Template talk:Infobox Creature
From TibiaWiki
I added a border to it, if it looks ugly or makes something to fail, comment it here and revert it.
--Lord de los Druidas 00:31, 9 Jun 2005 (EDT)
[edit] Sounds
It's great you guys are adding the sounds monsters make, and I'm sure a fancy "Monster Sounds" page will be made, but would it also be possible to put up whether or not a monsters' sounds can be heard over a large distance? Some monsters sort of "yell" their sounds, whilst others don't, and it would be nice to see which do and do not. --Erig 00:31, 7 March 2006 (CST)
That's a cool idea... I hadn't thought of that. Does anybody know...when a creature "yells" a sound, does that creature "yell" ALL of their sounds? Or does it only yell some of their sounds? If they always yell all of their sounds, then this can easily be added to the template. Otherwise, it will need to be marked somehow next to the sound.
Fac ut gaudeam.
-- Whitelaces † Talk † -- 07:25, 7 March 2006 (CST)
Creatures can yell sounds but than the sound is in capitals, if they don't yell it can be either upper or lowercase letters. (And example is the Mino Mage
[edit] Raids
I got an other question, can't we add in the template of a creature if he active in a raid? You got a list of sounds,abilities etc. and if it's in a raid would perfectly fit in that list i think. User:Bennie 18:33, 2 September 2006 (CST)
How would it look any different from the current templates?
I assume that you mean to make a different list template for the Raids page, but I do not see why this is necessary, since there is no special information to be displayed there. I think that the current templates are very adequate.
Can you maybe explain how you think it should look different? -- Whitelaces † Talk † χρισtoς αnεσtη, αληθως αnεσtη -- 07:26, 5 September 2006 (PDT)
I mean, now you see e.g. by a rat this list of specifications: -Abilities, Max. damage, immunities, sounds, behavior, field notes, location, strategy and loot. What I want to change is this: among that list of specification of a creature there must come the item e.g.: raid: Yes, thais orc raid./No. So when people looking at a creature see if it's active in a raid or not.
I hope you can catch the idea, i don't know if you need to change something in the template for this. User:Bennie 20:53, 5 September 2006 (CEST)
[edit] Reterget
I suggest adding field in template which would indicate whether certain creature retargets or not. Or even to set range of values like: never, sometimes, often. I noticed some creatures have this written in strategy field, but I think it would be good to add separate field for that sicne this knowledge if often crucial.
--Kind regards, Ethnar 06:36, 29 September 2006 (PDT)
[edit] Loot
I suggest Loot is changed for Loot in the template, so players can click on it and see what Loot is.
Ψ Genosonic Ψ Ψ My Contributions Ψ Ψ Talk Ψ 21:22, 23 January 2007 (PST)
You mean to change the text "Loot" on the left into a link to the Loot page?
If there are no objections, I guess I don't have any arguments. I'll go ahead and change it, but if anyone comes up with a good reason to change it back, post here.
-- Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
-- Whitelaces † Talk † -- 06:10, 24 January 2007 (PST)
[edit] Creature background
Personally i'd like to be able to read the background story of the creatures too. The information posted in the tibia.com library. Just to have 1 page that holds all information. Both statistics and story.
- ¨˜”°º•Eleanor•º°”˜¨ ¨˜”°º•Talk•º°”˜¨ ¨˜”°º•Contributions•º°”˜¨
That's a good idea.... but we cannot just copy the text from tibia.com.... it has to be all original.
TibiaCity has this kind of stuff on their creature pages, but I think it would be difficult to make sure it is accurate (since we cannot just copy the text from Tibia.com).
I think we might need some more discussion about this before we decide anything.
-- A posse ad esse
-- Whitelaces † Talk † -- 11:46, 8 February 2007 (PST)
Well I don't mind rewriting the tibia.com story's. Don't expect me to do them all in a week tho :p. Or we just ask Erig to ask cip with puppy eyes, to get permission :p.
- ¨˜”°º•Eleanor•º°”˜¨ ¨˜”°º•Talk•º°”˜¨ ¨˜”°º•Contributions•º°”˜¨
Is it necessary to make a separate line for creature background or can it just go in the notes section? Some creatures like a rabbit would have little background but a demon has much more to be said about. I have no problem writing out a history for the creatures, there just might need to be some extra watch for people writing ridiculous things about some creatures.
--DM ><((°> Contribs <°))>< talk to me 18:36, 17 April 2006 (CDT) 13:52, 8 February 2007 (PST)
For information to be accurate, you need references, if not, like DM just said, people will be writing random stuff. The solution would be posting the background along with references pointing where the information was taken from, like information from NPCs, books, tibia website maybe?. Information about some monsters are rumors, but to be stated I suppose it such rumors have to been widely known.
Ψ Genosonic Ψ Ψ My Contributions Ψ Ψ Talk Ψ
Well I was talking about writing the same things that were in the tibia library, but just use your own words/sentances. So it's no longer copyrighted. Don't invent stuff.
- ¨˜”°º•Eleanor•º°”˜¨ ¨˜”°º•Talk•º°”˜¨ ¨˜”°º•Contributions•º°”˜¨
Well, I guess you could rewrite those, but, specify that the info was taken from there and mofidied to fit this page. That's just my opinion...
Ψ Genosonic Ψ Ψ My Contributions Ψ Ψ Talk Ψ 08:01, 11 February 2007 (PST)
[edit] Loot in bag/directly in monster
I just wonder if it's possible to add info: is lootable thingy in bag or just directly in monster. Would require to change template and add a lot of info.
Any opinions?
jura, 26.09.2007
[edit] Just something to change
Please change, actually add this code <td align="right" valign="top">Location(s):</td> instead of this: <td align="right" valign="top">Location:</td>
[edit] Immunities, Weaknesses and Strengths
Since the entire element system has changed, and new elements were added, old ones were changed, etc. I decided to alter the creature template.
I removed all of the "elementimmune" parameters, and I added "immuneto", "weakagainst" and "strongagainst" parameters.
You can see an example on the Beholder page. This is certainly available for discussion. Please post your reactions and ideas/suggestions here.
-- Nullo metro compositum est.
-- Whitelaces † Talk † -- 12:24, 11 December 2007 (PST)
well, i thin the elment resistance should be sorted this way Immune -> Strong -> Weak they are currently sorted. Immune, Weak, Strong
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mahamad 4u (talk • contribs). Remember to sign your comments!
No problem. I can easily fix that.
-- Te audire no possum. Musa sapientum fixa est in aure.
-- Whitelaces † Talk † -- 07:38, 12 December 2007 (PST)
The current template with "free text" for the immunities does not work for the List-template. To have an easy way to generate the lists, there should be a more formal approach (like the yes/no from the former immunities).
The following would work nice on the List-template:
- invisibility = immune
- firedamage = weak
- icedamage = weak
- holydamage = normal
- earthdamage = strong
- energydamage = strong
- ...
We could then use [[Image:Firedamage_{{{firedamage|normal}}}.gif]] to select different graphics. The picture "Firedamage_normal.gif" could be an empty picture (or a picture with a medium fire), the picture "Firedamage_weak.gif" a picture with a big fire, the picture "Firedamage_immune.gif" a picture with a crossed out fire, and the picture "Firedamage_strong.gif" a picture with a small fire.
Lafajev 05:40, 17 December 2007 (PST)
That may be a good idea, but I think it will confuse people more. I have already noticed some people get confused by the words "strong against" and "weak against". I can't come up with a better way to put it, but certainly shortening it to "strong" and "weak" will be more confusing. This is the main reason that I changed "immunities" to "immuneto"... changing the parameters to all use the same voice, context and subject should make them all easier to understand.
I completely agree that we need to make the immune/strongagainst/weakagainst things easier to read. Right now they all blend in to the rest of the template. The only reason I did it this way, is because I wanted a way to build the DPL lists on the different damage pages, and I needed to do it fast before people started adding this info in all different ways. This may not be the most accessible and readable method, but at least it is standardized.
The thing I like most about your proposal is that it would allow us to define these categories in the template, which would provide for a cleaner and more reliable method of organizing the creatures dynamically.
I guess what I'm saying is... I like the idea, but I think I would like to see it in action before we change the template. Can you mock something up in the TibiaWiki:Playground for us to play with and refine? When we get it to something that we think looks good, then we can go ahead and deploy it.
When making these icons... I recommend making them 16x16 pixels. The current 10x10 pixel images would be too hard to distinguish when we start making variations (like crossed-out, etc).
-- Mirabile visu
-- Whitelaces † Talk † -- 10:49, 17 December 2007 (PST)
Monsters are weak and strong with different % against elements. This should be added, too. It's easy to test with area spells!
--NeWsOfTzzz 12:36, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I've added a little bit to enable icons with the current format of the template.
- I've uploaded a picture for Holy Damage - because I do not edit GIF's normally, its not transparent and ugly...
- Ok, someone was faster while I was writing this, transparency was already added. :-)
- We should probably change the icon for Earth Damage
.
- Maybe we should change all icons so that the names match the damage- or immunity-type.
- I've added a template to create a List of Icons: Template:Infobox Creature/Damage Icon List.
- I don't want to spoil all list pages, so I added a new List-Template for testing: Template:Infobox_Creature/List2
- I added Cyclopolis to my sandbox page, so the Templates can be seen in action: User:Lafajev/Sandbox
If this works everywhere, we could incorporate it in the normal lists (I have no idea how I check it with DPL). My sandbox loads very slow after an edit right now, so I don't know if the template is too complex or the load on the server is high right now...
Lafajev 22:39, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Addition of 'neutral' immunity parameter
I was thinking, maybe there should be a 'neutral' parameter so that all elements are mentioned, currently Frost Dragon is marked as weak against energy damage, when according to tibia.com's library, they aren't immune, strong or weak against energy.
Frost Dragons have 1800 hitpoints. They are immune to fire, earth, and ice damage and cannot be paralyzed. Moreover, they are strong against physical damage. These creatures can neither be summoned nor convinced. In addition, they are able to sense invisible creatures.
Sixorish
My contributions
Talk page 08:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I think that way would be harder to get wrong edits on the weakness space so... I support sixorish
Rafailo Sagara Talk Contriutions 
22:58, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Creatures that can push objects
It'll be useful to add an attribute about if the creature can o not push objects like parcels Seth66 23:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Inconsistency in the template
The template documentation lists parameter behaviour but the template doesn't recognise it. The template uses different spelling behavior. Please make changes to use any one form of this word. I noticed that some creature pages don't display this info even though it's added in page source.
Also by the way, it would be nice to add dots to the default text for those parameters: abilities, behavio(u)r, notes, location, strategy, loot so if the info is missing they would be displayed as (for example):
Abilities: Unknown.
rather than:
Abilities: Unknown
John Locke 
Talk 11:29, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Made some changes, now both forms of behavior should work, the parameter defaults now have periods after them, thanks for finding the error. -- Sixorish 11:36, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Immunities, Weaknesses and Strengths (2)
Continuing the discussion from User_talk:Sixorish#_Unlocked template.
You state your new parameter system is the same as the old one. Technically +20% and 120% is the same. Also, -20% and 80% are the same, but already harder to understand. But what do you mean with 99%<? or 101%>?? Also, you abbreviate Life Drain to Drain, which is also confusing. Besides, there was nothing wrong with the 3 seperate lines, it made it easier to read. ^^ Bennie (talk ~ fellows) ^^ 16:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Maybe 120% is more complicated than +20%. But dude, look into the histories of the creatures! I just write what I remember by brain for strongagainst values (and it was written that way on the page!):
Strong Against: Ice Damage (+20%)
Strong Against: Ice Damage (-20%)
Strong Against: Ice Damage (20%)
Strong Against: Ice Damage 20%
You can see, the strong against field was with '-', with '+', without any arithmetic operator, without brackets. And that's what you call easier? (same was for weakagainst and also with different numbers for sure).
About the Damage Modifiers, I'm atm working on documentation (there is also explained what those values mean, and it's clickable on every creature page so most people should be able to find it):
and for editors I'll update that:
Template:Infobox_Creature/Documentation
NeWsOfTzzz 16:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
About "Drain", this will be changeable in the template with 1 word and then it'll be changed on all creature sites. This is just cosmetical stuff, let's delay this until tomorrow, when I'm done migrating all data.
NeWsOfTzzz 16:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
About those values being in 3 lines, also a cosmetical thing, may even be now automatically placed by DPL, will have to work in that. If it's possible via DPL (And I'm kinda sure it is) then I'll just have to put 1-2 lines into the monster template and afterwards it'll also be in all monsters. (But for that change maybe we should make a vote, because I think it's better all in one line but always the same order of elements. That way you don't have to search for a specific element.)
NeWsOfTzzz 16:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Okay, have changed "Drain" to "Life Drain" (may take some time until creature pages are updated).
NeWsOfTzzz 16:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
NeWsOfTzzz, you can use "<100%" instead of "99%<?", and ">100%" instead of "101%>?".
I created a poll and I'll add it to Main Page tomorrow.
If the "old system" wins, NeWsOfTzzz will revert all his changes.
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 16:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, as I've said, please wait until tomorrow with a vote. People can't vote for an unfinished system (and btw, Erig said that the damage modifiers SHOULD be added DPL compatible. So we can't just remove everything).
NeWsOfTzzz 16:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Ok, we can wait you change all creatures pages to make that democratic vote.
But we can improve the poll today.
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 17:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Wow, I didn't knew we had poll tags. How does it work?
Edit: found it here, although the info is little. ^^ Bennie (talk ~ fellows) ^^ 17:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
NeWsOfTzzz, you can use "<100%" instead of "99%<?", and ">100%" instead of "101%>?".
The problem is, we can't, otherwise DPL won't work anymore, the number must be at the beginning, nondigits may only stand at the end of the value.
PS: Where is the exact problem with it anyway? Those values should be replaced as soon as possible by people testing those values (so 99%<? may be replaced by 60% for example), so they're just temporary anyway.
NeWsOfTzzz 18:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Why couldn't you make a testpage in the User namespace and let people vote on that? Why do you want to edit every page, then vote? You'll have to revert everything again..
It's not clear now what is the best element to use on a certain monster.
I don't see your changes as an improvement.
Temahk 19:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
"It's not clear now what is the best element to use on a certain monster."
Erm just look for the highest number.. (let's say ice 50%, fire 90%, energy 120% and earth 110%, then take energy).
But if that's too complicated for you, how did you do it before?
NeWsOfTzzz 19:36, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I phoned my mom, so she could ask my dog to take a note to the milkman so the milkman could then put a message in a bottle and throw it in the Atlantic, so the message would be received in Japan where a fisherman would get on a boat and sail to China to make seven Chinese children in a basement process the wiki page.
The Chinese children would then tell a rat to get on a truck full of fireworks on its way to Russia so the rat could bite a mans toe as many times as the percentage would be so the man knows what smoke signal to send to Poland where a wild boar would jump over the fence of its habitat to get to the post office so the clerk could then send a teletex across Germany so then finally a pidgeon could poop on my head and tell me what element I would need to use on a monster.
Temahk 19:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
You wouldn't believe how much this actually explains for me.
NeWsOfTzzz 19:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Ok, let's not fall into pointless discussion, Temahk we understand you think the new system is not very user-friendly. NeWs, we will handle this issue democratically, all will be fine. Also, please understand you might not appear very convincing and look like a new user (having a red-linked user page seen in RC). Naturally, the opinion of more experienced users and active-in-community-users are more convincing. ^^ Bennie (talk ~ fellows) ^^ 20:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
You're maybe right that this isn't helping me in this case...
My oldest edit is from may 2006, wrote that onto my user page (so it isn't red anymore).
NeWsOfTzzz 20:28, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
@Hunter of Dragoes:
"I created a poll and I'll add it to Main Page tomorrow."
1) People don't know about the benefits, you'll have to include all of them into the vote, like "keep old system but loose ability to sort by weakness % (good to find the most effective monster to hunt), loose ability to see all monsters that are neutral to an element, loose ability to change the standardized layout of the damage modifiers, loose ability for editors to faster find untested values (which would mean less and slower process of testing damage modifiers) and loose some more technical possibilites of the new system"
(It's ESSENTIAL for any democratic vote for the voters to have all information available to them)
"If the "old system" wins, NeWsOfTzzz will revert all his changes."
2) Well, that's not correct. As Erig said the values should be DPL compatible, so we can't revert everything. But let's wait for the vote.
NeWsOfTzzz 20:42, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Old Sistem:
Inmune: (no need to explain)
Weak: (bigges weaknes first) (then lower weaknes --> ) (and last uknow weakness)
Strong: (Most Strong) (mediun strong) (unknow strong)
Othere elements that hit the same are not important to mention.
I want to know if a monster is strong to holy: 1- I look to "strong to" line, 2- I read that line and find out holy is there so is strong (done).
Whith this new sistem:
Damage Modifiers: Physical: 75%, Holy: 99%<?, Death: 90%, Fire: 100%, Energy: 105%, Ice: 90%, Earth: 50%, Drown: 100%?, Life Drain: 100%?
I want to know if a monster is strong to holy: 1-look in the line 2- read all of them cause theres alot of things in the same line that I dont care to read but am forced to read to find the thing I want. 3-Find that holy is 99%<? 4- What the hell <user thinks what is that> 5- He post in a talk page and asks 5- one day later some one answers 6- now he knows that the monster is strong to holy.
Thats 6 more step just to find out if a monster is strong to holy and takes more time to read too.
Problem is all is mixed in a line if you get that separated so if you want to find if a monster is weak and not read the other ones that you don't care (strong to, immune to) that would make it faster.
Also I don't like the 99<? 101>? thing, can't you use something else? Before whas just numbers from 1% to 100% much less complicated and faster to read and understand.
Kwigon the sharpshooter 20:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Personally for "simple" people I would imagine that the "99<%?" / "101>%?" would mean absolutely nothing to them, it's a nice idea though and it could be useful in some way if there could be some kind of page that would display what monster is the most weak to a certain element but, how the damage modifier is right now it is just too much of a mess to look at.
For the poll there could be extra options on it. Instead of it just being "like it" "dislike it" there could be options like "nice idea but could be more user friendly" "prefer the old way but like it" or "dont care" or something. Beejay 20:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I agree with kwigon, but I can also imagine it could be improved and still hold the technical improvements. Adding "don't care" to this vote would not be suitable, if people don't care, why bother voting anyway? ^^ Bennie (talk ~ fellows) ^^ 21:07, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Sorry I didnt mean it as that. What I meant is usually polls have a "I like it" "I dont mind it" or "I dont like it" as if they arent bothered by the change happening. Beejay 21:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Is the "ability to sort by weakness %" so essential? The most effective monster to hunt isn't choosen by weakness %.
About the "ability to see all monsters that are neutral to an element", we can add a "Normal/Neutral To" field in every creature page, so it's the same.
About the "ability to change the standardized layout of the damage modifiers", I couldn't understand it. Is this essential too?
The "ability for editors to faster find untested values" is good, and maybe irreplaceable.
I don't know if values DPL compatible are so essential.
A benefit of the old system is "ability for viewers to faster find what they want (immunities, weaknesses or strengths), since there is one line to each type".
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 21:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
The poll:
Question: What do you think about the recent changes in Immunities, Weaknesses and Strengths of the creatures? Note that with the new system we can sort the monster by weakness/strength % and find untested values.
First option: I like this new system, with "Damage Modifiers" field (see example here).
Second option: I like the old system, with "Immune To", "Against To" and "Weak To" fields, this is more organized (see example <we need an example>).
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 22:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Your poll is biased nonsense, but anyway, let's not discuss that now.
I think the main problem was always that you absolutely have no idea what a coder may be do. As I've said I first wanted to finish the technical stuff, then the cosmetical things. Although I'm not fully done with the technical stuff, you kinda forced me to do the cosmetical stuff earlier.
Well here you go. I'm atm updating the monsters (I've seen that after a template changed they have to resaved).
But you may look at it already: Orshabaal and an in-depth explanation is there: Damage Modifiers
NeWsOfTzzz 23:27, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
@Kwigon the sharpshooter: Now it's even simpler than before if you want to find out weaknesses of a monster. Before you had to find the proper line, reading through the line names:
step 1) read "Immune To"
step 2) read "Strong To"
step 3) read "Weak To" and then find the element in "Weak To"
Now you just have 1 step:
step 1) read "Damage Modifiers" and look at all the green things. Even simpler than before!!!
NeWsOfTzzz 23:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for force you to do the cosmetical stuff earlier.
Sorry, but I hated that rainbow, it's ridiculous. Can you change it?
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 23:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Somehow I stopped caring what you want as it's obviously impossible to satisfy.
@Bennie, I'd be really pleased if you or someone else could create an unbiased poll...
I don't think Hunter of Dragoes is able to do this, because he's neither acting objective nor is he acting in the service of the community in this case.
NeWsOfTzzz 23:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Can you respect everyone? You are not higher than we, and vice versa.
I think that it is impossible to do a good cosmetical stuff, just forget it and don't use coloured letters (it's just what I think, you don't need to do it).
Edit: If you want change something in the poll, feel free to say.
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 00:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I have a couple of problems with the modified system:
1. It clashes visually. This could be fixed by changing the colors, or just removing the color coding altogether.
2. It's counter-intuitive. Categorizing weaknesses and strengths qualitatively (as the old system does) is simply more accessible.
3. The existing system works fine. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
4. The number of damage types makes the new system bulky. Without line breaks, it looks messy and unprofessional, but adding line breaks would greatly increase page length, which is inconvenient.
5. The logistics of implementing a new system for displaying effectiveness is discouraging.
So, my vote is to keep the old system. I could be swayed by making changes (or perhaps a compromise between the two systems?) and a bit more humility from the one suggesting the changes. ;)
Tethys of the Angels 01:37, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
@Tethys of the Angels:
1) Just cosmetical, may be changed at all times
2) Now they're also categorized by color. Looking in one line or looking by one color isn't more complicated, no real change.
3) Oh, if we followed that we'd still be riding horses by now and fighting with swords.
4) Was the same before if the monster was strong against 6 elements, so also no change.
5) What do you mean, with this new DPL compatible standardized system it is one change in the template and it'll be on all creature sites (Contrary to the old system where we had to change all sites for such cosmetical stuff).
@Hunter of Dragoes: I've coded a bit and found out how to put those stuff into 4 lines with the new system (weak against, neutral against, strong against, immune to), so it's just a cosmetical thing now. But let people decide how they want it:
Poll Question: How do you want the damage modifiers of the creatures to be displayed?
Vote 1: The color idea is perfect.
Vote 2: The color idea is good but please use other colors. (You are free to submit HTML color codes here)
Vote 3: Display it like before with 4 lines (weak against, neutral against, strong against and immune to) and without colors. Note: This has the disadvantage that the damage types are always in another order, so looking for one specific type like "ice" is harder.
NeWsOfTzzz 07:13, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry, an objective poll will be made (later today, when I have a bit more time). In the mean time you can make 1 page with: an example of the old system, an example of the new system, the benefits of the new system, the benefits of the old system which will be linked to in the poll so people can read a bit and get a fair opinion. Does that sound fare enough? Maybe try to put it like TibiaWiki:Poll Explanation or something like that. ^^ Bennie (talk ~ fellows) ^^ 07:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Well as I've stated above I've built a solution so we can use the new system with the old displaying style. So actually there are no disadvantages or advantages comparing those 2 displaying styles, only that with the old displaying style in 3/4 lines it's harder to find one specific element. With the new it's easier because they're always having the same order.
So you can take the poll I've posted (I added that disadvantage of the old system into the description) and I don't really care what ppl want now, because as stated both ways are compatible with the new system. I only care about the technical stuff ;)
So let them decide, if they want the old displaying style back with 4 lines I'll just recode the Creature template, that'll take me 5 minutes, then it'll be on all creature pages after they're saved, still using the new system and still having all advantages.
I leave my house in 10 minutes and will be back in 4 hours, then I could make an example page with the old displaying style and post it here, but I don't know how urgent those people are with a vote and if they are able to wait 4-5 hours.
NeWsOfTzzz 07:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
That's an example how the old display may look with the new system:
http://tibia.wikia.com/wiki/User:NeWsOfTzzz/test2
NeWsOfTzzz 10:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
By the way: The system is already being greatly accepted by some editors who are testing damage modifiers, because now it's worth the time to do so. So actually one of the benefits I intended with this new system is already fully showing its potential.
(And it's obviously not too complicated, as those editors are doing well so far)
NeWsOfTzzz 10:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I had a look at User:NeWsOfTzzz/test2 and I like that solution since it combines the old and the new (improved) system. I do have a cosmetic suggestion though. Could you make the paralyze and invisible immunities show up in the "Immune to:"-field? As it is now you have 2 fields with immunities.
Nevaran 11:23, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes I could also combine them in one field. But first let's wait for the vote since I think colors is better (but maybe we should chose other colors).
NeWsOfTzzz 11:35, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
As an example for the new system you may use Hero
NeWsOfTzzz 11:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
With the old displaying style in 3/4 lines it's harder to find one specific element, does your browser have a find function? I use IE and if I want a fast find I just need to press ctrl+f and write the specific element.
About the new system with the old displaying style: if a damage type is in "Immune To" field, it's clear that the damage is 0%, the same for the damage types in "Neutral Against" field, the damage is 100%.
There are users who like the arithmetic operators (+20% instead of 120%), I think there could be this option in the poll.
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 12:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Use the new sistem but keep the old sistem lines "weak" "normal" "strong" "inmmune" (colors could be use but no to make a code just to point out the element faster like the word "HOLY" could have yellow color or maybe a yellow line under it or something yellow around it, same for the other elements) I really don't like a color code <hate it> telling me what is what, also people won't know wich color is what unles they read it or they check 2 or 3 other monsters to understand the color code. Also I think is ok to use 80% 120% people can get used to it and could be better this way. Also don't forget to add drunk, invisible and paralyze in the same line of immunities.
Kwigon the sharpshooter 17:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
@Hunter of Draegoes and Kwigon the sharpshooter: I know you don't like the color code, but I just looked into it and I could even make the color code dynamically by weakness / strengthness! No joke! That would mean 100% could be black, 105% a tad green, 115% much greener, 125% like very green.
Ah just look for yourself how it could look:
http://tibia.wikia.com/wiki/User:NeWsOfTzzz/test4
NeWsOfTzzz 00:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I've got some valuable input by Beejay, so I've changed the template a bit for now.
Look at Hero to see changes, and if you like it better now?
NeWsOfTzzz 01:20, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I think it was better with colored %, if you want color just the damage type, use its color (orange to holy, green to earth etc.)
Is the dynamic colors system other option to our poll?
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 01:30, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't think we need it as a special option.
And why do you complain about the color? You whined about not being able to see immediately which ones are weak and strong (although I could see it immediately because it's not hard to spot only numbers above 100 or only numbers below 100) and now there are colors, but that's still not right -.-
I think the way it is now is the best, as you've said "search by CTRL+F", come on, that's much more work compared to the element always being at the same place (i.e. place #4 for ice).
Now you can easily spot one specific element + you can easily spot all weak or all strong by color.
If it's in 4 lines again then we can only spot weak or strong by line, but spotting one specific element would take much more work.
NeWsOfTzzz 01:36, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I compared Nightmare and Hero. I cant make my mind up on how i think it should look. But I feel as though the bright colours on the bold numbers were too much. Im not good with coding so Ill just go with what I can see. Kwigon said maybe having the colours relating to the element, I cant imagine how it would look altogether but as long as the colours werent standing out too much it might look ok. beejay 01:50, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Personally I liked more the colored % than the current Template:Infobox Creature, since everyone doesn't think like me, should you create an example with the colored % (so we can add it as an option in the poll)?
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 02:44, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Before I'll create like 400 examples for different layouts, I first want to have the general decision: color codes or 4 lines? So we'll wait for Bennie to create the vote, and then we can still develop it further.
NeWsOfTzzz 02:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Is there a poll somewhere? I will sai it here: I like more the 4 lines stile, and you can still use colors to writte Holy (yellow) fire (red) ice (blue) drown (cian) earth (green) death (black) lifedrain (could be pink)...this can make things faster to find even with 4 lines.
Kwigon the sharpshooter 02:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
NeWsOfTzzz, you do not decide who will create the poll. I think it's fair that I will do it.
If you want just one example with color, so be it, the current Template:Infobox Creature is good for you?
let's delay this until tomorrow, when I'm done migrating all data. - NeWsOfTzzz 16:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC), unfortunately we had to wait more than one day, can you finish it as soon as possible?
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 04:51, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Nope it's not fair, as you've already shown that you can't create an objective poll (you inserted your opinion "it's more structured." as a fact and you are clearly opposing the changes, so you would be the worst candidate for creating such a poll), and Bennie already said he'll do it, just look a bit above this post. And as example for colored damage modifiers use Hero, you can't use the template as example (there are no colors in the template -.-)
NeWsOfTzzz 04:56, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
PS: @Hunter of Dragoes: Use Hero as example, because I'll always keep him up to date if I tweak the layout.
NeWsOfTzzz 05:03, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
the current Template:Infobox Creature is good for you? means is it what you want or you'll change it again?
My poll:
- How do you want the damage modifiers of the creatures to be displayed?
- The color idea is perfect (see example 1).
- The color idea is good but please use other colors.
- Display it like before with 4 lines (weak against, neutral against, strong against and immune to) and without colors (see example 2).
Example 1 - example of the system with colors, see explanation here.
Submit HTML color codes to be used in the damage modifiers here.
Example 2 - example of the system with 4 lines and without colors.
[end of the poll]
Since it's impossible put links in the poll, I put them below the poll. There was an option to the dynamic colors system, but I removed it because of your last messages.
Any objection?
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 05:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Hunter of Dragoes has just proven that he's unable to create that poll (objectively), as he just started abusing his powers against me, just because I'm criticising him, look at User_talk:NeWsOfTzzz. I'll keep this opinion unless proven false by a quote of Hunter of Dragoes.
PS: Yes, the template is fine now. And I migrated all monsters.
NeWsOfTzzz 05:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Since NeWsOfTzzz didn't see any objection in my poll it proves that the poll is perfect, right?
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 05:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I have the objection that you deleted the sentence about the disadvantage the old layout has.
NeWsOfTzzz 05:27, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I just recoded the first elemental overview Ice Damage, so now you can also see one of the advantages of the new DPL compatible system, sorting by % weakness or strength. Contributors can also see all untested values easily now.
NeWsOfTzzz 05:33, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Using both layouts?
why not have both as options... win/win? - Sixorish 04:59, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
You mean both layouts? I've seen that maybe I can put parameters via URL into the template, but that would mean every time someone wants to see the other layout he'd have to click a link on the creature page (you see, I already thought about that option, too).
I don't think there is a way you could say that there should always be the one or the other layout.
NeWsOfTzzz 05:03, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I mean by using CSS to define the layouts, having the most preferred one as "default" styling and the other hidden, but users would have to use custom CSS to be able to view it in the other (which usually isn't an issue unless they use a shared pc..), we can set classes depending on a certain variable and it would render fine, allowing for further customization (different colors, for example).
Only issues I can see is that some browsers (namely Lynx) may completely ignore the invisibility and display it all. also, afaik there's no way to make elements completely "gone" so that copying multiple rows may be interfered by the hidden element. -- Sixorish 05:19, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
You'd have to give me an example about it, or a how-to, a documentation about it. Anything alike. Then I'll look into that matter.
NeWsOfTzzz 05:30, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
your version / old version, the elements are hidden (see w3schools.com for info if you aren't familiar with that). since they're done entirely with styles, they allow custom CSS, CSS can be overwritten client or server sided (the latter requiring a login, though). The template doesn't currently use CSS (in other words, the styles are on the same page) but they can be overwritten.. see MediaWiki:Common.css for example (which is where we keep our cross-skin 'default styles'). -- Sixorish 06:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, I know how CSS works and how to make things invisible, but how can a CSS be overwritten client sided? Never heard about that, maybe with an Addon to Firefox? Don't think that even 0.1% would use such an Addon.
NeWsOfTzzz 06:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
See Help:Customization/CSS, most popular browsers allow it. -- Sixorish 06:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
If this happens, we may as well scrap the old parameters, it would take less to maintain one, and I'm pretty sure there's a way for the old to work with the new parameters, but I won't play around with it until a decision is made/agreed on.. -- Sixorish 06:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm already removing the old parameters lol. As I've said the old layout is also possible with the new parameters and system, I'd parse those integer parameters and display them properly into the 4 lines.
I didn't delete them yet because of the elemental pages like Ice Damage, but I've just recoded them to use the new system (also fixed a bug while I was working on it hehe).
But right now I'm deleting them and if the vote decides to use the 4 lines layout then I'll just write a parsing function into the monster template, this way we can keep all DPL advantages.
NeWsOfTzzz 07:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
[edit] XP/HP ratio
Is there any reason why the XP/HP ratio is written manually into each and every creature? It could probably be calculated and displayed automatically.
NeWsOfTzzz 07:19, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
List of Creatures by Exp/HP Ratio, the values themselves do not display on the page, they're only used on the lists. -- Sixorish 07:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
[edit] readded support for /List
Sixorish, what do you mean by this, where did I break that support? Where is it used? I think those values there are bogus since they're not used and only shown in the creature template itself but not in the creatures using it.
NeWsOfTzzz 20:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Anything with the title Template:Infobox Creature/... can use it; e.g the featured creature on the main page... was showing as "unnamed" -- Sixorish 20:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Okay, sorry for messing it up then, didn't see any use.
NeWsOfTzzz 20:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Untested Values
Contributors can now see and access all untested values easily:
- Contributors:Untested Physical Damage Modifiers
- Contributors:Untested Holy Damage Modifiers
- Contributors:Untested Death Damage Modifiers
- Contributors:Untested Fire Damage Modifiers
- Contributors:Untested Energy Damage Modifiers
- Contributors:Untested Ice Damage Modifiers
- Contributors:Untested Earth Damage Modifiers
NeWsOfTzzz 13:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
I think "Contributors" isn't a real namespace, like "Talk:", "Special:" or "TibiaWiki:". But it doesn't matter very much, just letting you know. ^^ Bennie (talk ~ fellows) ^^ 19:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
As far as I know you can create whatever namespace you want and use them afterwards, that's the freedom of a Wikipedia, isn't it? :)
I think Contributors is a good namespace, we could create some more pages in that namespace, like what things have to be done or other useful info for contributors.
NeWsOfTzzz 19:57, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
They're still in the main namespace. Creating a namespace requires an edit in the config files, which we don't have access to. Not directly, at least.
Things "to do" have always been listed at TibiaWiki:Community Portal.
Temahk 20:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Cosmetic changes
I noticed 2 things that could be improved cosmetically.
1. As I mentioned in my post here on January 16, make all immunities appear in the same field (Immune To:) instead of in 2 fields.
2. When there's an untested weak/strong value it shows up as +1 or -1 on the creature pages. Could it be done so that when it says 99%<? or 101%>? it shows only a question mark on the creature pages? Or else people could think they only have a 1% resistance and when they attack they notice that in reality it's almost immune.
Check holy and ice damage on furies and also physical and death damage on amazons to see what I mean]]
Nevaran 11:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Also calculating Physical % is hard cause monsters have armors so the best you can get is an average or write (5% to 10%) but now I guess you can only write one value.
Also read what I and other 2 user say in TibiaWiki talk:Poll, we think that it could be nice to add maching colours to the names of elements. Maybe making another poll to see if people will like the idea.
Kwigon the sharpshooter 14:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
User:NeWsOfTzzz lost some inmmunities during his eddit on monsters, some monsters used to say drunkenness, paralysis, invisibility immune, now you check some of the monsters to eddit it and it does not says that anymore, also even if you add that they are inmmune to something it does not show up in the immune line when you save the eddit. Does some one know how to fix that?
Kwigon the sharpshooter 14:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
what were you trying to put as "immune" exactly? not all "attacks" are supported as of yet, if you're putting "0%" most should appear the moment you save. -- Sixorish 15:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Besides from undoing all his edits I don't know. Doesn't the parameter | immuneto = Drunk work? ^^ Bennie (talk ~ fellows) ^^ 15:28, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
It was Sixorish fault, as he removed the displayed immunities. But as I've seen he just readded them :p
For further information about the parameters please refer to the documentation: Template:Infobox_Creature.
NeWsOfTzzz 15:32, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
