Green Wiki Requests

[Jibartik]

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

A bug in some of the AoE code has been fixed. AoE spells will now effect more monsters.

holy shnykies does this mean maybe that AoE kiting was literally impossible for 6-9 months batman?? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.][You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.][You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.][You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

whoah momma just found this gem from 2002 http://web.archive.org/web/200202050...om/patches.asp

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Some of these patch notes are amazing, I feel like it's 1999 again.
Now loramin, bear with me, but hwo cool would it be if you go to the levitate page, and see the patch history for levitate and find out that prior to September 13th 1999 you couldnt click off this buff [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yeah see all that patch text is exactly the problem.

Even if Nilbog implemented everything exactly identical to live, down to the day, and even if we have the patch notes for every live patch (as I understand it, different sites have different sets of patch notes, so there's not even one complete set) ... we've still got a "forest from the trees" problem. And there's a very good chance that at least some changes in the game aren't going to be timeline-exact.

Really, most of the stuff in those notes doesn't matter to the wiki. "Levitate: All players may now cancel this effect." Sure if you're bored you could add a note about this to the Levitate page, and I'm not denying it'd be cool (in a very un-cool, nerdy way [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]) ... but what people really want to know is "can I levitate from day #1, or do I have to wait until ____ patch or expansion?"

So what I'm saying we need to tease out is, how many more times were spells/items/NPCs added to the game, besides the known eras. Was there a handful more? Maybe 10-15 more, but like 3 "clumps" with a ton of new stuff, and those other times are all like "we fixed this one glitch in this one zone and now NPC Bob who wasn't spawning before spawns and drops his new magic hat"?

I think this is what's really helpful there:

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

For the sake of clarification would you consider 8 line items on this timeline 8 chunks of content? http://wiki.project1999.com/Players:EQLive_Timeline

Nilbogs announcement is slightly different. And leaves room for additions (I mean there were like 1 patch a day for months and months and things wer changing a lot, I wonder if there is a file cabinet somewhere with all those somewhere in a warehouse somehere [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] )

* January 2020: Plane of Fear
* April 2020: Plane of Hate
* May 2020: Temple of Solusek Ro opens / Legacy items cease to drop
* August 2020: Plane of Sky
* November 2020: Ruins of Kunark
* April 2021: Epics
* July 2021: Scars of Velious
* The above list is not exhaustive; each month will have unlocks of patches from March 1999 to December 2001.

From what Nilbog wrote it sounds to me we need to add new wiki "eras" (with matching categories and templates) that we don't currently have for:

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

* January 2020: Plane of Fear
* April 2020: Plane of Hate
* May 2020: Temple of Solusek Ro opens / Legacy items cease to drop
* August 2020: Plane of Sky

But again, before I dive in, I'd really like to hear if there's actually 10 (or 50) more times like those where a bunch of new stuff came out. Any ClassicQuesters (or "ClassHoles") want to chime in? Because if so, making those new "eras" is pointless.

[Halfcell]

One thing that would be very convenient (and maybe it already exists and I just don't know how to find it) is a way to figure out exactly what tradeskills and recipies will be useable and when. Like obviously day 1 we wont have the cultural armors and weapons. Or for Alchemy, we wont have a potion to field of bone, but are wort pots in the game day 1? Greater Null pots? I can't be the only person who is not sure what got added when.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Halfcell [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

One thing that would be very convenient (and maybe it already exists and I just don't know how to find it) is a way to figure out exactly what tradeskills and recipies will be useable and when. Like obviously day 1 we wont have the cultural armors and weapons. Or for Alchemy, we wont have a potion to field of bone, but are wort pots in the game day 1? Greater Null pots? I can't be the only person who is not sure what got added when.

Thanks for posting this, this is exactly the sort of thing I was looking for in this thread!

My gut feeling here (without being a ClassicQuester) is that for most tradeskills, most recipes will be there on launch, so we don't have to completely tear-down and re-build the tradeskill pages. But there will definitely be chunks added in latter eras (the Velious armor recipes and Tinkering being the most notable exceptions).

Again my gut thought is that we just need to add era tags to those pages (probably the short ones on most pages, since most use tables for their recipes). Once we do, the same era filters I added to the class spell pages should just work on the tradeskill pages too. But if anyone thinks we need more than that please speak up.

[soronil]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Thanks for posting this, this is exactly the sort of thing I was looking for in this thread!

My gut feeling here (without being a ClassicQuester) is that for most tradeskills, most recipes will be there on launch, so we don't have to completely tear-down and re-build the tradeskill pages. But there will definitely be chunks added in latter eras (the Velious armor recipes and Tinkering being the most notable exceptions).

Again my gut thought is that we just need to add era tags to those pages (probably the short ones on most pages, since most use tables for their recipes). Once we do, the same era filters I added to the class spell pages should just work on the tradeskill pages too. But if anyone thinks we need more than that please speak up.

So there are hundreds of cultural tradeskill recipes that were added some point later, and not at the era periods you currently have. Even non-cultural stuff, like fine plate armor, and some jewelry recipes. There were multiple patches in kunark and velious changing tradeskills adding stuff.

If a recipe is added 1 month before Velious, a "Kunark Era" tag is pretty useless.

Since the current plan seems to be monthly patches, I think "Era" tags are pretty useless. Those groupings may be fine on live where you've got 20 expansions, but when there are only 2 expansion, "Kunark Era" and "Velious Era" are way too vague.

[AbstractVision]

What about a Green auction tracker? Sorry if this was already addressed somewhere else.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by soronil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So there are hundreds of cultural tradeskill recipes that were added some point later, and not at the era periods you currently have. Even non-cultural stuff, like fine plate armor, and some jewelry recipes. There were multiple patches in kunark and velious changing tradeskills adding stuff.

If a recipe is added 1 month before Velious, a "Kunark Era" tag is pretty useless.

Since the current plan seems to be monthly patches, I think "Era" tags are pretty useless. Those groupings may be fine on live where you've got 20 expansions, but when there are only 2 expansion, "Kunark Era" and "Velious Era" are way too vague.

Thanks a ton for this! However, here are a few more relevant details. First, the wiki has more eras than just the expansions: http://wiki.project1999.com/Category:Era_Templates.

Second, those hundreds of tradeskill recipes ... and for that matter most recipes/items/NPCs ... I understand Nilbog will be patching monthly, and my memory sucks, but I really don't remember it being like:

January we add mummies, 2 hats, and the iron pot recipe. February we add one gnoll in Blackburrow, the disease resist jewelry recipes, and the posky isle 1 quests. March ...

Stuff generally came out in clumps, no? Like a new zone (eg. Fear) comes out, and then the Fear NPCs and the Fear items come out then too? There might have been some fixes made a month later or something, but A) I'm not sure Nilbog is truly recreating every line of every patch note, and B) I don't think it will be the end of the world if new Fear items and ones patched a month or two later are both in one "Fear era".

Maybe tradeskill recipes don't come out then, but didn't they too mostly come in very big clumps, not "drip drip"? The reason I'm focusing on this is, I really think it's going to be A LOT harder to flag everything in the wiki by patch than by era (eras are half done).

If some small percentage of content did come out between eras, I don't think the wiki requires a massive overhaul of literally almost every page. Again I think it's ok if ... for instance ... a bunch of tradeskill recipes came out a month after Fear (or the Hole, or Chardok 2.0 or whenever) and we just say "they're in that era". Or maybe we just add notes "comes out one month into Fear" on important pages that aren't clear cut ... but mostly still group by era?

So I'm really trying to suss out ... does all of the above seem logical, or is it truly going to be "new stuff every month" ... and enough that the wiki will be significantly less useful if we try to make things massively easier on ourselves by grouping into eras?

[soronil]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The reason I'm focusing on this is, I really think it's going to be A LOT harder to flag everything in the wiki by patch than by era (eras are half done).

First, we have to decide if we really care. We didn't even have a wiki in live, is it really important to accurately tag each piece of content? How bad do you feel if someone runs across karana to find an NPC that didn't actually exist until later in that "general period of time (era)", or gathered all the mats for a cultural recipe but then it turns out that recipe wasn't around until later in velious.

Assuming you want 100% accuracy:

A. The annoucement indicated monthly patches. the list he gave was called the "highlights". So you would want that granularity.

B. I don't think you have to make a hard swap. Here's how I would do it

1. rename existing eras. "Stonebrunt Era" -> "March 2001 (Stonebrunt)"
... I'm not sure if live timeline months make sense here, since our timeline may be slightly different, live monthish? p99 green month (which we may not know until it happens)? p99 green patch #? You may have to change the name of the groups over time, I Assume this is trivial to rename existing category. Probably not for a user, but for the administrator it should be similar to a find/replace?

2. Add new eras. Empty at start, and then over time people can move content from the original eras you have already defined today, into more specific areas.

This way, none of the work you've already done is wasted. Things are already "close" to when they happened on live, and as people learn that a npc/item/recipe/etc is actually attached to a smaller patch, they can just update the era/patch for that content.


You still have some outliers that are more complicated. Things that were introduced at some point after launch, and then removed/changed/nurfed at some other point, so you have to have some way to indicate multiple eras i guess

[Jibartik]

Originally Posted by soronil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

First, we have to decide if we really care. We didn't even have a wiki in live, is it really important to accurately tag each piece of content? How bad do you feel if someone runs across karana to find an NPC that didn't actually exist until later in that "general period of time (era)"

I would feel very bad.

My interest is purely academic.

There are players here who pride themselves on their classic knowledge, that don't even know half the quests theyre planning on exploiting on green didnt exist for 4-9 months after launch.

I am going to have to get my hands dirty this weekend and start working on my own patch guide that hopefully will help us all in the hunt for the most accurate classic patch timeline on the internet, I would love for that honor to exist on p99's wiki [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[loramin]

Originally Posted by soronil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

1. rename existing eras. "Stonebrunt Era" -> "March 2001 (Stonebrunt)"

Let's start here. The wiki already today says "Stonebrunt Era (added Summer 2001)" ... when someone uses a "page template". It certainly would be easy enough to change "Summer" to "Aug 2001- Jan 2001", because that text is generated by a single template which we can just edit.

But it also has two other templates for showing era info "inline" (eg. in a list of items) or in tables (eg. the class spell lists). Right now we already have a large block of brown text that say "Velious Era" or "Chardok Revamp Era" or "Hole/Veeshan's Peak Era" next to such content (items, mobs, whatever).

With Green we'll likely use all these templates more: anytime a page will have any kind of "filter" (like the checkboxes to only show certain eras on the class spell pages), they will rely on these templates to tell which content is from when. Do we want to see slightly bigger blocks, such as "Hole/Veeshan's Peak Era (June 2000)", or do we want to try and reduce their footprint (and start only calling it "Hole Era")?

Clearly if a spell came out in the Hole era, we don't want "Hole/Veeshan's Peak Era (June 2000)" ... in the spell column that currently just says "Vel." [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] But what about the "inline" templates that currently say the whole era?

For the sake of argument let's say we decide "the inline stuff will be too ugly with that much more text ". Even if we only change the page templates, how should the details work?

Right now we've got:

{{Stonebrunt Era}}

Anyone can check http://wiki.project1999.com/Category:Era_Templates and find the template to use (though most won't even do that).

We can ask the ones who will to add a time argument, so that you could specify "this came out in this month of this era":

{{Stonebrunt Era|September 2001}}

That seems easy enough to do, and no one could really object to slightly more accurate (but no more verbose) era text, right? Except ... I worry: what if Nilbog announces each patch like "this is patch #5". People are going to be thinking "we're on #5", and what they're really going to be looking for in the wiki is "is my sword in #6?" And we'll really want "Stonebrunt (#27-#31)" as the era text.

Originally Posted by soronil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm not sure if live timeline months make sense here, since our timeline may be slightly different, live monthish? p99 green month (which we may not know until it happens)? p99 green patch #?

This.

Originally Posted by soronil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You may have to change the name of the groups over time, I Assume this is trivial to rename existing category. Probably not for a user, but for the administrator it should be similar to a find/replace?

Yes and no. In general with categories, no, because they are part of the page. If you want to rename a category you have to edit every single page in it.

But luckily most of the era categories come from a template, and if we edit that template it changes every affected page. That means that we can tweak text on existing eras easily, and again I can even change the templates to let people specify details. That's probably the best path forward, but I'm still not sure of the exact details right now.

P.S. To educate myself on all this though, I did make a new http://wiki.project1999.com/Patch_Notes page in the wiki