User talk:Fingolfin
You have no idea how amused I am that the first article edited by the brother of Feanor is High Elf. Nicely done. --MoogleDan (talk) 14:57, 28 November 2014 (CET)
Contents
Mutation Rollbacks
Just so you know, the reason I rolled back your edits to those mutations is that mutation articles should not have version tags at all. They all get fed into the page Good mutations, and ideally THAT page gets kept up to date and has an appropriate tag. If the individual pages get tags, the overarching page suddenly gets broken up by dozens of version breaks. Instead, we just try to include the mutation's version history in an extra box added at the bottom of the mutation info. --MoogleDan (talk) 13:54, 30 January 2015 (CET)
Heavy Crossbows?
Hey, Fingolfin? Are you CERTAIN about that triple crossbow => heavy crossbow name change? I was under the impression that "heavy crossbow" was just the special weapon type for "Sniper," in order to explain its slower than normal attack delay... Have you seen no triple crossbows in that game? This seems like the sort of change they would've mentioned in the 0.16 change notes, but I see nothing along those lines... --MoogleDan (talk) 13:08, 18 March 2015 (CET)
Signing your posts
When you add something to a discussion page (as you did on Talk:Player ghost), it's good to sign your posts using --~~~~ (the tildes are automagically converted to a signature) so everyone knows who's saying what. --Lokkij (talk) 17:04, 13 April 2015 (CEST)
Possible projects - strategy for species
Hey Fingolfin! Honestly, I think I largely edit like you - focusing mostly on updating and correcting obsolete and incorrect info (and even that's in huge fits and starts), but there is one thing that's been nagging at me just a bit lately, the lack of much (or even ANY) decent strategy info on the species pages for newer and more inexperienced players. Some of them have a ton of helpful details and look great (like deep dwarves), but others could really use something (in my admittedly, very non-expert opinion).
For example, the human article. it's pretty short, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it has zero strategy tips, which might be a turn off to some players. I mean, why play a human if you don't know what's good or bad about them and some general ideas of how to use them? Clearly, we don't need anything near as detailed as the character guides, just some general, common-sense tips that most players/editors can agree upon (i.e. won't piss anyone off).
So, that said, if you're interested, can you think of any good strategy we could add to the human article (or any other lacking species)? I was thinking highlighting their adaptability and quick leveling, and trying to show how that might influence even some tactical considerations, but honestly I'm a bit stumped for any real gems of advice. As they say, two heads are better than one - anything come to mind? (also, if this is in anyway not something you're interested in, feel free in telling me to buzz off, I will totally understand :) --Buddy23Lee (talk) 01:11, 18 August 2015 (CEST)
- I like the idea of adding some strategy info on the species articles, though I have virtually no experience in playing humans (yes, I was rebuked by the lack of any advice on hox to play them, since the article only states the negative points of humans). I also think the same should be done with backgrounds, especially since most caster backgrounds basically just list the starting spells. However I don't have much playing time right now and I won't be able to add any significant contribution before 1-2 weeks, but if you're still motivated then, I'll be glad to join you in this quest. --Fingolfin (talk) 18:50, 19 August 2015 (CEST)
