Talk:Items

From Star Trek Timelines Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Was wondering what people thought of Da Vinci's Workshop Holoprogram as being a template for items? I do know it still needs some refinement when it comes to the crafting part of it, to show some consistency between Item List, Location of Item, and Cost to combine. Eeb3 (talk) 23:57, 14 February 2016 (MST)

Nav Box

Just made/started a Navbox idea for Similar Looking Items, so it could have a more central repository, wanted to get some people's opinion. (Will be made to be 'collapsed' later) Nav Box Idea
--Eeb3 (talk) 16:58, 30 March 2016 (CDT)

Made a template {{SLINav}} Where you just call for a specific base item, and will only show those related items, instead of an entire list of items (that would need to be then collapsed)--Eeb3 (talk) 18:43, 31 March 2016 (CDT)

Writing Padd for Lt Com Data lvl 90

I have 1 from somewhere but still need another 7 from The Mad Vedek on epic level to write a poem about Spot.

These are my attempts so far,

38 x 16 = 608 chronitons

Pattern Enhancer 2* - 6

Isolinear Chips _* - 8

Expansion Module 1* - 101

Expansion Module 2* - 28

Writing Padd - 0

Give up?

Full craft costs?

Should we list the full build costs of items somewhere, or even the build trees? It can be rather excessive to collect these, though...
I am currently outfitting Constable Odo, who needs an Uncommon Odo's Uniform ★★ at lvl 30 (...and 40...and 50... x-P ). I used Google Sheets to reconstruct the build tree, and the total cost for ONE of these things is:

Any volunteers to reverse-engineer these lists for all variants of all items, and add them to each variant of each item? x-D --Crunch (talk) 17:09, 23 May 2016 (CDT)

Reward Listings

Id like to suggest that normal missions (i.e. Away missions and space battles) be separate from cadet challenges on item pages. In other words, have 4 possible categories: Standard, rare, Cadet standard, Cadet Rare. The pages are very difficult to read now with a mixture of different types of missions. --Admiral Titan (talk) 03:14, 24 May 2016 (CDT)

I tend to disagree. Do you have a specific example in mind? --Tygra Dax (talk) 00:21, 25 May 2016 (CDT)
With the new icons next in the mission names depicting Away Away.png, Space Battle Space.png, and Cadet Missions Ticket.png, I think the only separation needed is for Standard and Rare rewards (and of course the Faction Centers). Database (Panel) and Science Experiment are good examples of how it looks with a mix of missions and cadet challenges under the Standard and Rare headings. Jello (talk) 08:03, 25 May 2016 (CDT)

Changing Item format

As some may have seen I've been working on a way to streamline the mission walkthrough a bit, and hopefully simpler for people to edit. One question I have for the other players/editors/readers is which format of the items would you people like better:

  Normal Size as on Mission pages Font-size:85% as on Item Pages
Option A:
Current Format
Option B:
Eeb3/Jello's
Suggestion
Option C:
CodeHydro's
suggestion
  Mission/Crew pages only Item Page
Option D: Koba44's
suggestion for Character
pages (see here),
but with smaller icons
StarfleetUniformENTBasic.png RecipeBookCommon.png PsychologyTextUncommon.png Please See
Option A, B, or C
for Item Page Choice
RayGunRare.png HoloprogramSuperRare.png MultidimensionalTransporterDeviceLegendary.png
Option E:
Crunch's suggestion
(combining option D
and current look)
StarfleetUniformENTBasic.png Starfleet Uniform (ENT) Please See
Option A, B, or C
for Item Page Choice
RecipeBookCommon.png Recipe Book Common
PsychologyTextUncommon.png Emory Erikson: Father of the Transporter Book Uncommon
RayGunRare.png Captain Proton's Ray Gun Rare
HoloprogramSuperRare.png Insurrection Alpha Holoprogram Super Rare
MultidimensionalTransporterDeviceLegendary.png Multidimensional Transporter Device Legendary

You can also see format A and B on my User:Eeb3/MissionTest page.

Which do you prefer? (Due to particularities, Options D and E wouldn't be used for Item pages, only for Mission/Crew
Please vote below. Results will be shown when you have voted.
You are not entitled to view results of this poll before you have voted.
There were 13 votes since the poll was created on 00:31, 15 June 2016.
poll-id 6F93F5A9D91ED0AF11C462AF01FF7F68

Hm, there are two (actually, three) new variants which might be considered...time to restart the poll? :o) --Crunch (talk) 18:53, 14 June 2016 (CDT)
(Combine the tables a bit, and renewed the polls) Eeb3 (talk) 01:43, 15 June 2016 (CDT)
  • I'd avoid making the code for Template:Item more complicated than it currently is because Template:ItemX is already pushing the parser expansion limit. Adding images will require a massive #switch statement. Each time you nest an #if, #expr, #switch or a template tag, it adds the the expansion depth. I had to work really hard to keep ItemX as light as possible to make Uhura's Earpiece work... each single parser statement in Template:Item will be expanded 6 times by the time you get to Basic Text Book. Heck, look what happens by the time you get to Text Book if all I do is wrap three expansions around Legendary Uhura's Earpiece:
  • x1 Common Expansion Module [e]
  • Note how the expansions suddenly makes ItemX unable to detect the existance of TextBook (says missing even though it is not). If you edit the above (in preview) and add just one more expansion, the whole thing collapses into unreadable garbage.— CodeHydro 21:10, 14 June 2016 (CDT)
    Just wanted to add to the above comment. In addition to losing the ability to detect Text Book's data template, you will also notice that the words "Basic" and the stars have disappeared.. that's because it hit the expansion limit ãfter expanding Template:Item's tag, but breaks before it completely executes Template:Item as attempts to use the #switch statement that selects rarity.— CodeHydro 21:36, 14 June 2016 (CDT)
    As I argued here, I think it is important for the Crew pages to include the item name, not just the picture, search-in-page being the major reason, but also ambiguity (just having a tooltip doesn't really help).
    Concerning the item format itself: I understand the concerns about the misalignment when keeping the Basic/Common/etc. modifier to the left. But I can't really warm up to these icons with the letter. It's kinda unintuitive what the letter stands for, even when you know what it's supposed to mean - hard to explain. And trying to translate a German expression, it quickly results in "glaring colors".
    I am reluctant to introduce yet another proposal, but CodeHydro's last modification to the current item template (=the "upwards shifted" rarity-text) got me an idea, and after playing a bit with that I believe I found a solution that combines many of the advantages, and reduces several disadvantages: User:Crunch/ItemTest
    • left-alignment is being kept
    • rarity-text is still present (searchability, recognizability), but reduced in importance by making it much smaller and truly superscript
    • ...which aligns it at the same time with the stars
    • the IMHO obtrusive coloring of both the large text and especially the icons is avoided
    • the amount of required space is minimized --Crunch (talk) 17:18, 18 June 2016 (CDT)
    • I don't think we need to modify the poll for that. This change is just a minor variant of the current version, which we can discuss in a separate poll after this one resolves. Actually, I'd consider all the choices where Item pages and Character pages have different templates to be the same basic idea; they all boil down to "keep it simple for recipe pages and make items on crew pages include images." In fact, I think idea of "make item templates specialized for recipe and crew pages" has already won. What we should do now is make two polls to decide which recipe item and which crew item designs should win. (PS: I would modify crunch's suggestion a little bit. Isn't showing icons and stars a bit redundant since the item picture has the stars already? — CodeHydro (msg) 18:05, 18 June 2016 (CDT)
    Concerning your PS: Please take a look here here (Paragraph "A possible compromise..."), where I already answered that. IMHO the extra stars help a lot, visually. --Crunch (talk) 18:24, 18 June 2016 (CDT)
    • McCoy's Scrubs just totally blew my mind with its depth. I thought can't get deeper than Legendary Uhura's Earpiece... and Legendary McCoy's Scrubs goes 2 levels deeper! — CodeHydro (msg) 15:13, 25 June 2016 (CDT)

    Sorting order of Locations in Crafting Tables

    I noticed Writerguy731 recently modified the sort order of the where-to-find-locations of several Crafting Tables on item pages (for example, here). From what I can tell I believe he changed it from purely alphabetical to 1. Ship/Away 2. Chroniton use.
    IMHO it's not a bad idea. Alphabetical order seems rarely useful in that context, as you (or at least me) usually are looking for the missions with the fewest chroniton usage, and most missions with chronitons above 10 often have requirements well beyond 300, which only very advanced players can manage. So a sorting order by chroniton use seems sensible.
    Sorting by mission type is probably not a bad idea either, both visually and for the reason that you often try to fill your daily mission contingent so you choosing the mission type first, and then think about how many chronitons you want to spend.
    Other, even more useful sort keys (that are difficult to implement and maintain, though) would be the skill requirement you'll need, or maybe even the drop chance (but we don't have enough DropTests for that yet).
    So what would be your preferences/suggestions? --Crunch (talk) 18:11, 18 June 2016 (CDT)

    • I personally don't think we should even care about order for item pages. Even for items dropped by a very large number of missions, it takes what 30 seconds to read through the whole list? I personally don't really care about the chroniton cost as long as I can do it and it has good drop rates. Sorting the missions just seems like a lot of unnecessary work IMO and our time is better spent improving other areas on the wiki. — CodeHydro (msg) 21:31, 18 June 2016 (CDT)

    Medical Scanner?

    Are there two different types of Medical Scanner with the same icon? One type comes from A Logical Response Ep 01. The other from A Popular Item in Ep 02. I'm levelling up McCoy who needs basic Medical Scanners at level 30, 47 basic scanners in my inventory, 0 available to use in the build.

    Asked here during the event, https://forums.disruptorbeam.com/stt/viewthread/52853 --Elemntee (talk) 11:23, 20 June 2016 (CDT)

    • Yes there are two Medical Scanner with the same image and which cannot be used interchangeably. I pointed it out to DB over a month ago. They gave a lame response like "Always get items from the suggested missions to ensure you get the right one" -_- Maybe if a lot of people email them and complain at the same time it would work. This is not the only item however; I've found clones of Starfleet Test Cylinder and Quantum Chronometer though I haven't pointed those out to DB since my last attempt felt like such a waste of time. I didn't add a warning message at the time because I hoped DB would fix it... but I'll do that now. — CodeHydro (msg) 09:30, 21 June 2016 (CDT)
    Thanks. Ugh, is it really that difficult to change the colour of the icon at least? I've farmed loads of Quantum Chronometers and didn't notice, cheers for the info. --Elemntee (talk) 12:00, 21 June 2016 (CDT)
    McCoys Scrubs up until level 80 have used only one type of medical scanner now his level 80 Scrubs need both types just to add to the humour :D --Elemntee (talk) 03:22, 23 June 2016 (CDT)
    Please add the recipe info to McCoy's ScrubsCodeHydro (msg) 07:00, 23 June 2016 (CDT)
    Np, sorry didn't have time this morning will update later.--Elemntee (talk) 07:19, 23 June 2016 (CDT)


    Expansion Fix Parsability

    I'm noticing that a number of basic items have been getting some sort of "expansion fix" that replaces the neat tags with a bunch of garbled looking code. For example, Template:ItemX/Civilian_Security_Clothing/0. I realize this is for a good usability reason in the wiki, but one disadvantage is that the pages become difficult to parse. I've been working on wiki parsing lately (see: [1]), and it's bumming me out that all the basic equipment is disappearing for me. Specifically, I'm having trouble figuring out where the item quantities are in the expansion fix template. Thoughts? --Ophydre5 (talk) 21:50, 6 September 2016 (CDT)

    Yeah, a bunch of that's me. I only recently realized that when converting several pages to the ItemPage template, I'd introduced an expansion error, and this is the fix. It is important for wiki usability; it's what keeps the nice item recipe trees working. For what it's worth, I'm think I'm done fixing the things I broke now.
    I don't know anything about wiki parsing, but if you're looking for the item quantities, they're still in there. Using your example of Template:ItemX/Civilian_Security_Clothing/0, the first non-comment line begins with {{#ifeq:2|recipeonly||<li style="white-space:nowrap">x{{#if:2|2|1}}. It's actually in that bit of code twice: both the number after the #ifeq (and before recipe only), and then again just after the x with {{#if:2|2|1}} (which is a really fancy way of saying "2"). So the first item of the recipe, in this case Clothing Pattern, has a quantity of two. Similarly, the later code for the other recipe item, Security Reports, has a quantity of 1, so it begins with {{#ifeq:1|recipeonly||<li style="white-space:nowrap">x{{#if:1|1|1}}. Does that help at all? bntracy (talk) 00:06, 7 September 2016 (CDT)
    It seems to me that a lot of the substituted code should be unnecessary since the basic items in ItemX templates are functionally just dressed up links as they don't expand any further. It might be possible to remove some of the excess code to improve readability and accessibility. SleepingDragon (talk) 13:46, 10 September 2016 (CDT)

    Replicator and Items

    Need to know what cost in basic material to replicate and item is.

    Also need to know how much item is worth in basic material if used in replicator. ‎--WaldoMag (talk) 23:12, 16 September 2016

    Replicator --Crunch (talk) 06:33, 17 September 2016 (CDT)
    Ehm... it tells you exactly those two things - half the page contains just tables to explain it. The cost of replicating a Rare Equipment is 580 basic items, or 580 fuel points. An Uncommon Equipment is worth like 5 Basic Items, or 5 fuel points. Am I completely misunderstanding your question? --Dhrekr (talk) 08:13, 17 September 2016 (CDT)

    Thanks Crunch I must have missed that there was a link on the item page. Now the tough part to calculate the average replicator gain per a run for a mission.

    Ti = Total of item i's collected on a mission; Fi = item i's Replicator fuel value; Tn = Total of all items collected; Nr = Number of items collected per a run; Cr = Cost in chronitons per a run; Formula: Replicator Gain =((Σ(Ti*Fi) for all i) * (Nr) / (Tn * Cr))

    A gain greater than one means you get more replicator Basic units per a run, the higher the better. Or multiply the Gain by Cr to get the average number of Basic replication units gained for a mission. Probably should be color coded to worse items probability accuracy.

    Item & Component Item Images

    I started this discussion to specify format of item images. I believe there should be consistency in images format (and stars position) in the same way as there was specified rules for Crew images. Currently there are three types of images (I added working names - standard, upper and small):

    RomulanEncryptionAlgorithmSuperRare.png ViolinSuperRare.png PhaserRifleSuperRare.png
    standard position
    of stars (most common)
    upper posiotion
    of stars
    small stars

    I always tired to change upper versions of images with standard versions whenever it was possible. Those wersions was originally posted by Jello, when I started adding and are most common on wiki. Recently I noticed that Otto VonBacon changed some stardard versions with small versions. This created inconsistency, for example on user pages, where those images are used. I believe there shoul be one format of stars position specified, to be consistent, but lets talk about that.

    Other thing is a rule that images should have blank borders - this is not a problem, Im just mentioning it.

    LateVintageBloodwineRare.png LateVintageBloodwineSuperRare.png
    normal border blank border

    What do you think? --Koba44 (talk) 02:07, 18 January 2017 (CST)