FANDOM



Discussion

I rb'd the changes, because the attributes were impossible, and no BA ranger uses WD. If you want, you can discuss here. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 11:12, 10 June 2007 (CEST)

That was the original Skill Set/Attributes from the original Guild Wiki, so whoever added WD and messed up the atts was a vandilizer, an idiot, or both. --Hikari 08:00, 6 July 2007 (CEST)

Yeah, but I'm an admin, I can't say things like that. ;-) - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 08:03, 6 July 2007 (CEST)

Checked and Reviewed

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

^^lol. Resurrection Signet for AB? Take that away for something else.. like... Screaming Shot.. good otherwise!

That's because this build is meant for more than just AB, though if it is used there I would suggest another defense skill like Whirling Defense. Riveted 02:33, 2 August 2007 (CEST)
Pin Down or Veil or Purge imo. --Edru viransu//QQ about me 03:08, 2 August 2007 (CEST)

Merge?!?

Why not merge this build with the cripshot ranger? Except add burning arrow as a variant...-Lisark 6:00, 9 July, 2007 (CEST)

Rofl, same attributes too. I agree... name it Burning/Cripshot ranger, and just make the elites interchangable. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 01:08, 10 July 2007 (CEST)
Because they are different builds. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 01:12, 10 July 2007 (CEST)

Definitely no merge here. Those are two very different builds, designed for two very different purposes. There's more to a build than its skill bar, you guys. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 05:06, 10 July 2007 (CEST)

Merging is idiotic. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 06:13, 10 July 2007 (CEST)

You guys do realize that this, the cripshot, and the BHA ranger all have the same everything except the elite? I think this should definitely be merged. PaintballerSig The Paintballer (T/C) 08:28, 24 August 2007 (CEST)

I'll quote Krowman, because you missed his comment; "Those are two very different builds, designed for two very different purposes. There's more to a build than its skill bar, you guys." Burning Arrow is a damage elite, Crippling Shot is a snare elite. Cripshots take forever to solo gank, and thus are rarely gankers - they are rangers, however, and thus do base defending pretty well. -Auron 08:35, 24 August 2007 (CEST)
For once, I agree with what Krowman is saying xD Dark Morphon 20:59, 13 September 2007 (CEST)
Krowman =/= wrong. — Skakid9090 04:04, 30 September 2007 (CEST)

Why not make a guide and just leave the elite off? then give an abbreviated usage for the three major elites. Just an idea, please don't hurt me :)Under Gunned 07:39, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

i feel like i want to punch you 76.98.149.51 07:03, 11 June 2008 (EDT)
btw thats a celebrity jeopardy reference and meant as a sarcastic response to your request that nobody hurt you, not a personal attack inb4permab& 76.98.149.51 07:03, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Common?

I've been using this EXACT build for months before I even saw it on PvXwiki, is this a common build?24.74.106.195 04:54, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

Extremely. People have been using it since the beginning of NF. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 04:58, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

I too have used a build almost identical to this, however I am clearly missing the reasoning for such high expertise...IMO Marksmenship and Expertise attribute points should be swapped *confused*
Apply Poison, Burning Arrow, Savage Shot, and your energy will be 0. =P — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 21:53, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
Moving marks to 14 would give you one second of burning and +6 damage on BA and make all of your skills cost 1 to 2 more energy. It's clear whether it's worth it. --Edru viransu//QQ about me 23:25, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
Maybe in PvE the choice is clear but in almost any level of PvP you will need that energy to continue your role of shutting down that curse necromancer for an entire game. Twenty extra damage per cast is absolutely insignificant when your energy is gone after three minutes and you need to Distract that Aegis or Diversion. Teutonic 03:19, 2 August 2007 (CEST)
That's why the choice is clear... because the extra second of burning and miniscule damage increases aren't important... --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 14:08, 24 August 2007 (CEST)

PvE?

can this build be used for pve? Or is there another burning arrow build i can use? - Mesmer-icon-small Dean Harper 23:06, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

I use this. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 00:35, 28 July 2007 (CEST)

For PvE the only thing I'd reccomend is adding Epidemic over Mending Touch. Teutonic 03:13, 2 August 2007 (CEST)

I added Epedimic in the variants for PvE. User:Undergunned

Would Restore Life be a decent alternative for Res Signet in PvE? What would it's power cost be (it's a touch spell)? User:Johnarbo 2007 Nov 20, 21:27 MST

Just bring res sig, sunspear rebirth sig, fomf or even rebirth if your party fails (read: PUG) –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 14:50, 21 November 2007 (CET)

HB

This would make an ok HB build? (not for heros)Kiteeye 06:05, 9 August 2007 (CEST)

Insignias

Well? I'm using Stalwart (+10 vs physical), but I dunno what other people think should be used. And there's a spare rune slot, too, after you add in a vigor rune. I'm using attunement. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 21:42, 9 August 2007 (CEST)

Vitae or attunement for that rune. I'd normally use survivor insignias, but since it's a ranger, you shouldn't die, so maybe radiant or armor or something weird. --Edru viransu//QQ about me 22:41, 9 August 2007 (CEST)
I considered survivor, but I decided that if I *was* attacked, 80 al vs physical and 100 al vs elemental would probably help more than around 75 more hp. I didn't expect to run into energy problems (and I haven't, mostly!), so I didn't put in Radiant (and I switched the attunement to vitae for lack of a better choice). -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 22:54, 9 August 2007 (CEST)

Clones

This is a clone of the burning arrow ranger and mending cripshot builds, we should just find the majority favorite and put the other two as variants, since it's only an elite different on each one.--Daniel Rendat 23:20, 9 August 2007 (CEST)

No. They play entirely differently. --Edru viransu//QQ about me 23:26, 9 August 2007 (CEST)
This has been discussed over and over again. They serve different purposes. The preceding awesome-sauce comment was added by Skakid9090. 23:26, 9 August 2007 (CEST)

Wow

Nice! Amazing, Works like a charm, just switch Res for LR or WD for AB purposes.

I love switching to a Flatbow, and letting off a crazy shot and hit someone a mile away and they degen to death :D

-AtL

The problem would be to actually hit the person standing a mile away. The arc from a flatbow is ridiculously (or whatever way you spell it) high. If you wanted to do that, the longbow is better. Dragnmn talk 18:32, 15 August 2007 (CEST)
He was saying pwnage if you get that... He wasnt reccomending it. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/RFA) 18:37, 15 August 2007 (CEST)


Shouldn't mending touch's energy cost be reduced becaus of expertise becaus it's a touch skill?--Theripperfex 17:28, 17 August 2007 (CEST)

It does get reduced. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 17:33, 17 August 2007 (CEST)
I think he was talking about the energy cost on the hover thing. Desi 18:03, 18 August 2007 (CEST)
It is indeed reduced in-game; there's a bug in the PvXcode that doesn't reduce the cost of non-ranger touch spells due to expertise. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 22:52, 18 August 2007 (CEST)
Mending Touch hasn't been a touch skill in a looooong time. 58.110.140.18 19:57, 26 November 2007 (CET)
...what? — Skakid9090 19:57, 26 November 2007 (CET)

Little changes

Hey, I run a build like this but, I use poison tip sig. and barbed arrows. Ive tried it with your way, and I found it alot harded to manage my energy because of apply poison.The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cranag (contribs) .

Then you need to manage energy better? --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 00:11, 25 September 2007 (CEST)
The trick is to not spam skills like a maniac. I know I did when I first tried this build. With such high expertise you can afford to keep Apply Poison up all the time and spam Burning Arrow, but spamming your interrupts (and Pin Down/Screaming Shot, if you take it - I prefer Pin Down, which is more expensive) will burn you through your energy like a maniac. If you're still having energy problems (which you shouldn't, by that point) swap your vitae for an attunement. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 19:48, 25 September 2007 (CEST)

First off, I'm not a noob, I know how to play rangers, and I just just suggesting a way to keep pressure with little energy loss. Both ways are good though, so Ill leave it up to others to decide what to do.The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cranag (contribs) .

Barbed Arrows is bad. Poison Tip Signet is mediocre. Apply, however, is very good. It's an easy decision. Apply's probably cheaper, really, considering its longer duration and not having to get SoDed to get it off. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 23:54, 27 September 2007 (CEST)
Expertise means little energy loss. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 08:03, 1 October 2007 (CEST)

My personal preference is Screaming Shot over AP and using RtW instead. Bleeding + Burning is already maxed degen. RtW enhances flatbows (which i'm sure everyone knows already) and all the added +dmg takes out a target easy. I've had 2 luxon warriors beating on me and I degened and shot them to death before I got beaten to death by a third warrior. Sometimes I run R/Rt with Nightmare or Brutal Weapon to really pump the dmg up. --BeeD 03:47, 25 October 2007 (CEST)

All of those variations on this build are bad. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 03:49, 25 October 2007 (CEST)
I don't get the point of "improving" a build that's already next to perfect. First of all, this build is not about direct damage, so there's no need for more +damage skills. The idea behind this build is to have a solid, versatile build that can outlast most other pvp builds via degeneration, interrupts, blocking/kiting and self healing which is important for solo-ganking NPCs, while still beeing able to do a good job at the flag stand (or any other 4v4/8v8 situation). That being said, Screaming Shot < Apply Poison. Screaming Shot is SLIGHTLY better for ganking situations, while Apply is FAR SUPERIOR at the flag stand. If you're using this build in Fort Aspenwood (I guess you do, Luxon Warriors and stuff) there's no need for Screaming Shot/RtW either. Just use Barbed Trap instead of Res Signet and with some practice you're gonna take out any amount of Luxon Warriors (+ the Turtle) without even getting hit a single time.--Makku 13:13, 25 October 2007 (CEST)
It all comes down play style. Personally, I rarely use AP since I tend not to spec very much in wilderness. I have a marked preference for a combination for degen/+dmg hence the use of BA/SS/RtW, sometimes taking Sloth Hunter Shot instead of screaming. --BeeD 04:28, 26 October 2007 (CEST)
Yes, it comes down to play style. There is the effective play style: the current build, and the ineffective playstyle: your version. :) --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 04:32, 26 October 2007 (CEST)
  • Yawn* Depends on what you want to do. I'm not going to cry more that you don't like my variant. It's effective, suits my style. that's all there is to it. I've lost count of the times I've nearly had to hold off the luxon assault through the green gate, picking off the swarms of luxons coming through and most importantly, winning the game. I've used different variants, some are good, some are better. If you sit on one version of a build and don't evolve it, the game gets awfully boring real fast. --BeeD 04:56, 26 October 2007 (CEST)
This build(and the other current popular ranger builds) is the result of years of evolution of ranger builds. Screaming Shot is worse than Apply because it is strictly worse for both single target degen and condition spreading. RtW isn't really a meaningful damage boost(particularly not one worthy of dropping Apply) except for rspike(and even then, skill changes and introduction of new skills have rendered it obsolete). Even conjure's better. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 05:03, 26 October 2007 (CEST)
Oh I have no doubt about that. It's one of many builds I've tried. I've never sat on one build for very long before messing around with it. I'm still of two minds about AP vs SS. Yes, you can get 1 packet of 10 degen on a target in one go. But the two packets of +dmg from both BA and SS is something that appeals, because you get 2 dmg boosts. Short of being blocked, the boost SS gives when it hits followed by the bleed I've found to be very beneficial. RtW is something i use situationally. It's a staple in my FA bar, being a Kurzick, I like firing from the heights and that plus the long bow i use is great for fast sniping. (I haven't got a decent flatbow yet). In the field, I'm still experimenting, and I've been at this game as long as it's been around, but it's all in good fun --BeeD 05:34, 26 October 2007 (CEST)

Longbow

A Kurzick with a longbow can solo the amber mines in FA. Also good for turtles/kiters just out of range. But I dunno; does a flatbow do the same? -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 01:53, 1 October 2007 (CEST)

I don't understand the edit tbh, flats suck more than longs, it's like shooting BHA's all the time. Also, on an unrelated note: any reason this isn't in the TA cat? –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 02:03, 1 October 2007 (CEST)
The main purposes of flatbows and longbows are for hitting distant stationary NPCs without them being able to attack you, in which case a flatbow is definitely better because it isn't going to miss regardless and it has faster refire, and pulling NPCs, for which the only important shot is generally the first one, and NPCs will often be stationary or moving slowly when you fire that first shot, so the longbow's not much better than the flatbow. Perhaps have both in the equipment, since sometimes, I suppose, the longbow might be superior? For PvP, flatbows are more efficient for their purpose, because they attack faster and the NPCs you'd use it on don't generally won't move. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 02:24, 1 October 2007 (CEST)
The only reason I could think of to include the longbow would be for the situation I described. I'll do testing and see if a flat works. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 07:59, 1 October 2007 (CEST)
Flatbow works. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 08:41, 1 October 2007 (CEST)

Teh Uber Pwnzer

I can't remove his vote... ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 01:26, 4 November 2007 (CET)

I'm an idiot. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 01:29, 4 November 2007 (CET)
Lol. --Teh Uber Pwnzer 01:37, 4 November 2007 (CET)
Reason was, Usually i haven't voted on a build, so when it came up with only 1 box i was like what??? I want to remove it, not rate it... XD ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 01:58, 4 November 2007 (CET)

Moo?

Is this build really goof enough to be in the great section, it feels like its not strong enough anymore, other elites are suporior, magabane and cripshot is so much better. Is this just me or? Fish Signature Fishy Moooo 12:37, 3 December 2007 (CET)

Different use. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 15:07, 3 December 2007 (CET)
Diffrent use, and the diffrent use isen't that effective anymore.... Fish Signature Fishy Moooo 16:24, 3 December 2007 (CET)
It's better at ganking than the other 2 you mentioned. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 16:38, 3 December 2007 (CET)
Send a warrior or something....and cripshot for example can be stronger at ganking also. If 3 ppl fall backon it, it can cripple them and gets a safe runaway. It kills fast anyway if you know how to gank and use right bow. Belive meta has killed this one to much... i test ran it and it's not effective at ganking anymore, or arenas. Fish Signature Fishy Moooo 18:04, 3 December 2007 (CET)
This is definately not a great build anymore. - Rawrawr 18:10, 3 December 2007 (CET)

Broadhead Arrow, Cripshot Arrow and Burning Arrow

These are all of the same builds and should be merged explaining the different variances with the elite skills for the different playing styles. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Talyyn Silent Wind (contribs) .

NO. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 23:57, 3 December 2007 (CET)
NO. Shogunshen Sig Shen(contribs) 23:58, 3 December 2007 (CET)
NO. — Skakid9090 00:00, 4 December 2007 (CET)
NO.--Shadowsin 00:30, 4 December 2007 (CET)
NO. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 00:39, 4 December 2007 (CET)
TRIED IT! xD and GO HERE IF YoU WANT TO LOOK AT IT!Build:R/Mo: General Utility Pressure

--Shadowsin 00:06, 4 December 2007 (CET)

they are the same builds with a different elite. Your trying to tell me a spade is a heart. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Talyyn Silent Wind (contribs) .

NO. (Also, sign your comments with 4 tildes (~~~~). Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 00:12, 4 December 2007 (CET)

then how can you guys delete otehr builds that are similar with different purposes? Thats a little hippocrittical to me. Also, I don't think Admins should be allowed to make builds(if they are not already) The preceding unsigned comment was added by Talyyn Silent Wind (contribs) .

First... why shouldn't Admins be able to make builds...? Second, and I hope I only have to say this once, All three builds have different purposes, therefore, they should not be deleted or merged. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 00:16, 4 December 2007 (CET)

they are the same build. They have the same stats and all the same skills except for the elites. Wich create different purposes for the builds just as if you were to have "optional" slots for variations to the build.

And for admins creating builds, I think it is a conflict of interest with regular users. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Talyyn Silent Wind (contribs) .

lern2gw –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 00:19, 4 December 2007 (CET)
Different purpose means different build. Sign your comments. Shogunshen Sig Shen(contribs) 00:20, 4 December 2007 (CET)
There's no conflict of interest... Also... I don't know what to say other than you're wrong. They use the same skills, but for radically different purposes. That one skill literally makes or breaks the build. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 00:20, 4 December 2007 (CET)

This has been tried time and time and time again. NO. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 00:21, 4 December 2007 (CET)

They wont get merged, I tried. XD Although i do agree they are used for different purposes, but its been argued time and time again. Please stop posting and go to my userspace if you are really wanting to see them all together. --Shadowsin 00:22, 4 December 2007 (CET)
Lol@Admins shouldn't be able to create builds... and NO. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 00:23, 4 December 2007 (CET)

Why is that funny about admins not creating build?Talyyn Silent Wind 00:25, 4 December 2007 (CET)

Oi. Shogunshen Sig Shen(contribs) 00:26, 4 December 2007 (CET)
(EC)Why shouldn't the LEADERS OF THE COMMUNITY be able to contribute? ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 00:27, 4 December 2007 (CET)
Why wouldn't they be allowed to? They themselves are only allowed to remove votes that are invalid (and are assigned by the bureaucrats only if they're certain that admin knows what he's doing). Their vote doesn't count for anything more. Their builds will get shot down as well if they fail. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 00:28, 4 December 2007 (CET)
Well, I could argue that the influence generated by our position of power pressures users into giving our created builds a favorable bias that they otherwise wouldn't have. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 00:31, 4 December 2007 (CET)

I thought the leaders of the commuinty were here to monitor and help make it better?

Talyyn Silent Wind 00:29, 4 December 2007 (CET)

How is not being able to contribute being able to make better? ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 00:31, 4 December 2007 (CET)
Anyways, we would just make an admin-bitch, tell them to post this, and then we edit it as much as we want. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 00:31, 4 December 2007 (CET)

Well I have seen abuse of that power with removing votes that are unjust and the teaming up of admins against casual users.

Talyyn Silent Wind 00:32, 4 December 2007 (CET)

Wait... you're arguing that Admins shouldn't be able to make builds, vote on builds, or remove votes O.o? And yet you think their job is to improve the site... Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 00:35, 4 December 2007 (CET)
Talynn Seriously give up.... alright? this is killing the RC page and its definatly been argued and denied before.. >.> .............. <.< ................ >.> just stop. --Shadowsin 00:33, 4 December 2007 (CET)

thenk you frv, you are a great exampleTalyyn Silent Wind 00:34, 4 December 2007 (CET)

I agree with admin vote removal. Am I an admin? No. - Rawrawr 00:34, 4 December 2007 (CET)
._. Talynn Seriously you are in a battle of wits without any ammunition, your points are invalid. ADMINS ARE PEOPLE TOO!--Shadowsin 00:36, 4 December 2007 (CET)
That was pretty insulting right there. Give him a chance to justify his arguments. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 00:38, 4 December 2007 (CET)

shadowsin why would you say that? thats like a personal attack...Talyyn Silent Wind 00:39, 4 December 2007 (CET)

To be fair, according to the No Personal Attacks policy which we follow, as long as he doesn't comment on you, but instead comments on your edits, i.e. "your points are invalid" it's not a personal attack. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 00:40, 4 December 2007 (CET)
It's the first part of his statement that can be interpreted as a personal attack. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 00:41, 4 December 2007 (CET)
Hmmm... I guess metaphorically, being in a battle of wits with no ammunition could equal "You are stupid." But, I personally interpreted it more as a statement about the quality of the arguments. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 00:43, 4 December 2007 (CET)

what I am trying to say is that I think admins should help make the community better. I see some admins removing votes from a build with no justifiable reason. Yea, admins should control this, but I feel as though some admins are removing votes because its a friends build or fellow admins build. That is why I do not think admins should be able to make builds(if they are not allowed already)

Please show me an instance. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 00:43, 4 December 2007 (CET)
I agree they remove alot, but thats because the build is meta and those people don't know what they are voting on really, not because it is a fellow admin's build. - Retard omgz 00:46, 4 December 2007 (CET)
What's interesting is to look at the very first contributions to this page and see how the build began. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 00:48, 4 December 2007 (CET)
First. THIS BUILD IS L33T doesnt count toward real vetting. Hence it gets removed, even it it is true. Admins dont abuse their power end of story and even if they did... who cares? its a wiki its not like they control the fate of your gaming experience. The fact that you are even arguing this HERE of all places is just ......... This is a build discussion page, not a "Lets make random accusations" page. --Shadowsin 00:48, 4 December 2007 (CET)
Second, did you even look at the Merge!?! sub section toward the top of this page before you posted?--Shadowsin 00:50, 4 December 2007 (CET)

I care if an admin abuses his power. I want to enjoy my experience browsing and contributing. Second, a vote should not be deleted if it is a valid vote and does not violate the policy of voting.

Talyyn Silent Wind 01:01, 4 December 2007 (CET)

You have yet to post a single example where this has been the case. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 01:03, 4 December 2007 (CET)

I am sure if you scrolled through the three builds I brought into question, you can find 1 in each, and some deletions where the deleter is making personal attacks.

Talyyn Silent Wind 01:09, 4 December 2007 (CET)

Then it shouldn't be hard for you to do so. Good luck. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 01:11, 4 December 2007 (CET)

seriously stfu ur worse than everyone who helped with rawr's talkpage combined ur spamming about ur ideas no one else seems to care about so much :P--«º¤¥Ω☼Vørråx☼Ω¥¤º» 01:13, 4 December 2007 (CET)

He is as free to express his ideas in an orderly manner as you, and everyone else here, is. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 01:15, 4 December 2007 (CET)

watcha think i was doin i was just bored >.>--«º¤¥Ω☼Vørråx☼Ω¥¤º» 01:16, 4 December 2007 (CET)

I shouldn't have to worry about comments like that when I am participating in a community.Talyyn Silent Wind 01:20, 4 December 2007 (CET)

If the vote was removed there was a reason behind it. You are getting WAY off topic here what purpose does this talk serve for the build? --Shadowsin 01:24, 4 December 2007 (CET)
Get evidentiary support for your arguments, and you definitely won't. Shogunshen Sig Shen(contribs) 01:25, 4 December 2007 (CET)

………………..,-~*’`¯lllllll`*~,
…………..,-~*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll¯`*-,
………,-~*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll*-,
……,-*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.\
….;*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll,-~*~-,llllllllllllllllllll\
…..\lllllllllllllllllllllllllll/………\;;;;llllllllllll,-`~-,
…...\lllllllllllllllllllll,-*………..`~-~-,…(.(¯`*,`,
…….\llllllllllll,-~*…………………)_-\..*`*;..)
……..\,-*`¯,*`)…………,-~*`~.………….../
……...|/.../…/~,…...-~*,-~*`;……………./.\
……../.../…/…/..,-,..*~,.`*~*…………….*...\
…….|.../…/…/.*`...\...……………………)….)¯`~,
…….|./…/…./…….)……,.)`*~-,……….../….|..)…`~-,
……/./.../…,*`-,…..`-,…*`….,---…...\…./…../..|……...¯```*~-
…...(……….)`*~-,….`*`.,-~*.,-*……|…/.…/…/…………\
…….*-,…….`*-,...`~,..``.,,,-*……….|.,*...,*…|…...\
……….*,………`-,…)-,…………..,-*`...,-*….(`-,…

Not this shit again. --71.229.204.25 01:41, 4 December 2007 (CET)

Re:^^^^^^^^^ Surprised its not me this time xD--Shadowsin 01:43, 4 December 2007 (CET)

Archive

The talk page?--Shadowsin 01:25, 4 December 2007 (CET)

Evidence

I gave my evidence. I said look at those 3 builds there and you will see. I do not know all the coding to post them here. Also, if you want me too look I will, but regarding shadowsin's statement about "this build is leet" not being a good reason, there are plenty of votes like that. Talyyn Silent Wind 01:39, 4 December 2007 (CET)

And if someone has a problem with them they will be removed. As far as i know. Btw what evidence? you have not pointed out one instance other than "Look" well i have looked and i'm not seeing one vote that was unfairly removed. and this must be the third time i have mentioned this but.... DISCUSSIONS NOT ABOUT THE DAMN BUILD DO NOT BELONG ON A BUILD TALK PAGE!.--Shadowsin 01:42, 4 December 2007 (CET)
Easy, Shadowsin. We've done this a dozen times before without capslocking out. :)
1) Go to Page
2) Highlight URL
3) Right Click -> Copy
4) Come here
5) Right Click -> Paste
6) Profit, etc. --71.229.204.25 01:44, 4 December 2007 (CET)
Is this about merging the builds wtih the same build but different elites? Get over it and read up...--ViYsig2(talk/pvxcontribs) 01:46, 4 December 2007 (CET)
http://pvx.wikia.com/wiki/PvXwiki:Admin_noticeboard is where this shite belongs. Again, if i'm not mistaken. btw... The Drama Llama is not impressed >:O. --Shadowsin 01:47, 4 December 2007 (CET)

This was already discussed several times...different usages, different pages. If you still insist to reinforce they should be on the same page give up on life imo.--ViYsig2(talk/pvxcontribs) 01:48, 4 December 2007 (CET)

That was his argument, now he is saying the admins shouldnt be able to post builds or vote because they abuse their power in doing so. way to read victory xD.--Shadowsin 01:50, 4 December 2007 (CET)

This is my favourite ranger build. Za kyoukan 08:48, 28 December 2007 (EST)

New Name

Burnshot. BA Arrow Ranger should be Broadshot.--Relyk 20:38, 29 December 2007 (EST)

What, following the same line as Cripshot? Nah, Cripshot's only Cripshot cause its more mellifluous than crip-uh-leeng shot. Normally people just abbreviate anyways. Shogunshen Sig Shen(contribs) 20:40, 29 December 2007 (EST)

Does it matter? ViYsig5Victoryisyours (talk/RfA) 21:01, 29 December 2007 (EST)

Anyway, its BHA... ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 21:02, 29 December 2007 (EST)
I think we should name them as they're referred to in game. People go looking for cripshots, BHAs, and burning arrow/BA rangers. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 16:45, 30 December 2007 (EST)

Res Sig?????

Whats the deal with the res sig? haha i mean if your second prof is monk why even CONSIDER using res sig?

...might have been asked already but i couldn't stomach all these hideous topics... Broadshot? how does "broad" have anything to do with fire?

Because there's not a single monk hard res that's worth running on any bar(except for rebirth in pve), much less a ranger? — Edru/QQ 21:33, 8 January 2008 (EST)
(restore life used to be, but only on mesmers)Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 21:34, 8 January 2008 (EST)
And Broadshot was being mentioned as a possible contraction of Broad Head Arrow, which we also have a build (and a contraction) for. --71.229 21:39, 8 January 2008 (EST)


are these attributes correct? 14 exp isnt enough for the 60 break point, so shouldnt it be 11-10-10? or does it hit the breakpoint? i'll shut up now.Dark0805sig2 09:59, 13 January 2008 (EST)

How do you propose to get it higher? -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 13:20, 13 January 2008 (EST)
I'm saying since you can't get it higher, reduce it to an 11-10-10 situation. i will look into breakpoints right now, to see if it is worth it(gogo preview button).Dark0805sig2 20:27, 13 January 2008 (EST)
14's a break for 10->4, 13's a break for 5->2. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 20:30, 13 January 2008 (EST)
Absoutely true, and 10+1 in either marks or wilderness does literally nothing. Scientific process ftw. Hypothesis:disproven.Dark0805sig2 20:32, 13 January 2008 (EST)

Metagame

I have a feeling this will be archived soon for falling out of metagame. I havent seen any in observe in a while.XCrossfire Godlysig14 21:51, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

Still used. -Shen 09:15, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
Just because a build falls out of the GvG meta doesn't mean it needs to be archived. You still see this a lot in RA/TA anyway.

Antidote Signet

Should be added? --Lann-sf2 Lann 17:39, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

It's kinda bad. Especially since you have Mending Touch, which is superior in just about every way. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 19:41, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
Err, it lets you run blackout so no. But it gets around cripshots who you need to hit the cover. The preceding awesome-sauce comment was added by Rawr. 19:42, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
For srs, run blackout on your warrior or someone who's actually going to be up front. Or go Koreaway and run Blackout and Gale on your esurge. BA is for ganking, and if you're taking blackout you're dropping troll, which essentially makes you a stand dps ranger = bad idea. Maybe, maybe on cripshot, but no. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 13:09, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
run blackout on your warrior i lol'd — Skakid 02:15, 1 July 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, ok, I wasn't being serious. But still, there's better options than your ganker who's... not gonna be at stand half the time. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 20:54, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

PvE

In the notes it has tips for PvE but there is no PvE tag? 122.104.165.13 23:34, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

PvE tag probably got removed because there's no AoE anddegen takes forever to kill in pve--GoldenGoldenstarStar 23:37, 18 July 2008 (EDT)
Is still good for PvE imo. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 07:39, 19 July 2008 (EDT)
It is. Burning Arrow is pretty good damage and you still have your utilities. However, TBH, I'd rather just make a PvE version. --GoD Wario Sig*Wah Wah Wah!* 07:51, 19 July 2008 (EDT)
Done. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 23:40, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Scrim

Been running this in scrim, replacing res sig with pin down. Is it actually possible to beat this build with a sin using daggers and a sin elite, without gayblock? Id love to know if someone can make a build to do this, ive tried so many different things --Seth M 18:18, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

Scrim as in 1v1 or scrim as in Gank Wars? Either way, it doesn't matter. This can beat on most any physical that doesn't have anti-block. --GoD Wario Sig*Wah Wah Wah!* 18:20, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
How can you not beat an assassin 1v1 with pin down, natural stride, and dshot? - Panic sig5 18:24, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
Defeatists attitudes ftl :( Im certain it can be done! Best ive managed so far was a double KD build using Mark of Insecurity--Seth M 18:29, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
I'm not being defeatest; The core ranger bar is designed for survivability and utility. Without some way to stop the ranger dshotting your chain, you're going to have a tough time beating one. You'll also need some way to remove cripple or else he'll just pin you down and kite you with BA until you're dead. - Panic sig5 05:29, 4 August 2008 (EDT)
that has nothing to do with attitude tbh, there's just no way (really, no freakin way) for a melee to beat a BA ranger who knows what he's doing, because the ranger's whole bar perfectly suits this situation. he's got a snare (pin down), an IMS, blocking, self heal, condition removal, a lot of degen and nasty interrupts to pwn your healing attempts. the only thing you MIGHT be able to 1v1 him (never tried it, maybe it could work, maybe it fails horribly, dunno) is going for some assa-caster/shutdown hybrid. go for A/Me, bring tons of energy (you'll need them) and Mantra of Resolve to counter d-shot and savage. Use Augury of Death - Dancing Daggers - Entangling Asp - Signet of Toxic Shock for damage and degen. Use Arcane Larceny to steal Mending Touch and Leech Signet to interrupt Troll Unguent. I guess Energy Drain would be the best elite skill choice to have some e-management. attributes should look like deadly/inspiration/domination = 12/10/8. just a quick thought tho.--Makku 08:31, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

Buff

To Incendiary Arrows on August 7th, 2008 rendered this inferior in all aspects except damage, this is basically not as good unless you want large damage on one target. Whos watchin the olympics by the way? Imight be *Jebus*IAmJebussig3Enter my contest! 10:39, 8 August 2008 (EDT)

You only every run BA as a ganker in split builds, in which case it's still better than Incendiary. --Ibreaktoilets SignatureTab Moo 10:42, 8 August 2008 (EDT)
With VoD gone, split is either gonna become imba or fall out of meta completely. Imight be *Jebus*IAmJebussig3Enter my contest! 10:49, 8 August 2008 (EDT)
I can't imagine splits won't still be seen. You'll still want to defend your base and clear out theirs as much as possible so if you wipe all or most of their team you can get in and fight them and their lord without the bodyguard and archers fucking with you. - Panic sig5 10:56, 8 August 2008 (EDT)
I think splits are dead. WE Scythes do way too much pressure for 2 monks to handle, so they will just pressure through your stand team and win. ~~     Frvwfr2     talk    contribs    admin   11:04, 8 August 2008 (EDT)
You might be right, but we're just speculating so let's give it a week and see what happens; the update was only last night after all. - Panic sig5 11:10, 8 August 2008 (EDT)

ganking while the gl stays home

now that the guild lord doesn't come at 20min, ganking is realy deadly. if you get pushed back in your base and you lost most of your npc it is hard to get them back out side. the tiebreaker is also some thing wich gives split team an advantage. if the mian teams stay at the flag stand and you gank/split dealt some dmg against the guild lord and the main teams can't push the other team back in there base aroun 20min and they keep at the stand it is possible that becaus of your little dmg against the gl your team wins. dont forget that now ganking is inportant again, you can make the other team (if it runs a build where they need to be to getter to work, hway, intensif spike with no gank/split capacability, hex way, ...) split up and make there build weaker. 84.194.246.17 06:42, 15 August 2008 (EDT) justme

LOL

Just go and buff one the of the most awesome elites in the game :> --FrostyMini england 19:16, 9 October 2008 (EDT)

not much of a buff, it wont even hit 6 sec unless u get 12 marksmanship MuffinPWNAGEMUFFIN crabs 21:27, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
How much marks could you get with 7+1 wilderness? -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{Bacon}} 22:02, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
Wait, I'm dumb, nat stride is still under wilderness. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{Bacon}} 22:03, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
Yeah they neda switch it to expertise so ranger dont have to spec into wildy.--ShadowRelyk Sig 23:52, 9 October 2008 (EDT)

Post 10/9 buff attributes

What do you think of dropping one point out of expertise and altering the attributes to 12+1 exp, 10+1+1 marks, 8+1 wild, 2 prot? Poison lasts for 10s (down from 11s), nat stride for 5s (down from 6s), burning arrow does +26 damage and burns for 6s (up from +23 damage and burns for 5s - an increase of 17 damage), and troll unguent gives +7 regen (down from +8 regen). The drop in expertise from 14 to 13 costs you 1 extra energy when using burning arrow and savage shot, but that's it on this bar. So what do you think: is what you give up worth it for the extra armor ignoring 17 damage every 5s, or not really? Zephyr Cloud Zeph sig 17:42, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

The breakpoints for energy and nat stride say no, unless you're doing some serious zergway. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{Bacon}} 19:00, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
Yea you still need 14 expertise --FrostyMini england 19:04, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
Just use a Major. Exp 11+1+2, then you can bump up marks by 2 and hit the 12 breakpoint. Mightymousemoush 23:32, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
An extra second of burning is definitely not worth the 35 hp loss. The build is fine as it is, and as the change is liable to be reverted next week (though that assumes ANet has brains), just don't mess with it. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{Bacon}} 00:21, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
You shouldn't have to worry about a ranger dying for 35 hp to matter. Some people even run radiants on rangers. With 12 marks, you can also get debil to deny 8 energy. I doubt BA is going to be reverted since if people keep 10 marks, it only adds 1 sec of burning. Mightymousemoush 00:26, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
An extra 35 HP makes ganking that much faster (and in splitting in GvG you won't be carrying debil anyway). Seriously, you guys are overreacting; just take the buff as it is (excessively minor) and move on. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{Bacon}} 00:30, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
The only point of this buff (and nerf of IA) was to make it have a chance to compete with IA. Most people will probably be running Melandru's Shot after it got buffed anyways. Mightymousemoush 00:34, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
Melrandru's Shot blows --70.129.153.72 23:06, 11 October 2008 (EDT)Hatred
Burning is the choice of bad rangers on the split, melandru's is the choice of good rangers on the split. IMO, mel's still needs about two seconds less recharge to be on par with burning for pure damage, but it's already much greater of a utility skill. -Auron 23:11, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

Screaming/Hunter's shot

Add bleeding for extra degen? 65.95.243.103 18:01, 28 December 2008 (EST)

No room for it. Plus those belong on turrets. 24.6.122.112 00:10, 18 January 2009 (EST)

Vote Removal

Innovation means "something new". This skill set is the same as others. Even though the elite is changed for a different version...it is not innovative because it is not new. How can I go about getting my vote changed?Talyyn Silent Wind 00:07, 18 January 2009 (EST)

delete your vote then rate again--20pxRelyk_||_I hammers u! 00:15, 18 January 2009 (EST)
I just want to make sure that someone agrees with me and that I dont get banned from the site...Talyyn Silent Wind 00:17, 18 January 2009 (EST)

Troll is Bad

Hunter's is 5xbetter and infinity x more used. Fishels[슴Mc슴]Mootles 12:36, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

change it then --Tai Sig 12:36, 1 March 2009
Lol i don't know wiki code. Fishels[슴Mc슴]Mootles 15:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC-SA 2.5 unless otherwise noted.