Talk:Vs. System

message: Does the majority agree with the current stated "Strategy Depth" of "High" in the box-out?  Personally I disagree with this and wouldn't classify it any higher than "Medium" but if I'm in a minority then no worries, leave it as is.  What're your thoughts? --Stenun 19:40, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well as it's been 6 weeks and no one has commented either for or against reducing the "Strategy Depth" I've gone ahead and done it.  If you disagree then please say so here and say why before reverting it back, thanks.  --Stenun 13:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article on Magic:The Gathering lists its strategy level as high. Using that as a standard, do you think that VS System's strategy depth is medium? I think a game like Yu-Gi-Oh! or Dragon Ball Z would be considered medium. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 16:22, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally I think Magic should be Medium as well.  High should be reserved for such games as the original Middle-Earth TCG (NOT the Decipher version) or Babylon 5 CCG or possibly even the original Star Wars CCG.  This is no way you can say that both Magic and the VS System have the same strategy depth as the Babylon 5 CCG.  Creating more rankings might be a decent solution, possibly giving them a rating from 1 to 5 or something.  As for Yu-Gi-Oh! and Dragon Ball Z, they should be Low.  Bear in mind that this is a rating purely for CCGs/TCGs and as such just because a game is slightly more complex than Snap it doesn't mean it shouldn't be rated as Low.  --Stenun 12:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that MTG out-of-the-box is not very complex and should probably be listed as medium. The same with VS. It's not like either game is chess. But I wouldn't want to be the one to go over to that article and try to convince the editors there that their game isn't "hard." -- Malber (talk • contribs) 12:47, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But just because that article is wrong, it doesn't mean every other one should be too.  Besides, if we make sure that every other article is correct and THEN try and change the Magic article to be more accurate and less fan-boyish it will help our arguments if we can point to the changes already made.  --Stenun 06:30, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh, I say there's a difference between strategy depth and a game's complexity. As for VS System, it's 'high enough' in my opinion. NorrYtt 18:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strategy depth 

message: Can someone explain the card ratios? For instance, what do 13:1 and 1:1 mean? Thanks. --Chris Griswold 19:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where do you see that in the article? -- Malber (talk • contribs) 13:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It's not in the article, nut I think it should be; it's on the card packs. :--Chris Griswold 02:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The ratios refer to the statistics of finding a particlular type of card in a pack. For example, every pack has a foil and a rare, so the ratio for both is 1:1. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 20:43, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ratios 

message: Would anyone be interested in working on a WikiBook Vs strategy guide? :--Chris Griswold 06:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikibook 

message: This article has been tagged a couple of times for cleanup and I have removed the template both times because the editor did not properly list it on the cleanup page. I do believe the article needs tidying and I would have listed it there myself if not for a few reasons. First, I didn't have the time to fully analyze the article enough to point out specific areas that the article needs cleanup. Second, I don't think the article would get the attention it needs from the cleanup crowd as the article requires attention from people knowledgable about the subject. A year ago, when I was a less tenured editor, I listed the article on the cleanup page and received no responses. I considered including this in Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics, but I'm not sure where to start there, or even if it is appropriate. I looked at the M:TG page, but they have their own project going. I was unable to find a broader category for TCGs. I will try to develop a to do template for the talk page. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 20:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good points. There's a cleanup page? --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 20:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

text: This article is so in need of a clean up it almost would be easier to start from scratch. For one thing it is far to large, and contains much repeated and unencyclopedic infomation. But would hate to see useful info thrown out. Really I am just agreeing here. I may try fixing a few bits but feel I am not familiar enough with the game to do it all justice. - Waza 00:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: What kind of clean-up would people suggest? SeventhSoldier (talk) 02:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For cleanup, the first thing I would suggest (after you look at and comment on the new starting paragraph I have written below) would be to consolidate the History sections. I don't know why there are 2, or why they are so long, because, as an outsider to the game, I don't want to spend that much time reading the history. Mathman1550 (talk) 22:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: The descriptions of the team themes needs to be updated. Marvel Defenders and Wild Pack are also missing.
:The descriptions are very helpful. I don't know all the affiliations nor what their themes are, or in some cases how prevalent they are in tournaments. NorrYtt 10:58, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need more team descriptions 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Vs. System. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090201051946/http://entertainment.upperdeck.com:80/vs/en/news/article.aspx?aid=5166 to http://entertainment.upperdeck.com/vs/en/news/article.aspx?aid=5166
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:51, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified