User talk:86.71.126.49

Best modifiers
I've re-reverted your edits to the Modifiers page. The claims you made aren't exactly incorrect- in fact, that's the problem. The claims across this wiki about which modifiers are "best" cause a lot of debate and revert-warring, as they're largely a matter of opinion. Which modifiers are best isn't a definable quantity, any more than what weapons are best or which of the three Mechanical Bosses are hardest, so claims like that are typically removed outright. Unfortunately, these claims are often tied into important information- in this case, the Best Modifiers table is a step towards clarifying what criteria make a weapon able to hold a certain modifier, as well as informing players that summoning weapons largely derive no benefit from the modifier set they receive (this will change in 1.3, necessitating a revision of the page anyway). There's no clean solution for reducing this information down to the bare facts quite yet, and it'd be irresponsible to just remove the entire table without a plan to salvage the valuable parts of its content. Even so, claims and arguments are better suited to a guide. I'll not remove it if it's readded, as I've no intention to get into a revert joust over it, but eventually the page will need to be cleaned and reformatted.

As for the issue with the table sorting, that's a really weird issue that's somehow avoided attention and whose cause eludes me at the moment. It's likely related to the non-numeric characters being sorted alphabetically or the values of positive and negative being treated weirdly. I'll look into it tomorrow, but the tables are protected so they'd need a sysop to authorize changes to them anyway, in addition to basically needing to be redone in a way that sorts properly.

Sorry for writing so much, but I'm trying to convey a simple but easily missed idea- these reverts weren't meant as a personal attack, or done out of favoritism or distrust. They just happen to be smaller parts of a larger, more complex problem that's made immediately visible through the Recent Changes log and happens to be easier to deal with in the meantime. I apologize for any inconvenience. --Gearzein (talk) 12:31, 9 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your explanation. and yeah the reason I added this information was because I spent quite a while to find the modifier I wanted. There is quite a lot of modifiers and while which is "best" is debatable and subject to preferences, efficiency is not, especially for tools and since now we have Smart Cursor you can really see how quick it is to dig or cut down a tree. I won't rerevert that last change you made because you explained yourself in detail here quite well so thank you for that again. However if you could keep in mind to not completely destroy all the "best modifiers" information in the future but rather move it to a guide even if it's gonna stay as a WIP. And link the guide in the main article. Because really that article is just too big. I read it all but when I want to check something quick the best modifiers table is my number 1 source.
 * Ho and don't be sorry for writing so much, it's alright ;) 86.71.126.49 14:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Hey, I did notice your response. I haven't had time to reply, but hopefully you'll be pleased to know that people have been working on fixing the sorting issue. I'm actually kind of embarrassed this problem has persisted this long- because of the best modifier business, a huge chunk of the wiki links to the modifier page. It should be fixed shortly after 1.3 releases, as it's been confirmed that it'll add a whole new set of modifiers, and will likely expand on the ones that are already there. I'll be making all the changes in one big move. Again, thanks for pointing this out. Gearzein (talk) 08:02, 14 February 2015 (UTC)