Blooncyclopedia talk:Update history guidelines

Are these guidelines finished?

Did polavux forget about this

Overclockbtd (talk) 23:53, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

I didn't forget, just been focused on other things. I think the only thing that's missing is the guidelines for how to use the buff/nerf icons as determined in a proposal. Polavux (talk) 00:11, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

"Decreased" or "reduced"?

So, up until now, I've described changes where a stat is lower than it used to be as "reduced" (e.g., "Attack cooldown reduced"), but I've noticed that some editors use the term "decreased" instead. This is so minor that I don't think it needs a proposal, but I would like to know which term people prefer so it can be standardized. Polavux (talk) 00:26, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

More importantly is what do readers prefer? I would use "decreased" because it's the direct opposite to "increased" when I edit articles. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 00:43, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

idk which one to use because NK has used both of them. I just went with whatever NK said in that update's patch notes.

Overclockbtd (talk) 05:34, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

I have never thought about that, checking edits I've done, I seem to use both at random, but "reduced" is certainly more common, but maybe is just only because "reduce" is a more common verb than "decrease" in my native languague.

Quick search in the internet gives arguments for either side, for example, decreased is usually preferred when used as an intransitive verb, but "reduced" is preferred when we talk about numerical values and intentional changes about the subject. Maybe "decreased" is "more correct" in the way we use it as an intransitive verb. Drgoku282 (talk) 06:15, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Personally I think "reduced" looks more natural in most cases. It is usually used intransitively on these pages, but there is the context that these changes are made by NK and don't just materialize from nothing. Though, it might be less natural for changes that are unintentional (bugs, improper implementation, side effects of other changes, et cetera). I could go either way. Polavux (talk) 06:55, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Ability cooldown

For balance changes involving ability cooldown reductions that include non-instantaneous attacks, like Turbo Charge, or maybe all activated abilities in general, how should we format ability cooldown?

• Ability: Ability cooldown reduced - 45s -> 40s

Above is what I think the format would be, but Update History does not explicitly say how to deal with Ability and Ability Cooldown, as this might be one common scenario of when to include the same word or not. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 11:44, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Writing just "cooldown" might be confusing if, for instance, an attack has a series of attacks that have more attacks, like the Doomship's bomb delay and the drop bombs per interval (those probably are "drop delay" and "bomb interval" for those two), but stuff like Turbo has 0.034s attack cooldown, so maybe there's a case where we must distinguish the attack cooldown vs the ability cooldown in these cases. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 11:47, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

It's not in the guidelines because I thought it was self-evident that we should use different terms for attack cooldown and ability cooldown. Polavux (talk) 12:12, 24 July 2026 (UTC)