User talk:Pika Fan

Don't go wiping other people's work like that. Auto-attack is a term used for skill that is automatically chained. You can put any skill as your auto-attack with Ctrl + Mouse 2. Quick Draw description clearly states "Short bow and Longbow skills" which by definition include any skills granted by these weapons. My note is helpful for players mistakenly taking this trait and thinking it would increase their attack speed.--Joppe 16:37, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

So despite recharge rate and attack speed being completely different things, you are going to call him out for vandalism? Okay... Vili 点 17:03, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Vili, good to see you here again. And yes, attack speed and recharge are two entirely different things. The revert will remain unless you get get enough community consensus, else 1RV is in effect. Pika Fan 17:15, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

He deleted my research finding with no discussion - I don't think calling my finding "redundant and pointless" is discussion - and apparently wants to start some kind of revert war here. I consider this vandal behavior.--Joppe 20:05, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

It's not a "research finding", it's just something ill-conceived and blatantly wrong. This is a wiki, not your property, sorry to say. Anyone can edit, revert and remove any comment as long as it's justified. You are wrong, I am right, that is all the justification I need to revert your comment. You are welcome to break the rules to revert war, and I am welcome to report you for doing so. Pika Fan 20:16, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) He reverted it because of the quick draw note, not because of the attack speed. That's just lazy editing, which was easily amended. He was also correct in saying cooldown reduction is redundant and pointless; autoattack is synonymous to chain skills when it's a comment on a chain skill page. No one will be confused by using one term or the other.--Relyk 20:26, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Feast Notes Template

(I prefer not to discuss issues in Summary texts, and I do not appreciate "undo wars" thanks.)

It occurs to me we may be talking about different things: I'm talking about how to make the recipe sheet for trays/feasts using the mystic forge. You seem to be talking about how to make the trays/feasts themselves? -- Nighty 06:32, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

On the pages documenting the feasts and trays themselves? You honestly can't see there's a fundamental flaw in your argument? It pains me deeply to have to describe something so explicitly when it is as obvious as that to begin with to a race of creatures supposedly a lot more intelligent than the average animal. Pika Fan 08:54, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok. Personal attacks are not cool. Goodbye. -- Nighty 10:05, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

They are when the receiving end begs for it. Goodbye. Pika Fan 13:52, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey Pika - I think your Ctrl + mouse 2 may be stuck down. — snograt 14:06, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Stop with the personal attacks. If a user is confused, answer them plainly instead of insulting them. —Dr Ishmael 14:27, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

I am not sure which part of it is a personal attack. Could you elaborate? I am so confused. Pika Fan 16:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

You insulted the intelligence of average animals :( Vili 点 05:29, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I think it counts as a vaguely personal attack--Relyk 06:30, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

You may not be calling him names directly, but you are being condescending, rude, and entirely unhelpful. —Dr Ishmael 13:01, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Condescending and rude, yes; unhelpful, extremely far from it. People have to be taught how to critically think for themselves, and holding their hands may be the fastest way to go about it for the time being, but I am sure everyone is loathe to take 3 days worth of discussions to explain something simple to another each time something like this happens. Highly inefficient and ineffective. Pika Fan 16:41, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

If you had left out the condescending and rude parts of your initial response here, the explanation would have been immediately clear, and it would not have dragged out for 3 days. —Dr Ishmael 16:48, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

The point would also not be stressed in a certain individual that, not using the gifts bestowed upon him by nature's providence and harassing his peers over trivial and simple matters, would result in a backlash that is not so pleasant as he thought. Do you not agree? If I explained the logic behind it in a kindly and motherly manner, not only would I overstep my boundaries by presuming to be his superior, it would also be equally as condescending, if not moreso than bluntly stating and stimulating him to think in the right direction as he should have right from the start. Pika Fan 18:00, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

No. Be civil or else. 18:17, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Now you're going too far the other way. All you have to do is give an objective explanation. Don't be condescending at all (either rudely or motherly), don't make hyperbolic comments about anyone's intelligence, don't say anything beyond explaining the problem. It's not "hand-holding" in any way. —Dr Ishmael 18:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

^That explains why perfectly good contributors such as I are harassed every other day by people wanting "confirmation" over the most mundane and frivolous of matters. Well, to each his own I guess. "Civil" is now defined by "spoonfeeding" and "hand-holding" now, I will keep in mind to try not to offend even the most over-sensitive of people from now onwards, you never know when stating the most innocuous of statements would cause an uproar over the citizenry. Pika Fan 19:20, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

yawns Ok, pretty much your sin is going off topic while sounding like a dick. Also the "I know something you should know". Helping new editors isn't a bad thing and is actually a measure of how good you are at teaching. So, demonstrate your superior intelligence by learning from these admonishments. --JonTheMon 19:39, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

activation time

If I restricted allowed values for Property:Has activation time into quarter increments, then you would get a eery yellow triangle and hateful debug message yelling at you. And I would laugh maniacally. Crossfire doesn't have a listed activation time, so the template is lying in the first place.--Relyk 08:14, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Since I don't disagree with removing the activation time from the template, what would be your point? That it should be put into a Notes section after all? Pika Fan 11:46, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but I don't really care enough to do anything about it.--Relyk 09:15, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Ok.Pika Fan 09:59, 11 December 2012 (UTC)