All queries and discussions should be carried on here. This includes discussions from the Talk page of the Main page, the forums, Community Portal and Community Corner. This is a temporary arrangement and will later be shifted to the Discussions Feature.
Etiquette to be followed while posting here:
- Please begin a new discussion or topic with a new heading. The source code is == Your topic here ==. Copy it whenever needed by removing the nowiki tags.
- There shall be no foul language used over here.
- No dispute will be settled by the administrative team unless either of the parties desires to do so.
- Every post must be signed with four tildes (~~~~).
- Whenever the issue is settled or the query resolved, the OP or any one of the correspondents must write ISSUE RESOLVED after the end of the last post.
GB Profitability (resolved)
I would like to add the levels at which each GB becomes "profitable" to an "average" high-level Arc (180% reward). I'm not sure the best way to do this. It seems like it would fit best on the cost/level table, but regardless of how its done, there will be a lot of cross-referencing between tables. KillMeNow4168 (talk) 03:00, April 9, 2018 (UTC)
- You're saying 'levels', but isn't it just one level after which it becomes profitable? This could be solved by adding a note or a short section on the page, no need to add it to the table.
What exactly would you want to cross-reference? Mr.Quib (talk) 08:04, April 10, 2018 (UTC)
- There are a range of levels at which a GB is profitable. You have to compare the cost to level to the rewards for 1st/2nd (which increase linearly). It would be nice to know when it starts being profitable and when it stops. Notably, the Arc is approximately between 30 and 70. KillMeNow4168 (talk) 02:05, April 13, 2018 (UTC)
- I've put the range of levels profitable for a 1.8, 1.85 and 1.9 Arc in a table you can use on the GB's page. This one can be expanded with other percentages if needed. I've added a '3rd place' column, don't know if that one's needed.
The second table can be used on The Arc page and should list all GB (alphabetically) with the profitability for 180%, 185% and 190% Arc on 1st place only, just for a quick oversight. I think this way there is no need for further cross-referencing.
Please let me know if this works for you; I'll take care of creating the tables and work out a little description to go with the first table. Mr.Quib (talk) 07:31, April 16, 2018 (UTC)
- I like it. I was trying to figure out how to do it and this seems as good as any. KillMeNow4168 (talk) 05:13, April 25, 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, I'll work this out and keep you informed. Mr.Quib (talk) 06:46, April 25, 2018 (UTC)
- 3rd place is never profitable on any GB. 1st and 2nd increase linearly and there is a "sweet spot" where the boosted reward increases faster than the cost to secure the position. 3rd is non-linear and never increases faster than the cost to secure. I don't know enough about templates, or I would remove the 3rd place column. KillMeNow4168 (talk) 04:08, May 16, 2018 (UTC)
- Done, removed 3rd place from tables. Mr.Quib (talk) 06:54, May 16, 2018 (UTC)
PvP Towers (resolved)
- Oh. Found it on the "Resources -> Medals" page. Seems like there should be either a PvP page or a Fighting page that also links there. KillMeNow4168 (talk) 05:27, April 25, 2018 (UTC)
Events Template (resolved)
- It's already included. Mr.Quib (talk) 06:54, June 22, 2018 (UTC)
- it doesn't show up here https://forgeofempires.wikia.com/wiki/Events KillMeNow4168 (talk) 06:23, June 24, 2018 (UTC)
- Yes it does, under 'Special Events' / 2018. Mr.Quib (talk) 06:45, June 24, 2018 (UTC)
- DOH! Seasonal vs Special. Meh. KillMeNow4168 (talk) 06:47, June 24, 2018 (UTC)
Infobox SpBu formatting
Can we set a standard formatting for the event listing in the infobox. Currently there are pages with a few different formats for that section.
- Zanni Mask Statue - one event fully written out and linked.
- Gondola Dock Market - one event with caption (example "Carnival Events") and only one year presented as a link. Also Grand Bridge follows this formatting, however the caption "Carnival Event" is singular.
- Old Graveyard - many events with a single caption (example "Halloween Events") and years presented as links to specific event page.
- Festive Tree - many events, each written out and linked separately.
- For a single event I would recommend the first example. Maybe if there is a reason to believe that the buildings is returning in a future event then the second example just to future-proof. However the first example says enough and is just one line of text instead of two.
- The plurality issue presented in the second example... I would recommend that the caption ie. "Carnival Event" is always singular. It represents a type of event and even if there is a few different years following it works in singular. Also makes it a little bit more future-proof.
- In case of many events I would recommend the third example. It has a clean look and gives enough information in just two lines (in case of single type of event). For example Phoenix Statue would have much cleaner look on four lines.
Kaitiig (talk) 15:12, October 14, 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for your suggestion and providing such clear examples and solutions.
- Agreed, both on style as well as the future probability for e.g. the new Halloween buildings.
- Agreed. Graveyard is an even better example, since it also appeared in a Summer Event. That way it is also sorted per event.
- One question though: any ideas what to do with buildings like Shrine of Knowledge that now seem to appear in every event?
Mr.Quib (talk) 14:55, October 25, 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the answer. On the last issue I can think of many different solutions:
- First and the most obvious would be to list all the events in the style like the Graveyard. It would be a long list but it would not break the page layout. However another problem comes to mind - some special buildings can be obtained through other means as well, not just the events. For example the Shrine of Knowledge can also be obtained from the Daily Challenges and the Victory Tower addition to that can also be earned through the Guild Expeditions. It would be nice to have that comprehensive information in the infobox.
- The second option that comes to mind is to put a link in the infobox under the events with a caption like "See below" that links to a section on the same page that lists all the events in the article itself. For example the page would have section "How to get" or "Availability" that lists all the events that the building was available and also the other means of getting that building. Fortunately there are only a handful of special buildings that would require that kind of approach.
- The third option, that I would probably go, is to change to infobox caption "Events" to "Availability". That section would list all the events in the current manner but also include tags like Daily Challenges or Guild Expeditions if applicable. For example the GE buildings would just have Guild Expeditions under the "Availability". I like that approach because you can see how to get a special building just with a glance to the infobox. That approach would be fairly easy to implement since it would not break anything, just requires some infobox updating. Regarding the Shrine of Knowledge I would be fine it having a long list of events in the infobox. We don't have many buildings with that issue and it doesn't break the layout. As long as the infobox information is formatted nicely, easily accessible and comprehensive then it serves the purpose it is supposed to do.
Kaitiig (talk) 17:18, October 25, 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry it took this long, but I had to check all different options and their consequences (besides being busy with a lot of other stuff here).
My choise would be the third, changing the 'Events' caption to 'Availability', maybe you can work this out with Pafton since you're already making changes on the Infobox SpBu.
However, I'm not in favor of endless lists in the infobox, I would rather use an 'Availability' section on the page, or just categorize the page in all the proper event categories. Adding a long list to the infobox does break the layout and would go against the function of an infobox: providing the most important info in a short summary. Also, take in consideration the work that has to be done to implement these changes and keep them updated.
Mr.Quib (talk) 13:03, November 21, 2018 (UTC)
Baroque Garden Style
I noticed that the word "set" was replaced with the word "style". I do agree that we can't call it as a "set" because that would be misleading. However I would recommend calling it a "theme". I also think we should expand on this idea since we have a few other "themes" in the game as well. For example "Venice Theme" which is yearly expanded with the Carnival event (for example Venice Canal, Renaissance Mansion, Masquerade Ball etc.) or the "Ancient Olympics Theme" which seems to be the theme of sporting events (examples include Athlete Living Quarters, Arena of Victors, Winners' Plaza etc.). Of course there are some other themes as well, however these are often contained in a single event.
- The 'Set' description was not replaced, but removed completely due to the confusion with actual set buildings. The discription on building pages has been changed from 'Part of the Baroque Garden' to 'Designed in Baroque Garden style', since there was still confusion and this is how Inno descibes these buildings.
Having said all this, I think it's a good idea to change it again to 'theme' and also apply this on other buildings.
- Special buildings only, since regular buildings are already categorized under their age/era category.
- No Set buildings, since they already have their own category.
- No Cultural settlement buildings, for the same reason.
I'll take care of updating the Baroque Garden.
Cheers, Mr.Quib (talk) 13:15, November 21, 2018 (UTC)