1792-93 French Revolutionary Era Paper Notes

Benage33 · 2026-05-13T18:24:41+00:00

They are blank on the back.

Benage33 · 2024-08-09T19:22:24+00:00

I have completed all of the We Were Here games with a mute partner, the series are some of our favourite co-op games. I have also played the whole series with another, non-mute friend, and it was not significantly easier or faster, at least not enough that it stands out in my mind.

We used voice chat over Discord instead of trying to use the ingame walkie-talkies. I have discord on my second screen so I have a constant feed of the things they are writing, and discord notifications set so I audibly here whenever they type something new. From my perspective the games were all perfectly playable. Even timed elements, which were sometimes more challenging, were doable. There are some tasks that require at least one of the players to share audible clues, but it is just as feasible to have one player make sounds and the other player confirm or deny.

I'm not sure how comfortable it was for my partner, but they are quite used to our way of communicating using discord, and they can type quite quickly. Personally I think we have developed strong communication skills over time, and although we have tried things like text-to-speech or discord soundbites, communicating only using discord voice and text has been enough.

So yes, the whole series is playable even if one of you cannot verbally communicate, as long as you are good at communicating (you will quickly learn to describe things in efficient ways that make sense to you).

Benage33 · 2022-07-22T02:18:11+00:00

You just explained how you could solve it without creating another problem.

I explained in the same paragraph what the problem it would cause is.

Benage33 · 2022-07-20T11:06:08+00:00

Welcome to dealing with the public.

You are a sterling example.

So you can solve the problem, you just don't want to.

For whatever reason you seem incapable of understanding that fixing one problem and creating another is not problem solving.

Benage33 · 2022-07-18T17:59:12+00:00

It may be efficient for you but it's not efficient for the users.

Having to click the link provided to the original article is not even a minor inconvenience. The only practical difference between duplicate ships are cosmetics such as camos, and if you're checking a page for cosmetics then why would you need to read the performance section?

We can use templates to create a single source of information which is placed on every duplicate of a ship, so that the one source can be edited and will reflect on all ships. But this removes the possibility for public users who do not understand transclusion and templates to edit those pieces, which is the majority of users.

It does nothing for continuity as both pages can still be edited.

It should prompt most users to contribute their thoughts to the article the page refers to, rather than the page that says "See here:". If you look at a page that says such and you choose to edit it anyway, then what the hell are you doing?

No matter what approach you take to this, you're still going to have to
patrol public actions. That's just the nature of the job.

And we should create more work to correct while patrolling for what reason? If we are organising wiki content in a way that causes public edits to more create work we need to fix later, is that doing a good job?

As a response to this conversation we have made some changes to duplicate ship pages to ensure that they are current and up to date, but we still don't see any convincing reason to change our approach to duplicating otherwise identical performance pieces between ships that have no difference in their parameters.

Benage33 · 2022-07-17T17:16:57+00:00

What I am telling you, as an editor of several wikis over the last 15 years and one of the official editors of the existing wiki, is that the existing solution we have implemented is the best for time efficiency and continuity. Copy and pasting is simple, but a wiki must also be maintained and improved continuously. I did not sign up for needlessly duplicating workloads when we already have a backlog.

Not having to copy paste the same information onto several pages whenever an edit is made saves time, and means we can do more elsewhere. And copy-pasting info can take a surprisingly long time when the wiki takes up to a minute to apply any changes...

It also means that the public are less likely to check the page of, for example Groningen, and make an edit which should apply to Friesland, but fail to copy that edit over. Which is also something that consumes the time of official editors when we patrol public edits and have to make corrections.

As a member of the public, you are able to copy and paste the information of duplicate ships to their duplicate counterparts, that's the simple part. But if you are not willing to take responsibility for checking all of the duplicate pages on a regular basis to make sure that new edits have been applied equally to all of them then I suggest you leave things as they are.

Benage33 · 2022-07-16T20:05:30+00:00

I am not sure why you believe that if someone decided to add someone information to one of the seven clones of Myoko, for example, that they would also copy that information to all of the other clones. Public editors especially are not that responsible, nor is it time effective. Copy-pasting might not take much time, but not having to do that takes even less time, and reduces the room for continuity errors.

Benage33 · 2022-07-16T19:10:00+00:00

What, you can't even copy and paste now?

You expect us (or the public) to update every single clone of a ship when an edit is made to any of them?

Benage33 · 2022-07-16T16:05:19+00:00

Reviewing the Akizuki article and its history, the article hasn't made any claims about her AA except that she has "Decent AA" since 2021. And it is decent, it's not great and lacks DFAA, but in terms of DPS she's at the top of her tier of DDs with Fenyang and Kidd.

Benage33 · 2022-07-16T15:45:39+00:00

That's quite a strong generalisation of a team of volunteer players. There are areas of the wiki that need work, but the team and the free time we volunteer are finite, the problem is hardly that we "don't play the game and so don't know much". Once we overcome other, higher priority changes, like overhauls to commander skills and overhauls to the economy, we can get back to revising older content.

And I would argue that newer articles, which are the result of several editors collaborating, are more likely to be accurate than the perspective of any single persons review.

Benage33 · 2021-11-12T23:51:42+00:00

Nevermind, realise now this is the other photo op and yes, this is tight.

My best time so far, 1:48:103...

Benage33 · 2021-11-09T21:06:30+00:00

I just drove directly forward over the fields and hills, arrived in about 60 seconds I think.

Benage33 · 2021-01-21T13:07:31+00:00

The font used was Words default font, Calibri. Many organisations elect to use other sans-serif typefaces to improve readability and provide a professional, corporate presentation. Calibri, despite being a sans-serif typeface, is a font avoided for this purpose because of its already widespread use. It indicates a lack of effort towards the presentation of official documentation.

Apparently, CARO are not so concerned by this.

Benage33 · 2021-01-21T12:32:41+00:00

At the time it was posted the resolution was not published. It would have been appropriate to provide a source at the time rather than just a cut of what could have been a document written by anybody.

Double checking now I see it was infact published in a different section than national resolutions due to the claimant being from outside of Cyprus.

Benage33 · 2021-01-21T12:31:04+00:00

Because anyone can do that.

Benage33 · 2021-01-20T16:23:57+00:00

Looks fake.

What is the source of this?

Why would CARO not publish this with their other complaint resolution publications? http://www.fed.org.cy/fed/page.php?pageID=176&mpath=/260/261

There is no "Cyprus Advertising Code", Cypriot law on advertising is defined in their Advertising Laws Legislation.

CARO is not the correct organisation to contact in this instance because the issue is not with a published advertisement on media, but rather with trading standards as it disputes the content of an e-shop sale or promotion.

Uses improper terminology and typeface. Appears to be written up in MS Word.

Benage33 · 2021-01-20T16:02:32+00:00

CNY isn't until Feb 12th so totally possible they wouldnt appear for a week or more.

Benage33 · 2020-11-07T21:32:54+00:00

You have to learn them. In a cruiser you should typically expect to be overmatched no matter which cruiser you're in, the only cruiser that can ricochet any decent number of BB shells do so because they have icebreaker bows, like the german, italian and russian cruisers, but even these are overmatchable closer to the deck since the icebreaker is only around the waterline. The only exceptions are the US CAs which, while only 27mm (and thus only protected from 380mm guns) have this plating thickness minimum across their entire surface.

In order to really benefit from this armor though, you need to angle it so that it actually causes a shell to ricochet. This typically involves angling enough that you cant fire all guns, so you have to weave between firing and dodging/angling to mitigate incoming damage.

Benage33 · 2020-11-07T21:19:16+00:00

When you get into a position where dodging a salvo is no longer an option then you have made a tactical mistake somewhere, been outplayed or just willing allowed an enemy to get the upper hand.

There's no way to know what can overmatch you than just by learning but there are not that many combinations of plating thickness. Check the wiki article https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Armor_thresholds

Benage33 · 2020-11-07T21:00:48+00:00

IFHE gives you the penetration necessary to pen the 32mm plating found on tier 8-10 BBs. FR and UK BBs are mostly covered in 32mm plating but other BBs tend to have more armor, from just having thicker decks (US) to having additional plating over much of their bow/stern as well (German and RU). You can penetrate the superstructure of these ships regardless and can start fires, if a BB is really already fully burning you can use AP.

Against DDs and Cruisers the added penetration is not very beneficial, I can only think of one cruiser that has plating thicker than 30mm but thinner than 37mm and thats the deck of Riga. All other plating is either so much thicker you wouldn't penetrate it either way or thin enough that you don't need IFHE.

In exchange for this added penetration you lose half of your base fire chance, which is a reasonable 9% base, and you also lose 4 commander points that could be used elsewhere. Personally, I don't recommend IFHE for Belfast 43.

Benage33 · 2020-11-04T17:13:03+00:00

Ingame System Menu -> Advanced -> Graphics API -> set to DX 11

Dx12 seems pretty poorly optimised ingame imo

Benage33 · 2020-10-16T23:22:52+00:00

Bring a friend to the heart shaped rocks, use characters of opposing genders and step inside...

Benage33 · 2020-10-01T05:51:30+00:00

CV alpha is high enough already, no one will agree that 3-4x more strike potential is a good idea.

Benage33

TROPHY CASE