Talk:Loot - Revision history

imported>Tlosk at 19:32, 26 January 2010

2010-01-26T19:32:27Z

← Older revision	Revision as of 14:32, 26 January 2010
(No difference)

imported>Tlosk at 19:32, 26 January 2010

2010-01-26T19:32:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:32, 26 January 2010
Line 30:		Line 30:

	I'll post some mockups later today to get feedback on the format before we update the page later. --{{User:Tlosk/Sig}} 15:08, January 8, 2010 (UTC)		I'll post some mockups later today to get feedback on the format before we update the page later. --{{User:Tlosk/Sig}} 15:08, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
			}}
			{{Post
			\| Indent = :::::
			\| Text = I wanted to update my progress on this, I've automated the collection of tens of thousands of weapon stats to verify some remaining questions but the number of permutations on stats and individually named weapons has made it more difficult that I anticipated to find edge cases with confidence. So I'll continue working on it and hope to have some mockups to post soon that will elegantly display relevant information while minimizing redundant information. It may be too much to include on the loot page itself, so I'm considering breaking it up into a summary on the loot page and more detailed information on the weapon pages (either individual for each type withing a weapon category or just all together on the weapon page). --{{User:Tlosk/Sig}} 19:32, January 26, 2010 (UTC)
	}}		}}

imported>Tlosk: /* Loot Weapons */

2010-01-08T15:11:41Z

Loot Weapons

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:11, 8 January 2010
Line 39:		Line 39:
	{{Post		{{Post
	\| Indent = ::		\| Indent = ::
	\| Text = You are correct, I suspect it is just because Spear and Mace are so disused that it hasn't been noticed earlier. We are redoing the table (see discussion above) and I'll incorporate these differences into the table, thanks for point it out. --15:08, January 8, 2010 (UTC)		\| Text = You are correct, I suspect it is just because Spear and Mace are so disused that it hasn't been noticed earlier. We are redoing the table (see discussion above) and I'll incorporate these differences into the table, thanks for point it out. I had assumed that they had been normalized like the other weapon types (like jos, shamishirs, etc) so that all the types in a req range have the same value ranges. --15:08, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
	}}		}}

imported>Tlosk: weapon value tables and variance

2010-01-08T15:08:05Z

weapon value tables and variance

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{RightToC}}
 == [[Old Ghosts]] Changes ==
@@ Line 218: / Line 259: @@
 --[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 09:31, 26 August 2008 (CDT)

imported>RhiannaE: /* Weapon Variance */

2010-01-08T05:38:10Z

Weapon Variance

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:38, 8 January 2010
Line 227:		Line 227:
	Variance is: (max-min)/max, not min/max. The best weapons have the lowest variance, not the highest. For Mace and Dagger, I changed the header to Min Variance, and plugged in the correct values. The rest of the melee weapons still need to be fixed. It would be even better if somehow the variance column was computed from the minimum and maximum damage values.<br>		Variance is: (max-min)/max, not min/max. The best weapons have the lowest variance, not the highest. For Mace and Dagger, I changed the header to Min Variance, and plugged in the correct values. The rest of the melee weapons still need to be fixed. It would be even better if somehow the variance column was computed from the minimum and maximum damage values.<br>
	--[[User:RhiannaE\|RhiannaE]] 10:20, December 9, 2009 (UTC)		--[[User:RhiannaE\|RhiannaE]] 10:20, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

			----

	I came here because this was mentioned on the official forums. The variances are a mess. Some use the correct (max-min)/max and some use min/max. Some are obviously based on the "best weapon" stats, and some appear to be but don't jive with the numbers right next to them. Take for example the hiltable daggers 400 wield where the best variance is given (in correct format but incorrect value) as 0.9 next to a 0.3-2 dagger which would be 0.85.		I came here because this was mentioned on the official forums. The variances are a mess. Some use the correct (max-min)/max and some use min/max. Some are obviously based on the "best weapon" stats, and some appear to be but don't jive with the numbers right next to them. Take for example the hiltable daggers 400 wield where the best variance is given (in correct format but incorrect value) as 0.9 next to a 0.3-2 dagger which would be 0.85.
Line 236:		Line 238:
	I wouldn't mind cleaning up the charts myself, but I'm not sure how to proceed at this point, especially if we change the format of the charts. I can copypasta and clean up values, but I don't know the pseudocode for Wiki well enough to build charts from scratch. I do know html quite well, and I can see that direct html works fine in many cases, but it would be best to use the wikicode for this. I might just change and normalize variances in the meantime, using the best variance in the chart, and change the labels to consistently state "best variance" instead of minimum or maximum.		I wouldn't mind cleaning up the charts myself, but I'm not sure how to proceed at this point, especially if we change the format of the charts. I can copypasta and clean up values, but I don't know the pseudocode for Wiki well enough to build charts from scratch. I do know html quite well, and I can see that direct html works fine in many cases, but it would be best to use the wikicode for this. I might just change and normalize variances in the meantime, using the best variance in the chart, and change the labels to consistently state "best variance" instead of minimum or maximum.
	--[[User:Elije\|Elije]] 22:43, January 4, 2010 (UTC)		--[[User:Elije\|Elije]] 22:43, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

			----

			When I originally edited the dagger table, I assumed the 0.3-2 dmg was a typo, and that 0.2-2 was the maximum. But I have since found a 0.4-2 hiltable dagger in game, so it's likely 0.3-2 exists as well. Unfortunately I didn't screen shot the 0.4-2 dagger before I blew it up.<br><br>I agree with your observation, that Tier 7 400 and 420 wield weapons likely all have the same maximum damage, best variance, and maximum attack, melee d, magic d, and missile d modifiers. Tier 7 370 wield weapons also appear to have the same maximum modifiers. Specifically the max mods for tier 7 370, 400 and 420 wield appear to be 20/20/4/4. With the exception of jittes and UAs, which are 20/25/4/4. --[[User:RhiannaE\|RhiannaE]] 05:38, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

imported>Elije at 22:43, 4 January 2010

2010-01-04T22:43:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:43, 4 January 2010
Line 227:		Line 227:
	Variance is: (max-min)/max, not min/max. The best weapons have the lowest variance, not the highest. For Mace and Dagger, I changed the header to Min Variance, and plugged in the correct values. The rest of the melee weapons still need to be fixed. It would be even better if somehow the variance column was computed from the minimum and maximum damage values.<br>		Variance is: (max-min)/max, not min/max. The best weapons have the lowest variance, not the highest. For Mace and Dagger, I changed the header to Min Variance, and plugged in the correct values. The rest of the melee weapons still need to be fixed. It would be even better if somehow the variance column was computed from the minimum and maximum damage values.<br>
	--[[User:RhiannaE\|RhiannaE]] 10:20, December 9, 2009 (UTC)		--[[User:RhiannaE\|RhiannaE]] 10:20, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

			I came here because this was mentioned on the official forums. The variances are a mess. Some use the correct (max-min)/max and some use min/max. Some are obviously based on the "best weapon" stats, and some appear to be but don't jive with the numbers right next to them. Take for example the hiltable daggers 400 wield where the best variance is given (in correct format but incorrect value) as 0.9 next to a 0.3-2 dagger which would be 0.85.

			Another thing I question is the format of the charts themselves, as they list a separate best variance for each wield tier. I don't believe variances are wield dependent, and I'll have to find a recent dev comment that confirms that. (It was in the forums in a thread about tier 7 staves.) This would be one best variance per weapon sub-type, usually same the across sub-types of a weapon type, but with some differences such as two handed spears versus cleaving weapons.

			Finally, the difference between 420 and 400 wields (and equivalent in bows/wands) seems to be undefined in tier 7. The wield itself appears to be just another mutation, and tier 7 400s can have stats equal to 420s. I don't have hard evidence of that, though.

			I wouldn't mind cleaning up the charts myself, but I'm not sure how to proceed at this point, especially if we change the format of the charts. I can copypasta and clean up values, but I don't know the pseudocode for Wiki well enough to build charts from scratch. I do know html quite well, and I can see that direct html works fine in many cases, but it would be best to use the wikicode for this. I might just change and normalize variances in the meantime, using the best variance in the chart, and change the labels to consistently state "best variance" instead of minimum or maximum.
			--[[User:Elije\|Elije]] 22:43, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

imported>RhiannaE: /* Weapon Variance */

2009-12-09T10:20:10Z

Weapon Variance

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:20, 9 December 2009
Line 225:		Line 225:
	== Weapon Variance ==		== Weapon Variance ==

	Variance is: (max-min)/max, not min/max. The best weapons have the lowest variance, not the highest. For Mace and Dagger, I changed the header to Min Variance, and plugged in the correct values. The rest of the melee weapons still need to be fixed. It would be even better if somehow the variance column was computed from the minimum and maximum damage values.		Variance is: (max-min)/max, not min/max. The best weapons have the lowest variance, not the highest. For Mace and Dagger, I changed the header to Min Variance, and plugged in the correct values. The rest of the melee weapons still need to be fixed. It would be even better if somehow the variance column was computed from the minimum and maximum damage values.<br>
			--[[User:RhiannaE\|RhiannaE]] 10:20, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

imported>RhiannaE: /* Weapon Variance */ new section

2009-12-09T10:17:20Z

Weapon Variance: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:17, 9 December 2009
Line 222:		Line 222:

	Question: For spears (naginatas) and spiked (maces), don't they have a lower damage? If so, I imagine the spear tables and mace tables would need to be changed to reflect that. I'm going off the following information from this website: http://www.kayoss.net/weapondamages.htm --[[User:Logan Conrad\|Logan Conrad]] 16:16, November 6, 2009 (UTC)		Question: For spears (naginatas) and spiked (maces), don't they have a lower damage? If so, I imagine the spear tables and mace tables would need to be changed to reflect that. I'm going off the following information from this website: http://www.kayoss.net/weapondamages.htm --[[User:Logan Conrad\|Logan Conrad]] 16:16, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

			== Weapon Variance ==

			Variance is: (max-min)/max, not min/max. The best weapons have the lowest variance, not the highest. For Mace and Dagger, I changed the header to Min Variance, and plugged in the correct values. The rest of the melee weapons still need to be fixed. It would be even better if somehow the variance column was computed from the minimum and maximum damage values.

imported>Logan Conrad: /* Loot Weapons */

2009-11-06T16:18:41Z

Loot Weapons

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:18, 6 November 2009
Line 221:		Line 221:
	== Loot Weapons ==		== Loot Weapons ==

	Question: For spears (naginatas) and spiked (maces), don't they have a lower damage? If so, I imagine the spear tables and mace tables would need to be ~~change~~ to ~~show~~ that. I'm going off the following information from this website: http://www.kayoss.net/weapondamages.htm --[[User:Logan Conrad\|Logan Conrad]] 16:16, November 6, 2009 (UTC)		Question: For spears (naginatas) and spiked (maces), don't they have a lower damage? If so, I imagine the spear tables and mace tables would need to be changed to reflect that. I'm going off the following information from this website: http://www.kayoss.net/weapondamages.htm --[[User:Logan Conrad\|Logan Conrad]] 16:16, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

imported>Logan Conrad: /* Loot Weapons */

2009-11-06T16:17:57Z

Loot Weapons

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:17, 6 November 2009
Line 221:		Line 221:
	== Loot Weapons ==		== Loot Weapons ==

	Question: For spears (naginatas) and spiked (maces), don't they have a lower damage? If so, I imagine the spear tables and mace tables would need to be change to show that.--[[User:Logan Conrad\|Logan Conrad]] 16:16, November 6, 2009 (UTC)		Question: For spears (naginatas) and spiked (maces), don't they have a lower damage? If so, I imagine the spear tables and mace tables would need to be change to show that. I'm going off the following information from this website: http://www.kayoss.net/weapondamages.htm --[[User:Logan Conrad\|Logan Conrad]] 16:16, November 6, 2009 (UTC)