Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"

Revision as of 12:48, 27 October 2006

Puptah: Maybe they should be both on the list...

Nuane: wonder which format should be used in mob page names, full shortdesc or? in my opinion 'Burglefloogah' looks nicer in the list than 'A gargantuan slime-lizard sits here with bulbous belly, burping belligentrily' though :P

Hrolf: A guild category and templates for areas and guilds might be nice.

Feel free to make new templates and categories if you want. For example those guild and area templates Hrolf mentioned. I made those couple first ones and they are quite easy to understand so just use them as examples when making new ones.

Monster template

We could prolly add 'Specials' field there too.

Question is, is it ok to share information about spells that some bigger mobs cast or specials they do? I'm not that sure it is. -Juo

Specials / revealing too much info

I don't think specials should be revealed. It's unlikely that anyone who's already killed a mob wouldn't remember what specials it has, and revealing them goes into grey area of too much spoiling in my opinion. Spells, however, are such a standard thing that revealing them does no harm I think, it's only nice to have a 'public notebook' to check what did we have to prot against again.

Also about bigger mobs and their eq, there are several eq listings available already which reveal stats of most topend eq out there, although I'm not too eager to post stuff about Tiamat or such, I'd like to remind that most of the info already exists. This is just a new frontend for all that info. -Nuane

Formatting values and statistics

I personally think that "300k" in a sacvalue field is much better than "229k000" as well as "+5% manares" beats "+5% resistance against magical damage".

It is, ofcourse, a subject of taste, but as we could have a guideline for this kind of stuff, please cast your vote here and we'll see which way we should go. -Juo

I agree with Juo with the examples, I don't see whats wrong with nicknames that everyone know and uses everywhere.
There's, however, one point that I have to mention, which is _category_ names. I already changed resistance categories to full long names ("physres" -> "physical resistance" etc.), but this is solely a matter of CONSISTENCY. For example, person A might prefer 'physres', person B 'phys res', person C 'phys resist' etc. and then we might be in a situation that we have a whole variety of different categories because people are too lazy to check which one is used before. This is why the longest possible format should be used in category names, in my opinion. Unless someone thinks there's a problem here, i'll be changing weapon damtypes soon too (asphyxiation damage, magical damage etc). Exception to this could be very commonly used terms such as str, dam, hit, avoid.
Anyways, aside from category names, like I said, I prefer common nicknames used. --Nuane 13:42, 27 October 2006 (EEST)

Yep. Thank god links can refer to Category: physical resistance but the actual linktext show as 'physres'. --Juo 13:48, 27 October 2006 (EEST)