User talk:Yena

Welcome!

Hiya :D yger talk 22:25, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Oh no lyger attack

Someone forgot to sign ;) Yena 22:56, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

It was a Kalli! Aw :D yger talk 23:03, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

You mean Kalli? :D 23:15, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

So yeah. Pro stylez. Slm. Maccarelly 23:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Woot! we're saved, Macca figured out indents :D 23:32, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Testing! :D Macca 23:55, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes it was I Kalli :P Kallisto Melia 01:57, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh my MH invasion! -- Cyan 10:09, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I felt left out. akka 11:44, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Poor akka. :O 13:02, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Now I don't! *yawn rape* and is this colour shinier? and less Broken Link-y? akka 13:18, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Much shinier <3 ena. 14:43, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Signature

Hey there, Yena! Just to let you know, the GWW:SIGN policy states that your signature image can only be as large as 19x19 px. Many people use an image as the first letter and then use normal text (markup) for the remaining letters, in case you want to go that route. Anyway, just thought I'd let you know! If you need any help or advice, feel free to ask or message any of the GWW:HELPERS! Happy editing! --★KOKUOU★ 00:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh nuts, I knew it was too good to be true, getting a workable sig in one try. :D I figured observing the 19 px limit on height as to avoid strange layout botching would suffice. If you could maybe clarify something for me: "The image used is constrained to a maximum size of 19x19 pixels, to avoid disrupting text spacing and readability." - GWW:SIGN suggests that the reasons are those I already observed in creating my sig. Do I still need to change it, and if so, why exactly? Thanks. 00:17, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

It's been discussed numerous times before. I trust you'll find your questions answered there. de Kooning 00:45, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Ironically enough, no-one actually seems to answer my above question in either one of those rant-a-thons. Regardless, though, I had no idea the subject had already been thoroughly stomped into the ground. Too bad really. Especially seeing as those who appear to be against using image-only sigs seem to have no actual argumentative ground to stand on provided the sig conforms to all set guidelines aside from the actual no. of pixels (19x19). That is to say, no ground to stand on besides "We really cba to change this because maybe in the far-away future it will let people get away with 10000x10000 pixel sigs" (which we all know is a very very dire threat indeed). Wiki is a beautiful system, but some parts of it are about as effective as a wet carrot. I'll change it in morning. 01:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

If you're really interested, you can dig through here to see why they chose the 19px x 19px. They wanted the images to not break lines and be small. I believe the main notion behind the rigidity against changing size is not "we don't want to change it because we're old school," but rather "there would be too many incidents involving disrupting sigs that Look Like This " So, it's just preventative measures against such sigs that policy states 19 x 19px. --RIDDLE 01:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Which seems pretty ironic seeing as your "example from hell" does actually conform to policy, as far as I can tell.(in the image/19x19 sense anyway) ^^ 01:26, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

All in all I can't help but get the feeling that some people missed out on the lesson regarding common sense when I read all the drama that's surrounded something as simple as a signature policy. End of the day it's only a bunch (361) of pixels with no other purpose than to distinguish between contribs. I dont see why there's need for a riot if someone wants to use a slightly different format which is still well within reasonable bounds. Less deathgrip on the policybook is key. 01:34, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't get it either. I always support longer sigs, not taller. Though, you may have seen me in some of those links. One of the most logical arguements so far is that the sig isn't there to function as a font of creativity, it's just supposed to link to your userspace, distinguish who the f00k you are, and move on. But even that is stretchable. I'm not sure why people refuse with such zealousy.-- anguard 01:38, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) (Edit conflict) "Be sparing with the use of colors, especially background colors." --GWW:SIGN

"If you allow 50x19 or 100x19, then you have to come up with rules saying they can't have any borders, they can't use background colors, and any foreground color and text used must be in compliance with the rest of the rules" ab.er.rant here

The "example from hell" was supposed to demonstrate what we might run into with the 19x100px limit. (Picture it as an image and not as text with markup :P)

And to throw in my two cents, I wouldn't mind if it was "19x100, non-disruptive and text only," except for the part where you let in too many possibilities to violate that part. --RIDDLE 01:41, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Well yeah, the way I see it, is it's something which some people like to edit creatively. And provided that, for instance a 100 width 19 height limit was adopted(or something along those lines), there really arent any reasons to oppose it. Not a single reason. I'd refer to my current sig for an example. If you were not to scroll over it, you wouldnt even know it was an image instead of text. Where exactly is the harm in it? Why then should it not be allowed? I've yet to find a valid answer to either question. :( 01:47, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I just gave a reason. And TONS of people oppose it, and they're pretty dead-set about it. For some reason. I read everything on it and I'm just as confused.-- anguard 01:50, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

"the sig isn't there to function as a font of creativity, it's just supposed to link to your userspace, distinguish who the f00k you are, and move on." That one? I don't see why being "a font of creativity" is a detestable provided it conforms to the other listed functions. By that logic, seeing as cars are there to be driven, they should be, by law, forbidden to look good. However, this is my first day on Wiki, and I'd rather not turn the whole community against me right at the outset, even though they are a bunch of silly gooses ;) I'll be a conformist in the morning when I have time and stuff. 01:53, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

It's detestable because that's not what the sig is used for. What part of this do you not get?-- anguard 01:56, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) You have a much greater potential of violating the "non disruptive" part with a bigger sig image, which is why the limit stays as it is. You can't expect people to read the "19 x 100" part and read or interpret the "non-disruptive" part. With all due respect, you didn't even read the 19 x 19px part (I know that comes off really sour, but I'm not trying to be bitter or mad or disrespectful toward you.) --RIDDLE 01:58, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Guys, I could stay up all night discussing this with you, and despite the fact that might be a nice way to christen my talk page, it's really not very fruitful. @Vanguard: No need to belittle my intelligence, I do understand how people would arrive at that argument, I simply disagree with it on basis of the fact that in case of a well-thought-out policy, there would be no conflict between function and form, which renders the whole argument irrelevant. @ Riddle, I do see what you're getting at, but you sort of shot yourself in the foot there. Exactly because of the fact that people, myself included, don't read policy first, it doesnt really affect the situation. As for the non-disruptive aspect, before I made my account I already had a fair idea of what would be considered disruptive or " not-done" in sigland, and as such sought to not be disruptive. In which case policy makes no difference. The other alternative, someone who simply goes all out and makes a rediculously disruptive sig, would be called to order in both the old and new system, pretty much in the exact same way, so once again, policy makes no difference. (I didnt find you at all sour or bitter though ^^). 02:10, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

What's why this exists. You won't be banned immediately or anything. We're just sayin'.-- anguard 02:13, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Well then I don't know exactly what your argument is. I've already agreed to change the sig in the very near forseeable future, I don't see why there would be need to mention Banning at all. All we're doing here is having a discussion about a topic that is, apparently, worth having an opinion on (considering the precedent). I'm not trying to be offensive but you sort of don't seem to be making any sense. 02:17, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I was replying to "Most people don't read the policy first. I probably should have quoted, as people often forget some of the things they typed seconds ago.-- anguard 02:18, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, entirely my bad. Yeah, I am one of those people who forget.. wait.. where am I? 02:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) You are here. And before I forget, welcome to the wiki. Happy editing. --RIDDLE 02:24, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, couldnt have hoped for a warmer welcome ^^. And a second thanks for being so patient with my somewhat rebellious nature. I don't mean any harm :) 02:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

(she does really...) akka 11:44, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Stop revealing my sinister plots, Akka. /angryface 12:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Way to go Sarah, winding people up on here also. /gg Macca 19:16, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Drama already?

Sheesh, we can't take you anywhere! <3 It's why we love you - never change! yger talk 12:13, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

It's not my fault that bureaucracy sucks, Lyger ;) God forbid someone questions a policy with something as blasphemous as an opinion. 12:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Non comformist opinions are surely not allowed in this brave new world! Conform or be conformed. :p yger talk 13:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Just tell the World one of her first characters she made was a Mesmer that looked like Orlando Bloom. akka 13:18, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

That's something to be ashamed of? Bob?... Don't make me use his full name. :P 13:24, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm using this sig because I hate conforming. Viva la revolution!

I figured this would suit you well. yger talk 13:25, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd totally adopt that, but if I don't conform they'll take away my editing rights and stuff. Which in and of itself is a funny thing to do over a couple of pixels, but hey, some people just take things seriously like that. QQ. Maybe :

This user's sig was considered disruptive to talk page formatting!

P.S. Userboxes kill talk pages :O 13:31, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Yep, that they do! You know you want that user box on your main page though. *prod* yger talk 13:37, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

And you say I incite drama! :O very well. Fight the powah! 13:39, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh well, this should appease the masses. ^^' ena. 14:40, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks nice! conformist. yger talk 14:44, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

"they'll take away my editing rights and stuff." QQ. At least I started out fighting the system! >.> ena. 14:46, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

row row fight the powah. :P --RIDDLE 14:50, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

You bet your sweet rear end I do. I was tempted to adopt that example you listed. >:D ena. 14:52, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Your user page is actually beginning to look *pretty*. You may want to change your disclaimer text of 'down with userpagerism'. ;) yger talk 15:58, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh no you don't. :P I am strong in my faith. Besides, Userpagism imo is listing every minor detail about every accomplishment. "OMG look at me I have KOSS unlocked, I ROCK!" etc etc. I will never stoop to that level. >:D ena. 16:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I know you. You will. It's only a matter of time, and we'll have EVERY single MINOR detail EVER acheived by you. I have forseen it. >:D akka 17:27, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I shall take great pleasure in proving you wrong >:) ena. 18:59, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

y u no liek me? QQ

Is it cause I don't have Chaos Gloves? Is it? TELL ME D: Lili 15:50, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I wasnt going to tell you, but yeah. That's it. >:) ena. 15:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

D:!!! Must.. get.. flashy.. gloves.. QQ! Lili 16:09, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

gogo. ena. 16:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Chaos Gauntlets are overrated. :)--Unendingfear 16:14, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

So is punching babies, but Josh still does it. :O ena. 16:15, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

lolz, at least punching babies is funny >.>--Unendingfear 16:16, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Yay I am top of your buddy list <3 Kallisto Melia 18:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

You should know by now, I like having you on top. *throws out her net* I'm going to catch me some trolls, harharhar. ena. 19:13, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I could have taken that the wrong way you know the me on top comment ;) Kallisto Melia 19:31, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

How so? On top is very flattering angle in my experience. ena. 19:33, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Because you can never be sure when I am going to pounce and tickle those below me Kallisto Melia 19:46, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I had too laugh

Not only am I listed as Donna, you put A.K.K.A Bob Hardman. That's awesome, I love you Sarah. akka 17:27, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

You need to sign more ;D ena. 16:18, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Whoops. akka 17:27, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Guess What

I has came to stalk you! DK 20:26, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

You've been on my buddy list since practically before you had a userpage! Nothing gets past me. :O ena. 20:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

darn it, my planz has failed..you probably know I've been outside your window the past few nights as well.

DK, stop forgetting to sign. ;) ena. 20:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll stop forgetting one day...soon! DK 20:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey Sexy

You never told me you were on wiki =O --Silven 21:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

It's only been like, a day. Poor people who patrol RC. MH hasnt exactly been subtle. ena. 21:27, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

being subtle is soooo overrated ;PDK 21:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Sine when have any of you guys been subtle? I'm the only subtle one in the guild! Har har. yger talk 21:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

keep telling yourself that Lyger! :P DK 21:31, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Lyger is as Subtle as the Drunk at the corner of the bar Kallisto Melia 21:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Are you really sexy? - Mini Me talk 21:55, 29 October 2009

sexy might be an understatement. DK 22:00, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Sexy like you can't believe. ena. 22:04, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

She is too sexy Kallisto Melia 22:38, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Too sexy for my car. ena. 22:39, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

She must be very sexy then. *grabs lotion* >.>--Unendingfear 22:40, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Stop being creepy. All of you.-- anguard 22:41, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

<.<--Unendingfear 22:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Pics please. - Mini Me talk 14:19, 30 October 2009 14:19, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Here ya go, enjoy:http://www.lolpix.com/pictures/11/Funny_Pictures_665.htmDK 14:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Osnap, so you knew about that one. Sign btw. ena. 14:57, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

yeah, I knew since it came out.DK 14:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

That is just wrong Kallisto Melia 05:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

chat

I don't mean to single you out personally, but could you and the other [MH] people consider using another form of communication if you're not going to discuss the wiki (or even Guild Wars)? It makes Special:RecentChanges very hard to use, especially if other conversations are occuring simultanouesly.

Thanks, – Emmett 23:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

"if you're not going to discuss the wiki (or even Guild Wars)" Last I checked, userboxes were a part of wiki. Also, are you going to say that same thing to all the other people with non-GW-related discussions on their talk pages? because there seems to be a considerable number of those. I'll ask the MH people (those who don't already)to start using ME, for one thing, so it's easier to filter RC, but seeing as most of them are working on their userpages in legitimate ways(afaik anyway), or visiting talk pages in a non-spamming non-offensive way, I don't see how I could tell them to stop it. Wiki is just new to us, it'll pass once everyone gets their userpage up etc. You should be glad of the activity. ;) ena. 23:21, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Or just QQ moar--Silven 06:38, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I made you one!

I made my first userbox, just for youz :P

This user is known to be rebellious.

hope you like it! DK 08:19, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Dk, that is so apt for Sarah, it's awesome. akka 11:47, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

That's so awesome :D thaaaanks DK! <3 ena. 12:36, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

here's you another userbox ^^

This user likes hammering people.

DK 16:11, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Sigh

Im not listed at buddehs QQ -- Cyan 12:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

HAPPY BIRFDAY!

Happy birfday! have fun and gvg lots =P--Silven 23:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Thaaaanks Silv :) ena. 01:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 01:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

My Engrish Skirrz

Are awesome, and you know it <3 --Shoji 20:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah so's your dazzling sense of style and eloquent turn of phrase. ;P ena. 12:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Umm... Yeah! You betcha! :P Sometimes I wonder if you realize how overwhelming your mastery of logic and rhetoric can be... xD

Not to me though, cuz I'm pro and I can use Word for writin' letters and sh*t. - Shoji 16:54, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Wordage. Josh haz it. Word.

Seemed appropriate somehow. yger talk 19:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

You rant so beautifully.

Have to say I agree, tbh. I abandoned the idea of running around with a warrior in my party a looong time ago (especially in HM) when playing a squishy, just because I could get all the passive defence that makes HM possible on my heroes and henchmen. I guess it's also part of the reason that it's taken my up until now to start giving my own warrior some much needed attention! Still, nice rant, shame that Anet won't do anything about it at this late stage of the game. Here's to hoping they sort it in GW2! yger talk 19:11, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks ^^ it came to me the other day that for once it might be fun to do something else than just cutting things up as hard and fast as possible, but then I remembered that there has never really been anything else to do on a warrior on GW. :P ena. 19:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

you forgot to mention ham storm QQDK 21:51, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah, ofcourse, how could I have been so foolish ^^ ena. 07:29, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

"After all, all that damage had to go somewhere,"

Yena, meet my friend Protection Prayers. Specialty? Preventing damage from happening. =P --RIDDLE 07:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure you understood what I was getting at. ^^ I'd love a constructive discussion, but if you simply highlight one bit of text, and add a somewhat smart-assy comment that isnt actually relevant to the message in any way, you might aswell not bother. I appreciate the attempt, though! ena. 17:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

No smart-assery allowed? You make me sad. ;_; --RIDDLE 18:58, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I know, it's cruel ^^ ena. 19:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I had a talk to Protection Prayers and she says she's not your friend at all, so seriously no BS.--Silven 14:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

But...but...I use her help all the time. I call on her for aid and stuff doesn't die. Q.Q --RIDDLE 16:58, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Hate to break the news to you... but I heard Protection Prayers is a complete hussy. yger talk 17:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Protection Prayers is actually a male. -- Cyan 17:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello Yena. You seem to be a nice person. Please fail less. Koda Kumi 17:28, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Aw Koda, you also seem to be a nice person, but you always now how to dissapoint me.. =P -- Cyan 17:39, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Yo Koda, I'm really happy for you, imma let you finish... But Yena had one of the best rants of all time! --Shoji 19:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello Koda, you seem like a nice person. Please stop being an ass.DK 20:55, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

At least if you were to tell me how exactly it is I fail, your post might have had some inkling of usefulness. :Pena. 16:05, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

If a warrior is not able to tank properly, the problem is not the warrior profession, it is the rest of your party sucking. And by that I mean standing in aggro range with 60 armor, not knowing how to prot, causing enemies to scatter, that sort of things. Adding aggro management for warriors just dumbs down the game and causes more problems than it solves.

Also, hello DK, you seem to be a nice person. Please stop telling me to stop being an ass :P Koda Kumi 16:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello Koda, you stopped already being an ass. Not your intention? =P -- Cyan 16:46, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Well clearly you seem to have missed the entire subject of my rant. I'm sure in some way that does reflect that *I* fail, as I may not have written it out plainly enough, but still. Calling me fail because you don't get it hardly seems justified. I'm not saying the game is too hard, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the warrior profession, and I'm not saying that as it is, party members should be in aggro range of any tank. Hell, I'm not even saying warriors should tank, I'm saying they *SHOULDNT*, and why. And most remarkable of all, you seem to have just about missed all of those points. The message here is, that I miss the duality of a frontline class as both tank and DPS, exactly because they cannot and should not function as a tanking class in GW. Because the mechanics are such that if they attempt to, they're playing below their optimum. Perhaps you could reread what I posted on my userpage, and if you still don't get the idea ^^ I'll gladly explain in further detail. ena. 16:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

The ironic part is Koda said something about people shouldn't resort to name calling on a wiki. Pika Fan 16:52, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Someone fails if he (she?) is wrong about everything. That is not namecalling. It is a fact.

"I'm not even saying warriors should tank, I'm saying they *SHOULDNT*"

They have the highest armor of every profession in the game. It is only fitting they are the first to go in. Whether they have a tank build or not.

"that I miss the duality of a frontline class as both tank and DPS"

An armor increase, damage reduction/mitigation skill and blocking take up 4 skill slots max. Add a res and you still have 3 slots left.

"However warriors as tanks that held aggro was still practically impossible."

Give me a reason why.

"the AI's tendency to just completely ignore the big loud person with the shield and armor."

Unless the warrior is the only one in aggro range.

"They shifted to Caster based damage, which had fewer issues with AI's increased mobility."

People like seeing big numbers. It gives them the idea they do more damage than the guy who does little packages of damage in a small amount of time.

"I believe Anet tried to adress the issue by giving warriors SY, to boost everyone's AL but their own, thereby making themselves a more tempting target for AI controlled monsters."

SY costs adrenaline, so you cannot use it before aggroing enemies. By the time you have the adrenaline, every enemy already has a target.

"It seems warriors will continue their somewhat niche role as DPS"

Niche? Try playing one.

Koda Kumi 17:53, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I think it's adorable how by trying to prove me wrong you only show how you either a) didnt read anything I wrote b) have no clue about how GW works. I'm hoping for your sake that it's option A ^^ Anyway, I don't mind explaining if your ego allows for it. Before I do though, let me remind you, that this discussion, as did my rant, applies to high-end PvE only (primarily HM).

"It is only fitting they are the first to go in. Whether they have a tank build or not." - initial aggro is not the same as tanking. Surely you should have known this one. I've even listed explicitly in my rant that they should be the first to enter aggro range.

"An armor increase, damage reduction/mitigation skill and blocking take up 4 skill slots max. Add a res and you still have 3 slots left." - once again you fail to see the point. (Completely off-topic: Any warrior using a blocking skill, stance especially, should be put down out of compassion. and LOL @ 3 slots of dmg skills) first off. we're not talking builds here, we're talking game mechanics, which alone nulls this argument, but even had we been discussing builds, your ideas would have been awful. Tanking is not about just slapping loads of bad wammo-esque survival tools on a warrior bar. It's about positioning and crowd control. Ideally, you wouldnt need more than one, maybe 2 defensive skills on a warrior tanking bar, had there been a way to keep aggro. There currently isnt, so even 8 defensive skills will still make you an inferior tank to, say, Perma's or Earth ele's, because of spell/skill immunity. Further explanation: see my userpage.

"Give me a reason why" - See this article: Aggro, and the first sentence of my rant.

"Unless the warrior is the only one in aggro range." - Warriors arent perma's. To tank in HM they would need powerful sustained heals and prots, not to mention cleans. This means monks will be at the outer aggro limit. Aside from a mob just randomly splitting off, there's always this mechanic (see the aggro article): "Ways of gaining aggro: Healing or enchanting an ally which already holds aggro." Also, damage dealers, even when ranged, will need to enter range to dps effectively, heightening the chance of a monster breaking aggro. all in all it's a very wobbly system, when combined to the AI's inclination to break aggro from targets being healed, with high armor, high health, and prots. Conditions all of which the tanking warrior would meet.

"People like seeing big numbers. It gives them the idea they do more damage than the guy who does little packages of damage in a small amount of time. " - This argument is just pitiful, and I shan't insult you by adressing it further. Needless to say it wasnt about the size of numbers, but about issues with monster mobility, which you should know, as you even quoted it.

"SY costs adrenaline, so you cannot use it before aggroing enemies. By the time you have the adrenaline, every enemy already has a target." - Why don't you get it into your head that Aggro is fluid. Monsters dont just latch onto one thing, and then bash that untill they or it die. (would that they did) I suggest you read the aggro article/play some Guildwars, and there would be no need for me to spell it out. in any case, what SY does, is give everything +100 Al. This the AI will register, and if enough conditions are met, it can decide to swap to the lowest AL target, which in this case would be the warrior. (about 130 AL compared to the rest of the party's +- 160 AL) We arent talking about initial aggro here, because initial aggro is not the same thing as tanking. Something you fail to understand, it appears. That aside, I also said, as you quoted, "Tried to adress". I never said it worked, I merely guessed at Anet's motivation for implementing a skill. Which means your argument of "But you can't maintain is right away" is irrelevant.

"Niche? Try playing one." - I have, for 4.5 years, in all forms of PvE and PvP. Don't you think it's strange that high-end PvE builds dont use warriors for DPS? that farms like Uwsc and Vsf etc don't use warriors? I don't. It's because with HM builds, ranged damage is simply more effective. I hope for your sake that you can see the truth of that, at least. The only real application is in manlyways (thats what they call the builds focussing on MoP and HB for damage) ena. 19:05, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

You kinda lost all crediblity when you told sarah to "...Try playing one." but it's really not like anyone really gave a hoot over your invalid scrawl.--Silven 05:20, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Strong argument is strong, Silven. Suck up less, please. --RIDDLE 05:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Credibility? I do not even know her... Koda Kumi 16:34, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Which is why he obviously means credibility to those who do know me, including himself. Honestly mate, thinking isnt that difficult. ena. 17:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Lol you said 'mate'--Shoji 16:02, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Josh everyone is turning Ausseh on us D: first Macca...and now Yena QQDK 22:07, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

You can't stop us we're too powerful JUST GIVE IN >:)--Silven 09:07, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Side note: A few days before the introduction of HM in guildwars i asked regina or linsey if it would be just an alternative game mode with biger monster attribute numbers. All my thoughts about HM stoped when the question was archived, shortly before HM went live. It will remain that way until foes AI get seriously integrated at a maintenable level in guildwars. On one occasion, while working for a triple A project for another company than mine i had to compare the credits of, say, Tomb Raider Underworld, and Nightfall. Even if the types of game are differents (that's what interested us in the first place) what immediately went out of this is that: Crystal dynamics covers extensively all key aspects of their product with specialists in every domain, sometime splitting a domain into several ones. Anet has far less resources (10% of domains covered by crystal dynamics, networking aside) and tend to merge domains because they lack some people. In games where enemies AI matters you tend, if you can afford it, to create at least a small dedicated team for it, sometimes with the help of some middleware. Anet doesnt or cant because of the complexity of the skills system (try to code one that support roll backs on a time frame of an aftercast and you will see) ... for the moment. Yseron - 90.28.85.229 10:20, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Resesting indent. No good can come from ranting, also shadowform broked the game!!!11!!! - Con 22:08, 25 December 2009 (UTC) 22:08, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

-- Cyan 11:22, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

You too! wait.. I'mma spam your talk page about it ^^ ena. 12:08, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy 2010!

^ -- Cyan 11:56, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

So I think

That you should change your username to Kaydee. akka 13:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

OMG SARAH IS A REVERSE DK!!!!....well I got a kick out of it--Silven 13:05, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

you just noticed xDDK 02:51, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

How about no? :D go troll someone else's page, Akka. ena. 14:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

your rant

is interesting. I honestly think ANet was in the middle of working on an aggro table when they were forced to cut their work short and release the product as-is. The tactics line is very obviously a tanking line, but from our experience in PvP and PvE, we just see that monks use it a hell of a lot better than warriors. But the existence of the line really hints that they were trying to do something with it. They also had ways to reliably draw aggro - you might remember the "book trick" from Sorrow's Furnace or FoW, where the person holding the item took aggro over pretty much everyone else no matter what they were doing. They removed that with the coming of factions (and rits with item spells), but they had it in the game for a year before then, which also hints that they had plans for tanking, they were just never able to put it in motion.
Proph's obvious focus on PvP as the intended end-game content might have been the reason they cut work on aggro tables short, but it would be nice if they finished it up for GW2. Boss fights (and any fight, really) can be so much more interesting with proper tank mechanics, especially over GW1's method of monsters running around like chickens with their heads cut off. -Auron 14:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree. It especially stings with the fresh buffs to the tactics line. I'd love to actually be able to bring blocking stances on a warrior one day and not feel completely useless. But alas, I doubt we'll see that before GW2 gets here. Hopefully then, though. ena. 13:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Goodafternoon

How are you doing? -- Cyan 13:08, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

MH died--Silven 08:23, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

What? Really? How that? I demand an explanation =) -- Cyan 10:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Yena isn't playing at the moment, Cyan.DK 10:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

And you already answered. Problem solved =) -- Cyan 18:13, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Everybody left and sarahs now a man--Silven 03:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I heard the whole story from Lyger.. -- Cyan 07:29, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey

I was in MH for a bit too, were you one of the ones that broke off to form another GvG guild when lyger got sick? -- Tha Reckoning 07:19, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Whoru?--Silven 07:56, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I used to jack around with lyger josh and kalli, I think I met them in AB or something. Whoru? -- Tha Reckoning 08:46, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Sarah's page guardian--Silven 10:57, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

slash stalkerDK 20:56, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Go back to xxx, you. >.> -- Tha Reckoning 23:13, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

No sarah used to stalk my edits lawl--Silven 06:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I am thinking of starting a feud again, but I do not know who I am going to feud with. I do, however, see potential victims here. Koda Kumi 21:24, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Die, potato. Morphy 16:08, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Now that I'm back from vacation, I dare you, Koda.DK 06:46, 12 June 2010 (UTC)