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)

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)

Magic Essence

The information on regaining Magic Essence from Maki needs to be added. Apparently (if I'm reading the update correctly), you only regain one magic essence out of the three used in Maki. Camomiletea 04:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Just made (and smashed) some Maki to verify. You get 1 ME for every Maki you smash. You put 3 ME in to make the Maki (yielding 3 Maki) and if you smash those 3 Maki you get 3 ME back (but of course lose the curds & whey + the nori you used to make it). Someone now owes me some curds and nori. LOL! -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 04:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Ooh, okay. Thanks for verifying, and I was confused. Camomiletea 04:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Added some clarifying text for the smashable stuff. :-) -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 05:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

crafting 6 not 3

should we write anywhere on the charts that magic essence is used to craft 6 ancient not 3 etc. Doreito 02:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary. People will see it when they look at the formula(s). Table's crowded enough as it is. -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 02:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC)