Difference between revisions of "Talk:Unit Naming Guide"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Possible Rearrangement) |
Shoenaemaeh (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Good point, mysterious anonymous person. Would we need several separate sections: 'High Weapon, High Armour', 'High Weapon, Low Armour' [Beserks, anyone?], 'Low Weapon, High Armour' and 'Low Weapon, Low Armour'?--[[User:Egregious|Egregious]] 15:17, 13 July 2006 (CEST) | Good point, mysterious anonymous person. Would we need several separate sections: 'High Weapon, High Armour', 'High Weapon, Low Armour' [Beserks, anyone?], 'Low Weapon, High Armour' and 'Low Weapon, Low Armour'?--[[User:Egregious|Egregious]] 15:17, 13 July 2006 (CEST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Maybe through: | ||
| + | * -[HH]- / -[HL]- / -[LH]- and -[LL]- | ||
| + | * Although i would either use something like -[5/4]- which would mean 50% weapon and 40% armour. Of course rounding is allowed; it has to give an aproximate view of the power of the unit. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Problem is when mixing units (like make a second recruit from a different type: you would have to rewrite the name of the unit...: 2 hours. [[User:Shoenaemaeh|Shoenaemaeh]] 16:36, 13 July 2006 (CEST) | ||
Revision as of 16:36, 13 July 2006
Maybe some changes could be made taking into account that now EQ is divided between armour and weapons...
Good point, mysterious anonymous person. Would we need several separate sections: 'High Weapon, High Armour', 'High Weapon, Low Armour' [Beserks, anyone?], 'Low Weapon, High Armour' and 'Low Weapon, Low Armour'?--Egregious 15:17, 13 July 2006 (CEST)
Maybe through:
- -[HH]- / -[HL]- / -[LH]- and -[LL]-
- Although i would either use something like -[5/4]- which would mean 50% weapon and 40% armour. Of course rounding is allowed; it has to give an aproximate view of the power of the unit.
Problem is when mixing units (like make a second recruit from a different type: you would have to rewrite the name of the unit...: 2 hours. Shoenaemaeh 16:36, 13 July 2006 (CEST)
