Talk:Java Edition 15w34c

Lead
, consistency has no value or meaning at all if it's inaccurate. It's the reason you don't put "released mainly to fix some bugs and crashes" at the top of the Horse page. Accuracy trumps consistency. A person visiting this page isn't going to be well-served by deliberately-placed false information. I'm surprised to find you getting into an edit war (you're on your 2nd revert of 3?), defending inaccurate information; I thought you to be meticulous about this kind of thing.

There were no crashes fixed, and as far as I can tell, only one bug fixed (as of this writing): the time-command one. The other one wasn't fixed in this snapshot. It's inaccurate and misleading to leave that bug on this page, but that's a different discussion. The blog reads: "even more changes to the melee combat mechanics, and some further (experimental) optimisations", so even though this is a 'c' snapshot, it's not a typical 'c' snapshot: it's inaccurate to say "released mainly to fix some bugs and crashes". – Sealbudsman talk/contr 15:34, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I second that. At least 3 people have changed this obviously false statement. This week, Mojang have used the b and c snapshots to add features and rebalance rather than bug fix. I think "15w34c was released mainly to balance/extended changes introduced in 15w34a/b" Is a better opening paragraph, though. Any thoughts? FM22 (talk) 16:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and changed it. which is better? FM22 (talk) 16:54, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * This has been the case for a lot of b and c snapshots recently. A lot of snapshot pages have only a few bugs fixed, and a lot of major additions/changes. While in the past, b and c have been big fix releases, this is no longer the case. PancakeMan77 (talk) 19:03, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

DPS
Perhaps it would be a good idea to put the weapons' DPS values into the table, to see how they really compare with each other? I was debating doing that with the last update, where the Axe's DPS dropped below the Pickaxe's, but I haven't had time. It's still a good idea, but I'm still rather busy. Firebastard (talk) 00:56, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The calculation is basicly  so using the current values we get a DPS table like this. Oozebull (talk) 01:32, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * {| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"

! Item ! colspan="4" | Damage/Second (DPS)
 * Swords
 * 5.8
 * 7.25
 * 8.7
 * 10.15
 * Axes
 * 6.8
 * 7.65
 * 8.5
 * 9.35
 * Pickaxes
 * 3
 * 4.5
 * 6
 * 7.5
 * Shovels
 * 4.5
 * 5.5
 * 6.5
 * 7.5
 * Hoes
 * 4
 * 5,32
 * 6,68
 * 8
 * }
 * Right. I was just saying that should be a part of the article. Firebastard (talk) 04:04, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * 5,32
 * 6,68
 * 8
 * }
 * Right. I was just saying that should be a part of the article. Firebastard (talk) 04:04, 22 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Added the DPS info to the article. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk Contribs 04:49, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Does that take into account damage immunity? Anomie x (talk) 10:59, 22 August 2015 (UTC)