Difference between revisions of "User talk:Inceptor57"

From War Thunder Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(penetration tables)
m (Undo revision 95460 by U28580205 (talk))
(16 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Pz.II C==
+
{{sp-begin|Archive}}==Pz.II C==
 
as the person who wrote the base version of the Pz.II C bio, which you appear to have edited -  
 
as the person who wrote the base version of the Pz.II C bio, which you appear to have edited -  
 
please go back through and fix some of the grammar.  
 
please go back through and fix some of the grammar.  
Line 129: Line 129:
 
: I feel like there needs to be another way to do this. Adding the additional 60 degree is helpful, but it looks quite cramped in the large table of numbers. I'm also not in favor of making another table just for 60 degree either as that'll just clutter the pages more. I'll look into the formatting and see if there are better ways to display the information. Until then, can you please hold off on doing it to every page? --[[User:U28580205|U28580205]] ([[User talk:U28580205|talk]]) 07:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 
: I feel like there needs to be another way to do this. Adding the additional 60 degree is helpful, but it looks quite cramped in the large table of numbers. I'm also not in favor of making another table just for 60 degree either as that'll just clutter the pages more. I'll look into the formatting and see if there are better ways to display the information. Until then, can you please hold off on doing it to every page? --[[User:U28580205|U28580205]] ([[User talk:U28580205|talk]]) 07:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 
:: Sure, that's why i'm asking. Only added this to 30 mm's and a few 35 mm's where it seemed drastically different from others so far. Just drop me a message, when you have a better solution. --[[User:U42773747|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747|talk]]) 07:32, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 
:: Sure, that's why i'm asking. Only added this to 30 mm's and a few 35 mm's where it seemed drastically different from others so far. Just drop me a message, when you have a better solution. --[[User:U42773747|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747|talk]]) 07:32, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 +
 +
== Regarding the optics instructions ==
 +
 +
The way you shortened the instruction up should work, at least until ATGM tank are introduced. (because they are the ones which specifically can't fire without optics for some reason) Most of those have NVD anyway, so i guess it works? Considering i'm going to fill in the tables anyway, the "try to fill the table" part or "refer to gallery" part can also be omitted, i guess. Is the instruction on NVD-fitted tanks alright in your vision? --[[User:U42773747|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747|talk]]) 15:30, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 +
: Do you have an example of a NVD section description? I will have to take a look at another time as I will be preoccupied for a while soon. Also, just want to standardise (that I didn't do on the ST-A1 page), we should try to have the optic subsection in the main armaments come below the ammunition/ammo-racks subsection rather than before them.<br>..."Alright in your vision", hah, that's funny. --[[User:U28580205|U28580205]] ([[User talk:U28580205|talk]]) 15:42, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 +
::As for NVD pages, i tried it out on a few vehicles i tried out to "trial and error" them to find out if any problems would arise. For example: https://wiki.warthunder.com/BMP-2#Optics_and_night_vision This is how i think it would look like when it's just barely filled out, https://wiki.warthunder.com/Type_75_SPH#Optics_and_night_vision is filled out "complicated tank" page and https://wiki.warthunder.com/Warrior#Optics_and_night_vision is how "complicated atgm" page is filled out (as in, what details might arise from looking at optics functionality > what can be pointed out to look for). Also by default i listed optics into/past ATGM weapon slot if it exist because of how it affects that weapon specifically (could just give it same level as weapon i guess?) and before machine guns, i guess my brain just went offline when i did it to ST-A1. As for standartization of placement, i'm not sure, for some tanks it seems more important than for others. The ST-A1 page to begin with is in a bit of a mess because of how i had to write text for it in other time and does not take well to inserts in between. I guess pushing optics past gun and ammunition on all pages works. The SPAA pages have "radar" section as well, but for them optics might be useless as well (with [[Stormer HVM|stormer]] and [[OTOMATIC|otomatic]] as exception i guess, the first one might as well have them straight after the gun). ''unintentional puns best puns''. --[[User:U42773747|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747|talk]]) 16:06, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 +
::::Anyway, preparations are all done due to [https://wiki.warthunder.com/index.php?title=User:U13682523&oldid=34725#List_of_all_tank_sight_magnifications Flame2512] and [https://wiki.warthunder.com/Night_Vision_Devices#List_of_vehicles_with_Night_Vision_Devices DnaGonite] help. With outside sources, it is now possible to fill out most of the data. If it is fine, i'll just put optics on same row as weapons themselves (the === row), past the weapon and their ammo but before MG and radars (because optics are more or less correlated with the main weapons) and go fix ammo tables and optics on all normal tanks (considering the last ST-A1 page edit as default). Meanwhile, you can decide on the NVD ones - just set me the bar by editing one of the mentioned pages and i'll fix the rest. --[[User:U42773747|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747|talk]]) 07:50, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 +
 +
== 109 K-4 Horsepower Chart -  Talk - F4Knight - Question ==
 +
 +
Hello. I'm F4Knight and I decided to share some of my work (specifically talking about the horsepower charts) and I was wondering how I would verify it. For the F-82E, I included screenshots of the localhost of the planes stats (Horsepower and such) on a Google Doc. Is that enough to verify the chart or is there more needed? Just wanted to make sure before doing more horsepower charts. Thanks - F4Knight
 +
: Hello there. Firstly, I think the hp charts you're trying to make are a neat addition. But as you may have heard from the other user that contested your charts initially, there's a lot of factors and such that affects aircraft horsepower than altitude. I'm trying to find out on my end what's the perfect setting to test these stats, but for right now can you say on what map did you test the current F-82 charts?<br>I would also recommend some changes on the chart:
 +
# Adding the game's version number so that users are aware when the chart was last updated should the engine performance ever change in the future.
 +
# Adding dots on the hp line where each 1000 meter mark is. It's rather hard to eyeball it at a quick glance.
 +
## To reduce the text clutter at the bottom, you can title the axis "Altitude in 1000 meters" and then just label each vertical axis mark "1, 2, etc."
 +
# See if its possible to remove the empty space below the 1000 hp mark.
 +
# See if the chart's standard can be converted to 100% rather than WEP, considering some planes don't have WEP. Or have the two data coexist.
 +
:Lastly, when you edit in talk pages, you can sign your edits with the <code><nowiki>--~~~~</nowiki></code> code.--[[User:U28580205|U28580205]] ([[User talk:U28580205|talk]]) 17:46, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
 +
 +
Aight, I will take note of your advice. I did the F-82 chart in the test flight so whatever map that is. I know horsepower will change depending on your speed so I tried to get to the highest speed I could reach on 100% Throttle then went on WEP for a few seconds, got a screenshot then climbed and repeated it.
 +
Ok quick update, I have updated the chart to how it looks right [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iRgQagM7xx5D1-P0qF8tPWwgL_wuJYASCzkBPzWCbUc/edit?usp=sharing here] I'll do the 100% Throttle data later but as of now does that look fine to you?--[[User:U48664895|F4K]] ([[User talk:U48664895|talk]]) 23:58, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
 +
 +
== You got rid off my talk page thing ==
 +
 +
You got rid of it saying it had "profanity". "Crap" isn't a swear word.[[User:U56907291|U56907291]] ([[User talk:U56907291|talk]]) 22:49, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 +
 +
== Thanks! ==
 +
 +
Hey, just wanted to send a big Thank You for the edits you make improving grammar and an overall readability of the articles. Excellent, and an extremely helpful work. As someone who's far from being an English native speaker, I can only say that I'm really grateful of your contributions to improving the edits I, and others, have made. :) [[User:U12017485|U12017485]] ([[User talk:U12017485|talk]]) 10:25, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 +
 +
== Award Request Images ==
 +
 +
Hello, I don't need the pictures I uploaded anymore. You can totally delete them. --[[User:U44629479|U44629479]] ([[User talk:U44629479|talk]]) 13:28, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 +
 +
== Frigates ==
 +
 +
Hi, can you create the icon for frigates, like the one for [[:File:Destroyers icon.png|Destroyers]]? They are a separate class of ships above the sub-chasers, so I think it would be good to have them in the [[Fleet]] page, given that they've been added with the latest patch. [[User:U12017485|U12017485]] ([[User talk:U12017485|talk]]) 08:29, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
 +
: Hello, we currently don't have a icon for frigates, nor am I the creator of most of the naval icons. However; I added Frigates to the "large vessel" category so that it is displayed. Apologies for the late response. --[[User:U28580205|U28580205]] ([[User talk:U28580205|talk]]) 22:01, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
 +
{{sp-end}}

Revision as of 21:06, 24 February 2021