Talk:Fighgunner - Revision history

Ezodagrom: /* Points for leveling */

2009-01-17T15:48:18Z

‎Points for leveling

Punisher106: Points for leveling

2009-01-17T15:42:47Z

Points for leveling

EspioKaos: /* Opinions on the design */

2008-02-15T05:20:57Z

‎Opinions on the design

Alkaiser: /* Opinions on the design */

2008-02-15T05:06:04Z

‎Opinions on the design

Sekani: /* Opinions on the design */

2008-02-15T02:45:23Z

‎Opinions on the design

Qwerty: maybe a table? Shamelessly ninja'd from Weapon Proficiencies, with some alterations.

2008-02-15T01:38:16Z

maybe a table? Shamelessly ninja'd from Weapon Proficiencies, with some alterations.

Alkaiser: /* Opinions on the design */

2008-02-15T00:44:22Z

‎Opinions on the design

Sekani: /* Opinions on the design */

2008-02-14T23:52:05Z

‎Opinions on the design

EspioKaos: New page: == Opinions on the design == Sorry; I meant to post my thoughts on this last night, but I kept getting distracted. Anyway, I think it looks great. I see a few things to be corrected, but...

2008-02-14T21:04:07Z

New page: == Opinions on the design == Sorry; I meant to post my thoughts on this last night, but I kept getting distracted. Anyway, I think it looks great. I see a few things to be corrected, but...

New page

== Opinions on the design ==
Sorry; I meant to post my thoughts on this last night, but I kept getting distracted. Anyway, I think it looks great. I see a few things to be corrected, but they're all pretty minor. (''Types'' instead of ''class'' and some capitalization here and there.) While looking at this, I had an idea for a chart we could use to display requirements and weapon/PA proficiencies. When I get a chance, I'll see if I can create it. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 15:04, 14 February 2008 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:48, 17 January 2009
Line 31:		Line 31:

	I think there should be a Mission Point chart for this class, so we know how much MP it will take to level it up.		I think there should be a Mission Point chart for this class, so we know how much MP it will take to level it up.
		+	* There is one chart, but instead of it being on each type page, it's in the Types page, how much MP is needed for Basic, Advanced and Master types. http://psupedia.info/Types#Type_levels_and_changing_Types - [[User:Ezodagrom\|Ezodagrom]] 09:48, 17 January 2009 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:42, 17 January 2009
Line 27:		Line 27:
	*** Really? Eh, I'm pretty much new to wiki editing (lol nublet), so I figure I'm bound to make a few mistakes here and there. The more you know, right? I just hope I didn't break this thing... anyway, yeah, I'd think that that table could work for individual weapon proficiencies.- [[User:Alkaiser\|Alkaiser]] 23:06, 14 February 2008 (CST)		*** Really? Eh, I'm pretty much new to wiki editing (lol nublet), so I figure I'm bound to make a few mistakes here and there. The more you know, right? I just hope I didn't break this thing... anyway, yeah, I'd think that that table could work for individual weapon proficiencies.- [[User:Alkaiser\|Alkaiser]] 23:06, 14 February 2008 (CST)
	* Heh, that's one of the things I was planning on adding, though I'd also like to include requirements and other data in the table. Looking at it now, I forgot that the proficiencies would take up so many rows when emulated like the game's table. I don't think I'd have enough info to fill in so much space. So, back to the drawing table! - [[User:EspioKaos\|EspioKaos]] 23:20, 14 February 2008 (CST)		* Heh, that's one of the things I was planning on adding, though I'd also like to include requirements and other data in the table. Looking at it now, I forgot that the proficiencies would take up so many rows when emulated like the game's table. I don't think I'd have enough info to fill in so much space. So, back to the drawing table! - [[User:EspioKaos\|EspioKaos]] 23:20, 14 February 2008 (CST)
		+
		+	== Points for leveling ==
		+
		+	I think there should be a Mission Point chart for this class, so we know how much MP it will take to level it up.

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:20, 15 February 2008
Line 26:		Line 26:
	*** I thought about using a table like that, but reconsidered because I didn't think it presented the information in the easiest to read manner. I like using tables for statistics or comparisons, but other than that it seems to be overkill for the sake of aesthetics. Just my opinion. <br/><br/>And the bullet points are still all screwy, what the hell? -[[User:Sekani\|Sekani]] 20:45, 14 February 2008 (CST)		*** I thought about using a table like that, but reconsidered because I didn't think it presented the information in the easiest to read manner. I like using tables for statistics or comparisons, but other than that it seems to be overkill for the sake of aesthetics. Just my opinion. <br/><br/>And the bullet points are still all screwy, what the hell? -[[User:Sekani\|Sekani]] 20:45, 14 February 2008 (CST)
	*** Really? Eh, I'm pretty much new to wiki editing (lol nublet), so I figure I'm bound to make a few mistakes here and there. The more you know, right? I just hope I didn't break this thing... anyway, yeah, I'd think that that table could work for individual weapon proficiencies.- [[User:Alkaiser\|Alkaiser]] 23:06, 14 February 2008 (CST)		*** Really? Eh, I'm pretty much new to wiki editing (lol nublet), so I figure I'm bound to make a few mistakes here and there. The more you know, right? I just hope I didn't break this thing... anyway, yeah, I'd think that that table could work for individual weapon proficiencies.- [[User:Alkaiser\|Alkaiser]] 23:06, 14 February 2008 (CST)
		+	* Heh, that's one of the things I was planning on adding, though I'd also like to include requirements and other data in the table. Looking at it now, I forgot that the proficiencies would take up so many rows when emulated like the game's table. I don't think I'd have enough info to fill in so much space. So, back to the drawing table! - [[User:EspioKaos\|EspioKaos]] 23:20, 14 February 2008 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:06, 15 February 2008
Line 25:		Line 25:
	Also, it looks like your <nowiki>:*</nowiki> for a bullet point breaks subsequent bullet points, Alkaiser. --[[User:Qwerty\|Qwerty]] 19:38, 14 February 2008 (CST)		Also, it looks like your <nowiki>:*</nowiki> for a bullet point breaks subsequent bullet points, Alkaiser. --[[User:Qwerty\|Qwerty]] 19:38, 14 February 2008 (CST)
	*** I thought about using a table like that, but reconsidered because I didn't think it presented the information in the easiest to read manner. I like using tables for statistics or comparisons, but other than that it seems to be overkill for the sake of aesthetics. Just my opinion. <br/><br/>And the bullet points are still all screwy, what the hell? -[[User:Sekani\|Sekani]] 20:45, 14 February 2008 (CST)		*** I thought about using a table like that, but reconsidered because I didn't think it presented the information in the easiest to read manner. I like using tables for statistics or comparisons, but other than that it seems to be overkill for the sake of aesthetics. Just my opinion. <br/><br/>And the bullet points are still all screwy, what the hell? -[[User:Sekani\|Sekani]] 20:45, 14 February 2008 (CST)
		+	*** Really? Eh, I'm pretty much new to wiki editing (lol nublet), so I figure I'm bound to make a few mistakes here and there. The more you know, right? I just hope I didn't break this thing... anyway, yeah, I'd think that that table could work for individual weapon proficiencies.- [[User:Alkaiser\|Alkaiser]] 23:06, 14 February 2008 (CST)

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 Sorry; I meant to post my thoughts on this last night, but I kept getting distracted.  Anyway, I think it looks great.  I see a few things to be corrected, but they're all pretty minor.  (''Types'' instead of ''class'' and some capitalization here and there.)  While looking at this, I had an idea for a chart we could use to display requirements and weapon/PA proficiencies.  When I get a chance, I'll see if I can create it. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 15:04, 14 February 2008 (CST)
 * I'll defect to your expertise on the details, but I had some ideas for cleaning up the main [[Types]] page as well after the individual <strike>class</strike> type pages were finished. In the meantime, still open to design and content suggestions before starting on the rest. -[[User:Sekani|Sekani]] 17:52, 14 February 2008 (CST)
-:* I personally think that the chart used in this page (as of this comment) is fine, though for completion's sake and ease of copy/pasting, there should be a row for TECHNIC proficiency (even if it IS a bit redundant). But that's just my opinion. Also, should links to the specific weapon types be added to the table? Just thought I'd ask beforehand. - [[User:Alkaiser|Alkaiser]] 18:44, 14 February 2008 (CST)
+** I personally think that the chart used in this page (as of this comment) is fine, though for completion's sake and ease of copy/pasting, there should be a row for TECHNIC proficiency (even if it IS a bit redundant). But that's just my opinion. Also, should links to the specific weapon types be added to the table? Just thought I'd ask beforehand. - [[User:Alkaiser|Alkaiser]] 18:44, 14 February 2008 (CST)
 *** I don't see we don't use something like this for the proficiency:
@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 Also, it looks like your <nowiki>:*</nowiki> for a bullet point breaks subsequent bullet points, Alkaiser. --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 19:38, 14 February 2008 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:38, 15 February 2008
Line 3:		Line 3:
	* I'll defect to your expertise on the details, but I had some ideas for cleaning up the main [[Types]] page as well after the individual <strike>class</strike> type pages were finished. In the meantime, still open to design and content suggestions before starting on the rest. -[[User:Sekani\|Sekani]] 17:52, 14 February 2008 (CST)		* I'll defect to your expertise on the details, but I had some ideas for cleaning up the main [[Types]] page as well after the individual <strike>class</strike> type pages were finished. In the meantime, still open to design and content suggestions before starting on the rest. -[[User:Sekani\|Sekani]] 17:52, 14 February 2008 (CST)
	:* I personally think that the chart used in this page (as of this comment) is fine, though for completion's sake and ease of copy/pasting, there should be a row for TECHNIC proficiency (even if it IS a bit redundant). But that's just my opinion. Also, should links to the specific weapon types be added to the table? Just thought I'd ask beforehand. - [[User:Alkaiser\|Alkaiser]] 18:44, 14 February 2008 (CST)		:* I personally think that the chart used in this page (as of this comment) is fine, though for completion's sake and ease of copy/pasting, there should be a row for TECHNIC proficiency (even if it IS a bit redundant). But that's just my opinion. Also, should links to the specific weapon types be added to the table? Just thought I'd ask beforehand. - [[User:Alkaiser\|Alkaiser]] 18:44, 14 February 2008 (CST)
		+	*** I don't see we don't use something like this for the proficiency:
		+
		+
		+	{\| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
		+	\|-
		+	\| {{Color-A}} width="17" \| X \|\| {{Sword icon}} \|\| {{Color-A}} width="17" \| A \|\| {{Knuckles icon}} \|\| {{Color-A}} width="17" \| A \|\| {{Spear icon}} \|\| {{Color-S}} width="17" \| S \|\| {{Double saber icon}}
		+	\|-
		+	\| \|\| \|\| {{Color-S}} \| S \|\| {{Twin saber icon}} \|\| {{Color-S}} \| S \|\| {{Twin dagger icon}} \|\| {{Color-A}} \| A \|\| {{Twin claw icon}}
		+	\|-
		+	\| {{Color-S}} \| S \|\| {{Saber icon}} \|\| {{Color-S}} \| S \|\| {{Dagger icon}} \|\| {{Color-A}} \| A \|\| {{Claw icon}} \|\| \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\| {{Color-A}} \| A \|\| {{Slicer icon}} \|\| \|\| \|\| \|\| \|\| \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\| \|\| \|\| \|\| \|\| {{Color-A}} \| A \|\| {{Twin handgun icon}} \|\| {{Color-A}} \| A \|\| {{Handgun icon}}
		+	\|-
		+	\| {{Color-A}} \| A \|\| {{Crossbow icon}} \|\| \|\| \|\| {{Color-A}} \| A \|\| {{Machinegun icon}} \|\| {{Color-A}} \| A \|\| {{Shadoog icon}}
		+	\|-
		+	\| height="25"\| \|\| \|\| \|\| \|\| \|\| \|\| \|\|
		+	\|}
		+
		+	Also, it looks like your <nowiki>:*</nowiki> for a bullet point breaks subsequent bullet points, Alkaiser. --[[User:Qwerty\|Qwerty]] 19:38, 14 February 2008 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:44, 15 February 2008
Line 2:		Line 2:
	Sorry; I meant to post my thoughts on this last night, but I kept getting distracted. Anyway, I think it looks great. I see a few things to be corrected, but they're all pretty minor. (''Types'' instead of ''class'' and some capitalization here and there.) While looking at this, I had an idea for a chart we could use to display requirements and weapon/PA proficiencies. When I get a chance, I'll see if I can create it. - [[User:EspioKaos\|EspioKaos]] 15:04, 14 February 2008 (CST)		Sorry; I meant to post my thoughts on this last night, but I kept getting distracted. Anyway, I think it looks great. I see a few things to be corrected, but they're all pretty minor. (''Types'' instead of ''class'' and some capitalization here and there.) While looking at this, I had an idea for a chart we could use to display requirements and weapon/PA proficiencies. When I get a chance, I'll see if I can create it. - [[User:EspioKaos\|EspioKaos]] 15:04, 14 February 2008 (CST)
	* I'll defect to your expertise on the details, but I had some ideas for cleaning up the main [[Types]] page as well after the individual <strike>class</strike> type pages were finished. In the meantime, still open to design and content suggestions before starting on the rest. -[[User:Sekani\|Sekani]] 17:52, 14 February 2008 (CST)		* I'll defect to your expertise on the details, but I had some ideas for cleaning up the main [[Types]] page as well after the individual <strike>class</strike> type pages were finished. In the meantime, still open to design and content suggestions before starting on the rest. -[[User:Sekani\|Sekani]] 17:52, 14 February 2008 (CST)
		+	:* I personally think that the chart used in this page (as of this comment) is fine, though for completion's sake and ease of copy/pasting, there should be a row for TECHNIC proficiency (even if it IS a bit redundant). But that's just my opinion. Also, should links to the specific weapon types be added to the table? Just thought I'd ask beforehand. - [[User:Alkaiser\|Alkaiser]] 18:44, 14 February 2008 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:52, 14 February 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Opinions on the design ==		== Opinions on the design ==
	Sorry; I meant to post my thoughts on this last night, but I kept getting distracted. Anyway, I think it looks great. I see a few things to be corrected, but they're all pretty minor. (''Types'' instead of ''class'' and some capitalization here and there.) While looking at this, I had an idea for a chart we could use to display requirements and weapon/PA proficiencies. When I get a chance, I'll see if I can create it. - [[User:EspioKaos\|EspioKaos]] 15:04, 14 February 2008 (CST)		Sorry; I meant to post my thoughts on this last night, but I kept getting distracted. Anyway, I think it looks great. I see a few things to be corrected, but they're all pretty minor. (''Types'' instead of ''class'' and some capitalization here and there.) While looking at this, I had an idea for a chart we could use to display requirements and weapon/PA proficiencies. When I get a chance, I'll see if I can create it. - [[User:EspioKaos\|EspioKaos]] 15:04, 14 February 2008 (CST)
		+	* I'll defect to your expertise on the details, but I had some ideas for cleaning up the main [[Types]] page as well after the individual <strike>class</strike> type pages were finished. In the meantime, still open to design and content suggestions before starting on the rest. -[[User:Sekani\|Sekani]] 17:52, 14 February 2008 (CST)