Archive talk:R/W Earth Shaker Ranger

This Build sucks. Put into archived. Readem (talk *pvxcontribs ) 15:52, 29 May 2007 (CEST)

I agree with Readem, I have tested this build and from what I have seen and you'd be far better off (and safer)picking them off one by one with a Bow. Huynh 06:02, 28 September 2007 (CEST)


 * This build is awesome. Good defense, 80 AL vs. physical, 110 AL vs. elemental and constant 75% blockage. Decent damage, has a constant 33% IAS and earth shaker + crude swing is pretty nice. Good aggro control, since you can KD an entire group (to keep them in AoE, or stop from running). - Skakid9090 13:12, 14 June 2007 (EDT)

I like this build. Especially since I helped make it. It's even better since Lightning Reflexes got a buff. --  Vallen Frostweaver  19:22, 14 June 2007 (EDT)

Ill be using this with Brambles :)


 * Looks sweet! I'd bring an extra knockdown skill thou I think... and skip Dryders Defence.. 89.160.87.204 12:38, 1 August 2007 (CEST)
 * Most often when you charge into a group you are casted on and shot at. Dryders helps eliminate spikes from eles when they abound in a group but it can be subbed out for another skill per area easy enough.  It's a general skillset and also a fall back in case you can't generate adrenaline for the stance renewal or in case you are fighting k/d resistant foes. --[[Image:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG]]  Vallen Frostweaver  17:05, 8 August 2007 (CEST)

Whirlwind Attack, I found is better than Crude Swing because it is not easily interrupted. -- Faramir  (+Contribs*/*talk) 11:00, 7 August 2007 (CEST)
 * But Whirlwind attack is adren based and Crude Swing isn't allowing you to use it right away. Still, it can work though. --[[Image:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG]]  Vallen Frostweaver  17:05, 8 August 2007 (CEST)

Crude Swing has been changed... no idea if this will still work for this build anymore with the -40AL but at least it isn't interrupted so easily. --  Vallen Frostweaver  15:00, 10 August 2007 (CEST)
 * Not sure if that's a problem for this build. Most attacks won't get through, and with IAS, the -40 Armor does not occur too frequently anyways. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 18:50, 10 August 2007 (CEST)

Weapon mods: +15% damage while in a stance seems bad on this build because it is only in a stance part of the time (due to the short duration and long recharge on the 2 stances). Why not recommend 15^50 instead? 72.43.123.103 08:47, 11 December 2007 (CET)
 * I think you overlooked half the build. "On Your Knees!" refreshes stances so they can be used again.  --[[Image:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG]]  Vallen Frostweaver  06:59, 18 December 2007 (CET)

Heroes
Someone needs to test with heroes. Though I've an inkling they won't LR or DD without first sustaining significant damage. Who knows. -Shen 20:29, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Wilderness Survival
I'd say drop it for more Expertise, drop Troll and Dryder's, and bring some PvE skills. Someth like this

Optionals could be Whirlwind Attack, "YMLAD!", "Finish Him!", Yeti Smash, Whirling Defense, or any other good PvE skill. &mdash;  Skadiddly [슴Mc슴] Diddles  17:09, 2 March 2008 (EST)
 * WTB Dwarven Stability in variants. [[Image:Ebon Vanguard Sniper Support.jpg|20px]]  Huynh Sanity  20:35, 2 March 2008 (EST)

Dryder's defense makes you borderline invincible, and helps especially when tanking elementalists. I'd say put it back in. You don't really need more expertise in this build.--99.225.57.217 22:20, 19 June 2008 (EDT)
 * Oh and Pulverizing smash is stupid, since "On Your Knees!" drains all your adren.--99.225.57.217 22:21, 19 June 2008 (EDT)
 * If you're not lazy it's better in every way though. Its the magic of skill order that allows you to use both! &mdash;  Skakid  22:30, 19 June 2008 (EDT)
 * I do find Pulverizing Smash a bit tedious, but it does work if you have good timing. The problem is, if you fail with PS, you're screwed. On the subject of the high expertise, this build only has 2 skills that cost energy.  How about another energy attack like Irresistible Blow (handy against rangers with stances)?  Or an extra stance, you might want Whirling Defenses (lasts pretty long). FiveAcez 17:47, 26 June 2008 (EDT)

Antidote Signet?
This build is great until you become blind, and in places like Tomb of the Primeval Kings, blindness comes up a lot, and quickly resulting in my death if my monks can't get it off. Would bringing antidote signet help?FiveAcez 15:18, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
 * It removes blind, so...yes?  ɟoʇuɐʌ ʎʞɔıɹ [[Image:Panic_srsbsns.gif|37px]] 15:16, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
 * Dont act stupid. Would help a little i guess, no reason not to take it. Now that it removes another condition aswell, all the more reason. Azula TALK  20:23, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Moar Dwarven stability plz
builds alrdy good but dwarven stability would just make it more awesome Whiplash513 13:11, 27 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Doesn't need dwarven. Lightning reflexes is recharged before it ends. However i think whirlwind attack should be main bar. Life Guardian 16:36, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

D:
Bringin Dwarven Staility makes OYK very redundant and using it actually cripples the build, draining all your adrenaline.  Ricky vantof  12:28, 12 January 2009 (EST)
 * ^--Anonimous. 11:17, 16 January 2009 (EST)

yeah I don't even bring OYK when I use this (which isn't often). I just bring dwarven and throw in either dryder or whirling depnding on situation.

Another tag?
Can't we include a guide for this build to farm trolls and give it another tag? TedTheFarmer 11:15, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Archive-Pending
I'm pretty sure no one really runs this now, and it's kinda outdated. Discuss. Toraen 20:28, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Updating works too. Toraen 04:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It actually looks like it would be amazingly good. Near-constant blocking replaces warrior armor vs physical, high elemental armor soaks up the rest of the damage, and a good bar for the rest of it. The only thing it doesn't have is armor penetration that warriors get. And if you have another SY in the team then you're all set. Still seems to be a sturdy build imo.-- Ikimono Needs more Paragon [[Image:Monk-Paragon-icon.png|24px]] 19:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The archive-pending was before i updated it.  Life [[Image:WikiLOD7.gif]] 03:21, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived, as it's trashed otherwise. I reverted to what it was before Life updated it, since that was the outdated build. Toraen 08:27, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Name Change
Tbh, its not really a tank. Mebbe ES Ranger?  Life  03:21, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Weirdly Enough
This is still surprisingly effective in most of PvE. (For nostalgia purposes only) Kracatoan 21:29, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * surprisingly, so is this: User:Smity_Smitington/Legend_of_the_AoE_Master ;) Smity Smitington 21:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Surprisingly, you still are alive! Shadow  Computer coded  06:40, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I use Earth Shaker all the time on my ranger. Got three hammers for it even. -- Toraen   confer  07:45, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Why not unarchive? These days we have dwarven stability, crude swing, and save yourselves.-- Relyk 10:54, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I could write a huge Tl;dr on how this build sucks, but I would be wrong.  RąʂKɭɘş ♣  14/f/japan  11:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a new build champ. Feel free to submit it if you want. Don't unarchive, change it all, then have to rearchive when it gets trashed. That's silly. A new misery  11:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This is why I avoid making suggestions anymore.-- Relyk 14:26, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Have to actually do something sucks right? A new misery  08:16, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * ES is strong on any class! I'm going to make an ES monk tomorrow just to prove how leet pvx is at pves!  RąʂKɭɘş ♣  14/f/japan  08:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I merely propose the possibility of archiving. You make a sarcastic comment about how unarchiving it is pointless because it's going to be trashed and moved back anyways. Maybe if you gave actually reasons for why it shouldn't be unarchived, it would avoid wasting my time and yours. And no, my previous post had nothing to do with the amount of fucking effort it takes to post a new build. I'm not exactly sure you feel so inclined that unarchival is a retarded suggestion when the discussion so far has been at least optimistic.-- Relyk 09:23, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I wasn't being sarcastic at all. You are misreading me. I'm saying make a new build rather than risking having to revert the archive if the build fails. Read what I actually said, then read what you said and look at how you are massively overreacting. If you want an Earth Shaker ranger, make a new build. Generally speaking you shouldn't unarchive builds unless there are no changes or very minor changes, such as this being archived because Lightning Reflexes was nerfed to end after one block, but Whirling Defense being buffed 3 months later to do more or less the same thing as old Lightning Reflexes. Remember the days when you spent weeks trying to make me say something sarcastic? I never have any fucking idea where your head is Relyk. A new misery  09:31, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I misinterpreted. I was implying posting an updated build or moving this build back into testing. The whole way you phrased your comment as if I didn't know such already and referring to me as champ came off as demeaning. Generally you want to avoid having a build and archived build with same name if there is a possibility of it being vetted. It was archived because of trash rating after the same changes I gave for unarchiving it now. In the current state of PvE, the given reasons for archival no longer apply. If you prefer, we can push it all the way back to when it was called Stance Tank and used in PvP. For the current version archived, that was not the reason for the build's archival. If you had explained why unarchiving was silly, I would have understood that reason instead of getting the obviously wrong impression and act like an idiot.-- Relyk 10:28, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't really see any problem with an archived build and an active build having the same name, but if it worries you just move this one to something like LR Earth Shaker Ranger or make the new one Dwarvern Earth Shaker Ranger or something. A new misery  10:40, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

"This build has been archived as of 08:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC), for the following reasons: Outdated Scythe Rangers Warriors are a better option for Earth Shaker" 1. how is it outdated when nothing of the build has been nerfed? Misery's point of LF is silly because it's untrue and scythe rangers no longer exist. Saying warriors are better at this is a poor excuse for archive since assassins are better at dagger spam and dervs are better at FoWsc than wars (point being wars are still listed) I agree this should be unarchived because archive reasons are invalid. Want to improve them, Misery? Soi Sticker 10:12, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Mommy and daddy can handle their own problems.  RąʂKɭɘş ♣  14/f/japan  10:31, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Just what the fuck? That isn't what outdated means. A new misery  10:37, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Neither is there anything majorly better than this for a melee ranger. I know what it means. Soi Sticker 10:39, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Misery this whole conversation is moot. Leave him to his ignorance, I'm writing up a new build right now that everyone can 5-5.  RąʂKɭɘş ♣  14/f/japan  10:40, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh cool, someone is going to do what I said the first time instead of trying to argue with me for some reason. A new misery  10:42, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm like a handsome genie.  RąʂKɭɘş ♣  14/f/japan  13:43, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

The reasons for archiving were perfectly valid in '09 when it got archived. We really have no chance to change the reasons given after every patch or meta shift. Also, I'm a huge fan of rangers with hammers. I'm all in for trying to put the bar up to date. Guess it's an alright player bar if you want to run fucktons of AoE and a less-defensive team-setup. Don't get your hopes up, though. -- DANDY ^_^ -- 15:13, 13 February 2012 (UTC)