Talk:General guide to RA

If you have something useful to say that will help this article, please do add the suggestions here or just edit the article yourself. If you are here to say "RA is not real PvP, you should go to HA or GvG" then please allow me to point you in the direction of Guild Wars Guru, where you belong. VegaObscura 19:30, 28 March 2007 (CDT)

It is totally possible to enter RA with a team if you know how to do it. Random Arena article used to list it as an exploit, I think. Also I am curious why we need a guide to RA, everyone knows it's joke PvP... :S A generic "guide to PvP" would be better, imho. (T/C) 19:15, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Yes it is possible to enter RA with a team, but almost no one does it. RA is not joke PvP, it is the highest level of PvP you can perform without having to assemble a team.  If I'm not mistaken there is already a guide to PvP, and regardless RA has some special things that should be noted.  It is true that winning in RA is mostly up to luck giving you good or bad allies, but adding an article should raise the level of RA players by at least a little.  Whenever I see an inexperienced player in RA I take it upon myself to take them aside, and help them.  This usually consists if taking them out to the Isle of the Nameless and having them attempt to fight the masters to find that they are weaker than an NPC. VegaObscura 19:30, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Hmm "weaker than an NPC" well they only need to do PvE to know that, NPCs pwn most human players at higher levels (thinking DoA etc here). But anyway RA is joke PvP, you can win glad points with Echo Mending. It isn't random and in fact quite a few people do assemble teams - when I enter and the next five teams are all SS Ele, ZB Monk, Impaler Sin, and Dragon Slash Warriors, I think that means something. :\ Moreover I don't see how not being able to assemble a team makes RA better than GvG or anything. You forget that the enemy can assemble a team as well - leading to much stronger opponents with actual tactics and such. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 19:40, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
 * You can win glad points, but your number of glad points will vastly drop. I'm willing to bet you don't have many glad points do you?  Less than 50 undoubtably.  Not being able to assemble a team is not a good thing, it is just a good way to save time.  Also PVE is totally different from PVP, and people almost never use the same builds in PVE that they would in PVP.  In the isle of the nameless, you take your PVP build and make sure that it can kill a player.  And I think you just assume that the enemy team is set up because they are relatively balanced. VegaObscura 19:46, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
 * What does me having glad points have to do with anything? The point is that anything works in RA, which makes it a silly form of PvP entirely based on luck of the draw - not skill. "Saving time" is also not a reason that RA is better. Do you prefer quantity PvP to quality PvP? Testing against the Masters on Isle of the Nameless is not a great way to test if a build can kill a player. You know every skill they have and so can design a build specifically to counter them; all of the Masters have very focused, specialized builds, unlike what you would expect in most RA builds (flexibility, reliable self-heal, condition removal, hex removal/counters). Masters all have particular behavior patterns - for example the Survivor one does little but kite, the Healer one does nothing but heal, etc. Unless a PvP build can take on almost all the Masters, it's not really a great test. (Exceptions to solely anti-caster or anti-melee builds, of course...) [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 19:54, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
 * No anything does not work in RA. The fact that you have that view and few gladiator points shows that.  It is true that the masters have very specialized builds.  As I mentioned in the article, the key to winning in RA is to be able to solo a healer.  The master of healing specializes in healing.  Need I spell this out for you more? VegaObscura 20:56, 28 March 2007 (CDT)

May I asked in what way this page is misformatted? VegaObscura 12:32, 29 March 2007 (CDT)