Difference between revisions of "Talk:Damage"
From SpiralKnights
(→Can we be more quantitative?) |
m (→Can we be more quantitative?: Typo) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
In looking at the page today, I noticed that there are no solid numbers explaining what "resistant to" or "weak against" really means in terms of damage. Likewise, there's no numbers for "low/medium/high" bonus damage. If we could quantify these things, it would go a long way towards helping people decide what weapons to use, or what unique variants are worthwhile. --[[User:Pauling|Pauling]] 02:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC) | In looking at the page today, I noticed that there are no solid numbers explaining what "resistant to" or "weak against" really means in terms of damage. Likewise, there's no numbers for "low/medium/high" bonus damage. If we could quantify these things, it would go a long way towards helping people decide what weapons to use, or what unique variants are worthwhile. --[[User:Pauling|Pauling]] 02:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC) | ||
| − | :Feel free to spearhead the effort. Just make the comparison numbers are at the exact same depth. --[[User:Equinox|Equinox]] 12:12, 29 April 2011 (UTC) | + | :Feel free to spearhead the effort. Just make sure the comparison numbers are at the exact same depth. --[[User:Equinox|Equinox]] 12:12, 29 April 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:13, 29 April 2011
Can we change the Healing "Attacks" Section to just Healing? The "Attacks" seems sarcastic and unnecessary. Also, does anyone know how to make the "Sources of each damage" tables not reset your browser back to the top of the page whenever you open or close them? --Softspoken 02:37, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
- I see no harm in changing it to simply "healing" or "healing abilities". As for the collapsible tables, that seems to be an issue with MediaWiki: same problem and a solution here. An administrator would have to step in to fix it. Maget 04:30, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
- I replaced the collapsable tables with showhide boxes, that use different js code and avoid the jumping to the top. --Alfwyn 12:37, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Can we be more quantitative?
In looking at the page today, I noticed that there are no solid numbers explaining what "resistant to" or "weak against" really means in terms of damage. Likewise, there's no numbers for "low/medium/high" bonus damage. If we could quantify these things, it would go a long way towards helping people decide what weapons to use, or what unique variants are worthwhile. --Pauling 02:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
- Feel free to spearhead the effort. Just make sure the comparison numbers are at the exact same depth. --Equinox 12:12, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
