Mud and Blood official Wiki talk:Discussion Room

From Mud and Blood official Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Question asked.)
Line 13: Line 13:
How come I can't edit this page?  David
How come I can't edit this page?  David
: It requires [[Project:Trusted|Trusted]] privileges. [[User:Bersimon|Bersimon]] • [[User_talk:Bersimon|talk]] [[File:Wiki_light_admin.png|Admin|link={{ns:4}}:Admin]] 00:33, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
== "Category:Strategy" update==
== "Category:Strategy" update==

Revision as of 17:33, 21 October 2012

Should the Discussion Room be added to navigation, like current events and community portal? --AvalancheO 19:59, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Only Urb can edit that. Also, at Ber, you're an officer, so I'll sign you up as one. --Riderx Talk~contibs Officer 22:21, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Gotta love the intro. :D --AvalancheO 03:16, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

true that!--thebomb 23:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Ooh... choox, you really shouldn't have added yourself to that list, particularly considering you've done little mainstream work- most of your edits are Talk page or User page edits. Discussion? -Branabus, minor WikiMod.png

should we make an honor roll for the staff?--thebomb 23:52, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Nah. --Bersimontalk Admin 03:12, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

How come I can't edit this page? David

It requires Trusted privileges. Bersimontalk Admin 00:33, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

"Category:Strategy" update

Hi Staff,

I am new to MnB2, but played MnB1 some years ago for quite some time. As a newbie to MnB2 I checked the strategies available on the wiki and also on the forum. Tried some newbie strats that got me nowhere until I found out that they are outdated. Patch 2.3 and the nerfed Bazookas. As it took me a lot of time to find some valid strats I would like to sort the 37 strategies on the "Category:Strategy" page. Also if I am able to do so I would like to create new sub categories like "Working with Patch 2.3" and "outdated (or something like that)" to make navigation easier.

What do you think about that suggestion? --Kuppuswami 10:53, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion- I'm about to do as you suggest, and then link the Main Page link to the non-outdated strats.
It's always interesting to hear from people navigating through the wiki for the first time: do you have any suggestions for how we should improve it? -Branabus, minor 12:52, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I have a suggestion. Conduct a poll about practicality/suitability of strategies which are registered on the wiki, then recommend some valid and good ones (according to the vote) for those who want to be helped. -HeinkelWolf 13:02, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi Branabus,
you already implemented the box saying "This article relates to a strategy for an old game version..." on the strategy pages which are outdated. But to find that information one has to browse through all 37 pages individually. What about the idea with the subcategories mentioned above? On the long run Heinkelwolfs suggestion seems appropriate to find the strats that are good in quality and are up to date. --Kuppuswami 13:55, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
The new category "outdated" is nice but if someone wants to find a working strat right now he needs to check both cat-pages to find out which he could use. A positive list or cat like "Working with patch 2.3" would be helpful.
By the way: I just checked the first three strats "AvalancheO's Strategies", "Blast from the past" and "British's strategies". Only the "blast" which mentions Patch 2.3 explicitly is compatible. The other two both use zooks with camnets for AT.
A positive list would include "Blast from the past", "SuperBrute's Strategy", "SuperSniper's Guide For Ultimate Domination", "SuperSniper's Guide for Regular Deploy" and ...? --Kuppuswami 14:17, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Excellent going here. I think that strategies should have an additional field where it is stated in what versions they were actually tested on. -- Bersimontalk Admin 23:49, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

@Bersimon: Also a nice idea. That would make the compatibility with the current patch version visible. It would also make sorting/categorizing/administrating strats easier.

@Veteran Strategists: You deserve credit for bringing up fresh concepts within your strategies like "putting 5 men in the upper half of the screen (Wespe)", "putting Frenchies/Medics in front of valuable troops (meatshild)", and many more. Maybe there is a way to put up some sort of "hall of fame" that honours unique ideas in strategies.

For me as a beginner my first step towards the game was looking into the wiki for information on units, game mechanics, medals and walkthroughs. Than I knew it was important to get to wave 100 on average within the first 100 games or at least make it to wave 50 within the first 50 games. There are quite a lot strats out there that claim they provide an almost foolproof way to VC. In fact right now it's a coinflip situation if you are lucky and start with a working strat or you fail miserably with an outdated one. That can lead to confused newbies or in the worst case one quits playing MnB turning towards other promising games. In my point of view it is crucial that beginner/VC strats are visible and working. The non-working ones should be marked accordingly. For advanced strategies maybe that isn't that important. By the time the gamer is able to use "proper planing", "close protection",... he could be able to recognise outdated features like zooks, quadbunkers, ... --Kuppuswami 15:50, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Personal tools