Talk:Hunting Places
From TibiaWiki
Contents |
[edit] Levels are inaccurate and should be removed
On many hunting places "minimum levels" are kinda different. Hunting places have lots of different parts, with lots of different monsters. It is not told what monsters the levels are for.
Let us take Hero Cave (not on page) as example. To kill some of the easiest monster level 8 would be enough (especially with higher level friends). To hunt on deeper floors, level 30-50 would be enough. To kill all monsters (in team), level 50-70 would be needed. To solo all monsters with profit, level should be even 200. So, what is put as minimum level? 8 or 200?
Look for example to Ankhramum dragon lairs. Minimum level for paladin has been 25, then somebody has added "70 recommend". Nowhere it is said if level 25 is for soloing all, or is level 70 is minimum for hunting all in team. Pits of Inferno has levels for soloing at PoI dragon lair, but somebody has added supplies that would be needed to hunt at actual quest areas.
I am proposing that this page should only list all hunting places in alphabetical order, and hunting guides, including levels, should be shown only on that page. For example Mintwallin page has good hunting guide, which lists all vocations, tells levels for solo, team hunt, most important spawns, and even supplies needed. That is what every hunting place-page should include. --Ville-v 01:34, 2 April 2007 (PDT)
[edit] Page is great idea
This page is a great idea. Maybe it would be cool to include "Approx. experience per hour" "Approx. mana/rune spend per hour" "Approx. loot value per hour"
Just an idea, what do you think?
I'll be contributing to this page with info on Ramoa (Bonebeast island) later on.
Ryek Azagoth 09:07, 3 November 2006 (PST)
It would be great if that kind of information was possible, but there are too many variables. If someone posted their exp/hr... it would only be accurate for maybe 1/3 of all players or gameworlds, probably less.
The primary things that affect exp/hr and cost/hr for a given hunting place are (1) respawn time, (2) speed player can kill creatures and leave the area, (3) cost per attack/damage they can cause per attack.
I have tried, and I have not found ANY good way to even estimate these values for them to be useful for more than a small group of players/gameworlds.
I'm sure that there are people out there with some ideas, but I can't think of any possible way to make these values useful for the entire tibia community.
-- Whitelaces † Talk † χρισtoς αnεσtη, αληθως αnεσtη -- 13:04, 3 November 2006 (PST)
- Why not make a ranking system? So all the 2's for instance would be high cost high Exp. 1's would be low cost high exp. 3 Medium cost high exp, 4 medium cost medium exp, or something to that effect. or a colour coding system... Some way of ranking at least.
Craggles
That would probably work, but how would you judge "high cost" or "low cost"? What a level 10 considers to be "high cost" would be super-cheap for a level 25 or higher, and there would be even more difference as you talk about higher levels.
Respawn time is certainly dependant upon number of players online, but creature density can counteract the respawn time to some degree. This also depends on the exp that each creature will give.
I still think we could not accomodate how complicated the issue is, but you may be onto something there, Craggles.
I would suggest separating cost, exp, loot... instead of having 1=high cost/high exp... have "high-cost" and a separate "high/med/low exp", etc.
Keep in mind that cost would depend almost 100% on what method they use to attack, and how much damage they can do with that attack (knights spend nothing to use melee weapons, for example, but mages spend mana and/or runes to attack).
-- Whitelaces † Talk † χρισtoς αnεσtη, αληθως αnεσtη -- 13:41, 3 November 2006 (PST)
[edit] Double info, new standard
I thought that we don't work accurate on this page. I took elvenbane to explain an example how it could be work better:
Advice level:
Knights: level 25-35 (Tip: Open dead bodies of monsters for forgotten loot.)
Paladins: level 20-30
Mages: level 19-35 (Tip: Use Great Fireballs.)
In this method we show better which level is good to hunt there and the real info such as location and monsters you can see on the page of the place itself and not here. If nobody is against it we can change every hunting place on the hunting places page to this new standard.
Bennie 30 December 2006 13:07 (CEST)
Since nobody posted against it I'll start to move everything to the new standard
Bennie 1 Januari 2006 11:49 (CEST)
It should be "Advice level or skills" instead "Advice level" because when you are paladin or knight, skills matter most. Also, there should be just minimum level, not maximum. Ville-v 05:01, 1 January 2007 (PST)
[edit] Warning about lvl
Ty very much...
About the hellgate info, it says level 30 for mages, does this include or not include elder beholders?
.:: Grady -=- Contribs -=- Talk ::. 00:15, 14 January 2007 (PST)
While the creatures were being blocked by a 100 knight, at level 27, Magic Level 38 sorcerer i could easily kill most things in hellgate but i still got spam from [Elder Beholder]]s when too close. If a 30 mage is soloing hellgate the open areas are the worst and not very cost effective. Each building structure inside is not bad since you can go up/down stairs. This of course depends on the mage but there are some free floating elders that definitely will cause problems for even a 35 mage if there are many creatures about besides. --DM ><((°> Contribs <°))>< talk to me 18:36, 17 April 2006 (CDT) 13:40, 14 January 2007 (PST)
[edit] Inaccurate
i think these levels are extremely low. For example the dragon lair which has dragon lords. You need to be a much higher level than 28 to kill dragon lords.
[edit] Organising
alphabetical ordering seems poor and innacurate to my eyes
I think we should divide the areas into cities
would do much better... what doi you think of it?
if there is no answer I'll do it anyway
hugs,
Nagatho Goldenflag
Talk Contributions 07:01, 1 February 2007 (PST)
It may be a good Idea to me, go ahead :P But maybe we should also have a link like on the questpage with an alphabetic ordering. I'll take care of it and if I don't you may finish it.
Wie niet slim is moet slim zijn
^^ º Bennie º ¤ Talk ¤ ^^ 10:22, 1 February 2007 (PST)
Many hunting places are far from cities, doesn't seem good way to order for me. --Ville-v 03:25, 4 February 2007 (PST)
I am pretty indifferent about the organization of this page, but I think Ville-v is right... most hunting areas aren't really near a specific city.... Orc Fort, for example..... some people would say "Carlin", since the amazon NPC in femor hills says they raid carlin... but it's actually closer to Ab'Denriel and Venore than it is to Carlin. Same with POH or POI... Thais? Venore?... but many people get there from the Dwarven Bridge, coming from Femor hills or Kaz.
Just something to consider as you guys work out how to organize this page.
-- Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo
-- Whitelaces † Talk † -- 07:00, 5 February 2007 (PST)
well, I dfo agree there are some areas which do not really belong to a city, but I see no other way to make it look more organised
I didn't start organising it yet as I'm waiting for more opinions/ideas
anyways hugs,
Nagatho Goldenflag
Talk Contributions 07:59, 5 February 2007 (PST)
If i recall correctly some other things in the wiki may be organised along the lines of the houses-cities connection. Houses in Femor Hills and Outlaw Camp belong to Kazordoon so should the local hunting areas. Ice Islands houses belong to Carlin, as well as hunting areas. Then other iffy things can go by logic. The northern Amazon Camp makes more sense to go with the city of women then of elves. Elvenbane is closer to Ab'Dendriel and has some elves in it. Ulderek's Rock is closest to Venore. If there are more questionable ones then ask in the talk page and discuss. I think, like it was mentioned above, it could be good to have two separate articles of Hunting Places, by location and alphabetical, similar to the creature page and divisions. --DM ><((°> Contribs <°))>< talk to me 18:36, 17 April 2006 (CDT) 18:34, 6 February 2007 (PST)
The page says that you have to be about level 30 to hunt in shadowthorn, but i've hunted there since i was level 16 (mostly elves and lonely elf scouts), shouldn't we put that in?
--Delatus 08:27, 2 May 2007 (PDT)
- Instead haveing a single hunting grounds page why not have level ranges pages for instance Sorceror's level 20-30 then advice - different stratergies. Effective use of the vocation and hunting area's what runes to take. This whole section is far bigger than a single page. We (as I mentioned)could intergrate a ranking system vocation and level specific. We could use a table for saying the primary attack i.e. primary attack gfb would require 4 bp's of gfb an hour and 1 bp of mana fluids. The main thing we'd then to do if put it all in an easy to manage table as most other stuff is. We could add some do's and don'ts aswell
There are only a limited amount of stratergies in tibia so we could have references to pages involving them - or even specific pages. We could have cross over points where a knight would work efficiently with a mage - perhaps hydras. the a couple of different stratergies with screenshots. Excuse the mad typing but I was in a rush and had alot of ideas.
Craggles
[Random::Chat::Guild::Contributions::Tibicam Profile]