Talk:Effectiveness

Note

Grexx, I saw your edit summary. If the mice you're thinking of were "old" tactical (dwarf, ninja or pirate), they don't resist physical damage (in the same way the vampire, mummy and friends don't resist arcane). I'm sure you know this, but seemed worth double checking. It does make sense that less effective wouldn't show up on a hit though. We all know that very effective doesn't show on misses. -- Pakaran 17:04, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Nope it was a thread I saw here and went to look at the player's profile. He caught a Student with Rocketine + Explosive while farming for stale cheese. And yup I know about the old and new tactical mice, I was playing the game before they were even tactical :P As for the messages info, it's there mostly to preempt some of the odd questions and things that people somehow end up doing, like going to the Moz with Brie, or entering the Lab with a Trebuchet, or asking what power type is the Monster :D

Oh and you'll be surprised, but old Tactical mice do resist physical damage in the Dojo. It was mentioned by the developers themselves in the mice talk page if I recall correctly. But to reduce confusion, I intentionally left that out since it's unlikely anyone would want to use a physical trap in Furoma anyways. -- Grexx 17:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding old Tactical resisting physical damage in Furoma - I've also seen a dev commenting on it, and I think it's important information to include in the Wiki. Camomiletea 18:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Well I've added a short 1 liner about it. It's bound to send some players off trying to see if they can prove the chart information wrong :p -- Grexx 19:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I know a lot of people who tried using their DDB in Furoma upon first getting there to avoid having to buy the (then-) new ZLM trap, with success on the physical mice there.

Also, I noticed the point about "less effective" *not* showing up on a catch -- I've had the message show up several times back when I was experimenting with different setups in places. If the way it's stated here is correct (i.e. message shows on a miss but not on a catch), would it be useful to have a notation so that hunters who've been around a while don't get confused between memory and Wiki information? Thanks! -- JasonTheHunter

Colors

Hey, I looking at the chart, and I personally feel like it would be more useful to have the "Less Effective" / "Very Effective" / "Normal" messages colored than the mouse type. This would make it easier to differentiate, and the mouse type isn't as important when figuring out how to catch it when the other information is there. Chessmonkey 23:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree. I've made a modified version, and would greatly appreciate comments. It can be found here. Feel free to edit it (with edit summaries please!) if you can see anything that could be improved. I think it's overall much improved from the current version, and would like to roll it into the official page. DaRkAgE7_[Talk] 07:37, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

When I created the chart I actually had a template with the addition of colors for the different effectiveness types, but decided it was a little too colorful. There's 2 ways to look at the chart, the current format is centered around the respective mice with 1 color, while adding shading to the effectiveness shifts the focus to trap effectiveness and merges both views into one.

The main reason why I avoided more colors, is that with the sorting ability, you can easily sort by mouse type and trap type to arrive at the desired information, so I was trying to avoid adding complexity to the chart.

That said, it doesn't really matter either way since the information essentially remains the same. If people find it easier to read with more colors, go ahead. But do watch out for mixing colors. When I did the chart I ran it through a color check site to make sure that it is colorblind friendly. Don't have the link at the moment but it would be a good idea to do a check. -- Grexx 09:22, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I like the table with the colors for effectiveness better than the one with mouse power types. Please do check your colors as Grexx commented. -- Camomiletea 14:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I put it through a color blindness checker and didn't see any problems due to the various types of colorblindness, so it does not appear that is something that needs to be adjusted. DaRkAgE7_[Talk] 17:40, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Just to double check if you used Vischeck's colorblind checker, it doesn't seem to read properly certain types of color tags. You can have a look at User:Grexx/Sandbox, under the Color Test section and run it through http://www.vischeck.com/vischeck/vischeckURL.php. I've got stored results here, not sure how long it will be up though. You might want to adjust the Yellow Red Orange Green colors to be more distinct.

What actually led me to do color testing was when I first canvassed for suggestions on the mixed colors, someone actually complained that the colors were the same. Not sure exactly how accurate the site is though, since I'm not colorblind myself. -- Grexx 19:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I actually used the checker at http://colorfilter.wickline.org/ , and it seems to have rendered the colorblind versions correctly... I can readily tell they are not the colors I can usually see. Anyway, all the colors seem quite distinct, and I think I'll be rolling out the changed version tomorrow, unless any objections come up. Also, should we be adding the calm clearing mice? DaRkAgE7_[Talk] 05:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm colour blind (partially, anyway) and the page seems fine to me. All colours easily differentiable to me. Also, I believe all hte CC mice have been added and the list is now effectively (pun? wow) complete. --Shinnok 06:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Wight + Lich

Wight and Lich mice seem to be missing from the chart. Is this because it hasn't been confirmed, or? Personally, I'd think Arcane traps is very effective and everything else is less effective, but I'm hesitant to add it just based on an assumption.

No worry. Someone just forgot to add it to the chart. You can add it if you want. They're the same as all other Forgotten mice. --Mikeyco 13:38, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Tactical Mice in Great Gnarled Tree

Apparently, (based on my friend's words) physical traps are of normal effectiveness against Tactical mice in GGT - no "less effective" message on a miss. I'm using Ambush, so can't personally verify... -- Camomiletea 15:22, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Not expecting it to be different from the Calm Clearing really. I'm quite certain the main reason they placed Tactical mice there is to block players from fully utilizing the high powered ACRONYM in the beginner zones. Anyways please go ahead and update any unknowns if confirmed :)

Someone needs to add in the new mice too, from a quick glance it looks like a few are missing. It's ok to just leave it all as unknown, much like the Acolyte when it first came out. Just let the community fill it in as it goes along. -- Grexx 05:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Missing Entries

I've noticed that there are some missing entries, is this because nobody tested this yet? I find it hard to believe... but anyway, I'm using a shadow trap (Bottomless Grave) in the Lagoon and I'm getting "very effective" against Goblin and no effect against Cyclops. Should this be added? Bus 16:36, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant Troll, not Cyclops. Anyway, I made the changes now. Bus 13:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Surely there's someone here who has used a Hydro trap against physical or tactical mice? I think we should try to fill them in! Spinnercat 19:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I found that the Hydro trap was less effective when catching a Gargoyle in the FG, Should we assume that the hydro trap is the same for all forgotten mice? Precisa 05:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)