Difference between revisions of "Talk:Taskforce Random Recipe Roll"

Latest revision as of 08:16, 19 January 2009

I'm not sure that table is accurate. I've been doing random rolls in the 30-34 range and got Neuronic Shutdown: Acc/Hold/Rech lvl.30 twice. According to the table I shouldn't get these.

Nord Blast 20:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I see the issue - the table is capping the 10-30 sets in the 25-29 region. Indeed they can be acquired at the 30-34 level. Catwhoorg 21:23, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

There is also the same issue at the other level capped sets 15-35 can be gained from the 35-39 roll, and the level 40 capped sest from the 40-45 Catwhoorg 21:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

The table isn't wrong, just the headers are misleading. If you look down and find Neuronic Shutdown in the list itself, it's listed as 10-30 on its specific lines. -- Agge (talk) 22:14, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, from my point of view, both headers and body are inaccurate.

If you look down the range 30-34 in the table, than according to table, you shouldn't get any recipes from 10-30 range. So body of the table should be corrected to reflect this fact. I would suggest, for example, to extend colored bars for level 10-30 recipes into 30-34 range.

Headers, on other hand, are listing wrong number of possible recipes included in specific range.

Nord Blast 00:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

The body of the table is correct. Neuronic Shutdown is listed as 10-30, meaning you can get this recipe on any of those levels. The headers are misleading, and I don't really know why the number of recipes are listed.

I don't really know why, but someone removed the subheaders that listed "Level 10-20 - 6 Recipes", followed by the six recipes in question. That, to me, was MUCH more user friendly than this current version. See this old version for how I had it before the subheaders were removed. -- Agge (talk) 03:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I concur. However even that diff had the 10-30 not covered in the 30-34 random roll range. I am using that diff as the basis for a reworked table. As there is literally line by line editing required, it may take me a while to get it done today. Catwhoorg 14:07, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I removed the subheaders because they interrupted the vertical flow of the table. I'm not sure how they're helpful, but for how I use the table, they just get in the way. Rigel Kent 08:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Though I admit they're not as bad on this table as they were for the Trial Random Recipe Roll table. Putting the subheaders on that table was silly. Rigel Kent 08:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)