Editing Talk:List of mass spells
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Is it worth mentioning [[Armageddon]] in this article? You could argue that it's a kind of a mass spell [[User:Ibraesil|Ibraesil]] ([[User talk:Ibraesil|talk]]) 10:50, 17 December 2016 (CET) | Is it worth mentioning [[Armageddon]] in this article? You could argue that it's a kind of a mass spell [[User:Ibraesil|Ibraesil]] ([[User talk:Ibraesil|talk]]) 10:50, 17 December 2016 (CET) | ||
: I think that's a good idea. We'll want to have separate sections though. One for spells that are always cast on all troops (e | : I think that's a good idea. We'll want to have separate sections though. One for spells that are always cast on all troops (i.e. armageddon) and one for spells that require the respective expert magic. We'll want to move the original article summary to this section. We might also want to put subsections in this section for the different types (allies-only, enemies-only, and allies-and-enemies). | ||
: --[[user:imahero|imahero]] 08:31, 18 December 2016 (CET) | : --[[user:imahero|imahero]] 08:31, 18 December 2016 (CET) | ||
::In my opinnion, no. Because the logic is different, as the Armageddon is "always" a mass spell, rather than becoming one at expert level (Fire Magic). –[[User:Kapteeni Ruoska|Kapteeni Ruoska]] ([[User talk:Kapteeni Ruoska|talk]]) 06:07, 19 December 2016 (CET) | ::In my opinnion, no. Because the logic is different, as the Armageddon is "always" a mass spell, rather than becoming one at expert level (Fire Magic). –[[User:Kapteeni Ruoska|Kapteeni Ruoska]] ([[User talk:Kapteeni Ruoska|talk]]) 06:07, 19 December 2016 (CET) |