Talk:Pirates, Vikings and Knights II

Latest comment: 13 years ago by S@bre in topic Article Title Change

Started it off but needs alot of work --Charlie.B 21:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Does anyone know what actually was changed to the blocking system in beta 2.0? It mentions in this that it was planned to change, but i don't really notice any difference (so if there is any, can someone add it) --Evil_kenshin 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Blocking is now directional (meaning, a block to the left will be most effective against a strike coming from the left). I'm not really keen on adding that tidbit to the article, as it's already overly detailed, and it the style of a guide to the game. Perhaps if someone wants to rewrite it... --daranz[ t ] 16:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Article assessment edit

I gave the article B class status. It's cited pretty well and appropriately, and flows smoothly. I would try to put some more info into the critical reception area given it's small at the moment compared to the rest, and could easily be bulked up a bit. Good job with it as it stands, especially in such short time.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Article Title Change edit

I propose the article's name be changed to "Pirates Vikings & Knights II" to fit with the new art and the removal of punctuation that is not proper for titles. --Pyroguy (talk) 17:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

If the punctuation is in how the official sources put the name in normal text, then it should be in the page name here. Not once on the official site is "Pirates Vikings & Knights II" used, either in normal text or the logo. What is used in official sources is a variety of "Pirates, Vikings, & Knights II" (as used in the site logo and in Steam), "Pirates, Vikings and Knights II" (as used in the site title for browsers) and "Pirates, Vikings & Knights II" (as used on the about page and on their wikia). Any of those three is suitable as a page name for this article, but "Pirates Vikings & Knights II", with no commas, isn't as it isn't the proper format. -- Sabre (talk) 23:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)Reply