User talk:Krowman/Archive 7

Build Deletion
Can you put Build:R/A MS DB Spammer here for me, thanks. Bluemilkman /Talk To Me 01:04, 15 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Sorry, someone beat me to it. All's well that ends well, I guess. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] Krowman   06:28, 15 September 2007 (CEST)
 * I move with the speed of a thousand bears on crack! Fear my Skuld-speed! Huzzah! —ǥrɩɳsɧ  ƿoɲ  13:14, 15 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Bears on crack? Dont those just run into trees alot? ~ ZamaneeJinn [[Image:Zealot's Fire.jpg|19px]] (contribs) 23:59, 19 September 2007 (CEST)

Quote:
'''Reason: I can win matches with a Leviathan's Sweep monk (I've done it before, back before shields + PvP inventory sets were feasible, might still work). That doesn't affect the build's quality...''

Ok. but I read here that universality is how well it would work on stuff outside of what it was designed for. As for effectiveness, 3 = acceptable, so why do I have to give a Great! rating just because everyone else did?-- §  Eloc   §  06:12, 17 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Well, on a slightly unrelated note, I want to see this build. - Vermain 06:16, 17 September 2007 (CEST)
 * The Monk, or the build from where that quote originated (I'll throw up the monk if that's what you wanted)? Anyways, not asking for a Great rating, just a reasoned one. Universality is a bogus criteria, its inclusion in the vetting procedure just leads to problems like this while contributing little real value to the build. It mostly deals with strategy changes, such as if you were expecting a meta build but get something completely random, would the build be able to handle that surprise. By reasoned, I mean something like an evaluation of the pros and cons of the build, not a statement along the lines of "I'm good and I can't make this work." - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] Krowman   06:22, 17 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Any Monk build that uses Leviathan's Sweep has got to be awesome. Let's see it! - Vermain 06:24, 17 September 2007 (CEST)

Discussion is about this build, Monk is here (remember this was back in Factions; Aegis was everywhere, same with Falling Shockers and R/Me Cripshots, ran with an RC and Draw off-monk, standard +5e melee weapon): Btw, I was referring to GvG matches, not RA or anything like that, where you might expect to see a skill like that on a Monk. Warriors were just as dumb back then as they are nowadays, so when you could tempt one of them into chasing you, you just kited outside of Gale range and hit him with the attack, then he's done. Other monk was RC, midliner had Draw/Aegis as well. Very similar to standard BLight, just more healing focused over prot, no GoH, dual signets allows the energy to use otherwise expensive (but efficient) BLight, as well as having boon healing in Sig of Rejuv and DK. Maybe it reminds you of the Hammer Bash monk that ended becoming something of a joke? - Krowman    06:41, 17 September 2007 (CEST)
 * See, Hammer Bash... eh, not really. Counter Blow? Now THERE'S a good idea. - Vermain 06:45, 17 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Yeah, I suppose that has its uses. Well, as many uses as any hammer attack on a Monk can have. The hammer bash monks were a joke from way back when, the kind of stunt you'd pull when you had a guaranteed spot in the playoffs or nothing to lose. I referred Eloc to that LS Monk build to use it as an example in a similar way as I could have the hammer bash monk. It's a bad build, but a good player can run it. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] Krowman   06:55, 17 September 2007 (CEST)

Krowman, could you please reconsider your vote? Respond on the talk page and read Dark Morphon's comment, i agree with him. Thankyou.--Victoryisyours ( talk /pvxcontribs ) 14:56, 17 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Responded as requested. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] Krowman   19:52, 17 September 2007 (CEST)
 * With a 0-0-1 vote instead of a 0-0-0 vote... i don't see why u give it a 0-0-1 vote as it applies good pressure. Just because you don't like the buiuld doesn't mean u have to give it 0-0-1 right? [[Image:Aura_of_the_Lich.jpg|19px]]Dark Morphon 19:39, 26 September 2007 (CEST)
 * It's not good pressure. Any team that is out-pressured by Bleeding can make any of the builds used against them look fabulous. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] Krowman   20:20, 26 September 2007 (CEST)
 * That's not where the most pressure lies. Most pressure is in the pet attacks, if used well. If you take Dlunge and Disrupting throw, for example, you can just spam interrupts. If you combine with a warmonger's rit, you can take other conditions like poison. Yes, a thumper is better but that doesn't make this one worthless. [[Image:Aura_of_the_Lich.jpg|19px]]Dark Morphon 21:07, 26 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Honestly, if you're bringing RaO, why would you not bring a thumper? KD spam's more pressure than whatever your spear or scythe RaO's capable of. --Edru viransu //QQ about me /sysop 21:23, 26 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Well, because it's more interrupting. [[Image:Aura_of_the_Lich.jpg|19px]]Dark Morphon 15:48, 27 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Okay Krowman explain me what is your 0-0-0 vote on my team build about? Your reasons aren't even good as most things you "suggest" are in variants alrdy, and even if they were it wouldn't make this a bad build an u know. I think it's just because I posted it and u hate me. [[Image:Aura_of_the_Lich.jpg|19px]]Dark Morphon 15:54, 27 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Pretty sure KD and daze spam is more interrupts than dthrow and dlunge. --Edru viransu //QQ about me /sysop 20:32, 27 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Changed that in my team build and spear attacks+warmonger's = ftw. [[Image:Aura_of_the_Lich.jpg|19px]]Dark Morphon 17:30, 28 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Ok I changed my build so that most of ur reasons arent true anymore, so plz re-vote. [[Image:Aura_of_the_Lich.jpg|19px]]Dark Morphon 15:52, 30 September 2007 (CEST)
 * The "crappy RaO Spear" has been removed from my build so none of your reasons are viable anymore. Re-vote or I tell it to your mummy xD. [[Image:Aura_of_the_Lich.jpg|19px]]Dark Morphon 15:36, 2 October 2007 (CEST)

The vote by User:Sy86 makes no sense. I got Health back from my staff and my Superior Vigor Rune and 60 energy is fine with Glowing Gaze.-- §  Eloc   §  18:03, 17 September 2007 (CEST)
 * He's trying to say you have two many runes, and your attribute points shouldn't be wasted in Healing Prayers, they should be in Energy Storage. He's right. See my suggestions (and other users' suggestions) on the talk page. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] Krowman   19:28, 17 September 2007 (CEST)
 * I reworked it, please remove all current votes from before I reworked it.-- §  Eloc   §  03:15, 19 September 2007 (CEST)

Please restore, sysops are supposed to read talk pages before they delete it according to PvX:WELL.-- §  Eloc   §  00:39, 22 September 2007 (CEST)

Get Online
Next chance you get, whisper me or get on IRC. I need to give something to you. —ǥrɩɳsɧ ƿoɲ  20:19, 23 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Sure, I'll try to catch you around. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] Krowman   21:13, 24 September 2007 (CEST)

Then I'll get called immature again. ;) — Skakid9090 21:58, 26 September 2007 (CEST)
 * What we need around here is more people to just say 'No.' This is a documentation (and instructional) site for a video game, the community needs to approach this documentation more scientifically. Scientists don't work under a democratic pretense. We need to move away from this 'equality/democracy/etc' system if the community here wants to, a) do a good job, and b) get taken seriously. I know people love their vote and I don't want to take it away from them, but I think that BM policy I drafted should empower smart people manage this place effectively, while the recognition of being a BM could entice more smart people to contributing here. This isn't real life; it's not as though anyone's rights are being trounced upon. Imagine if a scientific community had to operate under a democratic system, not an objective observation of facts. That's what scientists do, the observe and experiment, and base their opinions on their observations; they do not get together and vote on the outcome of an experiment. Problem is compunded by the fact that we don't establish or distinguish credentials; everyone's opinion is supposed to have an equal weight (in practice, the site doesn't quite follow this ideal, but it is set up to). Problem is, new player checks the Rating of a build and sees 7 people giving it high ratings, he figures it's a good build. However, those could be seven "noobs" casting their votes on the build. We've essentially got "nobbs" teaching other "noobs." That makes things worse by creating a whole new generation of "noobs," but also doesn't provide any instruction to educate the new player on how to become good and play competively (and that's how you can get the most enjoyment out of the game). We're here to document and educate, and we're failing (or at least doing a laughable job) at both. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] Krowman   22:03, 27 September 2007 (CEST)


 * I agree with you on this one. I'll admit, I suck at making builds. The only problem with this, is that it's a wiki, which is a community site, and this would discourage the whole community's participation. What we need is someone who will sit through obs. mode and write the meta builds. This site is very anti-meta right now, and if it is to start heading toward the better, it need to get rid of that. A lot of good build come from people who use meta builds, and find ways to make them better. Bluemilkman /Talk To Me 01:40, 28 September 2007 (CEST)

The only build we don't have is the GvG Trapper, and I already have that in my sandbox. Readem (<font color="Red">talk *<font color="Black">pvxcontribs ) 02:25, 28 September 2007 (CEST)
 * On the other hand, look at all the crap we do have. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman   07:40, 28 September 2007 (CEST)

Blocked before
orly? I don't see where it says they were, how did/do you know. єяøהħ 23:17, 26 September 2007 (CEST)
 * You can check a user's block log under Contributions -> Block Log under their name. — Skakid9090 23:21, 26 September 2007 (CEST)

Ignore me, I wasways forget thats you, eronth. — Skakid9090 23:22, 26 September 2007 (CEST)

See User:I want a cookie and compare IPs. - <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman    21:37, 27 September 2007 (CEST)

Rollback
Why does it say this now instead of Delete (under ratings)? — Skakid9090 05:07, 28 September 2007 (CEST)
 * You delete your own votes, you rollback the votes of others. As far as I know, that's how it has always been, though I'm not sure of what the significance (if there is any) of distinguishing between the two is (rolling back a vote doesn't have the potential to remove numerous votes, as rolling back an edit can in fact overwrite multiple edits). - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman   06:11, 28 September 2007 (CEST)
 * Always has been like that. Deleting your own vote completely removes it from the system, deleting someone else's vote leaves it there for someone else to see. -- Armond Warblade[[Image:Armond sig image.png]] 06:29, 28 September 2007 (CEST)
 * I meant under Recent Ratings, it used to say Deleted instead of Rollback. Was just wondering if it was some new feature or something. — Skakid9090 21:44, 28 September 2007 (CEST)
 * I never looked at that, actually... -- Armond Warblade[[Image:Armond sig image.png]] 20:59, 2 October 2007 (CEST)

Why a admin
Why is he an admin he voetes bad and is a n00b so why?

Vote here for a demote or a stay...

Favored:
 * (Place your vote here)

Unfavored:
 * 10:06, 3 October 2007 (CEST)Woefpoef 10:06, 3 October 2007 (CEST)

(Place ur vote here)

Tbh, krowman is just 1337 :D gets my favoued vote neways, but isen't this a bit wrong approach if you don't want to see his as an admin? <font color="#000000">Fish <font color="#959595">is  <font color="#FF0000">baed  10:21, 3 October 2007 (CEST)


 * First off, calling someone in a noob is PvX:NPA, so don't do it. Secondly, Krowman is a longstanding contributor that was vital to the growth of this site. Unlike some admins, namely myself, Krowman welcomes new people and tries to help them out. He's probably the kindest remaining admin we have, along with Defiant Elements. Finally, if you want to show where Krowman votes poorly, put a link up on the admin noticeboard but be aware as per PvX:ADMIN, voting well or being an excellent PvP player is not what being an admin is all about. —ǥrɩɳsɧ  ƿoɲ  12:56, 3 October 2007 (CEST)
 * Uhm yeah I kinda aggree, but he does sometimes give crap votes. It seems he only gives 5-5-5 or 0-0-0, so woefpoef does have a point, but why demoting? Don't really see the point. [[Image:Aura_of_the_Lich.jpg|19px]]Dark Morphon 14:36, 3 October 2007 (CEST)


 * We don't put random votes to demote someone on their talk page, it's demoralizing. If you have a problem with an admin, bring it up with Auron, as he's in charge of demotions around here. -- Armond Warblade[[Image:Armond sig image.png]] 17:46, 3 October 2007 (CEST)
 * Actually, Ben would probably be more receptive towards any "No Confidence" votes. My moral is fine, don't worry about that, but if you have a complaint, feel free to take it up with me here or through an IM. I've had my ratings quoted in other users' own votes; maybe you meant to say I vote "harshly?" Furthermore, I don't only give perfect or 0-0-0 ratings; for examples, see     . It is logical that such extreme ratings are noticed over the more rational ones like I posted simply because they are more controversial, and do more to ultimately categorize the build. As to the n00b comment, substantiate it. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman    20:55, 4 October 2007 (CEST)

Quick Question
This was a build I designed long ago in an attempt to make Consume Soul a semi-worthwhile skill. In light of EoTN, I'm attempting to revamp it, and I was looking through the votes, and stumbled on yours: "Very sub-par. Your spirits are weak and easily destroyed. Once people see what you are running, they will target them first and render you useless." If I may ask, who are the "people" you speak of, given that the build was designed for PvE? *Defiant Elements*  +talk  23:54, 3 October 2007 (CEST)
 * Just a mistake. Monsters target spirits first, because of the way they bodyblock, and because stationary spirits are technicaly the slowest moving foes to them (as most already know, you can break aggro by using an IMS and running from the critters). Anyways, I can delete the vote if you'd like, though I see it has already been removed with all the others due to a re-write. Makes no difference to me or the categorization of the build. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman   21:02, 4 October 2007 (CEST)

please help this is master of guilds. I logged out and i forgot my password and my email addrress has been disabled. What can i do?Beast194 00:48, 5 October 2007 (CEST)
 * Ahahahahahahahahaha. XD --InternetLOL 00:51, 5 October 2007 (CEST)

Give Away
Hey Krow, I posted on your "Give Away" page and you weren't responding so I figured I'd post here. May I please have the Daggers of Xuekao? Sorry for bugging you, ^^.--<font color="Orange">Victoryisyours (<font color="Brown">talk /<font color="Black">pvxcontribs ) 23:26, 7 October 2007 (CEST)
 * No worries. I've already cleaned out almost everything on that list in-game, and have not updated that page in a while. Sorry about getting anyone's hopes up. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman   22:33, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

Question
There is a Good build called Ineptitude Spammer in the PvE section that has some votes that dont make sense, and it would be nice if you could check it out, because i dont think it has the rating it deserves. Dean 20:37, 21 October 2007 (CEST)
 * Presumably, you would be asking about the low votes, since you gave it a 4.9, is that correct? - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman   20:44, 21 October 2007 (CEST)
 * Nevermind, those 'senseless votes' were directed at an older version of the build. They've already been removed by Edru. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman   21:05, 21 October 2007 (CEST)

Why play without monks?== ==

Uhhh did i say that? o.O heres a list of everything that could go wrong with your monks.
 * They died
 * They are Powerblocked
 * They are across the map
 * They are energy less.(Ex. They suck)
 * They are to far away from you
 * They are too busy protecting themselves
 * You run to far ahead
 * They are dead
 * They are dead
 * They are dead

What pvp player doesnt try to off the monks first?
 * Monks should not stay dead for any significant time unless your team is wiping, in which case, no amount of survivability will help(even paras and rangers die when their team wipes), or they get killed when you have to retreat(which shouldn't happen, and if it does happen, you, as a frontliner, had best have already died linebacking). Concerning powerblock, unless your LoD gets powerblocked(in which case your team very well may wipe if you don't play ultra-defensively), it's not going to be too extremely big of a problem, although hardly a non-issue, particularly if you're running less specialized and more hybrid-style monks(most backlines have prots and heals on both monks). If your monks are out of energy, too far away from you, too busy protecting themselves, they or you are probably bad, although, presuming you're still QQing about AoM, an AoM should do fine long enough for his monks to push up or for him to return to their casting range, when form is up. Outside of form, you can't overextend quite as freely, but you're still quite a hard target. Also, monks are often far from the best target. Disruptive characters like mesmers and rangers are often very important characters to kill when your team is having defensive troubles. When you can afford to play more offensively, defensive characters like paras and bsurges are often the best targets, particularly since Defensive Anthem, ward, or BSurge can do a lot more to stop you spiking than a monk can, although BSurges are often easier to shutdown(pleak their long casts, strip attunes, etc.) than to kill. Monks are certainly an important target, but they are far from the priority target. --<font color="Black">Edru viransu //<font color="Red">QQ about me /sysop 03:48, 29 October 2007 (CET)

Ty
For being logical. I will get back to ignoring this now. 68.35.91.2 03:03, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Image removal
Can you remove the following image please? It is no longer in use.

http://pvx.wikia.com/wiki/Image:Unreal_Havoc.jpg

Thanks. <font color="Blue">Unreal Havoc  01:07, 31 October 2007 (CET)


 * Ninja'd. -- Armond Warblade[[Image:Armond sig image.png]] 02:35, 31 October 2007 (CET)

Lol, thankyou. :) <font color="Blue">Unreal Havoc  02:41, 31 October 2007 (CET)

Understanding the code
I'm wondering if you can help seems it's obvious you have a good knowledge of template code etc. I'm trying to align two templates of my character bios on my userpage horizontally instead of vertically but nothing I try seems to work. Can you help please? <font color="Blue">Unreal Havoc  03:43, 31 October 2007 (CET)
 * Error: Unable to decipher code on userpages ("User:Krowman"); unable to apply code to userpages ("User:Unreal Havoc"). Suggestions: Apply sleep, reboot, retry. -- Armond Warblade[[Image:Armond sig image.png]] 09:03, 31 October 2007 (CET)
 * They look horizontal to me., aligned from side to side, not top to bottom. Maybe you got horizontal and vertical mixed up? - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman   08:08, 6 November 2007 (CET)
 * I think he means he wants the text to be next to the image, instead of below. --[[Image:Wizardboy777_Sig.jpg|19px]]Wizardboy777 (T/C/Sysop) 23:17, 6 November 2007 (CET)
 * No I wanted the images side by side as they are now but I managed to figure it out myself. Thankyou. [[Image:UnrealHavocSig.jpg|19px]]<font color="Blue">Unreal Havoc  04:20, 9 November 2007 (CET)

Thanks
for pointing me out PvXwiki:Ignore All Rules. I actually missed that one when going through the policies one day. :) -- (gem / talk) 23:47, 6 November 2007 (CET)
 * Np, yw. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman   07:54, 7 November 2007 (CET)

Help, please?
Help me with this retarded idea, please. --<font color="Black">Edru viransu //<font color="Red">QQ about me /sysop 03:56, 9 November 2007 (CET)
 * You don't have a single disenchant in the build. Ditch the LoD, ANet went and nerfed the skill that made Healing viable for the first time because they want to see a little more variety. Don't fix what isn't broken. More snares, like DF or w/e .You could prolly afford it on an MB, otherwise just bring one with a little AoE to shut down war/derv trains or w/e. You have no blind, right, so you don't want their melees near all your squishies. Rit runner has a lot of weapon spells on him. Tbh, I'd wait and see how people react to the update today. Big shakee-up to LoD means teams may become less effective to cope with party-wide pressure (this plus the death of 'passive defenses' like Aegis and the like is so horribly misguided, they are ignoring the factors which necessitate these skills). Kind of gimmicky to begin with, but you already knew that. :-) - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman    04:14, 9 November 2007 (CET)
 * Maybe one or two more points: eles are very vulnerable to ints and Diversion, and they are the core of the build. MB gets diverted or humiliated, you lose your e-mgmt and the ability to use your expensive spells. Casting times are very slow, Rangers will eat you up unless you have wards or DA/Aegis or w/e to protect your casters. I'd suggest putting some wards in there, like I mentioned, since you don't have blindbots or anything like that. Somehow you need to ensure your spells get away clean, but even if they do, it means your immobile for the casting time, giving an unnecessary advantage to opposing melees. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] <font face="dauphin" color="maroon">Krowman   04:20, 9 November 2007 (CET)