| abstract
| - [build prof=w/mo prot=12 healing=3 smite=12 tactics=0+3 strength=0+3 sword=0+3 axe=0+3 hammer=0+3][mending][mark of protection][pacifism][smite][spear of light][stonesoul strike][holy strike][divine boon] [/build] I'm pretty sure this disproves the entire basis for this policy. --Edru viransu//QQ about me 03:38, 16 August 2007 (CEST) I wouldn't say that...the possibilities for that build are endless! Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 04:05, 16 August 2007 (CEST) Yeah I need to change the name to something that isnt lengthy. Like uhh... it was just in my head, forgot it just now. MisfateImage:Daipenmon.jpg 04:09, 16 August 2007 (CEST) Technically that build up there should have a higher creativity score. ‽-(єяøהħ) no u 04:11, 16 August 2007 (CEST) Innovation does not mean being bad at the game. Also, Innovation is not creativity, it's this: "This criterion describes how new the idea behind this build is. Does it use a new approach for dealing with a known task or even act as a precursor for dealing with a previously unconsidered task? To what extend is it expected to become a prototype for a new class of builds?" A bunch of random crap stuck together doesn't really qualify as an "idea", much less a new one. It's not at all a new approach for dealing with a task, since it doesn't deal with any tasks. It's not likely to become a prototype for a new prototype of builds because it's a horrible idea. --Edru viransu//QQ about me 04:13, 16 August 2007 (CEST) what's the point of this policy? some things do deserve a 0-0-0, and this is easily covered in PvXwiki:Real Vetting#0-0-0 — Skakid9090 05:26, 17 August 2007 (CEST) Well... it is true that while some builds may deserve a 0-0-0, if a build works at all, it should have at least a 1 in effectiveness, and Misfate is right that people giving it 0s in effectiveness to Warrior builds lacking IAS or DW or something isn't an accurate depiction of a builds ability according to a reasonable, objective standard where we are simply asking if the build works at all. Image:Defiant Elements Sig Test 2.JPG *Defiant Elements* +talk 05:33, 17 August 2007 (CEST) Voting is flawed anyway. You should be able to vote from 3 choices: Good, Viable, Trash. Instead you're fucking around whether a build deserves 1-0-0 or 0-0-0 Asdfg 05:36, 17 August 2007 (CEST) You forgot "Great" :P. Regardless though, I think it's nice to have some choice (particularly if we can get a search engine up and running) because builds are Good in different ways, and not all Good Builds are as good as each other. I do however agree that in the cases where builds are going to the trash anyway (or in other cases where it doesn't really make a difference), actually arguing over this kinda thing is, at the very least, inane. Image:Defiant Elements Sig Test 2.JPG *Defiant Elements* +talk 05:38, 17 August 2007 (CEST) 0 - 0 - 0 is warranted in some instances, I suppose. I think the real issue that's arisen is that builds are being handed 0s regardless of any merit they might have. A 0 in Effectiveness should mean that the build is completely unusable and that there is absolutely no purpose in running it, but I see it being handed out pretty freely because someone doesn't like the build, even if the build DOES work (albeit poorly). And on that same note, Innovation should really just pertain to the build itself, rather than if the person submitting it is the originator of the build. - Vermain 07:38, 17 August 2007 (CEST) Okay so I didn't read over the entire convo. But my ideas are that first, everything deserves a 1 in innovation at the least, because if it can be rated 0, it should be immediately deleted according to the duplicate build policy. Also everything should have at least a 1 in effectiveness, because if it was 0 (e.g. a joke build with ABSOLUTELY NO SKILLS IN BAR) it should be deleted immediately per WELL too. I also wish to extend this to "nothing deserves a 5-5-5 or 0-0-0" too, since NO BUILD IS ZOMFGWTFBBQPWNZORZUBERLEETHAX enough to get 5-5-5. In other words, no build is perfect, ANet makes sure of that. E.g. A/W tigersin should not get all those 5-5-5s... look at it's self defense. At the most a 4 in universitality. So yeah, we might call it "nothing deserves maxed out votes" meaning either maxed out good or maxed out bad. -- Nova Image:Jirouji-Nova.jpg -- (contribs) 23:15, 17 August 2007 (CEST)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)