Template talk:Stats Table Cargo

Roman numerals and tank comparison

1. what the f*ck is that ii and iii? Is there any life form over Brendan use it instead of the common Mk2 and Mk3 or knows what sh*t it is? (s1, small... derives from game)
2. The Jumbo is 7,5m tall, and not 10m! That is the reason, why those tanks were not noted!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by NWM (talk • contribs) 02:35, 1 March 2015‎ (UTC)

Woho, calm down. First of all Brendan added it here and here to the template. I'm not sure what your problem is with it. Before they added the Roman numerals, I had added that the numbers (and not names) should be used preferably so that it's easy to rename the sizes. I guess they wanted to follow the same scheme. And considering that the old Mk* and new Mk* are quite different I'd say it would have been important if the old parts weren't removed (because then you'd have old Mk* and new Mk*).

I can't really do the measurement for your second complaint but I think (unless we start adding the part's height) that those tanks could help as a guideline. And especially for the Mk2 parts they were a relatively close fit to the noted tanks. (I'll query Brendan to make them aware) — xZise [talk] 10:52, 1 March 2015 (CST)

By the way sign your posts and use the “Add topic” feature. — xZise [talk] 10:54, 1 March 2015 (CST)

Don't tell me about the number of the sizes. I had offered you, as it was foreseen with the arrival of the 3.75m parts, the "small" and "large" loose their meaning. Now, it is replaced with "1.25m" and "2.5m" in official naming of part. The Mk* naming seems stable. The motivation of "ii" is same as replacement of  -s with spaces. And the sense is same too. NWM (talk) 20:56, 1 March 2015 (CST)