User talk:Voidwalker10578

Don't blank talk pages, even the ones on your userspace. Instead, Archive them. Thanks. --71.229.204.25 23:47, 29 November 2007 (CET)

Parabarrager wtf lol???
Bah, don't worry for the vetting, maybe you could try and submit a variant, meant for a more general use (ie outside ToPK, without BM, that's how I play it). You know, I also like my although lots of people say it's crap... —Fabes ''' 15:21, 3 December 2007 (CET)
 * Yeah, I agree... Although I didn't think the build was v. good I don't think the vetting of the build was very fair, but most of the users here are very biased. and their ideas seem to be set in stone.--Drowning Pigeon 19:50, 3 December 2007 (CET)
 * I like that battery build too:) (I use it in UW want-to-be-clearouts - and nobody cries for a BiP necro.) I don't think that I will submit another build, i'm dissppointed in this wiki. Voidwalker 23:50, 3 December 2007 (CET)

Dissapointment
Hey. Just to discuss a few things about the current hot topic of your para build. For starters, most if not all builds that i submit have been crappy, trash or other. Making builds isn't really my strong suit, yet i rate builds relativly strictly(Had i chosen to vote, i wouldn't have scored the para barrager any higher then a 1.5). Getting dissapointed over a bad build(or a build you think is good that gets trashed) is understandable. Keep in mind, however, that you have to look at both sides of the coin. You recieved a few votes that were clearly biased in your favor, which you neglect to mention. In addition, your suggestion that builds must be tested is simply not enforceable, nor practical. As i said on Krowmans page, anyone whos played the game for a little while can assess a build off of appearence alone, because the skills dont suprise you, they dont have hidden secret effects, they do what they say they will. Overall, i feel the build was trash. It fails compared to a normal barrager and really fails to a splinter barrager. If you want the buffs that it offers,a seperate paragon could be brought to support the team while also doing something useful instead of barraging. All in all, i hope this event doesn't discourage you from submitting builds and contributing. Just remember that it's nothing personal, and that people can easily and accuratly judge a builds performance without testing it. You probably can as well.Bob fregman 02:45, 4 December 2007 (CET)
 * I should take this feelie-touchie moment to say I've got nothing against you. [[Image:Shogunshen_Sig.jpg|19px]] Shen (contribs) 02:47, 4 December 2007 (CET)
 * I'm not angry, Shen. I just dunno why did the admins assaulted my build. I don't know, why, but i see that you think i'm a noob. Why? Because i refuse to agree you? Because i don't belive that you know better? Sorry, i belive my experiences, and to those, who tried the build (like Fabes).
 * And Bob: do you think that this is a community? I've checked the ratings just now. The admins do not remove their mate's votes (like the "read krowman's above, 0-0-0", or "trash please, 0-0-0"). They are much worse than the one that has been removed because the grammar (???? My god, mine is bad too, i know, but that is not a reason!), and because he wrote a V before the vote. I don't know why is that bad and the others aren't. Voidwalker 07:01, 4 December 2007 (CET)
 * I see and understand your point and id agree that sometimes the admins use their powers to advance their own interests(IE. why would krowman remove bad votes from a build he trashed as well). While this could be bad, normally, the thing is that most of the admins are responsible and things like this only occur when it's in the wikis best interest.  As to the unfair removal, look at it this way.  If i provided a very detailed explanation for why the shock axe was a 0-0-0(And im pretty good at bullshitting and debating, i could make it sound good) it is likely that it would be removed for the simple reason of "no".  Likewise if i voted 5-5-5 and my vote consisted of smiley faces, it's likely that theyd let it slide.  It's similar with your build, they hold the high votes to higher scrutiny since they and others feel that its a bad build.  My solution would be to greater clarify your voting reasoning so that your vote can pass the greater amount of scrutiny.Bob fregman 00:56, 5 December 2007 (CET)

General consensus on the build was that it should be trashed, so votes that subscribed to this idea weren't deleted as quickly as those that went against the idea. Note that I only removed two ratings; one which was a blatant and conscious violation of the vetting procedure, the other showing a deep misunderstanding of in-game mechanics (the Dazed condition and basic PvE strategy, to be specific). As to admins assaulting your build, the 3 admins that rated it gave it more generous ratings than many of the other users who rated the same build. - Krowman    01:06, 5 December 2007 (CET)
 * You think? Before you rated the build, the general consensus was that it is a good build (~4). And what do you mean it "should be" trashed? You decided it? Or the other admins? And what is this, that the vote you like worths more than the one you dislike? This is ridicilous... Aren't all users' and admins' votes equal? This remembers me the late 80's, the last years of the dictatorship in my country. Voidwalker 07:30, 5 December 2007 (CET)
 * Dang, son, read the first two words of my post. 'General consensus.' That means that the majority of ratings on the build have placed it into the 'Trash' category. No one user's decision, not an administrative decision. Far from a dictatorship. I haven't told anyone how to vote, and neither has any other admin. The majority of the users who rated that build told us admins where they think it belongs, and we put it there. - [[Image:Kowal.jpg|15px]] Krowman   07:32, 5 December 2007 (CET)
 * Void, i would like to point out that the build didnt actually work as it was intended anyway, so therefor a build that does not work should be trashed, no?--Shadowsin 07:36, 5 December 2007 (CET)
 * I wrote this to Shen too: I won't belive what you think if my and some other people's experiences says the opposite. I mean those who tried to play with this. Shadowsin, I'm sorry, but you can't convince me (because I'm sure you have no experience with the build - maybe nothing with a paragon, I don't know). And Krowman: I saw that the admins removed votes with the reason that the vote's text doesn't contain information. Why is Victoryisyours' vote still there? He rated it 0-0-0 trash please. Or the others who only refer your vote. Is this ok? Just because I will rate builds I dislike just like they do if it is allowed. Voidwalker 00:41, 6 December 2007 (CET)
 * The thing is, void, that while all votes should be help to a level of scrutiny, depending on the percieved correctness of the vote, the level is increased or decreased depending on your vote. For example if a 5-5-5'd a healing hands wammo, id need a damn good reason, whereas i could trash it with the comment "lol trash plox".  Likewise, as i said, i could vet the shockaxe with a simple "is good" comment, but probably couldnt trash t not matter how hard i tried.  In addition, the fact that your experiences lead you to beleive it works well doesn't mean that someone elses wont be opposite.  For example, my experience in America under George W. hasnt been half bad, and i honestly dont mind the man, but there are plenty of people who have contrary oppinions.  Noones asking you to change your oppinion, rather, your asking other people to change theres.  If you wont change your oppinion(the build is good) then why should anyone else change theres(the build is bad).Bob fregman 01:07, 7 December 2007 (CET)
 * Look! If somebody treis the build (has experience with it) and says it's crap, I will think about it. But no one's senses and ideas are better than my experience for me. And if I listen to those who tried to play, the build fits in the other, maybe in the good category. Voidwalker 10:33, 8 December 2007 (CET)
 * And none of your experiences are any better then my senses and common sense to me, or anyone else. All im asking is for you to understand that.Bob fregman 00:44, 10 December 2007 (CET)
 * If that's ok for you... The difference for me is like between 'talking about sex' and 'having sex'. Common sense is good if you have, but i'm not sure you have to rely on it in all situations - but that's not my business. Voidwalker 06:49, 11 December 2007 (CET)

Your vote here:

''Can be done much better with Soldier's Fury and Mark of Rodgort (no Cracked Armor). The extra adrenaline isn't so important after the "GftE" nerf.''

Soldier's Fury is a horrible skill, and Mark of Rodgort should NEVER be used on non-Elemenalist primaries. EVER. The nerf does hurt it slightly, but adrenaline fuels practically the rest of the skills (Merciless Spear, Blaizng Spear, etc). -- Guild of  Deals  13:55, 30 December 2007 (EST)
 * Intresting. On my previous build, the parabarrager, someone wrote it would be much better with MoR and Conjure Flame. Btw, i dont't think Soldier's Fury is a bad skill (explain for me, why is it crap). And really don't need so much adrenaline in that build (i never used that amount as i've tried it). Voidwalker 14:00, 30 December 2007 (EST)
 * Been posted on Admin Noticeboard. Take your misconceptions there. [[Image:Shogunshen_Sig.jpg|19px]] Shen (contribs) 14:05, 30 December 2007 (EST)
 * Thx.Voidwalker 14:10, 30 December 2007 (EST)

Heroes' Builds
I have a section just like that on my namespace. Did you get the inspiration from me? Just curious, I like being an ego-freak. -- Guild of  Deals  20:38, 30 December 2007 (EST)
 * Yes, I saw that on your userpage. Thought that I want to list my heroes' builds, so I created a page, like you did. I hope it wasn't copyrighted, and you aren't angry about it...Voidwalker 04:38, 31 December 2007 (EST)
 * It wasn't copyrighted... Copyrights are for noobies. Anyway, nice job. --[[image:GoD Sig3.jpg|20px]] Guild of  Deals  10:18, 1 January 2008 (EST)

Page issues
Seems your page is glitchy. The top tabs (you know, the one with user page, discussion, etc) becomes really small and the left menu disappears. Seems this happens with a few userpages, mainly because you accidently put a space or something somewhere. -- Guild of  Deals  08:09, 6 January 2008 (EST)
 * I saw that, yes. What can I do to fix it? Or what shall I do to avoid it? Voidwalker 16:58, 6 January 2008 (EST)

Vote

 * took tank out of the description, please revote, and try before rating plox.-- AESTHE  T  I  C 
 * Edited. You know, I try the builds before I vote. But this time it was so obviuos that this isn't a tank, that I can vote without trying. Now the build looks better. Voidwalker 02:17, 9 January 2008 (EST)

Archive:Team - Sabway
BR + monk may be fine energy, but SR on a necro is closing onto unlimited energy. Plus, it has splinter weapon. &mdash;  Skadiddly [슴Mc슴] Diddles  17:39, 12 January 2008 (EST)
 * I've changed it. Voidwalker 18:37, 12 January 2008 (EST)
 * You haven't changed it yet at least. For the record I ran your build. Damage wasn't enough with all the minions pounding without splinter weapon. Energy wasn't enough in harder areas.--Batno mercy 12:25, 13 January 2008 (EST)
 * Tried it too. It was pretty convincing for me that three necro hero isn't a must, can be done without one. BR was enough, it was on most of the time on the monk. And I added splinter on the monk, so the damage was just like with the three necros. Voidwalker 17:33, 13 January 2008 (EST)

Voidwalker, over the course of the day the edits have been somewhat drowned out, but I asked a few questions regarding your review on the Yellow-Way Team Build page. Will you please look over these and address them? Thank you! Darith Kaulk 17:45, 13 January 2008 (EST)

Added new damage dealers plz revote. --Fox007  10:34, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Hun Message
this is a hungarian message to Voidwalker (Who is hungarian).

Sajnálom hogy nem tudtam tegnap menni paragonnal csapatarénázni, nem volt netem ezért nem tudtam csinálni semmit a neten. Csak másnap (ma) állt helyre a dolog.--Borotvalt 11:19, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

A Francba!!! Valami vadbarmok törölni akarják a Paraway-edet! Borotvalt 14:57, 25 October 2008 (EDT)

''If the whole team receives only 10% of the damage, why you need frontliners? Everybody can tank... The frontliners have 5 attack skills - too much. Spear of Fury helps alot for the Imbagon, and almost useless for the SoP paragon. Expel para: give hm a zealous spear, or maybe Energizing Finale. "GftE!" is not necessary there. Angelic para: why do you need bonds if everybody receives 90% less damage? The entire build is useless. Expel Hexes on one paragon may not be enough in places where mobs use many hexes (or those that hits multiple targets, like Suffering). Do not use Furious Spearheads on paragons who carry Furious Anger of "FGJ!", you cannot gain more than 200% anrenaline.''

Frontliners are for damage output. 5 attack skills isn't too much if you are using an attack skill every second--there isn't anything else you can put there, since you don't need healing or defense. Energizing Finale is on the Buffer, and can use it on whoever needs energy. "GftE!" is more for e-management. I've changed the Angelic Para to an AoG Para. Removed the note to use furious spearheads. Please rethink your vote. ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡ ͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡ I͡n͡f͡i͡d͡e͡l  ̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲| ̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı__̡͌l̡*  17:46, 15 May 2008 (EDT)
 * I've also made a couple more changes, so if you would take another look at the build, it'd be greatly appreciated. ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡ ͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡  I͡n͡f͡i͡d͡e͡l  ̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲| ̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı__̡͌l̡*  19:10, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Image uploads
Please remember to select a license when uploading images. --  Toraen   talk  08:05, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, will do that next time! Voidwalker 09:38, 4 December 2011 (UTC)