User talk:Bob fregman

/Archive 1 I reworked the monk on Build:Team - Fear/Famine|Fear/Famine. is there anything else i can change to make the builds better? ZamaneeJinn 04:03, 9 July 2007 (CEST)

I disagree with your vote to touch ranger, it IS universal and can easily have 1 or 2 skills changed to counter kiting. Crippling can just be chucked onto another enemy, and touchers are not easy to kill. Even though everyone hates the build to pieces, it deserves a great rating, truly. ~~ Napalm Flame ^_^ (talk)·(contributions) 02:58, 11 July 2007 (CEST)

5 votes are required for a category change. - Skakid9090 04:32, 11 July 2007 (CEST)

if you ever need a page deleted, just tag it with {{delete|reasonhere}} - Skakid9090 22:41, 14 July 2007 (CEST)

test build

I gotted good rates on my build you gave 1-1-1. Plx test or something cause I beleive the build is more than meets the eye. ‽-(єяøηħ) ^{no u} 05:55, 18 July 2007 (CEST)

Build:A/any_Seeping_Punishment Seriously though, for a Seeping build it flows and acts rather nice. I was suprised at how well it worked out. ‽-(єяøηħ) ^{no u} 19:54, 18 July 2007 (CEST)

lolz 2+2=4

you said youd bumpo up quiverer rating if RA tag was removed... here you go ^^ — RAWR! Skakid9090 01:13, 1 August 2007 (CEST)

I'm a man of my word Bob fregman 04:23, 1 August 2007 (CEST)

Build:P/E Focused Flame Paragon

Hey I was kind of confused on your vote on one of the builds I submitted. 2 innovation? Most rated it 4 or 5, then you rate innovation the lowest part? --Victoryisyours 22:30, 9 August 2007 (CEST)

In response to your vote on my Anti-Shiro build, I'd like to note that modded Moebius Farmer builds still have a bad habit of dying when facing Shiro one on one. I've done a lot of testing in the Shiro area and found that build to be the best and holding him down, as well as dropping his health relatively effectively. Please test my builds before you rate them, or at least advise a way to improve the build. Thanks. cedave_{(contributions_buildpage)} 01:09, 13 August 2007 (CEST)

In nightfall, the build is pathetic, a waste of a slot for most of the mission and then only marginally useful at the very end. In factions, it's marginally useful in 1 mission. There's no reason that the wiki should document a build specifically to tank shiro, particualrly when already existing builds can do it. Bob fregman 01:39, 13 August 2007 (CEST)

Keep in mind the Wiki's policies. Builds can be meant for a specific purpose, so long as they achieve said purpose more effectively than another build. As for Nightfall, I've yet to find a group that isn't extremely happy to have brought me along, and in Factions, I haven't lost a single match against Shiro using a prescribed nuking team, including HM runs. I've just about gotten it to the point that I can take him using heroes alone. (Micro-management is still an issue...) Also, did you actually test the build? cedave_{(contributions_buildpage)} 02:35, 13 August 2007 (CEST)

According to past precedent on Build:N/Me SV Gate of Madness, we do not need builds which serve a purpose so utterly minimal. This build has a poor damage output, so im rather suprised that group in GoM want to take it along, particularly since it's only useful for a few moments. I beat shiro in factions, on hard mode, using only heroes and henches on my warrior, monk, and elementalist, and i beat him on normal on every one of my chars, so being able to hero shiro with a build is nothing special. The moebius build is more effective, and actually can kill shiro. this is a tanking build that has no use except in 4 minutes of the entire game, and even there, its use is minimal.Bob fregman 04:29, 13 August 2007 (CEST)

And also, this build uses the same exact defense skills as the moebius, but with vigorous instead of mystic regen, which the moebius can use it is so desired.Bob fregman 04:34, 13 August 2007 (CEST)

Build:A/E Shocking Moebius Striker

Hi, I saw your rating on my Shock build saying that it caused exhaustion too fast and it tended to pile up. I would like to know how you were using shock, because I have never had energy problems with that build unless I was forced to chainkill 3-4 people in a row. What sort of equipment are using? I currently run around 38 energy on my sin for this build and 545 health, maybe it is because you are running at a lower energy that you are seeing exhaustion pile up. Another problem might be that you are using shock to start the chain as soon as it recharges to start the chain. That is not how the build is suppose to work, wait for 10-13 seconds after the last attack chain to restart it so that twisting fangs has the time to recharge and not right after shock recharges. liangliz 12:46 (gmt+1), 13 august 2007

The point is that it's reliant on shock. An opponent dies, you have to go use shock again. If you wait the exhaustion off, then your wasting time. You chain costs 30 energy, 25 if we dont count shock itself. A few points of exhaustion really makes it tough to use.Bob fregman 17:25, 13 August 2007 (CEST)

AWARD!!!!!!

you win the Most Honest Voter award, congrats! — Skakid9090

— Skakid9090 07:14, 19 August 2007 (CEST)

time to make some room im my trophy case! Bob fregman 07:50, 19 August 2007 (CEST)

Build:Me/E FC Invocation

Your vote on it was removed due to PvXwiki:Real Vetting briefly forbidding author votes. For the moment, the matter is undecided. Feel free to vote again on the build. --Edru viransu//QQ about me 05:16, 22 August 2007 (CEST)

ok, thanks for the heads up. Bob fregman 05:30, 22 August 2007 (CEST)

Revote

Please do not make Build Comparisons when voting. Thanks! Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 06:16, 22 August 2007 (CEST)

You gotta be kidding me? I knew real vetting wasn't going to well, but i thought it'd only get better, now this is a total step backwords.EDIT: anyways, thanks for the note Bob fregman 06:17, 22 August 2007 (CEST)

Do not compare SoJ Sins to SP, or SF to RI. Thanks! Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 06:18, 22 August 2007 (CEST)

Elaborate

your vote here has no grounds to it, nor any reasons other than "Primary rangers are better" which is an ignorant thing to say in itself imo, because they are used for very different reasons. could you please further explain your opinion, change your vote, remove it, or something? thx in advance, ~ ZamaneeJinn(contribs) 23:55, 29 August 2007 (CEST)

on the build page itself, the build is compared to a primary ranger, so if you want to make them out to be "very different" then maybe you should remove the notes from the page itself. I fail to see how im being ignorant, the build does not perform as well as a primary ranger, and if you want to support the party with shout, then there are WAY better ways to do it then on a barrage paragon. I'll leave my vote as is. If you really want to do something about it, contact an admin like readem or grinch and they may or may not strike it. If they strike it, then ill go back and revote on it for you, in which case the score will likely drop since in my explanation, ill discover that the builds a bigger peice of shit then i initially thought.Bob fregman 01:51, 30 August 2007 (CEST)

It is simply not a very good build. Done, end story, end NPA+BS, kthnxbb. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 01:57, 30 August 2007 (CEST)

That, and he proved my case for me. EDIT: he=bob ~ ZamaneeJinn(contribs)

Build:A/E AoD Shock Sin

Hiya, I agree with your comment about the build's effectiveness in RA/TA (it's still better than Shadow Prison regardless, but shadow prison wasn't very good to begin with). Thus, I removed those categories from the build. Could you revote based on current cats? Thanks :) -Auron 12:13, 31 August 2007 (CEST)

Ya np, i was considering removing them myself and voting higher, but i decided that it probably wasnt a good idea.Bob fregman 05:17, 1 September 2007 (CEST)

Build:W/R Rapid Fire Warrior

Please take back your vote on this build, or at least edit it, you rated it 2-2-2 while everyone else rated it around 4 or 5, i don't know what you have against the build or me but i most of the votse seem to think this build should be a great build.Tsupert 14:14, 3 September 2007 (CEST)

no, i don't care what other people rated the build.Bob fregman 19:20, 3 September 2007 (CEST)

Bob votes what he feels like. That's why he got the honest voter award. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ〚〛 21:53, 3 September 2007 (CEST)

A/W Displaced Spiker

Your recent change to your vote on this build is highly abusive. YOU didn't see the build fit for the Great category so you lowered your vote just to knock it back into the good category. I know about NPA and what not but... you are a 100% Arrogant, Abusive, Tyrannic Jack-Ass. I know that i can not really change the vote or whatever, but i just wanted to give some "feedback" towards your arrogant actions. You are indeed not as awesome as you think. Have a nice life? Echo Ftw 01:25, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

=P forgot to add that you attempted to cover up your move with a minor edit tag and that THIS is why wiki builds dont work. =) ty Echo Ftw 01:27, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Don't violate NPA. Use the PvXwiki:Admin noticeboard if you have a problem. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ〚〛 02:31, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

I did not go back and change my vote for that build, in fact, theres only 1 build on the wiki that ive gone back to and lowered my vote on because i dont think it should be in the great category, and that's the touch ranger, which is still in the great category anyways. That was my initial vote on the build, so really, your statement has no premise in fact. If i put a minor edit on it(honestly i dont know the what constitutes minor and major anyway) it was most likley a MC, as i never intentionally do that, unless its a spelling error or something. I've explained the vote, honestly, i dont care about any of the other things you think, so thanks, i will have a nice life, and wont let a pvx rating ruin it for me.EDIT* Actually, after checking my contributions, ive used the minor edit checks alot lately. Guess i just do it without noticing. Bob fregman 02:42, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Votes

has anyone noticed, or does this guy like to vote low on plenty of builds that have gotten high ratings. I think he wants only his favorite builds to be voted high, maybe bias of some sort. notice all the complaints aboveTsupert 21:05, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Wrong. As Grinch said above, Bob is actually an honest voter. He doesn't get influenced by others. See the "Honest Voter Award" up top. Punjab 23:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

I like to think i vote on a build exactly as i see it. Some builds, after i vote on them, end up with a score lower then i think is right. for example a build that i think should be good, is actually other. I blame this on the current voting system. Universality should be more important, and innovation should be removed imo. However, seeing how it is right now, i tend to vote a bit more strictly then most. I think that makes the wiki a bit more credible, since builds in the great category are being put under a little bit of scrutiny occasionally. I generally dont vote 5-5-5, and if i do then its actually a kickass build. Idk why i bothered explaining this to you, since your just upset that i bashed your build.Bob fregman 02:44, 7 September 2007 (CEST)

PvX:NPA

This is NPA. As much as I love you, I can't make exceptions to the rule. Please don't violate NPA. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 03:08, 9 October 2007 (CEST)

yeah sorry. Though i understand its NPA, its also an honest question. Either way, wont happen again.Bob fregman 03:10, 9 October 2007 (CEST)

Ya, it seemed like a person attack, and how can you honestly ask that?--§ Eloc § 06:41, 9 October 2007 (CEST)

Well from a literal perspective...do you? Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 07:03, 9 October 2007 (CEST)

Sure, I suppose so.--§ Eloc § 18:05, 9 October 2007 (CEST)

Honestly, i was just trying to(in a less then friendly way) point out how your logic and reasoning is rediculously fallacious and your arguments were just silly. In hindsight, i probably didnt need too, but i was almost feeling sad reading your talk page.Bob fregman 20:53, 9 October 2007 (CEST)

Ya, I already got dealt with for my voting habits, no need to bring it back up.--§ Eloc § 01:30, 10 October 2007 (CEST)

It wasnt your voting habits that i was necesarily reffering to, rather, it was the way you responded when talked to about it(ie. how can i instigate something when i dont even know what that means).Bob fregman 01:36, 10 October 2007 (CEST)

Meh, probly due to me losing all lack of respect of Guildwiki and its forks as several people have done recently, but it's over with, so no matter.--§ Eloc § 02:47, 10 October 2007 (CEST)

Rt/E

You've probably seen this coming but, you find this a solid build but you find it unfocused???! well my eyes kept spinning because I don't know what you find unfocused, WoQ on improtant casters, like a Nuker or Prot/Heal monk or an SS Necro if you find that needed, weapons spells are perfect, Splinter for AoE, and Warmonger for FULL interruption on casters.. I want a SOLID respond on my post why you did'nt gave 5-5-5 like the others ty Tomoko 11:58, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

First off, i dont care if you want a solid repost, since you have no authority to demand that of anyone. Second off, the build in itself is unfocused. WoQ is good for healers and prot monks and certain others, but most monks recharhe fast enough for pve anyways, and the use of woq is good, but nothing incredible. Splinter is good. Warmonger has limited use. There are only a few areas in the game where id say you need to have full interuption on casters. Everywhere else, id just think that its a waste. The other skills in the build seem to have just been picked at random.Bob fregman 12:52, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

Sorry but if you really used this you wouldnt respond on that way, Warmonger + Dervish = Shutdown 100%, Splinter = AoE, and other skills random = wtf, you should observate build better, like the Shouting Soldier. Tomoko 16:04, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

the shouting soldier is not good at all. Its a hammer build, nearly all of which use flail as an ias. Flail is superior to soldiers stance for spiking, since it isnt elite and allows for the use of a tougher elite. The shouting soldier really isnt that good. Warmongers plus dervish is good spellcaster shutdown, if they are well bunched, but again, there arent alot of areas where you need to have them shut down. Its a plus, yes, but it doesnt really make a big difference in alot of places. Splinter is good, as i said. the build recieved a solid rating from me, so i dont really get your complaints. Bob fregman 20:48, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

Because 1): This is the first Rit Support in this way, can support the whole team in anyway, and if you dislike Warmongers take Nightmare or Sundering, this is the basic build. Tomoko 21:12, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

since you're obviously disgruntled, and i dont really want to continue this discussion much longer, hes full justification as to why i feel a 4-4-4 is plenty jutified, perhaps even generous. Ill break it down skill by skill. First you got WoQ, a good skill in itself, on paper. But in practice, what is it doing for your pve team. Maybe your monks heal recharges 2 seconds faster, 3 in a good scenario. Your eles RI only takes 4 seconds to recharge. These matters of a few seconds really arent that important in PvE. Next you got splinter, which is good. Then warmongers, which is situational. Warmongers can expediate runs a bit, but is only really useful in certain situations. Others times, it might interupt a few skills but reallys, its just not necesary, and really doesnt do anything worthwhile. AR is ok, a melee range nuke with a small radius that deals good damage. its a good support skill, but is nothing to make the build stand out. Essence strike is redundant, since the e management is fine with gole. Bloodsong doesnt serve much of a purpose but to give essence strike something to work off of. GoLE and FomF are fine. Really, the build is good, but its not the god of a build you seem to think it is. If you want to keep complaining, go ahead. The support isnt that great, and using weapon spells isnt that new.Bob fregman 21:15, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

Also, you are quoted as saying "this build is PERFECT as it is" so dont give me any of this "this is just the basic build".Bob fregman 21:17, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

• Sigh* that, the basic build yes.. but at any builds there are variants no? and you don't like Warmonger so it seems atleast not overall :P so use Nightmare Weapon, so no need to vote lower because you think the skills are just thrown in there. Tomoko 22:27, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

Tomoko, just because 1 person rated "your" build lower than a perfect 5-5-5 doesn't mean you have to panic, this isn't a competition. The build is still in the great category.--Victoryisyours (talk/pvxcontribs) 21:44, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

I know, but still find it kind of vague why he rates 4-4-4 thats all :P and of course i want to maintain 5-5-5 ^^ Tomoko 22:27, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

I wrote a good amount on why its a 4-4-4, so idk what you call vague.Bob fregman 23:24, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

If You Get a Chance

Build talk:Team - Contagion Pressure#Bob Fregman's Vote. Thanks. *Defiant Elements* +talk 05:11, 13 October 2007 (CEST)

BoA

What sin build? I can only think of AoD, which is used merely on a dual recall based split. The YAA sin bar is a gimmick (as well as the soldiers), and the Trampling version is only effective in HB. Though is lacks proficiency in RA, due to only having a single hex, wtf cares? It is RA. The only bar that even remotely compares is the shattering sins (and they fail at ganking). Either explain, or the entire basis of your vote is flawed. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 03:12, 17 October 2007 (CEST)

I think, and maybe im off base here, that instead of trying to act so logical, you should instead try to act reasonable. You think that the basis to my vote is flawed, however your reasoning for removing my vote was "i disagree". In any voting, or rating, system, removing a vote simply because you disagree, and then further jutifying your reason for disagreeing with oppinions, is flawed logic. The build in question, is listed for basically ever pvp area, half of which it simply doesnt perform in, and the other half i feel there are better sins for the job. My vote on the build is not biased. i dont want to bash it because its doing well. Originally i rated the build all 5s. Steadily, through nerfs and shifts in the meta, i feel the build has become outclassed and fails to perform. IMO, the shattering assault, crippling ganker, and AoD shock perform better in their respective areas. Even the grenths grasp assassin i feel is better. Overall, i dont feel your removal of my vote was warranted, since your reasoning was silly. Not everyone agrees with you.Bob fregman 03:33, 17 October 2007 (CEST)

Also, your re-removal of the vote, with no legit reason, even after id explained myself, is completely uncalled for. According to PvX:VETTING, theres no category for removal called "an admin disagrees with the vote". The fact that you cant logically rationalize at a level above that of a Jr. high student doesnt mean you get to just take it over my head and remove the rating without reason. Oddly enough, your basically the only admin that does this. I voted(relativly) low on a build that DE made himself, and his response was extremely reasonable, whereas yours is just immature and uncalled for.Bob fregman 04:00, 17 October 2007 (CEST)

The reasoning behind your vote, is simply terrible tbh. Votes should be based on a builds performance, not w/e your "opinion" may be. That is a common misconception made by many. The build is by far, the most effective (all-purpose) DPS sin. Countless guilds have run the exact same chain, including: [DF], [vD], and [MoJ]. Every highly ranked person in HB, have also used that build. What evidence do you have, to support your claim? Face it, you are voting against the majority, and unfortunately for you, the majority is actually right for once! I may be the only admin who removes votes with poor rational, but someone has to fucking do it. Otherwise it will only be a matter of time, before Shock Axe will be unfavored due to "To similar to other axe builds". Oh, and I suggest looking at the date of my removal bob, before making such brash accusations. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 04:36, 17 October 2007 (CEST)

for starters, i didnt make any brash accusations about the time of removal. I re-added the vote yesterday, and you re-removed it even after id explained myself. As i stated, i had rated the build a 5-5-5, but now i feel that its use has dropped significantly, so its really not me just voting against the majority. My oppinion is based off the builds performance. As you said, high ranked HB "have" used the build. When they did, i had it rated significantly higher. Most high ranked guilds no longer use this, at least not like they used to. I didnt vote it low because it was like other sins, so your shock axe point is not only irrelevant, but also a slipperly slope argument. You have no point. You removed it because it was too low for your liking.Bob fregman 20:58, 17 October 2007 (CEST)

*Sigh* I removed your vote, before any explanation was offered. If you had even taken a few minutes to cross reference, you would have realized this. Secondly, the build is still used by a great number of Top HB players. Only the top twenty use variations of it, and their entire teams are uniquely modified (such as dual Rt split, Smiter’s Boon corrupter, ect). Just because a build has fallen out of the metagame, does NOT mean it has lost effectiveness. This is what you are failing to understand. The Expel Paragon is still a great build, but since no one is running hex meta, its uses are limited. My Shock Axe point is extremely relevent to this conversation. I have removed multiple votes stating that it was too similar to Rending Axe. This is a foolish misconception! Unless you have extensive knowledge on sin builds/chains, I cannot possibly see how your reasoning is valid. I have spent 200+ hours playing a very similar build, and it is very effective. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 22:47, 17 October 2007 (CEST)

For your first point. you removed my vote X number of days ago for the reason that you "disagree". Yesterday, i re-added the vote stating that i really dont care whether or not you disagree. You contacted me here and i explained my reasoning. At this time, the vote was still there. Some time between me explaining and me checking again, you deleted the vote, again, despite my explanation. That is what im referring to. More then just the top 20 use the variations, and that may well be(in addition to many other factors of course) one of the reasons they are in the top 20. I am not failing to understand anything. The reason it has fallen from the meta is because its effectiveness has dropped. Against the meta, it no longer performs at a high level. I understand that builds that arent meta can, and often do, still perform well, but in this case, the build has lost its effectiveness. The point on the shock axe is irrelevant, because i didnnt bash this sin because it was to similar to others. In addition, we are not talking about the shock axe. The fact that you are mentioning it is either a slipperly slope or a red herring. Remember, every analogy is a false analogy(no, not literally, but for all intents and purposes, youve probably never seen, nor made, a letimate analogy. I dont care if you think my reasoning is valid, particularly since your arguments are littered with fallacies. I dont personally feel that the build is that great, and a decent sum of people agree with me. these people, like what you did with me, had their votes removed, basically on the premise that they were wrong and you could provide reasoning why. Perahps your only argument that you really have is that you're an admin and you think that people wont bother to go against you, since its become apparent to me that you really have no logical reasoning behind the removal of the votes. I dont care if you disagree with me, you are not an expert on this issue, and your oppinion carries exactly the same weight as anyone elses. Provide some facts, some legit logical reasoning behind which the vote should be removed, or stop crying and get over it.Bob fregman 23:25, 17 October 2007 (CEST)

False. I removed your vote before any explanation was given; shortly after I left the note. Facts r gud. The top twenty only recently began using the new variation, simply because of trampling. I understand HB much better than you do Bob. The reason the Shadow Prison Assassin has fallen out of the metagame, is because few teams can handle (defensively) assassins in general. Good guilds such as MoJ, run sins all the time (mostly BoA/AoD sin splits w/ ZB Recall runner). Once more, you do not see how Shock Axe is relevant...the Crippling Ganker is a direct variation of the SP assassin and nothing more. It is limited to HB exclusively, and can only be used by the best. I don't even run it, due to how difficult it is to execute a chain. Those people were wrong and or biased...and my argument carries farther than yours does. On multiple occasions your vote has been questioned, and finally you are plain and simply wrong. I spend multiple hours a day doing some sort of PvP. My average is 3-4 every weekday. On weekends +7. And you? How many hours have you spent playing an assassin? I don't fucking care about your feelings or thoughts Bob; I am just removing an inaccurate vote. Think what you want, It doesn't matter to me. Oh, and Grammar is ftw. Reading your posts is difficult beyond words. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 23:50, 17 October 2007 (CEST)

Also, questionable votes and NPA warnings seem to be 90% of your talk page. c/d? Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 23:56, 17 October 2007 (CEST)

I strongly beleive you are incorrect, as i can almost definatly recall checking the votes after my explanation and seeing that it was still there. Even if not, you were wrong in you second removal of it, since i posted the explanation only 15 mins after you questioned me on it here, so your removing of it again was still unwarrented, imo. TBH, i dont care what you think either, the only difference is, you make an effort to try and undermine what i think. Your argument, from a logical standpoint, doesnt carry itself at all. Your use of fallacies to prove a point doesnt further an argument. I probably dont play as much as you. You're claiming to clock around 34 hours a week, to which i cant compare. I have football and wrestling during the week, so i probably only clock about 10 hours a week, often much less. That being said, you still have no right to assert that my vote was innacurate, since that is purely your oppinion. The shock axe, from a logical and reasonable standpoint, is not relevant. I dont care if my page is about people questioning my votes, particularly since most of them are the authors of the builds, and most of the builds are doing fairly poorley. Honestly, before this, i didnt like you but i at least thought you were smart. This has shown me that in addition to having significant issues in dealing with people and acting rationally, that you also lack logic, and just try to hold your adminship over peoples heads to circumvent the fact that you cant think rationally. Sorry about my grammer, its the web, a wiki nonetheless, and i really cant be bothered to check or edit any typos or punctuation errors. Seriously, get a clue, or get off my back.Bob fregman 01:56, 18 October 2007 (CEST)

Dude, I removed the vote 3 minutes after I gave you notice. It is simply not possible for you to have responded in that time frame. Stop being so self-righteous, and get a fucking grip. I have given you countless valid reasons...that you are unable to comprehend. I am done being cordial with you, as I simply cannot stand such groundless arrogance. Your sheer ignorance astonishes me, and you retort merely with weak reversals. You support baseless arguments, and have little GW experience (or so it appears). Your punctuation and spelling is atrocious, which means you use IE...thus, you have absolutely no creditability. I am not the type to back down, when my ability to rationalize is questioned. Oh, and it doesn't take a fucking genius to spell "believe". QQ Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 04:56, 18 October 2007 (CEST)

You havent given any logica valid reasons. You stated that my vote was bad and then supported that statement with your oppinions that other builds are worse. You also stated that it has been used in the past by many top ranked guilds. Your only other argument is that you've removed shhock axe votes because they compared the shock axe to other warrior builds which are similar, which is irrelevant and a false analogy, since my vote wasnt comparing the SP sin to other similar assassin builds. I cant make statements on your ability tp play GW, since i dont know how good you are. What i can say is that i do have a good deal more fame then you, though we both know that doesnt necesarily matter. Sorry about my typing, but theres no way you can state that becuas ei use IE that im not credible. Your ability to logic is highly questioned, since so far every one of your arguments uses at least 1 logical fallacy, which i dont think you recognize. In fact, i dont even think you know what a fallacy is. Like i said, get a clue or get off my back.

Was that not just a personal attack on bob Readem? Here is a quote from you. "I spend multiple hours a day doing some sort of PvP. My average is 3-4 every weekday. On weekends +7. And you? How many hours have you spent playing an assassin? I don't fucking care about your feelings or thoughts Bob; I am just removing an inaccurate vote. Think what you want, It doesn't matter to me." What do you call that?--Victoryisyours 02:31, 18 October 2007 (CEST)

No different than: "Provide some facts, some legit logical reasoning behind which the vote should be removed, or stop crying and get over it.Bob fregman 23:25, 17 October 2007 (CEST)"

The vote was baed, but not necessarily worthy of removal, and Bob, if you returned the same vote without any change after Readem removed it, you broke 1RV and of course he would remove it again. Also, honestly, why does this really matter? By this point any one(or even several) votes on the build won't have much effect. If 30 people voted 0-0-0 on it, it would still have 3.15 or so. --Edru viransu// QQ about me/sysop 14:19, 18 October 2007 (CEST)

Show noob votes the door, not indifference. We give them victory for every ignored 0-0-0. 16:33, 18 October 2007 (CEST)

Wrong, first of all readems removal of my vote violates real vetting, since his removal reason was "i disagree". In addition, in my re-adding of the vote, i explained that i dont care if he agrees or not.Bob fregman 21:02, 18 October 2007 (CEST)

"What i can say is that i do have a good deal more fame then you, though we both know that doesnt necesarily matter. Sorry about my typing, but theres no way you can state that becuas ei use IE that im not credible." QFT lolgfg Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 22:49, 18 October 2007 (CEST)

Im honestly really suprised that your behavior, attitude, and general actions with regards to other wiki users is considered acceptable as an administrator. Your certainly an anomaly among the admins here. I honestly recommend that instead of playing gw 7+ hours every weekend that you spend some of that time being around people, so that when it comes to customer service, you dont come off as so immature and irrational.Bob fregman 22:55, 18 October 2007 (CEST)

Both Readem and Bob violated NPA but that's not what's important. If you two are arguing over a wiki dedicated to Guild Wars and are trying to argue how the vote was valid based on hours of Guild Wars PvP spent, well... I'll make this a tad blunt so there's no double speak to jump around: GROW A PAIR AND WALK OUTSIDE, INTO THE GREAT BEYOND. MEET SOME PEOPLE. FIND A GIRL. LIVE YOUR LIFE. For example, you may have noticed I haven't been on lately: this is due to me going outside and meeting some people and finding a girl and living my life. I mean, the fact that this epic wikidrama ensued is pretty pitiful. If you don't want to grow a pair, walk outside, into the great beyond, meet some people, find a girl, and live you life then that's FINE but stop arguing about petty garbage. Both of you have to find some sort of compromise on MSN or something and take your heads out of your asses. Neither of you are Herakles- you are not demigods, you are just normal people, so don't try to act like them. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 23:26, 18 October 2007 (CEST)

I blocked Bob for NPA violations. I would have blocked Readem but he's blocked himself for whatever reason. Take a chill pill, stop flexing ya'lls e-peens, and talk about the build instead of each other. -Auron 23:59, 18 October 2007 (CEST)

They might be gay grinch, way to be insensitive — Skakid9090 00:08, 19 October 2007 (CEST)

Might be geo-sexual. You should have told them to go find a nice rock. ): --71.229.204.25 00:11, 19 October 2007 (CEST)

My name is Geo, and I do not endorse the above statement! :P -- Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.>.cнаt^ 06:52, 22 October 2007 (CEST)

Contrary to popular belief, the only time your penis isn't flexed is when your aroused. The flexed muscles stop most of the blood flow. When they're released, it allows blood to rush in which causes it to, er, extend. --Teh Uber Pwnzer 04:20, 31 October 2007 (CET)

Ancestors Haze

Build:A/Rt Ancestors Haze Trash? It's not that bad for an anti-caster spiker surely? :( 0 for innovation? Might use some similar skills to the Assacaster but the way it works, the usage, and how it all comes together is so different. Energy management isn't great, that I won't argue, but it's not meant to be an attack spammer, it's meant to deliver a spike and GTFO. Rather than discuss this here feel free to take this discussion to the builds talkpage if you would prefer to, I also ask you to reconsider your vote somewhat, though a simple discussion over it would be a good start, thanks for your time. Unreal Havoc 04:32, 31 October 2007 (CET)

Overall, i feel the build is a neat idea, but it really isnt that great. I'm not a big fan of assacasters at all. With no energy management and a very high energy bar, this really isnt a good caster. This spikes much slower than your typical caster, so much slower in fact that the extra recharge from DP isnt even needed. This does only slightly more damage then your typical caster but lacks some of the utility and cant pressure all too well. 6 seconds of daze is ok, but it really doesnt change the fact that this is just a slower and less threatening variant of the assacaster.Bob fregman 23:47, 31 October 2007 (CET)

I really beg to differ. I will agree energy is something that can be an issue, however I feel the trade off is worth it because the spike is delivered pretty quickly and will take down casters with relevant ease. Dazed followed up by Dancing Daggers which interrupt any spells attempted to be cast thanks to Dazed followed by the knockdown from Entangling Asp give little time for the caster to breath, never mind heal. A quick Augury of Death followed by Signet of Toxic Shock then more interrupts from a recharged Dancing Daggers while they're still Dazed ensure a very quick and satisfying death with little time for the caster to react and save themself. I also find it hard to see how you think it spikes slower than an average Assassin Caster when it does more damage in a quicker amount of time. I won't sit here and argue my point, you will think what you will and vote accordingly I respect that, but trash? I think perhaps you have misjudged the whole concept and purpose of the build, and misunderstood just what it can do, and again I ask you to reconsider your vote. Last but not least, thanks for the civil reply, some people get really uptight about stuff like this lol. Unreal Havoc 23:58, 31 October 2007 (CET)

Unless DD is bugged, it won't interrupt anyone, regardless of whether they're dazed. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 00:06, 1 November 2007 (CET)

Why would it not interrupt? Under Dazed the caster is easily interrupted right? Or have I missed something? :s Regardless of that, it does perform a good spike, causing a variety of conditions which allow the target to be easily interrupted by an ally in cases of dual spikes etc too. A ranger with Needling Shot would have a field day with someone spiked by this. :) Unreal Havoc 00:14, 1 November 2007 (CET)

Easily interrupted means attacks interrupt them. DD is a spell. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 00:22, 1 November 2007 (CET)

You know what? You're right! How did I miss that?! :o However having just done some RA with it I still feel it's worth more than a trash rating, Caster hate this! Perhaps need some refinement and any ideas you guys may have to improving it would be very much appreciated. Unreal Havoc 00:46, 1 November 2007 (CET)

the build, in it of itself, doesnt really take advantage of the dazed at all. Beguiling haze really only weaken the assacaster build.Bob fregman 20:13, 2 November 2007 (CET)

Other than adding constant knockdowns I think it's a good way to slow down a caster enough to get your spike off without them outhealing you, especially monks in cases of dual spiking with another build like a SP sin. You think it would perhaps be more effective with another shadow step perhaps? Liko AoD or something? Unreal Havoc 20:17, 2 November 2007 (CET)

The variant that uses SoJ is better imo, since the kd utility is better then daze, and it also has energy management. I dont really like the idea of using a shadow step on an assacaster. At melee range, a dagger chain deals more damage faster then the caster, so i dont really see the need of a point blank sin caster.Bob fregman 20:44, 2 November 2007 (CET)

See here's the thing, Ancestors Rage makes a big difference to the amount of damage done. It's all over that quick the majority of casters don't have a chance. They find it hard to quickly retaliate, and under pressure of allies attacking them are pretty much going to be interrupted. This has a knockdown which when paired with Daze is very effective. While Shadow Steps on casters aren't to everyones liking it works well for this one thanks to the higher armour level than the standard caster. If you find it not to your liking, ok. However a 0 for Innovation? Even you said yourself above that it was a nice idea. :D IMO a trash build is one that doesn't work, period. This works, it does what it is designated to do fine, the only main issue it tends to run into is energy management, that's pretty much its main flaw, which even I'll admit. Unreal Havoc 04:36, 4 November 2007 (CET)

While ill agree on ancestors rage, i have to disagree about your statement on daze. The knockdown pairs horribly with daze, since whats the point in dazing them if they are going to be unable to cast spells anyway since they are kd'd. The SoJ variant keeps them perma kd's, and soj deals damage that is roughly equivalent to the damage dealt by ancestors, thus accomplishing the shutdown and damage while maintaining its energy and thus providing better pressure at range. The innovation is because it is still an assacaster.Bob fregman 04:42, 4 November 2007 (CET)

But you see the difference is one knockdown alone probably wouldn't be enough to slow down a caster, hence why I added Dazed, because it slows down the casters casting enough to make sure they can't out heal you while you deliver the spike, as they do get back up at some point. If I remember rightly the SoJ Sin caster has conditional kockdowns ie: the foe has to be attacking, that's no good against a monk who doesn't attack. A shadow step is nessacary to make Ancestors Rage work into the spike as it only damages adjacent opponents, so Beguiling Haze seems like the most fitting choice given that there isn't space to add say Iron Palm for another Knockdown. If I can't convince you to change your vote in any slight way at all then do you think you can help try and improve it? Unreal Havoc 04:51, 4 November 2007 (CET)

Actually, if you look at it, if you chain your skills on the SoJ variant they will be on the ground for all of the damage. 1 kd is 2 seconds. Entagnling asp is cast, then SoTS, which casts faster due to DP. With the aftercast, they basically will be standing for only a split second before being kd'd again. In addition, on the Beguiling variant, 33% of the daze is wasted since while they are kd'd the condition does nothing. The daze, though sometimes useful, simply doesnt provide enough benefit to warrant its tremendous energy toll, imo.Bob fregman 05:02, 4 November 2007 (CET)

Well... A shadow Step is most defintely needed for the spike, so I guess the best option is AoD seems it offers an escape route, a little cheaper to and allows points to be transfered into Channeling to max it out at 12, your thoughts? Unreal Havoc 05:06, 4 November 2007 (CET)

DaMn thats really long and full of arguing no noe needs to really read xD--Shadowsin 22:39, 19 November 2007 (CET)

Thankyou

For your post earlier on my talk page. I think perhaps I have been a bit out of order and perhaps reading into some stuff a bit too much, so sorry if I annoyed you (or anyone else). Friends? :) Unreal Havoc 04:15, 4 November 2007 (CET)

it's no problems at all, and i definatly dont hold anything against you. I hope that you do decide to stay, and i think if you take things a litte less personally that you'll have a considerably better experience on the wiki. Friends indeed.Bob fregman 04:21, 4 November 2007 (CET)

I have a new friend! :o (Breaks open Champagne). That means you have to visit my talkpage for a chat every now and then you know. =) Unreal Havoc 04:27, 4 November 2007 (CET)

Thanks (again?)

for your input regarding the vote removal. Nice userboxes also. Shogunshen 14:47, 4 November 2007 (CET)

Build:A/W Unstable Assassin

Even with changing the lead, the first 3 skills take 25 energy. The only reasonable spot for a lead would be black lotus strike. If you used a 5 energy lead, that would leave you with 5 energy, not enough to use Lotus Strike. If you wait a couple of seconds after you used Mark of Instability to restore energy, that gives the opposing team that much time to remove the hex. Your trying to get around the SP sin and HotO nerf, but using unsuspecting strike just is not viable. --Lann 02:48, 19 November 2007 (CET)

btw, My rating was when you had unsuspecting strike in the build. --Lann 02:48, 19 November 2007 (CET)

Even with unsuspecting, you can just barely pull off the chain. the first 3 use 25, unsuspecting 10 and lotus 10. You have a total of 42 energy. Automatically(aftercast) you must wait 1 second after MoI. Shadow prison and unsuspecting take around 1.7 seconds, just barely recovering 3 energy for lotus strike. In addition, if you want to be more comfortable, vamp daggers can be swapped for zealous, giving you a cushion of 1 energy for lotus.Bob fregman 02:53, 19 November 2007 (CET)

And i know what version your rating was from, i changed it, and that's why i contacted you.Bob fregman 02:54, 19 November 2007 (CET)

Until the build uses Black Lotus Strike, my rating stays true. A mabye yes it might or a mabye no will not make me change my rating. Has to many energy issues any other way. --Lann 03:09, 19 November 2007 (CET)

The lead attack is optional, you choose what you want to use. There are 3 options, each of which has its uses. In addition, i just provided how the energy can be managed, to which you had no response. Energy is tough, but it can be managed and between spikes there is ample time to refill. There is enough energy to perform the spike.Bob fregman 03:12, 19 November 2007 (CET)

Rating

You usually do not rate your own build. --Lann 03:08, 19 November 2007 (CET)

As in he doesn't, or he shouldn't? ~~ frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 03:13, 19 November 2007 (CET)

(Edit conflict) yeah, i know, but it doesnt mean i cant.Bob fregman 03:14, 19 November 2007 (CET)

Yeah, there is no rule against rating your own builds. Feel free to. ~~ frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 03:18, 19 November 2007 (CET)

My point is because of bias. --Lann 19:20, 19 November 2007 (CET)

Your point is recognized, but ignored.Bob fregman 19:53, 19 November 2007 (CET)

Build:W/E KD Spammer

'Ello, i've changed the build a bit, and was hoping you could revote on it! Kamer 04:16, 20 November 2007 (CET)

Focused Flame Paragon

Link is near top of your talk. I'm not really sure if this effects your vote, but Blazing Spear was added to the build. Feel free to change it if it effects your reasoning.--Victory (talk/pvxcontribs) 16:01, 25 November 2007 (CET)

While i agree that blazing is a useful addition, you should note that since i voted, conjure flame, agressive refrain, and "Go for the Eyes" have all been nerfed, thus the build is, IMO, worse then it was back in august. I'm not going to change my vote to reflect this, but also don't think it deserves an improvement by any standards.Bob fregman 03:57, 26 November 2007 (CET)

N/E Dark Aura Lich (talk · rate)

Mind rethinking your vote? The lower the HP the better in this build as HP regen will be doing more and you'll be sacrficing less with lower HP. Also, keep in mind Aura of the Lich makes me take half damage from all sources. § Eloc § 04:03, 26 November 2007 (CET)

True, however is also cause dark suras sac to be more powerful and leaves you open to degeneration via conditions, which very common in RA, and hexes, which are also pretty common. The sacrifice is reduced, yes, but the build still relies on constant saccing. While i like the builds idea, and it doesn function better then your average Dark Aura toucher, without any real utility being a melee ranged necro with mid 250 health just doesnt appeal to me.Bob fregman 04:11, 26 November 2007 (CET)

Well if you have 250HP, that would be equivalent to 500HP, which is like the standard HP amount. § Eloc § 04:15, 26 November 2007 (CET)

600-650 is the standard HP amount. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 04:17, 26 November 2007 (CET)

Is it? Well maybe with all Minor runes, but generally all the people I see PvPing have 1 Superior Rune and the rest minor. Anyways, do you really think it deserves a 1 in Universitality? It can be used against any enemy. § Eloc § 17:02, 26 November 2007 (CET)

Then you must generally PvP with morons, few people even use major runes, none the less superior.Bob fregman 00:14, 27 November 2007 (CET)

And the Universality is because of its poor survivability.Bob fregman 00:15, 27 November 2007 (CET)

D/N Contagious Reaper (talk · rate)

1 condition? It has 4, count again please.

poor damage? It's a spike build. It does alot in a short amount of time as the conditions trigger Contagion which trigger Dark Aura.

Please test builds before you rate them. § Eloc § 17:30, 26 November 2007 (CET)

Sorry, i missed the signet, it actually has two. I'm counting the conditions that trigger contagion and dark aura, ones you contribute to others dont. Overall, its a gimmicky and weak contagion build that fails to really perform in RA. What spike, the only bonus damage is from wearying strike and that is negligable, even with dark auras slight boost. I don't need to test a build before i rate them.Bob fregman 00:20, 27 November 2007 (CET)

Battle Rage

Bob fregman

Last edit: 07:21, 23 Aug 2007 (CEST)  

kinda what auron said. No bulls, no snares, meh elite.

Don't need a snare if your constantly running 33%faster. Gives you Protector's Bonus Damage. You also have to admit that the build works really well for using a crap elite, but I don't know if you even attempted to try it. Battle Rage Warrior --Lann 01:16, 1 December 2007 (CET)

33% move increase is nice, dont get me wrong, but it doesn't make up for a total lack of snares or bulls for a kd, nor the lack of an ias which is prohibited by Battle Rage. Agonizing has had its cast time increased since my vote, and i dont really think im reconsidering it favorably.Bob fregman 02:00, 1 December 2007 (CET)

A/W Daggers of Dark Apostasy (talk · rate)

Can you please explain to me how Critical Strike is weaker than Shattering Assault? Shattering Assaults attacks aren't bonus damage and are affected by armour. As for being blocked, um Wild Blow FTW? Which doesn't mess up your combo, removes blocking stances and enchantments, no matter when you use it. You seem to be under the impression it's a straight left to right chain when it's not. The only thing I will agree with you on is enchantment removal but that's just being picky imo. Revote please. Unreal Havoc 15:23, 5 December 2007 (CET)

Banned?

Lol, you thought I would be banned for good? I just got a slap on the wrist and a splash of cold water. Seriously, please don't mock me. --GuildofDeals 02:58, 6 December 2007 (CET)

And how unfortunate that is. --71.229.204.25 03:00, 6 December 2007 (CET)

I never said or implied that i thought you'd be banned for good, in fact, i didnt even know you were banned.Bob fregman 03:44, 6 December 2007 (CET)

Still, mocking me isn't my idea of fun. Same goes to red link IP address dude. --GuildofDeals 19:12, 9 December 2007 (CET)

lol@not knowing 71.229 ~~ frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 19:34, 9 December 2007 (CET)

I'm sorry that your idea of fun isn't high on my priorities when im making posts.Bob fregman 00:38, 10 December 2007 (CET)

WARNING: This page is 60 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections.--VictoryisSantas 12:38, 20 December 2007 (EST)

@ you.

--Shadowsin 00:13, 22 December 2007 (EST)

If you percieve an instance or two of mocking and a request to halt some irritating behavior drama, then yes i can see why the llama is not amused.Bob fregman 00:28, 22 December 2007 (EST)

his lazers sites of death are aimed at you, Guild, and Brian atm. --Shadowsin 00:30, 22 December 2007 (EST)

I don't know about brian, but if you post the image of drama llama on guilds page, you'll likely be reported for triple NPA and an attempt on his life as well.Bob fregman 00:31, 22 December 2007 (EST)

LuLz--Shadowsin 00:32, 22 December 2007 (EST)

Kekekekek I posted 2 :P actually 3, but the otherone is archived.--Shadowsin 01:46, 22 December 2007 (EST)

Mocking

I'm sick of it. Stop mocking me or I'll get someone who will. Mocking may not be under NPA, but it sure as hell gets on my nerves. I now have a record of 3 Drama Llamas on my Talk page thanks to the mocking. Again, stop mocking or I'll get someone who will stop you. --GuildofMoses 08:06, 22 December 2007 (EST)

Stop whining and we won't have a problem. Otherwise, go and get someone, you seem to have no reservations about reporting the slightest offesnes for NPA. Bob fregman 11:36, 22 December 2007 (EST)

I agree with Guild of Deals. — ク Eloc 貢 15:20, 23 December 2007 (EST)

Well that means alot, considering how intelligent i think you are and how much i care about what you think.Bob fregman 16:10, 23 December 2007

well arent you mister sunshine yes?--Shadowsin 02:45, 24 December 2007 (EST)

P.S. TEH LLAMA WILL OWN YOU--Shadowsin 02:45, 24 December 2007 (EST)

You owe me

You wanted a Drama Llama pic for Shadowsin's page? HAPPY BIRTHDAY! --GuildofDeals 15:34, 26 December 2007 (EST)

I appreciate the gesture, but if i really wanted to llama him i could have copied the one he put on my page earlier. I'm trying to avoid any excessive actions against any users for a little while, cause you know, being banned is annoying.Bob fregman 15:44, 26 December 2007 (EST)

scroll up 3 click things Victoryisyours (talk/RfA) 15:45, 26 December 2007 (EST)

When did that get there?!?!?!.Bob fregman 15:48, 26 December 2007 (EST)

File:GoDKhaan.jpg Try this one. --GuildofDeals 15:04, 27 December 2007 (EST)

Archive

Page is 66kb long, needs an archive please. --GuildofDeals 08:11, 30 December 2007 (EST)

I'll get around to it eventually.Bob fregman 11:00, 30 December 2007 (EST)

I can do it right now if you want.--Victoryisyours (talk/RfA) 11:01, 30 December 2007 (EST)

Thanks, but not necesary.Bob fregman 11:02, 30 December 2007 (EST)

[1]

/applaud Victoryisyours (talk/RfA) 20:38, 31 December 2007 (EST)

^ If nothing else, it will certainly draw an admin's attention. Shen(contribs) 20:39, 31 December 2007 (EST)

imo, that was the point of PW:IGNORE. Bob fregman 20:45, 31 December 2007 (EST)

Build:A/W SP Trampling Ox Assassin

However much I would love to, its against policy. But I wont change it back. Although maybe not against policy with IGNORE... --- Ressmonkey (talk) 22:01, 31 December 2007 (EST)

Rules were made to be broken. Adhering to policy dead on isn't always beneficial.Bob fregman 22:46, 31 December 2007 (EST)

Ignoring policy to put a mediocre(at best, unless Anet decides to unnerf eurospike, in which case you'd probably just go SP-BSS-Twisting, anyway) build into great isn't either. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 14:52, 1 January 2008 (EST)

Innovation

What's your take on it? And by that I mean your definition and it's role/place in RV. Shen(contribs) 11:58, 1 January 2008 (EST)

Well for one, i think it has no place in RV. I think it should count for nothing. I think the definition of it is quite literally what it says in RV however. How new is the idea, does it perform an old task a new way? Is it going to be the prototype for new builds. Therefore, i'd beleive the the original SP sin is innovative, since it was the prototype for all other sins. The original IWAY builds would be innovative, but all the other ones after it are just modification of the original prototype.Bob fregman 12:45, 1 January 2008 (EST)

So your meaning of it basically shuns its immediate connotation ascertained by one who simply looks at Innovation. Where would you stand if I were to state the definition in RV contradicts itself. A build that's "part of the current metagame" can't be "less likely to be countered" because it's unexpected. Shen(contribs) 12:52, 1 January 2008 (EST)

My definition is basically exactly what i thought when i read innovation. Is it innovative, not is it popular/common. Im my mind, effectiveness and universality have nothing to do with it, although i occasionally rate builds innovation based on those. I would agree with that statement. Like i said, i dont think innovation should count for anything.Bob fregman 14:12, 1 January 2008 (EST)

I Just

Rated every untested build in the PvP category, yay me!Bob fregman 19:30, 6 January 2008 (EST)

OMFG! --- Ressmonkey (talk) 19:55, 6 January 2008 (EST)

+1 Shen(contribs) 20:00, 6 January 2008 (EST)

*2 --- Ressmonkey (talk) 20:33, 6 January 2008 (EST)

You my good sir, are a beast --Wyvern 22:01, 6 January 2008 (EST)

U got room left in ur trophy case? Dark Morphon(contribs) 04:25, 7 January 2008 (EST)

Build:Rt/Mo_OoS_Hybrid_Support

• [2]
• [3]

Unless your running the shove spike or corrupt necros your going to be running a rit, wth OoS being common. 3/4 of the pvx great team arena team builds agree. Some form of it is run constantly. theres a reason why i added it. it poops out a damn near immortal spirit, spams heals, can run AoS, can antihex, and still has room for warmogners and ancestors. 09:07, 7 January 2008 (EST)

Dark's one is alot more common, the other one may have the variants but the main bar is fucking shit on it. And dualveil against balanced is fucking gg. - Rawrawr 12:18, 7 January 2008 (EST)

Build:Rt/any_Warmonger's_Supporter

Hi Bob, your vote has dissapeared from the rate page. Have you remove it? If you have, no problem with your decission. It's OK. If you haven't please let me know to report it as no reason have been done. Thanks

Chuki 17:59, 8 January 2008 (EST)

Yeah, i removed it. I added those votes at the end of my "rate every build in pvp" spree. Idk why, but i definatly mis-rated the build above, so to be fair, i removed my vote from this build as well. I'll probably re-add both again shortly.Bob fregman 18:05, 8 January 2008 (EST)

Ok, ok, perfect. No problem as I said. Just to know. Thanks and best regards. Chuki 18:33, 8 January 2008 (EST)

Build:Me/Mo_SoI_Support

Dupe of what trash build? Mike Tycn(punch out) 23:42, 8 January 2008 (EST)

I'm 99% positive that i saw a build exactly the same, in fact. I can't currently find it, so it may have been deleted or otherwise moved. That being said, my vote still stands. Since i can't find the build in questioned, i'll raise my vote a bit and change my reasoning, but i really dont like SoI mesmers. When you're entire build relies on 1 skill that needs to be recast often, it's just too counterable. While it does give some versatility in that you can spec all over the place, it just doesnt make up for its weakness. Either way, you can remove the vote tonight if you want and i'll probably change it tommorow.Bob fregman 22:48, 9 January 2008 (EST)

Archive and Restarant

First off, you REALLY need an Archive. Now. Second off, doesn't your name sound like a restaraunt? I feel like I'm expecting someone to go "Hello, welcome to Bob Fregman's, I'll be your server today." That's just me and my boredom. --GuildofDeals 16:34, 11 January 2008 (EST)

It sound's like a news reporter name. "Reporting live, Bob Fregman, 7 o' clock news." — Victoryisyours (talk/pvxcontribs) 16:45, 11 January 2008 (EST)

I don't even remember how i came about the name bob fregman. Bob fregman 20:06, 11 January 2008 (EST)

That Balance user box

better be a lie.. else i would question that large vote spam you did. s'posed to vett objectively not spitefully --Shadowsin 14:13, 14 January 2008 (EST)

yeah, except im a master of bullshit. I can vet both objectivly and spitefully. With the excpetion of some meta builds, it's not hard to find obvious flaws in builds that can warrant poor ratings.Bob fregman 19:10, 14 January 2008 (EST)

~.~ That and i think you ment, I am better than you.--Shadowsin 19:24, 14 January 2008 (EST)

First of all, it's "meant". Second of all, no, I'm so much better than you that grammatical rules need not apply to me.Bob fregman 18:38, 15 January 2008 (EST)

Coward

Since the upcoming buff, i'd like some revoke on my idea's, and i think i'm best off with you

<pvxbig>[build prof=W/Rt name="Coward Hammer"][Coward][Crushing Blow][Mighty Blow][Bull's Strike][for great justice][flail][enraging charge][Death pact signet][/build]</pvxbig>

<pvxbig>[build prof=W/E name="Coward Sword"][Coward][Sever Artery][Gash][Sun And Moon Slash][For Great Justice][Frenzy][Rush][Resurrection Signet][/build]</pvxbig>

How do you feel about this? Just some random idea's tbh. Btw, coward is buffed to 4 adr now if you didn't knew, pvxcode doesn't yet. - Unexist 15:17, 17 January 2008 (EST)

The first one is solid. It spikes at about the same speed as a backbreaker, dev hammer, or ES, but coward can be used twice as often so you can afford some disruption and anti-kite or whatnot in between. I'd tend to prefer rush over fgj, since it gives you the constant ims, reliable cancel for flail, but i can see the appeal of the 2 hit coward for more kd. Generally, i'd say ims is better since it is permaently maintainable, and EC is good for a little extra adren. The sword war is ok, but tbh nothing special over others. Swords in general arent good, imo.Bob fregman 20:48, 17 January 2008 (EST)

Lolz, i actually think the sword is better. Tried it in ra, it was against a stupid monk, this happened; FGJ + Coward, monk down, monk up, monk did 1 step, coward, monk up, monk 1 heal, monk 1 step, coward, monk up, monk 1 heal, coward. Monk kd 18 of the 20 seconds lolwut. - Unexist 03:27, 18 January 2008 (EST)

Lol@you taking 20 seconds to kill a baed monk. Mike Tycn(punch out) 08:11, 18 January 2008 (EST)

Yeah, but RA is RA. It's tough to argue a builds credentials based on its Ra performance.Bob fregman 17:59, 18 January 2008 (EST)

I just mean it by this, Coward + FGJ = kd train, nonstop. You might even kd both monks alot if you're good, which means they will collapse fast if your midline also does their job. - Unexist 10:17, 19 January 2008 (EST)

Oh trust me, i'm not arguing that an insta-act barely conditional kd that can be used every 2 attacks is bad, far from it. Rather, im a tad concerned about the longevity and overal effect of the build. FGJ only lasts 20/45 seconds. It also depends highly on where you're using this. In TA, you will definatly want this paired with someone to strip enchants, since AoS is all over.Bob fregman 13:53, 19 January 2008 (EST)

Ment more for new GvG meta. KD spam kills monks faster then 3 gay hammers with pets. Oh and btw, even w/o FGJ coward is still leet. And at gvg, they carry 1 AoS(usually other monk with balanced) so you'll have a wild throw para, and you kd spam the monk w/o aos ofc(or just diversion AoS). - Unexist 16:27, 19 January 2008 (EST)

I agree on all points. I'm not bashing the builds, coward is a great kd now. Sword wars in general just don't perform well compared to others imo, but that's just my opinion. I'd like to see how these perform.Bob fregman 21:26, 19 January 2008 (EST)

Coward will function better on swords then axes, since degen spam ftw. Axes without eviscerate are generally not worth it, unless you need a interupt for in example, GvG 3 tripwar builds(=charge axe with dismember + agonizing). That you do not like swords, is your point. - Unexist 11:09, 20 January 2008 (EST)

Agreed. Like i said, i'm interested to see how this plays out. I don't see the coward war replacing the shock axe, but i think it'll find a place. While obsing a saw a couple guilds running coward on swords, some to good effect, others not so much.Bob fregman 11:13, 20 January 2008 (EST)

Meh, i'd not replace it by Shock Axes, since 1 shock axe pwns the world. I'd rather replace it by dslash or Cruel Spear paragon(prefer for the pargie, since paragon's can camp 2 targets easier then warriors). I think Coward gets into the metagame, but not atm yet, since people are too afraid to try. Once a couple of good guilds(r10ish) will do, more will follow, and coward will be nerfed again lolol. - Unexist 11:20, 20 January 2008 (EST)

soap uses it on this bar

— Skadiddly[슴Mc슴]Diddles 11:43, 20 January 2008 (EST)

(Reset Indent)I like the synergy with steelfang for potential kd lock.Bob fregman 11:48, 20 January 2008 (EST)~

It's good when FGJ isn't up, but when FGJ is it's not needed. - Unexist 03:09, 21 January 2008 (EST)

+1

What is your IGN / Msn btw? - Unexist 11:21, 20 January 2008 (EST)

My names are(shockgaspomgwtf) Bob Fregman(ign) and Bob_Fregman@hotmail.com. I probably won't be on gw much in the next week since i got finals and tournaments all week and in my minimal spare time for gaming i tend to play a little of Cod4. I'll probably get back to GW next week once finals are over and my sports slow down.Bob fregman 11:32, 20 January 2008 (EST)

So i herd you liek msn and go accept me. - Unexist 11:34, 20 January 2008 (EST)

You herd wrong, i barely ever use it. It's just there incase i ever did need it.Bob fregman 11:40, 20 January 2008 (EST)

You said wrong, you said all about gw and nothing about msn. /p0wned. - Unexist 11:46, 20 January 2008 (EST)

If this was msnwiki i would have included more about msn.Bob fregman 11:49, 20 January 2008 (EST)

Keke, let's make it msn wiki then. - Unexist 03:07, 21 January 2008 (EST)

My Talk

Read what comments I put there and then repsond to this, "Are you like that?" --- Ressmonkey (talk) 15:53, 21 January 2008 (EST)

Archive!

"WARNING: This page is 83 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections." Wtf? Archive is your friend, abuse her. Godbox 15:14, 24 January 2008 (EST)

Yeah, it's gotten a tad longer then it should be. I'll archive at the conclusion of my rfbm, be it successful or not. If i do get promoted, ill have a new talk for my bmship, and if not, then ill need to archive just because it's getting too long.Bob fregman 15:24, 24 January 2008 (EST)

Right. You get my vote. Godbox 15:28, 24 January 2008 (EST)

well, i appreciate it. Bob fregman 15:31, 24 January 2008 (EST)

Response

I don't play Guild Wars as much as I used to, but I see no reason why I would stop contributing here, it's a good site, as far as the whole small amount of contributions things go, I don't comment on a page usually unless I have something relevant to say, if you look at people with 50000 pages on contributions, you'll notice alot of the stuff that has been " contributed " are simple/irrelevant things like " You phayl " , " I loled " , "Hugz4u" and the like, so for me quality and quantity... not that all of my contributions are of the highest quality, but you get the point. --Hikari 18:54, 24 January 2008 (EST)

I loled — Skadiddly[슴Mc슴]Diddles 18:55, 24 January 2008 (EST)

You phay. -Shen 18:55, 24 January 2008 (EST)

Hugz4u? (vĭk'tə-rē ĭz yôrz) 18:56, 24 January 2008 (EST)

archive

srsly =o ----InfestedHydralisk (Talk*Contributions) 17:23, 28 January 2008 (EST)

Up two sections. -Shen 17:26, 28 January 2008 (EST)

o rite, to lazt to look at all the stuff :p ----InfestedHydralisk (Talk*Contributions) 17:42, 28 January 2008 (EST)

no wai, archive is for nubs tbh. Fishy Moooo 03:24, 29 January 2008 (EST)

BMShip: Why You Win

YES

• Was elected by Punjab. That says a lot.

TYVM IMO??? Punjab 20:38, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Looking for the ectos too, Punjab. --GuildofDeals 21:03, 30 January 2008 (EST)

• Is supported by a lot of good people, such as Shen (now a BM), Victoryisyours, and of course me ('cause I'm awesome)
• Constructive comments
• Rudeness is good. It allows points to be made straight and foward
• Has 15 supports, only 4 Oppose (most of which are pretty BS), and only 1 Neutral

NO

• Hasn't archived his page. Seriously, it's VERY LONG
• Page isn't archived
• Talk page is too long
• Needs moar archivez
• Lacks archival

Cough up the ectos, buddy. --GuildofDeals 20:33, 30 January 2008 (EST)

I'm very suprised(pleasently) by how my rfbm turned out. I wasn't even sure if id accept it, since i wasnt sure that id even be considered. But here we are, im happy with, and grateful for, the support i've recieved. Much appreciation.Bob fregman 21:55, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Who cares about archives? - Unexist 13:14, 31 January 2008 (EST)

When it takes a long time to get a post in, then it matters. --GuildofDeals 17:43, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Get a better computer. Lord Belar 18:04, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Oh no, 2 secs load instead of almost insta. Only things you need archive is when you have like a tidespike, only then loading goes slow like hell(thrust me, i tested it once in preview). - Unexist 06:42, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Freudian slip? --71.229.204.25 06:49, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Build:Team - Dagger Spam Pressure

I'm much too lazy to do the actual calculations, but you might want to check your vote in light of the BR buff. *Defiant Elements* +talk 19:21, 6 February 2008 (EST)

done.Bob fregman 16:50, 7 February 2008 (EST)

Just one question, why are you always right?Frans 16:28, 17 February 2008 (EST)

I'm not always right. I try to be right as often as possible by only involving myself in discussions where i know i can prove that i'm right, and when i'm wrong i try to be humble instead of arrogant so that i dont seem like an idiot.Bob fregman 18:38, 17 February 2008 (EST)

oh u idiot u just told that u didnt want to look like an idiot../sigh --InfestedHydralisk (Talk*Contributions) 20:20, 17 February 2008 (EST)

You lost me.Bob fregman 20:47, 17 February 2008 (EST)

First

First, I beat ViY! --GuildofDeals 21:43, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Don't know if im breaking some kind of rule archiving for you, but i did it anyway =D. (vĭk'tə-rē ĭz yôrz) 00:00, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Second, and I don't think anyone will care. Lord Belar 00:02, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Bob might but i can see anyone else complaining. XvivaX 00:04, 18 February 2008 (EST)

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!!Bob fregman 09:03, 18 February 2008 (EST)

i lol'd. Railin 11:48, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Fixed. — Skadiddly[슴Mc슴]Diddles 21:44, 18 February 2008 (EST)