Difference between revisions of "Talk:Keyboard strafeturn"
From DoomWiki.org
m (Talk:Strafe turning combos moved to Talk:Keyboard strafeturn) |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:Oh, and the article itself needs some major style tweaks BTW. -- [[User:Janizdreg|Janizdreg]] 20:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC) | :Oh, and the article itself needs some major style tweaks BTW. -- [[User:Janizdreg|Janizdreg]] 20:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : I don't see what relevance this article really has. Yeah, if you turn and strafe at the same time you'll move in a circle. If you press forward and turn right you'll move in a circle as well. This is just [[circlestrafing]] done with the keyboard. | ||
| + | : Unless it can be improved to better explain what its purpose is, and given the poor style of the article, I'd argue for just deleting it. [[User:Fraggle|Fraggle]] 08:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 03:05, 28 September 2007
Merge with Controls ?
Seems obvious (though I've said that before...), especially in light of our "original research" policy. If radius had a very narrow scope in mind when he created Controls, and if other editors (who actually participate in these threads when they recur at Doomworld) support that, fine, but that would be news to me.
- Merge. Ryan W 19:42, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- I disagree. IMO the Controls article should concentrate on the very basic controls, whereas this "strafeturning" thing is obviously more of a curiosity/advanced tactic which doesn't have all that much to do with the basic controls. Of course links to articles about advanced controls/movement tactics such as this should be added to the Controls article.
- Oh, and the article itself needs some major style tweaks BTW. -- Janizdreg 20:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see what relevance this article really has. Yeah, if you turn and strafe at the same time you'll move in a circle. If you press forward and turn right you'll move in a circle as well. This is just circlestrafing done with the keyboard.
- Unless it can be improved to better explain what its purpose is, and given the poor style of the article, I'd argue for just deleting it. Fraggle 08:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
