Discussion of format for technique pages

page 1 of 212next »

Discussion of format for technique pages

bigalphillips 24 Jul 2012 23:59

So various people have been discussing various ideas in chat for the best way to present techniques on the wiki, particularly for techniques that have a lot of forms such as pyrophobia or raven's eyes. I thought I'd start a forum topic instead of having chat conversations with the people involved here and there.

Problems with the current format

• Inconsistency between pages (sometimes it's underlined, sometimes it's italics, sometimes it's x, <x>, <X> or <∂>, etc.)
• Kind of a pain to edit large blocks of text within a table. Have to use lots of underscores which always screw me up.
• Not very clear about what conditions take precedence if multiple conditions are met. (Eg. on the pyrophobia page, it's not stated that having a cold skull equipped doesn't matter if you don't satisfy the defence comparison check.)

Things I'd like to see

• No matter what else we settle on, make sure that the pages stay easy to read AND easy to edit.
• Some specific issues issue:
  • Consistency with placeholders for damage values. I prefer a simple x everywhere - it's easy and clean. I'd be okay with <x> as well, since a few of the pages use that. Some pages use x, y, z, which is okay until we get to a fourth message, and then it gets out of order and we end up with something weird like x, y, z, v, u. I don't think it's really necessary to show that one message has a different base power than another, since x depends on your power/defense/rng anyway. I definitely don't like the ∂'s and Ω's.

---

So Valmo (and Arkaim) has posted a (couple) mockups on his page, and I made a few tweaks to that format and put it on the sandbox page. I think the top part looks pretty slick and it isn't too hard to edit. For the bottom table, in my version I removed the centering for the conditionals and the messages since I think that makes it look easier to read.

I'm not sure if I prefer using nested ellipses to indicate subconditionals, or the bolded heading bars for Valmos/Arkaim's format. Thoughts?

Thoughts?

Re: Discussion of format for technique pages

Valmo 25 Jul 2012 00:51

With something like a Base Damage column in place a humble <x> or <X> should be sufficient in messages. Where the base damage is unknown would it be better to use blank squares, a ?, or <?>.

Input on just how to display combat messages and the conditions/subconditions that produce them will be a big help. Once we know the look we're going for we can start tinkering on the simplest way to get it done. Just keep in mind the goal is ease of use both for reading and editing when making suggestions.

Edit:
Slight threadjack. Al made a change to the bat swarm using tabs. I'm willing to make the same change to all of the other opponents if people have a liking for that setup.

---

Gone fishin', be back at dark-thirty!

Last edited on 25 Jul 2012 03:58 by Valmo Show more

Re: Discussion of format for technique pages

Magnifico 25 Jul 2012 14:42

Thanks for taking this up, Al and Valmo. The formatting inconsistencies in techniques pages was setting off my OCD. *twitch* And, well, making the pages easier to read and edit is also sort of important, I guess. :)

The new format for the basic technique info is sharp-looking, but I prefer the old format, both because it involves a simpler table setup, and is therefore easier to edit, and because it more closely resembles the in-game technique description. I don't think it's a big deal either way, but if we're going to go through and revamp every technique page we might as well not make thing harder for ourselves than we have to if there's not much to be gained.

I definitely agree that we can just use one placeholder for known damage values, especially if we have a "base damage" column right there. My preference is for <x> over x, because angle brackets say "not part of in-game text" to me, (c.f. You found <two of:> [item1], [item2], etc.) but I'm OK with a simple x too as a way to save some keystrokes. A <?> or ? where we're not sure about the base damage seems sensible, and might encourage some spading.

Moving the combat messages down to a separate table is a huge improvement, and I like the basic format you guys are converging on. I'm still looking at different pages for issues we'd run into making tables. Here are a few:

• Techniques with different messages depending on whether or not you're etheric, like on the Pyrophobia example you guys are already working on.
• Techniques that can also block attacks, or remove the opponent's technique the following pass, like Release the Hounds or Petrol Splash.
• Techniques that interact with multiple pieces of equipment, like Behind the Mask

I'm still thinking about how to set up a table so it's easy to edit but presents complicated information like that in a way that's also easy to read.

Last edited on 25 Jul 2012 14:43 by Magnifico Show more

Re: Discussion of format for technique pages

Valmo 28 Jul 2012 17:31

I've noticed on the opponent pages that on occasion all of their attacks are listed in a section of the topper. It just looks odd to have the information in two places especially where it being there isn't a consistent practice. Would it be alright to start removing the double entries?

---

Gone fishin', be back at dark-thirty!

Re: Discussion of format for technique pages

bigalphillips 29 Jul 2012 06:40

I've been slowly removing those every time I happen to edit a page with them in place there.

Re: Discussion of format for technique pages

bigalphillips 31 Jul 2012 03:52

Okay, I've finally found something that I'm more or less satisfied with - see (C) on sandbox for a couple examples (for lash out and shield block). Valmo's latest version inspired it, just took out the tabs and listing the conditional twice.

It's super simple, gives lots of room to explain things, and doesn't result in the combat messages wrapping onto 4 lines for a single sentence by trying to fit it all in a single row.

I'd say we should go with 3 columns by default (Condition/Base Damage/Notes), but it's easy to add more as needed for particularly complicated techniques (eg. ones that do or defend against multiple types of damage).

Thoughts?

Last edited on 31 Jul 2012 03:53 by bigalphillips Show more

Re: Discussion of format for technique pages

xKiv 31 Jul 2012 11:56

I am not sure I like having combat messages so far from their respective conditions. This is already two different pages on my monitor.

Tangentially, shouldn't we collect messages from both sides of the tech? We have messages for "you use the tech on somebody else" for techs usable by players, and for "the opponents use the tech on you" for techs usable only by NPCs, but not "the other PC uses the tech on you" (in pvp). Those might be subtly different. Or maybe not. Do we know?

Re: Discussion of format for technique pages

Magnifico 31 Jul 2012 13:48

I hate to say it, but I'm not crazy about this format either. It seems like it's very close to the format for opponent pages that we just decided to get rid of, with the combat messages separate from the technique info.

The "defends against" column seems to take up a lot of space relative to the information it conveys. Maybe it'd be better to just put ^MRE or whatever after the base defense? We could even linkify them thusly ^MRE if we don't think that's too difficult to edit.

An unrelated point: whatever format we use, we'll be listing the hidden damage bonuses one way or another for all the different variations of a technique. So we can probably just stick with the in-game text for the "Special" row of the description, if any.

EDIT: I took a shot at making a proposal. It's not that different from some of Al and Valmo's ideas. Since the conditions and notes can get pretty involved, I think having a whole row just for those, with the messages in a separate row below them, is the best way to get all the information we'd want into the table but still have it readable. I also like the idea of putting in shaded lines dividing each condition/message sets. It don't think it'll make pages that harder to edit, especially if we make a good template with sample rows, and it makes things a lot easier to read.

I tried out the linkified ^MR business for defenses, but it seemed like a lot of hassle to edit for not much benefit.

Last edited on 31 Jul 2012 15:03 by Magnifico Show more

Re: Discussion of format for technique pages

Arkaim 31 Jul 2012 14:59

I was rather iffy about Al's new format as well. Similar reasons as Mag. It seemed… different and strange and not polished(?) to have the combat text separated like that. Until I identified that the combat text is pretty much just fluff, and he had all the important info in the same chart nicely condensed. Very easy to pick up on everything you could be wanting to know for making decisions and whatnot.

So from this, I figure Valmo's next step up from that format is rather intuitive. Integrate tabs. But, I'm not sure on how Valmo decided to list the various combat texts. Sure, it works fine for shield block. It seems, however, that it is leading up to the same problem that made a mess of quite a number of the technique pages have. Which instigated all this brain storming.

Edit: Also, you guys! What the hell? Base Defense of shield block with shield of scales is 6! quit this 4(?) businessz making me worried I'm going to have to fix that whenever you get to updating all the pages.

Last edited on 31 Jul 2012 15:00 by Arkaim Show more

Re: Discussion of format for technique pages

Magnifico 31 Jul 2012 15:27

I'm not sold on the tabs. For one thing, it means repeating the conditionals when you do the messages, which seems like extra work. It also means having the messages physically separate from the other info in the page code itself, which seems like an invitation for data to get lost with less-than-careful edits. Or, at least, it means you have to pay closer attention when doing an edit to make sure everything winds up in the right place and the conditionals you change in one tab get changed in the other as well.

As for how important the messages are, I guess it depends on your play style. I like to see them right there with the other info because a lot of the time I'll see some combat text and wonder "Huh, is that new?" Since seeing a variant combat message is a good indicator that there's something worth spading going on, I'm hesitant to bury them in a tab. But if you are more focused on what (spaded) things do, it may well matter much less to you to have that information handy.

page 1 of 212next »