Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Weapons"

Latest revision as of 02:34, 31 December 2010

Alphabet sections?

This list is currently a bit of a mess, so we should make a choice: Use the automatic section creation process by adding articles using Category:Weapons or not, by using Category:Weapons| Weapons. (The trick is the space character, which removes it from the ABC, which probably looks better for smaller selections of articles.) There are a bunch of weapons, but much less in the subsections, so for consistency's sake it's perhaps best to use the trick. (Category:Vehicles on the other hand does consistantly use the ABC thing.) Retodon8 17:12, 23 March 2008 (EDT)

I vote for ABC thing. It looks nice, just needs those who are not in the alphabetical list to be in it, while those who are in the sub-sections should appear here as well. By the way, the Singularity Cannon is a super weapon (no article yet, will write soon), the Enhanced Shock Rifle is one as well. --GreatEmerald 17:58, 23 March 2008 (EDT)

So It should be changed or something? By the way, we should have a voting system, for example: [1] --GreatEmerald 14:59, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

I don't have a strong opinion either way, but it defiantly needs to be consistent. What are your thoughts on the subcategories? With the smaller number of articles in them, they start to look even more odd. – Haarg 16:46, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

I think they're good, weapons should be in the Weapons category and in subcategories. It's useful to keep these, but needs sorting. --GreatEmerald 16:51, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

What I meant was, what do you think should be done for sorting in the subcategories? It would look rather odd to have 3 letter headings, each with a single article listed under them. – Haarg 17:03, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

Oh, well they could be in alphabetical non-letter list. --GreatEmerald 05:09, 5 April 2008 (EDT)

Hmmm, it's possible to use the piping trick in one category, but not the other. A mere three headings each with a single article should be avoided, so piping is the best option there. If piping is not used in a category where/so more ABC sections appear, I wouldn't mind that particular inconsistency.

Category:Maps should also use the pipe trick. However, the ABC headers are very useful in Category:Deathmatch maps. Not sure about something like Category:UT2004 maps... :\ Retodon8 18:21, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

What's a pipe trick? :D --GreatEmerald 05:09, 5 April 2008 (EDT)

Removed pagenames from most of the articles. IMO it looks good, don't forget that there are still several U2 and UC2 weapons coming there. Where do you put the Ball Launcher, Translocator and the Hover Board then? --GreatEmerald 11:40, 20 May 2008 (EDT)

Cores and nodes

Oh really? I think it's not the same as against vehicles - I think it's the same as against infantry, as using an EMP weapon that hits 200 times more against vehicles does no damage to cores at all; while using incendiary weapons which do minimal damage to vehicles, the cores burn in seconds. I know that sounds strange, but that's how it works. Am I right or there's something wrong with this? --GreatEmerald 17:07, 7 November 2008 (EST)

OK, it really counts Nodes as vehicles, and cores as infantry :) Strange I didn't notice it before. --GreatEmerald 11:16, 23 November 2008 (EST)

Comparisons

What do you think, should we create dedicated pages (per game) where different weapon stats, like damage per second, are compared? —Wormbo 04:34, 31 December 2010 (EST)