User talk:Solus

User:Solus/Archive1

New page
Yeh. Solus  04:00, 31 March 2007 (CDT)

Adminship
Your comment here (Requests for adminship/Dirigible) troubles me; "deserving". Adminship isn't a reward for whatever reason, by any means, I hope you understand that. &mdash; Skuld 12:10, 31 March 2007 (CDT)

Build:R/any Incendiary Quickness
Could you mabye explain your vote a little more? -- Friend of Chaos 18:48, 31 March 2007 (CDT)

Sorry if I didn't make it clear. As the build was orignally voted on and unfavored, you removed one skill and put up another R-a-b. IMO one change to the build isn't really enought for a re-vote. Solus  21:09, 31 March 2007 (CDT)


 * Defiant Elements put it up, not me. -- Friend of Chaos [[Image:Sbgroup.gif|22px|]] 21:21, 31 March 2007 (CDT)

Alright, regardless one skill isn't enought for a re-vote in my opinion. I was not judging the build on how affect it was, so if you made decent changes to improve the build I may strike out my vote. Solus  21:23, 31 March 2007 (CDT)

(CDT)
 * Huh? -- Friend of Chaos [[Image:Sbgroup.gif|22px|]] 12:17, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Wrong message lol Solus   18:41, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

What do you think about...
this? InfestedHydralisk  07:29, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Not bad, but the screams Infuriating Heat. Maybe drop Fecrious strike on the bunny reaper for it, Ooa + IH...Lots of pressure then. Small amounts of energy isn't needed on the Reaper. I don't HA alot so I can't give you detailed descriptions on how affective it would be. Pretty good though. Solus  07:42, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Hmmm yeah, good idea InfestedHydralisk   09:17, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Any other ideas? InfestedHydralisk  09:32, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Probaly a good idea to give the Necro Order of Pain and the Ritty Recovery, other than that's its not bad. Infurnating heat sacks good with Soothing the enenmy probaly wouldn't bother targeting them. Solus  10:11, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

About the rit, Recovery you say eh? I don't think that will be usefull as much conditions will be: Dismissed! and for the necro, OoP can come in handy yes. InfestedHydralisk  10:16, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Since HA is 8v8 again, SF spikers are thriving, so recovery can be used to take the pressure off coniditions in general and hopefully cut SF spikes short. Solus  10:20, 1 April 2007 (CDT)


 * Don't bother, liquid flame + glowing gaze = gg spirit &mdash; Skuld 10:20, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Place spirts in the backline = GG skuld. Solus  10:21, 1 April 2007 (CDT)


 * Overextend to kill them. This isn't theory &mdash; Skuld 10:24, 1 April 2007 (CDT)


 * In a SF spike team burning is applied quickly anyway, so Recovery isn't that great InfestedHydralisk  [[image:Shadow_Prison.jpg|19px]] 10:25, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Skuld, you'd risk running into the backlines to kill a recovery spirt? Ughhh Ok. Also.... to help reduce daze from thumpers, traps well from trappers etc... Solus  10:27, 1 April 2007 (CDT)


 * Yes &mdash; Skuld 10:30, 1 April 2007 (CDT)


 * Everyone is mostly focusing on the monks, so a SF going to attack the spirit for like 3 seconds noone actually goes all strike the SF all of a sudden InfestedHydralisk  [[image:Shadow_Prison.jpg|19px]] 10:34, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

A Coordinated team would. Solus  10:36, 1 April 2007 (CDT)


 * Coordinated.. HA.. good one :P &mdash; Skuld 10:37, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Ok, my team would. Solus  10:40, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Current Project
I like the idea behind using Signet of Midnight with Determined Shot...I'm curious, has it ever been done before? Spen 11:09, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Not sure, haven't bothered looking. Cant really expand far with it there considering most Ranger attacks have low recharge times. Solus  11:10, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

I couldn't find anything in unfavored, Oath Shot would probaly work better anyway. Solus  11:13, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Eh, it's something different. Which I believe is what you aim for with most of your builds. Spen 11:27, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Unfornately is probaly won't work, O well. Solus  11:31, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

fevered thorns
I am aware that its AOE area is quite large, but the fact of the matter is, your dont need AOE that large. AmericanVlad 19:10, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Why? Solus  19:11, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

...thats a good point, but the AOE range barely increases. The elite slot would be better off gone on to some other use, but I think I am going to change my vote. AmericanVlad 21:03, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

BTW, what is your nog64 contest build? jw. AmericanVlad 21:04, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

A contest where you pick an unpopular elite from a list, and make a build for it. Solus  21:10, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

See Nog64's Skill contest. Solus  21:12, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

User talk:71.57.3.16
Your comment here sharply contradicts the ideals behind a wiki. Anyone can edit anything here. Once you have posted a build on the wiki, it is no longer yours; it belongs to the wiki, and we can do what we like with that. I left a comment on that user's talk page though, saying that his changes disqualififed the build as a contest entry, and that he should repost under a different name. - Krowman (talk • contribs)  19:15, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Don't give me that crap, you know what I meant. Solus  19:16, 1 April 2007 (CDT)


 * If you feel that your contributions have been misinterpreted, you need to clarify and explain them. You are giving a new user an impression of the wiki which is quite different from what it really is. Truth is, no one can be sure of anything but the literal meaning of what is written, and since that is a new user, he may very well be unfamiliar with the way things work around here. If you don't think that I have explained the situation to him appropriately, you can elaborate on it on his user talk page. - [[Image:Candle.jpg|12px]] Krowman (talk • contribs) 19:30, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

I honestly don't care, I simply asked a question. He edited, I reverted. End of Discussion. Solus  19:34, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Differences Aside
Dude, I am sorry if I offended you in anyway whatsoever. It wasn't personal. I just have a basic belief in what is necessary for each class. Obviously, neither you nor I are noobs to Guildwars, and should have a mutual respect for one another, for that reason alone. So how about putting our differences aside, and make an attempt to get along? Readem (talk *contribs ) 00:39, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Eh? I've got nothing against you. Solus  00:41, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Sure... lol jk. Readem (talk *contribs ) 00:42, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Just... You really need to test builds before you vote on them, don't unfavor with stupid reasons. Reasons like PvE builds need a self heal when there designed for a balance party, I mean come on! Solus  00:44, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Well... just to get involved a bit, there are some PvE builds (regardless of what they are designed for) that should bring a self-heal. Speaking as someone whose favorite profession is Monk, there are times when I cannot believe that people didn't bring a self-heal and then get mad at me after their reckless behavior kills them. May I ask what the build was? Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs) 00:47, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Build:D/Me Fevered Thorns, Mysticsm is the self heal here anyway :). Solus   00:54, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Really now...
This is totally useless information. He removed it for a reason. It has nothing to do with the build, equipment, usage or anything; so why should it be there? Allowing useless facts about each build to remain on the article page can quickly spiral out of control, it is something better suited for the talk page. -Auron  11:15, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Build a bridge. Solus  11:18, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * And that means? I'm not here to be cryptic. The information is useless and an eyesore, but I can't remove it without breaking 1RV. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|19px||My Talk]] 11:20, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

To make you happy I will. Remember to build a bridge, and get over it. Solus  11:21, 2 April 2007 (CDT)


 * Your sarcasm toward Auron is unwarrented. Please do not act this way again, especially over an irrelevant note not suited for the article. Auron was correct that such information should be placed on the talk page. &mdash; Gares 11:32, 2 April 2007 (CDT)


 * The Info's removed, I'm been warned about sarcasim? Solus  [[image:Shield_of_Judgment.jpg|19px]] 11:33, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

signature
As per GW:SIGN about a signature image: –Ichigo724 12:50, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * The image file must redirect to the users user page or talk page.
 * The icon's image file should be exclusive for the signature, not shared with anything in GuildWiki. This allows for a redirect on the image file to the user page or the user talk page. Note: The image can be a duplicate of another image, if it's resized appropriately.

Done. Solus  12:52, 2 April 2007 (CDT)


 * I'm off, good debate, nothing personal though. Solus  [[Image:SOJsig.jpg|19px]] 12:56, 2 April 2007 (CDT)