hello, nice to see you here :) gcardinal Gcardinal-signature {{sysop}}

John 11:35. DE Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 04:03, 30 April 2007 (CEST)
Thanks to both of ya. =) Rapta 20:57, 30 April 2007 (CEST)

We <3 Rapta! Jaofos 21:53, 30 April 2007 (CEST)

May I ask what would be impossible to enforce in PvXwiki:Percentage Favored Vetting? DE Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 00:13, 4 May 2007 (CEST)

Not only does it involve constant re-calculations of build voting percentages, every single build in the wiki would need to be re-evaluated. Rapta 23:27, 4 May 2007 (CEST)
Ah, I understand what you meant. I was thrown off my the use of the word "enforce." You should know that we are writing a script to auto-update the percentages, and, as to re-evaluation... well, we could have that problem almost regardless of which policy we pick. But, I do understand what you are getting at. DE Sig Test 2 *Defiant Elements* +talk 23:28, 4 May 2007 (CEST)
Can I get you to look at one of my RA monks? * Build:Mo/Me RA Vital Bonder Shireen 06:08, 21 May 2007 (CEST)

Administraition VS Buildmaster

I think there is a difference between being a site janitor and being a build master. The Admin concept, as my job description was eplained to me, was to keep doing what I am doing, and merely uphold consensus, take a more proactive role in preventing vandalism, and use my authority to uphold standards in page quality. Other than that I have all the same abilities and authority over build vetting as the normal user base. The position of Build Masters on the other hand is a still a topic that needs to be discussed. Because I don't feel I am a build master, but I do feel I am an adept site admin. That, I think, is why Hipp is being considered for adminship, because he understands the line I follow and would make an excellent addition to the codding base (which requires certain admin privelages). Just my thoughts on it bro. Shireensysop 16:01, 24 June 2007 (EDT)

Not a build master, but sufficient experience with builds, imo. That's how I see an admin, not an admin with minimal experience but knows how to use Wiki-code. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 23:14, 2 July 2007 (CEST)
Hhhippo has experience that none of have, and that takes more then just playing a game. We don't pick random admins, Rapta. Refrain from further comment, EVERYONE. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 23:18, 2 July 2007 (CEST)
That's how you see an admin being, which is different of how I see an admin. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 17:21, 3 July 2007 (CEST)
In all reality, people who know more about builds then wiki-code, are worthless in comparison to those that do. Myself included. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 13:45, 4 July 2007 (CEST)
...What? — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 13:51, 4 July 2007 (CEST)

auspicious renewal

it has the same amount of nukes as the original renewal, you can replace GoLE with auspicious and you having nothing except a better build. can you explain your vote further? - Skakid9090 18:40, 4 July 2007 (CEST)

Build Rating Question

I had a question reguarding your rating on Build:A/any Critical Fox... I posted my response on the build's talk page (as per the policy, I believe). Simply rating the build won't add it to your watchlist, so this comment is merely a heads-up in case you didn't already see my response. --GEO-logo Jioruji Derako.> 04:07, 5 July 2007 (CEST)

Nothing was changed other than the paragraphs being condensed. The original build still has huge problems. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 10:13, 5 July 2007 (CEST)
You didn't quite answer my question, which I posted on the build's talk page. If you've got any suggestions on the build's setup itself, by all means fire away; I'm always happy to improve on the original setup. --GEO-logo Jioruji Derako.> 10:13, 6 July 2007 (CEST)

IX Degen

Since i got this 0 from you i just wanted to know if there is some good reason. You said i "found every degen skill possible and put them into a bar + res sig". This is not what i did so pls i would have some serious comment on the build (also because some ppl gave it a 5 or a 4.7 ). Thank you Sjeps 10:54, 7 July 2007 (CEST)

My vote is solely on the build itself (check the unfavored pile for random bars filled with degen skills). I couldn't care less if other people gave it a 5 tbh. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 23:38, 7 July 2007 (CEST)
I like your concept of random. Probably for you war builds are random bars filled with attack skills and monk builds are random bars filled with healing skills. Oh i forget "+ res sig" Sjeps 13:11, 8 July 2007 (CEST)
Except they're not. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 21:00, 8 July 2007 (CEST)
The Build is not good. Please refrain from speaking to any of the voters, and leave it on the talk page if you absolutely must comment. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 21:09, 8 July 2007 (CEST)
That was a justifyable comment. It's like saying someone found every AoE spell possible and threw it onto a Elle bar (I've seen and done that). You need a backup plan to that build than what you have going. 1/3 of all users bring some kind of hex removal, so the chances of you getting a glad point with this significantly drop. Shireensysop 21:22, 8 July 2007 (CEST)
To Readem "If a vote appears unjustified (e.g. only 0-scores or no meaningful reason given), the voter should be asked for clarification". To Shireen, i don't know if it is or not a justifyable comment but i know that what he's saying it's not truth. I just asked "some serious comment on the build" after letting him know that i didn't "found every degen skill possible and put them into a bar + res sig". Sjeps 1:41, 9 July 2007 (CEST)
Rapta's reason was justifiable. The skills have very little synergy. My vote was justified by the build itself. Next time, if you find a questionable vote, discuss it on the talk page. Bringing it to the user is considered almost tactless. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 02:39, 9 July 2007 (CEST)
This build apparently is love-hate... either you love it, or ya hate it... I haven't tried it, but just commenting... and author, I wouldn't worry about it. At least you can use it effectively... ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 01:49, 9 July 2007 (CEST)
QFT. On the Wiki, build design has a lot to do with how your average player can use builds, in my opinion. Often, as a build creator, you have such a good understanding of how it all works that you can use it perfectly; while a player who didn't have anything to do with the creation either won't be able to use it well, or would simply prefer a build that is easier to use right out of the stable. I personally can shadowstep all over Hard Mode with my Seeping Wound Assassin, but I'm really not surprised that I've yet to get a Seeping Wound build favored... I'm just proud to know that I'm one of the few that can use a "bad" build effectively. Weather or not your build gets a high rating or a low one, will it really affect your own performance with the build? Of course not, becuase the rating comes down to how well it works for everybody else. --GEO-logo Jioruji Derako.> 04:21, 9 July 2007 (CEST)
0 ratings come probably from ppl that didn't test build and/or read usage section, and just rated the build for the skillset (i hope at least). I would never do this to any build but everyone is free to do what he wants. Talk is over for me ty Rapta for efforts. P.S. After a few days playing this build (and some gl points) i see less SoR builds and more Divert Hexes/Blessed Light builds. Sjeps 10:56, 9 July 2007 (CEST)

We fail, I know :/

I just realized, that the only WoH Build we the one that spam HP and channeling :(. If I write up a build, will you fix? Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 03:50, 9 July 2007 (CEST)

The one I wrote's in testing. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 04:49, 9 July 2007 (CEST)

Build: A/W Alone Assassin re-rate

could you re-rate that build? some anon edited it with stupid other skills, who the hell takes siphon when he has YAAA?... i changed it back to its original build. (also note the SYNERGY between jungle strike and YAAA, its bonus damage is insane to crippled targets and the build kills just as efficient as shadow prison mainstream build; also YAAA has EARSHOT=normal cast range and an excellent cover condition that disables physical damage dealers at the same time aswell, and it's unlinked. all in all >>>> siphon) thanks--Taki Fujiko 21:19, 9 July 2007 (CEST)

No. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 23:03, 9 July 2007 (CEST)

I think we know who the real nub is =)

[1] skadid eh? Skakid9090 18:47, 12 July 2007 (CEST)

Featured builds

Hey Rapta, since you were usually pretty concerned with updating the featured builds on the Main Page appropriately, I thought I'd tell you about the my changes to its layout. If you would like to change the featured builds from now on, you may do so yourself Template:Builds Table|at this location, and it will update the Main Page accordingly. Hope that makes things easier for you. - Kowal Krowman {{sysop}} 19:46, 12 July 2007 (CEST)

Ah, very nice. Thanks a lot. — Rapta Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 21:16, 12 July 2007 (CEST)


hi,since i'm and old guildwiki user and don't want to come up with a trash build, i'm asking for feedback from expert players, so i wondered, could i ask you to give this page a look and some comments/corrections/suggestions? Build:Rt/A_Grasping_Bomber. If you could, that'd be just great. Thanks! --Morten 17:25, 14 July 2007 (CEST)

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