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

Join The Fan Lab, a private Fandom research community for users in the US and UK where you will be asked to share your opinions on all things gaming and entertainment! Click here to see if you qualify

User:Rafe Alexander

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I play a Mesmer primarily, with a hearty penchant for necromancy and Elementalism. I've ran an assassin through and learned some of it's ways , but in general I'm happy to make it a secondary most of the time. Being new to Wiki, feel free to drop me lines about what I've started to contribute to Guild Wiki! My first ever Wiki contribution is my Build:E/N_Earth_Turret E/N Earth Turret Build]

Builds[edit | edit source]

Most anyone would agree that the Builds section is special. However very few are satisfied, and a huge majority of people, it seems, are greatly unhappy with it for various reasons. Generally the GWiki adept see the headaches in maintaining it, and the contributors--especially the less adept like me--are in for quite a shock when attempting to contribute to it. Following the discussions on this subject, especially with the proposed policies (GuildWiki:No Original Builds,GuildWiki:Post No Builds), is rapidly becoming a feat in tracking a diaspora of ideas leading in all sorts of directions.

I take up the stance of getting rid of the section, bathwater and all for the sake of change, and because I agree with the position that the Wiki way of doing things breaks down in attempts to place order--or preference--on the creativity and fun inherent to the ultimate process choices of playing the game, the character build. That being said, it isn't impossible to apply the strengths of the Wiki system to a Builds section within the Wiki. As simply as I know how to say it, the Wiki system is designed to document and display information in a most egalitarian way, and where some objectivity is to be had on a subject vetting can be useful. This isn't the case with builds however. Builds involve not only meta-gamer know how, but a lot of personal preference on play style and enjoyability--highly subjective material. Also considering the fluidity of the game, showcasing builds is a sure recipe for unending debate, abuse, curmudgeonry and even vandalism.

Someone needs to limit the options. I envision an egalitarian documentative builds section. First, accept that the build section will be huge, but not insurmountable to navigate. There will be around what, 55 single character profession combinations (Me/N, Mo/W etc.) and various team ideas (Not sure on how many) for classification and browsing. FotM and popular builds would have their name on the build already so could easily be found by anyone searching the site. If someone wanted ideas on how to run any character profession, browsing by categories as they're listed in the unvetted and unviable areas now is quite efficient for it's purpose. No vetting and no showcasing. Occasionally if a specific section becomes glutted with builds, and many are seemingly ridiculous, then anyone can begin a discussion on removal on any particular build, addressing the author ideally. Say when the W/R section has more than 20 builds. The team sections would have higher thresholds since they will have more variables.

The same standards of initial publication would apply, like looking over the section to see if the idea has already been expressed, albeit in a different manner by someone else--before posting.