Curse

Fay Vert · Apr 25, 2006, 11:04 PM // 23:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stabber

Don't be ridiculous. Nothing is censored.

The article was merely moved to its proper name.

http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/R/N_Grawl_Bomber

Well I am pleased to see it back again, but when I posted, the article, the cross-linked article and even the talk articles were all marked for deletion. Some overzelous little busy body had definately gone too far.

I also don't see this as an R/N only build, you can do it with many secondarys, so the original post was just as valid.

But serioulsy, if their are people who object to farming builds on wiki then what the hell is 55 monk doing there. Or for that matter ANY PvE build.

Jack Valmont · Apr 25, 2006, 11:16 PM // 23:16

To be honest, I would have rather not seen it changed to a Ranger/Necromancer build only. There is more than area of effect skill that will work--it's just that no one gave me time to update and add to the article before picking it apart.

Stabber · Apr 25, 2006, 11:17 PM // 23:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fay Vert

Well I am pleased to see it back again, but when I posted, the article, the cross-linked article and even the talk articles were all marked for deletion. Some overzelous little busy body had definately gone too far.

You are simply wrong, sir. I put the delete notices up after the articles were moved, and the delete notices were for the sole purpose of removing useless redirects. At no point was the text of the article missing from the wiki, and nothing had to be restored, as you claim.

Quote:

But serioulsy, if their are people who object to farming builds on wiki then what the hell is 55 monk doing there. Or for that matter ANY PvE build.

You are making a strong accusation that the Wiki censors articles. My impression is that you are unaware of how the wiki wprks, but if you think you're right, you should follow it up on the links provided earlier. The wiki has open democratic access as one of its key ideals and I would hate to see this policy broken or tarnished by baseless accusations.

You may also be interested in

http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/Category:Farming_Builds
http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/Category:Build_stubs

These categories contain many farming-specific builds. The stubs are in the process of community vetting, and will migrate to the first category when enough people vouch for them.

My opinion of farming is mine alone, not the Wiki's, which is why I rarely touch these articles.

Barek_NO · Apr 26, 2006, 01:17 AM // 01:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Valmont

To be honest, I would have rather not seen it changed to a Ranger/Necromancer build only. There is more than area of effect skill that will work--it's just that no one gave me time to update and add to the article before picking it apart.

I'm the one who attached the "R/N" designation on it. The build formatting at the wiki has all build articles designated with professions in their titles (except the invincible monk build, for some odd reason - but that one predates most other build articles at the site). The reason I used R/N is because the build as listed uses both Ranger and Necro skills and attributes.

It's common in other builds to have a "Variants" section. That could be added to this one with alternate but related variants that use a different secondary. Then the article just needs to be renamed with an "R/Any" designation.

Slash Winder · Apr 26, 2006, 02:40 AM // 02:40

I did try a few runs without oath shot, since I didn't had the time yet to cap it. It worked one time, well enough to kill the melee ones, and I think there was enough, because they didnt run from mark of pain.

However, it looked like EoE did not trigger because all the cranes did not die, or suffer enough damage.

Did I do something wrong here?

Fay Vert · Apr 26, 2006, 03:00 AM // 03:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stabber

You are simply wrong, sir. I put the delete notices up after the articles were moved, and the delete notices were for the sole purpose of removing useless redirects. At no point was the text of the article missing from the wiki, and nothing had to be restored, as you claim.

You are making a strong accusation that the Wiki censors articles. My impression is that you are unaware of how the wiki wprks, but if you think you're right, you should follow it up on the links provided earlier. The wiki has open democratic access as one of its key ideals and I would hate to see this policy broken or tarnished by baseless accusations.

You may also be interested in

http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/Category:Farming_Builds
http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/Category:Build_stubs

These categories contain many farming-specific builds. The stubs are in the process of community vetting, and will migrate to the first category when enough people vouch for them.

My opinion of farming is mine alone, not the Wiki's, which is why I rarely touch these articles.

Then my apologies that I misinterpteted all the delete notifications and also your orignial post in this very thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stabber

Your GuildWiki post has, unfortunately, angered the orthodoxy. This is partly because (Grawl) farming is not too respectable in the circles that frequent GuildWiki, and partly because your article did not fit the several ephemeral build article guidelines there. (Full disclosure: I hate farming and despise farmers. Of all kinds.)

Perhaps you can see how I formed this opinion when I followed the origina links? I am sorry, but you can't say things as black and white as that and then claim the very opposite when someone disagrees with it. In this context I don't think you could describe my accusations as baseless, very well founded I would say.

Stabber · Apr 26, 2006, 03:56 AM // 03:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fay Vert

Perhaps you can see how I formed this opinion when I followed the origina links? I am sorry, but you can't say things as black and white as that and then claim the very opposite when someone disagrees with it. In this context I don't think you could describe my accusations as baseless, very well founded I would say.

However, what I said is very true and I have never claimed the opposite. See the discussion for yourself on:

http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/Talk:R/N_Grawl_Bomber

One of the first things the GuildWiki community responded with was a satirical article:

http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/W/R_Wall_Charr_Bomber

I don't think it is a stretch to claim that the Grawl bomber was not seen as a serious build.

Note that both these articles have been allowed to stand. No censorship as far as I can tell.

Iskrah · Apr 26, 2006, 04:36 AM // 04:36

Guildwiki talk aside, I wanted to post in that thread to show my appreciation of that build. I remember watching the video a few months ago, thinking I could never do it... well, in my quest to know more farming spots, I finally tried it today...
... and I got it to work after a few tries.

MAN. When those 15 something Grawls fall for the first time, it feels good.

Thanks again!

Iskrah · Apr 26, 2006, 04:43 AM // 04:43

And let me add something about the reaction of a few players against the build appearing in Guildwiki.

That build drops about 9k an hour, excluding some surprising drops you could get as a bonus (such as an occasional superior armor or a black dye, which I just got actually, but i don't count it). It's more than any Mino farming. It's easy to do, it's reliable and it can be included in a circle of different farms.

Who can seriously deny its interest? Sure, you're better of with soloing Forest of FoW, but who can say it's easier and that you have constant access to it?

Fay Vert · Apr 26, 2006, 09:31 AM // 09:31

And not just gold. What many people are interested in is farming skill points. For a 2-3 minute run with scrolls you could get 5,000-10,000 XP, easily a skill point every 10 minutes if you could do it reliably (which I can't, I'm about 1 in 4)

Iskrah · Apr 26, 2006, 03:16 PM // 15:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fay Vert

And not just gold. What many people are interested in is farming skill points. For a 2-3 minute run with scrolls you could get 5,000-10,000 XP, easily a skill point every 10 minutes if you could do it reliably (which I can't, I'm about 1 in 4)

True.
15 * 136 xp = 2040. The run lasts around 1min30 at worst... Add in scrolls and it's incredible. Hell, I never use scrolls and I already got so many skill points in few hours!

Peligro Puro · Apr 26, 2006, 10:33 PM // 22:33

Not a serious farming build?

Skill points
I would honestly like you to find a better way for a ranger to get as much experience as a 55 monk, if not more. I am currently sitting at 4,000,000+ experience, and while there are people out there with more than that, I think it is safe to say that there really isn't a better way for rangers to gain skill points.

Just because a build or location fails to yeild fellblades, green items, and ecto, doesn't mean it lacks in its strength as a solid farming strategy.

Fay Vert · Apr 26, 2006, 11:29 PM // 23:29

Kind of makes you wonder if the people editing and debating the entry have ever tried it. Some imply that they think it's about killing the low level Grawls in Ascalon area

Jack Valmont · Apr 27, 2006, 12:47 AM // 00:47

I updated the article with images and examples and I clarified a few things that seemed to got lost in some GuildWiki user translations.

Overall, I'm happy with what some of the users did with the article (as per cleaning it up) and I'm happy that it might be unstubbed very quickly--it is a viable farming builds for both exp and steady mid-level farming.

On a final note: The build on GuildWiki is pretty much infallible, and that's because of Pelligro Puro--all credit goes to him.

Jack Valmont · Apr 28, 2006, 09:25 PM // 21:25

As a note to everyone:

http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/R/N_Grawl_Bomber

This has become an official GuildWiki build, and it does still work since the recent update. Just follow everything the guide says and you'll be farming those Grawl in no time.

Silent Elvin Ranger · Apr 29, 2006, 05:14 PM // 17:14

What did they do to EoE?? I havent tried it in a while...but what makes this build not work now??

Fay Vert · Apr 29, 2006, 05:22 PM // 17:22

I think the effect radius of EoE is now centred on the spirit and not on the Grawl that dies, so many of the Grawl will now be out of range. The solution is to drop EoE after you agro everything at the top of the hill so the radius is as before.

Jack Valmont · Apr 29, 2006, 05:25 PM // 17:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Valmont

As a note to everyone:

http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/R/N_Grawl_Bomber

This has become an official GuildWiki build, and it does still work since the recent update. Just follow everything the guide says and you'll be farming those Grawl in no time.

It still works just like this. It might 2-3 Grawl Crones, but that's it.

Peligro Puro · Apr 30, 2006, 06:47 AM // 06:47

The attribute points on guildwiki are incorrect. The points are as such.
Beast mask with superior beast mastery
Expertise mask with MINOR expertise
10 - curses
9 + 1 + 3 - beast mastery
8 + 1 + 1 - expertise
9 + 1 wilderness

You don't need the extra 1 in wilderness, and this will allow you to have 10 in both wilderness (+8 troll) and expertise, while having the max amount of HP.

Eragon Dragonslayer · Apr 30, 2006, 08:12 AM // 08:12

great job dude i love this build