Talk:Hamstorm

Is this a common slang term?
I've never seen it used anywhere. &mdash; Stabber 19:44, 26 February 2006 (CST)


 * Sounds more like a sandwich to me. "I'd like a Hamstorm on wheat with mustard, please."  --Rainith 20:14, 26 February 2006 (CST)


 * A Warrior using Meteor Shower is a person with serious psychological issues. And Fire Storm has been irrekably broken for 6 months now. :( This is bogus. If I see a tank casting MS before going in (PvE or PvP) I would code a "Kick" butting into my version of GW just to kick them. This is ridiculous. Interestingly enough, I did go with one of these in a Galrath quest once. Most absurd thing ever, and he kept saying "MS ftw" and stuff. Ugh. --Karlos 20:59, 26 February 2006 (CST)

It's a joke build from a little while back. For a couple days you could see teams of W/Es doing this in tombs (or what was tombs). I think it started because of a screenshot on the game box of a warrior doing it. --68.142.14.9 21:58, 26 February 2006 (CST)
 * People were using this, even if it was just for fun? If that's the case, we should probably leave this up as a slang term. ;) --130.58 01:49, 27 February 2006 (CST)


 * I do not think the term exists, regardless of the build. --Karlos 18:03, 27 February 2006 (CST)


 * Karlos, regardless of the article content, do you think calling the article "Charr doodoo" in the delete tag is appropriate? -- 20:45, 27 February 2006 (CST)


 * Yes. --Karlos 21:23, 27 February 2006 (CST)


 * I, respectfully, disagree. --130.58 21:59, 27 February 2006 (CST)


 * So, you've seen it used in PvP arenas and outposts? --Karlos 22:09, 27 February 2006 (CST)


 * Yes. Do a search on any of the large forums if you're in doubt.  It'll be clear that people know what "hamstorm" means, even if it's not a viable build. --68.142.14.9 00:00, 28 February 2006 (CST)


 * I, personally, have not. The above thread of discussion is about what's "appropriate" in the delete tag, not the article's accuracy, however.
 * It's not anything to do with politeness, either (though politeness is nice, too, I suppose). What I object to is the strongly biasing nature of that statement. If you, as an admin, saw a page made by an unknown contributor with "This is utter crap and I know for a fact that not a lick of this is true --(one of the biggest wiki contributors)" in the delete tag, would you think twice about wiping it?
 * When what you really mean is "I've never encountered this myself," this is (unintentiounally) disingenuous: the perceived level of certainty is far greater than your actual certainty on this topic. By making such a strongly emphatic statement, you heavily bias the decision and occlude the actual facts of the matter, whatever they may be. --130.58 00:54, 28 February 2006 (CST)
 * I find it amusing that this is causing such a big hullabaloo, and yet when another contribueter put "He's gay" as a reason to ban a vandal yesterday, it caused no such outrage. --Rainith 01:10, 28 February 2006 (CST)
 * Chuiu was mimicking the vandal's vandalism, which you might have noted was replacing text in pages with "Rob's gay" or some such. I too was taken aback at that ban message at first. It was, perhaps, too clever. &mdash; Stabber 02:57, 28 February 2006 (CST)


 * If I saw a contributor here marking an article for deletion and saying "It's crap" then explaining why he thinks its crap, then I could care less that he called it crap. I would look into his reasons and agree or disagree. Keep the discussion on me if you like. But it's not the first time someone has been "severely underwhlemed" with an article and it sure will not be the last. I am saddened that Tetris, once again, turns the discussion to Karlos instead of what the issue is. I am not partaking in this thread any further. You guys go ahead and get me banned because I thought the article and the concept of the build was "Charr Doodoo." --Karlos 08:33, 28 February 2006 (CST)

Hamstorm is the build of awesomeness!! (the term does exist) 22:31, 27 February 2006 (CST)

A cursory search reveals that the term is used, though not widely, and that the build has popped up in HoH as a joke. --130.58 00:54, 28 February 2006 (CST)


 * This proves that it was a fairly popular term (though I have never heard it in over 3 months now in different PvP arenas). So, delete is unwarranted. This is so hilarious though: :)


 * Check the inside cover of your GW box.
 * A DEADLY COMBINATION: Strike with a Hamstring attack to cripple your fleeing opponent, then rain fire down upon him as he slowly limps away.
 * In actual practice, this combination is so overpowered that most players shy away from it. A team of 8 Hamstorm warriors easily takes the Hall. No team can survive 8 Firestorms all killing them at once while they cannot escape.
 * Hamstorm is Arenanet's greatest failure - the one sign that they are complete unable to balance the game. It is responsible for a lot of the top guilds leaving, and a lot of the empty districts these days - what's the point of playing the game with any other build when you can just win with Hamstorm no matter what?
 * Feel free to try it in CA, but expect to get called out for using such overpowered skills. Hamstorm is the Akuma of this game.


 * ArenaNet's greatest failure? Players don't use it because it is too powerful? lol Still sounds like charr doodoo. :) --Karlos 08:33, 28 February 2006 (CST)

Ok, this is the box designer's skill bar: (extremely funny)
 * "I Will Avenge You!" (yes, the IWAY build was concocted by ANet apparently) :)
 * Galrath Slash
 * Hamstring
 * Defensive Stance
 * Chain Lightning
 * Fire Storm
 * Ice Spikes
 * Phoenix

To top that all off, he's using a bow! :D

Apparently, players in the beta had infinite attribute points and energy. :) --Karlos 09:32, 28 February 2006 (CST)