Talk:Combat system: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:52, 6 October 2016

Didn't you want \cdots and not Xs? Spaces are also much easier to read. VANKRASN39 (talk) 13:36, 6 October 2016 (CDT)

I tried a few ways of formatting these formulas and prefer this over the alternatives, and it has to do with the multi-word variable names.

While $a\cdot b+c$ is better than $a\times b+c$ , I don't think $\mathrm {VeryLongVariableName} \cdot \mathrm {AnotherVariableName} +\mathrm {YetAnotherVariableName}$ is necessarily more intuitive, and since the reader won't mix up $x$ with $\times$ if all the variables are long words it's fine to let stand.
Subscript scoping makes more sense in non-spaced variables. Compare: $\mathrm {ShieldSizeModifier} _{\mathrm {Ranged} }$ vs. $\mathrm {Shield\ Size\ Modifier} _{\mathrm {Ranged} }$ : it's more obvious in the first case that the subscript applies to the entire variable name.

ZHOUY1 (talk) 13:52, 6 October 2016 (CDT)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Didn't you want \cdots and not Xs? Spaces are also much easier to read. [[User:VANKRASN39|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39|talk]]) 13:36, 6 October 2016 (CDT)
+I tried a few ways of formatting these formulas and prefer this over the alternatives, and it has to do with the multi-word variable names.
+*While <math>a \cdot b + c</math> is better than <math>a \times b + c</math>, I don't think <math>\mathrm{VeryLongVariableName} \cdot \mathrm{AnotherVariableName} + \mathrm{YetAnotherVariableName}</math> is necessarily more intuitive, and since the reader won't mix up <math>x</math> with <math>\times</math> if all the variables are long words it's fine to let stand.
+*Subscript scoping makes more sense in non-spaced variables. Compare: <math>\mathrm{ShieldSizeModifier}_{\mathrm{Ranged}}</math> vs. <math>\mathrm{Shield\ Size\ Modifier}_{\mathrm{Ranged}}</math>: it's more obvious in the first case that the subscript applies to the entire variable name.
+[[User:ZHOUY1|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1|talk]]) 13:52, 6 October 2016 (CDT)