Forum:Gems listing

Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > Gems listing

Note: This topic has been unedited for 4746 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

I was going to discuss this on Gairo's talk page, but I realize this is better on the forums. So, when was it decided to not list the gems dropped by the monster?

I understand this will make the page long... but really, it isn't that long, no? Very common items like Dreamstones and Coupons are still listed.

The other idea of keeping it listed is to use the "What links here" feature on the wiki. This is how in the past I was able to list items and update the pages. --D. (talk · contr) 05:29, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

hm, it was actually more of my own opinion that it would make it really too long on mob pages. but yes, as u mentioned, and as i realised when i was thinking of how to move them from my subpage, its gonna be a pain without the 'whats linking here'... (and i never got around to put up a discussion page about this :D .

so, what does everyone else think? list it on every mob page and deal with the extra length, or just list on the gem's droplists? -- Gai (Talk) 20:38, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

I know it was more of your opinion! ;]

Anyway, I think any solutions are okay to have, and a list of gems like the one on your userpage. Lists are always appreciated by users. Page length isn't really a problem, unless you have to do a lot of scrolling (like the Casino Night article, which was recently trimmed down). --D. (talk · contr) 23:13, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

we're gonna come to a slight problem though,; the asterisk mobs. they are gonna be problems in several ways, since they have weird drops. somewhat, to solve this problem, we need to either start creating separate pages for each asterisk mob, or to change the template for mobs so that we can add in the asterisk mobs below the normal mob. (asterisk mobs drop different gems and sometimes equipments, which would be stupid to list as the normal mob's drop.. ) -- Gai (Talk) 09:15, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

I can't give an opinion regarding that, because I don't know much about them (or maybe I did, and I forgot everything I read about them). It depends if you guys treat them as separate monster and such, so I'll wait for more feedback for that. --D. (talk · contr) 22:36, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

they're teh same mob, but "stronger". drop the same basic stuff, but partly or completly different gems, and have a possibility of dropping equipments (and i just recalled that ppls have reported random drops which are new, and seem to not really have any use..).

somewhat, i think the easiest way would be to add in an 'asterisk mob' part on the existing mob template. the stats are different though; they're barely ever same lvl as original mob, they usually have either higher hp or def or atk (or combinations). but i dont really know if its worth bothering the stats, since ppls should realised by lvl 10 that they are just the normal mob, but stronger and bigger... if anything, add in a note at the top of the 'asterisk mob' part saying "asterisk mobs have possibility for higher hp/def/atk" or something.

but then changing the template kinda ruins the 'what links here', since just the mob name might not be correct. so this will either mean we have to check the mobs pages when we make the lists on the gems pages, or the players will have to check for themselves on the mobs pages, if its the original/1star/2star that drops the gem. -- Gai (Talk) 02:37, February 26, 2011 (UTC)

I think adding the drops both to Gairo's list and the drops to the individual pages is best. As for the asterisk mobs, how significantly do the drops differ from the base mob? If it's not too different, the template route could be used and a note could always be added in the drop list that it's from ** or whatever. →SSF ^(talk) 04:56, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

drops like Lacquer, Banana and Quintuple Manor Keepsake, which drops from White monkeys, drop exactly same from both 1star and 2star. but as u can see on my sub page, the gem drops are not the same (only obsidian is dropped by all 3). but then comes the equipment drops, which i would like to not list on the normal mobs droplist. if anything i guess we could list the gems and specify which they are dropped by with asterisks (but this would definitely make the list too long...) :

Drops

Lacquer

Banana

Quintuple manor keepsake

Amethyst (C)

**Obsidian (C)

*Opal (C)

so i would actuallt suggest changing the template slightly so that 2star and 1 star drop below whats already on the page. (if changing the template is not too hard). but it cant be too hard to add in 2 more droplist boards below the existing? -- Gai (Talk) 08:32, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Another alternative is just adding the gems drops manually without a template line, and just specify which mob. Kind of like how on some recipe steals, the location is just in parentheses (like Orange Whipping Grass). Length on these pages doesn't seem like too much of a problem, since the current template goes up to 15 items. →SSF ^(talk) 04:09, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

so, now we have:

• make own pages per mob (not recommended)
• add in 2 extra droplists in the template (probably cleanest, and easiest to read off, but requires most work, [1][2])
• specify which mob before/after the drop itself (easiest one, and i guess it wont be too horribly long..)

and yeah, the template goes up to 15, since i edited it for King Noisy Snake (i think we need to get it to 20 for king..). but if u check the kings page, that is kind of "too long", even though normal mobs wont reach as far as that, they will be pretty long. White Monkey has 4 basic drops(5 with coupons), 5 different gems (if u dont double specify that 2star and 1star drops partly same as normal), and atleast 1 armor piece. this brings it up to 10, and it is how most mobs will have it. -- Gai (Talk) 10:05, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

I don't see the problem with the page being long; it isn't even long in my opinion. If the drop is legit, there's no reason to not add it; the point to include everything is so people know all there is to know about the monster. The table only lists up to 15 items because I didn't add more than 15, but we could do 100 if we wanted. I think it'd be good to have them sorted by groups as well, but the current template makes everything look squashed.

Why would equipment be included with the template? I'd like to know, because I don't see why it should be excluded, unless they can drop any piece of equipment available. As long as the page is still readable and comprehensible, length shouldn't be an issue. --D. (talk · contr) 17:31, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

I'm not bothered by the length either, and the squishiness could be altered by moving the image above the stats, since there's a gap there for most mobs. →SSF ^(talk) 03:07, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

seems my arguments fail me :p

but lets put it like this instead: rather than fixing legth problems (since technically my way makes the page longer..), making separate droplist boxes for 2star and 1star would make it look cleaner and easier to read. once again its gonna lead to alot more work fixing the template, and therefore it would just be easier to list it in the normal droplist and just specify in some way.

this'll be my last try to get it put into separate droplists. if your against it i'll just agree to list it either way u find best. (sadly i cant realy help with fixing the template, since im not really familiar with that. but would it be possible to make my own test-template to try it out?) -- Gai (Talk) 01:51, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

I think there's some misunderstanding? There's flexibility on how the data is formatted on a page, seperate droplists are fine, but I think the issue is making sure as much data as possible is included on that one page. A subpage to test it out is a good idea. →SSF ^(talk) 07:02, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

i'll see if i can make a subpage to try out adding separate droplist on the current template.

and to maybe clear out misunderstandings; i dont really care about the length anymore, its rather that it should look clean, and be easy to read. possibilities are:

• make new pages for each starmob (waste i'd say, but easiest for the linking on gems' pages)
• note what mob drops it by adding asterisk before the drop, or within brackets after dropname (easiest to do, but will not be as easy to read; will be "larger" amounts of text)
• change template (most work, but nicest if it works out fine. i'll see what i can do for this) -- Gai (Talk) 02:12, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

There's absolutely no problem with testing the templates. You can technically make tests on the actual template if you feel comfortable (as long as it doesn't make the template not work for too long—hiccups are fine though, and there's always the revert option if it anything goes wrong). Moreover, I'll be there to fixing (unless it's too obscure/too complicated/impossible to do, I should be able to fix it).

I haven't given much thoughts about the template, so I can't give feedback on that yet. D: --D. (talk · contr) 07:27, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Finally got myself to do the damn template stuff! so its now part of my sub pages ; template and test of template. currently using the PAGENAME template for names above drop tables, so we dont have to bother about that. problem with that tho is the "Edit" link beside it. any way to remove that? -> slight fmt fixes by u guys might be needed to fix my crappyness of html code. ;D

oh well, slam me with your thoughts of it. -- Gai (Talk) 21:08, March 24, 2011 (UTC)

Woo woo! I like these :D The Edit link is just from the ='s, so those just need to be removed and replaced with something else. →SSF ^(talk) 02:08, March 29, 2011 (UTC)

yeah. pretty much figured that, but had a dumb moment and didnt know what to do instead. but thats fixed now! (the fontsize should maybe be 1 smaller? or do you have any other way than changing the fontsize?) -- Gai (Talk) 09:01, March 29, 2011 (UTC)

It could go one smaller. Using <big> looks to be about the same as <font size="3"> to me. →SSF ^(talk) 02:04, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

i changed it to <big> now, looks a bit better indeed. any other comment, or ideas about this? -- Gai (Talk) 10:52, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

The only thing I can think of is maybe try seeing how it could look with a large amount of drops/steals listed. →SSF ^(talk) 07:39, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

ok, a long test is now made : BestiaryTestingLong (was the longest page i could think of.) faked some drops to make that drop list look like it kinda will. i think it still looks ok. -- Gai (Talk) 22:34, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

Long looks good. I'm wondering if the * sections need some sort of brief explanation, so users don't mistakenly put drops in the wrong spot. All I can come up with are these, but I'm hoping there's a better way. →SSF ^(talk) 19:13, April 2, 2011 (UTC)

i like the left one, since its linking to asterisk monsters. it would be nice to make it only one line though, but i guess that will be "hard" without any larger changes to the code due to the limited space. and cant think of any other way to do it either. -- Gai (Talk) 01:21, April 3, 2011 (UTC)

i changed it to the left version for now. and i think it would be good to chnage to this template soon, so players can start contributing this without hesitation. what the not actually says can be changed at a later date anyway, if we come up with something better. -- Gai (Talk) 16:51, April 7, 2011 (UTC)

Looking good. I took the liberty to make it appear in one line, and make the drop list appear only if |asterisk is added somewhere in the template (value is "yes" in the test page, but it could be anything—it just has to be there). Technically, we could make it appear only if drop* and such are added, but this is going to get silly (in terms of coding). --D. (talk · contr) 23:27, April 7, 2011 (UTC)

awesome! and having the |asterisk is gonna be useful until drops are a...wait. there are actually monsters which doesnt have any asterisk monsters, so its really good to have that condition, to not confuse/give false hope on those mobs. the documentation needs to be changed now as well though, so it includes these changes. once its changed, i'll probably try to go through most mobs to start listing the new/gem drops (at least all grade C and higher) -- Gai (Talk) 09:25, April 8, 2011 (UTC)

Is there always a second (**) asterisk monster? Right now, it will include both drop tables if asterisk is called. We can make it a bit different though if some monster will only spawn a * monster. --D. (talk · contr) 21:06, April 8, 2011 (UTC)

it always works that after 50ish~ normal mobs killed a 2star spawns, and after 3~4 2stars, a 1star spawns from the 2star (dont know if its actualy set amount of kills, cause its hard to test, but seems to be somewhat these amounts). the only exception to this that i know of is our current sneaky peak. so there wont be a problem with the template as it is at the moment. -- Gai (Talk) 02:13, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

Any other comments/questions/whatevers? or would it be possible to update the real template? -- Gai (Talk) 00:50, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Huh, I thought I replied. Anyway, the template was updated yesterday. --D. (talk · contr) 00:41, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

yeah i saw the changes, but didnt really have time to start editing any pages. but now i wanna ask if we should change the "exclusive to asterisk" text, and remove the 'exclusive' part. firstly because its easier to just add in everything the asterisk mobs drops in the list, and because i think lots of ppls will do that, and then its not always 'exclusive'.. -> White Monkey; only gems added so far, but they're not fully exclusive.. armors and onyxes will be added when i know exactly which ones.. -- Gai (Talk) 08:48, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

Ha, yes, the wording is confusing. It's been reworded. --D. (talk · contr) 16:05, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

thats a lot better xD. now to the work of adding everything in .... -- Gai (Talk) 23:41, April 19, 2011 (UTC)