Electric Blue's 1.10 Wolf Guide

[electricblue]

From the scientific point of view, it is called relativity. Trust me there is nothing wrong with that.

Thanks for the advice, though. But I prefer its original form.

Have to agree with theDragoon on this one. Here's why:

If you wanted to, you could have written every single bit of your guide in code. Provided you gave your reader's the code at the begining of the guide, explained what you did, and were consistent throughout, there would be "nothing wrong with that." Would you do that, even if you happened to prefer the code to written english? Take things down a notch: if I wanted to, I could start replacing "Diablo" with "B." Providing I tell my readers I'm doing so, and I remain consistent, "scientifically" there would be "nothing wrong with that." But why would I do that? We already shorten that (sometimes) to "D" or "Big D," among other things.

It's not that what you did was "scientifically" incorrect. However, strategy guide's are written either for (1) general D2 audiences, or, (2) more specific D2 audiences. Your guide seems to be slightly more geared towards a specific group. I applaud you, btw, for stating flat-out that your guide is intended for those with mid- to high-end gear, rather than simply assuming your readers will own any piece of equipment you think is good. The point, however, is moot -- regardless of who your guide is geared towards, it only makes sense for you to use accepted standards when describing things such as IAS.

Finally, I'd be inclined to believe just about anything TheDragoon has to say about Druid Shapeshifting guides. I mean, damn, man, have you SEEN his website? What you're doing is like arguing with Jesus about the Bible!

All in all, quite an interesting read. Gave me a few ideas about builds I might want to try! As a final note, remember not to take any criticism about your guide as a negative -- the mere fact it's getting so much discussion and interest shows you did a good job. From that standpoint, criticism the fine, experienced folks at the LL can only improve your guide.

gekko

I already explained the reason of using WIAS in some other definition then the popular one.
here again

'As I said before, the table was a product of some independant study done 2 - 3 years ago (just cant remember the year) way before the popular calculators or tables I have seen (yours, for example). And preserving definitions is just some form of respect shown to that studies.'

And, the guide is evolving constantly with the help and critisism of people. Just follow the update messages :)

Also, here is another quote from the same post.

'If I get more messages regarding the issue, however, I may change the formats. For now, added a note about the WIAS definitions in my guide and elsewhere'

And yes, he has a nice site and linked from my page.