Hey I need to ask why are meta builds also in the great builds section. I don't think this should be the case because if they are meta they are better then just great. Also how can a meta build be both okay and meta. Also it would get really confusing hitting a great build but seeing a meta build. the whole point of separate sections is because they are on different levels. Lets take the pve section and compare PS/EA warrior to the Axe/Mace GS. The PS warrior is great but isn't meta. The GS axe/mace warrior is way better than PS warrior if playing it right so I didn't put it in the great sections because its better than great. Its its own section. So I was just wondering because I am looking at the WvW section and seeing meta builds in the great section. --Josepepowner (talk) 14:25, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

If you check GW1's PvX wiki they do it the same way as we do it. There are only 5 stars to be given, and 4.75-5 is "Great", meta isn't better than Great usually. Meta is just a term for the currently most widespread builds - for example under the PvP section there are 2 variants of bunker guardians and they both great, but only 1 is meta. Actually, even Good builds can make it into the Meta section sometimes - let's say that build isn't better than most builds but hardcounters an extemely strong build that other calsses can't, then it can be labaled as Good and Meta. Meta is an independent category and not something that comes after Great. And having the builds under the Meta section and under the section where they belong emphasizes this. --Hanz (talk) 14:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Isee I stand corrected good point. I didnt realize we were doing it in this manner but it makes perfect sense. Meta isnt a real rating just stating this is widely used okay not a problem I will fix the pve section accordingly thanks for the heads up.--Josepepowner (talk) 14:51, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I wanted to get some builds into the testing phase so that more people who aren't submitters of content can start getting involved with testing/rating. I only put builds that haven't had any changes in a day or more into the testing phase.

I think we can do that on Monday, bu it's easier to just see all the current builds at the same place for now and when we have basically everything we can start what you've started. Also, when discussing, use your signature, a button for it is among the tools above the textbox so people know who you are and the tie of your post. :) --Hanz (talk) 06:56, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Oh wow I didnt realize I actually edited your page LOL. Still getting use to all this. And gotcha on the sig thing. --Josepepowner (talk) 14:50, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Np it's hard to navigate at first :P But you are getting it now. --Hanz (talk) 15:14, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Just thought about something. What about ranger pets are they included in the wiki like pics of them and stuff like the skills are. If not its something that should be included. --Josepepowner (talk) 16:49, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Good catch, they are missing - you can test this by trying to link the skill in Edit on any page and use the Preview function. Everything you type leads to the associated section on the GW2 wiki, but the pictures have to be added to this wiki too and pet skills are certainly missing. I will add the F2 pet skills, other pet abilities might be insignificant except for 1-2, but I don't think guides will include things you have no control over. --Hanz (talk) 17:04, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
So at the very least in a build I should link it to that specific pet in the GW2 Wiki? If that's the case I can do that.--Josepepowner (talk) 17:09, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
No need for that. I will add the skill to this wiki soon, which means you can link pet skills the same way you link player skills. If there is another skill with the same name, which is the case for Swoop, you must put (bird skill) into the link after the skill name. The easy way to figure out what do you need to do in order make your link work is making the link, then clicking it asd see the Disambiguation it takes you to (this is a place where things with the same name are collected). Then you just click the one you want and look at what's in the URL after the skill's name. As I've mentioned before, for Swoop it's Swoop (bird skill), no need to write (bird_skill) as the URL does tho. --Hanz (talk) 17:21, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Okay thats why sometimes I see Skillname (Classtype) Example the necro signet. Makes sense let me check around to see if this is the cas with any builds. At least in the PvE section as I really like editing those.--Josepepowner (talk) 17:25, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
It's good to see the PvE section getting some edits, PvE and WvW needs to be expanded upon next week. Which classes you you play in PvE? We could really use some Necromancer, Engineer or Thief builds there. --Hanz (talk) 17:34, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

pet images[edit]

I think if you uploaded the bigger versions the ones with less transparency around them it would be easier to see. Look at the ranger build in the pve section those pets are minis. LOLS I can help upload if need be I find this wiki thing really fun.--Josepepowner (talk) 18:08, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Would be appreciated if you could do the pets themselves. I'm doing pet skills atm and damn these pets have so many. If we are at ranger, don't forget, 44 mins until the balance stream starts on twitch and it will target ranger and engi! --Hanz (talk) 18:16, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Thx for the heads up and yeah I can do pets for yah, Ima use the more zoomed in versions and see if it works better.--Josepepowner (talk) 18:18, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Quick update I finished uploading all pet icons. TO MANY PETS.....--Josepepowner (talk) 19:18, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

GG. I hope you haven't forgot about setting the Licensing part to Arenanet & properity (top one on the list) :D --Hanz (talk) 19:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I didn't I followed how you uploaded your images and just went off that. I am learning based on other users.--Josepepowner (talk) 19:22, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
kk good, it stuck me like 10 mins after you started uploading those images that "omg I forgot to tell about it" - meanwhile bearbow confirmed new future meta --Hanz (talk) 19:46, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I saw that, beast mastery now a passive GG finaly signets useful.--Josepepowner (talk) 20:17, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Also drastically increased LB attack speed, increased dmg, and huge improvements on GS aswell. But they did nothing about the condi builds. --Hanz (talk) 20:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


I was wondering how much editing am I allowed to do without interrupting the original build. What I mean by this is lets take the warrior axe build I put up. I have variations of the build in the variants tab. I am not talking about changing builds but adding its variants. Am I allowed to do something like that or should it be put in the discussions tab. These builds that I would be adding the variants too would be the meta builds. nothing else, reason for this is because well there isn't really discussion needed its the meta build. The one I would be editing next would be guardian as it has variants in the build depending on the situations and I don't mind adding them. I just don't know if its morally allowed. --Josepepowner (talk) 14:09, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Even a 100% overhaul is possible on this wiki afaik, so feel free. I've seen your additions to the builds and they are all pretty awesome, keep it up. --Hanz (talk) 14:11, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah when I look at the builds I read everywhere DnTs and any other relevant areas that I need too I dont just go by one source (although for PvE we already know where to go LOLS) And alrighty I don't plan on doing complete overhauls I just want to insure people get the info they need. Also I might not focus on ranger till the update because its going to change. --Josepepowner (talk) 14:14, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
i can understand not focusin on ranegr anyways :P Btw the balance patch is at least 2 months away.
Well then if its that far off I might just keep the build up to date. The one currently in the PvE section is good. Also just finished the guardian variants TOOK TOO LONG. To many variants but I feel it didn't need its own page. The hardest part isn't including the variants its making sure it all makes sense. --Josepepowner (talk) 15:51, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

PvP to do list[edit]

We are going to need to clean up of the builds in the PvP section.

  • We might need some kind of naming structure for PvP builds. We are going to have difficulty with this since we can't just name builds after their Elite skill. We probably just have to use some general guidelines since the majority of builds still have something they focus on. Most of our names so far are fine so far but it's something to keep in mind.
  • Elmentalist mostly needs clean up. S/D I'm going to overhaul to keep it more inline with the meta. You've added Support Staff so the only other build I think we need to add is Berserker Staff (aka Jihad Ele).
  • Engineer, the multi kit condition engineers will need different names. We should probably have a minimum of 3 multi kit builds Nade/Tool Kit, Bomb/Tool Kit, and Bomb/Nade (very popular in NA due to Ostrich Eggs). Generally the third kit in these builds (usally Elixir Gun) isn't core to the build and can be swapped with little difficulty. So we don't need to focus on the build being triple kit. We also need to add Rifle Hybrid which is a build popularized by Five Gauge/Chaith. I'm not sure if the build is popular in EU but he is well know streamer here so a lot of people copy his build or run the older version with a Berserker Amulet. Static Discharge might need to be added but currently the build is bad in my opinion. But since Anet has stated they are going to buff SD and I still see people play it, we should add it anyways.
  • Guardian looks good. I can't think of any popular or good build that needs to be added. Maybe AH Symbol DPS but Meditation is such a stronger build than it. And Symbol DPS never grew to be that popular.
  • Mesmer. We are going to have add PU mesmer sooner or later. If we don't do it now someone will do it later. 4/4/6/0/0 Lockdown and it's variant 6/2/6/0/0 will probably need a mention. The old Sword/Focus Shatter build will need a page even though the modern double ranged shatter is a stronger build. Especially after the the change to Sword 3 but I feel we should mention it to keep it archived.
  • Necro looks good. I can't think of another good build that should be mentioned.
  • Ranger. I'm going to add Shout Regen ranger because it needs to be archived for similar reasons to S/F Shatter Mes. Power Signet was over taken by Read the Wind in usage and it never was that strong of a build in my opinion. BM Ranger I would wait until Anet buffs it because it will probably see an overhaul similar to what Read the Wind did to Power Signet.
  • Thief looks good. The only other good build I can think of is 10/30/30/0/0 but really only Cruuk plays that build. Also someone is going to add a Venom P/D build it will hurt my soul a little when they do. But the builds we have should be fine.
  • Warrior looks mostly good with these builds. Sword/Sword Condi Warrior probably needs to be added. I personally think it's a very strong build and got like 90% of my Champion Legionnaire with it. Banner Bunker Warrior might need to be mention for archive reasons.

Any other ideas on what we should do? Also I think we should hold off spreading the word on the official forums until a bit later. --DantesS_P (talk) 14:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

  • I've been thinking about how to name the builds for each section of the game, and i think most builds only exist in 1 section so it's easier. For builds like D/D Thief that are PvE and WvW aswell, we can just put "D/D Dungeon" or "D/D Roamer"/ in other cases "Frontliner" to distinguish them.
  • Yeah we should postpone the announcement of the section, even the main site is yet to be finalized.
  • We have to draw the line somewhere in term of builds.
  • PU is entirely a WvW build that has no place in pvp: heavy stealth makes it incompetent at contesting sidepoints, its teamfight pressure is 0 and once focused by 1-2 players its gone. Having a PU in the match is like playing 4v5.
  • While zerker staff Jihad ele is a fun troll build, it's.. well, a fun troll build that's barely viable even for hotjoin - 1 thief or nec and you are respawning before you can target them. Same as PU, you make your team 4v5 while playing rallybot.
  • Never heard about shout ranger and I guess this happened for a reason :D These 3 builds would immediately wander into the Trash category I think.
  • Bomb/nade was meta in EU too for long, but nowadays everybody runs Tool kit + either bomb or nade. I think our current engi names are fine. The good thing about condi engi kits is that they can be included as variations, the core of the build barely changes. Personally I'd like to keep tripple kit, because it's not a common thing and I think it was teldowho made the first viable tripple kit build + this needs and entirely different playstyle stometimes that would be just confusing and complicated to add if merged with other articles.
  • Cele Riffle, it's not a thing at all on EU but I'm curious about it, and if it's a thing on NA then we should definitely add it ^^
  • S/F mesmer, may deserve an own article but I think aside from swapping staff with s/f and changing 1 trait everything is the same, so idk.
  • P/D would hurt my soul aswell so just skip it xP Btw, same issues as PU, heavily relies on Stealth and too vulnerable when focused, not suitable for pvp, it's a WvW build. Shadow arts thieves can be skipped for the Pvp section.
  • I think mace/sword is superior to s/s, but if you think it's good then k it should be added. But aside from 1 weapon and maybe 1 trait, is that largely different from mace/sword? If not, we could just add it as variants. Bunker warrior, it's an unkillable beast, but bunker guardian is superior to it aswell. Might worth to be documented but I don't think they benefit teams too much. I think if newbies would pick up that build from here, they would be frowned upon by every single teammate they will ever have. --Hanz (talk) 15:36, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Also, I'm holding back some of the builds I've created because I don't want to mix real-test builds with meta builds that are in this category just because of the site's Beta state. Just add the most relevant ones, having 30 builds is a pretty big achievement already :) I thought the build diversity is much smaller than this. --Hanz (talk) 15:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
It's wierd Hybrid Rifle is very much a thing on NA, there where two in that qualifier. But the changes you made to the standard multi kit engi builds look great. I'm going to add Hybrid Rifle then I think we can sit on these builds for a while. You are right we don't need to add every build that comes to mind and we have the majority of the meta covered. --DantesS_P (talk) 22:06, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Re:PU mes, it may be awful but it is very popular in NA solo queue. Just something to keep in mind.--TV Thief Icon.jpgTahiriVeila(talk) 23:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

My concern about PU is that it really is a bad build for rated play and I wouldn't want to encourage even more people to use it, because I'd feel like giving them an incorrect build. It's like: let's say in GW1 people start using AB builds in RA, not even taking res signet and such. Just because they do it it's still a bad idea. This may be the effect of not having a site like metabattle at their disposal and they go with whatever they use in WvW roaming. My hope is that this site can get NA back on track :D --Hanz (talk) 06:51, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Ready to switch to new template[edit]

Hey, I'm thinking the best way to do this, would be to go into each build that currently exists, and write down the "one" line version. They share the same name right now, but if we go through and write them all down while the old one is up we can easily see what traits go where. The old one is kinda hard to read :/ So I'm gonna go through and break the templates we have for the pages with the new one liner ^_^ Chase (talk) 15:02, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

kk, i start in the good section, you start in great so we don't edit the same ones.
I was in the all section >.< Don't think there were any mistakes. Anyhow, I gotta go for lunch, I'll be back later though to see where we're at :) Chase (talk) 15:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
kk :P --Hanz (talk) 15:35, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
But we really shouldn't keep the traits at this state for long --Hanz (talk) 16:04, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Yep! I'm back, I'll start working on the PvE ones, you start the WvW ones Chase (talk) 16:11, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
kk --Hanz (talk) 16:12, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Don't forget the Trial and testing sections. --Hanz (talk) 16:40, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Done, including trial and testing, for PvE. Let me know when you're finished :) Chase (talk) 16:41, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Could you do the WvW Zerg sections's trial and testing? Only 2 builds, I'm doing the Roamer section. And i think there are 2 builds left under conquest's Testing and trial. --Hanz (talk) 16:45, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Sure :) Chase (talk) 16:53, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
I think we're done :P --Hanz (talk) 16:54, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Okay! LETS DO THIS! Chase (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
*sniff* it's beautiful... Chase (talk) 16:56, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Totally agree. Awesome :D --Hanz (talk) 16:58, 3 August 2014 (UTC)


I probably won't do too much editing for the next 4 days but will keep an eye on changes and talks :P --Hanz (talk) 16:47, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Hover Tooltips[edit]

In general, for traits and what not, I think I've figured out how to do them. It would be the most insane amount of work (in the beginning) for us though. So I'm thinking instead, we'll try to just work on it over a long period of time instead of trying to get it all done in a week or two. It just involves making so many new template pages. Updating them will be something the community can do though. So in that one sense we'll be better than most websites that rely on a single developer to update all that when trait balances do happen. What do you think, would we be interested in doing something that big? Chase (talk) 18:37, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I've got plenty of time in the upcoming weeks until I start studying for my exams. And unless Arenanet throws 3 new pvp gamemodes, a guild ladder and a balance patch at me in the next couple of weeks, I'd really like to help out :D Let's do this! --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 19:00, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Check this out XD Getting close to finished! Still got free time? I'm gonna upload icons and write out the template structure tomorrow. But making allllll the templates is gonna be work. I don't think we should do all of them, but just getting the idea down will be good for the long run. Lastly, I am having issues resolving the idea of multiple boxes. For instance, for an auto-attack chain, we might want to show all three, but stacked vertically that won't fit very well. In that case I figure we can go horizontally. In another issue-case, I'm thinking of how we'd like to tackle such things as glyph of storms, kit refinement, etc that have a "1 of 4" or "1 of 6" right click to see next box things. Check out Engi Tools IV or Ele Arcana XI in game and let me know what you think. Chase (talk) 04:00, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
We don't need multiple boxes maybe. If possible we could just add the entire chain into 1 box - similar to the in-game version, it's enough if we display 1 icon and add all the mouseovers of the chain skills to it. We don't have to do it as gw2skills I guess. Same goes for traits maybe, just list what they do in each attunement in the same box for example. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 10:19, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Forgot to add: The top box you can scroll your mouse to the bottom edge and see that the tooltip fits upwards, moving the mouse up automatically places the tooltip below the mouse cursor. I have extended the box all the way to the edge on the right side as well in the white space so you can mouse right all the way to the right to see the same effect. Let me know if this worked on your browser. Also ignore that horrible icon. It will look better when I go through the dat file and get the correct icons/textures. Chase (talk) 04:04, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Great job and works well (Chrome). :D And yeah still got time. Also ty for the World Boss category. Based most of it on the TTS guide, but they are a lot less specific about gear and skills and it's more about the tactics, so metabattle can be a good addition to that. Will try to contact them and ask if they are willing to check the section. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 09:17, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Excellent, yeah that would be super awesome if TTS got involved :D Okay so for now I'm gonna ignore the extra boxes, but I have an idea for the future I'd like to test for people that have bigger screens they'll be at least able to get that feature, and for those that just have normal screens, theyll get the bare minimum. But we'll worry about it later. Chase (talk) 13:03, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey, can you please check my sand page to see if the implementation is okay? Please test in your browsers and with different widths. Obviously it is not 100% perfect, but if you think it's passable, let me know :) Chase (talk) 16:03, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Works well, pretty great ^^ I see you are also trying to include the things some traits add.--Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 16:21, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Well otherwise, I feel we won't get that overall "immersion" with the build. I'm very stuck on damage right now. I want to switch it to skill coefficients to save us all a headache, otherwise we'd either have to calculate it on our own or I'd have to look into writing a complicated function to calculate damage. Skill coefficients might be easier and better. Chase (talk) 17:09, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Could you help me?[edit]

Hey, I'm on my mobile phone for another week and it would be too hard to edit a page from here. Could you add this build for me please? I'll add additional details to it. http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/?fJEQNAneRjMd0FaZImdwJaAmgCdnPBfwx0OAU+EfOA-T1CFABFcCAa4IAYnOAAeAAFq+zVKBRS5kDHCgkUykm2mW2fIAACwNbz28mBO6RP6RP6R7m38m38m3sUAMJMC-w --Billaboong (talk) 15:47, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, sure. Currently I'm also on mobile but will take care of it in 1-2 hours :P--Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 15:51, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Are you sure you wanna run without zerker stance? I'd rather replace Endure Pain with it. And 20 in Strength is more common than 20 in Arms for GS. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 17:53, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
100% sure about this build. Rising raiden has been using it for ages and yiu can see on its videos that it works. Zerk stance will be nerfed soon so you can alteady start playing without it now. You need 20 in Arms is a must have for GS might on crit and CD reduction. Endure Pain is defenitily optional but I'd rather go for Sigil of Stamina than Zerk Stance for the same
Motivation as above.--Billaboong (talk) 22:17, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
The thing is part of the reason why warriors were so bad in PvP for the first year is that they were easy to kite with conditions and were extremely vulnerable to blind. Haven't seen anybody in WvW/PvP who takes Berserker Stance off the main bar since it was buffed more than a year ago. Signet of Stamina is great, but you are still vulnerable to blind. But k, will add it today. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 09:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Once again, if you could add this for me <3 http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fNAQJARTjMqUxa/Kusw1agAha9BEAFQzYIfduv7QKboCrxC-TlCDwA62fIm6PSVeA4CA8VJIUlYKOCAh0FQ4BAM5QAEAABgje0je0je0SBMqwI-w It's a WvW zerg build for Ranger. --Warrior Icon Color.png Billaboong (billa-talk) 10:49, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm not going to add any ranger builds until the balance patch, sry. :P And I'm currently busy with editing images for a Phase Retreat guide, I want to get it done today. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 11:52, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
I guess I'll start studying the changes and prepare new builds.
Lot of work incoming with the next patch. By the way, how dovyou plan dealing with it, I think builds will meed a sign that sayis "updated from XX.XX Balance patch. --Warrior Icon Color.png Billaboong (billa-talk) 12:20, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
I think we will observe the patch's effects on the meta and make adjustments ASAP. If a build gets #rekt then we will archieve it, but if only minor changes need to be done then we will just simply update the build's page. if we need to do major changes we make the changes and then put the build back to Testing and reset the ratings. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 12:43, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

New World Boss Category[edit]

I believe this is done, I hope correctly :) Let's get the TTS peeps to look it over and add some content to it. I am positive that will really help. Also to see an outside group use this wiki engine in that way will hopefully inspire others to join in. At the least, outside groups linking to it will give credibility to the site. Chase (talk) 00:01, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Spirit Ranger[edit]

I think we should move the spirit ranger build Ranger - Spirit Master up to Great. Mainly because it will help differentiate it's effectiveness from the other two PvP Ranger builds we already have, trap and power. Spirit Ranger is easily the best build for Ranger currently and mostly fell out of favor because it did not receive the same amount of power creep as all the other classes (cough Energy/Battle/Intelligence on one build is balanced). Having it as great will make new players more likely to pick it up. And I've seen a few people on Reddit ask why there were no Ranger builds in Meta/Great only good. We should definitely not put in Meta but Spirits in Great should be fine --DantesS_P (talk) 19:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Faced the same questions :/ While i don't really agree that it's "great" it's only a bit behind now, so k, probably moving it up is a good decision because it's really better then the other 2. I wonder how will the balance patch affect the class, because afaik spirits and trap rangers don't get buffs at all. But there might be other changes too. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 19:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)


Hey, I'm a total noobo n formatting, coul you give me the code to copy and paste to get the warrior icon in my signature? Thanks a lot --Billaboong (talk) 19:05, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

taken from dantess' page --Warrior Icon Color.png Billa (billa-talk) by « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 19:23, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
That's what I get ----[[File:Warrior Icon Color.png|18px]] [[User:Billaboong|<span style="color: ">Billa</span>]] ([[User talk:Billaboong|billa-talk]]) (talk) 02:16, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Fixed, thanks! --Warrior Icon Color.png Billa (billa-talk) 02:17, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

New runes + sigils on chinese client[edit]

link. The rune of dodging looks super sexy for a 2/0/4/2/6 Soldier Evisc war with Reckless Dodge + Leg Specialist: loads of extra ferocity then dodge roll to proc fury + swiftness + cripple + immobilize (leg specialist) + possibly a second reckless dodge-type damage proc (it's hard for me to tell based on the kanji used) -> swap to axe set (proc sigil of intelligence) -> eviscerate immobilized target. gogo theorycraft.--TV Thief Icon.jpgTahiriVeila (talk) 15:36, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Tbh, i really hope these will be PvE-only changes :D S/D Thief with 2/0/0/6/6 at least has a lower crit chance than 2/6/0/0/6, but with Runes of Dodge they can have perma Fury and higher Ferocity. Changes like this make me question if the balance devs ever played GW2. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 16:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Oooh that sounds positively evil--TV Thief Icon.jpgTahiriVeila (talk) 19:10, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Because you are a sneaky shadowlurker but for me these are terrible news :P NP, in 2 years, necs will have fear on autoattack. And I'll be there. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 19:14, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Fight Tips[edit]

I've noticed you moved my guide to another page called "Settings Tips" I tried to delete the change my self but didn't work, anyway I'm gonna add many other things such as animations and how to dodge and other stuffs, it won't only be about options. --Warrior Icon Color.png Billaboong (billa-talk) 07:32, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh ok. Well currently it was enitrely about in-game settings so I thought it would be more appropriate. I'm currently adding keybinds / other settings into that guide btw. What kind of things would you like to add? I think they may deserve their own guides. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 07:38, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes I will split them, the idea is to record animation for all classes burst and explain what to dodge, how to dodge and when not ot attack, also showing the most common combos so that you can prevent your enemy. An example is making a video with Burning Speed, then Burning Speed with Lightning Flash and saying that it's better to dodge even if you see the skill is not aiming you because the Elementalist could teleprot to you. Another one is showing Shelter and saying : during this animation it will block any attack, don't waste your skills. I think this would become an extremely popular guide but it will take its time and it would be even better to get videos implemented with the wiki by the time the gudie is ready. --Warrior Icon Color.png Billaboong (billa-talk) 09:18, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Hmm this would be an extremely long guide. Maybe it should be splitto 8, 1 for each profesion. But I'm not sure if it's doable - many specs don't have these counterplays and if you want to include every spec of every class.. plus a single balance patch can mess up the entire guide. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 09:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Not all skills, just the most common. I don't think there are more than 10-15 for each class. Anyway I will find it out really fast if it's too much work or not as I start the first class :P --Warrior Icon Color.png Billaboong (billa-talk) 09:48, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Builds rating[edit]

Hey, how can I move a build from a category to another (example from testing to trial), and how can I add the warning "this build will be deleted if nobody sayis anything or update it for the next XX days? Need this to keep the WvW section clean and up to date as the patch will change many things --Warrior Icon Color.png Billaboong (billa-talk) 17:13, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

You simply press edit on the top right and replace the Trial word by Testing on the very top :P Don't delete any builds, we will likely move them back to testing or archive them. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 17:20, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Popup windows[edit]

This is gonna be delayed I think :( There is an awesome extension but apparently they've pulled it back into beta and are awaiting some further testing. Once we get a chance though, I will install it and it will be glorious! Just wanted to let you know I did my homework on it xP « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 14:03, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

 :D np :P It can wait. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 14:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Missing Links[edit]

Hello Hanz,

When editing, I have noticed that certain skills/sigils have missing links, is there anything I can do to add link within the same format as

Grenade Kit Grenade Kit
Grenade Kit
Device Kit. Equip a kit that replaces your weapon with grenade skills.




Hi Martini :P Well, basically every skill directly links to the official wiki, but the images must be uploaded to metabattle too. If no image is displayed next to the link AND the link correctly takes you to the right wiki page then you can click the red duplicate text which takes you to a page where you can upload an image for it. But if you find anything that's missing just tell and I'll look into it ^^ Also, don't forget to use your signature on talk pages, you can find an icon for that above the textbox.--Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 12:53, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

PvP Category[edit]

Sorry about that! Totally forgot to remove those xP « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 17:52, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Survival Bleed Ranger[edit]

The thing is that empathic bonds interacts rather shitty with survival of the fittest if the transfer procs unlucky. While I agree that it will be a lot better versus a condition heavy teams it does close to nothing against power classes because survival of the fittest removes by far enough condis. Thus just a situational trait swap though. It certainly also allows to swap sigil of doom for something different which can be good.

For sharpened edges I think while offering more overall dmg the survival of the fittest proc and higher bust bleed of keen edge can be better. 10% higher condition duration is also not a bad stat for the immobilizes of the build and the 100 power will add more to the direct dmg than crit chance/dmg with this amulet.

Currently running my versions on rank ~100 EU and I like it but ofc I am open for more discussion.

Empathic Bond is a really powerful trait, you can play without it with survival of the fittest, but having both traits is key when fighting other condition heavy specs, especially a necromancer who can constantly transfer those conditions back - as a ranger you should be able to take the 1v1s in a team based gamemode, so you must choose the traits that are the most useful overall. Keen Edges isn't a bad trait either, but I feel like that fits another amulet/build more, for example a settler or carrion. With a high attack speed weapon like shortbow paired with Rabid amulet and constant Fury appliacation from SotF trait, it would be a shame to leave
Sharpened Edges Sharpened Edges
Sharpened Edges
Chance to cause bleeding on critical hits.
Book.pngChance on Critical Hit: 66%
Bleed.pngBleeding (2s): 85 Damage
out. I'm considering adding a Sword/Torch + Axe/Dagger build that's 2/0/6/6/0 with settler or carrion amulet, Keen Edge fits that better . Unrelated: don't forget to use your signature on talk pages, you can find a button for it on the toolbar above the textbox :P --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 13:17, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Builds similiar to existing builds[edit]

Hey I wanted to ask what would be the best way to include builds that are close to existing ones but do differ in certain key aspects so that listing all that under alternatives of the original build would kind of pollute the page? --Dojo (talk) 08:12, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Good question, and a complicated subject :D I'm about to upload another ranger build, pretty similar to a current one in terms of trait distribution and utiity skills. But it has some different skills, amulet, rune, and playstyle. Could you tell which weapons do you want to use, trait point distribution, and in general main differences to the currently existing one? --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 09:16, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Alright I think we talk about the same build which replaces sb with sword/torch in the axe/dagger ranger build making it a bit more bunkerish and adding burn to the condi arsenal. I find it a lot more reliable than sb which feels kind of meh dmg wise. Also Sharpened Edges really doesn't do that much dmg wise so the 10 in marksmanship for Keen Edge makes a lot more sense here. --Dojo (talk) 14:53, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Yeah we are talking about the same build then. With Rabid Sharpened Edges does a lot more than Keen Edge on Carrion. I've been playing both builds recently, both has their pros and cons, overall I think it's easier to outplay torch + Sharpening stone, and after that you're left with barely any dmg while with the current setup you can reapply 10+ stacks under seconds, nobody can cleanse that much. The biggest reason to take the Sword variant is the mobility IMO. I'll upload the build now so we can discuss it there :P --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 15:10, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Ranger - Side-point Jesus - added the build, there are many things to discuss about it :P 1st one is S/D + A/T vs S/T + A/D. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 15:39, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Farming build ideas[edit]


1. Tagging

  • 3-5 targets via aoe, piercing, cleave
  • hits foes quickly after activating a skill (less travel time, less cast time, etc)
  • tagging isn't an exact science yet, however aim to hit 500 non-critically and 1k minimum on crit
  • crit perhaps around 50% ideal, extra == good, ~40% min

2. Mobility

  • at least 25% movement speed, 33% is better
  • weapon skills/utilities that cover ground is a plus

3. Gear

  • Hopefully the gear required is similar to the dungeon gear required for that class, many PvE players should have a set like this already.
  • Else offer many alternative, esp cheap ones for those that only have a farming set to make extra money

4. Survivability (least prioritized, not even important for me actually :P)

  • condition clear
  • stun breaker (stability == plus, totally not mandatory)
  • vigor/health regen

Rating is based on the above as well as a fifth category:

5. Ease of use

  • how much of a zombie can you be to farm?

This is really important because farming is not requiring a lot of brain work, if one could watch tv while farming that would probably be best. If they could do it while having the option to cover ground when playing actively that's even better. And if they can do it with passive survivability, that's meta.

Ele D/D (air) -- http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fFAQJAoYhcMaa25wlBf0ACAS4BBOI+0lMlKD-TBROwAjU+BY/Bwq/ITJIA-e

Ele Staff (fire) -- http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fFAQFAWnMISTD25AuMAfEGgAQCHIyAxjKlp0bA-TBROwAjU+BY/Bwq/ITJIA-e

Ranger SB/GS -- http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fNAQJAVBjEqUwa/KOsGIQoWfA1bAweBcBueCA-TBBVwAA2fAhyviq/cRJIA-e

Ranger LB/GS -- http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fNAQJATBjEqUwa/KOsGIQoWfABwWzeBcBueCA-TBBVwAA2fAhyviq/cRJIA-e

Necro DS -- http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fRAQJBLhNyRTLtF3YZD7tJwFKofzAoFi6CouNOjnF-TBROwAjU+BY/Bwq/ITJIA-e (this one is hard... I honestly can't think of how to sustain quick tags, figured camp ds and use the rest to maximise that)

Guard Staff + Sc/To -- http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fVAQNAW7fl0ApUolDxdI8DNh/gYdhKBwu2tgXVC-TxAXgAA7PK/6V/5RJIA-e

Thief SB+SB -- http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fZAQJAVVl0MpwplOxyJ0PNRPhsbgF+Ft7cziB-TBxVwAFU+BY/Bhq/QRJIA-e could be s/p or p/p maybe too with some tweaks allowing for bouncing bullets and pistol dps increase. i know this looks really weird for thief builds but i think it's interesting too, spam 2 and weapon swap every 7s. could work with normal scholar runes too, but then maybe just run this instead: http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fZAQNAV6al0MpwplOxyJ0PNBQhsVAvXWsZ3z0C-TxAXgAA7PK/6V/5RJIA-e (i've done this last one and it's real easy and simple, i liked it a lot, damage was still great)

Engi P/P Grenade Kit -- http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fdAQJAqalUUpvrlYxzLseNSbBNqwA6NkhP85CEgjC-TxAXgAA7PK/6V/5RJIA-e I like this version way more than what is currently meta on our site. I agree that flamethrower is a good tagger, but personally I prefer p/p for that same role, the extra range is nicer to me and it hits up to 5 foes i think instead of just 3 over and over could easily variant flame thrower over grenade kit or even over the stun break slick shoes. This version would still use flamethrower to better effect as it does more dps thus leading to faster tags/more security in tagging. Another variation: http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fdAQJAqalUUpvrlYxzLseNSeBN6kckaC6BEgD8p6B-TxAXgAA7PK/6V/5RJIA-e

Mesmer -- http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fhAQJARWl0npEtlpxINUrNSqhgyvhJ9gATK5mOA-TxBEABG8AAYS5Xb6AA4CAMy+DJq+zWKBBA-e Now that power spike or whateve rhits 5 people it makes this really awesome. GS is great for directly hitting foes: 3 on auto, 4 on bounce perhaps, 5 on quick mind stab, quite a few on phantasm. Can swap blink for another mantra to increase damage further. I think centaur runes are great for this build, but travs works, so does typical scholar's for dungeon gear, however you run slow -- can't really fix that I suppose. Staff is meh imo, but chaos storm rocks so i left it there for swap

okay! what do you think about this preliminary list? Honestly most farm builds can just be the equivalent dungeon builds with a few switches here adn there to utilities. That method could be easier. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 19:11, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Also forgot to add what I think they would be rated xP

1. Meta - Guard 2. Great - Ele Ranger Thief Engi Warrior 3. Good - Necro Mesmer

There really is nothing equal to the lootstick's efficacy / ease of use. The range is gross. The tagging is gross. The mobility is fine. The gear is equivalent to dungeon unless making a few changes to weapons for better tagging (not needed at all). And survivability is good too.

Should probably also add things like "turn auto-targetting back on" for going super noob and zombie mode farming. Or for engi maybe instant aoe cast so grenades aren't such a pain if they go that route over p/p or flamethrower. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 19:32, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Nice job :D One thing, IMO every class should get at least 1 build in the meta for this section - many people have tunnel vision and only check the meta section not knowing that others exist. Plus it's not that much of a hardcore section, I don't think anyone's gonne come in an say "hey, I've been counting the amount of necs on labyrinth farms for 10 days and came to the conclusion that they aren't good at higher levels and top open-world farmer groups will change servers when they see one" because this situation does not exist :D If it's the best at tagging for that given profession we can take that as "profession-meta". --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 19:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Edit: for Thief I've been experimenting with a similar one - perma shortbow 2 spam. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 19:51, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Edit2: For mesmer I've found something like this on reddit. I'm trying to theorycraft a nec one now but i haven't played nec in PvE since 2012, switched to guard after. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 09:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Edit3: So here's a Necro one I've been testing. It's a tag machine. Spectral armor is optional, you can take any other skill for example Blood is Power and you do not need Locust beause you will have perma swiftness from warhorn. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 10:15, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Necro: Hilariously I came up with almost the identical necro variant. It works surprisingly well, I just don't get the flame legion runes on your build, I stuck with elite pet and ranger's. But if plague is really good at tagging, I'll try that too, perhaps with scholar runes or something. I also have to try out dagger main hand, I digged scepter just for the crawly hands thing, but now that staff is a ranged set, I will try the dagger :) I have the least experience on this class, so just heads up on that haha
Mes: I actually really liked that version when I used to farm karka, I'm not sure about places like labyrinth where reflection hasn't played a huge deal so far for me. Perhaps we could just go full out mantras and set it to auto-attack with this build. this one loses the 4 second cd on mirror blade (plus the extra bounce) and the 12 second phantasmal berserker from the first one I posted, but it does pretty good damage with the extra mantra pulse. Also swaps equal self condi cleansing to heal and trades in triple stun breaker/stability. ka-blammo! Probably similar to one of the dungeon metas as well. Overall for farming it would have been perfect if we could go 66004, that way we'd have +% damage modifiers, extra mantra cast, reduced gs2 and 4 as well as extra bounce on 2. I'll settle for the fact that insta cast like gs3 is preferred over the travel time/activation of gs 2 and 4. So I dig 66020 for it's high condi cleanse (no more immob problems) and great damage/speed of tagging 5 targets. If only mantra of pain cast time were shorter...
Thief I want it to be so simple it doesn't require the usual thief level of play bouncing around and teleporting and spamming skills etc. The rng of bouncing pistols is not gonna work I think. Overall I think thief is the most gear independent. They can get almost anything they need from utils/traits + shortbow. Mostly I'm enjoying the high intiative version. It works without active play just using sb auto and if one were to actually try they could easily activate RfI > weapon swap for 9 more initiative. Steal every 20 seconds from 1500 range to mug them and get another 2 initiative. Without centaur runes I think sig of malice was a really good choice. And sig of agility/smoke screen/sig of shadows are also good variants. Smoke screen I didn't actually use that much, but was handy during that candy corn 50% menace. Ultimately I really digged this version. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 13:33, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Necro - well that rune is just a cheap placeholder :P Scholar's probably better. As long as the zerg has guardians everything will have perma burning from the 1st second btw so that rune works with everything. I've been thinking about scepter and axe too as main-hand options, but only dagger cleaves (hits only 2, but still) and it's a really fast weapon.
Mesmer - kk I trust your one more. But that feedback should be added somewhere.
Thief - I do not have pistols on that build :D Btw I was aiming for such a high initiative regen that I can just spam
Cluster Bomb Cluster Bomb
Cluster Bomb
Fire a cluster bomb at the target area. Detonate in midair for multiple explosions.
Damage.pngLarge Explosion: 353
Bleed.pngBleeding (4s): 170 Damage
Book.pngNumber of Targets: 5
Radius.pngRadius: 240
Combo.pngCombo Finisher: Blast
Range.pngRange: 900
Detonate Cluster Detonate Cluster
Detonate Cluster
Detonate your cluster bomb in mid-air.
Damage.pngSmall Explosion: 122
Bleed.pngBleeding (4s): 170 Damage
Book.pngNumber of Impacts: 3
Book.pngMaximum Targets per Impact: 3
Radius.pngRadius: 240
24/7. I did not put emphasis on Steal, basically I've used it to trigger
Thrill of the Crime Thrill of the Crime
Thrill of the Crime
When you Steal, you and all allies gain fury, might, and swiftness.
Fury.pngFury (10s): 20% Critical Chance
Might.pngMight (10s): 30 Power, 30 Condition Damage
Swiftness.pngSwiftness (10s): 33% Movement Speed
Radius.pngRadius: 360
and then kept the bundle for
Improvisation Improvisation
Stealing recharges all skills of one type (venoms, signets, traps, tricks, or deceptions). Deal bonus damage when wielding a bundle.
Damage.pngDamage Increase: 10%
's passive bonus, then used the bundle roughly when I expected steal to recharge and then kept repeating it. How about something like this? Kind of a middle ground between the 2. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 14:28, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Okay, necro one makes sense with guardians, let's definitely offer that suggestion on that page. For mesmer I agree fully that we should have a reflect variant as it works really well in some scenarios. However even for reflect version I think I would prefer 64040 for the extra damage modifier (at least in solo farming situation). We could also split mesmer into solo karka farmer and zerg farmer build pages. I can't think where else the reflect is good, but we can probably just use both variants on same page. For thief, I think steal should be kept to mobilizing and potentially tagging a single target -- agreed there. Improv doesn't seem to be worth it because shadow step is to cover ground (possibly not even needed with infil arrow and perma swiftness once with the zerg) and ini sig should be kept on passive unless requiring a stun breaker. So to me, going that many points into there doesn't make much sense. I was emphasizing passive play as well as active play. In the passive version we get the easy boosts to swiftness once with the zerg and a solid 15% damage modifier. In the active there are a lot of options for recouping initiative for clusterbomb spam. From what I tried I was able to tag things very easily both ways even though the damage traits weren't taken. I'll try your version today and let you know some more :) Also please send me some way of contacting you either in game or on skype, i have something you might like, but want to keep it on the down-low :P « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 14:39, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
IGN - Gandarel.5091 :P --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 14:49, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Don't know if I already said this, but when we're done we should have a "See Also" section at the end with all the farming builds in it so they can link to each other. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 21:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hmm but why would you want to go to a necro build from a warrior? I don't think it's necessary. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 09:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Well I thought someone might enter on the staff guardian page as it's ranked on google, but it's not a big deal. I tested the mesmer one's out. Settled on 46004 for gs + pain mantra tagging. This was my final setup, it worked remarkably well, but not as great as I'd hoped. The 2-3 seconds while charging pain mantra was quite annoying. That being said, putting it on auto-attack worked really well xP « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 21:22, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Heh :P Btw wouldn't sword/focus do a better job than staff? Those autoattack projectiles are so slow. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 21:51, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I only used staff once or twice to start with chaos storm and then swap back. once I used it to cast a couple clones/phantasms for the damage modifier on a boss, that's it :/ I say we do the sword/focus as you said, that way the reflect variant will make more sense. I also don't know if 46040 or 64040 would be better for reflect variant. Something tells me damage modifier would be more important than activating mantras, but I'm not sure as I can't think of the situation off the top of my head... Karka farm would be 64040 i think « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 23:22, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

All PvP[edit]

So for instance we could have one box on the main page that just says PvP and it links to this page here. What do you think? « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 14:44, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Looks good but I'm a bit concerned about the main page. Wouldn't that be a bit blank? --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 14:50, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
There's really no way to stop people from clicking meta before all the way we have it set up. I was planning to move all those down to below the info boxes and to put these on top to encourage newbies to try it instead of the original set up below, I think that would work out « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 15:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
You mean placing the Build by Professions / Obsolete Builds / Guide tables above the PvE/WvW/PvP ones? --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 16:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Sure, I was thinkign three big boxes for PvE, WvW, PvP after the notice box and then the builds by profession perhaps as a table or some other set up, then the info boxes/traditional pve/wvw/pvp tables. But we could just put these three big boxes for the game type above the table we have now, and hopefully the new players will just click those or something? « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 23:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Here is an example of what I would put up on the front page. The table that exists right below it would go into the pages that the user clicks on above. So instead of one click to get to meta it would take two clicks. This is possibly annoying for members that understand how it works but I was looking through our page views, and our "all" pages get seriously low numbers. Therefore I don't think people see any of our "good" builds which we have plenty to share. They can always filter "meta" once they click on the category inside. Test and Trial builds will be accessible through the inside category but will not be displayed in the "all" section. Let me know if that should be different. What do you think? Also help me with the "descriptions" when you hover over them. I jsut wrote them kinda randomly xP « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 01:54, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Hmm I like the idea :P I think we should try it. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 09:36, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Edit: 1 thing, the "Welcome to metabattle, (...)" part on the top of the page should stay because of google keyword reasons. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 10:14, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Of course. What should we do with the "news" section? I was gonna leave it there and perhaps trim it down to three lines, I'll start working on the pieces and hopefully by tonight we can transition :) « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 14:45, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Sounds good ^^ Yeah the "news" part definitely needs to be smaller. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 15:04, 15 November 2014 (UTC)


Afk currently because and can't handle queueing without getting frustrated with Anet. But the new matching making system looks fantastic especially, unranked queue. Regarding your question about Power Ranger and ESL/Other Cups. We make this website for the average players that play in Team and Solo Queue. If it's meta in the internal metagame we need to reflect that. The people that play in tournaments know what builds they should run and and can bring the best out of their builds. So if it's Meta in Team/Solo queue we need to reflect that. Plus this will help us in the long run when some tournament player disagrees with our build because he has a some personal preference. Or if some other random user tries to justify a build change just because Caed likes running it this way. Tournament players heavily influence the Meta but they aren't the final say in it. --Human icon.png Dantes (talk) 22:58, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

kk ^^ I put that ranger back to meta for these reasons a while ago and will keep it there then. And the new UI looks amazing indeed :P Regarding changes I'm especially looking forward to unranked que. On the other hand, in its current form the profession-specific MMR is going to be abused extremely hard in order to climb the rated ladder IMO (play a class until you get into the top 1k, play another until you get to top 500, another until 200 etc, your ladder placement will skyrocket and you'll still be fighting noobs, giving you free wins). But we will see. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 14:17, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Warrior PvP Meta[edit]

Change out hambow and put in shout war? Not seeing much hambow action these days, and seeing a lot more of the shout variant. Just not sure how long we "wait" to designate the meta. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 19:47, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Hambow's still by far the most common warrior build on EU ranked, but shout's becoming a thing too. I'd wait some more days tho, at least until the next ESL on the weekend. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 21:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Spam Delete[edit]

I'm sorry you had to deal with that. I logged off after banning the first person. There is a filter in place now that bans users from blanking a page like that. I'm pretty sure that will help with this in the future. Will be back home in a week :) « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 17:43, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good ^^ Well it wasn't a big deal to undo this. Me and a friend decided to duoque as turret engis to make people rage. I started reverting the edits while waiting for the match to start, then capped close, dropped supply crate in case someone tries to sneak up on me while I'm not there and then continued restoring the pages. By the time I was back my turrets downed a thief for me :P #balanced (k the thief was bad too but I guess he sensed that I was afk and that's why he did not disengage) --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 18:01, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
That is hilarious. Poor thief. As a thief I hate turret engis too. >:D « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 04:03, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Another tweak to the filter, that last one was surprisingly RIGHT on the edge of working xP « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 04:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Meta List in PvP[edit]

Yo, why dagger/pistol ?? Lol I can understand the other three pretty well, but I'm surprised that thief is in the meta list right now. Seems like there was a big change over night? Also I'm planning to cull the meta list of roaming builds in wvw when I get back, there are far too many meta builds there which should instead just be great. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 04:03, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Take a look at this guys, it seems like Hanz changed the tag from meta to great (intentionally?) but they they are still showing up under the "Meta" category?-- Galaxian (talk) 01:34, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

It takes about a day for the front page to reflect the actual changes. This reduces server load when we create our dynamic pages. I figured a day was about the right number but we can make it shorter too xP « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 04:03, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Well, it's kind of a test, the PvP section is now similar to WvW zerging - instead of picking 1 build for every class and tag it as meta, we're actually representing the current "celestial meta". S/D went extinct a bit at tournaments lately, even Sizer rolled D/P but thief's still a thing because of its backcap/executioner/stealth potential. I think something similar should happen to Dungeons too. And actually, ArenaNet is well aware of the site, we were mentioned in multiple PvP 101 streams so this way they will get a better picture of the current balance/meta - if we can make the balance team's job a tiny bit easier (hopefully that means more frequent/meaningful patches), it's worth it. Plus maybe this encourages people to try out different builds on their class not just the one tagged as meta. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 08:56, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh right, I remember now that you said a while ago that it takes some time for the list to update. Yesterday was overall a confusing day for me :D-- Galaxian (talk) 15:49, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
No problem, galaxian -- I can relate to that xP So hanz, that totally agrees with my belief of how the meta should be ordered on our site, so obviously I respect this decision. We'll have to do a passover of the rest sometime this year. I'm planning to do a post for metabattle on reddit that asks people to list some of their favorite builds or what not that is not currently on the site but could be listed under great or good perhaps and I will try to add much more builds to the site. We still lack a surprising number of builds in other sections outside PvP. Also I still need to go through and make the PvE section better than DnT's forums/Dulfy's guides xP So ... that might take up most of my time when I get back along with whatever templates will help that. Excited for the new feature patch, hopefully it has skill/build templates! « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 15:56, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
I forgot to mention but it might have sounded like I questioned Hanz meta/great decisions which I really didn't :D It was just strange that he changed the tags but the they remained in the the previouscategories on frontpage. Chase, skill/build templates would be amazing and would make life much easier!-- Galaxian (talk) 16:12, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Yeah most of the contributors upload PvP builds, but the viable ones are pretty much already up there. @Galaxian lol np, I should have asked about it before making the changes anyways :D And build templates would be awesome, currently I have 2 rangers/guards/warriors just because I don't want to swap traits/sigils/etc all the time. Regarding testers/contributors, maybe making a guild could work. People love guilds xP It could be a place where people can find partners for theorycrafting/testing things before/after submitting a build. Question is, can I inv people from both regions into the same guild (so we don' have to have 2 guild with separate chat)? I think I can, they just can't play together. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 16:25, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
I doubt we can invite cross region, but if we could that would be insanely cool -- Another idea would be to have a "private" ish chat room where we can discuss like oldschool times with IRC and all, but that doesn't seem like it will get as much attention to me. However at the least we could have two guilds and have it be like a "mandatory" meet up on one day of the week (weekend, and diff times for NA/EU) it would be great if we could communicate with each other while testing a build in guild chat I think. If we can have one mega guild that works even better, but we'll have to pick a time that suits both quite well. I'm excited to try this jazz out! « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 04:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Moved builds up on main page[edit]

Yea, no one was using those links sadly. Now we have our builds higher up like you wanted ;) I think this is a better change over all as well. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 13:53, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

When I suggested that builds were very low because of the different design but it was fine after that :P We should at least keep the "news" section where we can link to balance patches, upcoming changes (I wanted to add GvG and Revenant teaser dates this week) so that part of the info box should come back imo. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 14:31, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
I prefer our "live twitch" method for those kinds of things -- that should suffice? but a dates system would be nice too... Okay I'll try to bring it back, let's keep it more "up-to-date" and remove the gibberish about helping out « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 15:26, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


We're seeing tons of hotjoin builds posted for conquest recently, I'm starting to think people don't get what the purpose of the site is. I'd like to add the following to the main page, below the News section:


  • Before posting a build, there are some things you should consider such as:
    • Can this build fill a necessary role in a specific area of the game?
    • What can this build do that other builds can't?
    • Is it unique/good enough?

It's not the final version but you get the concept. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 17:40, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh. Obviously I did this. But forgot to notify you. Sorry « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 16:35, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Have to send you a command in private[edit]

When will you get skype??? I can't be bothered to log into game and send you code in a mail xP « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 16:35, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

In due time.. :D for now try reddit --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 16:47, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Brah do you even frontpage?[edit]

Brah do you even frontpage? --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 13:39, 2 April 2015 (UTC) So what were you trying to say? Fredor (talk) 07:14, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure you've heard the expression "Bro do you even lift?", it became a thing and sometimes people say "bro do you even <insert anything here>". With this I was refering to that you asked for some changes to be made like moving the ranger dungeon build to Great but those changes already happened and you could have seen it on the frontpage :P Nothing serious. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 07:33, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Ahh that came a bit late to make the connection ;P I diddn't see it because I use the class specific tabs and not the category specific since it is faster. I additionally check the recent changes page where I diddn't see the upgrade. That why it came to that misconsception ;P Fredor (talk) 08:26, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Omg I never use the profession specific drop downs. I hope those are okay! « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 12:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Well it is faster an easier to navigate imo. You have one class and all of it's builds sorted by gamemode. I use the other ones very rarly and only if I need a quick overview of crossclass builds for a certain mode. Dunno why you are so surprised, I guessed that most people use these. Fredor (talk) 12:49, 7 April 2015 (UTC)