Guide talk:General RA Tactics

IMO, there are some times when its really good to stay back, like when you have a spirit spammer on your team. IAm *Jebus* 13:45, 23 March 2008 (EDT)

That is true, except Spirit Spammers aren't as common these days, and that still doesn't counter the fact that someone has to trigger the battle. Otherwise, you'll just be standing there with your team while your spirits die off because the natural reaction is to avoid: the spirit team will want to stay on defensive; the attacking team will want to avoid the spirits whenever possible. In RA, you're considered a noob if you defy those principles, even though you're really just standing there for five minutes doing nothing. That's no way to fight an RA match. -- Scottie_theNerd (argue/criticise/complain) 22:47, 23 March 2008 (EDT)

A "defensive" spirit spammer is an awful bad spirit spammer. A good ritu will heavily pressure the opposing team by setting the spirits towards it, one by one, step by step, constantly(!), and only retreat behind the lines if attacked - hoping to let the enemy catch spirit aggro. There are only few maps where the opposing team can avoid fights for a long time by moving away. Spirit spamming is an aggressive style of play, if done right.

OTOH attacking and killing away the aggressive spirits as fast as possible (e.g. when being a derv, a fire ele or a para) is the best strategy to "shut down" a spirit spammer - experienced players neutralize a ritu with ease for the rest of the match. This is why dedicated spirit spammers are seldom seen in TA... they are pretty useless with good players.

BTW, this is by far the freaking best primer for RA I have ever read. Kudos to the author(s). Every single word is so freaking true. Really enjoyed reading it. --82.83.60.48 13:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Just thought I'd say, my RA team wtfowned [Rusl]. Well, not wtfowned really, it was pretty close. Ojamo 17:54, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

There's a little slang in here.--Relyk 22:17, 17 April 2008 (EDT)

This page needs to be wikified! but i dunno how to ad a tag... 217.87.247.163 15:17, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

What do you mean? The page is already extensively wikified. -- Scottie_theNerd (argue/criticise/complain) 07:07, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Wait.... there actually is a threat about RA? —ǘŋƐxɩsƫ 05:22, 4 June 2008 (EDT)

LOL. RA+Tactic. LOL. RA aint a smart place, just here when ur fucking bored and dunno what else to do Enjoy phailer! 10:44, 4 June 2008 (EDT)

This is more of a practical guide to make the most out of your boredom. -- Scottie_theNerd (argue/criticise/complain) 05:06, 5 June 2008 (EDT)

2 rules of RA that you all need to know. 1: Kill stuff(duh). 2: Don't be bad. 3: Don't run anything without big damage(except for monk)(and i do count poison as damage), since of rule number one; kill stuff. —ǘŋƐxɩsƫ 11:40, 5 June 2008 (EDT)

Ugh

Being a frequent RA'er (im also r4) i must say alot of this stuff is false. You claim the MAJORITY of players in RA are mindless tards... this is very very very untrue. Go RA for 30 mins --Bim (talk|contribs) 21:16, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

RA has defiled your basic thinking ugh--Shadow 21:31, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

we need to get more ra ppl to read this. PWNAGEMUFFIN crabs 21:42, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

Way to stuff words in my mouth. Did I say the majority of players are mindless tards? No. I said most players just want to slog it out. Go play RA for a year. -- Scottie_theNerd (talk/contribs/complain) 22:12, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

tbh if there isn't a monk wounding strike dervishes should be killed first unless they have a lot of self heal.--Simpson Man File:Homer1.png 21:48, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

WS Dervishes are like any other melee pressure. They're dangerous, especially if you're a caster, but they're not the easiest to kill. Assassins tend to be higher up on the "general" priority list than Dervishes, but Mesmers and Necromancers are still seen as hotter targets after Monks and Ritualists. The "standard" approach is to shut down melee pressure and kill casters, otherwise the casters will make fun of you while you're trying to kill melee pressure. -- Scottie_theNerd (talk/contribs/complain) 22:12, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

The tone of this guide is all wrong. It reads like one long complaint. We need a 'balanced build' guide and a 'gimmick guide'Kiteeye 04:37, 16 November 2008 (EST)

If we did that the whole guide would just be a link to this --Ojamo (>.<(O=(- -Q) 10:50, 16 November 2008 (EST)

requirement

well, there should be certain requirements to the builds used in RA.

For example if you use an offensive build, that build should be able to solo both the master of healing and master of enchantments on the isle of the nameless. I know those npcs are weaker then regular players but if your build can't even do that, what does it say about your builds?

for spike builds I think they should be able kill all the master of damage on the isle of the nameless in under 10-5 seconds because it's not a real threat if you kill any slower. (warning this only proves that you can inflict enough damage to kill someone)

for hex shutdown they have to be able to continuously shut down at least one person indefinitely.

that's all the requirements I can think of right now.

That takes away the randomness. If you want to avoid (most of) the possibility of suckage, try TA. Kratos the Traitor

on Before the fight

don't forget that W/E are normaly hammer knockdown with shock

who runs shock hammer, and is there any kind of hammer besides knockdown (that doesnt suck)? --Ojamo (>.<(O=(- -Q) 22:55, 9 January 2009 (EST)

no, not really. Shock is for an extra unconditional knockdown. The only unconditional knockdowns in the hammer line are elites, and the conditional ones have major drawbacks *cough*lose all adrenaline*cough.* for a warrior exhaustion isn't much of a drawback. You don't even have to put any point in air magic.

First off, a ton of W/E's also run Conjure (as opposed to Shock). A W/E is most likely running one of the two, but they could be wielding any War weapon (even more likely in RA is just absolute shit wars running Fire Storm or something). Not note-worthy. --ShazamTheSnake _{hissssssssssss} 23:24, 9 January 2009 (EST)

For a standard hammer war, exhaustion will rape you. --Ojamo (>.<(O=(- -Q) 23:33, 9 January 2009 (EST)

not if you space the shock out. a good hammer shock warrior can take out a full health non blocking caster in under 10 seconds. keep him down for 6 seconds (with a minor 2/3 second between them). and still have enough room for a res sig and a minor buff, but then he'll probably need time to recharge his adrenaline skills.

thought they were talking about hammers--ChristmasRelyk 23:42, 9 January 2009 (EST)

This, this, and this say hi. Achieving a 6-second kd lock ON A WARRIOR shouldn't require shock (even sadder is the part about "spreading it out." Okay, let's not even achieve 6-second kd as often as possible). No one runs freaking shock hammer. It's redundant, destroys your ability to use Crushing Blow/Enraging Charge on recharge, and is completely obsolete to recently-buffed warrior bars. If a war isn't abusing those, assume they are a wammo. --ShazamTheSnake _{hissssssssssss} 00:52, 10 January 2009 (EST)

heavy blow and hammer bash completly destroy your adrenaline pool thereby cutting off your access to the more powerful hammer skills, and can't be used with each other (Now that would be redundant).

shock is a touch skill, immune to blinding a blocking, common warrior shutdowns.

The hammer mastery has very limited unconditional knockdown skills. many of them can't be used with each other because they're either elite or makes them lose all adrenaline. If using only warrior skills ony two unconditional knockdown skills can exist on a warrior's build at any one time. add shock and you have 3.

Warriors only have 2 pips of energy regeneration, an experienced warrior can make it so that the exhaustion caused by shock will never cut his current energy.

Using only hammer unconditional knockdowns and other warrior skills a hammer warrior can only keep a person down for a maximum of 10 straight seconds.

--Under the effects of an IAS use "back breaker," "hammer bash," an attack under the effects of "enraging charge" and "for greater justice," and then "hammer bash" again.

If that warrior had shock in his build he could keep that person down for 20 straight seconds.

--Under the effects of an IAS, use "backbreaker," "hammer bash," 1 attack powered by "enraging charge" and "for greater justice," 1 attack powered by for "greater justice," "shock," "backbreaker," "hammer bash," and shock again(though after this combo exhaustion puts him back to 5 energy).

Above anything warrior a warrior can add shock to give them another unconditional knockdown skill, either extending the time the opponent is knockdown, or increasing the rate at which he is knocked down.

The only thing wrong with shock is that it is a difficult skill to use. Because of it's relatively short recharge time n00bs are often tempted to spam it, thereby ending up with a 0 energy pool. Shock must be used with judicial judgement or else anyone who uses it will find himself in deep trouble. Factors to look at when determining when to use shock include current energy, current amount of exhaustion, if the enemy is using a key skill, if the enemy is about to get up, and if the enemy needs to be down. In my experiences it should be used every 10-15 seconds with no minimal harm to your energy pool (it takes a full 30 seconds to undo the full effects of shock but as a warrior and as a player I've never had much use for a full energy bar during battle unless i was doing a skill chain)

P.S. personally I don't like the build I mentioned above, I just listed it as an example for how long a warrior can keep an opponent down for extented periods of time. My Hammer build can kill a person from full health in 10 seconds, which i preffer over keeping them down for 20.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.21.108.62 (contribs) 05:51, 10 January 2009.

Lol FGJ.PikaFanFile:Chrismaspika sig.jpg 05:54, 10 January 2009 (EST)

You don't need unconditional kd skills when you can just make a chain. It's really easy to pull off WITHOUT Shock, being the reason no hammer warriors even use shock. And why would you possibly care about losing your adrenaline pool at the end of a chain? You'll be at 0 for all your other skills anyways. --ShazamTheSnake _{hissssssssssss} 14:41, 10 January 2009 (EST)

you don't need unconditional kds? You're kidding me right? I suppose you're just going to wait for them to attack before you use counter blow, or wait until they start blocking so you can irresistible blow? No, wrong. in PVP casters rarely ever use their wands to attack a target, and by the time they start blocking they're already immune to all the hammer's biggest attacks. Unconditional kds are key to any hammer warrior's build. That's why the hammer elites are so good, because they provide kd on command without any drawbacks. In all of Guild wars there are only a handful of non elite unconditional kds. The only 3 that can even be considered for a warrior are grapple, shock, and hammer bash, because of their low cost and relatively low recharge time. however each has their own problems. shock causes exhaustion which can easily deplete your shore of energy, grapple causes yourself to be knockdown removing any chance for a follow up attack and strips you of any stance, and hammer bash can only be used at the end of a chain.

and You might not have understood me. The full hammer warrior with only skills in the warrior line can only make a knockdown chain of 2(3 if he takes grapple) skills, with shock that's 3(4) unconditional kds, increasing the amount of time the opponent stays on the ground. I'm not saying shock replaces hammer bash or heavy blow, I'm saying it can be used conjunction with the hammer's other formidable kd to increase the knockdown time of the opponent.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.21.108.62 (contribs) 18:12, 10 January 2009.

Most people run D-Strike, but Shock doesn't work too bad. -- Guild of Deals 17:16, 10 January 2009 (EST)

Learning to capitalize on the conditions of KDs > unconditional ones (elites excluded). The reason they even have conditions is because if used with skill, they have less drawback than unconditional ones. Shock is ran because a standard non-hammer war bar only has access to Bull's. Playing with skill > relying on skills with drawbacks that are more serious. --ShazamTheSnake _{hissssssssssss} 20:31, 10 January 2009 (EST)

you cannot possibly use shock on a hammer if you want to qlock on charge, which is what you do in ra if you arent terrible. no one ever uses counter blow or irresistable blow. your arguments make no sense, stop bitching about what to run in fucking ra. --Ojamo (>.<(O=(- -Q) 20:54, 10 January 2009 (EST)

On a hammer if you want another KD you'd actually take Iron Palm. 20 seconds is shorter than 30 seconds. Bull's->Crushing->Elite->whatever->non-elite->whatever->iron palm. If they only have one person who can remove conditions from other people (likely in RA), all will be unconditional. - Misery Is Friendly 21:05, 10 January 2009 (EST)

Monk not requiring rez

Am I the only one bothered by this? Some classes not requiring rez. I heard a monk say he was not supposed to have rez, and I called him a moron. I might have been in error, although it would hardly go noticed in RA. Two people have told me that Rangers aren't supposed to bring rez either. I just don't understand the counter-logic to this. The most durable characters aren't supposed to bring rez? What if someone needs a rez? It happens. It's RA. If someone outspikes your heals, you're just supposed to go, "My bad," and leave them on the ground? Just bothers me. Of course, I still think everyone should bring some healing/armor/blocking/condition removal too. It seems trendy to run AB builds that aren't durable and tend to lean on the idea of a godlike monk. I tend to be very conservative and self-sufficient in RA builds. It's probably just my nature. I don't see the wisdom of ever forsaking rez. --Srinivassa 18:13, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Monks shouldn't bring res, they should stop dying. Imagine how many people die during a 3s Res Sig during pressure.

Rangers need res afaik. ---Chaos- (talk) -- 18:22, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

If a monk has to stop healing and res they're doing it wrong. If they stop healing to res more people will die. --Oj▲mo 20:17, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Rewrite, please

Has some grammar faults and is seemingly written by something with its IQ around room temperature. Too much caps lock and !'s etc. Needs to be more objective. ---Chaos- (talk) -- 21:52, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

Fixed some of the spelling errors that just jumped out at me as I was reading through, however I wasn't reading it looking for mistakes so I most likely missed some. There was also a couple that I wasn't sure if it was a mistake or not like this one "Perhaps you find out that you are better off with a different 2e profession." This 2e didn't make sense and I didn't know if it was just a term i wasn't familiar with or not so I left it there. It's under Don't be Afraid to Change 1 if anyone wants to confirm that it's a mistake and wants to change it. Daeheru 22:16, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

The writer meant "secondary". I've read as far as "making your own RA build", and I notice the person who wrote it is terrible, and I'm likely to remove much text from it. ---Chaos- (talk) -- 22:17, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

2 slots for self heal lol. ra tactics lol.FMK- 23:10, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

This does explain quite much, but the article about making own builds is terrible English n' stuff. The ending is also dreadful. ---Chaos- (talk) -- 23:12, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

healing is a vampiric weapon and res signet--Relyk 00:08, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

I'm just gonna take a day to rewrite this bullshit...Ben^..Squint 04:24, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

"Noobs are tomorrow's leets." Who the fuck? Shazzydiddles 04:51, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

Updated

So it made sense. It's pretty ugly atm though, and someone who can make it look pretty would be cool. I condensed it a bit, but tried to maintain the general ideas of the article (Although I'm not sure some are even worth stating.) Nevertheless, it should look a bit better than it did. Ben^..Squint 05:30, November 27, 2009 (UTC)