Difference between revisions of "Talk:Super Pack/Heroes and Villains"

Latest revision as of 20:55, 15 March 2012

Unnmmm....

o.o I was compiling the set info for sticking in the 'contents by rarity' section when I realized... all the recipes are duplicated.. for example "Blaster's Wrath Dam/Rech" is Card #57 and Card #134. At first I thought there might be 2 versions, one that's rare, and the other VR, with the VR having higher stats, but they're the same thing.. <.< and the really screwy bit is, your more likely to get the VR card of it instead of the R... --Sleepykitty 00:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that too, when I was compiling my list, I saw the same one at 60 and 137 and stopped, because I was sure there was an error... but if that's what you have too... than I guess it is right. —Thirty7 04:30, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

>< I'm wondering about it to.. but basically, each whole set is in the VR section, and about 2/3rds of said set are in the Rares.. which strikes me as a bit pointless, as while you can get to Rares, I've yet to ever get 2 enhancement rares out of the hundreds I've opened... and that also effectively means that with 3-4 of each set duplicated.. we only really have about 157-164 cards, not 205... --Sleepykitty 04:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Numbers/Rarity

Should all of that info be rolled into ONE sortable table? I should think so... because having two mega-long tables is a bit ridiculous. —Thirty7 14:10, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

As an example:

Then the title of the section can merely be labeled: == Contents ==. —Thirty7 14:29, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I am always a fan of reducing the number of tables we have to maintain when possible. --Eabrace 14:36, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I have already begun the process of consolidation: User:Thirty7/Projects/H&V Table, feel free to add in, alphabetize, whatever! —Thirty7 15:30, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, ran into a slight snafu with my awesome idea, is there a way to force a sortable wikitable to NOT sort like an idiot (1, 10, 124, 2, 20, 205, etc.) without listing all the numbers as 002, 003, 025, etc? —Thirty7 15:41, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Numbers will sort as numbers as long as the contents of all cells in that column are purely numerical. The "of 205" makes your numbers not numbers, which is what's breaking it. You'll either need to pad with invisible 0's or drop the extra text. Follows is an example of invisipadding (using some dummied data). Notice that in addition to using the span with display:none, I also had to use 1= to explicitly specify the parameter for {{center}} due to the equal sign in the span tag. -- Sekoia 15:50, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Addendum: The reason your table at your project page is failing for sorting is because some cells contain "?" which is not numerical. Try maybe leaving those cells blank? -- Sekoia 15:53, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, sir! Yeah the ?? will be removed, eventually anyway, so that should fix it me thinks. I also switched the {{center}} out for alignment instead, so the actual cell contents should be pure numerical soon. —Thirty7 16:01, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Not to be a jerk, but I don't think that table looks very nice. Why not just put the card number after the listing in the existing tables already created? ~ AGGE talk/cons 20:53, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Mainly? Because I don't like the look of the tables currently in use on that page. The current table has no precedent in terms of organization... and, personally, I think making a table of a full "card set" listing sortable trumps whatever kind of aesthetic value folks feel the existing table has. Also, there seems to be agreement that it needs a change.

Did you have anything specific that you didn't like about the above table so that it could be rectified? A suggestion, mayhap? —Thirty7 10:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Another suggestion for the table: Would it be worth it to use the card background colors to indicate the rarity? For example:

• Common
• Uncommon
• Rare
• Very Rare

Alternately, if there's some concern that those icons would be too small, we could go this route:

• Common
• Uncommon
• Rare
• Very Rare

(Colors taken from Costume Colors/Palette, adjustments to the actual selected colors welcome.) --Eabrace 04:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

o.o are we talking about doing the entire background of that table cell in those colors, or just sticking the image in? if its just sticking the image in, you might want it to be before the name, not at the very end. course.. are we using the above table or the one on the page? --Sleepykitty 07:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

My suggestion was just to add a quick visual reference of some form. I didn't really have changing the entire background of the table cell in mind. For instance, using the table currently on the page:

Card #	Item	Type	Rarity
1	Rejuvenate	Dual Inspiration	Common

OR

Card #	Item	Type	Rarity
1	Rejuvenate	Dual Inspiration	Common

Alternately, using the table above:

Name	Number	Type	Rarity
Blaster's Wrath: Accuracy/Damage/Endurance/Recharge	137 of 205	Archetype Enhancements	Very Rare

OR

Name	Number	Type	Rarity
Blaster's Wrath: Accuracy/Damage/Endurance/Recharge	137 of 205	Archetype Enhancements	Very Rare

--Eabrace 07:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I Like this one:

Name	Number	Type	Rarity
Blaster's Wrath: Accuracy/Damage/Endurance/Recharge	137 of 205	Archetype Enhancements	Very Rare

Though I did make the image just a touch wider (and taller), which I think helps its visibility a lot. —Thirty7 10:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

o.o need the text slight farther away from the circle, its cutting off a couple pixels when in the graph... either one would probably be okay, but visually its a bit... err.. odd? distracting? having the purple or yellow on the far right just draws the eye over to there first, I'd really recommend moving the rarity cell to the left if your using color coding.--Sleepykitty 18:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

If I'm interested in seeing what a card's rarity is, I can read it. If I'm interested in finding cards of a given rarity, I can sort them. So I don't think we need to make them more visually distinct, especially if it will make them unnecessarily eye-catching (as Sleepy points out). And I really don't think it's worth putting Rarity all the way to the left just so we can include the icons. If we do use it, I prefer seeing us use the icons based on the card images since they're actually what's seen in game. -- Sekoia 18:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Also, looking at User:Thirty7/Projects/H&V Table, I'm going to recommend you drop the centering on the columns. I think it makes the Rarity column look really bad with the icons included. Even without the icons, I think it'll be visually easier to follow and more consistent if all columns were left-aligned. -- Sekoia 18:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The more I look at it, the more I agree... so no rarity image, and no centering... I can do that, afterall, the reason I am making it in user space is because of just how work in progress it is. —Thirty7 21:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Cards by Number

>_> starting to list the Packs cards here, Generilisk said he has about half on googledocs, but no link, so hopefully the overlap will cover a decent amount of them. --Sleepykitty 14:43, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Ooops...here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AnEyKIImI1H6dHNRMEpDTmd2ZTFyTlV2RzVabVRFbFE Generilisk 23:37, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Complete List

Based on combining the information on the various AT IOs from Rare and Very Rare, I have compiled a complete numbered list. It appears as though the order (numerically) is maintained across both of the rarities, so it was just a matter of filling in the gaps in one section with the non-gaps in another. Now, any suggestions on formatting and usage of the table?

—Thirty7 08:37, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Soooo, any issue with replacing the tables on the page with the full list in my user-space? —Thirty7 11:51, 14 February 2012 (UTC)