Talk:Elementalist Ancient armor

Female elementalist armor that's not showing a lot of skin? 0_o What will Anet thing of next??? --waywrong 21:26, 19 November 2006 (CST)
 * ^^^Agreed. I was horrified. Baron [[Image:Baron.JPG|25px]] 04:44, 26 December 2006 (CST)

Crafting material costs are: 25 dust and 1k for each of the headpieces; 150 cloth, 15 damask, 10k for the Robes (chest piece); 50 cloth, 5 damask, 10k for the Gloves; 100 cloth, 10 damask, 10k for the Leggings; 50 cloth, 5 damask, 10k for the Shoes. I'd edit the article, but I'm not registered. 72.11.28.126 23:20, 24 November 2006 (CST)

One of the best-looking Ancient sets, IMO. 68.53.168.153 15:50, 31 January 2007 (CST)


 * For females, I could not disagree with you more. While I agree that not all female Ele armor should be skin tight and revealing, this is not the way to give players a conservative alternative. I have seen players with this armor on in-game and it looks like a potato sack - completely frumpy and unflattering in every way. Denali 01:30, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Why only 10k? 69.179.188.152 12:30, 1 February 2007 (CST)
 * Because the armor doesn't come with any of those extra stats you get in prophecies and factions armors. You have to apply the insignia or whatever it is called into it which really doesn't cost all that much. But you never really know about inflation in GW. >Trace 19:37, 7 February 2007 (CST)

Wow, male elementalist set is really nice...just got for my ele, beautiful and accepts dyes fairly well--Warior kronos 13:47, 12 May 2007 (CDT)

Can we stop using the /attention thing? I dunno wether to buy it for my female ele because someone decided to do that /attention crap, it sucks. -- Ruby Red 13:56, 8 June 2007 (CDT)

Does long hair clip through this armor? I think it does EnterNameHere 00:46, 24 June 2007 (CDT)
 * Why would we stop doing the /attention? It gives a clear and even view of the armor. It's the best way to show armor, IMO. Also, i'd just like to say that the big ass on the female ele totally ruined this for me. Saw it in Domain of Anguish yesterday, absolutely ruined it.--Darksyde Never Again 02:35, 7 August 2007 (CDT)
 * Because frankly, nobody ever stands at /attention, so nobody really sees armor displayed in that fashion elsewhere. I think I can speak for the majority of the Guild Wars community when I say that when we want to see what an armor set looks like, we want to see how it'll look like the majority of the time.  Which is just a regular standing shot.  Anything else is just pretentious. -Wang 21:44, 25 September 2007 (CDT)
 * OMG OMG OMG!!! O_O FINALLY SOMEONE AGREES WITH ME!!!!! RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg]] 02:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * They're not the only ones that agree with you. Fact of the matter is, there's a subconscious feeling you get when you see someone standing at attention while wearing ANY sort of armor- a feeling that the armor that they're wearing is somehow uncomfortable. Do you think that when a model stands at the end of a runway, they stand at attention and turn around while in the same position? You get more of a feeling of comfortability when not using the pose.--Kajex Firedrake 20:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll upload a new gallery when I borrow a computer that can run GW in 1900x1200. [[Image:ShidoSig_moebius2.gif]] 17:07, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * agreed with the attention thing, i prefer to see a ele without /attention, its better to see how it looks that way.Sharpened Daggers aka RIP 23:58, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

clipping
shouldn't it be noted that the male chestpeice's collar clips very slightly when your character looks to the right? i'd add it my self but i'm not sure howAkbaroth 06:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * also just noticed that the cuffs around the hands clips with the lower part of the cloakAkbaroth 04:31, 6 February 2009 (UTC)