User talk:Emilesin

Urgoz SC build
Heya, I reverted your recent edits because category pages are not meant to be edited. As you were creating a build there I moved your created content into a user subpage, User:Emilesin/Urgoz SC. You can create a team build page in the build namespace for this build when you've finished filling it with content and polishing it. To create the build page it's easiest to type the desired page name into the search function, click the red link and then create the page when prompted to. A possible name would be Build:Team - Urgoz's Warren Manly Spike (pick anything that fits, that's just a quick suggestion). Keep in mind that the rating tag has to stay in a comment outside of the build namespace and new builds have to be released in the testing category until they've received enough votes to decide on a rating tag. If there are any questions, feel free to ask. --Krschkr (talk) 17:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Your edit to Category:Untested testing SC builds has been undone for the same reason. Please follow above instructions to submit the content as an actual build page. --Krschkr (talk) 19:30, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi,
 * I have tried to do so. But I can't find any other way to get a page where I can build up that post. Also, i have no idea how to move it after to the right category. Al these links on the main page are a link to a link to a link, and nothing I can click on so that a page to write on appear.--Emilesin (talk) 20:16, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

(reset indent) Its all messed-up now, no idea how to fix that.--Emilesin (talk) 20:40, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm quick-fixing some things for you. Please note that you are NOT allowed to edit CATEGORY pages. If you need help on how to create a new build page, ask for help first. Your Urgoz SC build can be found at User:Emilesin/Urgoz SC, and I've moved your Deep SC build to User:Emilesin/Deep SC. If you go to User:Emilesin, notice how that page name starts with "User:"? That means it's a user page. User:Emilesin is your user page. When you are on that page, look in the URL bar of your browser window (the place where you can type in and see web page addresses), and you will notice that it says "User:Emilesin" towards the end of the address. If you click here and manually re-write the address to "User:Emilesin/Sandbox", then press Enter, you will end up on a separate sub-page that is still part of your user page. You are free to edit ANYTHING that is part of the "User:Emilesin/..." space because it is part of your user page. However, when you tried moving your build from the category page, you accidentally moved them to "User:DeepSC" instead. That is a different user page entirely, so it's not the right location for it. That's why Krschkr and I moved them for you, so they are part of YOUR user page. If you wish to save quick links to these pages, you are free to edit your "User:Emilesin" page with links to these two sub-pages (and any others you create in the future). The sub-pages in your user space are perfect for "building up the posts" as you said. You don't have to worry about categories or using the vetting templates while they are in your user space, and you can ask for further help when you feel they are ready to be tested. When that happens, the pages have to be moved (for example, by manually rewriting the web address again and copying the builds there) to the "Build:..." space instead of the "User:..." space. I hope this explanation helped you understand how the different page types work and how to create pages - feel free to ask here if you have more questions! Sacropedia (talk) 21:14, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Also please note that you have an extra copy of your build located at User:Emilesin/DeepSC.. Notice the lack of a space in "DeepSC" and the extra dot at the end compared to the page I made for you. You can choose which one you prefer to keep. Sacropedia (talk) 21:34, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I totaly don't see how i can change the name of the teambuild. iI gave it quick a name, but i want to change it in to "The Deep Small Team way". Or how i can move it to the Category:Untested testing SC builds, so people can actualy see my post.--Emilesin (talk) 22:14, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The New User Guide will probably be of help. It has a section specifically on creating a new build, but the other sections are also a good idea to look over if you're unsure of something. -Toraen (talk) 22:24, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * @Emilesin, follow this link: Build:Team - The Deep 5 Man Manly Spike and copy-paste your build's code onto that page. Do not use the "move" option - just copy the text. Remember to add back the trial template. Out of curiosity, what is your native language, if you don't mind me asking? Perhaps one of us can explain better that way. Sacropedia (talk) 22:32, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I am dutch, and yes, not that good in english--Emilesin (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Great, i see that the Category:Untested testing SC builds section is restored egain, sorry for that. Is there a way someone help, me to get a link in the Category:Untested testing SC builds section or even better the great working speedclear build section. So people can actualy see my post? also this talk about voting a build...i don't see where i can vote a build up or down. 1 hope to get a good movie soon from the Deep run as a proove this is actualy really a great working team setup. like 3 year aggo people really not believed a assassin tank was great good in Deep. Now all the regular runs are done with a sin tank. Al this new people don't even know warrior tank was the old meta/only posible way. Now only the zraw guild does that kinda runs as a speed clear, but this tactics require high experience from people. Without them supporting this runs with team speak a experienced tank and necroe and monk, i say their way is imposible. Since Assassin tank is way more comon now, so as VoS Dervish in Deep. I say my team set-up is a wel prooven, game friendly verty doable way and only require 5 people. I have bin doing Deep runs with this team set-up since like 4 years now.--Emilesin (talk) 14:11, 29 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Build pages show up in these categories depending on their vetting status. Right now your build is in the trial category as it is marked as a trial page. That'll be changed to testing once the page is finished. Accordingly, the page will then show up in the testing category. It'll end up in the good or great category once the build has received at least two votes and received a rating of at least 3.75. You can rate a build by clicking on the link Rate in the real-vetting template on top of the page as soon as the build leaves the trial category. Despite being the page's main editor you're allowed to rate your own submission. To get the required second vote you could invite your usual team mates to sign up in PvX and rate the build... ;) --Krschkr (talk) 19:49, 29 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I would like to vote this build to great. Tough I can't find any vote button to vote. I remember from long way back there was this vote button, from how we got RragarSC manly way in the great working section. Is it cause i still have Windows 7 or some, that I can't find this vote link?--Emilesin (talk) 20:19, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

No, this is not because of your OS. The vote button will be there as soon as the build is moved from trial to testing. --Krschkr (talk) 20:23, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * To clarify, there are regels en beleid that you must follow when posting builds. The build must first be in trial, and can only be voted on while in testing. It can only change from trial to testing when the page is afgewerkt. Finish the page first, then we can change it to testing, THEN you can vote, and if it receives good votes it will be placed in the Great category. Sacropedia (talk) 20:32, 29 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I noticed a changed heading text. Which is incorrect. It is about this text. "This maximizes the chances of rare drops for each player, such as rare and unique weapons from Kanaxai's Chest".. Nothing really maximize a chance on a rare drop. And what you get from the chest is all shitty and worthless. Except the demonic stone and jadeite stone, that are useful. That text I wrote is about getting faction points, and an extreme rare drop from killing a foe or open a chest with a lock pick. Only than you have the chance on get a zodiac shield with 10ar VS demons or VS plants...or even dual mod shield with -2 wile enchanted also on it. Those are extreme expensive, and not drop from the end chest. Old school weapons never drop from an End chest. Also, with pull foes in 1 dot, it is about the red dot's you see on the compass. You see when foes are hostile, when they are marked as red dot's on your compass. The compass is like a second screen. The name of the build you gave it now, looks great to me. If you have another name that fits more, I guess I am fine with that as well. As long it's about a faster than regular runs, 5 man Deep team. But thanks a lot for the help so far, Really thanks.--Emilesin (talk) 07:53, 30 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for moving my post to the Testing section. Now i finally figured how to vote my build. Have to say that I had a hard time to figure how to do that. I remember the old way to vote a build. That was easy to find on top of the page, not to miss. Now i really really had to look for some button how to vote a build up or down. It probably is just me, Tough I wonder other people will have the same issue, to find a way to vote a build up or down.--Emilesin (talk) 11:13, 21 November 2019 (UTC)


 * One in game friend of mine made an account on this site, to give a vote to my Deep post. After a hard time making an account linking his twitch account. He was still not able to bring a vote cause he did not have any contributions. Kinda hard than, to get my post to the great working section. Is there a solution to have serious people voting my build in an honest and non trolling way?--Emilesin (talk) 12:34, 21 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Any contribution will count, so he could simply make a user page (not profile) edit or say hello to you on your talk page. Just two edits are required to be able to vote. Compare that to the old system, requiring 8 votes and waiting a couple of days. It's really not that big a hurdle now. :) --Krschkr (talk) 17:51, 21 November 2019 (UTC)


 * The rate button at the page top has been restored thanks to Chieftainalex and Toraen. --Krschkr (talk) 17:49, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Rating without first-hand experience
Although there's no strict rule that actual testing of builds is required for a valid vote I'd like to ask you to only rate builds you have first-hand experience with and builds that are closely familiar to builds you know. Without first-hand experience no one can really say how well a build performs, especially an unusual full team which isn't used the same way as other builds with the same purpose. Take, for example, Build:Team - DoA Conta. Its functionality is different from that of various variants of DoASC that revolve around E/Mo bonder and (a) tank(s) coupled with some spikers. In those cases, it doesn't matter that much if the spikers use energy surge or shockwave or mark of pain or ray of judgment or fragility. The tactic and reason the team works is the same and it's somewhat safe to say that the build will work, although not completely safe, and you can't really know how well it will actually perform. That makes your vote on Archive:Team - DoA Fragway somewhat valid, but lacking a proper fundament for fair judgment. The Conta team doesn't make use of the same tactic as it is a high pressure team without dedicated tank. You won't, for example, do a big pull in the foundry with it, rather kill groups of foes one/two at a time. You won't usually lure foes together tightly for a good spike (although it of course helps) and rather engage like in standard PvE. It's not a tank&spank, rather a very effective pressure team. Due to its unusual composure one can not fairly divine from experience with tank&spank teams or standard pressure builds how this obscurum will perform. That makes any judgment about its actual effectivity and reliability baseless and invalidates it unless it is founded in test runs. Therefore I ask you to reconsider removed these two votes due to lack of actual reasoning (even though I have a large interest in seeing Conta gain some popularity and submitted it myself after playing it a few times). --Krschkr (talk) 18:13, 21 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Ah Yes apologies for that vote. I already was aware of that vote rules, but I got overexcited from the movie I saw that is posted with the build. It looked as a real great working team set-up. So I hoped with my vote it would come on a page, where more people would see it and also want test it. At that moment I forgot the vote rules and just putted my vote out. I will remove them as soon this wiki is recovered from this error. Sorry for the inconveniences.--Emilesin (talk) 18:00, 11 December 2019 (UTC)


 * On other hand, I do have some experience with many other ways of doing DoA. And also i have a lot experience in making builds and team set-ups, at least 4 of them are in the great working builds section right now. SoOSC Rangerway and RragarSC manly way for instance. Probably one of the most played speed clears in the game right now. And i have posted them. Changed my name a couple time over the years due to the lost passwords. But if you see the lag of English you will see it is me.--Emilesin (talk) 18:13, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Repeated violation of PvX:VETTING
You have repeated your violation of PvX:VETTING by submitting a vote that is not judging the build's quality, as explained to you here. According to the policy, this also constitutes a violation of PvX:1RV "Each user has the opportunity to change his/her vote any time as the work on the build progresses. This includes the submission of a new vote after a vote was stricken. Note however that the re-submission of the same vote without any further explanation is violating 1RV." . Rating a build based on the layout of its overview may also be seen as not applying common sense when voting. The vote has been removed and you receive a warning for this incident. I reserve the possibility to discuss further moderative actions upon repeated violation of these policies with Chieftainalex. Please take your time to read PvX:VETTING and adhere to it in the future. I suggest that you PvXwiki:Chill Out for a day. In the meantime I'm working on a solution to break through the language barrier that's preventing successful communication between the two of us. --Krschkr (talk) 14:08, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Can't believe this... The exemplary teams look ugly and confusing, builds that are in there, are just incorrect. The whole view of that page encourage people to bring skills like Chaos Storm and BiP, which not make the team any better. Just cause you don't know better builds or combinations in skills you need BiP or Chaos Storm?? encourage inexperienced people to bring skills like Chaos Storm in an elite area is just super wrong. Then this tank build... you constantly blame me for not testing the builds (Which I did tested before all this). Then I give a tank build, that at least makes sense for Deep (Since 100% tanking in Deep is just not possible) i clearly explained all that. Then you trash my tank build without testing it yourself...saying I don't understand this team setup because it not require a tank. Well than look at your own tank build, why in gods name does that build does make any sense in your team setup?. Believe me, i already know by now, how you are going to twist yourself out of this, by saying you don't know the tactics blablabla. I found you guys extremely unprofessional in they way you response on my comments. Then why is it not fair of me, to give this a bad vote? That page need improvement as long I don't see that improvement it should not be in the great working build section.--Emilesin (talk) 15:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

? --Veggie (talk) 15:10, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I made a new vote, and clearly explained my vote is NOT only about the exemplary teams.--Emilesin (talk) 16:12, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I would love to see BYOB in the great working build section. Just not with that exenplary teams and all that BiP stuff, and ofcorse the tank build.--Emilesin (talk) 13:30, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Just a simple question: If your vote is not (only) about the exemplary teams, then how does that fit in with this statement of yours: "Maybe now you understand why vote it down? IT IS ABOUT THE TEAM OVERVIEW. THE EXEMPLARY TEAMS!"

). It was explained to you by Krschkr multiple times that this against the rules of PvX:VETTING. This is why your vote was getting deleted. Not because you said the build is bad and because of your criticism. It's because you said many times now that your vote was mainly based on something that according to PvX:VETTING is illegitimate reasoning for a vote. This has nothing to do with opinions, or not being able to take criticism or whatever. You simply broke the rules. --Veggie (talk) 16:53, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I made several argument's and a lot of explaining. The major part is about the team overview yes. That was what the discussion was about. However, I have mentioned the Tank build also, and skills that are missing as optional to bring. Beside that, the builds that I have posted where not explesive mentioned as "Post it like that" just how a build could look like with optional skills in it. So the builds in the exemplary teams would look more mixed up, and more optimal for people to pick skills. Also, to have more hex skills, that last longer than Mistrust for instance so you would have optimal use of Cry of Pain. If you don't want to post the A/D tank build, I would say; Not post any tank build at al. Since it is totally not required in the way you guys do Deep. But if you do bring a tank build, than at least bring one that can recast Shroud of Distress without getting interupted by Oni's or Carps--Emilesin (talk) 16:06, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * So you see no problem with you being so adamant about your vote being only about the layout and the exemplary teams that you had to write it in all caps in one sentence, and later on saying that obviously your vote was not only about the layout and the exemplary teams? You didn't say that your vote was "mainly" about these details. That simply didn't happen. That's not what the sentence where I quoted you says. You don't get to simply say you said something different than you actually did. That's just not how a discussion (or reality for that matter) works.
 * But let's set this detail aside. You now repeated again that your vote mainly wasn't about the actual build but instead the layout and the exemplary teams (Quote: "The major part is about the team overview yes."


 * I made several argument's and a lot of explaining. A big part of our discussion was about the tank build. And the tank build is not even showed in the exemplary teams builds. I found it strange to think that my vote was only about the exemplary teams.
 * The text I wrote in al capital letters, was also a reaction on the response I got on al the comments I wrote. In particular about having Cry of Pain in your build without having a hex skill, and the frustration on how all my comments where misunderstood.
 * I guess I need to mark words in a different way, so it looks less aggressive. Sorry for that one.
 * But yeah, the exemplary teams are the first thing you see when you open the page. The builds in there look just incorrect to me. I found it very strange if PVX Wiki not let people give a fair rate on a build overview/exemplary teams, specially if they not look good to your opinion. Everything in me says, that you give a vote to a build that is posted with all included. So it is finished and everything in that build post is correct.--Emilesin (talk) 18:29, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Has been moved to User:Emilesin/Team - EMo Bond team as per PvX:NAME. Since it's a team build, it must begin with the "Team -" prefix rather than a profession prefix. It may get renamed again to better emphasize the seed monk as well, I just couldn't think of a way to concisely include it atm. -Toraen (talk) 08:17, 24 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't know where to find that link now. I saw some with E/Mo bond Chock team or some. Not sure what is the chock part in it. Probably i misunderstood the full meaning of it, or there is some other explanation for. Anyway, I don't make a big deal of the name, as long that it is clear that it is about a E/Mo bonder team--Emilesin (talk) 16:47, 1 May 2020 (UTC)


 * So you guys just going to Delete the build now??--Emilesin (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)


 * A well i have see enough...you guys are just the most arrogant, selfish dumb pieces of shit..total unreadable wet newspapers...I am done with this crap site. fuck you all. really FUCK YOU ALL!!--Emilesin (talk) 17:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Please take your time to chill out. Personal attacks aren't achieving anything and I ask you to refrain from them. Likewise, please stop vandalizing in the form of emptying those build pages.
 * The page in question is built in a way that's bypassing the vetting system, as two users pointed out. Once that problem is solved the 0/0 rating will be removed (because it loses its reason) and the page will stay in testing until a new second vote is submitted and it can receive a provisional rating. --Krschkr (talk) 17:43, 3 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Nah, you had this comming from miles away...I don't want you guys to show the builds i have posted on this site..you should not show of, with someone else his builds and ideas. Ande than akt out like that--Emilesin (talk) 18:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I've given you a temporary timeout to help you chill out.
 * Please note that all contributions to PvXwiki are considered to be released under the CC BY-NC-SA 2.5 (see PvXwiki:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here. --Krschkr (talk) 19:01, 3 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I remember clearly, I posted this Solo SoOSC Auraway build. you guys deleted it...than about two days after it was deleted, this guy Barath made a Solo all time record in Shards of Orr with almost the same build...he changed 1 skill...That is how you guys work--Emilesin (talk) 19:17, 3 May 2020 (UTC)