User talk:Zarevak/Categories

Feedback
I'll just move the discussion here. It was getting crowded over there, and it's nice to be close to the discussed material. Here are my issues with the current proposal. Issues meaning it's something that must be cleared out, not necessarily a permanent objection. - Dashiva 05:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Trainging / Ability / Skill relationship
Class/Tier X trainings/abilities being subcategories of Class/Tier X skills. Upside is that it gives natural access to abilities/trainings when navigating skills. Downside is that it gives us class and tier categories with only one subcategory (and they're pretty empty already). - Dashiva 05:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * In the interest of moving on, I suspend this issue. It's independent of the overall structure and can be resolved later should we choose to. - Dashiva 17:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Ability subtypes
Attack abilities, etc. I considered these, but I am convinced it is impossible to partition abilities properly. I tried in Dofus, and failed. Here we just got a medic skill that both damages the enemy and heals the party. - Dashiva 05:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * In the interest of moving on, I suggest we skip these for now. They depend on the ability template only and will be added automatically if we modify the template. - Dashiva 17:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

X by Y names
These just nag me. I imagine you feel the same about "Class abilities" and similar, though. - Dashiva 05:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * In the interest of moving on, I suspend this issue. I doubt we'll find a good name, so we might as well settle for something that works. - Dashiva 17:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Skills as common term
Use of skills for training+ability. Here we must ensure we don't clash with common terminology. - Dashiva 05:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Here I suggest we return to "ability", "skill", "skill and ability". Ability for logos abilities seems strong in common use; the game has a clear skill/ability dichotomy; engineering skills are not trainings; "skill and ability" makes it clear it's a combining category. - Dashiva 17:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Tiers
Along the way, I've reached a point where I wonder why we have tier categories. I don't really see anyone searching for tier-specific abilities, nor do I see any inherent value in overview that can't be explained a fire-line table otherplace. Why don't we just do away with the tier categories? - Dashiva 20:14, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

More Feedback
Hope you don't mind me making a new section, thought it might be best as it's been 8 months since the comments above were made! All of this is based on the outline currently shown on User:Zarevak/Categories.

Skills vs Trainings
I think the categories should be using the word Skills, not the word Trainings. Looking at Image:Ability_window.jpg, the window is split into two sections, the first headed "Abilities" and the second headed "Skills". You get "training points", and these can be spent either to pump Abilities or Skills. The Abilities and Skills are the two categories and "training" is what you do to improve either of them - Training isn't interchangeable with Skill. It could be interchangeable with "skills and abilities", though.

Tier categories
I think the only Tier categories should be those that group classes. I don't think there's really much value in having a category for Tier 2 abilities, or a category for Tier 3 armor. People aren't likely to care what Tier a skill, ability, weapon or armor is, only what class it relates to. It makes sense to have the Classes grouped into Tiers because that's how progression works, but beyond that I think we just risk over-categorising everything.

Tool skills
I think Tool skills should be a separate category, though it will only have three articles - Photonics (Salvage Tool), Genetics (Tissue Extractor) and Tools. While technically they could be classed as weapons because they're held like weapons I think this just complicates matters. Of course, with the crafting system up for review they might remove the training requirements for Salvage Tools and Tissue Extractors (or remove the tools entirely), in which case I don't think there's a need for a category for Tool skills (and no need to categorise it as a weapon skill or anything else, it doesn't really need to be in a sub-category, just have it in Category:Specialist skills).

Results of above on Zarevak's outline
Category:Characters
 * Category:Classes - contains all Classes articles (Recruit, Spy, ...)
 * Category:Recruit - all articles connected to Recruit class - even the class article itself
 * Category:Recruit abilities - (Sprint, Lightning)
 * Category:Recruit skills - (Firearms, Motor Assist Body Armor, Genetics, ...)


 * Category:Tiers
 * Category:Tier 1 - contains Tier 1 Class articles (Recruit)
 * Category:Recruit
 * Category:Tier 2 - contains Tier 2 Class articles (Soldier, Specialist)
 * Category:Soldier
 * Category:Specialist
 * Category:Tier 3
 * Category:Tier 4
 * Category:Tier 4


 * Category:Trainings - contains all skill and ability articles (Sprint, Motor Assist Body Armor, ...)
 * Category:Trainings by class
 * Category:Recruit abilities - same as under Recruit category
 * Category:Recruit skills - same as under Recruit category
 * Category:Abilities - also contains all ability articles (Sprint, Lightning, ...)
 * Category:Signature abilities
 * Category:Abilities by class
 * Category:Recruit abilities - same as above
 * Category:Skills - also contains all skill articles (Firearms, Motor Assist Body Armor, Tools, ...)
 * Category:Armor skills - (Motor Assist Body Armor, ...)
 * Category:Weapon skills - (Firearms, Hand to Hand Combat, ...)
 * Category:Tool skills - (Photonics, Genetics, Tools)
 * Category:Crafting skills - (Thermodynamics, Photonics, ...)
 * Category:Skills by class
 * Category:Recruit skills - same as above
 * Category:Skills by class
 * Category:Recruit skills - same as above


 * Category:Attributes - (Mind, Body, Power, ...)

Weapon and armor categories
I'm not sure I understand the purpose of categories like Category:Pistols and Category:Motor Assist Armor. What articles would be in these categories? There's no article for "CryoGen Motor Assist Armor Helmet v3", for example, and I'm not sure why there ever would be. The only articles that would ever go in categories like this as far as I can tell would be the unusual items like "Big Bertha". There's the Holiday Hat as well, but unless that actually counts as Motor Assist Armor in terms of providing increased run-speed that shouldn't really be categorised as Motor Assist Armor, I don't think.

Tools
Again, I think Tools should be separate to Weapons. I can see why they could be classed as a weapon but they aren't really weapons, and creating a separate category or leaving it in the parent category seems sensible to me.

Class specific weapons, armor and tools
I think all weapons, armor and tools should be categorised by class, in the same way that the skills and abilities that allow the use of those items are categorised by class. It would be useful to be able to identify which items are specific to which class, rather than just lumping them all together. Okay, many categories will only have a single article (Sapper armor, for example) but it would still be useful information that could be used elsewhere to construct lists and so on.

Resources and components
I'm wondering if "materials" might be a better name than "resources", unless there's some in-game reason to use the word resources? Currently the article relating to the "stuff" used for fabrication is called Fabrication components, and the article relating to the "stuff" used for modification is called Modification components. It would be less confusing if we gave them two separate names since as far as I know the two are never mixed. So perhaps we should have "Fabrication materials" and "Modification components" as the two individual article and category names? Although this is all subject to change when they bring in the new crafting system, of course...

Medical
I think this should be renamed to "Combat consumables" and contain Med Packs, Res Trauma Kits, Armor Chargers, Adrenaline Boosters and Power Chargers. Having a category just for Med Packs and Res Trauma Kits and then leaving the rest uncategorised seems less intuitive. Pharmaceuticals can be categorised both under Ammunition and Fabrication components. Portable waypoints don't really need to be in a sub-category, unless we're going to have a separate article for each of the three waypoint types in which case they can have a sub-category of their own.

Results of above on Zarevak's outline
Category:Items - contains all items
 * Category:Weapons - contains all weapon type articles (Pistol, Rifle, "Big Bertha", ...)
 * Category:Weapons by class
 * Category:Recruit weapons


 * Category:Armor - contains all armor type articles (Motor Assist Armor, ...)
 * Category:Armor by class
 * Category:Recruit armor


 * Category:Tools - contains all tool type articles (Repair Tool, Tissue Extractor, ...)
 * Category:Tools by class
 * Category:Recruit tools
 * Category:Specialist tools


 * Category:Schematics
 * Category:Fabrication schematics - contains all Schematic articles that create items
 * Category:Thermodynamics - these 4 categories filter the schematics by requirements; if schematic requires more skills at once, it is in more categories
 * Category:Photonics
 * Category:Chemistry
 * Category:Genetics
 * Category:Weapon modifications - one article/one article per modification type (eg.: Modification: Steal Health, Modification: Steal Power, ...)
 * Category:Armor modifications


 * Category:Consumables
 * Category:Ammunition
 * Category:Combat consumables - Med Pack, Res Trauma Kit, Armor Charger, ...
 * Category:Fabrication materials - Micromech, Nucleotides and Mechanical/Electrical devices
 * Category:Modification components - currently only one article Modification component...
 * Category:Explosives - Grenades, EMP Bomb
 * Category:Armor paint - Armor paint and all related articles (colors, schematics, ...)
 * !! Portable waypoints


 * Category:Mission items
 * !! Medical Supplies (Miner Difficulties) + Medical Supplies (Supplies On The Double) = Medical Supplies which list two missions - I prefer one article for both items as they share same name and same icon
 * Category:Junk

Summary
Anyway, that's my input (you did ask!). Mostly the above is just minor alterations to the outline that was already there. Happy to go with the original outline as well but I think most of what I've written makes sense, or at least it does in my head, and it would be great to get it off the drawing board and into action. Hope it's coherent, writing between work breaks leads to lost trains of thought. -> CommandoXXX 16:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Wow! Thank you for your valuable input. I'll try to comment and also comment Dashiva's previous comments...
 * Characters:
 * I see the Skill / Abilities / Trainings naming issue won't be resolved, as I don't like Trainings to be general term for Skills and Abilities. As you've written the game uses two categories: Passive Skills and Abilities and under the Abilities category everything uses Ability: prefix and under the Passive Skills category there are two prefixes: Ability and Engineering:. The window tab is simply named Skills in D11
 * I agree to get rid of Skills by Tiers and Tier X Skills categories. You are right: they don't give any useful information.
 * I also agree to have proper Tools category. They are distinct enough.
 * I think many of Dashiva's comments were commented above with the exception of these two:
 * The attack/defensive subcategories - they are not in the design anymore.
 * The Skills by Class categories. I've came up with possible solution User:Zarevak/Categories which would enable us to have Recruit Skills and Weapon Skills flattened under one general Skills category without the need of special middle Skills by Class category. What do you think about this solution?
 * Items:
 * As described on Template talk:Armor I understand the reason for having similar category system for items (based on which class can use which items). Once again, we can probably flatten the category system by removing the Armor by class subcategory and just having Recruit armor subcategory under the main Armor category.
 * As you and Dashiva pointed out, we don't need Pistols and Motor Assist Armor categories because all the current information is written in just one article. We can always create more categories in the future
 * Because the whole crafting system will be changed, we probably don't need to design these categories yet...
 * The whole Consumables section was designed based on the Military Surplus category system. You are right it's too specific an we can use more general category for all the Combat consumables. Personally I don't like the term, but I'm not a native English speaker... We may not even need any Consumables subcategories, because there are just a few articles and only Category:Ammunition (with 5 articles) is distinct enough to have its own subcategory.
 * Summary:
 * I see a light at the end of the current categorization hell. There is one more issue we forgot to mention here and it was the first reason I've re raised this discussion:
 * How to deal with Spy Skills (and similar = Ranger Armor) categories?
 * Should the Spy Skills category contain all the Skills available to Sapper (even with Recruit, Soldier and Ranger skills?) - this would need the Recruit skill articles to list all 15 Classes.
 * Should the Spy Skills category contain Spy skills articles and Ranger Skills subcategory? - by progressing through the tree user would get list of all available skills.
 * Should the Spy Skills category containt Spy skills articles and all its subclasses skills categories? (Ranger Skills, Soldier Skills and Recruit Skills categories) - this would be similar to previous solution except it would enable DPL to list all Spy skills with one query (DPL can also get articles from a first level of subcategories of the main listing category)
 * Should the Spy Skills list just the Spy skills articles and nothing else like it is now?
 * I will update the proposal based on your comments...
 * → Zarevak 00:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Skills/Abilities/Trainings:
 * They love making things difficult for us with their Abilities, Skills, Passive Skills, Trainings and Engineering terms, don't they?   I have to say that I'm not a huge fan of categories that have the word "and" in them, but how about this as an alternative:  Have the root category as Category:Skills (because that's the name of the tab on the character window), and have subcategories as Category:Abilities and Category:Trainings (because those are the prefixes within the window itself, as shown on Image:Ability window.jpg).
 * It's not perfect but I don't think anything ever will be. I don't think we should have a category called "Skills and abilities" which then contains "Abilities" and "Trainings" because it just doesn't make logical sense.  Admittedly it would also seem odd to have Skills as a catch-all term for Abilities and Trainings, considering the subheadings on the Skill tab are Abilities and Passive Skills, but that's Tabula Rasa for you.  At least it would match up with the prefixes, and saves the confusion of having both "Skills" and "Passive skills" categories, which would look even more strange.  I think we can safely ignore the Engineering skills as they should be disappearing soon anyway - for the time being we could just categorise them as Trainings.
 * X by Y:
 * It took me a while to work out what the purpose of the pipes in the category names was, but I like it. It's a good solution that helps reduce the number of categories while still allowing us to group things together.  One question I do have is do we really need to group together anything other than the Class categories, since we're not grouping things by Tier any more?  What I'd suggest would actually be the opposite, and using a space after the pipe to shuffle the main categories to the top of the list while leaving the class categories to order themselves.  Or do it the other way around, and use a space to shuffle the class categories to the top of the list while leaving the main categories as they are.  The former would probably be neater, I think - for example in Category:Abilities there's only one category which isn't class-related (Category:Signature abilities), so it would make more sense to have this shuffled to the top of the list and leave the other categories to sort themselves by letter.  Not really a big deal though, my argument is more about neatness than structure, and it can always be changed later if it looks odd.
 * Category:Spy skills, etc:
 * I think of the options you've suggested I like option 3 the best, because of the potential for it being possible to create DPL lists based on it. Okay, so it means Category:Recruit skills needs to be in 15 categories, but at least it's only the category article that we need to mess with rather than every individual skill article.  I think it gives a good balance of not over-categorising the articles themselves too much while still making the categories useful both from a user and a DPL perspective.
 * -> CommandoXXX 11:40, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Zarevak: Could you create a new page (subpage probably) with your current proposal? That'd give us a new discussion page as well. I could comment here, but based on some of the suggestions above I'd probably miss the mark on at least one of them. - Dashiva (talk) 17:01, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for encouraging me I've moved the discussion to the centralized place, because it's issue for the whole community and not just mine:
 * TaRapedia:Formatting/Categories/Proposal (comments)
 * → Zarevak 16:48, 6 September 2008 (UTC)