User talk:HellMuT

I like that you've put the tables in, the pages look more professional now, and more usable. But mind if I reformat them to this style? It's a slow process, which is why I'm glad there's something already there, and the armor needs to be up first since there's very little armor up at the moment, but maybe later? -- Ladywinter 00:32, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter to me. I just like having things separated because there is less clutter, easier to sift through, seems more organized, and its easier to edit separate sections. There's still a few more pages without tables regardless. I guess you can knock those out first before with the style. Or maybe try to get a poll on which style people like :D, because there's like 3 separate table formats for weapons currently: Spear, Lightsabre, and Cross - HellMuT 00:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I just looked at the three templates. First template gives the needed information, and looks professional with the pictures. Second template gives the same information, but adds the quotes that are put on some weapons, that can be gotten rid of and put onto the weapon's specific page. Third template is the weapons template I made, but its not designed to be put into a list, it simply has too much information on it and takes up too much room. So I suggest using the first template that Ladywinter made and just make the names link to the pages where we can use the larger and more comprehensive weapon template. ~ Illara 01:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

They all contain the needed information. It's just how the information is displayed is the importance. Its basically this: one long sortable table vs multiple small tables broken down by level bracket - HellMuT 01:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking just use the list Ladywinter made, and then create a separate page for each weapon. You can add extra information about it on its own page: quotes, how to obtain, recipe's, etc. That way we have a concise sortable list, and an area to expand on each item. ~ Illara 01:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm fine with that...sometimes the weapons have alot of info...and when you want a table you don't necessarily want/need the recipes/quotes -- Ladywinter 02:33, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Creating a separate page for each weapon is unnecessary, but for weapons created through recipe and obtained through quests, sure, its fine to add a separate page detailing what mats are needed or what quest you need to do. But for every other weapon, you're just re-listing all the details already available in the table except adding trivial information like gold sell value and how much weight it takes up in your inventory. Quotes/item description may not be needed on the current/future table, but I just added it out of flavor and boredom. It also eliminates the need to make a new separate page for the weapon just to list the quote. Not all items even have any description anyways. It's mostly Slayer weapons, Orange items, witch weapons, and some fighter items. So it won't clutter the page all that much.

Anyways, as long as the essential information is there, I don't really see the need to change the current table format when its already on 19/25 weapon pages already. They all may not be completed, but its still there with most of the weapon names for easy editing. I personally like it how its formatted. I wanted it sorted like the JP wiki, but instead of sorting it by rarity, I opted sorting it by levels just to change it up a bit. But in the end, its 2 against 1 and I can't really do anything about it. I'll just keep editing whatever is there/needs fixing. - HellMuT 03:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Honestly, I'm fine with a system so long as it's usable. If you like the table format we can put the quotes into the Notes section. And to make the tables sortable is easy, the Spear page is currently sortable, that's why the rarity is it's own column. ...hmm, I should perhaps add a note on how to sort the things at the top. x.x -- Ladywinter 03:12, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll still work with whatever. I'm just more biased towards the current tables because of working with them for awhile. As long as its broken down to smaller table categories at least, be it by levels or rarity or whatever. Like when Green Items was all one table. There was so much stuff, it becomes a pain to look through despite being sortable, let alone edit. Even still, when broken up by armor categories, there's a lot of clutter, but its still better off before. Maybe I'm just being nit-picky, but I just don't like really long tables. - HellMuT 03:33, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The table format is not bad. Put pictures, some info, and it might be complete. One thing: it's a little clustered up, so you should edit it to group it into parts. And why put the orange/purple/pink items first? Shouldn't you include blue items first? The majority of items are blue. ---Regards, TechnicalDeath 04:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Can you link the table you're referring to? Some tables are broken up and do have pictures. Of course a lot of it is incomplete, because only a few people have been working on it on their spare time. Also, I did purple/pink/orange first because its what most people are interested about. They want to know the stats of rare items, so they know what items to look forward to. - HellMuT 04:17, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I will try to make a table for blue items, and put them all somewhere. The thing is, I actually suck at table formatting but I make websites - and that's a REALLY wierd thing.---Regards, TechnicalDeath 04:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I re-read this and realized I'd missed something during the first read thru. Shorter tables? x.x To be honest I kinda prefer the longer one 'cause you can sort the whole thing. I do prefer sorting by levels instead of rarity tho. Hmmm, what about a compromise: 15 levels per table? That's small enough to have the table comfortably fit on a regular monitor, I think. -- Ladywinter 16:34, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I feel that its neater that way, but it really doesn't matter in the end. We should just get all the info down first. Then if you want to change it, feel free to. - HellMuT 22:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Green or Purple?

I...am a bit confuddled. Are legacy items green or are they purple?  ::scratches head:: -- Ladywinter 04:44, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Legacy armor equips are green. Legacy weapons are purple - HellMuT 04:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

...wut. DDD= -- Ladywinter 04:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Well there are Legacy Items for Armor and Weapons. The Legacy armors are green, and the legacy weapons are purple. - HellMuT 05:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

lol, I'm less wut at what you said than the fact that the developers didn't make their game consistent. -- Ladywinter 16:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Katanas

your edit was not exactly accurate there are 2 aktans with different crits and at least one that specifically does NOT have the -1%hit bonus, taking them out makes it so that specifically those that benefti from 'lacking'the stats are not seen as such, did you not realize this when making the change? ~Aselus

If it doesn't have the default Crit or Hit bonus, it can easily be stated into that Katana's stats. Which Katanas are you specifically talking about? - HellMuT 23:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

tbh the only one i really remember is Legacy: Katana of Lauvi, would haveto look through them again to see if there was another. ~aselus

Ok added the line "Hit Rate ± 0%" to those that don't have the normal hit rate and not the -1% hit rate. (31-40) - HellMuT 02:27, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks ^_^ ~--Aselus 18:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

monster table!

I like it! I do wish that there could somehow be squeezed in a map tho, location marked with a green person icon or something. Perhaps on the right? =\ dunno. -- Ladywinter 20:56, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

How about that? Feel free to edit it a bit, as I'm not super proficient with tables. - HellMuT 23:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)