Lukejohnson (talk | contribs) m (→Nerfed) |
m (→Nerfed) |
||
Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
:::::::{{ec}}Weird to archive an unvetted build, but then again it was/is an actually used build. --'''<span style="font-family: Matisse ITC;">[[User:Chaos Messenger|<font color="black">-Ch</font>]][[User talk:Chaos Messenger|<font color="deeppink">ao</font><font color="black">s-</font>]]</span>''' 16:22, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
:::::::{{ec}}Weird to archive an unvetted build, but then again it was/is an actually used build. --'''<span style="font-family: Matisse ITC;">[[User:Chaos Messenger|<font color="black">-Ch</font>]][[User talk:Chaos Messenger|<font color="deeppink">ao</font><font color="black">s-</font>]]</span>''' 16:22, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
::::::::What do you mean, it wasn't unvetted I votewiped it. [[Image:Frostysig9000.jpg|19px]][[User:Frosty|<font color="Blue">Frosty</font>]][[User talk:Frosty|<font color="Blue"><small>the</small></font>]][[PvXwiki:Administrators|<font color="Blue">Admin</font>]] 16:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
::::::::What do you mean, it wasn't unvetted I votewiped it. [[Image:Frostysig9000.jpg|19px]][[User:Frosty|<font color="Blue">Frosty</font>]][[User talk:Frosty|<font color="Blue"><small>the</small></font>]][[PvXwiki:Administrators|<font color="Blue">Admin</font>]] 16:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
+ | :::::::::Oh, no wonder, because I was so sure it was vetted. I just happened to be lazy and look at the wrong revisions when finding out if it was the same build or not. And I saw no removed votes/votes whatsoever. Does a votewipe make votes show under removed votes? =/ --'''<span style="font-family: Matisse ITC;">[[User:Chaos Messenger|<font color="black">-Ch</font>]][[User talk:Chaos Messenger|<font color="deeppink">ao</font><font color="black">s-</font>]]</span>''' 16:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
::::::::Well tab. i just thought what with all of the turret rangers going around, and the occasional mesmers, that possibly a build that still uses lc but with almost immunity against it might be slightly tweaked and used. but ofc that's not why some people use this is it tab... [[User:Lukejohnson|<font color="darkgray">— LukeJohnson</font>]] [[Image:LJ_BS_Sig.jpg|19px]] 16:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
::::::::Well tab. i just thought what with all of the turret rangers going around, and the occasional mesmers, that possibly a build that still uses lc but with almost immunity against it might be slightly tweaked and used. but ofc that's not why some people use this is it tab... [[User:Lukejohnson|<font color="darkgray">— LukeJohnson</font>]] [[Image:LJ_BS_Sig.jpg|19px]] 16:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:27, 28 February 2009
I may have missed a few skills but these are being run fairly often, nerf to fast casting coming soon! --Frosty 17:40, 16 December 2008 (EST)
- I know that it's a widespread opinion here that LC+suffering is good, but is suffering really deserving of main bar? I just don't get it. Karate Jesus 17:45, 16 December 2008 (EST)
- Spammable AoE cover hex that also does pretty nice degen ftw. Rawrawr Dinosaur 17:47, 16 December 2008 (EST)
In an update a while back suffering got buffed to -3 degen at 12, back in june infact, shows how bad gwshack are. --Frosty 17:51, 16 December 2008 (EST)
- I knew it was -3, I just didn't think about the fact that it's basically a cover hex. My bad. Karate Jesus 17:53, 16 December 2008 (EST)
vett. --Frosty 11:44, 18 December 2008 (EST)
- Zzz innovative--ChristmasRelyk 12:27, 18 December 2008 (EST)
- I heard pblock doesn't like fast casting. Dutchess of Roseakalukejohnson - talk 15:48, 18 December 2008 (EST)
- I heard that this is true. --Frosty 15:52, 18 December 2008 (EST)
- I heard pblock doesn't like fast casting. Dutchess of Roseakalukejohnson - talk 15:48, 18 December 2008 (EST)
lol testing --Frosty 11:48, 19 December 2008 (EST)
Add Ra/Ta tags please. This builds rapes both arenas and is being used the most by Ta balanced teams now. (Timcago 19:36, 13 January 2009 (EST)).
Nerfed
A total of 3 degen has been lost and signet of humility disables all of your necro skills now. (Timcago 20:43, 5 February 2009 (EST)).
Seen this version being used sometimes, may bring up unarchival if it gets seen more often. Frosty po! 00:13, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Ups, even better version, still being used so pulling out of archive. FrostytheAdmin 15:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- I want to know what idiot stuck it in archive anyway. it was obvious it was still going to be used — LukeJohnson 16:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- You are talking to that idiot. FrostytheAdmin 16:08, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- LJ, the new LC bar hadn't come to use, and the current one was nerfed, so archival was the only option, no matter how you reason. ---Chaos- 16:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- No, i mentioned when thsi was going nito archive that it only needed tweaking. — LukeJohnson 16:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- LJ, the new LC bar hadn't come to use, and the current one was nerfed, so archival was the only option, no matter how you reason. ---Chaos- 16:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- You are talking to that idiot. FrostytheAdmin 16:08, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- (EC)Weird to archive an unvetted build, but then again it was/is an actually used build. ---Chaos- 16:22, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- What do you mean, it wasn't unvetted I votewiped it. FrostytheAdmin 16:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, no wonder, because I was so sure it was vetted. I just happened to be lazy and look at the wrong revisions when finding out if it was the same build or not. And I saw no removed votes/votes whatsoever. Does a votewipe make votes show under removed votes? =/ ---Chaos- 16:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- Well tab. i just thought what with all of the turret rangers going around, and the occasional mesmers, that possibly a build that still uses lc but with almost immunity against it might be slightly tweaked and used. but ofc that's not why some people use this is it tab... — LukeJohnson 16:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- What do you mean, it wasn't unvetted I votewiped it. FrostytheAdmin 16:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- (EC)Weird to archive an unvetted build, but then again it was/is an actually used build. ---Chaos- 16:22, 28 February 2009 (UTC)