Talk:Barrage ranger
nice work, but please check B/p ranger, the two articles should be merged. --Xeeron 10:23, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
- Ah crap. I made redirects for BP ranger, Barrage pet ranger, and even BP but I didn't think to do that one... ug... what a mess I've created now... I'll look into that one. --File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 10:32, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
- Looking at it that one seems to cover the team idea behind the BP used for BP groups. I would think that the B/p ranger could then be a subpage of this one that I had made. I could have the redirects go to the B/p ranger version or something. Any suggestions? I like the info there but I'd rather avoid combining it as not a lot is actually in the Barrage ranger article. I have a history of combining things in the past and I will if needed but I'd like a little input first. Thanks. --File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 10:41, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
- I found the time to completely read this page and unfortunately, I feel that it is not a great example of how to make a build/guide article. Let me explain why:
- The article tries to cover to much ground. It tries to describe any ranger using the skill Barrage, meaning that it tries to describe builds in one article which might differ in up to 7 skills and be used in different modes of game (PvE, PvP). They might have the same elite, but not much else in common. That leads the article to be very vague in the main sections (Basis&Side Skills).
- What I would like much more is one (disambiguation type) article called Barrage ranger here, listing all different types of barrage rangers and then more specific articles about barrage rangers (eg. One about B/p groups, one about a standart PuG barrage build, one about uses in AB, etc). --Xeeron 06:02, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- I disagree with you, Xeeron. I think this is exactly what a guide should be - as broad as possible, listing as many strategies as there are available. The idea of making the Barrage/Pet a subpage of this guide is, IMO, a very good one. Erasculio 08:52, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- "as broad as possible" Mind if I ask: Why? Mass is not equal to class, so just producing an extensive list of all possible skills and equipment you might possibly use will not help the user. A guide should describe not only what you can use, but also why and how you should use it. Both are arguements for spending more time and space on each individual strategy instead of going for one long list. As I said above, there should be many subpages to this one, each describing a specific way to use barrage. Putting all strategies on one page will just produce a list that is not explaining enough. --Xeeron 09:26, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- The "why" and "how" is exactly have I have in mind - but instead of limiting "how" to fit a specific build, I would rather keep it open enough to tell players how to use a skill in combination with others even outside such restrictions. Exactly like this: it's not a list of different strategies that in the end would boil down to a list of different builds, rather it's a full guide with explanations of many different ways to do something and listing how all skills linked to that something could be used. This is what I expect from a guide. Erasculio 10:40, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- Please compare the amount of "how" in the pages Barrage ranger and B/p ranger. You will find that Barrage ranger lists tons of different skills, but very little on the why and how to use them. B/p ranger has a lot less skills, but a lot more on how and why to use them. Insofar it is much closer to http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/General_minion_mastery_guide than this page.
- Then the only open question is how long articles should be: I prefer having 5 detailed normal length articles about different types of minion master to having one huge article, but that is a preference on structure, not content. --Xeeron 12:15, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- The "why" and "how" is exactly have I have in mind - but instead of limiting "how" to fit a specific build, I would rather keep it open enough to tell players how to use a skill in combination with others even outside such restrictions. Exactly like this: it's not a list of different strategies that in the end would boil down to a list of different builds, rather it's a full guide with explanations of many different ways to do something and listing how all skills linked to that something could be used. This is what I expect from a guide. Erasculio 10:40, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- "as broad as possible" Mind if I ask: Why? Mass is not equal to class, so just producing an extensive list of all possible skills and equipment you might possibly use will not help the user. A guide should describe not only what you can use, but also why and how you should use it. Both are arguements for spending more time and space on each individual strategy instead of going for one long list. As I said above, there should be many subpages to this one, each describing a specific way to use barrage. Putting all strategies on one page will just produce a list that is not explaining enough. --Xeeron 09:26, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- I disagree with you, Xeeron. I think this is exactly what a guide should be - as broad as possible, listing as many strategies as there are available. The idea of making the Barrage/Pet a subpage of this guide is, IMO, a very good one. Erasculio 08:52, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
[Reset] That's where I get a little lost. As much as I could make the information about the barrage ranger very very long I think that it's not the best idea. I mean, I love having Olias as my MM but have never read the MM guide that is linked above since it's waaaay to long for someone who wants to get some info and figure it out quick (like me). Sure I read the details next to the skills to help me decide what skills may be best but I skipped the whole rest of the article any time I've visited the page because it's too lengthy. The example build I used does explain much more detail about the skills and shows how long it can get (and that's with _very_ limited descriptions in place). I can see sub pages coming off the Barrage Ranger like sub:B/p ranger, sub:offensive barrage ranger, and sub:defensive barrage ranger. Each could go much more into detail on how to accomplish each with Barrage and even have a skills list with suggestions next to them. Then if a reader visits the page they choose their own path for what they want to do. If I want to barrage and do defense I don't want to read all the stuff on the other 2 and reverse for the others. This could help to better structure it and offer more detail for those interested in it. What do you guys think? --File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 13:19, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- Your proposal is exactly what I want: One host page that gives a quick overview (even much less than is currently written here) and links to several subpages which go into detail and describe not only the skills used, but also how to use them. --Xeeron 13:43, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- And what about you Erasculio? --File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 15:40, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
I find that having pictures of the skills on a skillbar (like guildwiki) really does help ALOT, it is a great visual aid to help guide people through the process of a build guild.--203.129.61.20 05:32, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
GWW:CONTENT[edit]
From the GWW:CONTENT page: "...we retain all content that documents or describes current mechanics, terminology, game play, skills, equipment, strategy, and canon..."
I therefore am requesting we keep this page as is since it is a strategy that involves skills and is shown as such. A limited number of skills may be in use thus making it resemble a build article but it is commonly seen and current (more of a guide and how to play a strategy or defeat it). I see no reason to eliminate this article as there is no reason to delete it either. --
Vallen Frostweaver 02:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
