Template talk:Online Place Summary

More parameters?

Following on from the discussion on CP, which is now archived, I would like to first of all bring back the idea of adding a "Recommended Level" parameter; this was left at 2-for-2 on CP, with myself and Jak suggesting that it would be a useful addition to allow people to make informed decisions about whether they set out for an area that msy not be tuned to their level, and Jeancey and Nocte suggesting that it may not be necessary since monster levels are clearly displayed on the UI. While I agree that they are clearly displayed, knowing the state-of-affairs before going there and potentially being killed would save what otherwise may have been a wasted trip. This parameter would give the added benefit of also being viable for settlements, in which case we could display the level range of the items on sale at the stores.

Secondly, there are a number of places which, while not dungeons and therefore not clearable, can still be completed due to them having an "objective" tied to them. I was wondering whether we should indicate which places have these "completion objectives" in the template, or whether mentioning them in the article text is enough. Also, the "Clearable" parameter is currently not visible like it was for Skyrim; are we planning to change that so it can be seen?

Finally, I was considering adding two more options to the "alliance" tint switch so we can tint places in Cyrodiil and in Coldharbour. Anyone have any opinions on this?

As a side note, the documentation doesn't compeltely match up with the parameters that are actually avaiable.
Thanks, Enodoc (talk) 23:54, 7 March 2014 (GMT)

Just a note about the alliance tints, Cyrodiil needs no other options. All of the locations have a base alliance that they are attached to. Coldharbour could just use the default color instead of an alliance color.

Which parameters aren't documented? I can fix that right now. Jeancey (talk) 00:00, 8 March 2014 (GMT)

Is the base alliance useful enough, though? The whole zone is disputed. I haven't made it into Cyrodiil yet so I don't know how it works in the long run. All of the keeps and resources can of course flip alliance if you take them over; what happens to the other places, like the towns, Ayleid ruins and so forth? Do they remain with their original alliance, or flip based on the nearest keep as well? Anyway, my idea was to have the alliance for all Cyrodiil places set as Disputed, which would also serve as a secondary indicator that it's a PvP zone and anyone could get attacked by someone else.

I also thought it may be nice to have a corner icon for Cyrodiil and Coldharbour places for consistency.

The missing parameters are: alliance, clearable, discoverable, and instanced. Also I think the skyshards parameter should be skyshard (and/or perhaps skyshards could be added as an alternative, since that's how it's displayed in the box). color and alliance_icon aren't there either, but they may not need to be since I defined them directly with a switch. --Enodoc (talk) 00:19, 8 March 2014 (GMT)

While the keeps and such may switch back and forth, they are all in distinct areas associated with those alliances. If the Daggerfall Covenant has Fort Alessia, for instance, that doesn't change the fact that Daggerfall now has a keep in Aldmeri territory. Does that make sense? They switch back and forth, but they are assigned an alliance that is their base. This can be seen by the areas listed for those forts, keeps, etc, which are Cyrodiil (Aldmeri), Cyrodiil (Daggerfall) and Cyrodiil (Ebonheart). Jeancey (talk) 00:25, 8 March 2014 (GMT)

Oh really? That's interesting, I didn't know Cyrodiil was explicitly defined like that. Three subzones, just like the three subzones that all the other zones are invisibly divided into. Well in that case, you're right; it's probably unnecessary to change the tint, although we could make use of my errant alliance_icon parameter as an easy-identifier for a PvP location; override the default alliance icon with the Battle icon for example. I may test that out on the Cyrodill page to see how it looks; it currently looks lonely without any icons :) There's also the Imperial icon which I haven't uploaded yet; it'd be nice to find somewhere appropriate to stick that one. (Maybe when they release Imperial City?) --Enodoc (talk) 00:44, 8 March 2014 (GMT)

(←) I know marker_icon can take marker_id as an input; would it be worth adding an alternative input "service_id" as well? This could take images from Category:Online-Icons-Services for the pages for stores, which also use this template. If you do add service_id, that'd be another thing to add to the documentation along with those I mentioned that were missing above. --Enodoc (talk) 20:44, 9 March 2014 (GMT)

I added most of the missing parameters, though I didn't add clearable or discoverable because we're still not sure if those are actually staying. Jeancey (talk) 21:21, 9 March 2014 (GMT)

Oh I didn't know those were under contention. In which case, I don't think "Discoverable" is particularly relevant, and maybe "Clearable" should be changed to "Completable", which would determine both whether it's a dungeon to be Cleared, or whether it has an objective to fulfil. --Enodoc (talk) 21:57, 9 March 2014 (GMT)

Regarding my "service_id" suggestion above, I think it may actually be easier just to add those icons in directly with the "marker_icon" parameter, given that the definition of "marker_icon" seems to be intrinsically tied to the "marker_id" alone. Either that, or we rename the Service icons to mapicon so that "marker_id" is able to use them direcly. Any opinion? --Enodoc (talk) 10:52, 14 March 2014 (GMT)

(←) I had a run around the whole of Glenumbra and Stormhaven over the weekend, and would like to bump the idea of the "Recommended Level" parameter I mentioned before. The zones are just too big to keep traversing if you realise you've ended up somewhere out of your depth. Foreknowledge would be a huge benefit given the size of the regions. I also managed to get into Spindleclutch (a Group Dungeon) by myself, at Lvl 8 (although I left as soon as I entered). Does that mean the minimum level requirement has been nixed? --Enodoc (talk) 10:37, 17 March 2014 (GMT)

Better use for Discoverable and Completable

...would perhaps be to put in here the amount of XP/VP you get for Discovery and Completion. Then we don't need to worry about the criteria for completion (Objective, Kill x, etc) in the summary, and can put that criteria in the text instead. --Enodoc (talk) 20:28, 2 July 2014 (GMT)

Capitalisation Problem

On Online:Chid-Moska Ruins, the template insists on making "Argonian" lowercase. Not sure how to fix it other than changing the wording. —Legoless (talk) 14:02, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah the template has a forced {{lcfirst:}} on the description parameter so that it generates appropriate syntax when in the middle of a sentence regardless of the capitalization in the parameter; this goes with the forced {{ucfirst:}} that exists on the Place Link template, since the Description is used there too. There's no way to override it unfortunately, unless we added an extra override parameter. It would probably be easier just to stick another adjective in first, like large, small, ancient, flooded, etc (not sure if any of those actually apply). --Enodoc (talk) 15:18, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Tweaked it for now, but an override param might be worth keeping in mind for future. —Legoless (talk) 15:26, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Category applied by the "disabled" parameter

Do we need the Category:Online Disabled Places applied by the disabled parameter in addition to Category:Online-Deprecated? --Holomay (talk) 13:07, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Aside from it being useful as a list of specifically disabled places (as opposed to deprecated anythings), not everything that is disabled is deprecated. --Enodoc (talk) 17:42, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! I just wanted to make sure that it's needed as I've found quite a number of wanted categories lately that were redundant or had been created by wrong template parameter values/checks. I've created the category and hope the description is fine. Also, the parameter hasn't been added to the template's doc yet. --Holomay (talk) 21:44, 27 February 2018 (UTC)