Difference between revisions of "Talk:Staff Fighting"

Revision as of 05:38, 13 March 2012

Inapplicable

Should this page even exist? It's based on a video that may be faked, although I personally doubt it. It's certainly not confirmed and we ought not to post such dubious information here.

Catwhowalksbyhimself 1729, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

You're right. This article is based on an unauthorized video that was since removed by its uploader. I know the details of who/what/why, and while the video was legitimate, it was unauthorized and I agree that the page should be brought down until the powerset is formally announced. --GuyPerfect 17:55, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I nuked it. Do not re-implement this article unless the powerset is announced officially, and only with details that are freely available to the public if it does. I am not messing around; the only reason the devs allow the wiki (more aptly, the Titan Network) to continue our sometimes "nefarious" means of information gathering is because we don't allow non-public information to be passed. ~ AGGE talk/cons 05:00, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Stalkers

Did they change their minds on Staff Fighting for Stalkers? The game data does not include them, nor did they say at the Pummit that it will be available for Stalkers. ~ AGGE talk/cons 06:00, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?p=3995396&highlight=staff+stalker#post3995396 --Codewalker 07:45, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I recalled that they specifically mentioned Stalkers using Staff in a few places... ideally I shoulda looked it up and posted the above link here myself.  :) (Also, I reorganized this page to go in proper date order...) ~ Thirty7 File:Contrib-Icon.jpg 16:18, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Issue 22

This didn't make it into issue 22? It doesn't seem to be available as a power selection option or in the market. RogerWilco 19:00, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

It was never supposed to be in I22. From the moment it appeared on Beta it was made clear that it was going to be a post-I22 powerset, but before I23. --Codewalker 20:18, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

O.k. The Historical section seems to assume it was added in issue 22, but maybe it's trying to say that it will be added before issue 23? RogerWilco 13:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Had it been released, the release date would be more insightful than MM/DD/YYYY. (-: --GuyPerfect 20:22, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

The fact that it is in red, with a slash means it is an editing note, and that it was an either/or type of statement. Had it been i22, it would read "...released in Issue 22" but it wasn't so it will read "...released on DATE", whatever date it happens to be. As an aside, I am REALLY getting annoyed with this issue folks are having with Staff's release date. I have no idea why folks are so up in arms about it.  :( —Thirty7 05:38, 13 March 2012 (UTC)