Sindusk

Suggestion: Reverse the WU Policy

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Sindusk said:

So instead of using data to root out old, outdated misinformation... you would prefer to guess that it's not applicable and leave the incorrect information there? The proposal is not to preach the WU source as gospel. It's to update information from years ago that is absolutely, 100%, without question wrong, and replace it with more updated information. I mean, the alternative, for example, would be to simply delete the aggressive fighting page entirely since none of that information is applicable to Wurm Online.

 

There are a few options here, for in terms of policy and in terms of what people can do to contribute, loosely in order of preference. Obviously, not every option is feasible in all circumstances (as you said, some things are very hard to test).

  1. Do some in-game testing to see if what you've determined from the Wurm Unlimited source applies in practice to Wurm Online. In this example, you could test aggressive fighting stance in-game and see how much it appears to affect the swing timer. Like you said, this may be difficult or infeasible in this case.
  2. Confirm that the general sense of the information in the wiki is correct or incorrect, and if correct, removing too-specific information that appears to be incorrect or dubious. For example, changing "reduces swing timers by 1s" to something more generic like "reduces swing timers". This resolves the problem of removing dubious claims without having to rely on WU source-diving or completely blanking whatever information is valid, such as deleting an entire article.
  3. Development team clarification. There have been times when the dev team has provided information directly, but this is not something that a user should generally attempt to solicit, cannot be expected in any given case, and is definitely not something an individual developer can provide on their own. This sort of information is only given very rarely, and not generally by player request except when absolutely necessary.

 

Quote

I didn't catch the post before the edit. You literally cannot increase a horses speed by 0.24kmh. The minimum threshold of speed increase is 0.72kmh. Speed also is not linear based on QL of shoes. The whole section is complete nonsense and I have in-game testing (Wurm Online, mind you) to confirm that it's nonsense. But I can't update it with the correct information, since it comes from WU.

 

If you have in-game testing to confirm that it's nonsense, then that information can be used to edit the wiki.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ostentatio said:

 

This all runs into the problem I've been mentioning (aside from some information missing from recent updates, like firemaking ash QL): There simply is no guarantee that the "correct" information from Wurm Unlimited source-diving is 100% correct and applicable in Wurm Online.

If that's actually the case then there should be more work between developers and wiki editors to verify information

"hey we just got this massive rewrite of a page based on wurm unlimited code, can you check to see if it holds up"

"oh yeah sure i've been laughing at the fact that people think aggressive fighting increases damage by 33% for years but we can't confirm x part"

 

All i can say is the "let the players test it and write up the wiki" isn't working very well so far for consistency. especially for things like fighting, as mentioned above. due to my ping all of my weapons show wildly inaccurate swing timers, will the wiki accept me adding the findings that my sickle randomly changes between 2 and 4 second swing timers? can i add that woa does nothing for swing timer even though its wrong (and most people actually believe that it does nothing) due to my ping hiding it? will the fact that 3.5s swing timers show as alternating 3 and 4 second swings for someone in germany right next to the server be listed as 3 or 4 seconds? if i have really bad fighting stance and it's reducing my damage but i have really high weapon skill will my info that one weapon is much weaker due to this hold up? if you want the info to be player driven, players need to be given the tools to test information reliably.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ostentatio said:

If you've run a test that shows information in the wiki to be incorrect, then it can be corrected. It's that simple. And if that testing verifies what you've seen in decompiled Wurm Unlimited code, then that would be reason to include that new information in the wiki.

Again, that is not what I said. You are either not reading my post or ignoring it and then making completely new unrelated points and attributing them to me. That's no way to hold a discussion. 

 

14 minutes ago, Ostentatio said:

As for the rest of what you've said, I feel I've already expressed my concerns. Any information in the Wurm Unlimited source cannot be relied upon to accurately reflect Wurm Online, either now or when that version of Wurm Unlimited was released, and therefore it cannot be used as an authoritative source for editing the wiki. If you can confirm that information from decompiled Wurm Unlimited source code is accurate through in-game testing, or can provide evidence through in-game testing that something currently in the wiki is inaccurate, then that can be used as a source for editing the wiki. The Wurm Unlimited source cannot be relied upon on its own; testing is required in-game to verify that it applies to Wurm Online.

Yet verifiably wrong and completely misleading information can be inserted or left there arbitrarily. Got it.

 

16 minutes ago, Ostentatio said:

but the only information we have is either from Wurm Unlimited source code (which cannot be used as a citation by itself)

Why? What's wrong with, say, adding the most likely true information and adding a citation that explains its from datamined information? Again it begs the question, why leave the false information untouched?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple solution, dump WO data to be datamined. 😆

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Pingster said:

Simple solution, dump WO data to be datamined. 😆

Botters would have a field day. Lul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Angelklaine said:

Yet verifiably wrong and completely misleading information can be inserted or left there arbitrarily. Got it.

 

If you can verify that information is wrong, then that information can be removed from the wiki. WU datamining does not count as verification.

 

30 minutes ago, Oblivionnreaver said:

if you want the info to be player driven, players need to be given the tools to test information reliably.

 

I understand the frustration here, but what tools would you like to be available?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ostentatio said:

If you can verify that information is wrong, then that information can be removed from the wiki. WU datamining does not count as verification.

 

Okay so help me with the horse speed one. Should I just delete that whole section and we pretend that horse shoes and saddles don't matter on horses? Or should I replace it with updated information from WU which I have tested is accurate for as far as the 40QL shoes I have in-game? Is it safe that, since my testing backs the WU speed formula, that the formula is accurate? Should I add the speed calculations to the wiki?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ostentatio said:

I understand the frustration here, but what tools would you like to be available?

 

32 minutes ago, Oblivionnreaver said:

If that's actually the case then there should be more work between developers and wiki editors to verify information

"hey we just got this massive rewrite of a page based on wurm unlimited code, can you check to see if it holds up"

"oh yeah sure i've been laughing at the fact that people think aggressive fighting increases damage by 33% for years but we can't confirm x part"

Its the ONLY tool there is, given players dont have access to the live Wurm code.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Ostentatio said:

 

I understand the frustration here, but what tools would you like to be available?

Ways to accurately record and measure, like for example, crafting an item, i can clearly see create chance, if i increase my skill or tool ql, the chance to create increases. Crafting provides me with the tools required to get an accurate reading and i can use this info to add info to the wiki about necessary crafting levels needed to make something, for example 8% chance to make a gold altar at 13.00 jewelry smithing using a 90Ql large anvil. this is a verified number, i can clearly see that a large altar is hard to make and need about 100 skill+ql to make it. Then we go back to weapons, here's the halberd page

 

  • Skills: Polearms -> Halberd
  • Strength: 0.45 (Similar to the Two Handed Sword)
  • Attack Speed: 5 seconds (4 in Aggressive Mode)
  • Damage Type: Cutting
  • Parry Rate: Medium
  • Wielding: Two-hander (Unable to use a shield with it)

What is "Strength"? How is "attack speed" accurately measured (its not coz aggressive is showing as 4s), isn't halberd half slashing half piercing?, what is "Parry rate: Medium and how was it found out?

 

And compare it to the huge axe page

  • Strength: 0.60
  • Attack Speed: 6 seconds (10% faster in Aggressive Mode)
  • Parry Rate: Low

And then the Two handed sword page

Parry Rate: High

 

This one has the correct aggressive speed, but how much is "Low" parry? is it half of medium? 10%?

 

Then compare it to the table of weapons, https://www.wurmpedia.com/index.php/Table_of_weapons , and there would be 0 way to make this table reliably without a dev providing it, but even then Halberd there is showing 100% parry rate? wasn't it supposed to be medium parry rate? it's 100% same as the two handed sword, which is a high parry rate? Anyone who can read the code or has actually used the weapons before can tell you that a 2 handed sword will parry much better than a halberd, and a shortsword will parry much better than a 2 handed sword due to parry being based on weight, but the wiki is telling me both that a sword will parry at the same rate as a halberd, and that a sword is better in two different places. How can i accurately test attack speed critical chance parry rate and fix this page up? It's based on so many factors like characteristics skills height position in relation to the enemy that the same test for two different people could give wildly different results due to outside factors, there's nothing in game that says "you can parry well" or "you cant parry well" or "you have a 8% chance to parry" or "your 90 body control is really screwing up this experiment and confusing the 10 other people testing it". is my instinct that my shortsword is the best weapon in the game for parrying enough info? do i have to blindly accept this page that the dev has provided even though i know it's not entirely correct based on my time ingame but i can't test it reasonably? would going onto test server and using their version of combat that shows the rolls for parrying showing that the shortsword is much better at parrying than the halberd be considered correct info?

Edited by Oblivionnreaver
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now