ADVERTISEMENT

Main Page/Builds

Suggestions for changing the Main Page Template[edit]

We don't need separate categories for every dungeon in the game. What is optimal in Arah is usually what is optimal for AC. The dungeons aren't complex enough to make specific builds for each dungeon. And if someone makes an optimal build for a dungeon those will be exclusive to record runs. Normal speed clear groups will be using the same meta PvE builds for all dungeons. It's going to need some discussion but my initial categories for PvE would be.

  • General (Not entirely sure if this should stay but would be general overworld PvE builds)
  • Dungeon (Normal Dungeon builds)
  • World Bosses (Some guilds have specific builds for Tequatl and Wurm)
  • All PvE builds

PvP section will also need to be looked at. sPvP and tPvP are generally used to refer to the more casual form of PvP Hotjoin and competitive PvP like the Solo and Team Queue. We should ingore the Hotjoin side of PvP due to the lack of consistent meta. But we could make two categories for Solo Queue and Team Queue. There are certain builds I consider very much viable in Solo Queue but not usable at all in Team Queue. Decap Engi is one example, the build is surprisingly very strong in Solo Queue due to the lack of communication. But no high level teams consistently run a Decap Engi due to it's weakness in team fights. Even average teams in team queue can easily rotate around a decap engi if they know how to communicate. I will cause them trouble but the build overall isn't as strong in team queue. But that may not be necessary when the wiki is still young. And we should just keep all the PvP builds in one category. WvW should probably stay in all one category but it might be necessary to separate Roaming/Small Group builds with Large Group/Zerg builds. So some combination of

  • Solo Queue
  • Team Queue
  • WvW Roaming/Small Group
  • WvW Large Group/Zerg

We can just keep things compress to tPvP and WvW but if there are enough build submitted to warrant expanding them I think we should. So any thoughts on modifying this template? --DantesS_P (talk) 02:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

I like the categories mentioned here. Potentially for PvP add a category for dueling servers? --TahiriVeila (talk) 02:16, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I would love to hear what others have to say about this before making any hectic changes. I personally think that the dungeon sections should be merged to one section called Dungeons, we should keep the General section and skip the "World Bosses" section since it will be based on 2 events only (or?). The sPvP and tPvP sections should be merged to one section called sPvP/tPvP and the WvW section should be split to Roaming/Small Group and WvW Large Group/Zerg sections just like you mentioned.--Galaxian (talk) 02:50, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah Tequatl and Wurm are really the only large scale PvE events that players make specific builds for. Those builds should just go to the General section with other PvE builds that aren't optimal for Dungeon clears (Condition, Tankier, etc). --DantesS_P (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I think we should definitely categorize solo queue and team queue separately. While plenty of builds can be tagged for both, there are definitely a significant number of builds that are effective in solo queue but not team queue (and vice versa)--TahiriVeila (talk) 03:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I don't think we should split sPvP and tPvP. There really isn't a large enough gameplay difference from solo queue and team queue to justify it. While Roaming and Zerg fighting have very large gameplay differences. You do pretty much the same stuff in Team and Solo Queue. If a build does have significant effectiveness differences it would probably better better to mention that on the build page itself. It will also cut down on redundancies because what will likely happen if we keep two categories for sPvP and tPvP. The majority of builds will be shared and only a handful of builds will actually be different in the two sections. --DantesS_P (talk) 16:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I agree it's not too important to differentiate between SoloQ and TeamQ at this stage, but I would strongly advise splitting WvW into solo/smallscale and large scale.--Elemelentalist (talk) 16:47, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Need your feedback on the planned changes[edit]

Alright, I have been thinking today and those are the changes that I think will be best for the website:

PvP sections:

  • sPvP and tPvP sections should remain as they are right now.
Reason: There are some builds that are more effective in sPvP than tPvP and vice versa. Having those 2 separated will make it easier for people to find those builds, not to mention that if a build works in both sPvP and tPvP it can be tagged for both of those very easily.
  • WvW section should be split up to 2 different secitons, one for Zergin and one for Roaming.
Reason: It will be much easier to split those 2 than keep them in one section so that people can find what they are looking for easier.
  • Meta build should skip the Trial/Testing phase, admins will make sure of this and that no other bullshit build is being seen in there.
Reason: If it's a meta build, there is no reason to discuss it and rate it.

PvE sections:

  • The dungeon sections will be merged to one big section named "Dungeons" where basically all dungeon builds will be placed.

Reason: Most builds can be used in multiple dungeons and the PvE section won't look that empty, this change might be reverted in the future if needed.

General changes:

  • The "Great" section will be removed completely.
Reason: It feels like the meta and good sections will be enough, at least for now since the meta will contain meta builds that should be used. The good category will contain all other builds that have passed the Trial/Testing phase by getting a rating above X. In the future if the game gets more build diversity the "Great" seciton could be readded.

I would love to hear what you guys think about this. I would also like to point out that the PvE section will only contain 2 subs sections if those changes are made, the General and Dungeon sections. If you have any sub section suggestions feel free to write them. Atm I feel like the suggested "World Bosses" section will only contain builds based on 2 events which feels a bit pointless.--Galaxian (talk) 22:51, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey I have been working on the site since I heard about it and from what I noticed these changes would be perfect. To many sections for dungeons IMO you don't need a whole new build for ARAH just include the new sigil variants in the variants tab. Its what I have been doing. Also I would love to be in charge of the PvE section of the Wiki I have been trying to insure all of them follow a consistent look. I think thats the most important part about this wiki. Giving the information to everyone in the same style. Just check out the wikis I have been editing and you can see what I mean. I dont change what people say just move it to make a little more sense.

As far as categories go please make it happen soon. We really don't need 1 billion for PvE.--Josepepowner (talk) 23:03, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Alright great first feedback :) I will gladly promote PvE admins, I just need to make sure that you know what you are doing, could you please send me a PM over at Reddit http://www.reddit.com/user/Mukilol/ or use one of the contact options found on the Adminstrators page?
Email sent. --Josepepowner (talk) 23:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree with these PvP suggestions. One thing I've been thinking about is if we keep the sPvP and tPvP categories combined. Certain builds will feel like they deserve two different ratings. A build can receive low votes for its effectiveness in tPvP but at the same time receive high votes for sPvP. In a combined sPvP/tPvP category it would end up at a good rating but when split it will receive a Great or Meta in sPvP.

For PvE I'm a little apprehensive. Because there are certain builds that probably deserve a Great rating for their occasional uses. But aren't meta for everyday dungeon runs. Builds like Phalanx Strength Warrior are very strong builds when you are in a pug group that gives little might. But organised groups will almost never use it. And certain classes like Necro and Engineer are currently not meta in dungeon comps. But the optimal builds for these classes deserve at least a Great Rating. That might be a little harsh to not include certain classes in the Meta Category for dungeons but they really aren't Meta. --DantesS_P (talk) 00:18, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

I also agree that the "Great" category should be maintained. On PvX we decided to maintain the Good + Great tags (while dropping the Poor tag) when we implemented the Meta tag because some builds can be a part of the meta while still being sub-optimal. I don't really think there's much to be gained from getting rid of the Great tag, but we do lose some descriptive power--TV Thief Icon.jpgTahiriVeila(talk) 00:35, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Okay I can see where everyone is coming from when it comes to the rating and I think I would have to agree. --Josepepowner (talk) 03:48, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Alright the Great section will most likely stay, we will see if we can fill all of the sections by time. I will make those changes over the coming days since I will be unavailable today due to traveling.--Galaxian (talk) 12:31, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


I still disagree with keeping the sPvP section. As Dantes pointed it out above, sPvP is just the unrated casual playground version of Pvp - has no meta, nobody plays to win, entire place is about autobalance abusing. People use it to farm daily achies and to test builds. IMO Pvp needs only 1 section: Conquest. As other gamemodes are on the horizon, this would make future categorizing much easier. The reason why it's pointless to have sPvP and tPvP as well as Solo and Teamque is because it looks something like this:

  • Teamque - to achieve bigger things you need builds from the Meta and the Great build categories.
  • Soloque - even some builds in the Good section can work in soloque
  • Hotjoin - literally everything works here. You can go there with a PvE farmbuild, take out your off-hand weapon, disable your healing skill and still dominate 2v1s, that's why this section is entirely pointless

Thise means the Meta/Great/Good categories work as intended: less-serious builds work well in less-competitive scenes but a skillful player can make them work everywhere

So again, as gamemodes are coming soon, we should start categorizing by Gamemode - so far it's only Conquest.

For the PvE side, I think having General, Dungeons, Fractal, World Boss and maybe a Leveling category would make the most sense.

On the WvW side have to agree with Dantes again, Zerg (or "Large-scale)" and Roaming are good choices.

However I'm against the removal of the 'Great' category. There are build that are Great yet aren't meta like Dhuumfire nec, any condi engi in PvP or Condition Clone Death.

My standpoint on Dueling-Server category is that this is not an official gamemode of GW2, and 2 kind of people use this: ones who want to practice their Pvp builds and ones who come in with WvW roamer builds. 1 thing you should also consider is that each dueling server has its own rule set: for example, the 'better' ones ban things like celestial, settler or soldier amulets, effectively killing off builds built for 1v1 --Hanz (talk) 12:02, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

^ I like all of these ideas Hanz--TV Thief Icon.jpgTahiriVeila(talk) 15:56, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


What I would love to see is as follows and this is a standpoint of a player not a web person. Its about thinking from outside in not inside out. You need to make these builds easy to find and well easy to navigate to. This also is the job of the respective build creator to categorize the builds right.

  • Section name goes here. (pretty much General play)
  • PvE (General roaming and having fun)
  • Bosses (not many but still)
  • Dungeons
  • FOTM (this is a MUST FOTM is so different things could change. doesnt mean dungeon builds cant go here. Its just some people run really good different builds.)
  • Then have the ratings like this
  • Meta
  • Great
  • Useful/Fun/Leveling (This area would just be for builds that get a ton of love but dont fit in anywhere SHOUT WARRIOR)
  • Beta (instead of Trial / Testing remove them and create this)

Something I have learned the more you separate the community the less ppl you have to interact with. This includes this trials / testing. If something gets moved no one will really see it if they arnt on the page 24/7 (again using the prospective of someone who is just visiting the site. NEVER INCLUDE to many options.)

  • The PvP Categories go here
  • tPvP respected gamemode here (IDK the names LOL but yeah u get it)
  • tPvP respected gamemode here
  • WvW Zerg
  • WvW Havoc
  • GvG (You never know this might be a thing)
  • Ratings should be a little bit different here. Its tPvP its either
  • Meta
  • Great
  • Beta (Again this is used for testing/trial phase it should replace it.)

Why no good phase well its tPvP good builds just dont work you follow the meta or a slight variation (Great) or you are just being useless that simple. sorry to sound elitist but its the way it is. So why no sPvP for me well it doesn't matter sPvP is just where you go to have fun same as hot joins its useless to play a specific build for it. What you think you can singly handedly take on 5 people on top of that you can make a build perfect for every build comp. No you cant so its useless to have this.

This is how I feel about it on a perspective of a person just looking for builds. Now on the wiki side of things. Well I find it still better why. The community is all voting in one section the new beta section easy for me to keep track of builds and know whats what. This will also give an area for fun builds in PvE. Why include them at all? Simple those people need love too. Why discriminate it from PvP and PvE with the whole no good ranking. Well in pvp you literally are losing it for the team. In pve you can run a full nomads set in dungeons yeah ppl might hate you cuz of the lack of DMG. But you really can't hurt anything from running a good build. (in this case the nomads set)in pve as opposed to a good build in pvp. Also I understand this might not all make sense so if there is a better way of communicating please link it. --Josepepowner (talk) 16:23, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

The current rating labels (Meta/Great/Good/Trash) are fine IMO. Tho I agree on the point of merging Testing and Trial, maybe. For WvW something like Large-Scale encounters would sound better than zerg i guess and for havoc simply roaming because that's more widespread. Also, i think WvW need another category just because as there are 3 sections of GW2, PvP, PvE and WvW they should be separated. WvW is not part of the Pvp gear system anyways. --Hanz (talk) 16:45, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
I can agree with the WvW thing it should be separately IMO its not a pvp thing didn't even think about that nice catch. As far as ratings I think we should find a way to discuss this in a less communication barrier manner. Faster means of communications. --Josepepowner (talk) 17:00, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay how about this. We start with the minimum amount of categories and as the wiki grows we add more.

PvP

  • sPvP/tPvP (Solo Queue/Team Queue)
  • Smale Scale WvW (Roaming/Small Group)
  • Large Scale WvW (ZergvZerg/GvG)

PvE

  • General (World Bosses/BearBow/Leveling)
  • Dungeons (Dungeons/Fractals)

We can easily separate and create more categories if we need to. But these will encompass every gameplay difference currently in the game. In a week/month/year if we need to separate categories we will do it but this will help greatly in getting things started. And make it easier for new users to add builds since they won't have to worry about a build not perfectly fitting a category. --DantesS_P (talk) 03:04, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

That sounds best to me--TV Thief Icon.jpgTahiriVeila(talk) 03:06, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm fine with these too, but one minor thing: WvW deserves an own section. It doesn't belong to Pvp afterall, they even use a different gear system (same one as in PvE). For PvE I highly recommend having a "Fractal" and a "Regular Dungeons" category, because these are the 2 types of dungeon builds that can be far from each other. Also, lol at bearbow ^^ --Hanz (talk) 07:09, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
I don't think fractals is different enough to completely separate it. The majority of the builds are exactly the same with Hammer Guard, Mantra Reflect Mesmer, and Phalanx Warrior really the only ones that become more popular in fractals. If a build is built with fractals in mine we can just put that in the name or build page. There weren't separate categories for UW and DoA in the GW1 PvX. WvW possibly separate it but it's still a form of PvP so I'm apprehensive in separating them. --DantesS_P (talk) 17:00, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
I agree, fractals are a part of dungeons whether ANet officially recognizes that or not. Plus the player base is too small to warrant a separate section imo.
On the subject of WvW, I think because the skills are separate from PvP, the gear and skills are based on PvE, they have their own leveling system in it, that it should be a separate section. Not to mention it's very distinctly separated from PvE and PvP in game. Yes they exist in the mists but the playstyle is quite different. It's like some hybrid PvE / PvP section. I don't think either can really fit it all together.
On a totally aesthetic note, I think the color for PvP should be purple, PvE yellow, and WvW blue based on the experience bars respective to them. Either that or PvP Orange, WvW Red, PvE Purple/Yellow based on achievement colors. I prefer the experience bar approach. Not to mention rank points are still quite purplish. Jugs of wvw experience are blue. Kinda just fits in my head ^_^
Also, the player base for PvE is probably the biggest. It also most likely has the most number of builds (considering how flexible and allowing general PvE is). So I'd preference listing it first and ordering them by "difficulty". Though one could argue that in reverse those in PvP are most likely to look up builds? I don't actually have that kind of data. I just think for a new player they kind work from pve to wvw to pvp as pvp is quite demanding in comparison to pve. Overall I'd show this as basic:


PvE-To-The-Edge.png PvE

Build Type Working Untested
General Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
Dungeons Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
World Bosses Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
All PvE Builds Meta Great Good All Testing Trial


WvW.png WvW

Build Type Working Untested
Zerg Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
Havoc Squad Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
Roaming Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
All WvW Builds Meta Great Good All Testing Trial


PvP.png PvP

Build Type Working Untested
Guardian Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
Warrior Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
Engineer Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
Ranger Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
Thief Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
Elementalist Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
Mesmer Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
Necromancer Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
All PvP Builds Meta Great Good All Testing Trial
With better icons to the left of the game types. Honestly can't think of a better way to section PvP off unless just by profession which I think is a good idea too. Chase (talk) 20:23, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Updated with icons and using professions under PvP to see what it looks like. I can see why Havoc Squad shouldn't belong in WvW, but I think World Bosses should remain under PvE as they are uncrittable targets which creates different builds. For now we only have two encounters, but I think it's possible new events like the Marionette or three knights or whatever will show up in the future. Chase (talk) 23:44, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Definitely awesome. Tho, PvP shouldn't be split for classes. This may result in entire categories left empty for some classes and each category displaying only 1-2 builds which may make the impression of this wiki having only a few builds, which is not true. 1 category for PvP, Conquest, would be enough (for now, then new category for every rated gamemode arenanet will release). I know 1 category is not much, but hopefully 1-2 months and this will change. Or to make it look better and foreshadow the future categories, we could make 2 categories: Conquest and Unreleased Gamemode with a lock before it, which means it's coming but not yet here. Also, despite having a rather smalle community atm, the demand for PvP builds is usually high - you can get into a WvW zerg with any build and nobody will notice, but in rated PvP you can't get away with a bad build. I see people asking for pvp builds on mists mapchat every 5th min or so. --Hanz (talk) 07:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Take a look at my user page and tell me what you guys think.--Galaxian (talk) 11:46, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Just a quick update regarding my current situation[edit]

Hey!

I am on an unexpected trip for the next 4 weeks in a country where it's pretty hard to get internet connection, especially when almost everything is closed due to some holiday. I have been trying to get internet access the whole day today and managed somehow using someones wifi. I just want to tell you that I haven't abandoned the wiki project nor do I plan to do that in the future, execuse me for being unavailable but I will try to get decent internet tomorrow, hopefully. I have also been thinking about the planned changes and will make them once I get a decent internet, they will not be 100% to the point like I said in the previous post, the meta category will stay for example. I will be making those changes on an separate page which you guys will be able to see once it's ready before I release it to everyone else.--Galaxian (talk) 21:00, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT