User talk:WikiMallich

From NexusClash Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Inane chatter

Huh. I've made more than 500 edits. :/--WikiMallich 20:29, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Rage Strike

I like the change and think it makes things clearer. The only other thing to maybe add would be an example of an attack with the charge and then one without to make the differences in AP usage / MP usage and damage more clear? -Dangermouse 17:00, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Something like "For example, a 1-AP attack that does 7 piercing damage could be changed to a 2-AP attack that does 22 points of unholy damage at a cost of an extra 15 MP. The charged version of the attack is identical to the ordinary attack in every other way (accuracy, ammunition usage, etc)"? Anyway, I don't know what the AP costs of the other charged attack are so I'm not going to touch their pages, nor the main Charged Attacks page. I don't suppose you've got an alt with one of them? --WikiMallich 21:22, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
I just started playing so I only have a couple of mortals at the moment. I think all the charged attacks cost an additional AP. Anyways, I made a few examples for the Rage Strike page. Does it make sense to you? -Dangermouse 17:52, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
First, I think a large examples page is better suited to go on the main "Charged Attacks" page. However, I've not got any actual reasoning which back up my opinion whatsoever, so it's probably just a matter of my own personal preferences :P
Next, your "target soak" field needs work. An attack that's charged up to do unholy damage only pays attention to the unholy soak - piercing soak is irrelevant. --WikiMallich 18:14, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Right, which is why the target damage (for the charged attack) is equal to the base damage in the table-- nothing is being soaked. The piercing soak is very relevant (IMO) because part of the appeal of the charged attack is changing the damage type in order to bypass soak. That's what I wanted to make clear on the page but it sounds like you are interpreting it differently. Which means other people will also read it differently. So how can we make it more clear and still get our points across? -Dangermouse 18:25, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
"Target soak: 5 Piercing, 0 Unholy"? The table will have to be a little wider, but (on my screen) there's enough space.--WikiMallich 19:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Righteous. Sounds perfect. -Dangermouse 20:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Charged Attacks

Quick Question: It seems like half of the charged attacks say 2AP and half say 1AP, which is a little confusing. What convention should we use? Should we treat charging the attack as not including the base AP needed to use the attack, which means charging each attack requires an additional AP? Or should we list the total AP to charge and use the attack (2AP for most cases), and say that cost includes attacking? I thought I would get a second opinion before picking one or the other. -Dangermouse 16:23, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I think that some of the confusion steps from the fact that different charged attacks have different AP costs. I've made a forum thread asking for AP totals - see http://www.nexusclash.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=57432.
Personally, I support the first option. Instead of talking about the charged attack's total cost we should make an explicit comparison between the charged attack and the uncharged attack. This should minimize confusion. I've changed the Rage Strike page to read "This is a Charged Attack, costing an additional 1 Action Point and 15 Magic Points when compared to an uncharged attack". The charged attacks that don't cost an extra AP when compared to the regular attack can read: "This is a Charged Attack, costing no additional Action Points but x more Magic Points when compared to an uncharged attack". Do you think that this makes is sufficient clear, or do you support the second option instead?
I think I like that. Since we are describing these more as modifers to an uncharged attack, I guess I will make the spell-ones (Sanctify/Taint Spell) appear as a negative MP adjustment. I'll wait a couple of days to see what comes up on your thread and then start with the changes. -Dangermouse 23:54, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Animus of the Bat MP cost

Wiki says it costs 10MP but on my rev it is listed as 5MP on the drop down menu and uses 5MP when you shift into bat mode. Is that right?-Dangermouse 21:39, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Huh. The changelog puts the cost at 10 MP, but you're right. If it's a bug, it won't be fixed, and if it's not a bug... it won't be fixed. Either way, I'll change the wiki. Thanks for the tip-off.
I don't know about the regular Shadow of the Bat.--WikiMallich 14:40, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Not sure about Shadow. I was not really paying attention when I had Shadow only. -Dangermouse 19:52, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
My chap went from "shadow" to "animus" without ever using "shadow", if I recall correctly. :( --WikiMallich 21:13, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

About Batteries and the Death List thing

Hey Mal, I noticed that you'd removed Tasers from the entry on Batteries as they are now Obsolete. But on the remaining entries, all obsolete weapons appear to have been listed (along with their reload capacity - see Poison Pistols in the Pistol Clip section). Should I revert your change, or remove all mention of these weapons (I cannot deny that I like this latter option more)? Sorry for a newb-y question, but I iz newb. EDIT: And to add to that, I hope you don't/didn't mind me editing your death list. I totally forgot that it was a user page and I should have asked for your permission first >.< I am going to go and read a manual on wiki etiquette before touching this thing again. - Aidan (talk) 16:20, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Regarding tasers... no idea! Some obsolete weapons return in mod-events, so it makes sense to keep some info on it. I think it's a matter of taser as to whether obsolete information is kept segregated from the rest of the wiki (on the grounds that it's obsolete) or whether it should be integrated (on the grounds that it can explicitly inform the playerbase of changes).
Regarding the list of deaths, I only set it up as a user page because, when I first started the list, is was far too incomplete to join the wiki proper. All editors are welcome; I've been planning on moving it to a proper page but never did get round to it.
P.s. Welcome to the wiki! --WikiMallich (talk) 18:20, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
I had a look, Mal, and Tasers are making a comeback during the candy exchange. As such, I might just edit it back in (along with anything else that could have made a return and requires ammunition).
Haha, awesome!!!! I have an additional death to add - Death via Candy Corn! :)
Thanks for the welcome! I will try to be useful around here as far as possible. Broke the last wiki I was in (some six years ago?) and never returned, so trying to be careful and deliberate this time, lol. - Aidan (talk) 19:01, 14 November 2015 (UTC)