Loading editor
  • We can always just change the 8-Bit Theatre bit from "inspired by" to "similar to". Can we?

      Loading editor
    • I guess, sure. If we find an actual citation, we can make it inspired by again.

      I seem to have a sort of vaguely admin-esque seniority here, but a lot of things like that can be easily done by you guys if you feel its important. Worst case scenario, we can edit it back because whoops someone tripped and deleted the entire page (go look at the history of Materials :3). The character pages are a mess anyways.

      Still, I do appreciate that you took the time to ask about it, thanks.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hey! My name is Atvelonis, and I'm the Fandom Wiki Manager for the Epic Battle Fantasy Wiki as well as an admin on Elder Scrolls. I'm here to help you and the wider community, and act as a liaison between you and Fandom Staff. If you ever have any questions or issues related to the wiki, its features (editing, templates, bots, etc.), or whatever else, feel free to reach out to me on my message wall or on Discord (Atvelonis#9495) and I can help out! —Atvelonis (talk) 16:29, May 6, 2019 (UTC)

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Would rather discuss constant mistakes on the EBF Wiki Discord Server than go hysterical every few edits.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Yo, you online? it would really help if you came discuss stuff on discord with us

      Loading editor
  • The plan is to cut most (mis)information from them and leave them as more or less simple lists with occasional trivia, rather than full explanations of all relevant foes. Just saying that to avoid wasted effort in case you was going to rework them.

      Loading editor
    • I think I see what you are getting at.

      Can you give me an example of a sort of a template to based things off of? There doesn't seem to be a good standard for the Foe Families.

        Loading editor
    • *shrug*
      Didn't really care of them yet.

        Loading editor
    • Oh and just in case, are you in Discord? Could join the wiki server, most of discussion is handled here.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I'm not really ecstatic about these new pages. While I respect your initiativity, I'd like to ask you to check out a few similar articles to what you're creating, and preferably follow their format. It should give an idea what's expected from your article, as well as simplifies article organization (e.g. so you won't need to come up with section names and just do them like the other article did).

    Let's take one of your articles as an example, and compare it with this recently created one. At this point the comparison ends. The whole article is just two sentences that barely explain what the foe is and how it looks like, let alone describing its stats and attacks. It's gonna take more effort to actually help the wiki (rather than fill it with tiny articles of no practical use) and make something to be proud of.

    Now I think it'd be for the better if you would stop with creating new articles and take time to improve those you've already made. Again, you're free to use existing articles as guidlines for what should be in the article; myself, I'd recommend checking out Fire Elemental, Wooly Mammoth and Mad Cactus for a start.

      Loading editor
    • View all 7 replies
    • Oh and about Overviews. Forget the "I'm not going to criticize them" part. If you would've been in that one Discord chat, you'd see me cuss about like a half of them.

      Black Clay
      As there is only one water elemental attack that can be easily used (barring water elemental weapons), Black Clays should be dealt with through either Seiken, Air Strike, or Judgement.
      What's the logic connection of the first part about water-elemental attacks and the second part about suggesting skills at seemingly random? It does not mention what makes "only one water elemental attack" (what is that even) a worse way to fight the enemy, neither why are those 3 skills a better way to.
      For those using the Soul Eater+Viking Helmet+Genji Armor combo, keep in mind that the Black Clay is immune to Souleater standard physicals.
      Any reason that a very specific combination of equipment even deserves a mention? It looks like it comes out of nowhere. And the part about immunity doesn't seem to make sense. How is 200% resistance supposed to nullify a 25% elemental attack?
      They possess a broad arsenal of dark elemental attacks, ranging from Dark Shot to a flurry of blows from the axe (this may also end in a Dark Shot).
      > claims its melee attacks are Dark-elemental, even though they're non-elemental

      > claims its multi-hit melee attacks may end with Dark Shot, while (I think...) it only happens for single-hit ones
      > claims Dark Shot to be also used separate from melee attacks, but it isn't
      Now that was bad.

      Black Clays also enter battle with Brave in effect
      Which only happens on Hard and Epic difficulties, while the original text suggests it's a thing on all difficulties.
      River Squid
      River Squids are not to be trifled with.
      Less random shout-outs please.
      White Clay
      White Clays resemble a Priest
      Any specific reason "priest" is capitalized? Is that a name of a character?
      While the Black Clay is more likely to kill you, White Clays can cause a game over just as easily if they are not dealt with.
      Yet another random shout-out that doesn't really add anything to the article. Every single foe in existence can cause game over if you don't deal with it. There's no need to mention it for a specific foe.
      Blue Clay
      Blue Clays use primarily wind elemental attacks. They can strike the entire team at once, or cast Tornado/Whirlwind.
      With a Bestiary quote "uses wind attacks" going right after, this overview barely has any use.
      Green Clay
      Green Clays primarily use Piercing Shot, Arrow Rain, and Gaia Bloom. Outside of the Earth attacks, all of a Green Clay's attacks can Poison.
      It's something more suited for the attack list section than an actual overview.
      Muddy Bush
      Muddy Bushes can be dealt with the same was as normal Green Bushes. They are slightly more resilient towards fire though. Muddy Bushes can also be summoned by a Big Muddy Bush.
      This overview forgot to actually talk a thing or two about the foe itself. A single mention of fire something is not enough.
      Wind Sprite
      Wind Sprites have 4 attacks. They can blow a plume of clouds, hitting a single target for non-elemental damage and potentially syphoning and reducing the magic attack of the target. Wind Sprites can also headbutt players, dealing non-elemental damage. Finally, they can cast Whirlwind and perform a Wind elemental multi-target attack which is capable of dispelling targets.
      What's the reason to write all of that, when it's followed by proper attack list template which lists the same but in a more descriptive way? It's the essence of redundancy.
      Though I'd also like to mention that, besides this paragraph, the overview is good and touches about as many aspects as it has to.
      Unfortunately, most units that would have Weaken-inducing attacks (besides Random Status Inflicting Attacks) used against them will either Resist or Absorb Dark
      What's the deal with random capitalization? I don't see a reason this whole "random status inflicting attacks" needs a single capitalized letter. This strange style makes it difficult to understand the text.

      I don't have any specific advice formulated this time, but I could suggest to re-read the article before publishing it, and see if anything looks out of place, repetitive, or not reasoned enough. Perhaps it would help to avoid the same issues showing up again and again.
      In a few days I'll try to get attack lists done for bushes and clays, though seeing how many articles I now need to go through, it might take longer.

      I still don't know what to do with the current situation of per-status articles being a repetition of a specific part of the Status Effects article. The same is with foe group articles and per-foe articles. Wiki structure organization really went off there.

        Loading editor
    • My apologies. Most of the stuff I did make a mistake (like the ranodm capitilaztion, definetly should not have done that). Redundancy is not as much of an issue in my opinion if it is being described in two sections; if there is an attack list, that is good, but it doesn't nullify the value of having the most volatile attacks being mentioned in the overview. It is an overview, and doesn't need to only have information found nowhere else. I was trying to help, but if I am doing so much wrong that I am almost being detrimental to the Wiki, then I will stop.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi, welcome to Epic Battle Fantasy Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the :Unobtainable Weapons page.

    Please leave me a message if I can help with anything!

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.