Talk:Combat system: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 14:27, 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)

How about only bunching when there's a subscripted part? It's really rough to read. VANKRASN39 (talk) 14:27, 6 October 2016 (CDT)

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 *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)
+:How about only bunching when there's a subscripted part? It's really rough to read. [[User:VANKRASN39|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39|talk]]) 14:27, 6 October 2016 (CDT)