User talk:Bomb Bloke
Chat Section
So are you an Aussi? (Oi Oi Oi!) --Ceruleus 19:17, 16 April 2008 (PDT)
Sort of, I'm a New Zealander who just happens to live in Tasmania (both areas are closest to the Oceania server).
- Bomb Bloke 19:36, 16 April 2008 (PDT)
A Kiwi! Very cool. Kia Ora! --Ceruleus 19:42, 16 April 2008 (PDT)
Sorry about the native res stuff. My moniter is large, and Wilki is all new to me. Having fun learning though. Bare with me:) --Meridus 10:36, 12 May 2008 (PDT)
(So THAT's what "noeditsection" does...) What does it do? I couldn't figure it out:) Meridus 20:46, 17 July 2008 (PDT)
You know how each section in a page (like this one, "Chat Section") has an "edit" link next to the title? Well, it gets rid of those. Handy when trying to embed sections into a table (where the links really mess things up).
- Bomb Bloke 20:53, 17 July 2008 (PDT)
Thanks. I had to laugh. I read your description, and then read the command, and thought "I guess it was kinda obvious." As a side note, your tables look awesome! Meridus 21:10, 17 July 2008 (PDT)
Thanks. But really I just found a few tables I liked, and then set about copying them where ever I felt relevant. ;)
- Bomb Bloke 21:15, 17 July 2008 (PDT)
Bomb Bloke...a full Bag of Sending can send 15000 gold not 1500 that is why I changed it. Try it out...1 charge per 10 stones...50 gold per 1 stone = 500 gold per 10 stones = 1 charge for 500 gold = 30 charges for 15000 gold.
TullyMars 13:48, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
My apologies, I got it stuck in my head that one charge per stone was required.
- Bomb Bloke 21:55, 11 August 2008 (PDT)
I wanted to notify you that I've responded to your comment on my talk page. Thadius856 23:35, 10 September 2008 (PDT)
Well, I've replied to your comment on my talk page. I'm not sure if I'll continue contributing... maybe, maybe not. I feel as if my additions to the guide are unappreciated, despite my donation of time and best efforts. Thanks for talking all the same. Thadius856 00:32, 11 September 2008 (PDT)
I've promoted 3 people in one day and am running out of stuff to say. Congratulations, please help update the Main Page. =] - JC the Builder 11:55, 5 September 2008 (PDT)
Replied to the discussion on my page. - GregStaats 04:36, 30 December 2008 (EST)
Great Pets section mate! I hadnt seen it before and I thought i had read this entire website! lol cant we get the guides listed under the guides section to auto list on the main page? when you look at the directory it looks like there are only a few guides when there are more hidden behind it? :) - ShadowSpinner 09:47, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, though I didn't write that from scratch. There's also a Mounts page you might be interested in.
Overall we don't have too many "guides", the exception being for quests. Many of the guides we do have "need work". Not really sure we have enough overall to justify sticking them on the main page just yet.
But there's other folks around here who have their own opinions, I'm sure. :)
Nevertheless I've thrown a "Pets" link onto the Directory. Tempting to expand it out into a section, but I don't really have the time at the minute to mess with the layout (which fits quite nicely at the moment).
Speaking of which, while I'm editing my talk page, I should note that I'm off overseas as of tomorrow. Back at the end of the month. Dunno if I'll be making much in the way of edits while I'm gone.
- Bomb Bloke 10:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Please check your Stratics private messages, I sent you one. Thanks. - JC the Builder 21:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Concerning the Math behind Luck: I was going to make the argument that some readers would find the complete math workthroughs amusing, and that having it there didn't hurt anyone. But then I realized that it sort of was hurting people, because although the assumption that some people would find the complete workthroughs amusing wasn't an outright fallacy, if a user just wanted to see the relevant equations and forget the rest, they probably wouldn't be able to pick them out if they weren't particularly good at math. So I split the difference, and bolded the main equations. Furthermore, if JC ever gets the <math></math> tags working, the entire thing should look a lot cleaner.
--Cogniac 03:19, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Very well. I still find it odd to include the "work back to L = C^1.8" steps.
You might like to include a "key" as to what the operators mean. Many people don't understand * and /, let alone ^ (granted, as you say, this'd be less of a problem with the math tags). Another idea might be to state the "final formulas" first up then show the workings underneath (for those people who really aren't interested in the process at all).
Also kinda worth pointing out is that the first equation could be extended like so:
- L = C^1.8
- ln(L) = 1.8 * ln(C)
- ln(L) / 1.8 = ln(C)
- e^(ln(L) / 1.8) = e^ln(C)
- L^(ln(e) / 1.8) = C^ln(e)
- L^(1 / 1.8) = C^1
- L^(5 / 9) = C
- Bomb Bloke 03:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
- e^(ln(L) / 1.8) = e^ln(C)
- L^(ln(e) / 1.8) = C^ln(e)
What mathematical identity is that using?
--Cogniac 07:11, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
b^(m*n) = (b^m)^n
So:
- e^(ln(L) / 1.8)
- (e^ln(L))^(1 / 1.8)
- L^(1 / 1.8)
- L^(ln(e) / 1.8)
Er, the point I was getting at (and hoping to highlight by converting e^ln(C) to C^ln(e) on the other side of the equation) is that logs are redundant in this formula. Including them is sorta like adding 1000 to both sides in one step, only to subtract 1000 from each later on.
In fact the only identity required is this one:
y^z / x = y / x^1/z
That is to say, if x = y^z, then y = x^1/z. A fraction rule that is actually proven by the second formula you initially had on the page, so I won't bother extending it out.
- Bomb Bloke 07:03, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I must've been incredibly tired when I looked at that, because I spent at least an hour looking for some crazy natural logarithm identity that would allow you to do
- e^(ln(x) / y) -> x^(ln(e) / y)
with no intermediate steps, when in reality it was a simple exponent rule. Plus, I looked at the
- C^ln(e) -> C^1
part and thought "Yeah, ln(e) = 1, that makes perfect sense." and then never noticed that everything happening on the right side of the equation was 100% useless redundancy.
I've removed the entire scientific calculator part, and just put the complete workthrough from L = C^1.8 -> L^(5 / 9) = C. Looking at it now, I don't even know why I wanted the scientific calculator part in there to begin with, as it was all an unnecessary obfuscation.
--Cogniac 08:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I did make that more of a riddle then it had to be.
- Bomb Bloke 10:52, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Deletion Requests
Got something you reckon needs the chop?
Post a link and your reasoning, I'll take a look at it.
My Questions
Regarding stamina/dexterity mismatches, and maximum skill caps.
Regarding damage types.
Regarding a cave entrance south of Sanctuary entrance.
Regarding an alternative to the rubbish patch notes page UO presents on startup.
Regarding... well, this one speaks for itself.
Regarding the true damage bonus given by Lumberjacking.
Regarding the best use of redirects instead of pages with little info on them.
Regarding an image I don't recognise.
To Do
- Crossbreeding info.
- Try to remember how often Fertile Dirt gave growth bonuses...
- Publish 51 would suggest runic crafted/looted elf/leather no longer falsely gets Mage Armor property, hunt around and see if any forum posts support this.
- Seems it's been fixed, try to work out which pages here mention the bug and note the change where relevant.
- Check out how the Moongate cohesion system works. It's doubtful it's exactly how the devs describe it. Rumour has it they're more likely to not let you through if you attempt to enter within the first couple of seconds of the gate actually opening.
- Research Poison.
- Update the Quiver pages. Half of them have got boards listed as the components.