User talk:Eloc jcg/Builds/W/Mo Strength of Judgment

Rate-a-build
''Please test and vote on new builds. Testing is required.''

Favored:
 * 1) (your vote here)

Unfavored:
 * 1) Absolutely horrible. Signet of Judgment + Bane Signet is problematic enough on a primary Smiting Monk or a Me/Mo, but on a Warrior? You must be kidding me. -.- Even with Stonefist Gauntlets it is pointless. One of the main attractions of KD and Hammers is Crushing Blow for a Deep Wound. You can do that with the Holy Combo of Sever + Gash, sure. But that is so cliche. Sever, Gash, Galrath/Final Thrust. Even if you are only using Core skills (which I might add, is a silly choice). It's the My First Warrior 101 skillbar...Attributes are spread very thinly. Less points to Swords = low damage output from melee attacks, and Strength of Honor is not enough to cover that. Mending is bad. Healing Signet with no defensive cover stance is bad. No speed buff is bad. No IAS is bad. No way to deal with Conditions, when you have Monk secondary, is very bad. The whole build just rankles. I would almost say a traditional Healing Hands wammo is better. >< [[Image:Entrophic Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 01:42, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * For user and author comments on this vote see "Response to Entropy's vote" below.
 * Compromise - you keep this confined to "1v1 Core Tournament battles" and I'll remove my vote.[[Image:Entrophic Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 04:38, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * Ok, well I thought it was just 1v1 Core Battles? I didn't plan it to be anything else. Eloc jcg 04:41, 19 February 2007 (CST) Oh, Farming and Running were Player Made also so why do they get their own slot? Eloc jcg 04:48, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * 1) I'm gonna have to say that any standard hammer warrior will outmatch this build... spread WAAAAAY too thin. --Debug0x2a 02:24, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * How is it spread way to thin? Not every build needs 16 w/e in an attribute. Eloc jcg 03:37, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * He means that your attributes are spread in too many lines. For instance, you put healing up to 8 and tactics up to 9, just for healing, when, in all honesty, heal sig is all you have in tactics.  Tactics could be dropped entirely, and a skill from healing prayers could be used, such as healing touch.  (or something similar, just using that as an example, yes I know it doesn't heal as much).  Furthermore, you're having to raise smiting fairly high, just for a little extra damage and a kd.  This could done with the strength attribute (as a higher strength will raise your damage on it's own), rather than relying on secondary skills.  And finally, that would free up strength and honor for something else.  Anywho, I don't vote on builds I actually haven't tested, regardless of what I think, but I'd recommend knocking this down to a build stub and asking for help in developing the page at least.Cyrogenic 04:02, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * 1) (your vote here).

Discussion
This build gives wammos a bad name. --SBR 18:40, 18 February 2007 (CST)
 * How come? Eloc jcg 19:12, 18 February 2007 (CST) Also, wammo is a prettye lame name.

* agrees with SBR* If you want to go KD, go hammer please. –Ichigo724 20:01, 18 February 2007 (CST)
 * Keep in mind it is only Core skills I am using and only have a choice of 100 skills.Eloc jcg 20:25, 18 February 2007 (CST)

Attributed are spread too thin. General effectiveness is crap. I suppose it's an ok idea in theory, but really, if you want to knockdown, hammers and eles do it better. 132.203.83.38 00:16, 19 February 2007 (CST)

It's not good, but it's not horrible either (being VERY generous here). Mending is a useless skill, replace it with Vigorous Spirit or Live Vicariously. With a better healing spell you can replace Healing Signet with Steelfang Slash. Drop Bane Signet and bring along a rez.
 * Ok, the skills you mentioned, not core, not core and it is a 1v1 build. Eloc jcg 03:38, 19 February 2007 (CST)

Response to Entropy's vote
The response for this vote got entirely too large for the RaB section, it has been reproduced below 
 * Bane Signet can be replaced for Purge Signet (read Variants)
 * I chose Core skills because that is what my Guilds Current Tournament theme is right now
 * 14 Swordsmanship is fine. Not every build has to have 16 w/e
 * Can't have a stance because they cost energy to use and I don't have any with this build.
 * Rankles? Wtf?
 * Healing Hands build isn't Core. Just try this one 1v1 in a Core match. It works perfectly fine. And use SoJ to knockdown and heal, by the time they are up you are healed.
 * Eloc jcg 03:35, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * Purge Signet has a very long recharge and costs you a lot of energy. You actually have 13 Swordsmanship. Try Bonetti's Defense, though that wouldn't work here. Rankles = sucks horribly, to explain it in simple terms. 1v1 match? Lol, that is pure crap. There is no such thing as a 1v1 match. SoJ = 20 second recharge, pitiful defense cover for selfheal. Same for Bane Signet. This build just sucks, period. [[Image:Entrophic Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 03:41, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * Purge Signet costs me no energy because I am not using any energy.
 * 1v1 matches do exist. Wtf do you think Scrimmage matches are.
 * I screwed up on the attributes. I am fixing them up. I should have 14 Swordsmanship
 * Eloc jcg 03:44, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * It still has a horrid recharge. I'll quote you, "Wtf do you think Scrimmage matches are." They are not 1v1, they're GvG. Making it into a 1v1 means absolutely nothing, since 1v1 combat is meaningless and proves nothing. We don't make builds for 1v1 combat on Wiki. You might as well argue that "Dodgeball" is a legitimate form of PvP and develop a build for it. [[Image:Entrophic Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 03:48, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * LMFAO, what do you think the Dragon Arena was? It was based off of dogeball. And why not have 1v1 builds in Guildwiki? I don't see anywhere saying you can't. Eloc jcg 03:51, 19 February 2007 (CST) Oh ya, what makes you able to rate this build. # You say you hate PvP meaning that you don't PvP meaning you never even tested the build in the first place.
 * Yes, but you are the one that has this build as unlabeled. It does not specify where it should be used, therefore, he could easily test it in some setting other than the one that you exactly had in mind.  He's not psychic.  What if he tested it in AB?  Besides, testing is NOT required.  Suggested, but not required.  Regardless of whether this seems fair or not, it's the current policy.Cyrogenic 04:08, 19 February 2007 (CST)  (note by cyrogenic.  Though it is numbered, I never intended this to be a vote, it was a response.
 * Irrelevant, that was a minigame and had no connection to ANY player skills or class or what ever. And it no longer exists, GG. And why not have 1v1 builds in GWiki? Because several reasons. (1) Limited usage - can't be used in any other form of PvP, can't be used in PvE, can't do anything except fight a self-imposed "1v1 battle". (2) Totally separate from every other aspect of Guild Wars. Game mechanics change, strategies change, skill usage change. It takes everything that makes GW, out of combat. That is why we have other builds than the Cripshot ranger, which is pretty much ideal for "1v1". (3) Until we have a Gladiator arena there is no official "1v1" and hence no reason to make builds for it. It's a player-created type of gameplay and the Wiki isn't here to post builds for it. (4) How many other people do you honestly think want to post "1v1 builds"? (5) Past precedent. Many builds have been unfavored for the exact reason that "we don't do 1v1 builds". (6) If we did 1v1 builds, every Wammo build would automatically be favored, since they wtfpwn in 1v1, and that's about it. (7) "But it works in 1v1" is the typical defense for crappy builds that aren't viable for anything else. We don't need more crappy builds.
 * You don't know the Vetting policy, do you? I don't have to give a fucking damn reason why I vote on a build, I don't have to test the piece of crap build, I don't even have to read the fucking page if I don't want to. And hell, you're going to say I'm unqualified to rate a crappy build because of a Userbox? LMFAO indeed. [[Image:Entrophic Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 04:01, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * Yes, you have to test the build. You don't even know if it works and why would Wammo builds be put in automatically? It would be like the Rt/N build. They would just be merged. What makes Mending so bad? It is basically a free, unconditianal +3 HP regen. Eloc jcg 04:10, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * Just because you changed the R-a-b doesn't mean jack shit, don't screw with policy. I don't need to test this piece of crap build to know whether it works or not. Wammo builds would be put in because there are many ways to make a good "1v1 Wammo", from all three Attribute lines (Healing, Protection, Smiting), and thus they would not be merged. Mending is pure suckage and that's been debated since before the beginning of time. And you are one of the very few people I've seen in recent memory who has ever actually defended Mending seriously. o_O The reason Mending is bad, even/especially for a Wammo: you could be putting that energy to much better use than a measly +3 regen. That will counter Bleeding. Ooh, impressive. +3 health regen = 6 health per second, that is a laughable amount of healing. I know the counterarguments - "It's free", "It increases survivability", "What other enchants would I use". Here are my counter-arguments. It's not free, it costs you a pip of energy that you could be using to increase DPS. It doesn't heal you enough to be worthwhile, +6 health every second is enough for about nothing. It'll counter Bleeding, or perhaps an Assassin's regular attacks not counting Double Strikes (probably not). What to use instead - Live Vicariously and Vigorous Spirit are infinitely better. More health gained per second, more total health gain, and the two effects are stackable. Not to mention Vigorous lasts 30 seconds, costs only 5 energy, and isn't a Maintained Enchantment. So it > Mending even if you insist on using Strength of Honor. [[Image:Entrophic Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 04:19, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * VS and LV aren't Core skills. And +3HP Regen isn't 6hp per second XD. When you are at 1 regen of energy there is no way that it equals 2 energy a second. Eloc jcg 04:23, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * Oh yes, sticking to core skills (stupid). But you should really check your math before laughing. Every pip of health regeneration is 2 health per second. Last time I checked, 2 X 3 = 6. And I think your understanding of game mechanics is lacking. Energy regeneration and health regeneration are completely different things. Energy regenerates slower than Health does. 3 pips Energy regen does not equal 3 pips Health regen. I won't call you a noob, because it's obvious you aren't, but really...those are some pretty basic things to know. >< [[Image:Entrophic Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 04:27, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * How are they basic to know? I spend my time playing GW, not counting how long it takes for me to get HP and Energy back. Eloc jcg 04:29, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * If you played for just a few minutes you would notice that energy regen and health regen are different. I don't know a single person who hasn't realized that by the time they get to Lion's Arch. And to prove concept: in Pre-Searing you can ask newbies how much health per second is +3 regen (aka Mending). Last time I tried, 9/10 of them answered correctly. They may not understand that each pip is 2 per second, but the great (and unfortunate) popularity of Mending is such that 99% of Guild Wars players can quote that statistic. As for counting regeneration, I don't do that either. But it's still basic to know if you have ever compared, let's say, Healing Breeze to Blood is Power. Big regen on both, but one gives back much faster. Tell me you have at least experienced both skills....? [[Image:Entrophic Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 04:32, 19 February 2007 (CST)
 * (reseting stack) 1 pip of health regen is 2 per second.  1 pip of energy regen is 1 energy every three seconds.  Can we do something about moving all this out of RaB, please?Cyrogenic 04:53, 19 February 2007 (CST)

Cleanup
A few things...
 * Needs to remove first-person references (I, Me, etc)
 * Don't put in things like "1", "6", etc. Use skillnames instead.
 * The Counters and Usage need to be fleshed out more.
 * Spelling and Grammar.
 * General stubbiness of article...

You're free to remove the deletion tag of course, but that's some of the reasons it was probably there in the first place. S&F guide doesn't look like this either. (T/C) 04:24, 19 February 2007 (CST)

And before you pester him, I second the cleanup notion. I'm not adding the tag back (per policy), but it could use a lot of work. Consider... expounding on the use. For instance, above you criticize entropy for incorrectly using or understanding the build. Well, expound the build, make sure people understand it. Just a skillbar doesn't make a build. That makes a build STUB.Cyrogenic 04:29, 19 February 2007 (CST)

There, cleaned it up a little bit. Also, note that the title is a typo. Judgment is spelled like that, not with an e. Common mistake, no biggie, I just don't go messing with stuff like that.Cyrogenic 04:36, 19 February 2007 (CST)


 * Thanks Cyrogenic. [[Image:Entrophic Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 04:38, 19 February 2007 (CST)