User talk:Ollj11771

What the heck is Green Numbers? I can't make heads or tails of it. If it's a personal page, please move it to User:Ollj/Green Numbers; otherwise, it needs serious cleanup (especially all that code). &mdash;Tanaric 17:04, 19 Jul 2005 (EST)

I have tried reading your pages and they are really hard to comprehend. They really need to be cleaned if they have something important to say. --Geeman 10:41, 25 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Hey Ollj, I'm sorry but even after your new pages (Relative Increase, 3-1, 7-3, 17-7, etc.) I don't understand what you are explaining. Please could you explain here (on this page) what exactly you are trying to document? If it's something worthwhile then we can help out with the formatting and wording to make it more understandable. 21:15, 25 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Also, please read carefully Style and formatting, it explains good practices for writing articles :) 21:16, 25 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Biro, it took me a while, but Talk:Green Numbers helped me figure it out. He's describing how numerical ranges scale per level.  It's actually not a bad idea... but it's pretty poorly implemented so far.  Stylistically, I'm not sure how we should include this information.  Right now, the most logical way would be to wikify all numerical ranges in skill descriptions.  However, I don't know if that would be immediately obvious to the reader.  Might be better to  range tables on the appropriate skill articles.  I'll fix up one of the ranges so you can see what he's trying to say more clearly. &mdash;Tanaric 21:21, 25 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Okay, check out 36-55. At each attribute level, you can see just how much more effect the skill will have. &mdash;Tanaric 21:28, 25 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * I don't mean to be pedantic here, but I'm unsure about the terminology used. Should this actually be 36...55? I thought a dash was used to denote fluctuations on effectiveness, such as weapons, and three dots were used to denote changes relative to an attribute? If this is the case then I understand this system slightly better (I think in truth I hadn't read enough of Ollj's contributions to make sense of them). 22:11, 25 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Also, why do all the tables go up to 20? Isn't 16 the highest possible value for an attribute point? Again, probably just being picky :) 22:16, 25 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Some attributes can go up to 20. 12 + superior rune + headgear + 2 from weapons + 2 from necromancer or elementalist skill. --Geeman 22:20, 25 Jul 2005 (EST)

1...32
yes, youre right about the terminology. ill change that. i just used "-" in my table because it was shorter (the table really wide)

is not documentated, but i think i know what it does, so i will keep it in mind when writing the other "from...to" ranges. I keep getting database errors, on so many articles so out of my range.

Its meant to be wikified in the skill descriptions. Some go up to 20, those who dont have an "x" at 19 and 20.


 * Have you noticed that many of your tables contain 12 in the attribute rank when there whould be 16 --Geeman 09:58, 27 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * fixed, and will use ' for bold from now on.

please visit Green Numbers
Please visit Green Numbers and let me hear your point on the matter I pointed out. Thanks. Roland of Gilead 11:20, 27 Jul 2005 (EST)