrior to use enough monk skills that reduce energy regen to the point where there is no energy regen... and use a zealous weapon?
 * Its not a very good idea in pvp. You can run a Mo/W in pve like that though. You should ask vipermagi. He knows more about that kind of stuff. Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 11:16, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * You can use a grand total of 12 maintained enchantments as a Warrior, iirc (if you have a ton of energy management, of course. 20 base energy doesn't help). You'll have -10 regen, and any other cast enchantment will cancel a running one. So, yes, you can get negative energy regen. Wielding a Zealous weapon and maintaining Mending twice will also give you negative regen. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]] -- (contribs) &emsp;(talk)  12:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * What I was asking however; was rather not a negative energy regen, but one where the regen was nuetralized, no gain, no loss. Then the energy gained from the weapon would be gravy, right?


 * If you have 0 regen, and take a Zealous weapon out, you'll have -1 regen. You can of course maintain one Enchantment and whip out the Zealous weapon to have net 0 regen and +1 energy on hit. I don't really follow you on that last part, though :P --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]] -- (contribs) &emsp;(talk)  12:18, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Verification Debate...
Here is the wisdom I have gleamed from a bit of experience myself. Let me know what you think. In PvP it is fine to use skills such as Martyr which may contribute to your own death (even while your allies survive; dying in PvP is irrelevant due to the auto-res and lack of DP. However, in PvE the opposite is true; there is to auto-res and no lack of DP, therefore potentially life-threatening skills such as Martyr should be advised to avoid.


 * You shouldn't attempt to die in PvP, ever. Getting yourself killed is griefing and mostly ineffective. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]] -- (contribs) &emsp;(talk)  12:18, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * While dying in PvP may truely be burdening in most cases, the number of conditions I have removed from others would leave me to believe that my build is more effective than not. And the fact that my side won all but one of those said matches might verify my theory. Besides, it is not like dying is my goal; nay, I do use two skills when doing the W/Mo Martyr build that counteract against conditions. Skills such as Remove Conditions and "I shall survive!!!" I also have Endure Pain to increase the already relatively large amount of Hp I have as a warrior. And to ensure I have enough energy for the Martyr and condition-removing skills, I use adrenaline-based attacks only. Lastly, there is one case when dying can be useful. That being with necromancers. The get energy and health regen and a corpse to exploit.


 * Necros only get a flat bonus to Energy when something dies, not regen :)
 * Imo, Wars should just focus on dealing a shit ton of damage. It's what they do best if you have a decent bar. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]] -- (contribs) &emsp;(talk)  12:29, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Elite War Tome...
With the weekend bonus coming up I have a quick question. I read that Elite Tomes do nor provide Exp., is this true?
 * that is true. Also sign your comments, even on your own talkpage, by using four tilde's (~) or by using the sign button at the top of your page. Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 13:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Base Defense...
My warrior can increase his HP to approx. 1400. The base defense attack deals 999 which would kill most toons of most any other prof. So my question is, if I was to increase my life to over 999 would I be able to get inside the base for at least a second? Charlie Stoneskin 12:05, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, but Base Defense knocks down for 5 seconds, so you need Balanced Stance or the like to actually get inside before he fires it again. [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 12:08, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 1 [[File:Recharge.png]] No.
 * Sorry if this comes accross as my being an ass... but... you have to remember, if you've "thought of" something, to stop and think "is this unusual? would nobody have thought of this before?"
 * Now, I'm sorry, but that amount of health is far too easily attained on a Warrior for it to be a "new find" of any sort. A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 12:15, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Right right. I was not saying that this was a new find whatsoever. I was merely asking if it were possible. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Charlie Stonekin (contribs).
 * Then I fail to understand.
 * To my way of thinking, it is perfectly easy to understand.
 * If you have more than 999 health, you survive, and take the same damage every second. If you survive all of this on your trek there (which you will not), then the 999 dps bit ends.
 * If you do survive that, enjoy the 1,998 - 2,997+ dps bit. (people who res will be able to help the Base Defenders... if they see any reason to bother...)
 * I really don't get the point of this. You will do nothing at all to help your Alliance, apart from trying to sneak into a base to take a fuckload of damage and attack people who have just resurrected and, thus, cannot take damage in the first place. A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 12:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sometimes it's just fun to see what you can and can't do. That's not a crime. [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 13:03, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sometimes it isn't fun to try to do something and fail.
 * I'm not saying "WTF? - U R NOOB!", just merely pointing out things Charlie has to account for. You can't take damage right after being resurrected, so, even if Charlie pulls it off... "why" is somewhat relevent. A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 13:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

The same reason one would want to use Necrotic Transversal to come aboard one of the ships in the very first NF mission, just because. Not saying I want to try to enter the opponents base, I was just curious. I agree that there really is no point to doing so, in A F K's defense... &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Charlie Stonekin (contribs).
 * On, and my apologies, but... that's somewhat wrong... A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 13:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Effectiveness...
Ok next question. I have two profs with different skills sets in mind; of each set is one more effective than the other. The two sets being 1) A sword-weilding warrior and a hammer-wielding warrior 2) a SS necro or a MM. Or am I right in saying it is more of a personal preference thing? Charlie Stoneskin 12:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I have this kind of thing in Alliance Chat several times a day... it drives me nuts...
 * Post specific builds, attributes, equipment, and where they shall be used. Thank you.
 * (I'm guessing still talking about RA, but then dunno why you're going on about a MM...) A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 12:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I've seen my fair share of MMs in RA, tbh. They can be quite annoying; 4v8 is silly, let alone 2- or 3v8. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]] -- (contribs) &emsp;(talk)  13:32, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Goals

 * 1) Obtain Blindfold.
 * 2) Dye Blindfold black.

Check here. No Black Dye :( A F K When Needed 12:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Very good. It shall be noted an corrected. Thank you very much, my friend. Charlie Stoneskin 12:38, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * =) A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 12:44, 26 June 2009 (UTC)