Revision as of 23:29, 20 January 2008

TECHNIC PP Cost Adjustments

• I've noticed that a lot of the PP cost values are now lower than they were, and as a result this table is now slightly incorrect. I can fix some of these values myself, but not all of them. Do we want to delete the ones we suspect, or know to be incorrect, or leave them as incorrect until someone fixes them? Spirit 05:40, 2 January 2008 (CST)
  • It would probably be best to delete the incorrect data for now and fill in with the most up-to-date information. We should also examine and compare the Tech. % values of the current article with the current state of the game as I believe certain TECHNICs received slight alterations in that area, too. And on a side note, I'm not certain of when, but this section (along with the other photon arts articles) might be receiving an overhaul in the future to implement a new design. - EspioKaos 10:43, 2 January 2008 (CST)
    • I don't know if you've already built something like this, but I got bored today, so I cooked up this Mock-up TECHNICs chart. Let me know what you think. =D - Spirit 07:07, 3 January 2008 (CST)
      • I made an updated version of that table if you're at all interested. It's up under Kietrinia/Sandbox. Posted your latest revision alongside my own for comparison. :)
        --Kit 13:37, 20 January 2008 (CST)
      • I do like the first mock-up table you posted, even moreso because it allows space for pictures of the TECHNIC in question. That'd be pretty helpful for quick identification. - Chaotist Razor 17:29, 20 January 2008 (CST)
  • Something to keep in mind is that the PP cost of TECHNICs depend on the class casting them. I know Fortetechers and Acrotechers both have different PP costs for TECHNICs than a Guntecher. --Kit 11:40, 2 January 2008 (CST)

Proposed revision

• User:Seikas2/Sandbox --Seikas2 13:34, 14 December 2006 (PST)
• I actually prefer the table as it appeared here. Mewn 13:52, 14 December 2006 (PST)

There was a weird rendering problem (some of the lines were missing) the last time I viewed that on the live wiki. That didn't appear on my development wiki. The problem seems to have disappeared now. Merged formatting into current revision. --Seikas2 13:59, 14 December 2006 (PST)

• Love it. - Tycho 10:15, 15 December 2006 (PST)
• User:JustTrio/Sandbox It would be nice to make this page more self contained. A limited number of the technics have their own page that details PP usage and the like, but most simply redirect back to the main page. I've got a non-template based setup at the top of the page and I'm removing them from the bottom as I complete the work. Any thoughts? --JustTrio 21:31, 27 April 2007 (BST)
• Using class="wikitable" would make the table look better, I think, as standard tables look rather ugly, other than that, though, I am pretty impressed. It's informative and well set out. Mewn 09:12, 28 April 2007 (BST)
• User:JustTrio/Sandbox Has been modified to use wikitable and then modified further to maintain a unified color scheme and proper padding. Would anyone like to turn it into a template or would it be appropriate to finish out the entries and update the technic page? --JustTrio 15:18, 30 April 2007 (BST)
• It looks even better now - as for the template thing, I'm not sure it's necessary, might want to seek a second opinion on that though. Mewn 15:40, 30 April 2007 (BST)

Redirects to TECHNIC page

• Since I fail miserably at wikis, how do you remove redirects? I'd like to try and make pages for each of the photon arts currently available online, like the ones I put up for Foie and Diga, if possible. SiegeV 18:25, 8 December 2006 (EDT)

After you get redirected, there is a link below the title, e.g. (Redirected from Agdeal). Either click on that link, or put &redirect=no after the title of the page.

Nuts?

• What kind of joke is this last edit? >_> - Tycho

• • # (diff) (hist) . . ! Techniques‎; 21:39 . . 70.250.43.212 (Talk | block) (→List of Techniques - )
  • Whois report for "Lord_De_Seis": Address: communist@ppp-70-250-43-212.

Ding dong, we have a winner. It's Bea, he said he'd do this as a joke, I didn't think he was serious >_>;; Mewn

New Techniques Added

• Three new images popped up on the image board showing even more new techniques. This is the stuff I've been waiting for, so I'm pumped about this right now. I just added in the new techniques that have been shown thus far, many of which are the replacements for shifta, deband, jellen and zalure. From what I can tell, the -deal suffix indicates a negative buff tech while the -al suffix indicates a buff tech. EspioKaos 10:13, 27 August 2006 (PDT)
• Yeah, these are awesome. My guess is that Retial is the Technique equivalent of the Buff Item Retialide/Letialide (this site uses Letia though) and therefore increases TAP and MST, as the item does. On a side note, the Buff Item and the Technique should remain consistent, in my opinion, so should we use 'Ret-' or 'Let-'? Mewn 12:09, 27 August 2006 (PDT)
• Tycho: *votes 'l'*
• I think we should go with 're' as the prefix. It would tie in better with the light series of techniques since those all seem to have the same prefix: resta, regene, regrants. EspioKaos 10:21, 30 August 2006 (PDT)
• Ah, very good point. I hadn't thought about that. 'Re' it is, then, unless anyone has any objections? Mewn 11:56, 30 August 2006 (PDT)
• doui shima~su - Tycho 04:46, 31 August 2006 (PDT)
• Has someone tried the boost thing for buffs? Just to see if it works with buffs or not, cos then you can say that buffs are(n't) included in the boost, and so you can make a boost staff.

Shifta, Jellen, et al

• I noticed that the names got changed... any source for this? Has someone been playing offline Story? Mewn 23:52, 24 October 2006 (PDT)
• Sorry, that was me. I didn't notice until after I'd posted the edits that I wasn't signed in. I bought the strategy guide while at work yesterday, and edited in the new tech names when I got home. I'm slightly disappointed that they opted to go back to S/D/J/Z as opposed to sticking with the new names. EspioKaos 05:16, 25 October 2006 (PDT)
• Ah, ok. I'm not really surprised by the change mind, especially after the changing of Regene to Reverser. Mewn 12:19, 25 October 2006 (PDT)

New Names

• 'Noszande'? 'Regrant'? Are they for real?.. >_< - Tycho
• According to the guide, yes. I question noszande, but it appears multiple times in the guide as that and not 'noszonde'. We should be able to confirm them in game very soon, though. EspioKaos 05:16, 25 October 2006 (PDT)
• What to trust? An apparently crappy strategy guide or an obviously crappy translation team? :/ Mewn 12:19, 25 October 2006 (PDT)

Shifta, Deband, etc

• I already know what the difference between level 1, 11, and 21 buffs are (radius of casting and duration) except what the amount of ATP, DEF, etc increased really is. Is there anyway to test this? Does it mean that a level 10 buff is useless, a level 20 is average and a level 30 is the best? Or does it only affect radius and duration? Cavarcous 05:53, 14 January 2007 (CST)
• Take a look for yourself. This doesn't mean a level 10 buff is useless (in situations where no other buffer is available, 10% is still useful), though it is nowhere near as good as a level 30 buff. Mewn 09:47, 14 January 2007 (CST)
• Relevant page ^^ --Seikas2 10:38, 14 January 2007 (CST)
• I meant to post that exact page, but it must have messed up. My bad >_< Mewn 12:23, 14 January 2007 (CST)