Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
- Past discussions archived to...
- ...Talk:Rogue builds/Archive01 Archived 09:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Before editing the Rogue builds page Edit
Please do not remove a spec unless you get the agreement of at least 3 other editors that it should be removed. Do not put non-NPOV comments about builds on the this page either. You may make non-NPOV comments on this talk page an link to them from the article (i.e. [[Talk:Rogue builds#comment about a build|See comment about this build]]. The comment about a build should match the name of the section where the comment lives.). -- (talk · contr) 12:50 PM PST 23 Jan 2008
Currently, level 80 builds are being added by everyone and their mother. If there are no objections by 15th of February, I'll do a cleanup and add the generally accepted (tested by ElitistJerks users) builds. Stijnherreman (talk) 10:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- After thinking about it, I'll do the cleanup tonight. Some of the PvE specs on here are just too stupid for words (Vigor, Improved Poisons and Vile Poisons instead of Prey on the Weak, etc). Stijnherreman (talk) 17:57, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- You can probably do it again, every single build in the unverified part is no match in PvE for the cookiecuttters provided, while the PvP builds are all situational. Refer to http://elitistjerks.com/f78/t37183-pocket_guide_wotlk/ for effective PvE builds (do note the HaT build, only one missing from the list here), which is also the first place to check for new builds in case of patch changes. AsheraKhad (talk) 15:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I moved the Mutilate2 build at the top of the page down to the Cleanup/Unverified section. All the builds at the top of the page were the result of extensive discussion and consensus on the ElitistJerks forums, except for that one, and there is value I think in keeping it that way.Digbong (talk) 19:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I also removed the tail end of a comment that was contextually inaccurate for the build it was referencing (it suggested substituting in a skill that was already present in the build), and that again, did not reflect the PVE discussion on the elitistjerks.com forums. Digbong (talk) 19:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Okay, what the hell? Edit
I'm curious as to who the HELL suggested http://www.wowhead.com/?talent=fGecoe0oV0oZ0xZxbcdhGzdVzh ? Take a look at it. It's TERRIBLE. The moron says it's for PvP, but he doesn't even include Heightened Senses, Master of Deception, Dirty Tricks, Blood Splatter, Fleet Footed, Quick Recovery, or Deadly brew! They specced into Remorseless attacks (Which is only good in a BG, and otherwise ignored) and they specced Ruthlessness (which, although debated, is not the best for PvP when you have other talents available). PLEASE remove this garbage. I suggest something like: http://www.wowhead.com/?talent=fhxbkeMoiMoZZeofdhhddVzc , because the prior build would NOT hold up well in PvP.
Link not working Edit
The link to the WoW community site for this build
(25/46/0) Combat Fist/Sword PvE Raid Spec Instant MH / Deadly OH - Poison focus as Combat (Krizzone of Anub'arak)
is not working. I was just curious what it is.
Removing Impossible builds/retuning others. Edit
After browsing the tattered mess that is the rogue builds, there were a few builds that were not even possible any more, and others that no longer followed the the very site they had cited for information (EJ's Pocket guide). I removed the broken link of one build (the fist/sword build mentioned above), and retuned the the others to follow the recommendation of the site they were cited from. -- CrayonOfDoom (talk) 17:40, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Advice, please? Edit
(re: Rogue builds#Shadowstep, Shadowdance (clothes: Ambush ed Eviscerate)) ASSSDDDDD Plz some help! Have i done this right now!? Why cant you edit this back just a little bit?! I read some documentation and i think this could be ok..isnt it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ampolla (talk • contr).
(re: Rogue builds#Assassination, Mutilation Bleedation)) At some point, this build showed up on the top of the Assassination list of the page, claiming to be the "highest possible dps build" since 3.3. Whoever put this in the page claims that testing has been done extensively on this build, though there are no links to this supposed testing and the spec appears in no mentions on any reliable rogue resource sites. I believe this build should be removed, or at least moved to the "Untested Level 80 Builds" section of the page. -- Glyphstream (talk) 01:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
- So moved. Noted that it should get references. Particularly the claim to be "highest DPS" should be supported by some evidence somewhere. Otherwise, it's one player's submission rather than a consensus. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:19, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
how do i add a rogue pvp mutilate spec to the rogue pvp build page? i have 1 that i have been using and its working really well. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Erniekuhns44 (talk • contr).
Mutilate Rogue 3.3.5 (51/13/7) Edit
I have tested this I found it to be way less DPS then the current Mutilate Daggers (51/18/2) build at the top of the assassination section. I used the rotation as indicated, open with Garrote, Mut, SnD, HfB, Mutx2, Rupture, Mutx2, Enven etc etc. I had the glyphs recommended (Rupture, SnD, HfB) compared to having Mut, SnD, HfB glyphs on the current 51/18/2 build.
Is there anyone else who can back this up and do some other testing?
"TO THE GROUND, BABY" Edit
Currently, every build on this page refers to the old talent system, and is hilariously outdated. Unless anyone objects, I'd like to rip down this page and post more relevant information, using verified builds (pulling from EJ and experienced raiders, not 12-year-olds playing with the talent calculator). If anyone is feeling particularly sentimental about their contributions here, I don't have a problem with renaming it "Vintage Rogue Builds" or "Rogue Builds (old)" or whatever, as long as it's not linked to in the class tables. Reasonable objections will be treated reasonably before 1/27/12. After that point, I'm going to click edit at the top of the page, press my friends CTRL + A, and then my good buddy Backspace. Horsest (talk) 22:02, January 25, 2012 (UTC)