Template talk:Padding weighting table
I rolled this back due to the changes made to official information provided by Wyrom at the bottom. I have asked follow-up questions on the officials, please wait for the responses. VANKRASN39 (talk) 05:39, 27 August 2017 (CDT)
I rolled back your rollback because there was no reason for it. Please do not remove edits I worked hard on because you are waiting for questions to be answered. If new information provides further insight then make the changes then. Kithus (talk) 10:13, 27 August 2017 (EST)
- I'm sorry, but you changed information that was official. That is not permitted and I will report it. VANKRASN39 (talk) 21:26, 27 August 2017 (CDT)
- Please cite the exact rule that states players cannot update relevant information on the wiki without your permission. Kithus (talk) 10:13, 27 August 2017 (EST)
- From Help:Style: "As GSWiki is considered official documentation and the place where all players new and old are sent to read up on any topic, grammar, style, and formatting should be considered carefully in editing so that the site as a whole will be as professional-looking as possible." You are not to change official documentation provided by GMs. Your chart did just that, and you removed the ranges. Your verbal harassment via LNET private chats, which has been sent to staff, is not appreciated. VANKRASN39 (talk) 21:57, 27 August 2017 (CDT)
- I took into consideration proper formatting and kept it similar to what existed before. There is nothing in what you link that says we cannot update mechanics information provided by GMs with new, more up-to-date information provided by GMs. You just didn't want me to change anything until YOU had all your questions answered. As such you removed relevant information from the Wiki because you're on a power trip. I'm glad you forwarded my comments on you to staff, it's not like I haven't told several of them exactly what I think of you. I have also presented a complaint to feedback about your continued tyranny.Kithus (talk) 4:04, 28 August 2017 (EST)
The following is part of an email I sent to Wyrom showing all of the evidence so far, and fully explains my decision to revert rather than simply correct the official information that was in fact changed (besides the time issue) due to the incomplete information about the in between numbers:
Now that the system has been released, the suspicions behind my inquiry were confirmed and the numbers in between the effective combat numbers are assessing as higher than they should be. With the extended range of 1-5000 instead of 1-50, players need to be given the actual service number that the item is at, the assess description is not good enough. I've posted this inquiry twice, and since the release yesterday two more people have asked almost the exact same question I have been asking since day 1. my two inquiries: http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Hunting%20and%20Combat/Weighting%20and%20Padding/view/139 http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Hunting%20and%20Combat/Weighting%20and%20Padding/view/224 https://forums.elanthia.online/topic/390/wps-chart/6 Sacru: "Got 26 damage padding services performed on already crit-padded armor. Assesses now as "fairly" damage padded, which is not congruent with the chart posted above." That chart on the Elanthia forums by Alastir pretty much matches what Kithus created, thus the chart, as I suspected, is wrong. SVEN2010's posts: http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Paid%20Events:%20Adventures,%20Quests,%20and%20SimuCoins/Duskruin%20Arena/view/8081 http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Paid%20Events:%20Adventures,%20Quests,%20and%20SimuCoins/Duskruin%20Arena/view/8088
- VANKRASN39 (talk) 12:28, 30 August 2017 (CDT)