Talk:Terminal silver
From DominionStrategy Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
Thirtyseven (Talk | contribs) (okay) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | ==Capitalization== | ||
Shouldn't "silver" in "terminal silver" be capitalized, since "Silver" (the card) is capitalized? -[[User:Thirtyseven|Thirtyseven]] ([[User talk:Thirtyseven|talk]]) 16:18, 4 November 2012 (EST) | Shouldn't "silver" in "terminal silver" be capitalized, since "Silver" (the card) is capitalized? -[[User:Thirtyseven|Thirtyseven]] ([[User talk:Thirtyseven|talk]]) 16:18, 4 November 2012 (EST) | ||
:I would capitalize Silver here too.--[[User:Qvist|Qvist]] ([[User talk:Qvist|talk]]) 16:37, 4 November 2012 (EST) | :I would capitalize Silver here too.--[[User:Qvist|Qvist]] ([[User talk:Qvist|talk]]) 16:37, 4 November 2012 (EST) | ||
| − | + | ::I was thinking no, because they're ''not'' Silver; "terminal silver" is just an informal term. In the same way, Bazaar and Wandering Minstrel are [[villages]], not [[Village]]s. [[User:Ajd|Ajd]] ([[User talk:Ajd|talk]]) 16:48, 4 November 2012 (EST) | |
| + | :::That sounds logical, and it does look awkward capitalized. Carry on. -[[User:Thirtyseven|Thirtyseven]] ([[User talk:Thirtyseven|talk]]) 20:07, 4 November 2012 (EST) | ||
| + | ==Sorting== | ||
I think it would be more interesting to sort them by bonus they provide rather than by cost and expansion, at least in the descriptive text. Fore example group Attack cards together and than Terminal Silver with vanilla bonus(es), Terminal Silver sifting/cycling ability and so on. We could then add a sortable table where all the cards are listed. You can then sort by cost and expansion easily if you want. What do you think? --[[User:Qvist|Qvist]] ([[User talk:Qvist|talk]]) 16:37, 4 November 2012 (EST) | I think it would be more interesting to sort them by bonus they provide rather than by cost and expansion, at least in the descriptive text. Fore example group Attack cards together and than Terminal Silver with vanilla bonus(es), Terminal Silver sifting/cycling ability and so on. We could then add a sortable table where all the cards are listed. You can then sort by cost and expansion easily if you want. What do you think? --[[User:Qvist|Qvist]] ([[User talk:Qvist|talk]]) 16:37, 4 November 2012 (EST) | ||
| + | :Hm, perhaps. I sorted them by cost because that was what the term "terminal silver" makes me think of—do I want to buy one of these Actions, or do we just want to buy a Silver? The fact that they're in competition with Silver as sources of +$2 is the main thing these cards have in common. Perhaps sorting them by function, instead of by expansion, ''within'' the cost groupings would be more appropriate? [[User:Ajd|Ajd]] ([[User talk:Ajd|talk]]) 16:48, 4 November 2012 (EST) | ||
Latest revision as of 21:07, 4 November 2012
[edit] Capitalization
Shouldn't "silver" in "terminal silver" be capitalized, since "Silver" (the card) is capitalized? -Thirtyseven (talk) 16:18, 4 November 2012 (EST)
- I would capitalize Silver here too.--Qvist (talk) 16:37, 4 November 2012 (EST)
- I was thinking no, because they're not Silver; "terminal silver" is just an informal term. In the same way, Bazaar and Wandering Minstrel are villages, not Villages. Ajd (talk) 16:48, 4 November 2012 (EST)
- That sounds logical, and it does look awkward capitalized. Carry on. -Thirtyseven (talk) 20:07, 4 November 2012 (EST)
- I was thinking no, because they're not Silver; "terminal silver" is just an informal term. In the same way, Bazaar and Wandering Minstrel are villages, not Villages. Ajd (talk) 16:48, 4 November 2012 (EST)
[edit] Sorting
I think it would be more interesting to sort them by bonus they provide rather than by cost and expansion, at least in the descriptive text. Fore example group Attack cards together and than Terminal Silver with vanilla bonus(es), Terminal Silver sifting/cycling ability and so on. We could then add a sortable table where all the cards are listed. You can then sort by cost and expansion easily if you want. What do you think? --Qvist (talk) 16:37, 4 November 2012 (EST)
- Hm, perhaps. I sorted them by cost because that was what the term "terminal silver" makes me think of—do I want to buy one of these Actions, or do we just want to buy a Silver? The fact that they're in competition with Silver as sources of +$2 is the main thing these cards have in common. Perhaps sorting them by function, instead of by expansion, within the cost groupings would be more appropriate? Ajd (talk) 16:48, 4 November 2012 (EST)
