Talk:Calculations

This is the discussion page for Calculations. Here, you may discuss improving the article. To discuss the subject itself, use the Forums.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.	Be polite Assume good faith Do not insult other people

Orelov's vision

Now I personally think Orelov's vision in Assassin's Creed: The Fall is a great early example of calculations in the series, where the Staff enables him and Daniel to perceive the shape of time, and events past and future. While what little they saw of Daniel's meeting with the Mentor proved accurate, any future is always a probability until it comes true. The futures Juno showed to Connor in the Nexus and Desmond at the Colosseum Vault were the future until she directly intervened. I feel I'm at fault for someone removing this example simply because I forgot to list it when I created the page. --Alientraveller (talk) 12:10, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Other(s) Function(s)

The question I ask is what are the calculations have another function or other (s)? For example, a space-time travel?

(I feel there are people who will criticize me ^ ^)  Math34 (talk) 12:29, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Desmond's Description

In Subject 17 Memo 2 in the Abstergo Entertainment research analyst's personal files, Desmond describes the Calculations as Clay Kaczmarek saw them as he descended into insanity. Should the quotation at the top of the page be replaced with that one? As it is now, it seems to be normal (albeit complex) mathematical equations the way Jupiter describes it, but that is probably the point anyway, as that's how he thinks of them.GZilla311 (talk) 14:55, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

Which part do you think we should put in the article? Because we can't put the whole lot in there. (Well, technically, we could, but it would be a ridiculous eyesore.) --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 18:14, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

How about this much? "They had these tools, these powerful machines, that could predict POSSIBLE FUTURES. Not what was going to happen, but wha-what COULD happen... probabilities. And... well, they spent a lot of energy trying to decide what was the most likely scenario for the future. Their's and ours." It seems to be a much more accurate assessment of them than Jupiter's comment.GZilla311 (talk) 19:37, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

Do we need a gallery?

As title, do we need a gallery in article?--UJ112013 (talk) 12:28, February 25, 2018 (UTC)

Source for name

This is an ongoing discussion.

Is there an explicit source for this being a proper noun and an official name? Darby's tweet specifically refers to it as an "in-house" name, meaning that the devs used it unofficially among themselves. In all other instances I have seen it used in the series, it was in a descriptive, not nominal, way and not as a proper noun. I could be wrong, so please correct me if there is a source that I missed. As it is, I fear that this is another case where we prematurely canonized a term in an official capacity (like how we treated Kassandra's official epithet as misthios for the longest time, when it is actually "the Eagle Bearer"). If we take Darby's tweet on this alone, it still does not confirm that it is official or used as a proper noun, and therefore this article needs to be marked as having a conjectural name. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 02:15, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Really? I always had interpreted Jupiter using "calculations" in his ACRev speech ("The Message" / Modern day conversations) to Desmond/Ezio as a noun, not a descriptor. Or are you looking for something more specific, like from a "Making of" or art book?

(Aside, should we work to fix Kassandra's epithet? If so, only way I can think to filter its transclusion in navboxes is to unlink it for a bit and sort from there) – Darman (talk) 02:40, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

I think you might be misunderstanding 'descriptor' here to mean adjective since "calculations" is obviously a noun when Jupiter uses it. By 'descriptive not nominal', I meant that he isn't using the word calculations as a proper name for the scientific process of predicting the future. He is only using a general word that can be used to refer to it. His hesitation, if it is accurately transcribed here, also seems to suggest that he gave a brief pause to think about the best approximate word that would characterize it without naming it. By Minerva's usage of it as well, it seems that she also adopted this simple word to convey the concept after him, but it is still not shown to be used as a proper noun as opposed to a general noun.

As for Kassandra's epithet, I have explained before that it is perfectly fine to keep introducing her as "the Spartan misthios Kassandra" in prose. That isn't incorrect and neither is introducing her as "Kassandra the Eagle Bearer", "the mercenary Kassandra", the "misthios Kassandra", "the mercenary known as the Eagle Bearer, Kassandra", the "mercenary Kassandra the Eagle Bearer", or any other variation that is factually correct. For good writing, we don't have to, and we shouldn't standardize that. But as for navboxes, I'm not sure what you mean? I didn't realize we have been treating "misthios" as her epithet in navigation boxes. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 06:11, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh yeah, reviewing Jupiter's speech again (it's accurately transcribed, just checked), he does pause briefly in thought. I think we had decided to latch onto that noun and use it as a title when creating the page in 2013, so this should probably have {{Conjecture}} on it. I can't recall, has this term been used in an official capacity since the page was made?

No, we aren't using misthios as an epithet in ACOD's navbox. The "Mercenary" section says "Kassandra the Eagle-Bearer", but her name is unlinked because she's already linked above under "Assassins / Hidden Ones". If you had wanted to changed how we intro Kassandra, I meant we'd have to unlink "mercenary" from the the AC2, ACB, etc. navboxes where it appears as a faction in order to sort out when it's used on a page or if it's transcluded. But this point is now moot since you said any variation of your above phrases is sufficient for introductions. – Darman (talk) 06:40, 12 July 2021 (UTC)