Talk:Orb of Alchemy

Crafting tables
Is it really desirable to add all the master crafting mods related to Alchemy Orbs on the page? It somewhat clutters the page and isn't very helpful in practical terms. I mean, if someone is on the look for crafting options, is he really going to search by currency needed? It makes more sense for him to go to the pages of the master(s) he has and and filter the crafting table there. --Climmels aka SirProblematique (talk) 07:04, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree. It would be sensible to indicate that alchemy orbs are used for various master crafting, but there is little reason to list out the entire table. Just link to the appropriate page. —Vini (t|c) 08:20, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Is there a way to make an expandable table? I started doing this because somebody had remarked that they wanted to see all the ways you could use a Chaos Orb. Actually, on a related note, how flexible are the table templates? I think some of them may need to be modified in order to accommodate so many entries. TheMipchunk (talk) 10:35, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


 * There is a way to create an expandable table; it exists as part of normal wikicode. As for your open-ended question about the flexibility of "table templates" I don't even know where to begin answering that. First of all, which templates are you even referring to? —Vini (t|c) 13:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Okay, sorry, I was sort of tired when I wrote that. Here is the ideal: the table of values can be generated automatically rather than manually. So, let's say that GGG changes one of the crafting recipes. Say a change from 3 to 4 Chaos. We could then update that number in a single location, and that change would be reflected across any and all articles that reference that crafting recipe. This would allow for the following feature: on any article for an item or mechanic, a little button could be clicked to expand a table of all recipes that relate to that item or mechanic.


 * There are many instances in which this sort of central referencing would be useful. For example, I've noticed that we've been trying to get a little section in the article for each skill gem that indicates where you can get that gem as a quest reward. But there is also already a central article where all quest rewards are listed. The ideal would be that we could just update that central table of quest rewards, and it would automatically update the articles of all skill gems to reflect that change. If this type of referencing is possible, I would be willing to work on it. It would have a large initial overhead but extremely low overhead in the future. It would limit the amount of editing needed to make changes to data about the game, and prevent the issue of conflicting information because one article is updated while another is not. TheMipchunk (talk) 20:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


 * In this case, I think you're over-complicating things. There's no need to list out every master crafting upgrade that uses alchemy orbs on this page as well as the relevant master pages. It should be more than sufficient to simply link to the appropriate page. It's not as if most people think, "I have some alchemy orbs, what master crafting upgrades can I do?" The usage scenario is in fact completely reversed: People determine what upgrade they want, then they look see what it costs. —Vini (t|c) 22:45, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't think it's necessary to list master crafting options on more than one place (the individual master pages) so when GGG changes them we only have to adjust them there. I agree with Vini, it seems illogical (and not worth the effort) to start with the cost of crafting instead of the result.


 * As for the the quest rewards, I believe OmegaK2 is working on something. --Climmels aka SirProblematique (talk) 09:23, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Correct, it's very WIP at the moment though. Besides, when it's nearning completion and proves feasable enough it may be possible to reuse the functions and methods in the future for other data on the wiki. For the quest reward discussion see Path_of_Exile_Wiki_talk:Community_portal--OmegaK2 (talk) 12:46, 4 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Okay, I will remove the table shortly. However, my proposal still stands: whenever there is a piece of information that is repeated on more than one article, it would nice if both pieces of data referenced the same value, so that there is no need to repeat the edit numerous times upon change. TheMipchunk (talk) 09:42, 4 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Ideally yes, but it's not always easy to do with MediaWiki. The item templating is extremely elaborate, and the quest reward templating is in all likelyhood even more complicated. —Vini (t|c) 16:50, 4 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Alright. I'm not too familiar with what limitations the backend for MediaWiki has. If you can't do the usual database-style scripting then I can see why there might be a problem. But if there's any programming tasks that need to be done, I can take a stab. TheMipchunk (talk) 21:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)