Torrenal's Proposal Table 1[edit]
- Concern: Is this table too wide?
- Design: This would work best with cell borders separating the 3 broad 'quality' columns. Those can be added, I've not looked up how just yet, experience tells me adding them could interact poorly with the row coloring.
- Design: Include a rarity as a 2nd row for the level column?
03:48, 24 June 2012 User:Torrenal
- Hum. Almost works at 1024x768. Time I draft up Version A so we can compare it with version 1. Torrenal 20:35, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
- Axed simple columns, added craft level columns. —Torrenal 01:22, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Compressed version[edit]
| Type
|
Bonus
|
Simple
|
Standard
|
Master
|
| Lvl |
Fine Mat / Amt |
Lvl |
Green Inscription |
Lvl |
Bronze Plated Inscription
|
| Mighty
|
|
5
|
|
10 |
|
+5
|
|
20 |
|
+5
|
|
| Festering
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
+x
|
|
20 |
|
+x
|
|
| Vital
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
+x
|
|
20 |
|
+x
|
|
| Precise
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
+x
|
|
20 |
|
+x
|
|
| Resilient
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
+x
|
|
20 |
|
+x
|
|
| Hearty
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
+x
|
| +y
|
|
20 |
|
+x
|
| +y
|
|
| Ravaging
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
+x
|
| +y
|
|
20 |
|
+x
|
| +y
|
|
| Knight's
|
|
55 |
|
60 |
|
+21
|
| +21
|
| +29
|
|
65 |
|
+23
|
| +23
|
| +32
|
|
Compressed version (no line breaks)[edit]
Compressed version discussion[edit]
This version eliminates the repeated inscription & bonus names. Aside from the obvious formatting issues (the script images need to be centered), I think it accomplishes what Torrenal and I are shooting for: at-a-glance, fits the screen, and either fully extensible or able to be repeated with a minimum # of other tables. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 00:57, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- painful to edit, but we can solve that wih templates. My only real gripe with the table is that the activator links are not associated with text, this makes them non-intuitive. Torrenal 16:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- They don't, imo, need to be associated with text; that's the point of a generic table: the intersection of "mighty" and "green inscription" is "mighty green inscription" — printing the name out is over-specification.
- Besides painful-to-edit, manual line breaks make the tables hard to copy & paste, for those wanting to use the data themselves. (I have some pretty good browser tools for handling tables, but even these cannot handle this many <br />.)– Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 18:35, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- Honestly, I don't like this table much at all. Being concise is usually good, but conciseness can easily be taken too far, and I feel like this tables does just that. —Dr Ishmael
18:51, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- Can you offer a specific critique (or several)? I don't like the current look, but I like the fact that it assumes people can match up column and row, rather than repeat details.
- Alternatively, do you have something in mind that you can describe? I don't mind putting together something else (that one can fix later), but I am keen to find something that limits the number of times we see "mighty" and "inscription" and "power," but is extensible (or at least repeatable) for higher levels. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:41, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- What is the goal of this table? i.e. What specific data is being represented in this tabular format? It seems a bit jumbled to me right now, so I can't really make any suggestions. —Dr Ishmael 20:25, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- The goal is to present crafting detail for a single component type for a single tier of crafting, eg: 'All Green-Wood based rifles' or 'All cotton leggings'.
- My gripe is with the missing text because it excludes the hyper-link-cue that these are clickable for crafting details. TEF, I didn't insert a single line-break in the table. I did sub-tables. If those cause problems, we might be able to get a little fancy and be repeat the format without them and have something that will copy/paste reasonably well. Even so, I'm no big fan of the condensed version.
- Right now I'm split between the top and the bottom. The gripe I have with the top one being that it displays poorly on my iPad. (Not that I'm likely to need it for looking the info up, but...) Some of that can be fixed by forcing column widths in a few places, which should force tablet and palm devices to scroll horizontally. Even then it wouldn't be a fav, but I would prefer it to the bottom table. I was considering a v2 of the bottom table, but while I could come up with snazzy tables for showing the info in a more vertical format, they'd all require users manuals to use. Torrenal 00:38, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- The first thing I'd say is excise the (Simple) blood variant - it's a standalone that isn't an actual inscription, so it doesn't belong in the Tier 1 table.
- Second, the "Lvl" in the table is ambiguous - character or discipline? Regardless, for everything but the Green inscriptions (and their equivalent, Jute insignia), both levels are constant for all inscriptions/insignia in a tier. It could be subsumed into the colspanned headers or listed above the table. —Dr Ishmael 01:06, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not so sure that levels are constant by Simple/Standard/Master type. Will be able to check during the stress test. —Torrenal 01:19, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- My goal is to have an at-a-glance method for showing recipes that are identical except for the "tier" and level. So far, we tend to list 18 nearly identical recipes in bullet points; that is almost worse than not listing anything at all (since it's all but impossible to see similarities and find specific recipes).
- I like the idea of leaving the simple out (for some reason, I thought there would be corresponding versions using venom sacs, etc). I think Level is fine because it will be explained in context (the same way we don't need to specify minor trait, since there's only ever one minor per trait tier).
- Regarding the difference between line breaks or tables-within-tables: I really dislike that method of formatting: it can often be avoided and it causes issues when editing or copying/pasting. (Of course, if these can by dynamically generated, that might be a price worth paying). – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 08:50, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- (Reset indent)So, running down the list:
| Material |
Type |
Req Level(s) |
Notes
|
| Jute |
Simple |
5
|
| Jute |
Normal |
10,15, 20 |
Anomoly: Healing Embroidered Mantle, non master, req lvl 20
|
| Jute |
Master |
20
|
| Wool |
Normal |
25, 30
|
| Wool |
Master |
35
|
| Cotton |
Normal |
40
|
- The Healing Embroidered Mantle looks truly anomalous. Similar items for other components are level 15.
Extrapolating (ignoring the anomaly - absent a second example I consider that to be an error):
| Material |
Simple |
Standard |
Master
|
| Jute |
5 |
10, 15 |
20
|
| Wool |
- |
25, 30 |
35
|
| Cotton |
- |
40, 45 |
50
|
| Linen |
- |
55, 60 |
65
|
| Silk |
- |
70, 75 |
80
|
| Gossamer |
- |
???
|
- This lets us suppose a number of things.
- Simple recipes might not occur after Jute.
- The 2 normal levels may discontinue with Linen, causing linen to stop at 60, and silk to have 65 & 70, with Gossamer at Levels 75/80
- Alternatively, Gossamer may be reserved for 'max' armor.
- —Torrenal 23:41, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Torrenal's Proposal Table A[edit]
Power
Condition Damage
Vitality
Healing Power
+x
+x
Precision
Toughness
