User talk:Raine Valen/Archive 34

When I archive this page, this section will remain forever. — Raine Valen 19:04, 20 Mar 2011 (UTC)

New UW run!

User:Raine_Valen/Srs_PvE/16Apr2011.1700. The last date fell flat on its face; sign up! -- Oiseau | 17:06, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Is this exclusive, or can I sign up? I need to make sure I'm available, but possibly 4,1 or 2. Usually I have more time after 24:00 UTC. --Moto Saxon 19:04, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Open to absolutely everyone! Also put your contact and availability information on this page. -- Oiseau | 01:51, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Please stop using your talk page as a forum. Your talk page has received 168 edits (minus a couple) about suggestions that achieve absolutely nothing in 2 weeks; for comparison, my talk page has been edited 134 times in its entire history. If you truly wish to host GuildWiki-esque random chatter, could you at least do it on a subpage of your userspace that isn't theoretically used for actually important/useful things? Thanks, – Emmett 00:01, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Or better yet, someplace where it actually belongs, like sardelac thread on guru? That spam is getting ridiculous. -Auron 00:16, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't see how said spam is preventing users from contacting me about ostensibly important matters. — Raine Valen 0:55, 13 Apr 2011 (UTC)

It's not really about that, it's more one of those sysop discretion things. People probably won't contact you for sysop stuff because you do so little of it to begin with. The talk page isn't useless due to spam posting, it's just annoying as hell, and rather a distraction for anyone with the misfortune of having your talk page watchlisted (as is usual for sysops). -Auron 01:01, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Then I'll move it to a subpage as a courtesy. Anything else? — Raine Valen 1:05, 13 Apr 2011 (UTC)

Just redirect everyone to here. →[ »Halogod (talk)« ]← 01:58, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I love how the words "Sysop Stuff" are apparently supposed to mean something other than deleting pages and dealing with bans.. --BriarThe Spider 03:46, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi

I felt like using your talk page as a forum. What's going on? Karate Jesus 01:37, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

My talk page isn't a forum. This is a forum, though. — Raine Valen 1:55, 15 Apr 2011 (UTC)

Wrong. →[ »Halogod (talk)« ]← 02:31, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Quite possibly the best troll ever.

David Motherfucking Thorne of 27\6. This guy is amazing. — Raine Valen 2:16, 15 Apr 2011 (UTC)

"I assumed Ollie is short for Oliver just as Anton is short for a normal sized human." I lol'd. --Riddle 03:25, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Wow, this guy sounds exactly like me when I'm not jammed out of my fucking mind and can be bothered trying to sound halfway coherent. It sounds like he's been arrested even more than I have. I believe I shall subscribe to his newsletter. –Jette 11:26, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

10/10, also, I miss your trolling, Jette. The clown thing on the help page is still top 10 of the most hilarious things I've ever seen, but maybe I'm just easily amused. -- Tha Reckoning 02:21, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Reaper's Sweep

Bull's Strike

Aura Slicer

Body Blow

Reaper's Sweep

Balthazar's Rage

Frenzy

Rush

Resurrection Signet

Body Blow is a lolfest. — Raine Valen 17:15, 19 Apr 2011 (UTC)

Also, Bull's -> Attack -> Reaper's is (perfect) qknock in Frenzy. Suplol. — Raine Valen 17:22, 19 Apr 2011 (UTC)

Can you hit that qknock with heart of fury? If you can it's def a better choice--TahiriVeila 19:14, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Your enemy has response time with HoF, which is not resulting in a lock. - Infinite - talk 20:40, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

God dammit. — Raine Valen 15:27, 29 Apr 2011 (UTC)

Well, at least you enjoyed it while it lasted. :> - Infinite - talk 22:04, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Recall is Awesome

Golden Skull Strike

Twisting Fangs

Golden Phoenix Strike

Blades of Steel

Recall

Frenzy

Rush

Resurrection Signet

Cancel your frenzy with LOLI'MANINJA. — Raine Valen 2:07, 27 Apr 2011 (UTC)

I'mma go vanquish some stuff for Asura points.

Who's down? — Raine Valen 15:28, 29 Apr 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. Can't be bothered to play this game. --Boro 20:03, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Too busy getting PvP armor in WoW. →[ »Halogod (talk)« ]← 23:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Too busy being oppressed by the man... --Riddle 23:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Too busy calling for your RfR. elix Omni 09:46, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'm free! :D Harrier C. Goodman talk 09:56, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

AB`

12hrs consec, new record! --Silven 05:57, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I pulled like 36 before. Get on my level. — Raine Valen 6:35, 30 Apr 2011 (UTC)

Feel like we've had this conversation before! Must be deja vu =D--Silven 08:58, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Woonding Flooms. InfestedHydralisk 09:54, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Ran that last night actually, Hydra. Also, never thought I'd see Etnaran Keys again. -- Oiseau | 15:15, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

We had Wounding Frag Flooms. Srsly WTF. — Raine Valen 15:57, 30 Apr 2011 (UTC)

I should invent something new! Also, that must have been a bug. Etnaran Keys is not meant to be a playable map! InfestedHydralisk 14:52, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Man, when it was Keys like two weeks ago, my friend and I went in expecting like 39482 districts. There were 3 people in Am d1, and int was empty. Fun battles. elix Omni 21:37, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey man

I'd appreciate if you could unblock my university's IP and stop misusing your sysop tools. Thanks. elix Omni 01:03, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Almost, but not quite

→ moved from Feedback talk:User/Konig Des Todes/Post 7-hero update: Profession Limitations

The issue isn't, in fact, OP skills – rather, it's that the objectives and game style in PvE favor a certain paradigm in buildcrafting (kill the fuck out of everything as fast as possible; don't worry about defense so much because (1) minions will first absorb damage, then explode, and finally kill enough foes by exploding to make more minions, (2) mobs don't understand the concept of not smacking into prot, (3) "Save Yourselves!", and (4) most PvE mobs are piss-weak, anyway).
Guild Wars PvE is a joke not because Signet of Lost Souls is lolwtfimba (you don't see it stapled onto y/8 players in a Halls party), but because mobs don't have any means to deal with, well, anything (for example, in the case of SoLS: 80% of mobs party formations have no real healing or defense and 100% of them have inadequate healing and defense, so necro heroes can spam SoLS like it's going out of style).
In a nutshell, a handful of skills are really, really good at PvE (just like some skills are really, really good at HA) because of overarching objectives that don't promote variety. Skills that should be balanced by having limited utility but being very good at a specific thing aren't balanced because the specific thing that they're good at encompasses 99% of the PvE game. — Raine Valen 1:02, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

"The issue isn't, in fact, OP skills"

"In a nutshell, a handful of skills are really, really good"

That's an exceptionally basic and fundamental point. Most people take it into account when deciding if something is over-powered or not. Yes, it changes from PvE to PvP. But then, most people already know that.

"a handful of skills are really, really good at PvE (just like some skills are really, really good at HA)"

You appear to be the only one who doesn't understand this (see next quote for details). In case the idea of discussing 7 hereos wasn't obvious enough - nobody here is discussing PvP; which nullifies a lot of what you said.

"Guild Wars PvE is a joke not because Signet of Lost Souls is lolwtfimba (you don't see it stapled onto y/8 players in a Halls party)"

Cool way of arguing how effective a skill used in PvE is by discussing PvP.

So yeah. What was relevant to the discussion (you're not seriously bringing 7 heroes into PvP, are you?!) wasn't in any way conflicting with what's been said. Please do bring my attention to anything I may have missed or interpreted incorrectly. A F K When Needed 18:37, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

To say it simple: Do Not Compare PvE With PvP. Damysticreaper 19:05, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

PvP and PvE emphasize team synergy. Kiting is a solid strategy in PvP and PvE. Shutdown is a key component of PvP and PvE. Your argument is invalid. In a nutshell, a handful of skills are really, really good at certain objectives in PvP and all-but-certain-objectives in PvE because of overarching objectives that don't promote variety. — Raine Valen 19:14, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) You managed to miss the point completely, which is almost commendable.

Your first quote is a classic case of a misquote, especially since the part you cut out is italicized for emphasis. "Some skills are really, really good" is a very basic point; it's not the point I was arguing.

Your second example is... special. I really don't know how else to put it because the concept that I'm trying to convey is so simple, but you've misunderstood it. Hard. I'll try again, though:

• Some people are very, very good at hotdog eating contests; others are very, very good at surfing while doing handstands. This doesn't make them very, very at everything or very, very good people because being good at one specific thing doesn't make a person spectacular – in fact, they're good at these things because of obscure peculiarities (i.e. stretchy stomachs and acute sense of physical balance) that aren't really useful for much else. They excel in their respective contests because their respective contests reward things that aren't, in the whole of life, really rewarded.
• Similarly, a skill in Guild Wars that excels in one specific scenario can't be considered any more spectacular at the game than one who can do surfstands can be considered good at life. A skill that is spectacular in PvE may be horrible elsewhere, and vice versa: this is because PvE is a format which rewards things that, elsewhere, aren't particularly valued.
• In this way, PvE is similar to a hotdog eating contest and, furthermore, both are jokes, for the reason that they highly reward specialization in things that are largely useless, elsewhere.

Your third quote seems to stem from the same (horrible) misunderstanding as your second. As tempted as I am to copy and paste what I just wrote, I'm going to, instead, approach it from a different direction.

Let's say that there were a skill that were, overall, very effective. Let's call this skill, say, Heart of Fury. Interestingly enough, because it's very effective on a grand scale, we see it all over the place: PvE, GvG, HA, FA, you name it – Heart of Fury shows up there.

Why is HoF everywhere while SoLS is not? Well, HoF is good because it satisfies a universal goal of all of Guild Wars (dealing damage) and is effective at moving toward that goal almost regardless of any other factors. While Signet of Lost Souls also satisfies a universal goal of GW (managing Energy), it only excels at it in formats where it can be unabashedly exploited – these formats are badly designed because they reward specific playstyles that are not useful, elsewhere.

If PvE were to stop being a joke (remember, it's a joke because it rewards specific playstyles that are not useful elsewhere – it would have to start rewarding more general and less specific skills to stop being a joke), the skills that excel there would stop excelling there. Accordingly, the issue is not "OP skills", it's "stupidly-designed format that makes certain skills disproportionately valuable". For another example of a "stupidly-designed format that makes certain skills disproportionately valuable", see Relic Run and "Make Haste!; it's akin to PvE not because HA and PvE are the same, but because they are both "stupidly-designed format that makes certain skills disproportionately valuable".

I do hope that I've cleared this up for you. — Raine Valen 19:08, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

You seem confused by small quotes. It's not that I lack human intellect and randomly made up points to argue with. It's that I quoted enough so you'd know which of your points I was responding to, and no more. I did this for a reason; they're your points. I figured you'd know them. Sadly; while you are indeed aware of your own points; you appear to only have read my quotes of yourself, and responded to those; ignoring what I actually said. Thus your response is relevant to you moreso than me. Sigh.

"Accordingly, the issue is not "OP skills", it's "stupidly-designed format that makes certain skills disproportionately valuable"."

I never disagreed with that. Look at "OP". Look at "over-powered". Look at "stupidly-designed format that makes certain skills disproportionately valuable".

"OP" - The easiest and quickest to type. People will understand what you mean. They've played the game.

"over-powered" - Marginally longer. Same thing fundamentally. People will understand what you mean. They've played the game.

""a skill that excels in a stupidly-designed format, because said format attributes disproportionate valuable to the skill"" - The most accurate. The shortest. But are you really going to type that shit out every bloody time? Hardly. My point, I don't think you understood it; is that people use "OP" and "over-powered" because they're shorter, and more practical. Because we are talking with people who have also played the game, we can get away with it. They know what it's like. When I say "Halls" and "Make Haste!", they know instantly what I refer to. They know there's nothing exceptional about Song of Concentration. They know that skill is of great value in Halls anyway.

Now, let's look at them. Which are you most likely to use? Which are you least likely to use? My messages on the Guild Wars Wiki are affected by the context. Context of being aimed at people who have played Guild Wars. Your version is superior when discussing the game with those who have never played it. But it's too long to be practical, so I for one, will never use it unless my audience has difficulty understanding more manageable terminology.

tl;dr: I'm a human talking on the internet. I have human intellect, by virtue of being a human. A discussion on the internet holds no importance to me; and thus I will inevitably be lazy in the way to which I approach it.

Had you read my message and not just my quotes of yourself before berating me regarding nothing other than you should have quoted more, you're doing it wrong - you would have understood.

I'm lazy in how I type messages, but at least I read what other people say. I hope this time you do likewise.

I 100% stand by the comment "What was relevant to the discussion (you're not seriously bringing 7 heroes into PvP, are you?!) wasn't in any way conflicting with what's been said." We already knew, and when everybody knows, there's no need to spell it out. That's why two letters is superior to just under twenty words, and always will be. Everyone, but you, understood we were talking about skills that excel at things such as vanquishing. There was context, we used it to shorten what we said. It only confused you; nobody else.

I do hope I've cleared this up for you. A F K When Needed 12:06, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Let's approach this in a different way.

• Premise 1: Skills that are good in only one scenario are supposed to be balanced by being good in only one scenario.
• Premise 2: In PvE, there is only one scenario through the vast majority of the game.
• Conclusion 1 (from Premises 1 and 2): Skills that are good in that particular scenario are not balanced by being good in only one scenario.
• Conclusion 2 (from Premise 2 and Conclusion 1): The skills are OP in that particular format because that particular format is badly designed.
• Premise 3: Rebalancing something to fix a problem that isn't inherent in the thing being rebalanced is what we call a "band-aid fix" (e.g. nerfing Flail and Burst of Aggression; reducing scythe crits; Dying Nightmares and Skeletons of Dhuum).
• Conclusion 3 (from Conclusion 2 and Premise 3): Nerfing skills that are too good in PvE because PvE is badly designed is a band-aid fix.
• Premise 4: Limiting the number of professions that one can take is indirectly nerfing every skill that would be run on their bars.
• Conclusion 4: (from Conclusion 3 and Premise 4): Limiting the number of each profession allowed in a heroway is a band-aid fix.

The intent behind the suggestion is sensible; however, the implementation is sub-ideal. Accordingly, I can almost, but not quite, support it. — Raine Valen 19:31, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Location

Konig moved this to my talk page. I'm moving it; and it's not going back. You started a discussion on his page. It doesn't belong on my talk page. So since he moved it, I'm presenting it to you. You started the discussion. Your signature is to be found the most times - even including my response in this same edit (but not the one in the location subsection; that's not part of the discussion).

If you don't want it, put it back where it was originally before being moved at all. It belongs on my talk page about as much as it belongs on the "Make Haste!" article. A F K When Needed 12:06, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

To clarify, I moved it to AFK's talk page because it was directed to AFK. -- Konig/talk 17:53, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

"We're dumping shit on your profile while you're offline because the contents of our talk pages and suggestion pages are seriously important, and archiving is simply too hard, so now you can do it, in your archive instead." Ryuu  *bite* 18:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Cool. You probably want to update the {{moved}} tags, though. — Raine Valen 19:17, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

They did, tbh. =x Ryuu  *bite* 19:19, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, I checked my talkpage before I checked my watchlist, so derf. — Raine Valen 19:33, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

@Ryuu: I didn't archive because it was an on-going conversation. I moved because it was irrelevant to the topic of the page, not that my talk page is too important or that archiving was too hard. Archiving seemed like an ass thing to do, leaving it alone would of only made it continue into further off-topicness, moving seemed like the best alternative. -- Konig/talk

So, I'm really tired and have an hour to kill

And! Rc is dead, and there's literally nothing to do ._. Help, pretty please? Ryuu  *bite* 19:36, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Wat do?! — Raine Valen 19:40, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I have a new /Design project to put up. Two of them, really. The first is interesting, the second is epic. — Raine Valen 19:41, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Gogo. Ryuu  *bite* 19:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

So...

You know you can just start your own reconfirmation, rather than supporting the request and waiting for a bcat to notice it (especially since they all seem afk)? -- FreedomBound 14:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not in a hurry. — Raine Valen 14:25, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I was wondering the same thing... Secondly, you can give up your tools without the need of another rfa and that is only a mention due to your support of the rfr... Kaisha 01:10, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

You've misinterpreted my support. :) — Raine Valen 2:31, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I suppose I have. :-S *confused* Kaisha 02:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

A reconfirmation vote does not necessarily mean that the sysop should lose the rights; it's merely a vote that a new RfA should be made to reevaluate the community support of said person. poke | talk 16:13, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I know that, but was merely making my suggestion... In case she doesn't want them, etc. Allowing that there's more than one option. For example, if one feels that the majority doesn't feel safe with her use of tools due to whatever... One can do a number of things - agree and understand with the community by supporting rfr and seeing what they thing or giving up the tools at any given point of time if one feels that would help the community better. It's just an option. I was a bit confused at her reasoning, but I think I kind of better understand it now. Kaisha 20:01, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I love how this conversation became so awkward so quickly. Morphy 15:08, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

De-sysopping

I have decided to exercise bureaucrat discretion here in removing your current sysop powers, rather than going through the formal reconfirmation voting, as I do not believe it would serve the wiki to continue to allow you to have them even through the next few days. If you desire to re-acquire sysop powers and believe that there is enough support among the general user base to indicate that my thoughts are incorrect, I will not stop you from starting a new RfA (though I find it unlikely that there would be). (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 07:24, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Out of sick curiosity, why did you do that Aiiane? Can you give me a TL;DR of Raine's sysophood, and what she did wrong? -- Tha Reckoning 15:30, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Had a sense of humour, nobody likes that, apparently.--Neil • 15:34, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

It's a sex thing, obviously; the male-led bureaucracy became terrified of a girl getting to be The Man too. –Jette 15:57, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

But Raine is hot, though. Does this mean all males in power anywhere are gay? -- Tha Reckoning 16:49, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Some males can still use their brain in the presence of a female. 76.10.172.239 00:16, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Lies. -- Tha Reckoning 11:05, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Carelessness. — Raine Valen 19:49, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Why the demotion and why the immediacy? (I'm not necessarily supporting or opposing it, but justification would be useful for Raine as well as the rest of us.) -- pling 17:46, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Because bureaucracy for the sake of bureaucracy is bad, presumably. Useless drama would've been useless. — Raine Valen 18:55, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

And still drama. I haven't had a good show in almost three days when I replaced all my neighbor's sprinkler heads with these things and watched him spend 4 hours trying to fix it. Please contest this, I'm really fucking bored. –Jette 21:53, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Meh. — Raine Valen 22:26, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

What Really Happened

Ryuu  *bite* 19:22, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not angry, at all. I'm not even annoyed. — Raine Valen 19:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I think you're blaming yourself a bit too much. A sysop should check histories and contribs regardless of who notified them - whether it was a friend or not. (Perhaps the only acceptable exception is if it was a fellow sysop and the situation was time-sensitive.) -- pling 20:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Indeed; I accept all blame for all of my mistakes: trusting people and taking them at their word for such weighty matters is simply unacceptable. — Raine Valen 20:21, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Would have helped if Felix had signed in :/ --File:User Chieftain Alex Chieftain Signature.pngChieftain Alex 21:32, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Would've helped if Felix had taken accountability. -- Oiseau | 21:37, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Ha. Ahahahahaha. Haha. — Raine Valen 22:27, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually: How much did you really lose? --Boro 12:07, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Alliance Battles

Ohi. Besides checking on my feedback page, lurking on PvX, and Wiki, I notice that you happen like playing Alliance Battles. If you ever need an extra, feel free to pm me, IGN: Vincent E V A N. On another note, sorry to hear you lost adminiship. Vincent Evan [Air Henchman] 01:56, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not, so you shouldn't be. :) — Raine Valen 1:57, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

"Power" on the Internet is relative anyhow. It's all about popularity rather than titles. But still, mind the random message, would you care to AB sometime? ;o Vincent Evan [Air Henchman] 01:59, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Certainly. — Raine Valen 2:01, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Awesome blossom, I can essentially run anything that you might possibly need, besides monk. I just came back so my attention span is probably to short to be bothered with that. On that note, I'm peacing out! Thanks for the feedback on my suggestion. Vincent Evan [Air Henchman] 02:06, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Ohhh, this is so adorable. I can't wait until this part ends, it's gonna be awesome. In the meantime, you can drop me a line in-game too if you need an extra, on the rare occasions that I'm on, assuming you don't mind playing with a manipulative bastard who spends half the match tabbed out on pornos. –Jette 02:10, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

But I know what you're thinking, what kind of pornos are you looking at? Vincent Evan [Air Henchman] 02:17, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Asking for links? darn o.o--Neil • 15:27, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, you know those insects that tear their mates' heads off after copulating? It's like that. –Jette 19:59, 11 May 2011 (UTC)