Talk:Forest: Difference between revisions
DrewUniverse (talk | contribs) (Created page with "== Minor Mob table == Initially I had a table prepared that had every stat included: Name, Element, HP, AT, DF, MAT, MDF, SPD, exp, gold, and drops. That proved a bit too muc...") |
DrewUniverse (talk | contribs) m (added signature) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<br> <br> | <br> <br> | ||
Later, I wonder if it'd look good and/or be feasible to make an expandable table. That would allow for people to choose to expand the details if they want without having to go to that mob's article page. For example, when someone just wants to know little things like which mob is faster in a formation of more than one mob type. It seems user-friendly, albeit unnecessary. | Later, I wonder if it'd look good and/or be feasible to make an expandable table. That would allow for people to choose to expand the details if they want without having to go to that mob's article page. For example, when someone just wants to know little things like which mob is faster in a formation of more than one mob type. It seems user-friendly, albeit unnecessary. | ||
--[[User:DrewUniverse|DrewUniverse]] ([[User talk:DrewUniverse|talk]]) 23:06, 6 October 2018 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 06:06, 7 October 2018
Minor Mob table
Initially I had a table prepared that had every stat included: Name, Element, HP, AT, DF, MAT, MDF, SPD, exp, gold, and drops. That proved a bit too much at first look, I think. It seems like a condensed table is best on location pages. With that said, what do people think about the current appearance? I left HP in as a basic stat, but it might not be used much. Maybe just element/exp/gold/drops. Seeking feedback!
Later, I wonder if it'd look good and/or be feasible to make an expandable table. That would allow for people to choose to expand the details if they want without having to go to that mob's article page. For example, when someone just wants to know little things like which mob is faster in a formation of more than one mob type. It seems user-friendly, albeit unnecessary.
--DrewUniverse (talk) 23:06, 6 October 2018 (CDT)