Difference between revisions of "Talk:Titles of Kings"
(Created page with 'How was an actual title provided as an example of the title contrasts, which existed ingame in Wild Kingdom History for years, subtly offensive? --~~~~') |
|||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
How was an actual title provided as an example of the title contrasts, which existed ingame in Wild Kingdom History for years, subtly offensive? --[[User:Klaa|Klaa]] 07:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC) | How was an actual title provided as an example of the title contrasts, which existed ingame in Wild Kingdom History for years, subtly offensive? --[[User:Klaa|Klaa]] 07:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | That was his title after a bug was never fixed regarding tower influence being reduced. It wasn't needed to only put his when there's been many rulers. | ||
| + | |||
| + | No, that title existed well before the change to how kingdom influence was calculated. Pedro was the only JK king char to ever exist, and overtime JK lost alot of influence to HotS and subsequently MR... thus the negative score at that time. When kingdom influence calculation was changed to accomodate PMKs for Epic, the subsequent drop actually put Pedro into Failed. That was part of how we even knew of those existing rates. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The cited title is a perfectly valid example of someone having such diverging subtitles in their king title. In fact its the '''''only''''' existing example, so I find it a little insulting for someone to accuse me of having such motives in a page I created almost ''three years ago''. The owner of Pedro (not sure who owns him atm offhand... always heard Duce) has never even mentioned it to me. --[[User:Klaa|Klaa]] 06:39, 19 March 2012 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | It was not even 2 years ago, regardless though Pedro was the first king, so how does the first king LOSE influence? Kings perhaps were implemented later in the game when influenced existed, but at one point Rolf changed towers to lesser influence (from like 200 range to 100 or something), and it made all the current Kings drop immensely. Hortons was reset to exactly 5.00%. It's why the Kingdoms History made no sense of how Taya's ending % didn't match Horton's starting %. If you say you have no motives or mean to be offensive, then I see no point in arguing. We can just leave it blank. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Wwiol... tried looking at the page history? I created it in 2009. In addition, Im fully aware of Wild's history and issues. Ive been a Wild player for as long as Wild existed. | ||
| + | |||
| + | I have no issue leaving the name blank. Noticed how I never reverted your edits? My issue is with YOUR initial comment. --[[User:Klaa|Klaa]] 22:35, 19 March 2012 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Sorry, and maybe your intentions were just to put an example, but I don't think it is polite to put just one person's up there, especially one calling him "Stupid" even if a game title did register him as that. It wasn't needed as an example. Do you have any objections to me putting Horton the Traitor Saint? | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Why would I care? Horton is a big boy who can handle himself. --[[User:Klaa|Klaa]] 07:15, 22 March 2012 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 08:15, 22 March 2012
How was an actual title provided as an example of the title contrasts, which existed ingame in Wild Kingdom History for years, subtly offensive? --Klaa 07:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
That was his title after a bug was never fixed regarding tower influence being reduced. It wasn't needed to only put his when there's been many rulers.
No, that title existed well before the change to how kingdom influence was calculated. Pedro was the only JK king char to ever exist, and overtime JK lost alot of influence to HotS and subsequently MR... thus the negative score at that time. When kingdom influence calculation was changed to accomodate PMKs for Epic, the subsequent drop actually put Pedro into Failed. That was part of how we even knew of those existing rates.
The cited title is a perfectly valid example of someone having such diverging subtitles in their king title. In fact its the only existing example, so I find it a little insulting for someone to accuse me of having such motives in a page I created almost three years ago. The owner of Pedro (not sure who owns him atm offhand... always heard Duce) has never even mentioned it to me. --Klaa 06:39, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
It was not even 2 years ago, regardless though Pedro was the first king, so how does the first king LOSE influence? Kings perhaps were implemented later in the game when influenced existed, but at one point Rolf changed towers to lesser influence (from like 200 range to 100 or something), and it made all the current Kings drop immensely. Hortons was reset to exactly 5.00%. It's why the Kingdoms History made no sense of how Taya's ending % didn't match Horton's starting %. If you say you have no motives or mean to be offensive, then I see no point in arguing. We can just leave it blank.
Wwiol... tried looking at the page history? I created it in 2009. In addition, Im fully aware of Wild's history and issues. Ive been a Wild player for as long as Wild existed.
I have no issue leaving the name blank. Noticed how I never reverted your edits? My issue is with YOUR initial comment. --Klaa 22:35, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, and maybe your intentions were just to put an example, but I don't think it is polite to put just one person's up there, especially one calling him "Stupid" even if a game title did register him as that. It wasn't needed as an example. Do you have any objections to me putting Horton the Traitor Saint?
Why would I care? Horton is a big boy who can handle himself. --Klaa 07:15, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
