Talk:Absolute Amazement: Stun (Superior): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Felderburg (Created page with "==Price Template== So this enhancement has a different template than even others in its set - the costs are side by side, vs. vertical. I seem to recall a discussion on this, an...") |
imported>Sekoia |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
So this enhancement has a different template than even others in its set - the costs are side by side, vs. vertical. I seem to recall a discussion on this, and a proposed revamp to enhancements. Is this part of that? I'm wondering because it's the first one I've seen, outside of an example mock up somewhere, that uses this inclusive template. [[User:Felderburg|Felderburg]] 20:37, 25 April 2014 (UTC) | So this enhancement has a different template than even others in its set - the costs are side by side, vs. vertical. I seem to recall a discussion on this, and a proposed revamp to enhancements. Is this part of that? I'm wondering because it's the first one I've seen, outside of an example mock up somewhere, that uses this inclusive template. [[User:Felderburg|Felderburg]] 20:37, 25 April 2014 (UTC) | ||
: Agge's edit summary was "MeritCost, AlignmentMeritCost, AstralMeritCost, EmpyreanMeritCost -> MeritBuy (if approved will move overtop of MeritCost)" so I'm guessing it was a demo of her proposed change. I rolled it back to make it consistent with the rest. -- [[User:Sekoia|Sekoia]] 21:16, 28 April 2014 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 21:16, 28 April 2014
Price Template
So this enhancement has a different template than even others in its set - the costs are side by side, vs. vertical. I seem to recall a discussion on this, and a proposed revamp to enhancements. Is this part of that? I'm wondering because it's the first one I've seen, outside of an example mock up somewhere, that uses this inclusive template. Felderburg 20:37, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- Agge's edit summary was "MeritCost, AlignmentMeritCost, AstralMeritCost, EmpyreanMeritCost -> MeritBuy (if approved will move overtop of MeritCost)" so I'm guessing it was a demo of her proposed change. I rolled it back to make it consistent with the rest. -- Sekoia 21:16, 28 April 2014 (UTC)