FANDOM


Would a Rajazans Fervor and the collector blood knife do fine? Then use Demonic flesh instead of the +30hp on axe/sword and use the +%20 longer enchantments.

There is a very large amount of enchantment removal enemies in PvE, especially in later areas. Dependency on an enchant can be devastating, as a ~200 health buffer-bam, gone. While initially more useful than +30HP, it can create a false sense of security then a 60 damage shatter enchant and 200 health gone- usually enough to kill someone if at half health. Or brutally wound them. Skax459

Deleting this page won't make them go away. - Skakid9090 04:18, 11 June 2007 (CEST)

question: does the idol mentioned at equipment (20/20) affect any of the skills used. i don't think so, since it affects spells and both vampiric bite and vampiric touch are skills, not spells.

Probably to make OoB recharge faster. Tycn 23:24, 16 June 2007 (EDT)

I'm going to unfavour vote this, this has far too many counters. ~~ Napalm Flame ^_^ Napalm Flame Sig Image (talk)(contributions) 23:41, 16 June 2007 (EDT)

Much harder to counter than most builds. Tycn 23:57, 16 June 2007 (EDT)

Not so, backfire works well, and things like diversion screw this over long term. ~~ Napalm Flame ^_^ Napalm Flame Sig Image (talk)·(contributions) 05:47, 17 June 2007 (EDT)
Backfire does very little to this build. The touch skills dont trigger it, only OoB would, and even at that if you cast with backfire on you it takes about 2 touches to recover that HP, or just wait until it wears off --Wakka 21:20, 21 June 2007 (EDT)
Let's not forget snares lol... Then again, snares are never seen in RA... LavaEdge324 16:00, 22 June 2007 (EDT)
Three words: "Can't Touch This!" --SoraMitsukai 00:06, 20 August 2007 (CEST)
Too bad that's a really horrible skill that will never see play except as a joke anyway. --Edru viransu//QQ about me 00:07, 20 August 2007 (CEST)
And even if someone takes that, only the first 3 or 4 touches fail, and after that they'll be dead. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 00:09, 20 August 2007 (CEST)

I don't like the fact that this can't be used if your crippled or something, so I made a little change to this when I use it by taking out Plague Touch and putting in Plague Sending from the Curses line since it doesn't need any attributes in it to make it better or worse <pvxbig> [build prof=range/necro expert=12+1+3 bloodm=12][vampiric bite][vampiric touch][offering of blood][throw dirt][whirling defense][dodge][plague sending][resurrection signet][/build] </pvxbig>Joshgt2 19:24, 3 July 2007 (CEST)

I actually think that Plague Sending should be in the main skill bar. Unreal Havoc 01:50, 30 August 2007 (CEST)

Checked and Reviewed

For Viability. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 16:36, 14 June 2007 (EDT)

I itself LOVE this build,but OoB...i use BiP.Remember to cast it BEFORE battle. Kabroz

you can't bip yourself - Skakid9090 20:52, 2 July 2007 (CEST)

YES,BUT IF IN PARTY IS 2PLAYER OR MORE(TOUCHERS)(caps)Alliance players suggested

Auron of Neon bip yourself xD Shido 23:16, 10 July 2007 (CEST)

I lol'd hard at this. --SoraMitsukai 00:13, 20 August 2007 (CEST)

love or hate

personally i find this build to be very cheap, i admit it was a good idea at the time and it works reletivly well, but its more of the people who use it that annoys me about this build, imo they think they are god and taunt you if they kill you or in ab for example, i have seen quiet a touch ranger just run into a group of 4+ ppl and think they will survive. i think it will better for the community if we delete this build because any new comers will think this is god mode. 24.66.94.141 21:00, 2 July 2007 (CEST)

Its a game staple and works very well in PvE as well as PVP. Touch rangers are easy to kill/survive through if you know how to deal with them proppery. Set them with degen and kite way from em, or just overpressure them to death. As far as deleteing them for being 'too good' or 'too easy' to create, thats up to ANet, if they nerf the build, this will go into archives. Shireensysop 21:03, 2 July 2007 (CEST)

I too hate touch rangers, the point of GW, IMO, other than to have fun, is to create your own build and show your own style. touch rangers don't have skill, at least, no skil when it comes to being creative, or building something together. Anet needs to nerf this, no question about it, the duplicate skills idea was stupid in the first place

Putting this build in the best category for almost everything (and yes, honestly it does pretty well in most situations) will just make more people want to play it! It's probably one of the most all round disliked builds out there! heh. I'm expecting to see a whole new wave of touch rangers out there.

Well now, I don't think it's this wiki's responsibility to decide if a build is moral or immoral, or even if its existence is good or bad for the community. In my opinion, this build page should be kept for the purpose of documentation, despite the fact that the build itself is considered immoral by the game community. If Anet thinks the build needs further nerfing, they will certainly do something about it. --81.183.144.187 16:17, 8 July 2007 (CEST)

your all just jelous because a touch ranger killed you and now you want to vent because someone else made this build and you didnt and you havnt been able to beat it and it angered you. just be glad i personally give major props to whoever made this build as it works very well since someone noted earlyer any newb can use this effectivly which means this is a very nice build and props to whoever thunk it up.
Pretty sure iQ boiled that up, ran 8 of em a few weeks after factions came out iirc. -Auron 10:39, 9 July 2007 (CEST)
The general idea was around waaay before then. I remember running a single touch ranger in the first 2-3 months of GW. Granted, they kind of sucked back then, specially since I didn't have hardly anything unlocked :P --76.2.226.33 14:10, 22 July 2007 (CEST)

And whoever the random person there is, FYI, it has been somewhat nerfed... Both touches are 15 En now... --Ramp Ager 12:28 (CEST)

Both touches cost 5 energy with all the runes+attributes counted. MisfateDaipenmon 18:30, 6 August 2007 (CEST)

As much as I think touchers are noobs, it's a very good build. You can't deny that. I played a toucher, in which I had to name it "Rusty The Hypocrite". But the toucher is a good, self-reliant character that does well in AB. No match for a decent mesmer, though :-) RustyTheMesmer 23:48, 7 August 2007 (CEST)

The touch skills should be typed as Spells, IMO, so they're susceptible to Backfire and other caster hate. There is no denying that the build is effective, however unoriginal it may be. --SoraMitsukai 00:11, 20 August 2007 (CEST)

It's turned into the thing to see in Aspenwood, just about every Luxon side has one, if not two (if you're really unlucky) With the buff to Plague Touch, you need a lot of degen to slow them down. I usually play my degen ranger spamming Burning Arrow and Screaming Shot, and I've had to hit them from as far away as possible to kill them. Adding in Pin Down might be an idea... I roll my eyes everytime i see a toucher. Touchers are often quite foolish, yet to fight a sensible one. They usually chase and it's easy to get them into the middle of a pack of NPCs who help out just fine. Just gotta be creative killing this now-not-so-creative build. XD --BeeD 04:53, 22 August 2007 (CEST)

This comment was funny imo. If you're playing a ranger, what are you doing with no interrupts? Dshot ftw? 76.102.172.202 23:37, 25 November 2007 (CET)
Any toucher with 8 curses seriously needs to rethink his build. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 04:55, 22 August 2007 (CEST)
"I too hate touch rangers, the point of GW, IMO, other than to have fun, is to create your own build and show your own style. touch rangers don't have skill, at least, no skil when it comes to being creative, or building something together." Then I guess no one is allowed to use any builds made on PVXWIKI judging by your logic. Oh wait if someone uses a rubbish build so you can easily beat them then that's ok? Lol. Unreal Havoc 02:02, 30 August 2007 (CEST)
People will always whine when they're killed by a Touch Ranger, call you a newb and such. But i agree better roll this than an Assassin with WoH or whatever the shit you people come up with. Still if your opponent isn't too dumb, he'll just kite if like i deal with Touchers, or give you some E-Denial or interruption. Feel free to use it, if some one calls you a newb, well he's one if he can't counter this, just stands and tries to kill you. Not that i care or anything >.> Alistair Cookie Ritualist-icon-small 21:32, 23 May 2008 (EDT)

Farm

This build work well form farming alone on differt creature in hard mode (especialy Warriors) for example the stone golem in Hard mode .... So why not put him too in Farm class ? --Rancoeur Subtile 21:28, 10 July 2007 (CEST)

Can be used to farm Cultist Rajazan and Ghial, amongst others. I believe a farming tag should be considered. Count Coolio 00:47, 18 July 2007 (CEST)
I have added a farming tag, contribute to it if you find anything else that would work. --Ramp Ager 13:46 (CEST)
All An All Nerfing Is stupid cuz GW Is Made for skill an if you just nerf when people get a build that works whats the point of play GW Go Play  WoW If it come to that

Idea

Anyone ever thought of using vampiric horrors in conjunction with this build? How did it work out? InfernoMrMetalFLower-...tlk

Well, considering that you don't have any death, it would work Great! ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 15:42, 2 August 2007 (CEST)

Well bloody done. That's why you put points into death magic. duh! InfernoMrMetalFLower-...tlk

Why would you want to do that... You don't have soul reaping to charge it, you are gonna spend 15 energy for something that doesn't do much DPS? Why plz. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 19:54, 5 August 2007 (CEST)

Iwan13

His vote says he never played it... how can he judge its effectiveness? ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 19:50, 5 August 2007 (CEST)

I don't test all builds I vote on, your point? –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 20:18, 5 August 2007 (CEST)
Hmm... coulda sworn the point of Real Vetting was to enforce actually testing a build(wasn't that the idea? Why doesn't PvX:Real Vetting say anything?)? And how can this only be a good build... it owns just about anything in PvP. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 20:23, 5 August 2007 (CEST)
Whether the build is good or not doesn't stop people from letting emotions get in their way when they vote. This would happen with whatever rating process we have, there are people that hate the build every time it is used and vote it down, and even people who don't even understand how the rating system works at all (someone seriously said: "Why did everybody give this a 5 for innovation?" and rated it a 0 there, a blatant show of how he didn't take the time to understand how it works). Mods can strike votes, but they are not machines. There will always be more people doing this than the mods could handle. Sadly the best we can do is vote as it should be and hope for the best. And should it ever become unfavored, well then it can always get a fresh start where hopefully be rated fairly. Wyvern 18:49, 6 August 2007 (CEST)
not testing the build dosent mean i havent felt it on my own skin.. i had contact with it WAY TOO MANY TIMES :( and got pissed off by it every single time.. so i know the way it works in-side-out so i belive that i am qualified to give my rate on it .. its effective i give it that ... but HELL I HATE ITS GUTS!... long story short ... i have enough expirience to give it my vote.. wich was good even tho i hate it i was not biased about judging --Iwan13 19:28, 6 August 2007 (CEST)

Farming information is almost Factions exclusive

Four of the five listings under Farming right now are for Factions. Can someone with experience diversify this to include more Prophecies and Nightfall information? 02:49, 11 August 2007 (CEST)

Well Factions had alot of solo bosses... thats why. --User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 05:20, 22 August 2007 (CEST)

Degen

i once help out against something like -8 degen and 3 people attacking me, i managed to kill 1 of them before i died. although it was in fort aspenwood, so someone may have healed me or killed the other guy, i dont know. Metalmiser 11:05, 26 August 2007 (CEST)

Relates how...? Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 11:28, 26 August 2007 (CEST)

Counters

Atrophy says hi :D Corpselooter 13:51, 27 August 2007 (CEST)

Diversion and DShot say "hi" from about 2 years ago. Why inconvenience them for 6 or so seconds when you can halve their damage and healing indefinitely? amirite?

Another Varient

I think that Well Of Blood is usefull in this build as you can heal yourself effectively as well as heaing others. I use this build often in AB and take this skill instead of a res. Peter 19:21, 29 September 2007 (CEST)

Really you shouldn't be taking a Rez into an AB. I find it to be pretty much pointless using them. - Joshgt2Sig Joshgt2 01:15, 11 October 2007 (CEST)
he said instead of a rez.... |IntemetIntemet Internet SigInternet| 12:37, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Energy Problem, no more?

Instead of your halves casting time inscription, throw a +15e -1 energy regen, with such high expertise, E regen shouldn't be a problem. Rella 01:09, 11 October 2007 (CEST)

Nah, energy =/= e-management. ~~ Napalm Flame >=] Napalm Flame Sig Image (talk)·(contributions) 01:16, 11 October 2007 (CEST)
While your at it why don't you make it an E/N toucher with high energy storage and 2 +15/-1 items! THEN YOU'LL NEVER RUN OUT! (sarcasm...) 76.102.172.202 23:39, 25 November 2007 (CET)

Why don't you try it before you judge it dickhole. It worked just fine for me, and if your party can't kill by the time your energy is down, leave.--Rella 16:05, 23 March 2008 (EDT)

PvE categories?

I haven't read through any policies or guidelines of PvX wiki and I don't know how the system here works, so I'll just ask here what to do.

Touching is very viable in PvE, although this exact variation presented here isn't an optimal one. Should this be added to the general PvE category, and possibly to the farming category? How should the PvE variation be presented? Another skill section with another skill bar? -- (gem / talk) 02:06, 12 October 2007 (CEST)

It used to be, the tag was removed a while ago. See [1]. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 09:34, 12 October 2007 (CEST)
So is there a reason for that edit or should I just add the categories back? -- (gem / talk) 11:08, 12 October 2007 (CEST)
Added them myself, add variants as needed. BOLD still applies here. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 09:11, 15 October 2007 (CEST)
Maby, but after my first very non-welcoming confrontation with other users on this wiki I'm not ready to piss anyone off for any reason. -- (gem / talk) 11:30, 15 October 2007 (CEST)
Well, I apologize on their behalf. Try not to take their responses as the general user response. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 20:29, 15 October 2007 (CEST)
Sadly those users are the ones that seem to run this place. A wiki with admins that break policies without anyone even noticing = a wiki with no hope left. But let's not get offtopic here. I'll gladly continue the discussion on my talk page if required. -- (gem / talk) 02:45, 16 October 2007 (CEST)

Craw Stonereap

I used a touch ranger to solo Craw Stonereap, I added a running skill and Life Siphon, does someone want to add this to the Farmable Areas Section? >(Shogankiller / talk)

"effectiveness"

I am removing all the 5 effectiveness votes that have no reasoning given. If your vote tells me how a touch ranger with so many weaknesses deserves a 5, I won't remove it... if your vote merely says "ololol soooo popular, ppl call me noob when i run it lol!!!11" and has 5 effectiveness, I'm nuking it. -Auron 02:20, 26 October 2007 (CEST)

Every build has weaknesses, but this is probably one of the harder builds to deal with depending on the person using it. It should be rated highly because it's a self sufficient build that does what its meant to do very well. Unreal Havoc 02:29, 28 October 2007 (CEST)

Its too easily countered now. Diversion, D Shot, Cripple, Snare are some examples. Hammer And Sickle۷ïεדt/c 02:00, 28 October 2007 (CET)
Take Plague Sending for Cripple conditions, it works wonders as it's rare anyone uses Backfire on a Touch Ranger (I've only had it used on me once so far). Hex based snares can do anyone over if they dont have hex removal so that's hardly a massive concern. Same with Interrupts, only the interrupts have to get through your blocking defenses if they are physical attacks like bows or melee weapons. Unreal Havoc 02:03, 28 October 2007 (CET)
Plague Sending is just bad because its a spell. As for D Shot, I was referring to how it disabled the skill for 20 seconds and it isn't hard to catch one of the 'touches' with D Shot as they will be spammed constantly. Hammer And Sickle۷ïεדt/c 02:06, 28 October 2007 (CET)
I guess that depends doesn't it? I've been interrupted a couple of times before though not many, while it does mess the build up, in AB you don't need Resurrection Signet which allows you another Speed boost which deflects projectile attacks. The chances of a Ranger getting an interrupt off is slim, especially if they're already under pressure from someone else anyway because there isn't a large window of oppurtunity to interrupt with the extra speed boost. Plauge Sending works ok, and is a life saver when crippled as you can just throw it right back at them then touch them to death. =) It has its fair share of counters, I don't disagree, but people choose to pretend Touchers don't exist rather than bring them. Unreal Havoc 02:15, 28 October 2007 (CET)
Touchers r > u :) --- Monk-icon-Ressmonkey Ressmonkey (talk) 03:50, 28 October 2007 (CET)
If you are to remove all the votes with no explanation, YOU MUST do that for every instance on every other build on this wiki. Otherwise, revert it to what it once was. If this doesn't happen, well, then the objectivity of the site has been compromised. There are literally thousands of votes that are approximately the same as the ones removed from this page. Also, I would be so bold as to say that the votes on this page were removed with bias, since some votes that were rather low AND non-descriptive remained, despite that other higher rated votes being removed with approximately the same descriptive qualities as the ones that had a low rating yet remained. Incidentally, I would speculate that the editors of the ratings on this page have a bias against the build. - Anon

Here's what you'll have to take out from this page alone due to lack of an explanation or being vague. I'll be compiling a site-wide list that will need to be removed as well.

List removed by User:Auron

Wrong place for such a list. Put it in your userspace and an admin will get to them as time permits. -Auron 01:12, 30 October 2007 (CET)
Some of that at least is valuable to discussion here. I'll put what I believe is valuable to discussion back. All of these are not descriptive according to the criteria that higher rated votes were removed under (that is, expounding on and giving reasons why and how). These need to go away as well. Punjab Prince wrote, "no longer good, imo." He/she rated it 3 overall. Ibreaktoilets wrote, "A bad, innefective build that is countered simply by not sucking." He/she rated it 1 overall. Ichigo724 wrote, "Works well for the tagged areas." He rated 3.3 overall. RustyTheMesmer wrote, "Used to be good but it fails now. Ele touchers own it." He/she rated it 3 overall. Shogunshen wrote, "no snare, easily counterable, dies easily." He/she rated it 2.2 overall. Jitson wrote, "this build is definitely losing it's 'touch'. aside: apparently anet supports touchers (the Restless Dead in Selvetarm's dungeon)." He rated 2.9 overall. Misfate wrote, "Fails if degen'd or snared or diverted." He/she rated 2.7 overall. Arse Biter wrote, "The most boring build ever! Press 2 diffrent skills until your target is dead. It's kind of effective but hated by everyone." He/she rated 3.4 overall. Armond wrote, "Way too easily countered." He/she rated 1.9 overall. Il Fez Il wrote, "easy to counter a decent mes would shut it down." He/she rated 2.3 overall. Readem wrote, "It is used for RA. GG. Stop being bad now. kkthanks?" He/she rated 3 overall. - Anon

Was a good point though. UnrealHavocSigUnreal Havoc 01:13, 30 October 2007 (CET)

There are still thousands of other existing votes that approximate the non-descriptive qualities under which these votes were removed. I'd guess more than 50% of all existing votes but that's just a guess. - Anon

Armond

Stop constantly removing my votes... and RV1 on you too. Reasoning is...

"Not quite as good but still kills most people in it's labeled areas."

~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 20:07, 29 October 2007 (CET)

The vote removal is getting annoying here, it defeats the point of people being able to vote in the first place! Oh wait,I get it now, we have to vote a build how you see it so that the vote stands? Unbeleiveable. UnrealHavocSigUnreal Havoc 20:15, 29 October 2007 (CET)
GOGOGO BUILDMASTERS. Ibreaktoilets SignatureIbreaktoilets 20:19, 29 October 2007 (CET)

Well, this is going ridicilous, but I wasn't expecting anything more from this wiki anyway. xD I've modified my 5-5-5 vote to have an even longer explanation. -- (gem / talk) 22:06, 29 October 2007 (CET)

I believe it was removed again. Lord Belar 22:08, 29 October 2007 (CET)
Nope, seems to still be there. -- (gem / talk) 22:10, 29 October 2007 (CET)

Can't understand admins who remove explaned votes and leave votes like: "A bad, innefective build that is countered simply by not sucking." with a 1-1-1 scale. :D :D :D -- (gem / talk) 22:15, 29 October 2007 (CET)

Oh, I can understand it, see my comment on the admin noticeboard. :| Lord Belar 22:16, 29 October 2007 (CET)
That vote is true, the only thing touchers can kill anymore are dumb wammos, 55s, and people someone else snared. This vote removal just stinks of something rotten, especially coming from the guy who suggested removing Readem (before he quit) because he broke NPA a few times. --InternetLOL 22:19, 29 October 2007 (CET)
Touchers can kill stuff, and no, they aren't perfect, but they are still acceptable (At least until "Cant touch this!" becomes viable.) and this seems like admin corruption at it's finest. Lord Belar 22:23, 29 October 2007 (CET)

Gem, I do believe you were encouraging Auron in his purging of these votes? As I explained on the admin noticeboard, I'm simply continuing that. As for all this "admin corruption" shit because I removed stupid votes and didn't want Readem as an admin: Removing stupid votes is what admins do. I didn't support Readem as an admin in the first place, but I mixed up time zones and didn't get a vote. I didn't want him to step dowm because of "a few NPA violations", I wanted him to step down because he was repeatedly failing at PR and such like. If you'd like to continue this, throw it on the admin noticeboard, I'm not going to reply here. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 23:56, 29 October 2007 (CET)

Funny, the discussion on the noticeboad was told to come here. Lord Belar 00:01, 30 October 2007 (CET)
O rly? Discussion on the build belongs here, discussion on the vote removal policy doesn't. -Auron 00:05, 30 October 2007 (CET)
I meant using Armond (talk · contribs · logs · check user · block user · block log) but whatever -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 00:07, 30 October 2007 (CET)

To voice my opinion here, any build that has "kiting" listed as a counter does not deserve a five in effectiveness. Because that means everyone has a counter to it. Everyone. --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C/Sysop) 01:15, 30 October 2007 (CET)

That's your opinion and should be reflected by your VOTE, not by deleting everyone elses. UnrealHavocSigUnreal Havoc 01:17, 30 October 2007 (CET)
So should all melee builds have no 5's? This build has a speed buff, just so ya know. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 01:18, 30 October 2007 (CET)
Oh, of course. And all ranged attackers as well, as everyone can dodge projectiles or get behind a wall. Lord Belar 01:35, 30 October 2007 (CET)

In AB it can have two. UnrealHavocSigUnreal Havoc 01:32, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Bull's Strike, Cripslash, Horns of the Ox, Leaping Mantis Sting, Crippling Sweep, Crippling Victory, Aura of Thorns, Grasping Earth, Shock Pin Down, Favorable Winds, Recurve Bow, Maiming Spear. Any other skill that causes knockdown, cripples, or otherwise slows down the target. Which, in my experience, is far more effective than a speed boost. --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C/Sysop) 01:40, 30 October 2007 (CET)
Recurve bow? Pin Down fails, leaping, bulls, and hoto are conditional, Cripslash requires adrenaline, Shock causes exhaustion, Maiming Spear is conditional, FW same as recurve. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 01:42, 30 October 2007 (CET)
And yet, they're all better than the complete and total lack of utility on a touch bar. I guess that means Touchers should get rated lower than your run-of-the-mill cripslash with bulls, eh? -Auron 01:45, 30 October 2007 (CET)
You have a point, but it can counter almost ALL of those. Cripple-->Plague Touch. And anyways, it would STILL not be trash. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 01:59, 30 October 2007 (CET)
What monk brings plague touch...? -Auron 02:00, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Two words... Plague Sending. UnrealHavocSigUnreal Havoc 02:01, 30 October 2007 (CET)

What are you talking about? The RANGER can touch cripple RIGHT back to the CAUSE. >.> ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2

(T/C/Sysop) 02:03, 30 October 2007 (CET)

(EC)Since when was this a monk build? Lord Belar 02:04, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Watch this discussion end up with someone rage-quitting PvX. Misfate 02:06, 30 October 2007 (CET)

What are you talking about? The RANGER can touch cripple RIGHT back to the CAUSE. Not if he's crippled at range he can't, one thing forgotten is Crippling Dagger. ;) UnrealHavocSigUnreal Havoc 02:06, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Are you people imagining some kind of silly toucher fighting warrior 1v1 e-peen contest? That's ridiculous. 1v1 is stupid, plain and simple, a fact that has been discussed ad nauseam on a number of forums. Good warriors don't attack touch rangers because touch rangers are stupid and not a threat. -Auron 02:07, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Good touchers pressure the opposing team by unnerving them to move their ass or be touched to death. They're not spikers and no one has ever claimed them to be. They're meant to presure and they do that well. UnrealHavocSigUnreal Havoc 02:09, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Yes, why does everyone think a build has to spike to be effective? Lord Belar 02:12, 30 October 2007 (CET)
Because if it doesn't spike, then things don't die :/? Terror 02:16, 30 October 2007 (CET)
Wow. I don't even know how to respond to that. --InternetLOL 02:17, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Because if it doesn't spike, then things don't die Say goodbye to most of the builds on this wiki then. UnrealHavocSigUnreal Havoc 02:20, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Basically, in GW, you either run warriors, or you run spike, or you run a build that sucks. The introduction of non-warrior frontliners(dervs, some sins, paras(although they're ranged, they've got the survivability to overextend and the damage to kill stuff)) and decent damage options for eles(Mind Blasters) has somewhat decreased this, it's still pretty much you run warriors/dervs, or you run a spike, or you run a build that sucks. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 02:44, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Warrior Builds (PvP)

Backbreaker Crushing Blow Irresistible Blow Frenzy Rush Death&#039;s Charge Healing Signet Resurrection Signet
Dismember Critical Chop Executioner&#039;s Strike &#039;You&#039;re All Alone!&#039; Signet of Malice Frenzy Shadow Walk Resurrection Signet
Shove Crushing Blow Thrill of Victory Wild Blow Tiger Stance Death&#039;s Charge Healing Signet Resurrection Signet
Backbreaker Crushing Blow Mighty Blow Grasping Earth Flail Enraging Charge Healing Signet Resurrection Signet
Counter Blow Bull&#039;s Strike Crushing Blow Devastating Hammer Hammer Bash Shock Rush Resurrection Signet
Eviscerate Executioner&#039;s Strike Shock Bull&#039;s Strike Frenzy Rush Healing Signet Resurrection Signet
&#039;You&#039;re All Alone!&#039; Sever Artery Gash Final Thrust Flail Enraging Charge Mending Touch Healing Signet
Sever Artery Gash Magehunter Strike Final Thrust Frenzy Enraging Charge Mending Touch Resurrection Signet
Sever Artery Gash Final Thrust Charging Strike Bull&#039;s Strike Frenzy Healing Signet Resurrection Signet
Dismember Executioner&#039;s Strike Axe Rake Critical Chop Charging Strike Healing Signet Frenzy Mending Touch
Devastating Hammer Crushing Blow Fierce Blow Bull&#039;s Strike Frenzy Rush Healing Signet Resurrection Signet
Mokele Smash Devastating Hammer Crushing Blow Fierce Blow Enraging Charge Tiger Stance Optional Resurrection Signet


If your monks can't spike, lrn2SoMW bitches.

We need to vote some of those baed builds down, tbh. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 02:44, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Just to throw my 2 cents in, get off aurons back. Auron is probably one of the fairest and least objectionable sysops on the wiki. This build fails to perform at a high level anymore. Gem, your vote is invalid, as is belars, since you only account PvE and the build is recommended for 3 levels of pvp. A build should be scored on the level that it performs worst in. If that significantly lowers its score, then remove that tag.Bob fregman 02:46, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Is it just me or do all those war builds have terrible energy management? Beware 13:13, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Stalin, Hitler and Sadam Hussein could have learned alot from the admins here. Almost every vote that is not consistent with the view of the admins is removed, even when good reasons are given for the vote. On the contrary obviously stupid votes that align with the admin board remain. I guess most current and past dictatorships employed the same system. So why not cut the crap, remove the rating system and just make this into a private build summary? I almost expect bans to follow for voting favourable to this build.

I use this build almost exclusively in RA and AB. It is an allround build. Not especially shining but good enough to complete most objectives. This includes killing almost all melee, almost all casters and almost any non-healer in general. It can solo cap every type shrine in ab. If you know how to play you can pull this build of and be succesful with it. I guess I could place a vote for this one but why bother? It'd get removed anyways, even if it's good borderline to great. It won't get unarchived anyways even though it's still a very good build to use.

Excuse me for the reduction ad hitlerum but it was quite applicable here. 84.193.179.123 10:44, 19 November 2008 (EST)

featured again?

why? MangleD sigmangleD(T/C) 02:17, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Debates. Hammer And Sickle۷ïεדИǺмЄŠЄ 02:17, 30 October 2007 (CET)
yeah but lol its still bad, people should have noticed. MangleD sigmangleD(T/C) 02:25, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Archive

Good. --InternetLOL 03:00, 30 October 2007 (CET)

Ty. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 03:00, 30 October 2007 (CET)
Ya rly. Epic build, one of the most creative builds in existence, but the meta (increased damage output from everything) sort of passed it by. -Auron 03:06, 30 October 2007 (CET)

why archive, how many people do u see in pvp who just randomly carry counters to touch rangers, mesmers are few and far between, i bet i could go use this in AB and own Lithos Soldier 04:07, 30 October 2007 (CET)

There is a very simple counter to touchers, brought by every person who is not horribly bad into every match. It is called moving. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 04:08, 30 October 2007 (CET)
I suppose I'm allowed to create a PvE variant page since it's very very viable in PvE atm? -- (gem / talk) 06:43, 30 October 2007 (CET)
W/e. Critters are arguably less intelligent than the human opponents found in many of this build's specified venues. The gist of the argument is therefore invalid. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 06:59, 30 October 2007 (CET)
(that's a yes.) --71.208.124.179 07:17, 30 October 2007 (CET)
PvE version created at Build:R/N PvE Touch Ranger. I'm actually quite happy that it turned this way since now the main skill bar on the page can include the PvE-only skills that are required for efficient play. -- (gem / talk) 08:09, 30 October 2007 (CET)
Thank God for this, crappest and most over-used build ever. --Peter 21:58, 30 October 2007 (CET)
Honestly, I think istani skale are smarter than most people in AB. :/ Lord Belar 02:52, 1 November 2007 (CET)
FINALLY! I so hate touchers. Dazing them is fun though. This build is so old and true, its biggest counter=Moving. Fear Drake 19:47, 3 November 2007 (CET)
Why is dazing a character who spams a skill(not a spell) fun? --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 20:05, 3 November 2007 (CET)
Yea, the only spell they have is offering of blood, and that has a quarter-second cast. Dazed really doesn't do anything to them. Diversion, on the other hand... --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C/Sysop) 20:10, 3 November 2007 (CET)
Isn't the counter for almost EVERY Warrior and Assassin build also "moving"? This isn't a good reason to archive this, unless you plan on archiving every Warrior and Assassin build that involves getting in close combat.--4.243.46.192 11:05, 11 November 2007 (CET)
Yes and no. Kiting warriors and assassins definitely lowers their DPS, but doesn't decrease it to zero. All good warrior or assassin builds have snares, whether it be Bull's Strike, Shock, Cripslash, a hammer KD, or a hex snare like Shadow Prison; all of those keep people from mitigating all of your damage by kiting. But touchers have nothing of the sort, only a speed buff which sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. -Auron 11:20, 11 November 2007 (CET)

Counters

If this is easy to counter, that would have to mean all martial classes that can block, blind, chase down targets are easy to counter.-Jax010 20:41, 8 January 2008 (EST)

Bull's Strike, Crippling Slash, Siphon Speed, Rush, Devastating Hammer, Shock, Rending Touch, Hammer Bash, Rampage as One, and Pious Haste disagree. Also every monk build ever and every elementalist snare, and Cripshot too. --71.229.204.25 01:02, 22 January 2008 (EST)

And forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought mods were supposed to remove votes that were going against the rules or doesn't have a reason, not remove them because of personal opinion?-Jax010 23:39, 7 February 2008 (EST)

They can remove them to bring a build's rating in line with its actual performance. Not a democracy, etc, etc. --71.229 01:14, 8 February 2008 (EST)
This build isn't that easy to counter TBH, ofcourse snares counter, but thats true for all melee-ranges.casting/attacking hate and preprotting don't do anything rly.(not trying to say it's good).--AESTHETIC
Every build has a counter, this build is still great. Especially in random formats such as RA, FA, and AB where people don't bring coutners. In places where people do bring counters there is always removal. I have seen touch rangers WIN games in FA alone because they are durable enough to get into the Green Room and take out gatekeepers. I've seen them win on the Kurzick side because they are fantastic at taking mines even with players picking on them. Taking them down at a mine usually requires several players and that's the mark of a good build. Most players who aren't hard core PvP don't know to run away from touch range and so killing them can be very hard. It's a good build and the person who archived it for the said reason is an idiot. 122.104.160.66 12:18, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
Every build has a counter, but no great build is countered by simply walking away. -Auron 12:26, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
Such as all the AoE capping builds for AB and CM. Show me a gate guard npc, or a Gatekeeper or a shrine guard that runs away. Oh right, they don't. Also like I said, many players don't run away from touchers and with all the projective evasion DS and CS are hard to hit with. They are far more useful than several favored builds in AB and CM...122.104.160.66 12:52, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
Do you seriously want to compare the damage of a nuking ele to that of a toucher, vs NPCs? I think the toucher would lose that by alot. Y'know, the whole AoE thing. -Auron 11:55, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
I still use this build all the time in AB. It works great still, no one caries the counter skills, and most people don't even try to run away. If they do, it's easy enough to find a target that'll stand and try to fight, and I kill plenty people with this. It can also still solo cap, so I don't see how it's out of date --68.166.2.29 02:23, 12 April 2008 (EDT)

why is someone even removing votes (or voting in the first place) when the build is archived? Pluto 06:39, 5 April 2008 (EDT)

Unarchive This

Tag it for CM and AB and unarchive it. Counters DON'T matter in AB or CM because the npc's are freaking stupid! It's still a very good build at capping in AB simply because you use the npc's at the shrine as a font of health while killing them. It is meta in AB. (I KNOW that is an oxymoron :)) Wtbursanswtsizzy 18:35, 2 May 2008 (EDT)

It still works in RA. 70% of people in RA don't know how to kite. Plus, how I look at it, if the monk's kiting from you, they're not healing, and if they're not healing, your other 3 players can kick the crap out of the enemy team. Also, if you bring Zojun's Haste instead of Whirling Defense (I mean, there's no point not to, unless you're actually depending on WD's damage), you can still do a good amount of damage when they're kiting (maybe a bit less than a warrior in Rush, though they're more susceptible to prot). This build still at least deserves a 'good' rating. Jaigoda 14:27, 3 May 2008 (EDT)
The reason behind it being archived seems flawed anyway. Many of the most popular PvP builds today are well known with easy enough counters and yet they aren't archived. This build should be unarchived as its still seen often and is still VERY effective. -- 82.46.237.197 14:32, 3 May 2008 (EDT)
Just ran it in Ra, first try we got 10 wins ICYFIFTYFIVE 06:02, 5 May 2008 (EDT)
This is the world's easiest build to counter. Just... run. ~~     Frvwfr2     talk    contribs    admin   06:33, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

wow, the build that killed itself-Lisark 17:22, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

"But...it pwns RA" ɟoʇuɐʌʎʞɔıɹPanic srsbsns 17:26, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

The "counters" for this build also counter more than half of the melee builds on this website, so we should either un-archive this build or archive every build that these counters apply to. That includes Diversion, rupting, snaring, and kiting. і†оκαҐυ 18:21, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

RA Pwnage Kitty amirite Antiarchangel Antiarchangel No U Sig TROLL 18:23, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Touch Rangers are awesome against people who can't play Guild Wars. However, you get killed by any person who has half a brain in the Guild Wars area. TBH, if good players are Rangers, they'd just run Magebane and shit. --GoD Sig3GuildofDeals 19:04, 5 May 2008 (EDT)
And I'm sure you would know that all good players would rather run Magebane over Toucher...I would rather run Toucher over Magebane. I'm sure that Magebane is more of a help to my team than a Toucher, but Touchers are, in my opinion, more fun. And that is the entire point of Guild Wars, is it not? To have fun?

EDIT: Forgot to put sperm at the end of my post...і†оκαҐυ 19:12, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

point of GW is to go "lol nubs, i pwned ur ass" Antiarchangel Antiarchangel No U Sig TROLL 21:02, 5 May 2008 (EDT)
Still widely used in AB, alot are running plague sending to counter crippling, unarchive imo. Selket Shadowdancer 22:01, 23 May 2008 (EDT)
widely used =/= gud Antiarchangel Antiarchangel No U Sig TROLL 22:03, 23 May 2008 (EDT)

All builds got counters, this deserves unarchieve. If you say it's too easy to counter, then why is http://pvx.wikia.com/wiki/Build:N/D_Sacrificing_Lich_Touch not archieved? BeQuickOrBeDead 16:50, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

Because it belongs in the trash? That build does more damage and has better survivability/e-management too.--Goldenstar 16:55, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
That makes no sense at all. As I said, all builds got counters. Enchantment removal DESTROYS that build. Just because you think it's better, doesn't make the Touch Ranger worse. If you think it's trash, then vote for trash. This build should still be unarchieved. BeQuickOrBeDead 17:12, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
except that the counter to this build exists on all builds, IE kiting Antiarchangel Antiarchangel No U Sig TROLL 17:13, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
A melee character kiting is just sooooo great! Don't you agree?:) A character doesn't only have to be good vs. casters.BeQuickOrBeDead 18:02, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
if your a melee and you cant kill a toucher uninstall plz Antiarchangel Antiarchangel No U Sig TROLL 18:04, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
How do you use a melee to kill someone with 10000000 block stances? Ok, you, Hammer warrior, go solo the Escape ranger! — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 18:05, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
wait for stances to end, spike, knocklock, w/e, gg Antiarchangel Antiarchangel No U Sig TROLL 18:08, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
By the time both Blind (32 sec) and the stance (21 sec) are gone, chances are you're dead.BeQuickOrBeDead 18:23, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
What if they have Dwarven Stability? — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 18:24, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
Okay, just don't unarchive this. Ever. This is how assholes play Rangers because they're too nooby to play BA, BHA, Magebane, etc. Just stop trying to say this crap is the best build ever. We have a PvE version, stop moaning. --File:GoD Wario Sig.JPG*Wah Wah Wah!* 18:26, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
since when did Dwarven work in pvp Antiarchangel Antiarchangel No U Sig TROLL 18:27, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
um isnt this still popular? I still see it run in ra and see 4 man teams of it in ab --Lann-sf2 Lann 18:30, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
once again popular =/= gud Antiarchangel Antiarchangel No U Sig TROLL 18:31, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
Damn, you killed the joke. And yeah, going back to the original point, this probably shouldn't be unarchived. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 18:33, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
ur rite, it = other. but still worth being on pvx if it is still widely used (in those areas) --Lann-sf2 Lann 18:34, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
I think it should be unarchived. Now, unlike half you freaking twits, I'm going to actually provide a reason: it is widely used, like most unarchived-ers agree, but not only that, it is good. I've run it before and farmed RA for a good five rounds or so. People can run, but a smart toucher will slip in vampiric gaze along with the build, and perhaps something like dark pact, and then you have a build which can not only target people via touch, but also far away. Have a good monk to deal with degen, and you basically countered everything that your going to deal with as a touch. Now I would add more, to counter other's arguements, but the thing is: all I've seen from you people is: "It ruins the community" which isn't actually worth fighting, because to archive it means to call it useless, not bad for the community, and "the health steal skills are the same thing" Which, again, isn't a question of it's usefulness. I would continue pointing out useless arguements, but I believe you people get the idea. 63.116.14.86 18:01, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
More people kite now. That counters this build. Osht, I just reduced a touchers DPS to maybe 10 or so. ~~     Frvwfr2     talk    contribs    admin   18:04, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
STILL doesn't matter if you kite. Again, slip in a ranged spell such as dark pact or vampiric gaze. Oshit, I believe I raised it back up again.63.116.14.86 18:07, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
You're wrong. Touchers have horrible healing, horrible damage, and horrible defense. They are absurdly easy to beat. Just because you're able to win 5 rounds in RA with it doesn't make it good. Anything works in RA.--Goldenstar 18:08, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
A toucher heals constantly. True, they do bring their health back down a lot, but bring something like demonic flesh, or some other max health raiser, and you have a counter for bad health(although you do admitedly have to replenish this). Touchers aren't ment to do good damage. They chip at the enemy while keeping themselves alive until they are victor. Defense is also countered by constant healing.63.116.14.86 18:14, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
It doesn't matter if it's constant healing. It's shitty healing. Touchers are bad, get over it.--Goldenstar 18:20, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
Ok, first off, don't say get over it. It won't end the conversation or debate. Second off, have you ever actually run a touch. Here is how it works: You h-steal, and the moment you do this, you h-steal, and again, and again. You run out of energy, and you hurt yourself and gain energy, and then h-steal(you see where I'm going with this?), and then do it again, ect.63.116.14.86 18:24, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
Ok, get over it. The toucher isn't some godly build, it's far from it. You know what, I think we SHOULD unarchive this, just so I (and all sensible people) can trash it and we can stop having these bad debates about the effectiveness (or rather uneffectiveness) of the Toucher. Here's the thing: You kite it around, shoot it with some decent pressure, and tah-da, it's dead. You're running around with low health pool, saccing 1/5 of your health for energy, and have no reliable healing. Sure touching heals you, but you have to actually touch someone. Kiting and shooting kill this. --File:GoD Wario Sig.JPG*Wah Wah Wah!* 18:29, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
Okay. You're healing for like 65. You have a superior rune, and your only defense (Whirling defense) is only up 1/3 of the time. Any melee profession auto-attacking on you outdamages your healing capabilities, as soon as you throw attack skills in the mix this thing crumbles in seconds. Touchers suck.--Goldenstar 18:30, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
  1. Patient Spirit obliterates touchers. Power creep.
  2. Monks are far more common in RA now than they used to be, and more of them run good builds. Meta change.
  3. The average skill level of the player base has increased. Not a whole lot, just enough that almost all players have realized that kiting is good. Counters have become commonplace.

By your powers combined, I am CAPTAIN ARCHIVED. --71.229 18:50, 16 June 2008 (EDT)

I do believe he has summed up my point.63.116.14.86 18:58, 16 June 2008 (EDT)

Umm no? He just refuted your point...--Goldenstar 19:00, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
Well, more the counter to kiting. The monk thing and the Patient Spirit thing came from nowhere. EDIT: Oops, forgot to sign it. 63.116.14.86 19:07, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
He said players kite more. Kiting ruins this build. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 19:08, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
They're counters. A monk will stop a toucher dead, unless the toucher has awesome pressure on his team. Monks are common now. Patient Spirit is a spammable throwaway heal that'll negate about four seconds of the toucher's work per cast. And really, Vamp Gaze isn't going to stop kiting, and if I saw a toucher spamming Dark Pact I'd hang around just inside cast range and smile as they waste time and energy doing more damage to themselves than they're doing to me. --71.229 19:08, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
Bring any player to go up and attack the monk. They can't defend and heal. And true, you won't do shit while using those skills seperately, but if you used dark pact then vampiric gaze repeatedly, maybe while chasing someone, either works, honestly, then you are going to kill them.
So what you're saying is, the build is abd unless you get a good team? BTW this page needs an archive sometime--Goldenstar 19:17, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
What I'm saying is, get a decent monk to take care of degen, and any ol guy to attack a monk. A perfect team isn't needed.63.116.14.86 19:19, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
Uh. I have no problems both defending and healing, and I'm a bad monk. It's pretty easy. --71.229 19:20, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
An inturrupt with something to cause dazed would screw the monk over.63.116.14.86 19:23, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
"I can damage the monk, as long as something else makes sure he can't cast." –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 19:24, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
Exactly. So long as somebody is keeping the monk from casting, the toucher is home free. Now, as fun as it is defending a build which will be ultimately trashed just because people will vote unfairly due to personal oppinions instead of actual thoughts on the usefulness of the build, but I have got to go now. 63.116.14.86 19:30, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
i lold — Skakid 19:31, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
(EC)If someone's preventing the monk from casting, chucking spears doing one damage would eventually kill him too, but that doesn't make it effective. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 19:33, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
This shouldn't be archived the reason given "Widespread popularity in turn created common knowledge of its overly-simple counters." is void in settings like Fort Aspenwood - you can kite and snare the toucher as much as you want, he's just going to focus on NPCS that wont kite to plague touch stuff away, so unless you have a diversion mesmer focusing on the toucher, or a hexer to slow/degen the toucher before it can reach NPCs. 2 cents Zerak-Tul 14:20, 29 July 2008 (EDT)
Why did some butthurt noob archive this build for such a bs reason? Perhaps the genius who did it does not understand the tagging system. I don't see too many monsters i am farming reacting to it's "widespread popularity" in the way suggested for warranting an archive. If you want to archive a build just because you are so fail that you can't learn to kite, why don't you become an hero? BTW, nice voting removal aurin and armond. Did you two faggots discuss that strategy under the sheets? Removing every single positive vote that was cast for this build based on you disagreeing with the users rationale? Wow... what a piece of shit pvx wiki has become with butthurt admins waving their rainbow flags like everyday is gay pride day. 71.63.45.9 05:21, 12 August 2008 (EDT) Anonymous
As for monsters not kiting, there is a PvE version of this that's rated good. The PvP version is what's archived, specifically because they DO know how to kite. It had PvE tags because it happened to work there too. Also, PvX:NPA. --Toraen 04:13, 13 September 2008 (EDT)

Solution

12+1+3, 11, 6+1, and bring Pin Down--ShadowRelyk Sig 04:43, 13 September 2008 (EDT) <pvxbig> [build prof=range/necro expert=11+1+2 bloodm=11 mark=6+1][vampiric bite][vampiric touch][offering of blood][pin down][whirling defense][dodge][plague touch][resurrection signet][/build] </pvxbig>--ShadowRelyk Sig 04:58, 13 September 2008 (EDT)

Shouldn't be archived, every build has its counters, even if it is easily counterable. this is simply too popular to be archived anyway. Blah10

lol@build. You cannot be serious. --76.88.191.47 19:38, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
Honestly, Toucher is a noobs way out 1212121212121212121 YAY KILL... if only people were that stupid... but seriously who doesnt know how to kite, and this does absolutly no dmg whatsoever. much MUCH more efficient builds. Zzes Tyan 22:11, 12 November 2008 (EST)
Is hella fun to make noobs rage at you in AB, though. Then again, Cripshot does that just as well. --The preceding srsly srs comment was added by Itokaru 22:51, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Unarchive for CM

Or create another version for CM, which will probably get WELL'd like mine. Anyway, it's great in CM. Plz unarchive. It may not have much damage, but it has direct, spammable life stealing. I frequently slip in through Green while Kurzicks are being dumb and end the game in about a minute. Also tears through bonded gates. So, again, plz unarchive for CM. Oh, and make an archive for this page. Iz loooong.--Gah The Epic 17:43, 8 December 2008 (EST)

Just convince Tai not to revert you on the other build. It's not already archived and it already talks about CM. Karate JesusGW Inverted Grenth&#039;s Grasp 17:45, 8 December 2008 (EST)
gtfo Tai sig Image 78 17:46, 8 December 2008
Angry Tai is angry? Karate JesusGW Inverted Grenth&#039;s Grasp 17:47, 8 December 2008 (EST)
Unarchive it so I and the rest of the sensible people on the Wiki can 0-0-0, delete it, and get this damn wart off the taint of PvX. --GoD Hammer and Sickle Guild of Deals 17:47, 8 December 2008 (EST)
This pwns RA gtfo GoD Tai sig Image 78 17:52, 8 December 2008
My little brother wanted to try to play gw a few days ago and I gave him this build to run in RA and AB, because it was simple and effective. His nub ass got 10 in a row a few times and did fine, when he went on this site to look for other builds he found out this was archived. My question is simple, what dipshit made up the counters and actually had the balls and clear lack of though to archive a meta build that everyone knows, using "how meta it is" as a counter and reason to archive.I heal if you shut it 05:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
i hate to tell you, but RA proves nothing at all. ever. ANd having it archived does not mmean you cannot use it.UnrealSignature1 05:10, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Michael Jackson's build can never be deleted.--Ikimono"a rabid grizzly bear"Monk-Paragon-icon 06:34, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment From a Typically NPoV User

Note: There are multiple thought processes and expository asides littering this comment, given in parenthesis, so try to keep focus while reading; you have been warned.

I know I'm beating a dead horse here, what with a far-and-away dated archive tag on this, but there are just so many vote removals on this build (the last two not withstanding...apparently stricken during archival, or so have been commented), with 80+% of these made by just two admins, totaling up to about 3/5 of all the votes (about 3/5 of the page, at any rate). Now, I do realize that this was archived almost two years ago (from date of this comment, anyway), which is why I use the old aphorism of a dead horse (I really don't have any experience with Touchers, so don't think I'm favoring this build in the least; I just had to see the votes when snooping around the talk page), but 3/5 of the votes is not simply a few bad votes...it's a majority of votes, including 3 BMs...more than the 2 logged BM votes that stand.

A few of these are probably valid removals, with some comments (not the removal comment, mind you) claiming that the build isn't too good, but the user yielding a 4-5 for the corresponding rating. But many of these seemed (to me, at least) to be valid ratings with ideas of the users' general experiences (of course, sometimes scrawled in the users' own personal slang). However many have been removed, with removal comments that typically address the admins' own experiences or biases rather than an incohesion between the ratings and comments of the users. Personally, I have no stake in the unarchiving; I'm not the biggest fan of touchers or rangers. But I cannot say that I am not concerned, as many of the removals that were included here, based on the removal comments left with them, appear to be a tossing-around of admin weight...especially when I noticed that three of these were BM votes (who were voted as such with their experience at creating cohesive arguments for or against builds). Aside from those three, amongst those votes tossed aside, a large portion of the users' comments do give an account of what they experienced, either good or bad.

Now, if the votes are simply outdated due to changes in the skills of the build, the build votes should simply be reset and a more current vote taken, to more accurately represent current sentiment for this build. If this build is affected by changes in meta, a consensus should be taken to reflect current user experiences of the build in gameplay, and archived, much as this build has been. Votes on a build, however, should not be arbitrarily removed based on admin biases for or against the build. If said admin is skilled in critical examination of builds, appeal to the community to attain BM status, or perhaps appeal to improve weights of BM votes to complement BM skill in their critiques. (I also understand there are those that would remove BM status in general, from any users holding such status, claiming that none are truly qualified. In my opinion, someone thought differently at the time of their creation...but that's another argument for another time, and for another person.)

I do understand the need to weed out votes that make a claim with no reference to experiences, i.e.: "in 1 word: fantastic!" (shortest I could find); it states no reasoning why it is fantastic. But removing them with a comment of "In 1 word; wrong!" does not lend credence to the technical reason for removing the vote, and reveals a subjective bias against the vote. Stating a reason such as "removed; no elaboration," for instance, makes this more a removal of technical merit, rather than subjective. Unfortunately, we will now never know; the comment has been seen...and commented on.

As probably a more typical user of PvX (far more reading, far less writing; maybe a dozen posts to my name?), I would certainly hope that what more resembles an election of the NDC Chairman of the DPRK (although I regeret the inflammatory, and long, convoluted reference, I feel it apt), in this case, is by and far an exception to the unspoken rule (a policy on Wikipedia, even) that would suggest benevolent dictatorship from adminship and a consensual democracy amongst users that is more representative of other wikis on Wikia and abroad. I understand that as a gaming wiki, there is an inordinately high incidence rate of trolling, sockpuppetry, flaming, and revert wars, but I certainly hope adminship doesn't lower itself to this level as well, with what may be the users' valid opinions. The purpose of adminship here, aside from their own vote (even the leaders of democracy get one), is to keep the voting clean...check for rigged voting machines, toss out votes with hanging chads, etc. Real Vetting is, after all, voting.

This is, in no way, an endorsement for, or an argument against, voting high, voting low, or unarchiving, the article Build:R/N Touch Ranger. This location just seemed to be a good place, from the author's view, to address all that was in the preceding wall of text, considering the circumstances surrounding this particular article...though there are probably other glaring examples, with a more thorough search. Moreover, the author would consider any use of this comment out of context to further a cause on this subject, rather than be a neutral reference on such, to be a personal afront to his own appearance of neutrality. If, providing general consensus among adminship, this section is out of place, the author kindly asks adminship to move it to a more appropriate location, and perhaps provide a link emanating from this page, considering the pertinent relationship to the talk of this article (it is referenced in this comment, after all). The author is also aware that this comment is a nose-in-the-air, high-falutin', hoity-toity argument using big and fancy $100 words...and doesn't really care. :p

The above block, up to the preceding L2 headline made by Abased Fear 00:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC).

This build is STILL great

I have been using touch rangers ever since factions came out. I use it to farm faction in RA, FA and AB. In those area's I play touchers almost exclusively and many of my friends do the same. It's an incredibly versatile build that can tackle most challenges in those arena's. I can solo cap every shrine in AB, often deciding the match on my own while the whole team is mobbing. FA: as a luxon I can cap the mines, as a kurzick I can ferry amber. By bringing well of the profane and chillblains I can counter the obliged bonders that usually ruin the fun in FA.

It has been more than two years since the forum nazi's first archived this great build. In those years there hasn't been a single nerf to the build. While kiting is a viable counter, I have yet to see anyone properly use this against me. Apart from mesmers, no one is a real challenge to me. Also I am not braindead. Experience from playing this build for so long made me know exactly what I can and can't kill. I am not godmode, but I am more than happy to kill a wandering assassin, warrior, ele, ranger or what have you that thinks he can kill me with a few shots.

This build will probably remain in the archives forever more but I still play it. I love the build to bits and I more or less identify with it in casual pvp. It's even fun to run it in HA, just for shits and giggles. Whine all you want over this great and fun build. I will still kill you with a couple of touches. See you in the game.84.193.179.123 13:24, January 22, 2010 (UTC) man, you are so cool --67.53.91.218 14:53, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

T.T No one can deny Michael Jackson-Way's godly effectiveness!--Ikimono1 11:39, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

touch rangers are gay, even dare say pedophiles, thats wat they are...after all, they all like to touch things, the dirty bastards...83.240.216.31 12:56, August 9, 2010 (UTC)enormous

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC-SA 2.5 unless otherwise noted.