Forum:Monster level module

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Monster level module
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 11 July 2015 by Liquidhelium.

I'm not exactly an expert on LUA, so I don't know whether this is technically possible. Ah well, here goes.

The Bestiary is severely outdated, and recently there has been another one of those edits. Because of that, I am suggesting two modules:

  • One module with corresponding template ({{monsterlevel}}, to suggest a name) which simply saves the levels of monsters. Should any monster's level change, it is easier to change it in there once rather than all over the wiki multiple times.
  • One module which makes bestiary pages automatically, based on level.

Please post your ideas below, or if anything is technically impossible or improbable, let me know. User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 16:19, May 26, 2015 (UTC)


Comment - I was hoping we'd be able to get SMW for this, but it's not looking very hopeful anymore. Another possibility was DataTable2 (which came with lua methods too), but wikia have elected to develop their own extension, the start of which is the new infobox syntax (which doesn't come close to the functionality present in either of the other extensions). cqm 07:39, 27 May 2015 (UTC) (UTC)

Back to your idea however, are you suggesting we have a single module with every monster's stats, or something more akin to charm or exchange where each monster has a separate module/template? cqm 07:40, 27 May 2015 (UTC) (UTC)
I was initially thinking the former with just levels, but after consideration the latter sounds better as to centralize all monster data under a single module rather than just levels.
I have set up a draft of these ideas. Feel free to comment on them. User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 12:06, May 27, 2015 (UTC)
The issues with the bestiary are very similar to what I've been grappling with in exchange modules for some time. For the record, I'm still not 100% happy with the implementation and there's a number of issues I've still yet to solve. I suspect a pure lua implementation is never going to be good enough and will ultimately require something more substantial for storing the data. cqm 18:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC) (UTC)
Levels are really as far as it should go imo. Particularly because most of what will need it only requires level. Besides, if we're going to have that many modules for this (and we shouldn't), we'd be better off just using dpl to include it. Module:Bestiary has a mockup for modulized bestiary pages, but that's a long way off. MolMan 19:59, May 27, 2015 (UTC)
I've been talking with some of the wikia staff and they are willing to consider giving us SMW. Right now I'm exploring how to handle monsters/items merged into a single page, i.e. switch'fobox, but I'm also trying to think of applications beyond the bestiary and exchange data. It'll be a few weeks away yet however, as they're going to wait until the SMW upgrade to 1.8 is completely done. cqm 21:51, 28 May 2015 (UTC) (UTC)
I love Super Mario World! Achievements Coelacanth0794 Talk Contribs 23:44, May 28, 2015 (UTC)
Lunar Magic is great. Right, coel friend? :) MolMan 23:52, May 28, 2015 (UTC)
It was nice, yeah Achievements Coelacanth0794 Talk Contribs 00:42, May 29, 2015 (UTC)

Comment - For the bestiary, I had a thought a while ago that changing Infobox Monster to add monsters to level-separated and free/members categories, then using DPL on the categories, would be a reasonably efficient way to make bestiary maintenance relatively hassle-free. It wouldn't work for drop tables, though. When I last looked at the in-progress module for the bestiary, it required updating a common page, which had last been done with an Excel export, which is a pretty inelegant way to maintain that kind of info. --Saftzie (talk) 01:06, May 30, 2015 (UTC)

DPL would run into the same problems that tons of individual modules would run into, which is load time. DPL itself isn't terribly efficient either, but works perfectly fine if you're willing to wait. As for the bestiary module, that's really just a mockup. In the end, something for just levels would be preferable. And in my mind, I'd have it set up so that infoboxes checked each value and if there was a mismatch, then the page would be put into a maintenance category signifying that either the page or the module needs to be change. Not the most elegant, but it's the best we can do (for now). I am looking forward to playing around with SMW though. Also, the spreadsheet was irrelevant to the actual bestiary in that I just wanted a large set of existing data to start with. Mostly for testing Lua's strengths and performance. MolMan 01:12, May 30, 2015 (UTC)
I think most of the slowness of DPL has to do with "uses," "include," and "includematch" because DPL parses the pages for templates and string contents. "Category" should be fast, because it affects the SQL directly. (Honestly, I would think "uses" would be fast, because "What links here" references are stored in the db, but apparently DPL parses pages instead. Oh, well.) But yeah, I get it that it's an area where ideas are still just getting kicked around. --Saftzie (talk) 01:47, May 30, 2015 (UTC)

Comment - Any news on this? User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 15:25, June 27, 2015 (UTC)

Just sent an email asking about the upgrade progress, should get a reply in a few days. cqm 07:31, 29 Jun 2015 (UTC) (UTC)
Apparently the upgrade is still in progress, but the guy who would be able to tell me more is apparently on holiday until next week. I don't mind if we close this and have another look at it a little while down the line, the bestiary has long been a problem and it's not something we're going to forget about anytime soon. Either way, I'm still going to be pushing for a decent solution to this and other related problems. cqm 08:03, 1 Jul 2015 (UTC) (UTC)

Closed - When the technical details get hammered out, a new thread should be created that clearly states the proposal and implementation. --LiquidTalk 22:40, July 11, 2015 (UTC)