Forum:Infobox Bonuses additions

Forums: Yew Grove > Infobox Bonuses additions

This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 16 May 2016 by Liquidhelium.

I've been working on some changes to Infobox Bonuses for a bit; I'm here to discuss them and find resolutions to a few hitches I've hit. (This thread follows from and expands on Forum:Attack range?.)

Changes

Add Equipment tier display (the tier parameter has been a part of the infobox for almost a year)
Add type parameter and display, to show additional information about the type of thing the item is (see other questions section for supported types)
Add attack_range parameter and display
Add charges support to degrades - if degrades is a number, displays 'X charges' instead of 'Yes' (yes still supported)
Add damage reduction support
- Automatically calculated from tier, type/class, and slot
- Only shown for relevant slots (head/body/legs/hands/feet/shield)
- Can be overridden and forcibly shown by pvmReduction and pvpReduction parameters (including other slots)
Remove header cell (the one that says Combat stats)
Compare link moved into template links and changed to button (JavaScript change)
Changed template links from [view]•[talk] to [FAQ]•[doc]

Display problem

In the current test implementation, the above changes remove 2 rows (header and compare), but add 3-5 (1 header for tier and type, 1 row for tier and type, 1 row for attack range, and 2 optional rows for reduction). This increase starts to make images look weird, especially images that are more wide than tall.

You can see some examples at User:Gaz Lloyd/t/example (the compare link will not have moved if you are not an admin in javascript test mode - enter it by clicking the button in the sidebar here and then force refreshing). You can also see some examples here.

I made some changes to the layout to get a wider layout to mitigate this: User:Gaz Lloyd/t2/example (again, javascript test mode needed - actually detrimental this time), with some images here. This variant makes damage reduction always visible to keep the layout, and attack speed is kinda wide.

A third, tall variant I made - I didn't really like it that much, so a live version isn't readily available, but I can make one if wanted - has some images here. It's much closer to infobox item in design, which doesn't really work so well when infobox item is already on the page.

Which one do you guys think is better? Current-style, wider, or taller? (You can obviously also suggest changes or make your own submission.)

Another problem is that I currently have not defined how second images work in the wider and taller variants: if you prefer one of those, do let suggest how you'd see that solved - e.g. revert to currentish with images stacked if there's 2? Edit: another variant from fetus

I solicited some opinions, and while I didn't get many, people seem to like wide.

Other questions

Some other things to discuss:

Attack range is currently defined as melee range = 1; i.e. how many squares you walk forward until you are stood on top of the target. Should it be melee range = 0, so you count the squares between you and the target (not including the ones you're stood on)?
Type supports a few specific values at the moment (listed next), and is hidden if one of these is not specified; should type instead always be shown, with a 'generic' description of the item? e.g. "Main-hand weapon", "two-handed weapon", "off-hand weapon", "hybrid armour", "jewellery", etc
Supported types; any additions? (case insensitive, with some aliases)
- Power armour
- Tank armour
- PvP armour
- Shieldbow
- Bow
- Defender
- Repriser
- Rebounder
- Halberd
- Shield
The FAQ could do with more questions (in fact, so could most of the FAQs)

Discussion

This was supposed to be a short thread. Welp. @Gaz#7521 15:49, May 2, 2016 (UTC)

Comment - Haven't really checked much on it, but does it have that stat compare thing I recall seeing? --Jlun2 (talk) 16:48, May 2, 2016 (UTC)

The functionality of the item compare script is unchanged with these additions, aside from the position of the link.

@Gaz#7521 16:54, May 2, 2016 (UTC)

But why male models? ʞo oɔ 16:59, May 2, 2016 (UTC)

You edit conflicted me with your shitty ass-meme. MolMan 17:01, May 2, 2016 (UTC)

Comment - Let's decide on and clarify that damage reduction only indicates natural damage reduction. So like, the extra damage reduction from obsidian armour or spirit shields won't be included. MolMan 17:01, May 2, 2016 (UTC)

The damage reduction shown in the infobox should strictly be the damage reduction as it is in the loadout interface in-game. Passive effects like those shouldn't be in the infobox, instead they should be explained in prose.

@Gaz#7521 20:29, May 2, 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad we agree. Let's shake hands. MolMan 12:13, May 3, 2016 (UTC)

Closed - The consensus seems to be general apathy. The general principles of BB and UCS can apply here. --Liquid^Talk 18:04, May 9, 2016 (UTC) Reopened --Iiii I I I 18:54, May 9, 2016 (UTC)

Support wider style --Iiii I I I 18:54, May 9, 2016 (UTC)

Support wider style per fetus ThePsionic 20:31, May 9, 2016 (UTC)

Support wider - Also, what about having the stuff for weapon damage/accuracy and range disappear for armour? Maybe a check for anything boots through head slot to make that now show up? Coelacanth0794 Talk 23:56, May 12, 2016 (UTC)

What would the layout look like if rows were hidden?

@Gaz#7521 00:23, May 13, 2016 (UTC)

Support wider style - I like -- Spine^Talk 00:01, May 13, 2016 (UTC)

Support wider style - It works well overall. - Ryan PM 00:23, May 13, 2016 (UTC)

If we need to use two images on a page, then Fetus's would work assuming it limits the height of both images to the lesser one. Ryan PM 00:50, May 13, 2016 (UTC)

Both images would be height and width limited (like they are now), to something smaller than the example shows.

@Gaz#7521 00:52, May 13, 2016 (UTC)

Grumble - Why couldn't you guys have said this last week before I closed it? I know you're all here lurking. >:( --Liquid^Talk 00:43, May 13, 2016 (UTC)

I didn't notice the thread until just now. I've missed two RfA's this year and only just found out about it in the last 48 hours. Also, I am lurking now. Ryan PM 00:50, May 13, 2016 (UTC)

CLOSED WITH PREJUDICE - FINE FETUS YOU HAVE YOUR WIDER STYLE. NEXT TIME MAKE YOUR DAMN VIEWS HEARD WHEN THE THREAD OPENS. --Liquid^Talk 17:19, May 16, 2016 (UTC)