GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.

GuildWiki:Featured build candidate

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search


This page is for centralized discussions of builds proposed for [:Category:Tested builds|featured build] status. A featured build should be an example of the best build articles that the GuildWiki can produce, and therefore have very high quality standards.

Nomination procedure

  • Check the [GuildWiki:featured build criteria|featured build criteria] and ensure that the build meets all of them before nominating.
  • Place [Template:fbc] on the talk page of the nominated build.
  • From there, click on the "leave comments" link.
  • Place === [[Name of featured build candidate]] === at the top of the page.
  • Below the title, state your reasons for nominating, and sign with ~~~~.
  • Click on this link and add {{subst:fbc2|Name of featured build candidate}} at the bottom of the list.

Supporting and objecting

Please read a nominated build carefully before supporting or objecting to the nomination.

  • If you believe that the build article meets all the [GuildWiki:featured build criteria|featured build criteria], then respond with * '''Support''':, followed by your reasons. Remember to sign your comment.
  • If you believe that the build article does not meet the criteria, respond with * '''Oppose''': and state your reasons. Each opposition must propose a specific rationale that can be addressed.
  • Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed. To withdraw the objection, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>) rather than removing it. Contributors should allow reviewers the opportunity to do this themselves. If you feel that the matter has been addressed, say so rather than striking out the reviewer's text.
  • To provide constructive input on a nomination without explicitly supporting or objecting, write * '''Comment''' followed by your advice.

Nominations[edit source]

[Build:A/E Knock it Off][edit source]

Note: this is part of an experimental run of a new proposed vetting policy.
Proposed: 13 Sept. 2006. Ends: 20 Sept. 2006. Tally: (1/0/0)

Tested this build on 12 Sept. 2006 in both Random Arenas and Team Arenas. Found it to be pretty valid and viable knock lock build for its intended environment. [Build:A/E Falling Shocker], the build it closely resembles (and one with which I have a lot of experience) is better for soloing NPCs in GvG. Energy management was generally not a problem until the third or fourth use of Shock, by which time the match was alredy decided. I have cleaned up the build article to conform to GW:BUILD to the best of my abilities. 00:26, 13 September 2006 (CDT)

[Build:R/A Lunge as One][edit source]

Note: this is part of an experimental run of a new proposed vetting policy.
Proposed: 13 Sept. 2006. Ends: 20 Sept. 2006. Tally: (1/0/0)

I have tested this build on 10, 11 and 12 Sept. 2006 in Alliance Battles. As the build article claims, this build has impressive unaided burst and sustained DPS. The build as stated (which I have cleaned up to conform to GW:BUILD) is certainly valid and viable, but I prefer the variant with Comfort Animal and Blades of Steel. The biggest deficiency of this build in theory is that it has no movement speed boosts, and therefore can appear to rely fairly heavily on serendipitous battlefield conditions. I have not found this to be a major problem in practice because I generally always manage to find targets. I briefly experimented with it in Fort Aspenwood, but found it to be worse than [R/A Repeat Expertise Assassin], my preferred R/A build for the venue. 01:08, 13 September 2006 (CDT)