Talk:Crafting

PLEASE NOTE: The MouseHunt Kitchen group on Facebook is specifically dedicated to discovering new recipes. You may have better success searching there first for new formulas and discussion of same.

Removal of credits

Because credits have been removed, noobs now believe that the recipes were simply copied from Plankrun's journal. There have been postings to this effect in the forums.

I understand why they were removed, but now anyone reading the wiki has no idea at all that MH players actually found these recipes through hard work.

Who cares? This isn't the MH Hall of Fame. -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 14:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Newcomers will always be newcomers :) You can't fault them for not knowing. Those who have played through the times when the formulas were just released would know. Additionally, I find that putting a name on the formula is highly inaccurate since most of the people playing around with the formula would have posted up their failed tries, which in turn was built on by those who eventually succeeded. Also, some of the formulas were literally written on the item descriptions. -- Grexx 15:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Missed point error. The point is not who found the recipes, but that they were found at all. Newcomers to the game are unaware of the hours of work put in by people to find these recipes. That matters because they are therefore completely unaware that potentially they can make a contribution to finding future recipes. Instead they believe they are going to be handed to them on a plate.

Didn't miss the point. The real point is that the formulas are all found within hours, or at most a day or two, of them becoming available for discovery. The VAST VAST VAST majority of MHers do in fact have it handed to them on a plate. That the formulas have to be discovered at all is a trivial part of the game, a momentary challenge at best. If you can come up with a sentence or two to describe what you think is important for players to know, by all means add it to the page. Personally I don't see the necessity but understand your concern (though I truly question the "hard work" aspect -- it's simple trial and error based on obvious hints). -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 16:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

we could make a credit page on the side and place names on there Doreito 17:32, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

In reply to Brossow, not all recipes were handed to MHers on a plate. Ancient Cheese was languished upon for literally days before Jason discovered it. --Shinnok 05:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Shinnok, I believe Brossow was referring to the fact that most players don't contribute at all to the efforts to find formulas, and are simply waiting for it to be handed out to them.

Anyways, whatever the point, it can certainly be included in a writeup for the Crafting page. The page is missing a nice introduction on crafting and what players can do with it. Any takers for the job? -- Grexx 06:32, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Splintered Wood

I would like to see Splintered Wood have it's own component page. Other crafting components have their own page and their is more information about Splintered Wood (multiple mouse drops in multiple locations) so I think there is enough information to justify it's own page.

I would say all crafting items should have their own page, if only because it makes it much easier for people to find them when searching the wiki. --Winelight 19:53, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree about the Splintered Wood. Not so much about all the crafting stuff, though. They used to be all their own articles, but there was hardly any information in them. Not worth the page... But as far as Splintered Wood, yeah - it's got enough info that it deserves a separate page. -- Camomiletea 20:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Obelisk Parts description?

Does it really say "ordinate" instead of "ornate"? I'm not gonna smash my OoS (not yet, anyway) just to find out. Wondering if it's an error by the devs or a transcription error. -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 20:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I can confirm that it really does say "ordinate" instead of "ornate". It's probably a mistake by the devs. -- Townsend 06:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Reducing duplicated info

Just looking to start some brainstorming on a way to reduce the amount of duplicated info on the wiki, particularly with regard to this page and General Store, which have TONS of identical info. Thoughts? Ideas? -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 22:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Lol have been avoiding messing with these 2 pages precisely because of this reason. The information is in need of a merge from the looks of it. The hard part is deciding what's going to end up where. For a start the item description needs to go from one of the pages. That's probably a good place to start working on where to divide the information, or possibly a complete merger of the 2 pages.

Or we can consider removing the "description" and "used in" columns from the general store page, so it'll simply contain pricing information, or possibly split the page up and make it a disambiguation page, and point the individual general store pages to their respective locations. -- Grexx 15:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

We still need additional input on this matter. It is getting more and more urgent with more and more stuff coming into the game. Maintaining 2 articles with almost the same content is a very bad idea -- Grexx 15:16, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Strip down General Store as you indicated above — basic list of what's found in each location and cost. No description, no fancy formatting. Just a basic list of what's available in each GS with a "See also" pointing to the Crafting page. For most things in the wiki, I see absolutely no reason to duplicate info when a simple link will suffice. Duplicated info = more work to maintain, virtually no benefit to people looking for info. -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 15:22, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

It's going to need a lot of work and I won't be able to spare the time to do this. If anyone has the time feel free to take over. I will list down the steps needed to make the changes:

1. Change all current ingredients that are pointing to General Store to redirect to Crafting, for example Bead of Slumber.
2. Remove the links in the Crafting article to avoid the now circular redirects.
3. Create the ingredient links (link names and not directly to crafting) in the General Store article, which will redirect to Crafting
4. Check that all entries currently in the General Store article have been included in the Crafting article.
5. Remove the "description" and "used in" columns from General Store.
6. Remove colors from General Store tables except perhaps for the headers.

And that should do it. -- Grexx 17:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

For task 1, the list of articles that redirect to General Store: Splintered Wood, Ionized Salt, Paint-brand Paint, Cheesy Fluffs, Invisi-glu, Burroughs Salmon, Nori, Salt, Curds and Whey, Rice Paper, Droid Parts, Bead of Slumber. I can start on this. -- Camomiletea 17:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I just killed the desc and use columns on the GS page. That's about all the time I have to give right now. -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 18:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

All but #4 appear done. -- Camomiletea 18:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I checked the entries and added some missing "Used in" info. This is now done. -- Camomiletea 18:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Items without pages or direct links

Ok, so I'm coming at this as a player (98% GM atm) who doesn't know all of this stuff already. I was just poking around, thinking to myself, "So I build my Ambsh, catch my Mojo... then what?" So I wound up on the ACRONYM page (lnked from Catacombs, I believe), and saw that I would need Obelisk Parts. Clicked that link, and... FAIL. It just drops you at the top of the Crafting page. Eventually I found what I was looking for -- waaay at the bottom of the page -- but it was really frustrating, as I didn't know what section to even look in. A wiki link should take the user directly to the information they're looking for.

And it's not just the Obelisk Parts that have this problem on this page.

So: I'm personally of the opinion that created crafting items are complex enough to have their own pages, but that's neither here nor there. For the time being, how can we make it so that when a user clicks a link for a crafting item that brings them to this page, it at least brings them to the general area of the item they're looking for, not just the top of the page? --GoBecky 02:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Well that's an issue that needs looking into. The crafting article is presently not well organized due to its wide scope, but putting the ingredients into separate pages doesn't work well as there's very little information on each individual item. A workaround on the issue would be redirecting to the section in question, but we'll need more feedback on how better to organize the article. I'll get to the redirect later when I have the time :) -- Grexx 07:36, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Fixed the link for now....
@Becky: you can easily do this yourself in the future -- just click the link from the table of contents to the section the required item is listed in and then from the address line of your browser copy the whole text string after the last forward slash >/< for use in the wiki link you like to improve. _____m. 08:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

The many uses of Salt

The description of Salt says it's used in a variety of flavours of cheese, yet so far I've only found the one. Does anyone know of other flavours of cheese that are not mentioned in this table? -- austin 14:33, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Table template

The alternating colors for rows in the tables are a nice effect but make it difficult to add new items (lots of new loot to add to the dropped crafting items section) or reorder. For those of you good at creating templates, is it possible to have the colors auto generated so that editors do not have to worry about maintaining a correct sequence? --Hyperchao 07:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Some template function (logic) on this wiki engine is not installed. That's why we can not put some 'logic' to auto generate color. On the other hand, it makes wiki faster (I believe) and lighter for CPU and memory usage.

I agree to remove some fancy layout, such as coloring, make the writing easier and increase accessibility (color blind). just my 2 cents. Pus 12:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

- I wouldn't be too concerned with colour blind readers - I'm colour-blind and find no real difficulties as of yet. austin 13:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I rather like the alternating colors in this table at least because some of the cells are so big, it would be hard to see where they end without the zebra effect... I wish it were possible to automate it, though. -- Camomiletea 19:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Adjustments of redirect linking

Planning on adjusting the way the articles link to make it easier to find the correct entry. Using a similar "div id" style as in the Mice article, all crafting items will now be enclosed in a <div id="Example">Example</div> tag. So for example, when searching for Bolt of Cloth, the page will redirect to "Crafting#Bolt of Cloth" instead of "Crafting#Dropped crafting items". This should aid the navigation into and out of the page. This will probably be extended to any other pages that need it, as they are identified. -- Grexx 10:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Something that I missed out, small articles containing little info other than the item description will also be converted to redirects that will point back to the Crafting article. -- Grexx 11:00, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Completed first round of edits to redirects. The remaining ones require more careful cleanup and consolidation as they contain some minor info. Not sure when I will get the spare time again though, so if anyone else can pick it up that'll be great. -- Grexx 17:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup of Crafting article

The page is getting too large and unwieldy. Some parts may need to be split off into separate articles. We need some suggestions on how to resolve this. The issue has been put off for a little too long now. This page is well visited and needs a better way of organization so that the information can be easily found. Haven't put too much thought into this as yet, so tossing a few ideas that come to mind at the moment. We can split the crafting article into crafting items and crafted items. Also thinking of merging the General store items, dropped crafting items, and created crafting items into one table, similar to the Mice page, with a generic "Source" column to consolidate the various sources. Alternatively, they can be organized along the lines of categories, such as Cheese, Traps, Blueprints etc. Comments? -- Grexx 17:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Splitting article into Crated items and crafting items seems like a good idea. I suppose the information on crafting slots will remain here and be separate from those other two. It will be a short article, but it does make sense that the mechanics of crafting is covered separately from all the lists of ingredients and the lists of items that may be crafted.

Consolidating into one table - I like that too, because there are items that go into several places (Splintered Wood is both in General Store and dropped).

Cheese, Traps, Blueprints categories won't work. Case in point: Splintered Wood (again) used in cheese (Combat), trap components (Ambush, Obelisk of Incineration, Dehydration Base), and map (Ship). -- Camomiletea 17:42, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

My suggestion on how to reogranize this is to break this into five pages. The first page is a general page on crafting - it contains the current section on available slots and provides a link to the existing Crafterd Cheese page and a list of the traps that may be crafted. The Crafted Cheese page and the individual trap pages have the crafting formulas as they do today. The crafting items are divided between three pages and can be navigated to from links in the formulas. The three pages would be Crafting Items Purchased, Crafting Items Dropped as Loot, and Crafting Items that are Crafted. For Crafting Items Purchaed you want to know where can I buy this item, for Crafting Items Dropped as Loot you want to know which locations provide this loot, and for Crafting Items that are Crafted you want the formula. For items like Splintered Wood that can be dropped as loot or purchased - they can have their own page. -- Ralphminer 17:50, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd prefer that there is a complete list of all ingredients on one page somewhere. As long as there's this kind of Master list, you can break off the pages with descriptions and stuff in more pieces (e.g. crafting items purchased, crafting items dropped), but a master list is a good thing too. -- Camomiletea 18:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay - I see the value of having a master list - I suggest it have four columns - the item, the description, what it used in, and a location. The location would be the place where it can be bought, or where it can be found as loot. For crafted items, it would be the location of the item it is crafted from. -- Ralphminer 03:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Comments welcomed on Crafting Items -- Ralphminer 00:21, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Rank affects crafting success?

Where in the world did we get this from? To my knowledge that's never been stated, and there's no evidence of the fail rate going down based upon watching GMs try to craft the Ambush. --Kirbix 14:35, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

It is merely because as you progress through ranks, you get more safe slots. If you don't have to use a red slot, your success rate goes up to 100%. It's probably poorly worded; I don't think it tries to say what you think it does. -- Camomiletea 14:47, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I reworded that section a bit. Hopefully it is clearer now. Feel free to tweak. -- Camomiletea 15:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC)