Talk:Ursan Blessing

Ursan Blessing is "a Blessing for Anet" and Doesnt Need A Nerf
I dont understand the complaining that seems to be coming from the Hardcore Elitist PvE crowd and a few PvP people as far as I can tell, which is really confusing, about this PvE skill that is too powerful???

What I get when I read is many people are upset because they feel that Ursan Blessing provides too easy of a way for people to play the game. Well, guess what, if you look at what goes on in GW you will see that the vast majority of players are not hardcore. Do you see groups doing dungeons in GWEN NM or HM, very few except for the few farming teams you see doing the end game dungeons. Alot of people paying for dungeon runs is what you see. Why, because most GW players dont have 2+ hours to sit around trying to form a group that will successfully be able to beat a dungeon. Ever try a PUG only to fail half way through. Very frustrating, which is a big part of the reason that you dont see many PuGs in the harder areas of the game, or you see people forming Ursan Groups because they dont want to waste their time in a Fail Group.

Also, for those that think Ursan is too powerful or whatever, there is nothing forcing you to use Ursan. My guild does UW, FoW, DoA without Ursan because playing Ursan is pretty boring, and I like to play mesmer. Let me be the first to say though that I would never go into HM UW or HM FoW with a non Ursan PuG because they would fail and it would be a huge waste of time. at least 33% of the Ursan PuGs ive been with failed.

The people doing Ursan are not stopping anyone from forming other types of teams, I see people forming balanced non ursan teams all the time, feel free to join one.

Also Nerfing Ursan will not help the game in any way. What you will see is what there was before Ursan, and that is a bunch of farming teams. 2man, 5man, whatever. It was like pulling teeth to find a PuG to even do Forgemaster.

Ursan has been good because now at least you have 8man teams there doing the missions to do them. Not a bucn of hardcore gamers making money of of noobs charging for spider runs, or whatever. I would actually like to see Ursan buffed to the point where people could do GWEN dungeons with it. Then at least people would play instead of paying for a run. Its really hard to find a PuG dungeon, (and I really wish I could because my guild and alliance doesnt do GWEN dungeons), because of everyone just paying some stupid 2man or 3man team for a run. Also its something that any character can do. Before Ursan you had certain team configurations that were populare in some areas and if you didnt have an ele, necro, or whatever then you couldnt get in a group cause everyone was doing the same crap.

Another good thing about Ursan for Anet is that Ursan helps them succeed in their original goal of making a MMORPG that you wouldnt have to be hardcore to play. Nerfing Ursan would backfire on Anet because they would be saying if you want to play this game in its entirety you have to be a hardcore gamer, you have to be willing to sit for 4+hours to be able to play in the high end areas of the game and close the door on the vast majority of GW players. Not a good thing to do with GW2 around the corner if you plan on keeping your current GW audience. Also I think that most people that post about games on sites like this are at least a little hardcore, so keep in mind that the posts suggesting an Ursan nerf probably only represent a very small percentage of the entire GW gaming community and for every post suggesting a nerf there are probably 90+ casual gamers that would be against it. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Steeler Fan (contribs).


 * "Why, because most GW players dont have 2+ hours to sit around trying to form a group that will successfully be able to beat a dungeon. Ever try a PUG only to fail half way through."
 * Acutally, the problem is most of the people suck too much to form a decent group.


 * "Also, for those that think Ursan is too powerful or whatever, there is nothing forcing you to use Ursan."
 * Ofcourse, you're denying the fact there is no other option with this playerbase.


 * "Also Nerfing Ursan will not help the game in any way. What you will see is what there was before Ursan, and that is a bunch of farming teams. 2man, 5man, whatever. It was like pulling teeth to find a PuG to even do Forgemaster. "
 * And, ofcourse, people will learn to play the freaking game. Most people can only grind for Ursan, with Ursan. And roll Ursan. PvE might just be a challenge.


 * "I would actually like to see Ursan buffed to the point where people could do GWEN dungeons with it. "
 * That's already do-able.


 * "Another good thing about Ursan for Anet is that Ursan helps them succeed in their original goal of making a MMORPG that you wouldnt have to be hardcore to play."
 * You don't have to be hardcore. You need to know what is viable. A spammable 15 Energy skill on your Monk (Heal Party) isn't going to work without any Energy Management. Vampiric Gaze does not help in survivability. Healing Breeze is a filler if there are no other viable options. However, there are dozens of good options. Still, I see the three aforementioned fuckups happening.


 * "you have to be willing to sit for 4+hours to be able to play in the high end areas of the game and close the door on the vast majority of GW players."
 * They're Elite areas for a reason.


 * Ok, done. Have fun. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]]-- (s)talkpage  18:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * First, please sign your comments by typing ~ at the end of them.


 * The whole "if you don't like ursan, then don't use it" argument has been made many times, and refuted many times. One could just as well argue, if you didn't like the duping bug, you shouldn't have used it, but don't ruin it for the people who do.


 * As for places that are too hard, I've only done a couple of dungeons, but I'm more familiar with the campaigns. The complete list of non-elite cooperative missions in the campaigns (58 missions total) that might be impractical for some classes to beat with henchmen/heroes without using peculiar gear, a secondary profession, pve-only skills (excluding ones given inside the mission, such as Vial of Purified Water), or consumables:


 * 1. The Eternal Grove
 * (end of list)


 * One reason for the constant runs is that many players don't learn how to play the game, because with Ursan, they don't have to, and can win anyway. Nerfing Ursan would make PvE harder only in the sense that removing the duping bug made farming gold harder.


 * The other reason is that players get lazy and get runs for missions that they could do on their own just fine if so inclined. That's hardly a reason to make it easier still.


 * As for PUGs being bad, a PUG is really only as bad as whoever organizes it. Too often, no one organizes the group, which is how you get problems.  Most of the time, it's completely predictable before starting the mission how well the PUG will do.  (Hint:  something to the effect of "hurry up and start" means "I'm going to find a creative way to wipe your group.")


 * So what about the game being an MMORPG that you don't have to be hardcore to play? Well, that's certainly what Guild Wars was before ArenaNet started adding PvE-only skills.  It's still true to a considerable extent today.  If I had an empty character slot, I could probably create a new character and have that character beat nearly any (non-elite, cooperative) hard mode mission (possibly a slightly longer list than above, for lack of fully runed and equipped heroes) in the game with just henchmen/heroes in under 20 hours of play time.  It's very rare that an MMORPG would allow new characters to be ready for the top level content so quickly.


 * But adding the grind of pve-only skills moves the game away from that. Instead, it pushes it toward the "whoever is the highest level and has the best gear wins, even if completely incompetent" approach of so many other games.  More pointedly, the approach of so many other games that I don't want to play because I don't like that approach.  I don't want to have to schedule my life around a game to have a chance to do the hardest stuff in it.  Quizzical 18:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Personally I'ld love to see something along the lines of "While under the affect of Ursan Blessing you cannot be the target of heals". Would actually make things interesting and fall more into line of the Norn's self reliant life style/reluctance to receive help...That and it'ld be funny to give Ursan groups something to complain about other then a classes base AL :P Hopeless Situations 04:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You gotta add Gate of Madness to that list. It's at least as bad as the Grove. - [[Image:AdVictoriam1.PNG|19px]] Ad Victoriam  05:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hopeless has an interesting idea. You'd have to make it stronger than only affecting targetted heals, though, as Light of Deliverance, Divine Healing, Heal Area, Life, Song of Restoration, and quite a few other skills can heal without having to target a party member.


 * And no, Gate of Madness most emphatically does not belong on that list. As far as the hardest missions with henchmen/heroes in hard mode and no pve-only skills, I wouldn't put it in the top 10.  I've done it with just henchmen/heroes in hard mode several times.  I did use a lightbringer title (rank 4), and sometimes Lightbringer's Gaze, Sunspear Rebirth Signet, or the sunspear skill of my primary class, but no other title track skills, and could have gotten by without those.  In ten tries in easy mode (all henchmen/heroes) and ten more in hard mode (some of which had other players, but never ursans), I've never wiped there, though I have had a few close calls.  Quizzical 05:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You gain half as much health when healed. ــѕт.  мıкε  15:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

"While under the affect of Ursan Blessing you can no longer be the target of any friendly spells or recieve healing" Congrats you now do more dmg then any other class in the game oh btw don't get hit cause you can't get healed you're ursan afterall and last time I checked there were no Norn monks :P Hopeless Situations 17:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

"The whole "if you don't like ursan, then don't use it" argument has been made many times, and refuted many times. One could just as well argue, if you didn't like the duping bug, you shouldn't have used it, but don't ruin it for the people who do."


 * The whole "if you don't like ursan, then don't use it", still stands, vividly.
 * It's the players decision to play the game the way he/she wants.
 * That's fundamental and it is not arguable.


 * Once more the "The Ursan Blessing skill is similar to a bug" argument. Ok.
 * The "duping bug"...
 * was a bug,
 * it was removed as soon as it came into developers notice
 * people got banned for using it.
 * items/gold was removed from players inventories if those players profited from the bug
 * didn't get nerfed. It was removed from the game.
 * Anet was hugely nice to players that used that bug
 * If Ursan is a bug ...
 * we are playing 8+ months with a bug in the game.
 * it should be removed from the game.
 * players should get banned for using it.
 * we shouldn't be arguing with the term "overpowered" any more

"One reason for the constant runs is that many players don't learn how to play the game, because with Ursan, they don't have to, and can win anyway. Nerfing Ursan would make PvE harder only in the sense that removing the duping bug made farming gold harder. The other reason is that players get lazy and get runs for missions that they could do on their own just fine if so inclined. That's hardly a reason to make it easier still."


 * RUNS. For 2+ years, players of Guild Wars had a "few reasons" to use RUNS and they were doing so. Now with Ursan they have "few reasons plus Ursan", so it is Ursans fault that players were always using RUNS and they are still doing so.
 * LEARN HOW TO PLAY. For 2+ years players learned the game because there was no Ursan. Now with Ursan the former players stopped learning or forgot how to play the game and the new players (buyers) don't learn anything at all, even if they want, because Ursan doesn't let them learn. It pops up on players skill bars and takes over their game-play.
 * LAZY. For 2+ years, players of Guild Wars had a "few reasons" to be lazy and use RUNS and they were doing so. Now with Ursan they have "few reasons plus Ursan", so it is Ursans fault that players were always LAZY (not the guild) and used RUNS and they are still doing so.
 * Sorry but you can't blame Ursan if players don't know or don't want to know how to play the game, they are lazy and they use runs, and/or anything bad that existed before Ursan.
 * Just out of plain opposition to Ursan-wanna-Nerfers.
 * Ursan Blessing and all PvE skills are some of the best things ever introduced to GW and if they are bugs, please Anet make more bugs of that kind. We want PvE bugs. PvE bugs for ever. Thank you !!! Ne33us 19:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * So basically, the way to refute someone else's argument is to begin by ignoring it, make up some other ridiculous argument that you can refute instead, and proceed to refute that? Sorry, but that doesn't touch the original argument.


 * Let's go over this yet again. No one is arguing that the existence of Ursan Blessing is a bug.  If there had been someone arguing that, then sure, you'd have refuted it.  But congratulations, you just refuted an argument that no one was making because it was so ridiculous.


 * The line "if you don't like it, don't use it" is used to implicitly assert its converse: if players do like something, then they should be able to use it.  Lest you claim that I'm reading something into the argument that isn't there, you laid it out more explicitly:  "It's the players decision to play the game the way he/she wants.  That's fundamental and it is not arguable."


 * But that is an argument that if something is in the game once, and some players like to use it, then it should remain in the game forever. That is, that nothing, no matter how game-breaking, should ever be nerfed or even changed.  Taken to its logical conclusion, that would mean that outright bugs should be left in the game.  Indeed, taken to its logical conclusion, an absolute right to play however they want would allow vulgar and hateful harassment, attempts at hacking servers, and other things far more destructive than the duping bug.


 * But after stating your claim, you shy away from its immediate corollaries. You seem to make an exception for bugs, but implicitly argue that anything else should be forever immune to nerfs.  That is, if ArenaNet doesn't recognize how powerful a skill would be when they first put it in the game or buff a previously worthless skill, and thus make it incredibly overpowered, then they should never be allowed to undo their blunder.


 * And that would be astonishingly awful game design. With more than a thousand skills in the game, it is quite difficult and perhaps impossible to balance everything perfectly.  Play balance is not an issue of, if we do such and such, everything will be perfect.  Rather, it is an case of, if we do this, it will make things better.  Good play balance comes as a result of hundreds or thousands of little tweaks over time, not some ideas in one game designer's head before he sees how stuff will play out.


 * If you're honest here, it's not hard to see that ArenaNet blundered. Do you really think that they intended to make Ursan Blessing vastly stronger than Volfen Blessing?  Even if one believes that play balance is a bad thing and Ursan Blessing should be insanely overpowered, why should not Volfen Blessing be equally overpowered?


 * You're arguing that once a mistake is made, unless it is an outright bug, it ought never to be undone, even if it could be fixed quite easily. If nerfing a skill is never allowed, then lateral changes for which it is debateable whether the skill is stronger or weaker cannot be allowed, either, because some will see them as a nerf.  Even buffing a skill would not be allowed, as it makes the other skills relatively weaker by comparison.  In that case, on what basis are you arguing that it should ever be acceptable to tweak any skills at all, or introduce new ones?  If GWEN should never have existed (as the new skills did create new counters to old ones), then Ursan Blessing should not exist at all, and we wouldn't have a problem with it being overpowered.


 * If you're going to make an argument, don't shy away from its immediate corollaries. Quizzical 20:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * DAMN! If that was me that you just refuted, I'd be QQing in a corner right now :P Anyway, to contribute to the "conversation", farther up on this page lies proof that it is overpowered and requires no skill --Gimmethegepgun 20:45, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I spy slippery slopes. --Shadowcrest  20:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The argument that dont want to use it then dont its not as simple as it looks like to do, because I have cleared fow a few times with a pug(a organized pug) and no ursans, the problem now is that if you want to do some elite area, it will take a lot much more time to find a group without ursan because most people will think "there is only ursans here, better I run it too, otherwise I dont get a group" this thought has come to my mind too, and yes I tried ursan, after 30 minutes I was bored to death of spamming through 123, and also the elite areas are called elite for some reason, maybe because players need to be more organized and to have a better strategy, not just go mindless with a skill, another problem that ursan causes is that hard mode gets easier so people who did vanquish, hard mode missions etc without it and spent a lot of time planning and vanquishing or doing the missions, will feel frustrated because now its easier to do it and there is not the same prestige associated to it.
 * About runs, there were allways runs and there will allways be, I have paid for runs, I have done runs, why I paid? because I was being lazy, with time I could have done the way myself with heroes and henchies, and I dont consider myself a very experienced player.
 * Sorry if sometimes I move from one thing to another too fast but the ideas are too many and they may come a little mixed.
 * And btw ursan needs a big nerf.
 * [[Image:FlowSig.png|floWenoL]] (Talk to me)  22:54, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Big argument...
 * If "Ursan is similar to a bug" is used as an argument to make Ursan look bad then someone has to argue about that. Or should we ignore it and let it be told as if it's true ?
 * Bug is a part of a program code that has unexpected/undesirable/not designed effects to some aspect of the program. (ok that's not very accurate, but more or less it is)
 * Now, you want us to believe that Ursans attributes where mistaken/mistyped/error in the compilation maybe, that none saw for 8-10 months and if/when Anet saw it, they preffered to ignored the "Ursan bug" ( it is not a bug).
 * So please, if you agree that we should not argue about "Ursan is a bug" stop using it as an argument and we will have less to argue about. Is my request unreasonable ?
 * Unless you truly believe Ursan is a bug.

About "if you don't like it, don't use it".
 * Your point of view is that the skill has to be nerfed. My point of view is that "I really do not care because I do not use it unless someone ask me to, so, let it be". So there is no point in arguing about the meaning of the statement to that notional depth.

About "But that is an argument that if something is in the game once, and some players like to use it, then it should remain in the game forever.That is, that nothing, no matter how game-breaking, should ever be nerfed or even changed. Taken to its logical conclusion, that would mean that outright bugs should be left in the game. Indeed, taken to its logical conclusion, an absolute right to play however they want would allow vulgar and hateful harassment, attempts at hacking servers, and other things far more destructive than the duping bug."


 * This whole paragraph is provocative since I never said anything of that and didn't even implied anything of the kind. And I won't be driven into arguing about things that I haven't said or that are irrelevant.

About "But after stating your claim, you shy away from its immediate corollaries. You seem to make an exception for bugs, but implicitly argue that anything else should be forever immune to nerfs. That is, if ArenaNet doesn't recognize how powerful a skill would be when they first put it in the game or buff a previously worthless skill, and thus make it incredibly overpowered, then they should never be allowed to undo their blunder."


 * You are putting words in my mouth (or pen/keyboard) that I never used, again.
 * First of all, you introduced bugs and associated them with a skill, Ursan to this whole argument.
 * My opinion is that Ursan is NOT a bug so I can't (shouldn't) compare unevenly things. So bugs are out of the argument for me and should not be used as an argument.
 * On the other hand and unless you state differently you seem to believe that Ursan is a bug and so you make assumptions that resemble actions against a bug.
 * I never said that nothing should be nerfed either, I didn't even implied such a thing. If I did then it was wrong. I'm only arguing about Ursan not in general.

About "And that would be astonishingly awful game design. With more than a thousand skills in the game, it is quite difficult and perhaps impossible to balance everything perfectly. Play balance is not an issue of, if we do such and such, everything will be perfect. Rather, it is an case of, if we do this, it will make things better. Good play balance comes as a result of hundreds or thousands of little tweaks over time, not some ideas in one game designer's head before he sees how stuff will play out."


 * You haven't written anything that we don't already know. And none of that means that the Ursan needs nerfing.
 * My opinion is that a game can never be fully balanced. And that is because of the players characteristics (not abilities). I don't want to go into categorizing the players but it my belief that "Ursan-wanna-nerfers" aren't the "balanced" category (yeah I know you will flame me for that remark).
 * So at the present time (and for the past 8-10 months) it seems that Anet (for their own reasons) have decided to "balance" the game in a way that it favors players who want to play a "Very Easy" game.
 * As I have stated before, the personal game-play-experience is utmost important for me and therefore, I'm not saying that the current "balance" is good or bad in general, I say it is good for me, at the present time.
 * I also believe that this "balance" (or unbalance as you may say) of the game is good "in general" for new players and for players just waiting around for GW2.

About "If you're honest here, it's not hard to see that ArenaNet blundered. Do you really think that they intended to make Ursan Blessing vastly stronger than Volfen Blessing? Even if one believes that play balance is a bad thing and Ursan Blessing should be insanely overpowered, why should not Volfen Blessing be equally overpowered?"


 * I sure hope I'm honest. I'm honest enough to say that i don't care that people around finally finish mission they never could. I honest enough to say that I don't care that people achieve titles that they couldn't before, I honest enough to say that I don't care that people make gold easier that before. I'm honest enough to say that I don't mind that before ursan a lot more people asked me what to do with some missions and asked me to organize them. And so on. "In general" Ursan affected my game play VERY LITTLE to make it an issue.
 * In turn, let me ask you, if you are honest, what did YOU miss because of Ursan appearance ?.


 * Other that that, I definitely can't believe that they are blind (or that they missed the "Ursan bug", It's not a bug !!!)).
 * They must have their reasons to make such a decision and keep Ursan so overpowered, it is not a "oops I made a mistake". I suppose that you know that they can statistically know if something gets (exploited maybe) unbalanced. So they can miss almost nothing.

About "You're arguing that once a mistake is made, unless it is an outright bug, it ought never to be undone, even if it could be fixed quite easily. If nerfing a skill is never allowed, then lateral changes for which it is debateable whether the skill is stronger or weaker cannot be allowed, either, because some will see them as a nerf. Even buffing a skill would not be allowed, as it makes the other skills relatively weaker by comparison. In that case, on what basis are you arguing that it should ever be acceptable to tweak any skills at all, or introduce new ones? If GWEN should never have existed (as the new skills did create new counters to old ones), then Ursan Blessing should not exist at all, and we wouldn't have a problem with it being overpowered."


 * De javu, I read the same things a few paragraphs above, but....
 * No, I never said that Ursan is a "mistake", that is maybe your opinion but not mine.
 * Yes, bugs are bugs and must be eliminated whatever effect they have (ursan is not a bug).
 * No, I never said "mistakes must never be undone", you say that now.
 * No, I never said "nerfing is not allowed" that's not even what we are talking about. Irrelevant.
 * No, I never said "buffing is not allowed" tha's also not what we are talking about. Irrelevant.
 * How to tweak the game skills in general, is also not what we are talking about. Irrelevant.
 * Another paragraph that provides no arguments in favor of "Ursan statistics should be reduced because...".Ne33us 17:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * So basically, you've just disavowed your entire previous argument (that Ursan shouldn't be nerfed) to instead take the tack that you really, truly don't care a bit about Ursan.


 * What's really interesting is that you assert, "Ursan affected my game play VERY LITTLE". And this, of course, comes after you went to many mission talk pages to say that you used Ursan and it worked.  In fact, a quick search of all of the mission talk pages found that you've never specified that you used any non-Ursan build.  And this affected your gameplay "VERY LITTLE" (your caps, not mine)?  Liar.  Quizzical 18:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Cool it with the NPA and stuff guys. --Shadowcrest  18:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Well basically you constantly manipulate what is written, using pieces to make up new lines, but it's ok. If you follow my posts, you will see that in most cases I say Ursan shouldn't be nerfed because it doesn't hurt anyone IMO, because the player chooses to enjoy the game the way he/she wants (please don't start with the hacks/bugs/abuses again, we understood, you think Ursan is all that and more). You also do not mention that in many posts I DO agree that Ursan is overpowered, but just that. Eventually it may be nerfed but not for the reasons you give. About the missions I did using it, if you read carefully I write HOW I did the mission AND NOT how Ursan is absolutely necessary to do the mission. Did I ever write that? (If I did, burn me !!!) But no, that's not what you want to point out. You only want to let people think I did the missions only because of Ursan. Again you do not mention (maybe you forgot, it's ok) that when you argued about the way I did one mission I went back and did it multiple times to make sure it wasn't done just by pure luck. Which IMO is a sample of a player that "fights the missions" and not a "bliah Ursanway player" (no offense to anyone going Ursanway, it's your choice, I used the term just to emphasize the sentence). You even make it sound like those missions are extremely easy when done in HM using a single Ursan and some H/H. Are they ?. Finally I didn't ever tried to hide the way I did those missions, for as you have pointed out I have posted what worked for me. Not everyone (I hope) reads the posts the way you do. As for my general gameplay, I use the skills available in the game, as it was presented to me, when I choose and when I think it's useful. I didn't ever said that I'm not occasionally lazy enough that I want to enjoy the game the way I want and the way other think I should. Now let me get in your line of thinking and the way you choose to manipulate other peoples words. I'm doing this just to show (not that is needed) that everyone can more or less manipulate or drive into conclusions with ease. I'm not doing this to offend you or anyone else or use it as an argument to "defend" Ursan, in any case. So you pointed out that I used Ursan to do HM missions, so you smoothly lead people to think that I'm a lazy, with no skills, Ursanian (nice ?) who would never got past those missions without the Ursan. So in reverse, you and anyone else who did those missions without using Ursan you are the only "Hard working, Elite, hard core players" who deserve the recognition and the respect. Therefore it is in your interest to nerf Ursan so you can remain the Uber Elite players. There, pure manipulation, reading in between lines, driving into arbitrary conclusions.

Finally, if you are honest enough, tell us what really bugs YOU about Ursan that has made YOUR game experience so miserable that you so much want it to be nerfed, especially since you don't use it !!. Will you ? Please ! Ne33us 14:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ne33us, you can repeat all your opinions hundreds of times (like you're doing now), but it wont change anyones way of thinking. Ursan will be nerfed 7th of August (hey, loo kat the date...) according to Izz.
 * It needs to be nerfed cause it gives everyone without a single shred of experience the ability to do everything with the greatest of easy just by pressing 4 buttons: Ursan Blessing, Ursan Strike, Ursan Rage and Ursan Roar.
 * Make PvE a slight challenge, by nerfing Ursan. You can keep on saying "IF U DON LIEK URSAN DONT UES IT OLOL" but the point is, if you run anything else you'll get laughed at by everyone without a brain. And you'll be surprised how many people are absolutely braindead. Everyone with a brain is either not playing PvE or is running a normal build with either H/H or alliance/guild.
 * If you don't have a PvE Guild, and you absolutely hate Ursan (my case), there's no point in going to any elite area, cause all you'll ever see, is Ursan.
 * There you have it, the reason it ruins MY gaming experience. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]]-- (s)talkpage  15:24, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I've done a lot of non-Ursan PUGs for hard mode missions. Most players are willing to eschew Ursan if asked.  Some even seem eager to do so after linking Ursan as their build initially, as though the only reason they were going to go Ursan in the first place is because they think everyone expects them to.


 * But Ne33us, you're again blindly repeating talking points without addressing the counterarguments. So let me repeat one for you.  Suppose that ArenaNet put into the game an "iwin" feature.  That makes it so that if you're in any mission or explorable area, typing "iwin" in the chat instantly kills all of the mobs.  That would make it trivial to complete any hard mode mission or vanquish, among other things.


 * So, would you say, it should be left in the game, and if you don't like it, don't use it? After all, if you're going to argue that Ursan doesn't affect people who don't use it, then surely this "iwin" cheat code wouldn't affect people who don't use it.  And if it were put into the game intentionally, it wouldn't even be a bug.  The difference between that and Ursan in its present form is only one of degree, not of type.  Quizzical 15:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ohaider, the first time I posted at this argument was to say that "Ursan is not a bug" (or iwin cheat code or hack or anything similar). Since then the same argument is used over and over again. So why is it me the one that is repeating ? If I see something I don't believe it is right I have the right to post every time that wrong argument is used.
 * If ArenaNet decided to nerf Ursan or any skills, it is their choice.
 * In fact I'm waiting to read some of your arguments in that Ursan nerf update like, "Fixed the Ursan bug/iwin thanks to community pointing it out to us" or "fixed PvE balance that was abused by excessive Ursan usage. Btw the Destroyers celebrated the nerf" or "Increased numbers of lazy, braindead players were detected playing our game, because of Ursan. That's unacceptable, so we were forced to reduce it's effectiveness". Where there any other Nerf-Ursan-arguments I missed ? (just joking don't take these serious)
 * You say "It needs to be nerfed cause it gives everyone without a single shred of experience the ability to do everything with the greatest of easy just by pressing 4 buttons: Ursan Blessing, Ursan Strike, Ursan Rage and Ursan Roar." . So you don't like EVERYONE to be able do everything. Only a few people should be able to do so. Well put and very democratic. And to put it in another way, you don't want to see everyone happy, you want to see frustrated people failing over and over on missions. Nice.
 * You more or less say (ok, ok, I know you exaggerated) that people using Ursan are braindead, but, please read where Quizzical proves that players using Ursan are not braindead, they are reasonable (as expected) and they are not attached to Ursan. "Most players are willing to eschew Ursan if asked. Some even seem eager to do so after linking Ursan as their build initially, as though the only reason they were going to go Ursan in the first place is because they think everyone expects them to." Thank you very much. That's a step forward. And please, be there, and give all those willing people a chance to play the game the non-Ursan way.
 * You say " If you don't have a PvE Guild, and you absolutely hate Ursan (my case), there's no point in going to any elite area, cause all you'll ever see, is Ursan.". Not totally but currently true. Yet again, Quizzical has saved the day with his entry statement. Given a good worthy alternative they might want to play a very nice non-Ursan build. Just ask them.
 * Quizzical, nice entry statement, thank you, so finally you agree that people given the right choice will dump Ursan no matter how powerful it is.
 * You said the same thing as Ohaider about repeating, read above. I didn't start this did I ? I only replied.
 * Oh, please, not the "iwin/bug/hack" thing again ? Is that really your primary argument ? Please, if you want me to repeat something please make me at least repeat about "PvE balancing". Oh no, you already said that given the choice players will dump Ursan. So make me repeat about "lazy people, runs, players with no skills", oh no, your words again, give the players a good alternative (open their eyes) and they will play it, not all players are so mindless after all. Ok, I agree, some people given a choice to be lazy they will prefer to go lazy. But I believe most people don't do that.
 * I won't argue the "iwin" thing again, it's pointless. Like adding oranges with potatoes and trying to fit a USB connector into an Ethernet port (shh, don't tell anyone, it fits but it might ruin the PC).
 * Oh, I asked politely for an answer using the magic word "please" but it seems that you chose either not to be honest or not to be polite :). Please prove me wrong for both.
 * (monolog) A few minute ago there was a discussion on our alliance chat about Ursan nerfing. At the time I was helping an alliance member with a quest with my assasin without ursan. After finishing the quest he asked me about the discussion about nerfing Ursan. And then he asked me "I got Ursan and I'm not using it. Does that make me stupid ?" I answered him "I suppose you haven't used it enough to like it yet" and he replied "I'm satisfied with my current build, but maybe I will try it". So there I had first hand proof that there are people out there that choose to play the way they want and that's more that enough for me. (And I'm not making this up.)
 * I want to believe I'm reasonable and more or less I admit it when I'm wrong. Throughout this discussion I didn't read one solid/truthful reason/argument to convince me that Ursan must be nerfed. The only true reason that I can not dispute with is the fact that the skill is obviously overpowered in comparison with other skills. Every other invented/produced reason/argument to nerf Ursan is not valid and not needed IMHO. I participated in all this argument hoping to reason with you people but alas.
 * Finally if/when Ursan gets Nerfed (the ugly way), I'm glad that you people finally will get what you wanted. After all it's just a game. Ne33us 22:09, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * So many words. Taking a more neutral look at ursan, it's very painfully obvious that ArenaNet still have a lot of work to do with balancing the game. Not just Ursan, but the game overall. Everyone is arguing that ursan makes the game too easy or that places are too hard without ursan e.t.c. Some people like to play casually, and pick up a bit here and there and various other reasons too lengthy to even bother with listing. At any rate, the game is somewhat back to where it was before the worlds most contraversial skill was introduced (give or take a few consumable items). But this still probably won't be enough to appease the elite camp who won't be happy until the only skills available to them are quick shot and flare. In the other camp, there's going to be an abundance of 'lazy' people who generally don't want to spend 5+ hours in a single area solid just to complete something (mainly talking high-level areas in this case) which is a ridiculous amount of playtime even for advanced players. So regardless what your stance is on Ursan, there's still going to be a reasonable split which divides players which to me indicates that ArenaNET CAREFULLY need to observe PvE games like they do with PvP to understand PvE balance a bit better to get things just right. Afterall, with regards to elite areas it is very little fun if you can only complete an area with one or two tried and tested methods, ursan included. But it would pretty much suck for people to go back to things like DoA balanced or Steel Wall e.t.c. as it shuts out a vast group of players, achieve the same results as an old ursan group and eat up more time than is necessary. Overall, while I am not too concerned with how ursan blessing goes (too powerful, too weak, whatever) I *AM* concerned with the overall balance for the game which I feel needs to be addressed much more carefully. Roll on the protective spirit nerf I say! (Yu Takami / talk) 17:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * "I suppose you haven't used it enough to like it yet". So uhh... does that mean that if we used nothing but Wastrel's Collapse builds for a year or so we'll end up liking it? Anyway, this conersation is getting way to enflamed, too much trolling, and far too long. End it. --Gimmethegepgun 18:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

(first of all i dont use ursan all the time and im not against it,i use a lot of other builds)

ANET was right to do something about ursan but what they did now is exaggerated. look what happened:

1. go to olafstead, there is nobody, i think those players didnt play anymore since the nerf. they wanted to achieve the norn title to be accepted in the r10 teams. but that doesnt matter anymore.

2. i havent been in the elite areas yet, but i suppose there are less players then before the nerf bcs they dont want to play 7 hours to finish those areas. a lot of players arent allowed to play that long.

3. players who had just achieved the norn title looked forward to do there first elite in a r10 team are now really dissepointed i think.

Players who wanted the ursan skill to be nerfed are you glad now?

why ursan should be rebalanced:

1. nobody asked the opinion of the ursan users

2. i think only 10% of the gw players complained about ursan and they were the only one who put reactions on wiki

3. what does it matter if people use ursans, does it hurts any body else, i dont think so

4. the discrimination: all the people that were complaining about not being accepted in a ursan team due to their rank, i think when they achieved rank 10 they will also discriminate the lower rank players so i dont think the had to complain about that.

5. people get lazy by using ursan, so what if they dont want to learn something else thats their problem everybody plays the came like he/she wants

6. ursan gets nerfed, then nerf other things too like the solo builds or the running builds, etc.

if you have other reasons add them pls.

I think ANET organise a poll where every player is obliged to participate, so ANET can find a solution to solve the problem. --80.201.99.86 22:17, 15 August 2008 (UTC)Haldir Murkwood

lolarchive this
nao. XD ــѕт.  мıкε  23:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Early archive?
The archive moved out two sections that had comments within the last three days. Quizzical 23:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Heh, we're all really arguing over nothing here, anyway. XD If Ursan is nerfed, I don't care, if it isn't, I still don't really care. XD ــѕт.  мıкε  23:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Let's face it Anet doesn't know how to balance they know how to take a big bat hit something with it repeatedly until it's unrecognizable or make something 50x better then it was just to you guessed it hit it with the bat a few times. If Ursans ever do get a nerf I just hope it'll be with the bat and not one of their first actual tweaks :P Hopeless Situations 04:07, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, they're trying very hard to find a workable nerf. Or they're just lazy. Almost a month with no update of any kind means one or the other.[[Image:Entrea Sumatae.png|Entrea Sumatae]] Entrea    [Talk]  05:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The problem is that they're waiting to nerf ursan until they have a lot of other skill tweaks ready. If Ursan gets a suitably heavy nerf, that will probably do far more to promote PvE play balance than all the other tweaks they do added together.  Quizzical 05:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Correct me if I am wrong but they used to do updates every week, why now they only update once in a month? :S its weird. [[Image:FlowSig.png|floWenoL]] (Talk to me)  11:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * GW2 --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]]-- (s)talkpage  11:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * At quizzical- sorry, I wasn't paying attention, though at a closer look the two didn't look like they would continue. You're welcome to move the topics out of the archive if you (or anyone else) is still using them. --Shadowcrest  16:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

To Entrea. There are other possibilities that they may not nerf Ursan, including, they don't want to. And yes they are lazy enough to nerf SF the way they did. Ne33us 17:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I Want Ursan To Be Nerfed, it ruined my game-play because....
This paragraph is simple. If someone is unpleased from the existence of Ursan the way it is implemented in the game until now, please state the reasons it affected his/her personal game play. Please don't start adding general stuff like "Ursan is a bug" or "Ursan unbalances the game" or "I care about the game, not me" we heard all about that, at the other paragraphs. In this paragraph we want to know how it affected you personally while playing the game.
 * Examples.
 * "Because of Ursan I can no longer find a party to join."
 * "Because of Ursan I make less money"
 * "Because I use Ursan I find the game less challenging"
 * "Because every party i join uses Ursan I find the game less challenging"

Be creative, enjoy the paragraph and to spice it up, post if you dare.Ne33us 17:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Because of Ursan, I cry myself to sleep at night. lol Seriously, though, Ursan doesn't really affect those that don't use it. Sure, it may be harder to get into a group for a certain area, but that's what Guilds are for, and I don't think it impacted the economy as much as Shadow Form did. Ursan is only effective when you have a bunch of them, and drops will be split, anyhow. ــѕт.  мıкε  18:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Because of Ursan my Wammo can no longer get parties in the Domain of Anguish. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 06:56, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Because of Ursan, I can play Guild Wars when I'm not in the mood to concentrate. This prevents me from doing constructive things like writing my paper. GG Anet! [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 07:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Felix, we don't want Ursan lovers here :P. Unless you wrote that in an ironic tone, which in that case makes it OK. :) Ne33us 14:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think he meant it ironic/sarcasic. And I want ursan to be nerfed cause i finally found use for my Assa again (UW Chaos Planes Farmer, 4-6 ectos per hour), and I want ursan to ben nerfed so ecto prices are gonna go up again, and i'll be making more cash then my brother, who just farms FoW the ursanway. Still with me? Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 19:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You want it nerfed because you found a new toy to play with ? lol, Nice.
 * Unless you are also ironic/sarcastic, SF runs to "ectoland" (chaos plains) have been abused for quite some time now. I guess there is a similar "nerf SF more" discussion somewhere out there :) Ne33us 22:20, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Because of Ursan, whenever I reach a mission outpost my message box gets bombarded by "R10 Ursan LF more" also partly my fault as I forget to untick the box. --BeeD 00:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Nerfed!! :D
Nerfed! High fives all around. -Grim Lich
 * I didnt even get to rank 10 :P. ko, but theres gonna be a LOT of angry ursans gunning for Izzy :P  }{ Ipo™ }{  23:58, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * They did? I think they forgot.  They changed it, but it's not much of a nerf.  Giving it more armor would be quite an odd nerf.  So would more health.  Making half of ursan strike armor-respecting isn't much of a change.  A 60 second time limit is pretty inconsequential considering that few battles last that long.  It looks like the main "nerf" consists of losing stances when you enter the skill.  Quizzical 00:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I didnt ursan much pre-update, but im sure your attributes were left alone. This strikes out the advantage Para's/Necro's/Ele's had with energy on shout/soul reaping/higher energy. Yes, most battles dont go over 60 secs, but how about moving from mob 2 mob? That would screw up ursans.  }{ Ipo™ }{  00:17, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * So it removes the advantage some classes had of more energy by making it so that energy doesn't matter at all? And that's supposed to be a nerf?  Quizzical 00:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Having a disagreement across 2 articles on the same subject is something new to me. But as i said on the update page, this is their "suitable" replacement, and I do agree that it wasnt much of a nerf, but its getting there in my eyes.  }{ Ipo™ }{  00:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It doesn't add more health and armor.... you armor is set too 100 and you get 800 health... and moving from mob to mob would be a pain!
 * Thought that would be the case, no point in removing helpful attributes (soul reaping/energy storage) yet allow paras and wars to keep their 80 armor + the 100 ursan armor.  }{ Ipo™ }{  01:08, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * In that sense the skill is certainly better balanced--BeeD 01:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * sure is, might actually see the good old 5 man fow/uw groups and whatever non-ursan groups for DoA :P.  }{ Ipo™ }{  01:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, at least it is a buff to certain caster type Ursan (like mes or rit), monks don't have to whine about these caster type ursans' poor armour anymore. 122.57.108.149 10:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * BTW, if atts are set to 0, does that mean for warriors, their shields now only give +8 armour? 122.57.108.149 10:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Just did a test at Isle of Nameless myself, sheilds don't even give +8 armour, so it is pointless to bring shields for ursans...122.57.108.149 10:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

What I love is how people scream omg ursans have been nerffed when in reality they made Ursan an actual skill not a "I Win Button" base 100 armor base 800 health, a skill that does 75 armor ignoring damage as well a physical component, an AoE KD that also causes dmg, a +dmg shout, perma 33% move speed skill..yeah for an elite that's so gimp..it actually compliments a build and isn't a build of itself anet suxorz with this one D:

Forgot to sign..again Hopeless Situations 02:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Wow, they really did remove any armor bonus that war war/para could have to make this "balanced".  }{ Ipo™ }{  10:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm happy they nerfed the win button finally--LaDoncella 13:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeh, they actually have to put a bit more thought into ursanway. Hopefully, as said above, we will see an increase in 5 man uw/fow and whatever was regular for doa pre-ursan.  }{ Ipo™ }{  13:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I really don't understand the nerf.it's not a big one but it doesn''t make sense and it wouldn't make sense even if it was a huge nerf.Ursan was a bit overpowered,, yeah of course but it was great for people who don't want to spend 4 hours doing an area in DoA.I mean I do have a life, I do like to play guild wars so putting the two together before ursan was really a tough job. And if I want to gain skill I would just go to RA or HA for a challenge.And besides if you say ursan is overpowered I bleieve it was just making things even in Pve cuz if you check things out, all pve mobs in HM have damage overpower that if you go with normal builds you are wiped easily.So i think that there was no reason to nerf this "skill".If you want to gain gamer skills go PvP not Pve honestly. Bleh Whatever.Guess I'll just go to pvp to be flamed by uber leets in RA -_-  -  Devill


 * I dont think this as a nerf but more as a balancing, removes the profession specific bonuses, and reduces its damage output a little, also it has a 60sec recharge so if im not wrong between each ursan use u have to wait 60secs of non ursan I think it will force the groups to consider to be less mindless button spammers, and to bring something that can really be used when not in ursan, but I am already thinking of some ways to use it faster, of course I will not say them, but someone else will think of it, someone allways thinks lets just hope people consider some alternatives to this now :) [[Image:FlowSig.png|floWenoL]] (Talk to me)  15:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It doesn't seem like much of a nerf to me. It actually seems to further fool-proof the skill.......... since this skill is predominantly used by those players who can't achieve thier in-game goals without it I think that this "nerf" is actually going to show itself to be a buff in diguise. I stopped playing GW just after Ursan took hold, there was no incentive to play because Ursan devalues the titles and economy to the point that they are without value, and intelligent players that preferred skill over Ursan has basically been forced out of the game, so the community is basically, pretty much QQ-Land now. I have been watching to see what A-net would do with Ursan. I have already quit the game and decided for certain that GW2 can take a long leap off a short pier. I was very interested to see if Ursan would ever be dealt with by A-net, this "nerf" is proof that they feel Ursan belongs........ Really is too bad, Guild Wars was awesome untill they decided to gear it towards 8-10 year old skill levels..... I guess in truth I feel like nothing A-net could have done at this point would have been anything more than too little too late and another slap in the face. 10 Months ago this might have at least made sense, but now, the fact that I care so little combined with the incredible amusement I feel......... and all I really see is an Eptitaph...... I will personally never buy another A-net / NCSoft product again. Bad desicions and poor treatment of thier customers make even good games suck.......Come On D3! 68.230.155.31 16:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Mmmm, while this hits W and P the most, it hurts E and N too (due to the energy bonuses they once had, and the armor bonus E's used to have). For me (Mo), this is a very welcome buff.  Now people might actually take me as an Ursan on UW speed runs, yay!  GJ Anet, for once I agree with your skill balances. --GW-Seventh 09:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but since you're a monk, they probably still won't take you, since they'd want you to heal them. Its part of the reason people don't like offensive smiting monks (i.e. bane sig, banish etc), people don't like damage dealing monks since they heal so well.  Arcdash 01:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * But if you already have the monks sorted, then you will take anythng else :P.  }{ Ipo™ }{  01:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

My prayers have been heared...I like the "balanced" fact that armor is set to 100, health to 800 and attributes to 0 basically making anything you wear useless. Also, the max of 60s gives this skill only a 50% up-time and thus will ursan groups be slowed down to like 60% of their previous run times. Ultimately the good old builds will become faster as they should be. This is not much of a nerf, but at least ursans aren't nescessary to do anything at all...62.194.247.7 00:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * When were Ursans needed to do anything in PvE at all? You mean people failed so hard that not even an Imbagon reducing 82% of the damage was enough?--Alf&#39;s Hitman 22:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

well, IMO, tis about fucking time. now we can actually play the game without being mindless noobs with a skill that requires no thought or skill. personally i think its better for the game so now we can focus on the innovative posiblities. no more HB HP only monking for me ^^ Pendulous Assassin 23:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

removes all effects
does it remove also environmental effects, rituals and consumable effects? --Dasen 19:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Rituals are AoE, if you're in them they'll be on you. It doesn't remove consumable I believe --Gimmethegepgun 19:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Only removes skill effects (stances,enchants etc) so cons, rituals and enviromental effects are safe :P.  }{ Ipo™ }{  19:34, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmm.... OK....
Here's my problem, and it isn't specific to Ursan. Lots of people in PVE seem to have this weird desire to make everything exactly like Dungeons and Dragons 2nd edition. For example: Monks in D&D can heal, raise people from the dead, and cause a lot of damage to the undead. That's pretty much it. Look what happened when some geniuses (and NASA should have recruited these guys) figured out how to create invinci-monks. If I'd been standing behind some of the "elite" players of GW, I'd have had enough bricks to build a house. They freaked! That's not D&D!

Rangers: let's be honest, Tolkien came up with Rangers. How often did Aragorn use a bow??? Hmmm... not much. However, you won't see a ranger in D&D without one, so all your skills in GW are aligned toward using a bow. Let's ignore that bit about Aragorn using a sword and wearing heavy armor in the last book!

Eles, Mez, and Necros, oh my! Let's restrict them to the point that they can only be a stereotypical wizard from D&D.

Paragons - yup. Paladins.

Assassins - We'll call thieves assassins, since the game isn't set up to allow stealing. After all, thieves in D&D have backstab! That's an Assassin kinda thang!

Dervish - I'll give you all that one... oh, wait, dual class Warrior-Monk. Nevermind.

Ritualist - See Eles, Mez, and Necros above.

Warrior - And there's the problem... People seem to have this idea that only warriors should be able to go toe to toe with the bad guys. That's what drives me crazy... it's like if you're not playing a Warrior (or to a lesser degree Paragon, Ranger, or Dervish), then you're a support character. Don't deny it... try playing a Smiter monk sometime without any healing skills. You'll never hear a bigger bunch of babies in your life if you join a PUG.

Go back and look at the various things that get nerfed... it is anything that challenges this D&D mindset. Look at how many people were calling for Ursan to be nerfed. Oh no, Mr Bill! It makes it so the support classes actually have a chance to kill something without a big bad tank to help them. InvinciMonk... aw hell no. We can't have that.

That's my point... If I want to play a Mez, I should have a reasonable chance to make it through the game using only hench and heroes, and NEVER have to interact with another human being. I shouldn't be forced to wait around until a Tank decides he'll join a PUG to do a mission. 74.140.151.79 01:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)Larry
 * I don't understand how this is even relevant to Ursan.. --Shadowcrest  01:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I almost never 'had' to get a pug with my mesmer, except for hardmode. Most of the time if i do it with people then I'm helping guildies or im too lazy to do it myself.  (few hard missions excepted from this)--Bastthegatekeeper 02:05, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Because, Ursan allowed (and still does to some degree) a non-warrior class to fight just as effectively as a warrior - and they could actually keep the skill up longer than a warrior due to a higher base energy. The reason I think a lot of people were screaming that Ursan should be nerfed was because it upset their idea of how a fantasy world should work. I'm not saying everyone is guilty of this, but a lot of people (and many of them hardcore tanks) seem stuck in this rut. Heck, just look at the character models if you want proof of how biased GW is in that direction. For example, it is impossible to play a warrior who is not built like Arnold Schwartenegger. It is also impossible in Prophecies to create a male ranger with short hair (at least it was back in February). My only real point is that if I want to play a necro with a sword who uses Ursan, whose Christmas am I @#$%ing up??? It just seems like every time someone makes a creative build (and yes, I know Ursan isn't a build... I'm talking Invincimonk here) that threatens these preconceived notions, you see people hit the roof! People who do a lot of PVP aren't so bad about this... anyone who thinks a monk is ONLY a healer and can't be a threat deserves what they get... but this bias is VERY strong in PVE. And that's why I think they nerfed Ursan the way they did... so nobody got an advantage on the Warriors when it came to close quarters combat. 74.140.151.79 04:03, 15 August 2008 (UTC)Larry
 * Well I think you have it about right with the D&D look at GW. I would say you have a few classes slightly off.


 * Paragon would be bard. They get some interesting fighter abilities and their songs(shouts)
 * Dervish would be Paladin, mixture of a Warrior and a Monk


 * I wish that things could change, my hero monk mostly uses a smiting setup with Smiter's Boon.[]. I haven't used Ursan in a long time, and I will not use it now. My problem is all the other jerks that wanted to dictate how others played the game. That is what is ruining the game. These elitist that run around "If you use Ursan you are a noob" " If you use X you are a noob" next it will be "If you use anything but my build you are a noob". FFS why can't people just enjoy the game and let others enjoy the game the way they want. If it isn't an exploit of some sort, just don't group with them. Tenetke 04:44, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, you're probably right on the Derv and Paragon... I like the Dervish class well enough, but I've never played a Paragon since they are a bit too stereotypically racist for my taste (Come on... an African Spearchucker... did they consult with Bill O'Rielly on that one? Give me a refill on my Iced Tea, MF-er!). 74.140.151.79 05:05, 15 August 2008 (UTC)Larry

Armor boosts
Does the armor Boost from something like Save Yourselves! still increase armor, or is the 100 armor flat (like the energy degen can't be affected)?70.110.115.23 19:44, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Very good question.[[Image:Entrea Sumatae.png|Entrea Sumatae]] Entrea   [Talk]  20:25, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * and I don't know the answer... can anyone check? Aaaand I still think it'd be usefull to know.   141.152.217.227 20:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Your Base-AL is set to 100. Thus, armor boosts still apply. I have pics to prove, if needed. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]]-- (s)talkpage  20:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

W00t 4 neuf
Gj anet, I'm sick of Every freekin body running ursan all over the place Random Time  10:06, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You made a mistake when trying to understand a lot of people playing Guild Wars.
 * They still are -->Suicidal Tendencie 10:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Meh - then it needs moar neuf Random <font color="Black">Time  10:15, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Won't happen, it'd make sure they'd never sell another GW:EN, if they can shift a few more to people behind the times, they'll keep that option open. -->Suicidal Tendencie 10:16, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Historic notes

 * This skill was drastically changed in the Aug 7th, 2008, Update. The main change was to its duration: before the update, the skill imposed -2 energy degeneration and ended when the player's energy dropped to 0, which meant that with energy management, it could be kept up indefinitely. As a result, the skill's use in locations like the Fissure of Woe has dropped considerably.

Looking at the history of this article, the following was said: Who is this "we" that Silver is talking about, seeing the article has been up 2 days without objections? I don't see a post of Silver's on the talkpage I cited (but I do see two editors posting in favor of historical information). GW:AR doesn't say that we don't keep historical info, it just says we treat it differently from current info. Reading the talk for GW:AR, you see the following points infavor of keeping a summary: My rationale for putting in a historical note is that much of the talk and discussion you can read about Ursan Blessing on this Wiki and elsewhere pertains to the old version and was partially invalidated by the change. (Just look at the "thank you" storm on GWW). If a user new to the game looks the skill up and sees its current form, he/she might not know what justifies it. That is why I posted a short summary to what the skill used to be like before the change.
 * 10:23, 16 August 2008 M.mendel (→Historic note: (new section) see GuildWiki_talk:Suggestions/skills_history)
 * 07:28, 18 August 2008 Silver Sunlight (we do not keep notes on all the old versions of skills, this one should be no different. we document the game as it is currently)
 * Lord Biro: In honesty I am not in favour of keeping historical information in articles.
 * Lord Biro: Personally I feel a fair compromise would be to say that we keep a summary and point the users to the history of the article.
 * Tanaric: I still think the best solution would involve replacing the article with what the concept used to mean, and removing details that are no longer relevant from a utility perspective.

You may reword the summary. Maybe the change wasn't "drastic", but merely "major". Maybe you'd want to link to the actual old version. That is all fine, but please do not remove this information altogether without discussion and a patronizing "we" that isn't warranted. (I'll excuse the "we" if you are a nurse). --◄mendel► 09:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd guess that Silver just didn't look at the article history, thus never saw your summary or the link to the Suggestions article, so he either doesn't know that Suggestion exists or he doesn't think of it as being accepted yet. But he is correct in that we do not traditionally note historical skill changes, regardless of what GW:AR says.  (Remember that policy is supposed to be an embodiment of wiki traditions/practices, and while it should be kept up-to-date and comprehensive, it often isn't.)  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 13:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, traditions develop. The discussion on GW:AR was really instructive (although I must be missing a big part of what was going on, some "see also" links would have helped), but as it seems it's been a point of contention even then, with one site proposing to keep everything available for posterity as it was, and the other demanding deletion of outdated articles. I think doing a small summary on each page doesn't hurt at all, it is easy to skip for those who don't want to know that kind of stuff, and people who would like to know get a pointer that the history of this skill has possibly interesting details.
 * In fact, I've done this coming the other way for candysmith, because tradionally for special events everything was kept. I figured it made no sense to have big lists of what each Candysmith sold back in 2005 when common sense tells you that sythes and daggers weren't likely to be useful, Factions not being out at the time. So I cut a lot of this historic information and condensed it down into a "historic notes" summary.
 * On Ursan, it's the other way around, adding a little bit of history where previously there was none. If you look back on the old discussion, the main thought that got the tradition of not keeping historical info started was that it'd be hard to verify historic information that is being added now. Today, the situation is different: any useful "historic note" summary can be verified by looking at the article history. The change that this particluar note describes is not yet historic, but quite current, but will become historic with time. --◄mendel► 18:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply. Yes, I did not look at the article history before removing the note. I just found it rather strange to see notes about the old version of this skill, since we do not document this on other "changed" skills on the wiki. That's why I didn't really try and see if there was any history behind the entire note being added. I don't mind having it there, but why should this skill be singled out? The change wasn't that drastic to it anyway, its functionality is still more or less the same. Also, there might be a lot of conversation over this skill on the talk pages, but what happens on talk pages is not really important to the article itself. The "we" I spoke of in the summary was just my way of saying the general consensus on the wiki, or at least the way I perceived it. <font face = "Matura MT Script Capitals">Silver Sunlight [[Image:SSunlight.jpg|19px]] 21:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, I'd expect that someone who leaves their revert explanations in the summary instead of the talkpage actually reads the other summaries - I guess that was wrong. :)
 * This skill hasn't been "singled out", as I explained above I've been slowly starting on historical notes. I'm sure Unyielding Aura would be another good candidate because it seems the update opened up an entirely new use for that skill.
 * I believe topics that raise much conversation in the community are important for the wiki - we document gaming terms and slang, and if someone actually reads the talkpage half a year from now, they're going to wonder what the fuss was about, and be disappointed that the page documenting the skill doesn't offer anything in the way of an explanation. (If the functionality is still "basically the same", what is all teh fuss about, then?) --◄mendel► 22:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Since you wrote "I don't mind having it there", I'm going to add the note back tomorrow, and tone down the qualifier for the change to say it is "important". I hope that's ok. --◄mendel► 01:24, 20 August 2008 (UTC)