User talk:Zuranthium

"Always, I want to be with you, and make believe with you, and live in harmony harmonyyy"
http://games.adultswim.com/robot-unicorn-attack-twitchy-online-game.html. Zuranthium 03:46, March 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * yes this game is awesome-- Relyk  talk  04:33, March 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * The first time I played it I lol'd at the unicorn exploding. Then they presented the "robot" excuse, which made it worse and better. -- Chaos?  -- 07:05, March 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * By far the best game on the internet, with the most amazing music on the internet. --Frosty  [[Image:Frostcharge.jpg|19px]] 10:23, March 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * That song is definitely on my iPod now, because of that game. Karate [[File:KJ for sig.png]] Jesus  14:28, 7 March 2010

If you want to GvG
Look here: http://www.teamquitter.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=17541. American playtimes especially need more guilds playing. Sit in that channel! You may not get picked up by my guild and be able to partake in awesome events such as beating Crow's guild with a Flawless Victory ( I'm a strong Monk :-P ) but someone will grab you to play. Zuranthium 17:25, April 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * And for the cynical ones out there, no, none of this is an April fool's joke. Zuranthium 17:26, April 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * what is the general opinion on bots? ^_^ (i'm 99% sure it's "fuck off", but you never know unless you ask!) ···  Danny So Cute    06:28, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * How do you mean? Several top players were using them, but they are pretty much universally frowned upon. However, ever since my latest post about bots on QQ I've noticed less people using them. Hopefully now that people are seriously getting banned for using bots, we won't see much of them on the competitive GvG scene. Zuranthium 06:39, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

hello
before you make edit summary claims like this can you please check here in order to avoid looking like a tit, thanks! - Athrun Feya  07:52, May 18, 2010 (UTC) - Athrun Feya  09:20, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * You don't seemed to have followed the course of the page properly. I created a build that was immediately vetted into "Great" because it was recognized as a top build and then the page was destroyed and replaced with that shit page for no reason. Tell people not to destroy the work of users who actually know what they are doing. And get some real Admins on this site who actually know how to play all areas of PvP. Zuranthium 07:56, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * And sorry for the rudeness, but it seems to be the only way to get a point across around here. <3 Zuranthium 07:58, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * I read all the cute drama that lights up RC. Readem simply made a more generic version of the build to gain community consensus since you had ignored and continue to ignore the portion of the community who disagree with the details of your version. It is interesting therefore that the blame is shifted to the admin who was simply doing their duty to delete builds which have been soaked into generic bars, under community consensus. Please don't paste your version over the generic vetted version, I can't think of anything more childish. - Athrun Feya  [[File:Lau_eye.png]] 08:53, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * It hadn't been changed under community consensus at all. The consensus was that a pure heal Monk was the best for RA, which is the reason I made the page in the first place, and then a couple people proceeded to destroy the page WITHOUT asking. Admins allowed this happen so, yes, it is their fault. The page as it stands now provides a complete bar for people who actually come to the site looking for a FULL RA Monk build. The variants section provides alternatives for people who wish to modify to something better attuned to their specific liking. Zuranthium 09:09, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * I reiterate, "ignored and continue to ignore the portion of the community who disagree with the details of your version"
 * Nobody is ever going to completely agree, that's why there is a variants section. There NEEDS to be a full bar listed, whatever it may be. Zuranthium 18:28, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * The guru community is not the pvx community Zur. No there doesn't have to be a full bar, you totally miss the reason for an optionals section. There's options to bring condition and hex removal. There's also option for bringing stances/defense. You're oversimplifying a build that represents a monk in RA. Even if you want to call "Full heal", that doesn't automatically mean your version of the bar fits the definition. Variants are only skills that aren't core to the build. The problem with an ra monk is that 6-7 of the skills tend to be vital. This is the reason you want a general bar rather than a specific one. Despite your reasoning that it has to be one way or not exist at all, you won't always need the exact bar posted. You might want to take a refresher with PvX:OWN and stop being overprotective. Just to note, the fact that people from guru said the monk bar was good is one of the most terrible arguments you can use.-- Relyk  talk  02:24, May 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Optionals are good for when a build is exactly the same except 1 or 2 skills. That isn't the case here. As for being overprotective - I'm not. My concern was creating an RA Monk page with an actual skillbar on it that people could come to this site and use. PvX users suddenly destroying the page and replacing it with a shit page is not me being overprotective of "my build", it's me being mad about them ruining the entire reason the page was created in the first place. And, actually, why does there have to be only ONE page anyway? We have separate pages for all kinds of Ranger and Warrior builds that are very similar. It shouldn't be hard to have two RA WoH Monk pages - one for a "Pure Heal" and one for the more "Hybrid" bar with Guardian on it. Zuranthium 04:42, May 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well the difference between a full heal monk and hybrid isn't much different in ra, so two different pages describing the "same" build is pointless. Optionals don't necessarily mean they should be used for 1-2 optionals, most of a build using WoH can be considered optional by choice. Stop overexaggerating people "destroying" the build, they make changes for whatever reason and you have to assume good faith. The changes are easy enough to revert or change. The problem is when any changes were actually discussed on the talk page, you ignored them. I should say you called any criticism wrong and then conveniently ignored it, assuming you alone knew what was best. You pretty much said one thing and did another. The purpose of builds on pvxwiki are to reflect builds being used in-game based on community input. The build has to be general enough so anyone can look on wiki and use the build effectively. Not all builds completely follow this, but its pretty important when you will define what a monk in ra should use (since they're the ones who carry matches). So while most people will get by on a specific bar, you can atleast afford some flexibility with a general bar. As to note, no one gives a shit about variants or bother to look at them. You are forced to look at optionals on the other hand.-- Relyk  talk  03:29, May 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * "The problem is when any changes were actually discussed on the talk page, you ignored them" - No I didn't? I wasn't on the site for several days and while I was gone people destroyed the page I made without trying to contact me first. As for variants, if "nobody gives a shit" then don't have that section on build pages. I agree a more simplistic or general build should usually be the main bar, though. Zuranthium 01:38, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

I read most of the talk on the RA WoH build and i was wondering if you could help me with the new player guide here, particularly the RA monk section. Let me know if you will help with it or not! :>-- Steamy .. x 13:21, May 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I haven't been dedicating much time to this site lately, perhaps in the future when I get a chance. Looks like a big undertaking. Zuranthium 20:01, June 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * yeah :p-- Steamy .. x 20:08, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Split Wikis?
What happened? Someone explain please. Haven't been on here in a long time. Zuranthium 03:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikia wouldn't let us just move, we had to 'fork' in their terms. Really it just means leaving that one to rot. They basically kept pushing new themes that didn't help our wiki's presentation and were spotty at best at making sure the server-side stuff got updated properly (basically trying to fix anything pvxcode related was a huge hassle). GuildWiki forked for similar reasons (although the theme change affected them a lot more). There was also drama over wikia staff removing administrator/bcrat privileges. Toraen TheJanitor [[image:ToraenSig2.png]] 03:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, you'll be able to find the majority of the issues in the community portal archive at the wikia PvX. There was stuff (mostly checkuser and admin rights stuff) which contributed to it though which is documented on the Wikia Noticeboard and its archive over there as well. Toraen TheJanitor [[image:ToraenSig2.png]] 03:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

wikia made a new skin to attract advertisers and looks shitty. they pretty much forced the skin on all the wikis. we "forked" because wikia wont delete any of its wikis (money from ads). im sure reading about it at the portal will be hilarious. kj made disparaging remarks about wikia and got banned from all of wikia. pvx is even more dead since you stopped contributing, you can tell since toraen has been stalking pages looking for things to do.-- Relyk  talk  05:25, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanations. Yeah, wikia's page looks like total shit. When I visited it, all I could think was "WTF did they do here?!?!" I'm glad the split happened and that the better looking sites still exist. Zuranthium 00:15, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The fun thing is? You remember that guy PLACE? The one who flamed us all? (well not you Zuranthium). I checked on PvX@Wikia and he's contributing there now ^_________^.--GWPirate 00:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * who?-- Relyk  talk  02:04, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure he's not...--TahiriVeila 02:45, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Well okay i thought so because i saw 5 serious edits in RC. Maybe not. And to relyk: http://www.gwpvx.com/User_talk:PLACE --GWPirate 11:23, 9 January 2011 (UTC)