User talk:Dazra/buildarchive/Build:W/E Charge Sword

/Archive1

Untested for now
There is obviously several key issues that need to be consensus-resolved with this build before it can concievably be deemed as tested and approved by the community. Chief among these is the issue of whether Shock is a key skill or not (if it isn't, then the name is inappropriate and should change), and there is also a question of whether or not it is useful to include 2 running skills in a GvG-oriented build. Obviously, my personal opinion is that a) Shock is at the core of this build, and b) 2 running skills is dumb. However, I am not much of a GvG'er, so I will leave it to others with more experience to hash those issues out. -- Bishop [ rap|con ] 18:17, 25 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Compare the article before Rapta (rather unilaterally) dropped sprint for shock and how it is now. It's pretty much the same, just with healing signet instead of an optional slot.  The current variants are pretty much the skills listed as choices for the slot before.  All the votes before Rapta came when the build didn't have shock actually on the bar.
 * About your opinion of the build, given the above, it's kind of clear shock isn't the core. If it was, wouldn't it be a variant of the existing W/E Shock Warrior?  The point of the build is charge (and also being a decent warrior).  In itself, having two run skills isn't a bad thing.  The issue is more that you only get eight slots.  Sprint serves a dual role of another speed boost (I would say mobility is a key difference between GvG and HA) and allowing you to cancel frenzy.  --68.142.14.19 18:29, 25 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Your opinions are likely valid, I'm going to retract my statements about the build and just focus on the process. Lets let the discussion simmer a while, then re-rate. If consensus is as you say, it should soon be clear. -- [[Image:Bishop_icon2.png]] Bishop [ rap|con ] 18:45, 25 July 2006 (CDT)

Why should this be reverted to untested, when it has both been proven in the highest ranks of PvP, as well as having a landslide in the number of votes in favor of this build? After all, that's why we have this voting system. &mdash; Rapta   (talk|contribs) 21:13, 25 July 2006 (CDT)
 * signifigant changes to build require revote. of course, "signifigant" is a very subjective term --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 21:23, 25 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Amusingly, the significant change is the one he keeps pushing in, from my point of view. --68.142.14.19 21:36, 25 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I hardly count replacing Shock with Sprint as the variant a significant change. Look at that blademaster build. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 21:42, 25 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Replacing Sprint with Shock changes the build a lot. Please see my points above as to why I think it should stay as Sprint. --Vindexus 21:46, 25 July 2006 (CDT)
 * no reason to be rude, anon 68, just vote approved again. last time it was approved in less then an hour, so you should have no problem drumming up the votes again. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 21:44, 25 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Argh, I didn't even see Rapta changed it again yesterday after three of us supported changing it back. --68.142.14.19 08:36, 26 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Since many people don't seem to realize this I need to point it out. Vindexus is a former top 20 GvG player (from Final Dynasty.)  He knows what he is talking about.  He still PvPs regularly and he still is very good at warrior.  Just because Last of Master runs Frenzy without a stance cancel doesn't mean it is a build for the masses.  What Rapta is doing is about equivalent for me going in PvE articles and repeatedly removing all references to the 55 monk because I prefer farming with a cyclone axe sword warrior.  I would be banned from Guild Wiki from a heartbeat if I did that.   If Rapta is such of fan of the shock sword warrior he needs to go and create his own article.  Otherwise he isn't editing information, he is just replacing one build with another.  The original build carried sprint, charge, and frenzy for a reason.  You need a stance cancel for Frenzy.  Frenzy makes you take double damage.  If good players catch on to the fact that you use Frenzy without a stance cancel they will watch for you to Frenzy and spike you.  They will shatter prot spirits and for a monk to save you he will have to sacrifice a huge portion of his energy putting the rest of the team at risk.  Last of Master has proven it can be run without a stance cancel, but there is a lot more too it than can be seen on obs mode.  you have to be aware of the behavior of every single player on the enemy team, time your Frenzy extremely carefully, and be very conservative with it.  With a stance cancel you can use Frenzy to build and rapidly cancel out of it at will. Sprint is a good stance cancel for the build and a great way for mid level players to learn.  When you compare experience, Vindexus outweighs Rapta by a longshot here.  Warskull 09:36, 30 July 2006 (CDT)
 * The opinions of Warskull do not necessarily reflect those of Vindexus. --Vindexus 18:35, 30 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I think this build either way is well beyond tested. I have a hard time calling most of the "tested" builds anywhere near as tested as this, as shown by its popularity among anyone who does significant GvG. To avoid a revert war, I'd like to point out GW:1RV which I believe (added: should have) put us with Sprint until a consensus is reached. (added: please don't revert anymore though - until we have some sort of consensus). --Kryshnysh 12:05, 31 July 2006 (CDT)

This build makes me lol. You can start Frenzy, but once you start you can never stop. If you happen to kill your target while Frenzied and then have no use for it, but are getting attacked, you can try to run but in all likelihood a team with any skill at all will have you dead within about 3 seconds. I see that it says "untested for now," so why is it in the tested section? At this stage, I would have voted unfavored.--Eetaq 01:16, 6 February 2007 (CST)
 * Seconded. Why Shock, and why no cancel stance?  Isn't the Charge Warrior typically part of a gank team?  In that case he should have a condition removal skill instead of the KD, and could run Tiger Stance instead of Frenzy.--Lodurr 03:11, 8 February 2007 (CST)
 * How about changing "Charge!" to Charging Strike? It's a really good skill, a cancel stance, I don't think we have a CS build vetted yet, and we would hardly have to change the name. -[[Image:Spiked Eggnog.jpg|19px]] Krowman [[Image:Spiked Eggnog.jpg|19px]] 01:08, 10 February 2007 (CST)
 * The purpose of "Charge!" is to help your team move faster in GvG. Charging strike does not accomplish that.

On another note, this build is not as intended by the author, and is not good. It needs to be removed from the Tested Section or needs to be returned to how the author meant for it to be. --Eetaq 01:45, 14 February 2007 (CST)
 * Once it is submitted to the wiki, it is wiki property. See the first point under the "Please note" heading on every edit pager on the wiki. The build author can keep his build displayed in his namespace. -[[Image:Spiked Eggnog.jpg|19px]] Krowman [[Image:Spiked Eggnog.jpg|19px]] 01:49, 14 February 2007 (CST)