Forum:Real skill requirements

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Real skill requirements
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 11 June 2011 by Haloolah123.

An IP user edited the listed task-related skill requirements for Blood Runs Deep and removed the Farming requirement listing and changed the Agility requirement from 60 to 35. I thought it was vandalism, but on closer examination, it seems that those requirements are not actually needed for the tasks; they're only needed to fully complete quests that only need partial completion.

That's just one of many examples where mistaking partial and full quest completion requirements has wrongly increased stated skill requirements. This is just plain inaccurate and needs to be fixed. I'm not sure exactly how it should be fixed (probably some complicated templates), but accurate skill requirements would be tremendously useful for people who don't want to waste countless extra hours leveling beyond the real requirement. --MarkGyver (talk) 18:31, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

Lists of partial completion requirements[edit source]

Things with partial completion required
Things that might make use of partial completions, directly or indirectly
  • Quests
    • Blood Runs Deep: partial Fremennik task set completion, which requires partial Barbarian Training completion and partial Fairy Tale II completion
    • Everything listed here needs the Ring of Charos which requires only partial completion of Garden of Tranquillity.
  • Tasks
    • Fairy Mountaineering (Fremennik medium task): partial Fairy Tale II completion
  • Transportation methods
    • Fairy rings: partial Fairy Talk II completion
  • Equipment

If anyone thinks of anything missing from these lists, please add it.

Discussion[edit source]

Please discuss any ideas on how to fix the problem. --MarkGyver (talk) 18:31, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

Comment/Question - I'm a bit confused. If you look at the Fremennik Tasks article, 35 Agility is clearly the highest Agility level needed for the easy, medium, and hard tasks, so weren't the requirements previously listed just the result of someone mistaking quest requirements for task requirements? In other words, if 60 Agility is required for a prerequisite quest of a quest required to do Blood Runs Deep, then shouldn't that be implied in the Quest requirements rather than the Task requirements (again, 35 Agility is clearly listed as the highest Agility level required for the hard tasks on the Fremennik Tasks article) for Blood Runs Deep? Or are you referring to the quests that are required to do the tasks?  Tien  19:27, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

I think what he means is that some stats listed are for completing entire quests when it is unneccessary. Such as, for example, listing 57 Herblore (requirement for Fairy Tale part II) for Varrock Tasks when the task that requires the quest does not reach the part involving the herblore, so therefore 57 Herblore, whilst a requirement for the quest, is NOT a requirement for the tasks, but is listed as such. What I've done Ciphrius Kane Talk 21:50, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I'm talking about the tasks listing excessive requirements when only partial quest completion is needed. However, the ideal solution would also keep extra requirements from appearing in other places, like quests. I think that a system of templates to handle requirement lists is the right solution, but I don't know enough about templates to attempt something that ambitious. --MarkGyver (talk) 22:35, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

Support - I believe this will be very useful, and I speak from experience. When doing some of the tasks I have leveled up farther then nessasary, or done more of a quest then I needed to, wasting hours when I could have finished that task relativly quickly. Spamnub 16:07, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. Do you have any ideas on how to make it clearer what the real requirements are? For example, how should it look in an article when only partial completion is needed for a quest? --MarkGyver (talk) 22:35, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

Support - More useful and less deceptive. Might require a bit of work sorting out what the real skill reqs are though What I've done Ciphrius Kane Talk 22:12, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I think that a list with quests that have partial completions should be made. I can't really think of that many off the top of my head, so I would think that we just make a special note on those quest pages that have it. If there's a lot of cases, then some changes to the skill requirement template could possibly be made. Farming cape (t).png Lil cloud 9 Talk 03:35, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

List of affected quests - I added a list of quests in a new section between the initial problem description and this discussion. If anyone can think of anything else, including non-quests, please add it. As for special notes vs template changes, I'm beginning to think that simply rephrasing requirements might be better (e.g. saying "unlock fairy ring access" instead of "complete Fairy Tale II"). --MarkGyver (talk) 18:56, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Support - I'd always support more accurate requirements, at the same time I'm admitting that they could be hard to find. HaloTalk 18:25, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Also, I don't see why we need a discussion on this. I believe it falls under common sense. bad_fetustalk 19:24, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

"Should this be fixed?" falls under common sense. "How do we fix this?" goes beyond common sense. Requirements exist for many categories of content and determining full requirements gets complicated pretty quickly. This discussion is for determining the best way to sort through the mess of requirements for each piece of content. --MarkGyver (talk) 20:01, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

? - Erm, if you could explain the problem in a bit more clarity, I'd appreciate it. Oh, and in your above statement

(e.g. saying "unlock fairy ring access" instead of "complete Fairy Tale II")

, I think that "complete Fairy Tale II" might be the better option, but maybe adding that you only need to partially complete it could be a good idea. So, maybe "Completion of Fairy Tale II up to gaining access to Fairy Ring" would be better than both, if it is a concern to you. Adam SavageTalk 20:10, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that excessive requirements are listed in various places. As for your particular example, I think "unlock fairy ring network" would be preferable to both; it's less verbose without being misleading. --MarkGyver (talk) 21:41, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

I fail to see how fixing it goes beyond common sense. There is only one way of showing the correct requirements. bad_fetustalk 11:44, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

There are at least two ways to fix this that have been mentioned in this discussion. The first one is to just manually change things. The second idea is to do it with templates. As for the templates, I propose the following system:
  • Make a generalized version of the Questreq template called "Req".
  • Make Template:Req/Something subpages for everything with requirements. For example, Blood Runs Deep would have {{Req/Blood Runs Deep}} instead of the {{Questreq|Blood Runs Deep}} and manually copy/pasted list of task set skill requirements that it has now.
  • Each Req/Whatever transcludes the templates for its requirements. For example {{Req/Blood Runs Deep}} transcludes {{Req/Fremennik Sea Boots 3}}, which transcludes {{Req/Fairy Ring Access}}, which transcludes {{Req/Start Fairy Tale II}}.
    • Each requirement would be on only one page, so most errors would only need to be fixed in one place.
  • The "Req" templates would make use of Skillreq as needed and Questreq could be rewritten to autotransclude the referenced quest and add whatever formatting.
If no one objects, I volunteer to make enough Req pages for {{Req/Blood Runs Deep}} to give correct results as a demonstration, but a bot and/or more people would be needed to make the other Req pages. --MarkGyver (talk) 04:48, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
Why exactly would we want to do that? You said only one page would have to be edited to fix something, but wouldn't it require one page to fix multiple things? Also, this is a lot of unnecessary work, because we could also just create another similar template for skill reqs to solve that problem. We don't have to merge skill and quest reqs. And if we are going to have {{Req/Fremennik Sea Boots 3}}, how big do you expect this web of subpages to be? Even though loading time wouldn't be such a big problem, I think it is a lot of uneccesary work to merge skillreq and questreq, and then split them to subpages. Having one template for questreqs and one template for skillreqs would be the best, and the easiest to fix things on. Oh, and programming a bot to do this would probably cost more time than just doing it manually. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 23:06, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
Addressing your issues systematically:
  • Requiring one page to fix multiple things: If a requirements error is appearing in multiple template-using places, then only the one template would need to be fixed as opposed to all places with the error visible, which is a good thing. If you meant something else by "one page to fix multiple things", then please elaborate.
  • A lot of unnecessary work: It will be more work right now, but it will be much easier to maintain in the future.
  • Just create another similar template for skill reqs to solve that problem: The whole point of this proposed template system is to generalize the requirement templates so they can be used for everything that has requirements. This system would have one template per requirement to maximize granularity. They should probably all just be subpages of {{req}}, but other organizational systems should give the same results.
  • Don't have to merge skill and quest reqs: We do if we want a generalized requirements template system. Also, the existing {{skillreq}} and {{questreq}} templates would still be there. Skillreq would be unchanged while Questreq would be rewritten to call the appropriate {{req/Quest Name}} template and add the hiding code.
  • How big do you expect this web of subpages to be?: It would be bigger than the existing system, but the increased versatility would be worth it. Also, if we restricted it to only replacing Template:Questreq, all the pages combined would be smaller because there would be no redundancy. For an example of redundancy, check what it has for While Guthix Sleeps and then see how many times the same sub-sub requirement is listed as a requirement for a quest that WGS requires. At minimum, each of WGS's sub-sub requirements is listed twice; this template system would list each requirement relationship exactly once.
  • A lot of uneccesary work to merge skillreq and questreq, and then splitting them to subpages:Refactoring generally does take a lot of work, work that would not be necessary if the coders of the original system had access to the hindsight that the current group does. However, once refactored, it will be much easier to handle. If you can think of another system to generalize the requirement template system to cover all requirements without having redundant information, I would be glad to read it. I don't really care so much about the granularity and one-template-per-piece-of-content per se, but I cannot think of another way to have full generality without redundancy than to give each requirement its own template page.
  • Better and easier to fix things with one template for questreqs and one for skillreqs: Even if those are different purposes, the functionality is essentially the same, so they should have the same template system. What you're suggesting is like saying it's better to have two different calculator programs for adding kilometers and adding miles when the actual functionality (adding two numbers/recursively showing all requirements) is the same.
  • Programming a bot to do this would probably cost more time than just doing it manually: Probably, but we won't know until after trying. When/if I make the parts of the system needed for {{req/Blood Runs Deep}} to show proper requirements, I'll try to remember and tell how much time/effort it took. Also, once it's there, if anyone experienced with bots is interested they could provide an estimate of how hard it would be. Either way, I'm not counting on having/not having buts and the prototype must be built first.
In addition to addressing those points, I would like to elaborate a bit on the current requirements template system and how it relates to the proposed system.
  • The current Questreq template is a mess of duplicate information, but at least it correctly gives the quest requirements requested when you put something like {{Questreq|Blood Runs Deep}} in a page. With the new system, {{Questreq|Quest Name}} would call {{Req/Quest Name}} and wrap the current auto-hide formatting around the results.
  • Template:Skillreq just formats the passed skill requirements with the icon and level, so to list the skill requirements for a piece of content, you have to find them somewhere and then manually enter {{Skillreq|Magic|75}}, {{Skillreq|Ranged|83}}, {{Skillreq|Agility|97}}, etc, for each requirement. There is currently nothing equivalent to Questreq for skill requirements, so you cannot do something like {{Skillreq|Blood Runs Deep}} to get a quest's skill requirements. Within {{Req/Whatever}} subpages, skill requirements would be listed using the current, unchanged Skillreq template.
  • As far as I can tell, there is no simple way to get all the requirements for any piece of content. For quests, Questreq helps a lot, but you cannot do anything like {{req/Completionist Cape}} and get a list of all requirements for a piece of content. That is what the generalized req template system is for.
I hope that explains the system better and addresses your concerns. Also, after some consideration, I think it wouldn't take too long for me to make enough of the system to cover everything that Questreq does, so I'll probably do that after making enough for Blood Runs Deep if I can get some consensus. --MarkGyver (talk) 21:11, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - There is consensus for these real skill requirements, I will leave it up to MarkGyver as how best to implement them. HaloTalk 23:27, June 11, 2011 (UTC)