FANDOM


The Admin noticeboard

There are a number of issues that can only be solved by an Administrator. The Admin noticeboard is one of the means through which users can contact Administrators in order to identify a problem that needs Administrative attention. Although editors are welcome to directly contact particular Administrators, posting on this page instead may be an easier way to let the entire Administrative group know of the issue (which may be particularly helpful since it increases the odds that at least one Administrator will see, and thus be able to respond to, the issue promptly).

There are only a limited number of things for which this page should be used. Many problems can be solved without Administrative intervention, and, thus, this page should be restricted to those issues that actually require an Administrator. Those are: blocking vandals, (un)deleting pages, (un)protecting pages, removing votes (either as per Real Vetting or because the build has been substantially edited), and mediation (only if the situation demands it).

Even in cases of vandalism, posting on this page needn't be the first step (and indeed should not be the first step). If you see vandalism, just go ahead and revert it, anyone has the power to do so. If it's a new article with no safe version to revert back to, tag it for deletion. In both cases you should leave a message in the talk page of that user to make him/her aware of why that kind of edit is unacceptable on PvXwiki. Only post here if that user persists in his/her actions, ignoring the warnings or if the content requires immediate Administrative attention (eg. if the material on the page is so offensive that should be immediately deleted).

(Be careful in case that user repeatedly insists on vandalizing, avoid a revert war; it's far better to temporarily leave the vandalized version of the page up until an admin has a chance to intervene.)

To create a new request: add an item to the bottom of the list below, providing a brief, neutral summary of the issue. As a sign of courtesy, also leave a message on the talk page of any other involved users so they are aware of this discussion. If you are alerting an admin of a vandal, use the {{IP}} template, with the first parameter being the vandal's IP or username. If you are requesting that vote(s) be removed, please use the {{Build}} template, with the first parameter being the build's name.

General Issues

General issues include (un)deleting pages, (un)protecting pages, banning vandals, and moderating serious disputes. This section may also be used for miscellaneous issues as well as Administrative announcements. See resolved issues here.

Eloc Jcg (talk · contribs · logs · check user · block user · block log)

He obviously doesn't understand the vetting procedure and how to rate builds... not really sure if this should be in this section but w/e.—Cheese Slaya's Sig Cheese Slaya (Talk) 04:00, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

He's a build now? :D Seriously, someone needs to read Real Vetting to him. Lord Belar 04:05, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Can you show us where he's violated Real Vetting? —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 04:06, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
(edit conflict)If you're talking about Univeratality, that's for if it works outside of what it was designed for & how many things it works for, and obviously alot of builds are just designed for one thing. It's not like I'm rating things like 0-0-0 or anything, if anything I'd be like 5-1-4, as it works awsome, but can only be used for one thing, but is still creative...what's so wrong there???--§ Eloc § 04:08, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
hit recent ratings, pretty much any build he rates has an increbily poor reason or he is voting builds 0-0 in universality/innovation b/c they're only used in one place. EC...—Cheese Slaya's Sig Cheese Slaya (Talk) 04:09, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
(edit conflict) "A vote must be based on facts. Votes that are entirely based on a false premise, flagrantly misrepresent a builds ability or demonstrate a minimal understanding of in-game mechanics are considered invalid." He does not give a valid reason for his continual 0-0-0/5-5-5 votes, as pointed out on his talk page several times. Lord Belar 04:11, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
EC...and btw thats exactly what im talking about. just because its only good for one arena doesn't mean universality should go down. You'ev been having a huge outburst of really bad build ratings, and you obviously don't know how voting works here at pvx.—Cheese Slaya's Sig Cheese Slaya (Talk) 04:11, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Big outbreak?!? That was just me voting on builds when I was bored, and my ratings didn't deviate much from everyone elses...I explain my reasons and Universitality is for if it can be used outside of what it was designed for. I don't even think I've gone below a 2.5 lately unless it was sheer crap.--§ Eloc § 04:15, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
  • 04:32 . . Rt/any Battlebox Spirit Spammer; Rating: 3.55 (good) . . E:4 U:0 I:5 . . Eloc Jcg (Talk | contribs)
  • 04:31 . . P/W Defensive Anthem; Rating: 3.55 (good) . . E:4 U:1 I:4 . . Eloc Jcg (Talk | contribs)
  • 04:30 . . R/any Speed Trapper; Rating: 2.1 (trash) . . E:3 U:0 I:0 . . Eloc Jcg (Talk | contribs)
  • 04:29 . . N/Mo Smite Bomber; Rating: 4.25 (good) . . E:5 U:0 I:5 . . Eloc Jcg (Talk | contribs)
  • 04:27 . . N/any Bonder's Bane; Rating: 3.7 (good) . . E:4 U:2 I:4 . . Eloc Jcg (Talk | contribs)
  • 04:27 . . Mo/E Diverted Glyph; Rating: 3.7 (good) . . E:4 U:3 I:3 . . Eloc Jcg (Talk | contribs)
  • 04:26 . . W/E Obsidian Tank; Rating: 4.1 (good) . . E:5 U:0 I:4 . . Eloc Jcg (Talk | contribs)
  • 04:25 . . R/any Feral Tank; Rating: 4.4 (good) . . E:5 U:1 I:5 . . Eloc Jcg (Talk | contribs)

I don't see anything wrong here except the low universality but they probably deserved it. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 04:15, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

That's exactly the problem. He never rates anything high on universality. Lord Belar 04:18, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
BS, I gave a few 4/5's last night, and look, only one was rated trash.--§ Eloc § 04:18, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
That's because nothing is universal, lololol. Go vote down touchers, they can't handle stance ending and high damage at the same time! Go vote down 55s, they can't handle interrupts and enchant stripping! Not everything can burn, down with SF! --InternetLOL 04:20, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Seriously, vote down all physical damage dealers, they can't handle blocking. Or casters, someone might bring dazed. Lord Belar 04:22, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Rating a bunch of builds good isn't something to be proud of :/ Seriously, the only rating in terms of universality I disagree with him on is the P/W Defensive Anthem, which should be 5-5-5 for meta. Looks good to me otherwise. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 04:21, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
I think you mean Effectiveness InternerLOL..--§ Eloc § 04:22, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
No, I'm mocking you for voting builds poorly in Universality when there isn't a single build in the game that's perfectly universal and all builds will suck if you use them for something other than what they're specifically designed for. --InternetLOL 04:25, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Just to bring this to a halt- Eloc, reread universality. Cheese, Lord, reread Real Vetting. The idea is that people vote what they want and as more and more people vote, it gets averaged out. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 04:24, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Good idea, it's too late at night to be arguing. :D Lord Belar 04:25, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Ya, I read Universitality and I still think it's fine and dandy. I still believe that if something is designed for Farming only, that it's Universitality will be low as you can't use it anywhere outside of farming.--§ Eloc § 04:34, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
lol Scourge Healing, monks can't handle it! BoA can't heal itself, what if it gets snared? Daze wrecks Elementalists, zero them all! --InternetLOL 04:37, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Cut the shit Internet. Eloc, Universality is rated upon in the arena that the build was designed for. For example, the Me/E MoR Warder should have a 5 universality because it carries counters almost every build known to mankind. In fact, a good team can counter any build in general. Remember- for the area designed, not placed in another arena. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 04:39, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
kk lol --InternetLOL 04:40, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Well, what about "...when used in a different location than originally intended."?--§ Eloc § 04:42, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
So you're saying that constitutes a 0 rating on a build used in almost every GvG team arrangement? Just want to make this clear. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 04:45, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Which means only GvG...not anything outside of that.--§ Eloc § 04:46, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
So you say that constitutes a 0 rating on a build used in almost every GvG team, right? It was a yes or no question. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 04:48, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
It doesn't matter that a GvG build can't function in HA- it's a totally different environment with different goals and metagames. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 04:47, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
This is pointless, please stop. And no, you don't give a GvG build a 0 in Universality because it can't function in RA. Hammer And Sickle۷ïεדИǺмЄŠЄ. 04:55, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

Removed every vote that violated policy which I could find. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 05:35, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

Licensing version

See this. Page is protected, so one of you guys needs to fix it. --Wizardboy777 23:48, 21 September 2007 (CEST)

I've been talking to Gcardinal, and we're unsure which is correct, and obviously, we can't fix it until we know which is the problem, so no fix, for the moment. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 00:04, 22 September 2007 (CEST)
I think we have to use version 2.0. We took over quite some content from Guild Wiki, and they use 2.0 with no note on the possibility of silent upgrades. So we have to put at least the pages which originated there under 2.0. Anyway, we should put up a consistent statement asap. – HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 20:32, 3 October 2007 (CEST)

[1]

Some admin do something before it becomes User talk:Napalm FlameSkakid9090 01:24, 29 September 2007 (CEST)

It is over. any more posts/comments will result in an immediate ban. If I partake, Auron plx ban me. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 01:33, 29 September 2007 (CEST)

[2]

See above. — Skakid9090 01:30, 29 September 2007 (CEST)

Resolved above. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 01:33, 29 September 2007 (CEST)

Mini Skill Bars

"For Great Justice!" Optional Optional Optional Optional Optional Optional Optional

.I know we had problems with this before, but it now seems to only affect FGJ.Darksig 14:19, 2 October 2007 (CEST)


'For Great Justice!' Optional Optional Optional Optional Optional Optional Optional

There we go. Use ' instead of ". —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 14:32, 2 October 2007 (CEST)

thanks, but... {{Mini skill bar|"Go for the Eyes!"}} is what works for other shouts..Darksig 14:41, 2 October 2007 (CEST)

Fixed. — ( ɔ \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ Reithan Sig 18:20, 4 October 2007 (CEST)

Build-Specific Issues

Build-Specific refers to any issue pertaining to the removal of votes. See resolved issues here.

A/D Assassin Tank (talk · rate)

At the moment there are two scythe sins up for vetting for PvP, and none past vetting, A/D Scythe Sin is the other one. But only one is marked for deletion, this happens to be the one with a greater self survivability. I think that both should be allowed to continue with their vetting, and the one that is given a worse rating should be thrown out. There is a large talk page on Assassin Tank where we discussed this issue. --Rach 05:55, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

Personally, I'd say that the other, i.e. the Scythe Sin is better. And to be honest, I think a big part of the problem is that yours is a Tank, when Tanks aren't good in PvP. However, I don't see a problem with letting it undergo the vetting process. I'll remove the deletion tag. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 06:03, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

W/E Freezie Triple Chop (talk · rate)

Skaid9090's vote needs inspection. Lord Belar 04:39, 5 October 2007 (CEST)

No. — Skakid9090 04:43, 5 October 2007 (CEST)
Elaborate. Lord Belar 04:44, 5 October 2007 (CEST)
I did on the rating page. — Skakid9090 04:45, 5 October 2007 (CEST)
You don't play PvE much, do you? --InternetLOL 04:55, 5 October 2007 (CEST)
Read your talk, Skakid. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 06:17, 5 October 2007 (CEST)

E/any Shackles Snarer (talk · rate)

Eloc's vote, he obviously doesnt understand universality and innovation...—Cheese Slaya's Sig Cheese Slaya (Talk) 12:52, 5 October 2007 (CEST)

Vote has already been removed. --Peter 18:49, 5 October 2007 (CEST)
Yeah, that was me, forgot to mention it here. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 22:00, 5 October 2007 (CEST)

D/P Signet Of Silence Runner (talk · rate)

I'm referring to eloc of course.please remove his vote.it is a quite good vote, however he shows he lacks even the weakest grasp of the vetting criteria&related policies IMO. I know you guys surely have warned him multiple times but all the votes i lately saw from him have a 0 in something and a 5 in something else. he seems to be always voting in his own personal criteria, which appear to be quite different from those of this wiki. --Morten 21:25, 5 October 2007 (CEST)

Resolved. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 21:48, 5 October 2007 (CEST)
thank you --Morten 21:55, 5 October 2007 (CEST)
Edited my vote, hope that makes more sense to you now...--§ Eloc § 04:12, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
No your vote is still not right, a slightly different circumstance means like a different spawn or a key enchantment removal, not how well it would do in an arena. When you say it can only run...thats all it's meant to do. --Rach 05:09, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

D/E Wounding Cracker (talk · rate)

BS vote(s) with no reason or explanation. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 04:32, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

I see nothing wrong with any of the votes. --Peter 09:09, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

P/W Defensive Anthem (talk · rate)

Poor vote, 1 in universality for a build used in every other team in current meta. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 04:38, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

Vocal Minority! --InternetLOL 04:39, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
...? — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 04:49, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
I'd like to explain that, but Grinch is being stern now. Check my behavior further up. ): --InternetLOL 04:51, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

A/D Critical Scythe Assassin (talk · rate)

The point of the build is to WELL all the others. — Skakid9090 05:26, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

Give me a list of the others. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 06:03, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Build:A/D CS Scythe Assassin, Build:A/D Scythe Sin, and Build:A/D Assassin Tank. — Skakid9090 06:23, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Hmmm... well... in the case of two of those, they claim to be for PvP, in the case of the other, we should probably wait until yours is vetted until we delete it. I don't disagree that yours is better, but, still better not to delete a favored build in favor of an untested build. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 06:25, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

E/Mo Storm Surge (talk · rate)

Added new skills and changed secrondry, prof for for more effective healing. Requesting removal of votes. --Peter 09:25, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

Wtb rollback all button. That was a good chunk of votes. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 09:30, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Also moved to E/A Storm Surge (talk · rate). -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 09:32, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Thankies --Peter 10:15, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

E/D Ring of Fire Farmer (talk · rate)

There are 2 votes on there and i get the feeling they're sockpuppets (or one at least anyway) if you look at the names the only diffrence is one has a capital l while the other uses a lowercase......PheNaxKian (T/c)Tag thumb 12:25, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

Fixed. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 13:57, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

A/Mo Moebius Norn Fighter (talk · rate)

Samug is a sock, perhaps?--Victory is Mine! Victoryisyours (talk/pvxcontribs) 16:39, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

His IP address is different than Eroth's (the author). Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 19:05, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

Team - TA Smite Spike (talk · rate)

Can you please take a look at Bob fregman's vote? It doesn't have very much reasoning behind it...PaintballerSig The Paintballer (T/C) 19:09, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

General Coding Issues

Coding refers to any issue or bug that needs to be dealt with by a Server Administrator (Gcardinal or Hhhippo). See resolved issues here. PvXcode related issues have their own section below.

Special:GraceExpired

The links at the top (the words 'abandoned' and 'trash') don't seem to work right. It's a specialpage though, so it might have to be gcardinal or hhhippo that fixes it. --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C) 23:56, 28 September 2007 (CEST)

Odd... it times out, every time. Bug somewhere would be my bet. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 00:17, 29 September 2007 (CEST)
When you hold the mouse over them, you can see the urls they links to: 'http://wiki.pvxwiki.com/index.php?title=Category:Abandoned' and 'http://wiki.pvxwiki.com/index.php?title=Category:Trash-builds'. I think it's because it's wiki.pvxwiki.com instead of www.pvxwiki.com. It used to be wiki.pvxwiki, but I think it was changed a while back. That page probably just didn't get updated. --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C) 00:21, 29 September 2007 (CEST)
Fixed. The links were pointing to the old test server. Thanks for noticing. – HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 19:44, 30 September 2007 (CEST)

Rate Tab

This is directed at gcard or anyone who has coding experience. Is there anyway for you to be able to have the rate tab available while on the discussion tab? It's kinda annoying to go to the build tab again just to rate something after adding to the discussion. --Lost 05:43, 24 August 2007 (CEST)

I agree, it is a lil annoying... hardly priority though. Search system>this. --User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 05:58, 24 August 2007 (CEST)
I'm working on it, but it's difficult since the tab on the talk page has to trigger an action on another page. Be patient... – HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 23:22, 27 September 2007 (CEST)

Vote Removal

Since you guys keep the back-end work pretty much to GCardinal and Hhhippo, I'll request here an ability to restore removed votes. Shouldn't be too hard, and it is easier than posting on the users talk pages and getting them to do it themselves. Less aggravating too. Thanks. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 05:45, 30 August 2007 (CEST)

Implemented. Please test and report problems here. A reason has to be given even though it's not shown anywhere atm. (This is needed for RecentRatings to see the difference between a new/edited vote and a restored one.) – HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 23:22, 27 September 2007 (CEST)

Recent Ratings

Fixed a bug that caused the vote timestamps to be wrong for readers outside GMT+2. The times are shown in the reader's local time now. Note that atm, only the last update (that is, submission, edit, rollback or restore) of each vote is shown in Recent Ratings. There are plans to improve on that.– HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 23:22, 27 September 2007 (CEST)

Div Frames

They don't work. Some examples of hide-able div frames are this and this. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 16:15, 16 September 2007 (CEST)

What do you mean? Єяøהħ 16:57, 16 September 2007 (CEST)
Click the show/hide buttons. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 16:59, 16 September 2007 (CEST)
Sorry, at frist I thought those were PvX links. I'm sitting here thinking "they work fine for me..." Єяøהħ 17:05, 16 September 2007 (CEST)
Will have a look. It's low priority though. – HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 20:32, 3 October 2007 (CEST)

Watchlist bug

Not sure if this is a bug with MediaWiki or what, but I have the page Build:Me/N Well of Illusions on my watchlist, and even after I visit it several times it still thinks I haven't looked at it since its last update (its still in bold). Other pages act normally. This has happened in the past, but it goes away after a while. --Wizardboy777 00:50, 14 September 2007 (CEST)

Happens every once. I use the mark all as read function to bypass it. Still a bug tho Swiftslash \\ Impale (contributions *warrior guide) 16:56, 14 September 2007 (CEST)
Ditto. –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 17:07, 14 September 2007 (CEST)
Have seen that, too. Seems to be a Mediawiki thing. I think it's something like the wiki believes a page is on the watchlist but the talk page is not, or vice versa. The one that is not on the watchlist will not trigger the 'read' status. A workaround is to unwatch and watch again. Make sure that both page and talk page are watched (that should usually be the case automatically). – HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 04:06, 15 September 2007 (CEST)
See also here. – HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 20:32, 3 October 2007 (CEST)

Checkuser links

I don't know if this is possible, but a Checkuser link next to people's names in Recent Changes and Ratings. Like Scarymonsterclan (Talk | contribs | Checkuser)... that would be nice, it's not to hard to do it now, but sounds like if it's possible it'd be an easy code. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 22:34, 22 September 2007 (CEST)

Should be possible, but will take some work. I'm not sure I'd like to modify Recent Changes, since that's a core part of Media Wiki and changes will make it even more difficult to upgrade the wiki software. – HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 20:32, 3 October 2007 (CEST)

Ratings

Timestamps on the ratings would be nice. Don't think it would be hard to implement, but adding them to all the old ratings might be tough. Not a big deal, but if possible, add it. --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C) 22:44, 27 September 2007 (CEST)

Stop reading my thoughts, I'm working on that ;-) – HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 23:22, 27 September 2007 (CEST)
I has mad mind-reading skillz. :P --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C) 23:23, 27 September 2007 (CEST)

More ratings stuff

I see this in the recent ratings: '16:52 . . Team - Conflagrated Coalition; Rating: 2.45 (acceptable) . . E:2 U:2 I:5' It's rated a 2.45, but says 'acceptable'. I thought the lowest 'acceptable' score was 2.5 --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C) 23:22, 28 September 2007 (CEST)

That may be a result of an original discrepancy as to whether we wanted to round votes up or not. Not a major issue but one that I guess should probably be fixed. Defiant Elements Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 00:24, 29 September 2007 (CEST)
I'll have a look. – HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 20:32, 3 October 2007 (CEST)

Yet more ratings stuff....

I was wondering (this may not be possiable at all jsut a thought though) would it be at all possiable to make a template or something where it automaticly updates the catagory it's in (e.g if something was at 4.49 in the good catagory and someone votted and it went to 4.5 or 4.51 to make it great, instead of having to manualy switch it it would automaticly do it.)PheNaxKian (T/c)Tag thumb 21:22, 29 September 2007 (CEST)

ENGLISH IZ GUD. --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C) 22:09, 2 October 2007 (CEST)
Dynamic templates. Not too hard to understand. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 00:25, 3 October 2007 (CEST)
Is on our major-things-to-do-list. – HHHIPPO ‹sysop› 20:32, 3 October 2007 (CEST)
If you're gonna get into dynamic templating... if you put, say, a {{build-stub}} tag on a build, then move the build, the build still appears in Category:Build stubs under the old title, and you have to remove and then put the stub tag in again to get it into the right place. It would be nice if it updated itself. --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C) 04:08, 5 October 2007 (CEST)
That's what i mean-where the template automaticly updates and changes what catagorey it's in.PheNaxKian (T/c)Tag thumb 17:59, 5 October 2007 (CEST)

Recent ratings and rollbacks

It would be helpful for detecting violations of 1RV with votes if it was possible to see previous rollbacked/deleted/edited votes. --Edru viransu//QQ about me/sysop 05:02, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

PvxCode Issues

Coding issues related to PvXcode. See also PvXwiki talk:PvXcode. Resolved issues are moved here.

Skills that don't scale

  • Smite Condition.
  • Spotless Mind.
  • Shadow Fang.
  • Signet of Illusions.
  • Castigation Signet.
  • Plague Touch.

Skills that scale incorrectly

  • Sundering Weapon
  • Angorodon's Gaze
  • Radiant Scythe
  • Aura Slicer
  • Shell Shock
  • Signet of Mystic Speed
  • Expert Focus

EOTN Title Specific Skills

The 50 EOTN PvE Title Track based skills don't work when trying to create a build. Currently, I have left them as optional and inserted a comment underneath which says about the skills. ---Andyhhp

That's because they haven't been added yet. Єяøהħ 19:47, 10 September 2007 (CEST)

Auto set primary attributes@0

It would be nice if PvXcode would assume values for all attributes (or at least primary ones) to be set to 0 unless otherwise stated. If time's an issue, though, ignore this and work on things like PvXsmall and PvXmicro. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 16:40, 2 August 2007 (CEST)

Speaking as a programmer, there are some things you'd have to watch with that:
  • A) You don't want it to do that for title-specific skills.
  • B) Builds that don't have any attributes listed should probably show the whole range, that might be a bigger issue with pvxsmall/micro, cause the whole point of using those is to take up less room and leaving out the attribs accomplishes that pretty well.
  • C) Just displaying single skills outside of builds (just <pvxbig>[Shock]</pvxwiki>, for example) should show the whole range.
And yes, having it do that would be nice. I keep having to go around putting @0's in glyph of lesser energy's. --Wizardboy777 01:15, 21 September 2007 (CEST)

Profession links in PvXBig

Not sure if this is a bug or not, but when you click on the profession header of a PvX bar, it takes you to an official wiki site. For illustration, clicking on either 'Elementalist' or 'Assassin' takes you to the official wiki, while clicking on the skills and attributes themselves takes you to GWiki. <pvxbig> [build prof=eleme/assassin airmag=12+1+1 energy=8+1 shadow=10 deadly=2][mind shock][lightning strike][lightning bolt][blinding flash][recall][dash][deadly paradox][feigned neutrality][/build] </pvxbig> Like I said, I'm not sure if this qualifies as a bug or just an oddity, but I figured I'd bring it to your attention to be safe. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 04:22, 3 August 2007 (CEST)

Template Codes

GW:EN skills are wrong, not your fault, but documenting it. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 21:14, 20 September 2007 (CEST)

Distracting Strike

Says sword attack, although it is a melee attack. — Skakid9090 02:24, 27 September 2007 (CEST)

Yeah, i noticed that too.--Victory is Mine! Victoryisyours (talk/pvxcontribs) 13:15, 27 September 2007 (CEST)
That's not a pvx problem, thats a gwbbcode problem. Take it up with them. -Auron 02:22, 5 October 2007 (CEST)

Anthem of Weariness

Recharge 8 --> recharge 10. — Skakid9090 01:32, 1 October 2007 (CEST)

We don't make changes like that, those are all affected by gwbbcode. When they release their update with skill balances, we'll have it updated here. -Auron 02:22, 5 October 2007 (CEST)

Deleting pages

I had a thought (oh o that's never a good sign...) would it be at all possiable to make it so that normal users can delete pages BUT they can only delete pages that have expired their 2 week trash period thing (basiclly been in trash longer than 2 weeks), this way it means the site can be better maintained and admins don't have to worry about doing that kind of grunt work so to speak.PheNaxKian (T/c)Tag thumb 22:55, 29 September 2007 (CEST)

PvXDecode does not create a downloadable build template

<pvxbig> [build prof=R/D exp=11 mar=10 earthp=10][Volley][Called Shot][Distracting Shot][Savage Shot][Optional][Optional][Ebon Dust Aura][Resurrection Signet][/build] </pvxbig>

OgojctZ6qSghTGPGqGAAAAgbCAA - PvX Decode only displays {template_bbcode} instead of a build code that you can download/save. Maybe it is due to the two optional skills, it does not work somehow. --Longasc 02:16, 5 October 2007 (CEST)

Yeah, I don't know why it doesn't work. Bbcode is supposed to give a template code even with blank slots (see this build, has a blank spot yet the bbcode gives you a template). I guess that's something we'll have to look in to? -Auron 02:21, 5 October 2007 (CEST)
The eye of the north skills screw up the template codes. However, as far as I know, volley is the only one I've seen that stops it from generating one altogether. Most of the other ones just make it give you a wrong one. --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C) 02:22, 5 October 2007 (CEST)
I thought it was PvE skills that screws up template code. And using more than 1 optional kills it. єяøהħ 00:54, 6 October 2007 (CEST)
Build:A/R Way of Disruption is a pvp build and its template code is screwy. The pve-only skills just don't show up. I hadn't known using more than one optional broke it, though. --Wizardboy777 SigWizardboy777(T/C) 08:52, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

Imo when you put 2 optional skills you just have 2 skills with the same name ("Optional") wich is not accepted. Exemple : <pvxbig> [build prof=R/D exp=11 mar=10 earthp=10][Called Shot][Called Shot][Called Shot][Called Shot][Called Shot][Called Shot][Called Shot][Called Shot][/build] </pvxbig> Maybe change this forcing BBCode to accept twice the same skill? Or make an Optional1, Optional2, etc... ?
--Assassin&#039;s PromiseTtibot(Talk) 16:50, 6 October 2007 (CEST)

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