Talk:Zafina punishers (Tekken 7): Difference between revisions

Discussion page of Zafina punishers (Tekken 7)
(Created page with "== Reasoning for notating Cursed Crow as b1 instead of b+1 == Why is Cursed Crow specifically notated as b1 instead of b+1? There's a refnote which states "b1:1+2 is written...")
 
m (RogerDodger moved page Talk:Zafina punishers to Talk:Zafina punishers (Tekken 7) without leaving a redirect: the great Tekken 8 migration)
Tag: Script
 
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:


Why is Cursed Crow specifically notated as b1 instead of b+1? There's a refnote which states "b1:1+2 is written as b1:1+2 and not b+1:1+2 (it's an exception to the rule)" but there's no reasoning provided. To my mind, there seems to be no reason to make an exception here either.
Why is Cursed Crow specifically notated as b1 instead of b+1? There's a refnote which states "b1:1+2 is written as b1:1+2 and not b+1:1+2 (it's an exception to the rule)" but there's no reasoning provided. To my mind, there seems to be no reason to make an exception here either.
:Basically nobody ever writes it b+1:1+2 to the point it becomes confusing to read. And with how often the move is in discussion it has stabilized in use. "b1:1+2" is the shortest recognizable notation much the same way EWGF is notated as that. It really is different from every other move where the community commonly uses both "f1+4" and "f+1+4". With this move even people who always put the plus sign everywhere pretty much don't bother. --[[User:Hating Mirror|Hating Mirror]] ([[User talk:Hating Mirror|talk]]) 21:50, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
:: The simple solution I would propose then is to just edit the refnote on the main Zaf page to say "b+1:1+2 is written as b1:1+2 throughout for brevity" --[[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ([[User talk:Kalki|talk]]) 22:08, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 16:00, 25 January 2024

Reasoning for notating Cursed Crow as b1 instead of b+1

Why is Cursed Crow specifically notated as b1 instead of b+1? There's a refnote which states "b1:1+2 is written as b1:1+2 and not b+1:1+2 (it's an exception to the rule)" but there's no reasoning provided. To my mind, there seems to be no reason to make an exception here either.

Basically nobody ever writes it b+1:1+2 to the point it becomes confusing to read. And with how often the move is in discussion it has stabilized in use. "b1:1+2" is the shortest recognizable notation much the same way EWGF is notated as that. It really is different from every other move where the community commonly uses both "f1+4" and "f+1+4". With this move even people who always put the plus sign everywhere pretty much don't bother. --Hating Mirror (talk) 21:50, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
The simple solution I would propose then is to just edit the refnote on the main Zaf page to say "b+1:1+2 is written as b1:1+2 throughout for brevity" --Kalki (talk) 22:08, 22 October 2022 (UTC)