Good job on your addition to the combat page, it is a job well done. Puk 01:32, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Well you certainly waste no time, I was halfway through editing the Accessory with my tripe when I checked back. Nice catch, I had completely missed the attribute bonuses and that is a much less confusing way of displaying it, thank you. Doing the same for the Accessory page might be in order, if you wish to take matters into your own hands. The multipliers for accessories are slightly more confusing however. Armithaig 20:10, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
- Yep. Thanks. --Felbryn 18:10, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
List of Ascended equipment
Hey, just wanted to let you know that I moved your List of ascended equipment to List of Ascended equipment, because of capitalization conformity. Just wanted to give you the heads up! —Jyavoc 07:53, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
- After doing some research, I've reverted my change, albeit leaving behind a redirect at the latter article to the former. Reasonings for this (and for the initial change) can be found on the original page's talk page. —Jyavoc 08:04, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Item nomenclature - Armageddon armor drops regularly from fractals. Not sure if they are consistent though. Aside from this list there is actually no clear way to see all your available options of getting certain stats. -- Karasu (talk) 01:32, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- A search for "armageddon" on the trading post turns up a bunch of armor, but it has a variety of different stats, and all of the attribute combinations already appear in the prefix list (I see Soldier's, Cavalier's, Rabid, and Magi's stats). I'd argue that "armageddon" probably indicates the source or the appearance of the armor, rather than its stats. If you find any attribute combinations that aren't already listed, though, I'd be very interested to read about them. --Felbryn 06:30, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
What other pages did you see that on? That word pairing doesn't make any sense (as you seem to agree), and they should all be changed to use "major." —Dr Ishmael 05:39, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Inscription and Insignia were the ones I checked that used "main". I honestly have no preference between "main" and "major", though; I'm just in favor of using the same term everywhere. --Felbryn 05:42, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- If you didn't have a preference, you wouldn't have changed it the first time. :P I've fixed both of those. —Dr Ishmael 06:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Someone else changed it from "Main" to "Major" in the triple attributes table (but not the double attributes table). I couldn't decide whether to revert the change or adjust the other table to match, so I checked some other pages and went with the majority. --Felbryn 06:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
This seems inefficient - 4 new minor headers that have less than a line of text (on my screen) each. Wouldn't it be better to consolidate this in a new top-level section with more details? —Dr Ishmael 19:21, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
- Since different material types have different promotion rules (and some don't promote at all), I think it makes more sense to talk about how promotion works for a given material class inside the section for that material class. But I don't feel especially strongly about it, so if you want to reorganize it, go ahead. --Felbryn 19:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I have no evidence for a hypothesis?
Why would you write "You have no evidence for this", on a footnote that is ASKING for information?
The footnote is as follows: If a player on personal reward Level 20-25 but completing even numbered Fractal 26 or 28, then they would be receiving a daily bonus chest for Level (?).
Some valid ideas for what fills in the blank for (?) are: (1) The even numbered daily chest equal to or lower than your personal reward in the same tier, (2) Daily reward for 26 or 28.
I know it's probably NOT going to be 26 or 28, but I was asking for confirmation on this. You could've written in your comment "It's obviously the even numbered fractal chest lower than your own personal reward" or "It's actually the blah blah blah chest". I think it would've been best if you replaced the question mark with the correct information or moved it to the discussion at the least.
It's a bit disrespectful writing "You have no evidence for this", kinda makes me wonder what you mean... Also, for those that are doing a personal reward in the levels that can receive both infused and non-infused rings but participating in the fractal level that, wouldn't you think they might be curious if they are or aren't receiving the bonus chest that is guaranteed to not have a non-infused ring? Thinking from that point of view, do you believe that footnote may have helped those reading the table? Fresh Berry Smoothie 21:24, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- By calling special attention to the specific levels you mentioned, you implied there was some reason to think they behaved differently from other levels. You have so far not presented any reason to be even slightly suspicious that that is the case. You are making crap up and posting actively misleading information on the page to try to draw attention to your crazy conspiracy theories.
- And I did write about it on the discussion page. Which you obviously know, since you've already replied to me there. So stop posting about it on different pages! Either make a real case on the discussion page or stop bothering me. --Felbryn 22:09, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- I don't know when "hypotheses" became "making crap up". You sir are rude. I will not bother you no longer. I just hope you don't talk to people afk like this. Fresh Berry Smoothie 23:11, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Sounds like it means exactly what I think it means. —Dr Ishmael 20:46, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- As a linguist, I think you might be mistaken. There are three types of affixes: prefixes, infixes, and suffixes. Here's an example of each (the bolded parts):
- Prefix: eco-car
- Infix: abso-frickin'-lutely
- Suffix: Hawaii-bound
- Infixes, by definition, must come within a single word. While English makes widespread use of suffixes and prefixes, infixes are extremely rare (although, some languages use them quite extensively) and are usually limited to exclamations or emphasis. The item nomenclature used in Guild Wars 2 is done so exclusively with prefixes and suffixes. --★KOKUOU★ 21:27, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- If I've somehow overlooked a bunch of items with stat-indicating infixes, by all means, point them out to me. The only substrings I'm aware of that occur in item names and indicate an item's attributes occur exclusively at the front or back of the name (even when there are multiple prefixes, the attribute-based one is first, e.g. "Traveler's Orrian Mace"). --Felbryn (talk) 21:38, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- UGH. I'm not using it in the grammatical sense, I'm using in a game mechanics sense. Specifically, definition 2. to implant. The infix stats are "implanted" in the item and cannot be removed or changed. The official API uses "infix" to describe them. The fact that Anet decided to map these infix stats to a prefix on the item's name is confusing the issue. —Dr Ishmael 21:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- Anyway, I realize now that using that word in that one sentence within that huge article is completely inconsistent. I'm not arguing the fact that you changed it. —Dr Ishmael 22:08, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- First off, if you use "suffix" in the same sentence (especially in contrast), then of course readers will assume you're using the grammatical meaning of "infix"—you've primed them for that mindset. Secondly, that definition you're citing is a verb, so it wouldn't be an "infix portion", it would be an "infixed portion". Third, the "suffix" attributes on ascended items can't be changed either, so they are just as much "infixed" as the other stats (game mechanically speaking).
- But what's this official API you're referring to? If ANet chose a stupid naming convention, that's not your fault, but this isn't something I've heard of. --Felbryn (talk) 22:19, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Preview Play Day: 27 September 2013
There is a Preview Play Day this week, at 9 AM PST on Friday, and we need a representative on fairly short notice (by tomorrow, Wednesday). Also note that we are going to be trying a new approach to documenting the previews- read this for details. If you are available at that time and interested in trying out the new journalistic approach, please go say something over on the talk page ASAP. Thanks! 16:22, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Yep. I think that is called a fail. -Chieftain Alex 18:26, 28 November 2013 (UTC)