GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.

Hello there! We are conducting a survey to better understand the user experience in making a first edit. If you have ever made an edit on Gamepedia, please fill out the survey. Thank you!

Talk:Armor Types/Archive2

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Semantics: Basic vs Standard[edit source]

Does anyone mind if I switch the usage of "Basic" and "Standard" in "Basics" section and "Armor Sets" section?

"Standard" to me implies something fairly common across the board, so I feel like for Armor Sets, describing this armor as having standard bonuses and that armor has blah blah mods on top of the standard. Currently the article use the word Basic there.

In the "Basics" article, the plain armor set was described, and since it is comparatively without benefits, it feels more natural to call that armor the Basic armor. Currently the article use the word Standard there.

Rather coincedental that they are "flipped"... Just minor semantical stuff that bugs me. Mind if I swap them around? -PanSola 00:36, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Will change them Monday night if no body cares. --PanSola 19:54, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

The "15k" in armor names should be in parenthesis[edit source]

The "15k" isn't part of the real name of the armor. It's a nick name to distinguish them from the non-15k armors. Thus I suggest to rename articles such as "Enchanter's Armor 15k" to "Enchanter's Armor (15k)".

Comments? -PanSola 09:33, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Will implement the change Monday night if no body cares. --PanSola 19:55, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
/agree --Rezyk 20:01, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Agree — Skuld 09:54, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
/agree --Tetris L 11:08, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Why Armor "Types"[edit source]

And not Armor? — Skuld 10:44, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

See section "Some meta/semantics stuff regarding "Armor Types"". --Tetris L 11:08, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Global vs. Local[edit source]

This is 60.240.230.90, moved from the article page:

check the guid wars web site armor faq and it says that absorption isnt gobally its locational so that a hit to the body won't reduce if your just wearing the boots http://manual.guildwars.com/combat/weapons-and-armor/weapon-armor-faq.html

Moved by Lunarbunny 02:15, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

SonOfRah's tests say they were global despite what the official saying is. Now that could've been "fixed" in one of the recent updates. But unless anyone run tests recently and proved it's local, I vote to stay with SonOfRah's old test results and ignore wht the official website says. -PanSola 02:40, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Both runes and knight's/Ascalon are global. I have tested. In addition, knight's/Ascalon reduces damage from all sources while runes only seem to protect from attacks (both say "reduces damage from attacks"). --Fyren 14:08, 26 November 2005 (UTC)