Curse

isamu kurosawa · Mar 05, 2008, 11:00 AM // 11:00

And to add, Its rarely any one person who creates a popular build. They evolve over time of people sharing suggestions and build idea's whenver new skills are released or just after a balance.

I used the dragonslash, fgs, SY, brawlers headbutt combo before it was a well known build. passed it onto my alliance who changed it a little, one guy there hadded steelfang slash. Then from a post about the combo here on guru i saw people using enduring harmony and adapted my build to use it.

That build still isn't set in stone however as you can use any IAS you wish and even gain an additional utility slot if you have enduring on a paragon in your team.
You can drop the brawlers part if your foes cannot be knocked down and add something else. Its the same basic build but adapted to meet your needs. Even while playing good warrior builds you can adapt your play style to whats needed.
Tanking builds on the other hand do not have that capability.

MithranArkanere · Mar 05, 2008, 04:01 PM // 16:01

When I go warrior in PvP I always go crippling-knockdown.
When in PvE I always go IAS damage-dealing with.

I love to try a lot of things in RA when there are weekends. Lest weekend I tested ele builds. I finnaly ended with a Earth E/A "Don't Get Close" build.
Quite cute. Even if you where an assassin, you will die if you got close to me.
I even made a cahracter called "Do Not Get Close" and then I said "I told you" when killing enemies, XD.

zwei2stein · Mar 05, 2008, 04:32 PM // 16:32

Running "snowflake build" is okay ... if that build is actually good. And if that build is good, it wont stay snowflake for long.

Hence, bad builds will always stay "snowflakes" and good builds will always be "cookie cutters". (bad and good is a bit relative here thou.).

garethporlest18 · Mar 05, 2008, 04:50 PM // 16:50

Well it works out okay for me. I run what I want and learn from my own experiences. I copy builds from the forums or something else for farming, and I've had my own builds for farming. You see since it's my time and I don't give a shit about others, I do what I want.

But yeah I tend to think a lot of the people that say people suck are tards in real life or something. I don't mind though, I make sure to tell people I'm bad at the game beforehand so they don't expect much of me.

As for Frenzy>Flail, I use Flail on every warrior build in PvP. I do this because of my own experiences, everytime I bring Frenzy I do a turn on turn off fest and get nothing done and I'm not gonna deal with that. I use Flail, they kite, they sit on their ass, I laugh, they die. Simple.

I mean with my necro I use Vamp spirit and most of the 1 energy touch skills, with 2-3 spells and Dark Aura or whatever it's called. Sure it's not a great build but if I succeed and have fun doing it that's what I'm gonna do.

So to sum it all up, I do what is fun for me, regardless if other people think my builds suck. If I join a group and I have to run something boring, I just leave.

Winstar · Mar 05, 2008, 05:01 PM // 17:01

What most people mean when they say a build is good or bad is how effective it is at accomplishing the goals for which it was constructed in the first place. Builds become standards or commonly used because people realize they are really effective at accomplishing those goals.

People don't always run standard builds because they often enjoy trying out different skills and appreciate the process of experimentation. But these experiments in most cases are not as effective as the standards, which makes them worse. Not necessarily less fun or interesting. But worse.

But on occasion this process generates new builds which themselves will become standards. In general experienced players who understand the game and clearly understand the purposes for which the build is being designed are more likely to come up with something like this.

In general most inexperienced players who use unique builds do so without knowing the game well and without a clear purpose in mind for the build at hand (a role in a team pvp build, ability to skill certain specific monsters in specific zones etc.) and as such the builds generally fail or are worse.

And so the life cycle of builds continues

moriz · Mar 05, 2008, 05:08 PM // 17:08

people need to realize that true "uniqueness" lies not with the build, but with how a player plays that build. as such, the entire discussion of "cookie-cutter" vs "unique" builds is entirely moot.

interestingly enough, the so-called "cookie-cutter" builds allows the greatest freedom for a skilled player to adapt, while most of the "unique" builds locks the player into a given mold no matter what. as such, "cookie-cutter" builds generally become favoured over time.

Snow Bunny · Mar 05, 2008, 06:21 PM // 18:21

You should run cookie-cutter builds because they work.

If you think of an original build that works as well as a cookie-cutter, run it.

Otherwise, don't be original.

Winstar · Mar 05, 2008, 06:50 PM // 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by moriz

people need to realize that true "uniqueness" lies not with the build, but with how a player plays that build. as such, the entire discussion of "cookie-cutter" vs "unique" builds is entirely moot.

interestingly enough, the so-called "cookie-cutter" builds allows the greatest freedom for a skilled player to adapt, while most of the "unique" builds locks the player into a given mold no matter what. as such, "cookie-cutter" builds generally become favoured over time.

To say that the build has nothing to do with uniqueness is absurd. The skills selected and the uses they are put to go hand in hand. When someone makes a build they select skills on the basis of what they plan on doing with them in game, and their in game needs force them to seek out skills that will accomplish those goals. So when the B-light Mo/a came out after ages of boon prot there was nothing unique about the build?

Many cookie cutter builds fail promote flexible play style. The standard searing flames ele is a really cookie cutter build. The skills on the bar are extremely one dimensional. Blow stuff up blow stuff up blow stuff up. There is also nothing inherently inflexible about unique builds given that every now standard build at one point in time was itself new and unique.

Nevin · Mar 05, 2008, 07:11 PM // 19:11

To an experienced PvP player RA and HA should be no different when it comes to making builds. All the standards must be met, what kind of offense does it bring, what kind of defensive capabilities does it have, what coordination does it require. The only difference is the scale, in RA you have 1 bar with 8 skills, and must try to sum up the most balanced and effective build you can conceive of. In HA or GvG your party can be viewed as 1 bar in it's entirety, and each individual as a skill. If you can't understand that simile, what I mean is that each player in a party brings something different to the table which underlies the "bigger image"; thus it creates a similar relation to how each skill is utilized in a build. Even split teams can be done in solo builds, simply by having split builds within one build.

Such as a build I use for AB that can both solo cap shrines with the first 3 skills, and still fend off attackers to an extent with the other 5. But of course if I were to ping this to someone in a party, they'd instantly call me "Noob" for having a preparation and barrage on the same bar, due to the person's lack of perception to see past the "known" utility of the skills.

[skill]lightning reflexes[/skill][skill]splinter weapon[/skill][skill]Barrage[/skill][skill]Natural Stride[/skill][skill]Distracting Shot[/skill][skill]Pin Down[/skill][skill]Apply Poison[/skill][skill]troll unguent[/skill]

Keithark · Mar 05, 2008, 07:40 PM // 19:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flem

Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa..... Whoa. Ok, wtf. Do you even read the posts I type? Seriously.

1.) I do understand there are no flawless builds. I've been advocating that for, IDK, ever since this game came out. I phrased that question that way for a reason. I don't just type to see what all these silly letters look like on the screen. I understand it perfectly.

2.) I have never said that cookie cutter was not effective. Never. I have ALWAYS said that it's not the only option and the brain-less zombie wave that exists on this forum purely to mislead new players is quite irritating.

3.) How are the vet-players on this forum any more creative then anyone else? The build you guys advocate for each class is, not only the same throughout each of all of your posts, but is cookie cutter throughout all of GW. There is very little wiggle room. Most of the time it's like..."well, that build will work if your ok with a sucky build. if you want a build that doesn't blow use these exact 8 skills, everytime, all the time, or your a noob."

Flexible? lol, what a joke.

It is not the only option and most people here do not say it is..we say it is the BEST option because IT IS.

Did you ever stop to think why did that build become "cookie-cutter"? I'll help you it is because it is more effective than other builds.

Most poeple on here are trying to point out (although sometimes not in the best way) that while your build may get you through there are superior builds out ther ethat do a better job. That doesn't mean you have to play them...I play a very sub-par build on my war in PvE lots of times because it is fun (hundred blades, barbarous slice, gash, savage slash, galrath, final thrust, enraging charge, res) I like it because I like conditions, and being able to spam skills rather than wait on adrenaline to build and this build allows you to spam attacks and cause conditions. Doesn't make it a better build because I like it just makes it fun for me to play. But, when in PvP most likely I will have evis, executioners, distracting, shock (or rending), bulls strike, frenzy, rush, rez because it simply morks better than other axe builds

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevin

To an experienced PvP player RA and HA should be no different when it comes to making builds. All the standards must be met, what kind of offense does it bring, what kind of defensive capabilities does it have, what coordination does it require. The only difference is the scale, in RA you have 1 bar with 8 skills, and must try to sum up the most balanced and effective build you can conceive of. In HA or GvG your party can be viewed as 1 bar in it's entirety, and each individual as a skill. If you can't understand that simile, what I mean is that each player in a party brings something different to the table which underlies the "bigger image"; thus it creates a similar relation to how each skill is utilized in a build. Even split teams can be done in solo builds, simply by having split builds within one build.

Such as a build I use for AB that can both solo cap shrines with the first 3 skills, and still fend off attackers to an extent with the other 5. But of course if I were to ping this to someone in a party, they'd instantly call me "Noob" for having a preparation and barrage on the same bar, due to the person's lack of perception to see past the "known" utility of the skills.

[skill]lightning reflexes[/skill][skill]splinter weapon[/skill][skill]Barrage[/skill][skill]Natural Stride[/skill][skill]Distracting Shot[/skill][skill]Pin Down[/skill][skill]Apply Poison[/skill][skill]troll unguent[/skill]

The people calling you noob are likely those who don't "solocap" because in AB it works best for teams to travel together and cap shrines and that is the "nooobness" of your build. The build would still be ok in a team setting but as explained by so many in this thread "ok" is not as productive as "great" Plus the fact that 100% of the time one slot on your bar is useless..either the poision or the elite

Sab · Mar 05, 2008, 07:57 PM // 19:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flem

Your opinion on who a good player is doesn't make them any better then someone else.

That does not change my argument one bit. Don't like the term "good players"? Replace it with whatever group you think are "against creative builds" and my point still stands.

Good builds get positive replies, bad builds get negative replies. That's all there is to it. Maybe some will give you extra points for creativity, but in the end, if the build is bad, it's bad - creative or not.

creelie · Mar 05, 2008, 08:17 PM // 20:17

New and good are two different things. All the builds that are now considered cookie-cutter were innovations once. They were developed by people using trial and error - mostly error. What worked was developed further - what didn't work was cast aside.

Builds become cookie-cutter, especially in PvP, because people admire winning, competency, and winning-based competency. If you want to come up with new strategies, that's great, and you may even hit upon a combination so powerful it gets adopted by others and becomes a new game standard. But don't do it for admiration, because most of the time you won't get it - do it because it's something you enjoy.

Loviatar · Mar 05, 2008, 08:40 PM // 20:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

You should run cookie-cutter builds because they work.

If you think of an original build that works as well as a cookie-cutter, run it.

Otherwise, don't be original.

actually if they come up with a truly equal effectiveness build that is easier to run OR actually better it will BECOME the new cookie cutter instead of the laughing stock someone else called his/her so called better builds

**cosyfiep** · Mar 05, 2008, 09:50 PM // 21:50

I guess I missed the point of the thread....I have never used a 'build' from this or any other website, I create my own skill bars....and yeah people have given me suggestions for 'replace x with y' and I have used that----

so yeah something new....and there are always new people playing the game and well over a hundred skills for each profession (and I am just getting around to the eye skills----LOVE agony!!----so always messing with new 'bars)

so I guess the answer is YES.