User talk:Honorable Sarah

Secondary profession for a warsassin
Assassins using axes suck. Please don't put notes like that in, as they give the wrong idea to fresh assassins. -Auron  20:51, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * i recall a very effective build using cyclone axe, sharpen daggers, and high critical strikes. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 20:52, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Just because it isn't the current popular build in HA doesn't mean its not viable. --Deathwing 20:55, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * which was my point with this whole campaign. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 20:55, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Assassins. Using. Axes. Suck. This has nothing to do with HA. It has to do with knowing this from personal experience. I've run an assassin through all three campaigns and in HA/GvG/RA/AB etc etc, and I can tell you that assassins using axes suck. What more do you want? Should I suggest bringing a Hammer next, because hammers do higher crits than axes? When do we draw the line between "it works" and "it is what sins should be doing?" -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|19px||My Talk]] 20:59, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * then offer some qualifing advice, if i though of it, so will some newbie sin, and he won't know better unless we tell him so. having not run a sin/axe build, i can't speak to it's effectivness, but i'm sure someone will try it and we should have an answer, not a blank spot. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 21:03, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * So wait, we need to fill it with equal crap via telling them every combination not to use? That makes zero sense. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|19px||My Talk]] 22:06, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * no, just address the major suckness, minor suckness can be ignored (like long splits or similar), just try to leave something useful for the prospective A/W to read, ok? no "X sucks, Y good, Z good" --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 22:09, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Take a look at the A/W section I left. It gave all the advice even the pro A/W's use; warrior IAS for increased DPS, and sparing spammable adrenaline skills (i.e., Fear Me) because assassins double-strike and build adren so fast. We seriously don't need to include "use axes," because that goes against everything an assassin is and does. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|19px||My Talk]] 22:15, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Aurons right Sarah, Sin axes are frowned upon everywhere. Readem (talk *contribs ) 21:01, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * To be honest, I would rather have a new assassin with an axe than a new assassin with Death's Charge. --Deathwing 21:04, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * A simple statement (but more polite) to the effect of "Assassins not using Daggers, Bows, or Scythes are regarded as stupid. Assassins bringing teleports without defense or retreat skills are regarded as dead." might fit here. --[[image:rollerzerris.jpg|50x19px]]    22:11, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Even bowsins and scythesins are gimmicky and don't deal as much damage as daggersins, even though they might be fun to use. I left the scythe and bow comments in even though they aren't the best of the best, because they're fun to use (unlike axesassins, which suck and are not fun to play). Heh, I had fun leveling a pet up with my A/R bowsin gimmick (hearty jahai rats ftw), but I honestly would not recommend that build to someone starting a sin. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|19px||My Talk]] 22:23, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * They're gimmicky, yeah, but aren't sins gimmicky to start with? -210.3.39.32 22:27, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Yes. Sins are cheat mode. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|19px||My Talk]] 22:39, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * I wouldn't suggest any new player start as an Assassin, Paragon, Dervish, or Mesmer, TBH. --[[image:rollerzerris.jpg|50x19px]]   22:29, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * But sadly, many people want to be a ninja. So they chose an assassin. Teleport in and kill them before they know what hit them right? like a ninja? -.- --Deathwing 22:31, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Ever noticed how ninjas first spend 5-10 years of their life practicing self defense? A new Assassin looks exactly like a Ninja would if they didn't have that practice. They'd jump right up to you, impale themselves on your sword, and wonder what went wrong. --[[image:rollerzerris.jpg|50x19px]]    22:34, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Dervish, maybe, but why paragon? The class that can C-Space and still deal damage about equivilent to a sword warrior, spam chants and shouts, and not worry about positioning and over-extension. Difficult? Oookay. There has already been a 7 (or 9?) page on why Assassins suck in PvE at guru. It's pretty sad how people insist that Mesmers and Assassins are "unappreciated" classes when they basically aren't needed in PvE. Usable and "Needed" or even "Good" are different. -210.3.39.32 22:33, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * I never said any of them were bad. I merely said new people should not play them.  And Paragons, at one time, were good.  After the nerfs, a Ranger beats them hands down.  Barrage > any Spear Skill around.  And Monks > nerfed Chants. --[[image:rollerzerris.jpg|50x19px]]    22:36, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * I'm not saying that they are good, read what I said. I said it's a brain dead class. Both in PvE and PvP, it's pretty much pressing T 1-2-3, and using chants as necessary, which is why it's good for a begginer. As for a ranger better.. barrage? Ha... ha. Seriously, using a bow for DPS is a lost cause. Warrior, being the heaviest damage dealer, at least a hell lot better than a ranger, and then the paragon, having a very similar DPS... let's see what that makes the paragon... -210.3.39.32 22:40, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Don't make me hit you over the head noting that Barrage + Splinter Weapon deals more damage in one shot then that Paragon can deal in 20. Anyway, I think I'm getting a bit touchy, so I'm off to bed. --[[image:rollerzerris.jpg|50x19px]]   22:42, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Only against mobs, in which case you'd be better off with SFs and MSes. Against straggling foes, even if you hit 2 at the same time, a paragon is going to deal more damage simply due to better IAS, Attack Speed, and damage. Barrage is around a shot per 2 seconds, plus the lag due to recharge, /W means no Conjure, and /Rt means time spent on casting, no vampiric, and certainly no conjures. It has no deepwound, no real spike. Plus on the interrupts though.
 * Try staying alive till VoD on a paragon. Get Conjure, SoL, Cruel Spear, Harrier's Toss. Fun fun fun. -210.3.39.32 22:52, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * And then you get assassins, with the highest DPS in the game... fun stuff. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|19px||My Talk]] 23:04, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Newbie assassins are usually dead, which equates to the lowest possible DPS :( (edit) new to guild wars, not new to assassin --Deathwing 23:08, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * To Auron- of course, "gimmick" has a negative connotation to it for a reason. Assassins are also one of the easiest to counter, speaking of Shield Bash, Holy Veil, Hexbreaker, Dshot/Savage/Wail/Interrupts, and Diversion, due to their reliance on hexes, and certain skills to deal any damage at all, and then you also have what must be the easiest spikes to catch.. well, kinda.-210.3.39.32 23:11, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * I disagree. They aren't as tough as, say, a warrior, but warriors are globally countered by Aegis etc whereas Assassins are not. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|19px||My Talk]] 23:18, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Ah, perhaps (sorry Sarah?), but it's been argued: that anti-warrior skills are so popular is a testament to their effectiveness~ not to mention that warriors are far harder to counter than sins -still-. You have blinds snares speed boost etc to counter warriors, some of those apply to sins, some don;t (shadow step), true, but these counters aren't hard counters in the sense that there is no fucking way dragons can win against archers, carriers can own EMP + BCs, and anything aginst mammoth tank spam. Mirror of Disenchantment, Powerleak, Powerblock, RC, Hexbreaker, and so on are your friends. In fact, nothing gives you a faster wipe than a melee/physical heavy build and a power block on an LoD on the infuser or Aegis from the prot. They aren't gimmicky in the sense it's how well you play and how well you counter and counter the counter that counts, whereas Assassins is whether you happen to have holy veil, return/shield bash or something like that near you. I also don't think sin spikes are anywhere as lethal as people put it without a shame/gale or something, but it's also less versatile, speedy, and in some cases unpredictable. Eh, I mean you can kinda guess when he's almost going to jump again, whereas a bunch of warriors/paragons can beat a squishie to pulp without really using any skills. If they do that, and you infuse, 10gold if you can guess who they are going to use the skills on.
 * lol, I talk too much. /shutsup. -Silk Weaker 04:14, 9 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Get off my lawn! --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 23:23, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * But I was using this discussion to Defy Boredom... --[[image:rollerzerris.jpg|50x19px]]   23:26, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * But Zerris, you do that for conversation in general. Readem (talk *contribs ) 00:38, 17 May 2007 (CDT)

bitter was auron
Okay, time to revive the discussion. Basically, Sarah, I cleaned up the article; you reverted and, to be frank, totally fucked it up. I cannot revert without breaking 1RV, so all I can do is plead to your sanity to remove stupidass shit like Apply Poison and Cyclone Axe on a warrior. -Auron  23:31, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Whoops, I'm talking about the Warrior one this time. In case you didn't notice, I only pruned the articles on classes I am very experienced playing; please don't mindlessly revert, especially when that means re-adding stupid shit. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|19px||My Talk]] 23:31, 8 May 2007 (CDT)

"although popular, a Necromancer using Fire Magic is rarely effective, and often disparaged by more experienced players." what the hell dude? why would you even comtemplate adding notes like that? &mdash; Skuld 02:44, 9 May 2007 (CDT)

A Necromancer using Fire Magic? I haven't even seen that in RA. --   06:36, 9 May 2007 (CDT)


 * The uncalled for attitude of an admin non-withstanding right now and I will comment on that on his page, I came across this where Auron stated Sarah she does not care for the efforts to make these secondary profession pages. If that is the case, then she is causing premeditated disruption to the wiki. I would have believed she actually thought what she was adding was what she thought was best for the article(s) until I read that. After reading that, however, any more disruptive behavior to edit those pages into some wacky circus of off-the-wall ideas just to confuse players looking for help from a user that doesn't even care about the articles, and I will enact administration action to make sure the quality of those articles are being improved instead of being hindered by any individual. &mdash; Gares 10:35, 9 May 2007 (CDT)


 * You do realize how incredibly unfair what you just said is, don't you?
 * "I would have believed she actually thought what she was adding was what she thought was best for the article(s) until I read that."
 * "That" being:
 * "Talking to Sarah in-game has revealed that she does not give a damn about our efforts."
 * So, you're warning with administrative action based on a subjective evaluation of intentions from Auron, who's one of the main protagonists of this conflict? Of course he's going to say that she doesn't give a damn about their efforts, she's stated it herself on the wiki that she doesn't want those articles to be only about what "top" PvPers think they should be like. You are threatening with blocking over a content dispute, failing to acknowledge that the guy whose words you're listening to is the same guy that just walked all over GW:NPA by spitting all kinds of colourful verbiage towards the person you are threatening to ban.
 * I didn't even want to get involved in this stupid issue, but H.S. hasn't posted in two days, and I'd much rather say something now hoping that it's not too late, than risk letting Auron and his merry band drive away from the wiki someone who disagrees with them using all sorts of unorthodox manners, including intimidation via trollish attacks and lynch mobs. Adding an unfair blocking warning from a sysop on top of that is over the line, I'm afraid. You want to see disruptive behaviour? User talk:Skuld:
 * "We're clearing out the crap. Please don't re-add the crap, Sarah.""Are you high on stupid juice?" "Stop adding dumb things sarah, we're trying to create some decent articles, not crap-strewn abominations."
 * Looking at the discussion above here and on Skuld's talk page I see a good faith contributor trying to find a compromise with the other side, and Auron's posse howling back not giving an inch. Your warning here is terribly out of place and unfair, in my opinion. --Dirigible 16:11, 11 May 2007 (CDT)
 * I got annoyed at the "don't do this notes" and flipped. Sorry about that Sarah. &mdash; Skuld 16:20, 11 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Sorry if I caused any hassle (I do that a lot ;) I was just concerned with the information we were giving out to the less knowledgeable players. No harm intended really, but just in case, I am sorry =) (First time using the smiley lolz). Readem (talk *contribs ) 17:07, 11 May 2007 (CDT)

Female
Aww, I want pictures! &mdash;Sig mA  09:57, 9 May 2007 (CDT)
 * O.o.... ~Readem
 * o.O --[[image:rollerzerris.jpg|50x19px]]   17:27, 15 May 2007 (CDT)
 * 0.O --Renegade26 05:44, 20 May 2007 (CDT)

Image copyright problem
Thank you for uploading the files listed below. GuildWiki takes copyright very seriously, and the images you have supplied are missing information on its copyright status. The images will be deleted after 7 days, unless the copyright status is determined for the license and the source of the images. Please review Image use policy and add a copyright tag to their image description page.

Thank you for your cooperation.

The following is a list of files that need attention: -- Xeon 08:57, 11 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Image:"Ni!".jpg
 * delete it. tracking down the frame grab and showing it was from a fair use site for an 11 month old image isn't worth the time.--Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 22:01, 11 May 2007 (CDT)
 * and stop plastering my talk page with that oververbose template trash. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 22:02, 11 May 2007 (CDT)
 * You can NEVER kill the spirt of the Knights that say Ni! Solus  [[Image:DiscipleSymbol2.jpg|19px]] 04:34, 12 May 2007 (CDT)

GPL
Do you really mean the GPL? While it's not strictly a software license, the way it's written makes it confusing or non-sensical for things that aren't software. --Fyren 00:52, 20 May 2007 (CDT)
 * GPL, Gnu General Public License. seems to have a hearty following over here --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 01:01, 20 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Less than 600 files out of 762k seems more like people not understanding the GPL or using it when they probably meant the GFDL. --Fyren 01:05, 20 May 2007 (CDT)
 * I came to this talk page right now to ask the exact same question as Fyren above, whether you really meant GPL and not GFDL. Using the GPL for images is icky, since you need to make available the "source code" of the images. This is usually interpreted as the .psd file, or whatever you were using to create the image, but it's still vague. There's other copyleft licenses which are more suitable for this purpose (f.i. the GFDL).
 * Furthermore, I'm not even sure you can release those pictures as GPL at all. They're just screenshots from GuildWars, I think the copyright is still with ANet. You can at most claim fair use, but relicensing them under a free license doesn't seem right to me. --Dirigible 03:08, 20 May 2007 (CDT)
 * have i mentioned how much i dislike bureaucracy? --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 11:02, 20 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Those are copyright, you dont own the rights to screenshots. -- Xeon 11:04, 20 May 2007 (CDT)
 * OMFG! I DON'T CARE AND I'M NOT CHANGING THEM ALL AGAIN! --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 11:10, 20 May 2007 (CDT)

skill quick references
Hi, do you think it's a good idea to remove the legend and TOC from the skill QR articles? The legend isn't exactly redundant because the icons are technically not explained. They are the same as in the game, yes, but that doesn't fit "redundant" in the context of the article. However, what's out of the question, IMHO, is that the TOC is useful and necessary for quickly navigating these articles and should not be removed. Would you object to reverting your changes? --Roland of Gilead (talk) 17:18, 20 May 2007 (CDT)
 * hover over the icons, they have explanitory text. click any of the icons, they link to the correct articles. all the legend does is get in the way. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 22:33, 20 May 2007 (CDT)