Forum:Reviews

Greetings fellow Nerfers. I am D.Kaiser. I have been an active member on wikis for about 5 years now. Maybe more. Anyway, I noticed an issue with this wiki that annoys me. That is, the reviews. To be completely honest, I think the idea of a numerical based review is absurd. Why? Because I every blaster I have read up on is different and has it's own pros and cons. That, and every numeric value used is arbitrary. You could say that the Barrel Break IX-2 has a low rate of fire and those should be lower on the scale and I could say that it fires two shots, and depending on the game, that could incapacitate another player, thus is should be higher. Due to the arbitrary rating, and the lack of criteria, there is no consistency. Have any of you noticed that all of the reviews for the N-Force weapons all have overall rating of 8 or 9? In a real rating system, one would conclude something like "Hey, you know, all these weapons or essentially equal. The only difference is the size of the blade and how you use it, so don't even pay attention to the rating because they are all the same". Simply put, the rating system says they're not snowflakes because they are all the same, which is untrue. Also, the blasters also have rating issues. The range has issues. If I've read correctly, the maximum distance a blaster has is 50ft (Longshot?), unmodded. The Alpha Trooper has a range rating of 9...and it fires, according to this wiki, 35-40. Okay, now lets pretty this formula applies: If 1/10, then 1=5ft (10=50ft). I that's the case, the Longshot should get a 10, which it does, and the Alpha Trooper should have a 7 or and 8...but it has a 9. Weird. Also, dart capacity. The Raider has the largest amount with a drum that holds 35 darts. Let's say 35 darts = 10. A gun that comes with a six dart clip, like the Recon should have a rating equal to 6 divided by 35, which is 0.12, or if we round up, 2. That makes sense because 5 clips, with 6 darts each, have a total capacity of 30 (remember, we rounded up so if we went by the real figure, then it would be 35). However, why does a Nite Finder, which has 4 darts, have a rank of 4 in this category. It should get a 1. A lot of these ratings are incorrect. Now, one argument would be "well, maybe because they are different types of blasters that shoot different types of ammo." To that I say, "True. But where did you see something that said that? None of the reviews I saw said 'Whistler dart firing blaster ratings criteria apply here' ". So, below I have a few recommendations:


 * Review: (Note: The guns should be treated as if they just came out of the box.)
 * Name
 * Type: Is it a Slam Fire blaster, Revolver, Sniper, Electric (Barricade may be an issue here as it applies to revolver and electric)? This should be here so the user an compare the guns in this category for themselves.
 * Ammunition (What kinds can it use un modified?)
 * Range: If 1/10, then 1=5ft (10=50ft?). For now, that's how it should be. However, if a gun in the future can fire 60 ft...then we have to change the scale. So, best make it so that it goes to 100 or 200 feet. If done, implement the > or < symbols.
 * Accuracy: This should be based on the range. Note: The type of blaster may need to be mentioned. If it's a Barrel Break, it shouldn't be measure as a sniper would. Do the range by distance both darts hit. If it's universal, a gun with a range of 20feet should low on the scale. If specific, do it with similar gun types and by, again, a higher range than the recorded types.
 * Reliability: Deploys and Longstrikes are said to frequently jam as can a Maverick. A Spectre was designed so that couldn't happen as often. However, there is a trade off to shooting quickly and not jamming. If I had a raider, I expect it to be able to fired it quickly. This may not be the case due because it is more prone to jams this way.
 * Rate: Darts per second? Max is four with the raider I think. If so, single shots have a rate of 2.5 out of 10.
 * Capacity: Probably should be based depending on the type of ammo or highest amount of ammo a gun can hold just out of the box. A Raider comes with 35 streamline darts in a drum. A Recon comes with 6 streamline darts in a magazine. Can't compare that with a Nite Finder. And if we do, the Nite Finder shouldn't have a 4/10 if it only has three darts at once.
 * General: Should be the average of the above types, rounded to the nearest .5.
 * N-Force polls: Every weapon is an 8 or a 9 out of 10. What the heck is a 1 or a 2? None of the stuff is consistent.

So, I'm curious as to what you guys think we should do. I am all ears, err...eyes. Thank you for your time. D.Kaiser 00:55, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

N-Strike blaster reviews

 * Hey D.Kaiser, just read your suggested changes to the reviews, and I love them. I really like the addition of the type of blaster to help sort blaster reviews into specific rules and whatnot. Things were convoluted before and I've been meaning to fix things. I've been busy as of late, but today was my last final for the semester. Now that I have the time, I can help put this together and redo reviews to go with this new system. JetCell 01:04, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, so before I get further into this, do you want to do it where we compare similar blasters? Like Longstrike vs. Longshot? The issue with that is, some blasters, like the Barricade, don't have a similar blaster or they have two. To be honest, I'd go with a mixture of both. Have a review for revolvers along side all blasters. That way, the user knows how that blaster stands. D.Kaiser 15:47, May 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, for an expanded response. As of now their are five categories a blaster can be rated on. Those are: range, accuracy, reliability, rate of fire, and dart capacity. Now I will review each and the possible options we can do to review them. The first category is range. The blaster with the highest range that I have seen on this wiki is the Longstrike CS-6 at 50ft. Now, in terms of basic math, if 10/10 has a maximum of 50ft, than everything should be in intervals of 5ft. So, 1 should equal 5ft, 2 equals 10ft, etc. So, that should be easy to measure. One thing to consider is if a blaster comes out that can shoot 60ft, our rating system is outdated, so make the maximum 75ft or 100ft. The second category is accuracy. All the reviews I've read here just say that a blaster is accurate, isn't, is fairly, or some other arbitrary phrase. I say we should pick a measurement that will act as a radius (preferably less than the width of the average human body) and state that if should be tested to see how accurate it is a fraction of it's maximum range. Range means nothing if the blaster can't hit the target. So, maybe say that accuracy is based on the likelihood of a dart hitting it's target from 3/4 of 5/6 of it's range. I say a fraction because it's maximum range of every blaster is the ground with a 100% guarantee it will make that extremely large and vague target. However, you MUST label it so it says the range you tried to hit it at. The third category is reliability. I, personally, hate this category. Every blaster is not the same as the one that share's its name and its reliability is completely arbitrary and cannot be measured. Someone could say the Raider CS-35 is a reliable blaster and I could say it screwed me over in a Nerf war because the drum go in the way. So, if we keep this category, I'd say we kept it as a section for people to insert their two cents. Rate of fire is the fourth category. This category is kind of arbitrary but can be measure, however "results may vary." Why, because some people may not be able to pump a blaster as fast as others or maybe the blaster is stiff, so that causes an issue. Also, this is a great place to insert an inappropriate joke. So, what one does in this category is measure how fast a blaster can fire it's rounds. The only issue is, some blasters are front fed or have three shots to fire while others have, I dunno, 35. So, the best thing to do here is pick a time and see how many darts that blaster can fire in that time. The air system blasters have a huge advantage as in one second they can fire 7-10, and slam fire blasters have 4. So, that being the case, make the is based per second. However, that depends on if we consider pumping part of "rate of fire." If that was the case, AS blasters go down on the scale. The fifth and final category is dart capacity, which is maxed at 35 by the Raider, unless you want to consider the Vulcan BF-50 or the rumored/original version of the Stampede ECS. So, pick a number, and like range, you should in make it so you have to pick from a number higher than it. I'd say 75 or 100. Why? Because if we do it at 35, some blasters will surpass it. If you do it at 50 some blasters could, in the future, pass it. So, 75 maybe a good option. However, I'm not sure what to do with the Stampede. Every blaster, recently, comes with 1 clip. It comes with three Eighteen dart clips and a standard six dart clip. It still fits into the 75 dart limit, but that's several clips. Almost seems to be a cheap way to do it, but meh. Okay, so that's what I think about the existing categories. In addition, I think we should note the accessories too, because if we're going to judge the gun on the ammunition clip that comes with it, I think accessories should be counted too. However, those can't be measured. All you can do is list the pros and cons of each. I do believe we should throw out the general or final rating, because that can be measured but I'd rather have a Barrel Break IX-2 than a Raider CS-35 just because it suits what I want, even if it isn't the "best". Also, this is one point I won't stress enough. Make a template for each gun that has a review. Write it up and protect it. Either completely or to just registered users, and make it so it's only edited if someone makes a mention. That too must have a link so you can redirect the user to that template or it's talk page. I can't think of any more to add, but if I do I will post it here. D.Kaiser 02:19, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * As of now, what do you think? D.Kaiser 16:01, June 6, 2011 (UTC)

N-Force reviews

 * As for the N-Force weapons, yes, the reviewing for those weapons REALLY needs to be fixed... not sure how to do that yet. JetCell 01:04, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * As for the weapons, I suggest that what is reviewed are things that make them different. Weight/force and length of blades are the two criteria most likely to affect a melee weapon's efficiency. Weight allows a weapon to have force, and break more defenses. Weight also decides if a blade can move quickly. Note: If a weapon should measure all blades and both sides. Those are the criteria. However, if would be best to review them without numbers. Instead, pros and cons should define them. My Stonewall Sword may weight and thus can't block well, but it can get me close quickly. I've used the Marauder Long Sword before. It has great range, but it's heavy. I can hit someone who has a Shadow Fury Short Sword before they hit me. However, if I stab and I miss, it will take me longer to get it back to a battle stance, which my opponent can take advantage of with their lighter, and slightly shorter, weapon. As for the N-Strike blasters, we'll cover those later. D.Kaiser 01:39, May 27, 2011 (UTC)