User talk:130.58/archive

W/R Build
You said: "Energy constraints melt away if you're using Warrior's Endurance. So I think a W/R version is definitely quite viable, and can even escape most energy problems, as long as you ditch the Tactics (I love Tactics, but it just doesn't work here) and get some Strength instead. But I agree with you, in general: this build seems a bit too defense for an axe poisoner, to me, really, and doesn't use Cyclone Axe, as stated - if that's the case, you're better off going with sword so that you can stack poison and bleeding (from the easy-to-charge-up Sever Artery). Also, given that axe base damage is lousy and they depend on high Axe Mastery to get devastating criticals, no Strength and low Axe Mastery is rather a poor choice, imho. --130.58 06:34, 17 February 2006 (CST)"

Now, as a novice W/R who is unfortunately not gifted with the insights into the inner workings of the games as some others are, it appears to me that the combination of a Warrior primary and a Ranger secondary is 'gimped' due to gameplay reasons. Nevertheless I refuse to give up this class combination as it has been the state of my primary for all the time I have played Guild Wars. So I was wondering... about the comment above, it seems like a surely tenable build, does it not? Do you have any other insights into how to make a right proper axe poisoner build? The conversation was at Talk:W/R Axe Poisoner by the way. 69.124.143.230 06:54, 17 February 2006 (CST)


 * I think W/R is doable, but that the example build there is untennable. I replied on the page, as I thought it would be topical. I will compose a response about my general thoughts about Warriors, Rangers, and Warrior/Rangers and post it here in a few hours. --130.58 08:06, 17 February 2006 (CST)

Skill box voting
So... are you going to vote Vertical vs Horizontal layout, and various Elite flagging choices? The exact landscape style isn't on the ballot, so you wouldn't be holding out, waiting for any new option to popup (unless it's a new elite-flagging option). -PanSola 08:19, 24 February 2006 (CST)
 * Oh, almost forgot! Thank you for the reminder. --130.58 09:56, 24 February 2006 (CST)

Is this an account?
Or an IP address? :S 03:48, 2 March 2006 (CST)
 * Hint: it's not four digits and I have the ability to make minor edits and upload pictures. --130.58 06:30, 2 March 2006 (CST)
 * you can do minor edits without having an account. Accounts are only to keep better track of your contributions and properly joining the community. --Tizzy 13:46, 2 March 2006 (CST)
 * Quickie: NO, you CAN'T make minor edits anonymously. I believe it's for admins that are filtering out minor changes. They want to see all anon. edits and therefore, no minor option. &mdash; Lunarbunny 14:16, 2 March 2006 (CST)
 * Correct. The check box does not appear in the edit options. Likewise, anonymous users definitely can't upload things (and, of course, you don't get personal preferences and watch lists and other stuff that's linked to your account settings). Anonymous accounts are technically less private than real accounts, too, because anyone can freely see your IP. --130.58 14:28, 2 March 2006 (CST)
 * In response to a question you might have, which is "Why pick such a dumb name?":
 * 1. I had already posted a bunch of stuff from just my IP address.
 * 2. I wasn't feeling very creative at the time.
 * No kidding. You ripped off 84.175!  --68.142.14.59 15:21, 2 March 2006 (CST)
 * 3. Sometimes I post from machines other than that one. This is what actually motivated me to get the account. They're all in the 130.58.xxx.xxx IP range, though, and I know of no one else who posts to Guildwiki from that range, so it made sense to use this as a name that can be easily associated with any forgot-to-log-in posts I make in a discussion. --130.58 14:28, 2 March 2006 (CST)