Talk:Fall damage

Move
Move to Fall Damage? It is consistent with all our other pages, especially if your think of "Fall Damage" as a mechanic. happypal (talk &bull; contribs) 06:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I liked how Fall Damage looked better ;_; but that's just me haha -- ❤Kalilla❤ 07:00, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Sentence case makes for easier transclusion linkage. See Game mechanics. It's one of those things we have to standardize I think with the growth and maturity of the wiki. But I'm happy to hear alternative viewpoints. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png ]] talk  07:03, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * What if you made it Fall Damage and made Fall damage redirect to the page so users can use both? -- ❤Kalilla❤ 07:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Same thing goes with Game Mechanics vs Game mechanics -- ❤Kalilla❤ 07:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Or simply made the redirect at Fall Damage (as it is now)... same result. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png ]] talk  07:10, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It all comes down to this: Do you write:
 * "Be careful to avoid Fall Damage"
 * "Be careful to avoid fall damage"
 * Up until now, any game related term we have been using has been capitalized. Now, having done this could have been wrong, and caps should have been given only to game related "objects", and not gaming terms...
 * There is no "move" request for pages like Defense, but the question remains for in sentence usage: "Molten armor has a lot of defense" or "Molten armor has a lot of Defense"? I vote for the caps BTW. happypal (talk &bull; contribs) 07:15, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's only an issue where the title is more than one word. MediaWiki automatically ignores case on the first word of title links. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png ]] talk  07:19, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * From a pure technical point of view, yes, but the question is more than just that. When you want to write a sentence, should it be caps or not? happypal (talk &bull; contribs) 07:34, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * If the page titles are in sentence case, they can be written into sentences normally. example: The defense rating of a character is used in the calculation of fall damage. If the page titles are in Title Case, the links have to be adjusted. example: The defense rating of a character is used in the calculation of fall damage. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png ]] talk  07:37, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

&lt;--Just ignoring page titles for a second, since we are referring to explicit game mechanics, the words are more than just their vague English definition. Shouldn't we be writing "The Defense rating of a character is used in the calculation of Fall Damage."? I think so, but I'm not sure. happypal (talk &bull; contribs) 07:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * looks better to me <.<; maybe its only because they are links -- ❤Kalilla❤ 07:49, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Caps belong at the beginning of sentences and proper names. I consider an item's "proper name" as it's label in game ~ thus the capitalization. The mechanics are more closely related to "glossary" terms than proper names, thus the lack of capitalization in my opinion. Kalila, while I understand your viewpoint, for me this is more of a grammatical issue than an appearance one. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png ]] talk  07:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying that links should always be capped, because they shouldn't. I'm saying a title of a page should be, even when it it's not in a sentence because users can make them anything they want just putting a | and text after it. -- ❤Kalilla❤ 07:58, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've argued both sides on several wikis, based on the best usage on that particular wiki. I do however believe that sentence case overall makes the best sense, and for this wiki (young and still relatively small made up of mostly small pages) making this adjustment is much easier now, than waiting until the wiki grows and expands. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png ]] talk  08:15, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The titles of most pages aren't capped just because, they're capped because the item/NPC/etc. name in-game has caps in that fashion. Fall damage isn't one of those objects, it's a game mechanic. If you search for the name of someone or somthing on Wikipedia, it's capped. If you search for an article on a general subject, it's not capped, eg. Null character ~Null(T-C) 12:28, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Wrong max calculations?
I believe that the calculations at the maximum fall damage section are wrong. The article says "On a large world you can take up to 23270 damage if falling from the top of the map to the bottom. This would mean falling down 2352 blocks (after 25 blocks). So from the bottom of the map to the top of the map (that a player can have access to) is 2352 blocks + 25 + 2 (because you land on your feet, you have to account for your body and head too) which makes a large world 2379 blocks in height"

The article starts with an equation about falling damage, and using that equation 2352+25 would result in dmg = 10 &times; ((2352 + 25) - 25) = 10 &times; 2352 = 23520, but both the image and the article itself says that the maximum fall damage is 23270. The confusion came from the part "(after 25 blocks)", because 2352 blocks is the absolute fall the character can do, including, and not excluding the 25 blocks, which are deducted from that number in the calculation. Am i right, or is it too early and i'm just missing something? -- Mrbay 09:23, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Case - "fall damage", "Defense"
This post follows-up on the old "Move" discussion above. I just rewrote a chunk of this page which was split between use of title case and sentence case for the terms "fall damage" and "Defense". There doesn't appear to be a standard. I settled on "fall damage" (sentence case) and "Defense" (title case) for my edit and updated the remainder of the page accordingly. Rationale: If you disagree or if there's an established/emerging consensus I'm unaware of, please let me know. I'd like to update the "Defense" page, which also contains mixed usage. Chibs84 21:09, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Defense refers to a central in-game variable which is displayed using a prominent, title cased label on the main in-game screen. It is a game mechanic, but it's also a central variable and concept.
 * fall damage is a game mechanic; neither a variable nor a prominent label.
 * fall damage consists of two simple words, neither of which are proper nouns. It can typically be injected, unadorned, into a sentence without disrupting the flow/readability.
 * The term fall distance is used frequently on this page; it certainly should not be title cased. Using fall distance and Fall Damage in close proximity looks silly.
 * The fall damage page is already named "Fall damage", not "Fall Damage".

Fall damage and NPCs
Do any monsters or NPCs take fall damage? I don't think they do. Should probably add that for completeness. Chibs84 20:20, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Move "Negation/strategies" section to new guide?
I'd like to create a new guide titled "Mitigating fall damage" by merging the following: and then replace both lists with a link to the new guide. The two lists are currently pretty much repeating each other, with this page's list currently being a little more fleshed out. I would edit the content into a seamless guide; not just copy/paste. Any objections/thoughts? Chibs84 06:56, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * "Negation/strategies" section of this page;
 * "Hellevator - Avoiding fall damage" section of Guide:Travel

minimum hight fall damage
The minimum amount of blocks you need to fall for fall damage to occur is 26 blocks Fuddlercrafter (talk) 05:13, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

outdated image
well, i updated the equation for maximum fall damage, and the screenshot is now obsolete! i have no clue how to use those things, so if someone could update/delete it, i'd appreciate it! FinaLemon 02:34, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I thought about it a bit and ended up removing the section. Nothing is stopping the player from flipping a second time and falling indefinitely, so the final value isn't particularly meaningful. Even if it were concrete, it's ultimately just the result of a fairly simple calculation, and one that most players won't encounter under normal circumstances- it's basically trivia, and even by those rules it's pointing out a fairly simple correlation that doesn't really merit its own point, much less an entire section. It was also pretty poorly written, even before these additions were made to it, so it's easier and cleaner to just remove it. Gearzein (talk) 04:04, 29 November 2015 (UTC)