Mobius Final Fantasy Wiki:Community portal

From Mobius Final Fantasy Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Things to Do

  • Create Skillseed Page
  • Create Spoiler/Future Content Page and Template
  • Write a summary page for the game
  • Compile the Guides of reddit to place on the wiki, include a credits link at the bottom
  • Write Documentation for Templates: Empty Documentation
  • Update Items with newest Multiplayer trade rotation
  • Upload missing card images: (LQ* These cards need better imgs)

Last Updated: --Lydhia (talk) 00:22, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Upload files to proper names before doing unnecessary moves

Since we've been going along with naming convention of Card_1234567890_EN_NameOfCard.png, please try not to upload to placeholder names.

To-Do List After Updates

Discussion

Create a new subject to discuss
Old & Closed Discussions can be found on the Mobius_Final_Fantasy_Wiki_talk:Community_portal
Make sure to sign your posts with ~~~~


How to handle this mixing up different data at the same place

The last days I really got confused by the last edits. I really don't know how to describe this but it seems that the structure this wiki has as base is completely ignored or uneffective. For example:

  • Areas of fiend encounters are placed in section of regions the fiend appears on the card page instead in the encounters section of the related fiend page, partially removing the template used there:
  • Cards with abilities that cause multi boons/ailments are linked to the single abilities instead to the boon/ailment given:

There are multiple examples for such controversies, so I think we should find a solution how to handle this. Maybe I am wrong with my interpretation of seeing different things there. If we stay with the given structure it will be much work to move all this informations to the right place, but the questions behind this will be:

  • there are multiple users that edit the wrong pages, will they give up if we move and delete all there changes because they do not fit with the given structure
  • if multiple users edit the "wrong" pages is this a sign that they look on the wrong pages based on a wrong given structure?

I usually have no problems with correcting this but I do not want to feel like controlling and dictating all others. But on the other side if there is a given structure I think it should be used... I am really interested in your opinions how to handle such things. Thanks --Lydhia (talk) 12:47, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Reply

Analysing the examples you gave I could tell the tricking fact is that we have some spells wich add ailments, refering at them with the same name as the common abilities which applies them so we have to make a distinction: (Unguard as example)

  • Unguard ability -> The name of the ability itself is "unguard".
  • Ability with description "Adds Unguard" -> The ability actually applies Ignore Defense, calling it Unguard but nothing to deal with the ability "Unguard".

My solution: keep a pattern to links, something like Card link to -> Ability link to -> Boons/Ailments. Except some unique cases that may appear, never link an ability from another ability. About the the fiend encounters, I'd say keep fiend information in fiend page, encounters are fiends info, so nothing much to discuss. Getting to the point of the speech, I don't think there's a wrong structure, just lazy people which do bad work: the fact itself that are so much people editing the wiki causes confusion. When I started editing here, I just looked at other people works, I couldn't even know how to edit if u remember, but I started with little simple edits, keeping an eye on how things work here. Most people don't do that and just press "Edit" without any concern about what they're doing. My mantra is "Do a good work or just don't do it", and I think everyone should use it as way of life. I guess creating an "Edit Guide" would be a good idea since you can't stop random people from editing, just give 'em tools to do it good. These are my thoughts. Greets --Juilian01 (talk) 23:06, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

I propose making redirects: "Unguard (ailment)" → "Ignore Defense". That way, editors can do this: Adds [[Unguard (ailment)|Unguard]] (nullifies Defense) to main target..
A guide, like "Project:General formatting" perhaps. --BryghtShadow (talk) 09:06, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Ability stat templates

All abilities, if they have an increasing attack or breakpower, follow a pattern: [1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.7, 2.0, 2.3, 2.6, 3.0]. After seeing all those ability stat templates, I thought of making it easier to display the stat for each ability level. And to reduce duplication/repetition.

Behold: Module:Ability stat, which will do most of the work! I think I've gotten most of the automation. Still not too confident on the cooldown formula, e.g. for abilities like Prompto's Piercer. Especially because Crit Chance may be a non-zero value even if it's not shown on the card. e.g. Taunt has a 5% crit chance.

Later on, I would like to have the module handle displaying of ultimate ability stats (follows the above multiplier pattern). --BryghtShadow (talk) 12:21, 13 July 2017 (UTC)


Unintended usage of category pages as mainspace articles

Pages in the Category namespace are not meant to become huge articles. Please move the contents to the main namespace and keep category pages short.

--BryghtShadow (talk) 07:06, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Are these examples which categories gone wrong or the only one where it makes sense? Think Category:Cards got really big now too. --Lydhia (talk) 08:21, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Just some examples from the most recent changes. The category page should be for describing what the pages listed on it are. Pages are automatically added so manually making a list on the category page itself is just strange. Imagine the ability card category if it looked like the job page. --BryghtShadow (talk) 10:42, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Ok, can only talk about my changes of Category:Early Acquisition. Someone started it and I continued to add the new batches. Maybe there it will be better to delete the listed cards and only make a table with the batches with release date and date the left early access? should be much smaller then. --Lydhia (talk) 10:49, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
I agree. Category pages should have 2-3 paragraphs at most -- usually only a line or two.
The current content is good. In most cases I think we could easily move it off of that page and into a page of the same name, without the Category label. (ex: Category: Job Cards could move its content directly to Job Cards.) However, we do seem to have a LOT of lists around the site, so perhaps some of these could be consolidated. For example, the Update Schedule page points now to the Events and Category: Card Batches pages, instead of taking current lists itself.
Gousha (talk) 18:36, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Updating Abilities by Job Type

  • I tried starting to update the page Abilities by Job Type. On the Talk-Page I finished a first try. Please lets discuss about it there, because the tables will become very large very fast. --Lydhia (talk) 14:09, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Aquisition Card Batches

  • As we all know the structure of the summon banners changed with the august update. While adding the info of cards that are not able to be summoned anymore into the batch-templates I found myself asking how to handle this new summon banner structure in the templates? Overwrite the old aquisition tables with the new structure or adding them below? What do you think about this? New banner structure is used in Template:Batch13-1Early and later. --Lydhia (talk) 15:02, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Some possible solutions:
  • Automatic -- Check the name of the page. If it's in the removed card group, then display that info. If it's not in the group, no change. This requires the least effort on updating cards. Only the template needs to handle this.
  • Manual -- Specifying via template parameter that it's been removed from summon pool. If specified, display that info. This required updating all affected card pages.
<!-- Automatic display example -->
{{#switch: {{PAGENAME}}
| Artemis (Card) | Cait Sith (Card) | Fat Chocobo (Card) | Gigant (Card) | Moogle (Card) = <!-- Still in pool -->
| #default = Removed from card summons on August 2rd, 2017.
}}

--BryghtShadow (talk) 03:46, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

  • Thx for this info, I will have a look on it later, but thats not the thing I meant. I mean the things with the changed banners. Old was something like: 3★ Ability Summon, 4★ Ability Summon and Greater Summon, now (since august) its Card Summon and Boosted Greater Summon. So should we overwrite all old summon banners with the existing ones or terminate them with a date and add the new possibilities below. First will be a short thing with only the actual state while the second will have something like a history effect. --Lydhia (talk) 12:15, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
I think second option of retaining history with current at top and oldest at bottom. If it gets too cluttered, splitting it to current acquisition, and putting the history in separate section. --BryghtShadow (talk) 05:09, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
  • ok, done with switch and history - I hope it will fit so. Changed all occurences from 3★, 4★, 5★ to ★3, ★4, ★5 in all templates too. --Lydhia (talk) 14:54, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

May 2018 card batches

Make note that the cards being offered in May 2018 are not labeled as "2nd Anniversary" cards.... just "Anniversary" cards. As the website puts it:

To commemorate the end of Act 1: Warrior of Light Finale, for a limited time from May 1 to May 11, 6 Anniversary Cards will be added to the summon line up.

So it's more the anniversary (?) of the first storyline's conclusion, rather than a calendar thing. I expect the proper 2nd Anniversary will come in August 2018.
I recommend changing Category: 2nd Anniversary Cards to Category: Act 1 Anniversary Cards
Gousha (talk) 05:32, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

I named them so because in the original they were the cards for 2nd Anniversary, so I don't think we will get other cards this august.
Finally I am not really sure how to handle this all - regular card batches without ability cards - only job cards; anniversary batches that are released before anniversary - all very confusing.
The next thing is: why did they call it "Act 1" here and in Japan Version its called "Season 1"
Let's collect some more opinions - the movement at a later time shouldn't take long --Lydhia (talk) 15:11, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Neo Bahamut and card disambiguation

We have light support "Neo Bahamut". Now we have a "Neo Bahamut" supreme card (ohmy). Naming proposal(s):

Disambig with (element card) OR (jobtype card) OR (element jobtype card) OR (jobtype element card)
"Neo Bahamut (light support card)" vs "Neo Bahamut (fire warrior card)".
Users will have to remember which one is specified and in what order if both are specified (I'm looking at you, sicarius cards and ff7 cards...)
Disambig supremes with (supreme card) or (supreme). Keep support baha as is.
Supremes are less common. Similar to scroll notation. Easy enough to remember.
This might mean we have to rename all supremes to use this notation, but that's simple enough.

--BryghtShadow (talk) 02:51, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

  • I have been informed that the news page was incorrect, and that the proper name of the supreme is "Bahamut Neo". --BryghtShadow (talk) 08:15, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
  • ... ah, yes, I saw that in a rental card today. Disambig problem solved! I was prepared for Bahamut Neo (Supreme)(Card). I'm glad it was sorted out on SE's end. I've fixed the calendar link accordingly. Gousha (talk) 07:42, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

New Admins

Given the long absence of User:ValorVercanos and User:Katsuxx, we've done remarkably well with no admins. I'm tired of it. So I asked for three of us to be promoted to admins... and the sysops have agreed! Now we have the ability to do those admin-y things like deleting pages, editing the front page, and working with user accounts.

To all involved with the Wiki: say hello to your admins User:Lydhia, User: BryghtShadow, and User:Gousha! Come see us if you have questions, or if you (as contributors) need help. Gousha (talk) 07:42, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Query and storage

Right now, we have Template:infobox ability which does very basic storage (just the name, description, jobtype, element), and Template:Ability stat which also does storage of the stats. I think the storage should be left to just the infobox ability (it will probably still store the data in 2 tables).

Storage
  • Template:Infobox ability to store name, element, jobtype, attack, break power, crit chance, cooldown, cost (if cost is indeed bound to the ability and not the card).
Query
  • Template:Ability stat to get ability stats, given just it's being used. (We can have it fetch data when a pagename or ability name is specified).
  • Template:Infobox card will want to know ability details. Card pages may also wish to display the full stat table, like they currently do. However, storage of ability data should be expected to not happen here, because some cards share ability.

Alternatively, Template:Ability could be the one that stores "ability" data, as well as fetch? Changes to the template would affect a larger number of pages, however.

I haven't fully rolled out the changes yet. --BryghtShadow (talk) 08:12, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

JobType icons on fiends (Support vs. Healer)

The recent Template:JobType change from Support to Healer has broken the icon link on the 60-odd "Support Fiends" with pages. (ex: Dust Gigas, Pure Earth) These are direct copies of the JobTypes defined on the fiends' corresponding Ability Cards. (ex: Dust Gigas (Card), Pure Earth (Card)). The more I stare at those fiend cards, the less that the JobType makes sense there. We don't categorize these fiends in that way at all -- the Ability Cards are the place for that.

Rather than changing the JobTypes on the Support/Healer fiends, I suggest removing the JobType from the Template:Infobox fiend layout entirely. Your thoughts?
Gousha (talk) 06:35, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

(Fixed the broken icon)
Apart from the obvious fiends which only have one type of card associated with (e.g. Dust Mage)...
  • Some fiends get access to various job-type abilities. Lightning's Shadow (boss), is probably a ranger because she uses "Army of One" ulti and the skin is ranger-type, but she uses single-target mage abilities (perhaps she's a ranger boss with mage lore). Also drops False Lightning (Card), which is a warrior-type card. Blazefire Saber is a Warrior-type weapon. She comes from a Paradigm-based game, not classic job-based.
  • Some fiends cannot be classed under one job by looking at their card (see first and second generation Sicarius).
IIRC, there are no player abilities that apply Clouded ailment AND no area effects where the fiend gets debuffed AND fiends never have Lucid boons on themselves. If someone can show a fiend with either Clouded/Lucid applied onto them, then this info will make sense.
I'm fine with removal because it doesn't provide vital information of the encounter (like whether it would get healed by my ability). --BryghtShadow (talk) 13:01, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Checked in the MFF discord, if a fiend uses Trance that matches their class, then their parameters are increased by 20%. So keep jobtype for fiends with definitive class. (Shadow Blanks have been seen with Lucid boons). --BryghtShadow (talk) 01:13, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
I think we can safely remove the entry from the Infobox for all fiends. I want to avoid putting in a special exemption in for Shadow fiends, because it sets a bad precedent. Those entries already have enough appropriate body text and skillset entries to reflect their job class, and we can deal with any others as they come to our awareness. Gousha (talk) 04:10, 1 February 2019 (UTC)