User talk:Sir On The Edge

=Talk about Builds in the Making= N/A

Grrr...In responce to your edit to my user page.
Grrr...Hahaha very funny. That table was there as a template for me to work off of while adding a table. Your little edit interupted that and screwed me up so now I have to start all over ;_; (you edited my page while I was editing it). "Mark my words...I will have my revenge!" he he :P&mdash; Azroth    20:09, 24 October 2006 (CDT)


 * Alright, fixed it. No harm done...but it still wouldn't hurt to sleep with one eye open...if you know what I mean.  he he :P&mdash; [[Image:Azroth sig.png||builds]] Azroth  [[Image:Azroth sig2.png||talk]]  20:45, 24 October 2006 (CDT)
 * He He. Just a lil fun, sorry I got in the way :P. Sir On The Edge 05:38, 25 October 2006 (CDT)

Changing Featured Tested build
Please updated the list as well, or else we can't keep track of which builds have been featured or not. &mdash; Rapta   (talk|contribs) 13:54, 3 December 2006 (CST)
 * Ah, dammit. Forgot about the list :D. Sir On The Edge 15:29, 3 December 2006 (CST)

Skuld and Auron
Sir, the disciple of death is a nice build. Arguing with these people is a waste of time. I just thought, what's the point of trying to convince narrow-minded arrogant people to change their mind? *By definition* they are people who don't take other people's opinions seriously. By the way I'm very interested in knowing if the signet of illusion build works out. I'm dying to cap it but haven't gotten there yet (advancing slowly with a friend).
 * I'll give it a try. If you make it so they would look silly if they argue with you they won't. Sir On The Edge 16:28, 4 December 2006 (CST)
 * I couldn't resist and got Skuld to argue with me. Look how he makes an idiot of himself. "Bleeding, who cares, deep wound, who cares". Lol. What a pompous fool. THe emperor is naked. NightAngel 13:08, 5 December 2006 (CST)
 * Even if you disagree that's no reason to harass. Sir On The Edge 13:26, 5 December 2006 (CST)
 * You're right. CAn't prove anyone is a pompous fool by calling him that. I can only try to lead others to the same conclusion by keeping my cool and arguing in a positive manner. Otherwise, I just offer him a good excuse for shutting me up. NightAngel 14:12, 5 December 2006 (CST)
 * Lol, total attitude change since the threat of ban. Not that that is a bad thing. :D Sir On The Edge 14:32, 5 December 2006 (CST)
 * I'm not terrified of banning, Guild Wars is a resource for me, not a personal project. And I'm NOT too proud to admit my mistakes. Tempted to say something about my foes regarding the same subject, but let's not go there. :) NightAngel 14:40, 5 December 2006 (CST)

Impaler in Eskimos
U rock for thinking of my build here=) --Midnight08 18:50, 4 December 2006 (CST)

Incoming flack...
lol, I never thought your A/D build would get such heated arguments going on whether its good or not. Personally I love it, but I'm running my variant of it so I cant vote on it until I test out yours. Still not sure when AR removes the Weakness though. Oh yeah, btw, I have one of every type of character now, so if there are any builds you would like me to test out and vote on just let me know and I'd be happy to help :) As it stands I wont bother to submit my A/D since yours seems to be similar enough to not warrant another build.  If you would though, feel free to stop by my builds page from time to time and give me a comment on anything that looks interesting.  Thanks a lot and good luck getting your builds favored ;)&mdash;  Azroth    14:52, 5 December 2006 (CST)
 * Gimme your variant and I'll add it to variants section. I'm glad it's lead to such controversy, but it's mainly between people who have tried it and people who just don't like the "idea". Sir On The Edge 17:01, 5 December 2006 (CST)

Ps: took away the Critical stikes (sic) idea on the variants section. It would need an off-hand attack. It is certainly possible to try to insert a lead-off-dual attack in the build, but that would be another build entirely? Anyway, just a heads up. NightAngel 07:52, 6 December 2006 (CST)


 * That troll warning... was it you? So funny :) And so true. NightAngel 06:40, 8 December 2006 (CST)
 * Not me. It was Skuld. Sir On The Edge 08:46, 8 December 2006 (CST)

="builds made by me"=

How about a "builds I helped develop" or "builds I helped contribute" section instead? ;o) --JP 14:20, 9 December 2006 (CST)
 * If the merge is agreed apon I'll add a note next to the build. Sir On The Edge 14:35, 9 December 2006 (CST)

Barrage builds merger controversy
I've got an idea for how this may be resolved. In the next 1-2 weeks I plan to make a new "general" barrage build that includes many basic options/professions that incorporates all the barrage builds and put it up for voting but only to replace the existing barrage builds (minus team builds) vetted or otherwise. I won't do anything to your build submissions in the mean time and when I put it up, you let me know if it looks feasible. May take me some time with the holidays eating all my free time but I'll get to it eventually and I'll make sure to let you know here when I do.--  Vallen Frostweaver  10:39, 12 December 2006 (CST)
 * Ok,good luck. Sir On The Edge 11:31, 12 December 2006 (CST)
 * So it took longer than 1-2 weeks... >.> Anyway, I think I've finished and am curious for you to have a look here and let me know what you think.  I'm sure there are a few small things I may have missed but I wanted to keep it simple.  Part 1, pure ranger Barrager, then the rest are all other profession combinations with other skill selections.  A few noted builds that have become popular may have their own mini skill bar and description as well.  So, what's your opinion of it?  If you think it's ready then I'll post it up in the builds section.  Thanks.--[[Image:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG]]  Vallen Frostweaver  11:23, 27 February 2007 (CST)
 * It looks good, post it up and if anyone does find mistakes then they can change it themselves, or so the old rumour goes... Sir On The Edge 13:42, 28 February 2007 (CST)
 * Posted and slightly improved from the archived version you saw at . Thanks.--[[Image:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG]]  Vallen Frostweaver  08:18, 2 March 2007 (CST)

Skill order?
Why did you change the order of the skills on my R/A Bestial Strike‎ build? Also, could you let me know what you think of my Paragon demi-builds?&mdash; Azroth    20:37, 13 December 2006 (CST)
 * Because you would use the KD first to get FS to work. I dought your paragon builds would get vetted due to the low amount of points in sword mastery. Sir On The Edge 16:56, 14 December 2006 (CST)


 * Why does the Swordsmanship matter? All you need is enough to use your weapon, and then the "Go for the Eyes!" takes care of your Crits and constant burning adds good degen damage. With the bottom one of the two u can spam "GftE" on every other attack, which gives you huge energy regen and keeps the burning up at all times.  Plus the "They're on Fire!"  means that you'll only take half damage.  Also, the bottom one doesn't even use a sword attack skill.  I'll tinker with it though, maybe dump Tactics as I find I'm not using it much, and see where it goes from there.  As it stands I'm currently running the bottom one with an Axe instead and it works well.  Oh well, anyhow please don't mess with builds in my user space.  I love feedback on them but I'm kind of possessive and don't like people just changing them without telling me or posting some explanation.  Thanks for cleaning up the order though.  Just next time please add a little reason in the history or on the talk page. ty&mdash; [[Image:Azroth sig.png||builds]] Azroth  [[Image:Azroth sig2.png||talk]]  17:59, 14 December 2006 (CST)

Hmm
I am archiving it on the grounds that new assassin skills, such as feigned neutrality render use of warrior primary utterly useless?! &mdash; Skuld 11:13, 15 December 2006 (CST)
 * Then debate about it, If you are able to heal yourself mid-fight and stay in longer you are doing more dmg, please let this be a cumulative decision . Just Like the delete tag you added. Sir On The Edge 11:15, 15 December 2006 (CST)
 * hummm &mdash; Skuld 11:16, 15 December 2006 (CST)
 * Sory, I was not clear. What I meant was there should be a vote. Sir On The Edge 11:18, 15 December 2006 (CST)

Some info on your A/D build
Hey, I know this was a point of interest earlier on, and I'm not sure if it was ever clarified, so I'll post the info here and u can add it to the build notes if u want. I would post it on the builds talk page myself...but that page seems to be a death trap now a days (almost impossible to not get flamed after every post :P). As far as Assassin's Remedy and Wearying Strike go...at least 1 hit will have Weakness on it. The effects are applied in this order, assuming u get a critical hit on each attack (to maximize ARs effectiveness)... Just thought I'd let you know in case this question was never answered. I tested this for half an hour on the Isle of the Nameless so I'm sure this is correct. Good luck with your builds and happy Wintersday :)&mdash; Azroth    01:21, 25 December 2006 (CST)
 * 1) with AR active you use WS and get a critical hit, you do critical damage+skill damage, inflict a deep wound, trigger AR, then Weakness is applied (so the Weakness doesn't affect your first attack, but isn't removed by the first trigger of AR).
 * 2) with AR active you attack and get a critical hit, you do weakened damage, then AR triggers and removes the Weakness.

A Wintersday gift for you...
Happy Wintersday!

&mdash; Azroth    02:05, 25 December 2006 (CST)

Ranger builds
I noticed you edited the list of ranger builds to be a little more up to date on my talk page. Thanks.--  Vallen Frostweaver  07:28, 2 January 2007 (CST)
 * I left out ones in need of merging. Sir On The Edge 07:49, 2 January 2007 (CST)

Rt/A Flagrunner
Hi there, you recently voted on the build I posted, commenting on the running speed. I've actually been running for a long time, and have done a very thorough analysis of running speeds. Dash provides an 18.75% overall running boost, faster than most running skills. I have a guide on running that you can see if you wish, and have posted a rationale on the build talk page with some sample running times, but honeslty you don't need the fastest running speed to win flag running - you simply need enough speed to allow for some interference - you have a minimum of 2 minutes to run a flag, if they are overcapping you, and you have a run that is generally less than 40 seconds each direction. People ran for ages with skills like Armor of Mist, Storm Chaser, Windborne Speed, most of which are actually outperformed by Dash (Windborne can outperform Dash with an enchanting wrapping and enough in Air magic, but even at 16 Air with 20% enchanting the difference on a 40 second run each direction is about 3 seconds, and if you are losing 3 seconds a run on the enemy it won't really translate into any pressure - there are only time for ~ 10 runs each by VoD, and that 30 second difference is really much more influenced by body blocking, skill at delaying and so on. I'd appreciate you taking another look at it, as I've used this build successfully, and top guids run runners with less effective speed boosts than Dash all the time. --Epinephrine 21:38, 2 January 2007 (CST)
 * There is a big difference between a constant 33% boost and an, if you keep it up as much as you can, 18.75% boost (more than a third less). So say you do actually only gain 3 seconds per run, it could mean the difference between you taking the flag and the enemy getting a moral boost. With an inconsistent boost such as dash there is also more chance for warriors and the like to catch up with you and if they get to you then it is far more likely for the enemy to get the game changing moral boost. However, if there was some sort of shadow stepping ability in there it would make for a much faster and safer running build. Sir On The Edge 07:09, 3 January 2007 (CST)
 * It may sound like a big difference, but it isn't in practice. The only running skills that REALLY throw pressure on are those that allow massive boosts - like Shadow of Haste on a map like Druids.  In that situation, they can gain 40 seconds a run on you, meaning that they get extra manpower for substantial periods, and you always have a 2 minute run when facing them.  Getting a Morale boost isn't about running faster though - even if you had instantaneous travel - shadow stepping there and back while holding the flag, the enemy flagger STILL has 2 minutes to get from the stand to his flag spawn and back.  Provided your speed boost is enough to get you back and forth in 2 minutes, with enough of a margin for error that a simple body block doesn't mess it up, you have enough speed.  More speed is good, and can help shift pressure, give you extra  time for errors, but it isn't needed; heck, War Machine ran using Bull's Charge in a playoff game, they didn't seem to have much trouble, and it maxes out at 13%. Much of the job of running is spoting problems before they escalate, and calling for help when needed - the other side of it, getting a morale boost, is largely actually the work of the tactics caller and the ability of your team to slow and delay the other runner.  Yeah, 3 seconds a run may add up over time, but a good team compensates, and at the very worst, with them hanging around with a flag, ready to cap over you, you still have 2 minutes to get back and forth.  In my experience, extra speed can be nice, but the important bit is to have enough speed to leave room for a delay; you can quite easily run flags without any speed boost at all, it's just more vulnerable to interference and leaves less room for error.  Having a single player drop back a few seconds (say, meeting you at the gate for a flag relay) can save you the time to run it in (20 seconds for example) and catch you up the losses of 5 or more runs; this type of adaptation keeps pressure off.  A relayed flag is a better tool than investing strongly for a huge speed boost, as is throwing a gale on the enemy flag runner on his way out from the stand.  That's your 3 seconds right there, as is an Ice Spike or similar hex. --Epinephrine 09:24, 3 January 2007 (CST)
 * Fine. Sir On The Edge 14:34, 3 January 2007 (CST)

= Other talk =

Profession combo articles
This is a generic notice to the people who took a part in the discussion of the restructuring on the profession combination articles almost a year ago. There is currently a deletion proposal for all profession combination articles. The main discussion is at Category talk:Profession combinations. -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 13:53, 15 May 2007 (CDT)