Template talk:INFOBOX Combat

I messed around with the styling of the drops a bit, but didn't find anything I liked. --Starwed 22:45, 17 September 2007 (CDT)

Just adding here (to catch more eyes) that the current display of Defense in this infobox (which shows Base Defense) is confusing with regards to areas one would try to use that number (like Hit Chance and Weapon Damage, which use Actual Defense). I proposed some changes to this template at Discussion#Monster_data_pages to clarify things.--Salien 20:18, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay, 'cause I'm weird I was wondering if this template could add the category "Combat Adventures" to the page as well.. The reason is there's a lot of combat adventures that are not already categorized as combat adventures (See: most Bosses). ==Serin 20:41, 7 August 2011 (CEST)

• The phyla are all subcategories of Combat Adventures right now, so it feels redundant to add it when a phylum is properly accounted for. It will classify !, ?, and missing phlyum entries into Combat Adventures as a default (which will likely change, once we have a better idea of what to do with them). Similarly, Boss is a subcategory of Combat Adventures. I prefer to avoid putting something in two categories, one of which is contained in the other. --Flargen 03:18, 8 August 2011 (CEST)

The reason I asked was if you look at Special:MostLinkedTemplates and Category:Combat Adventures Most linked-to templates shows 993 under infobox combat, and combat adventures shows 960 pages.. After looking through the links I could only count 5-6 that were obviously not combats.. Which means either I'm reading it wrong or there's a pretty big discrepancy.--Serin 03:53, 8 August 2011 (CEST)

Scaling meat

The clan of cave bars has a variable meat drop based on its ML (including how much +ML you're running)... looks like our switch statement here needs another case to cover this. --timrem 07:42, 25 March 2012 (CEST)

• You can just use meat= instead of Mval= in the data page. Code everywhere on the wiki should fall back to the meat parameter if the Mval is missing, and that parameter was originally coded up with the expectation that the value would be a string. --Flargen 07:57, 25 March 2012 (CEST)

Scaling defense

Can someone tell me why this template scales monster defense to 90%? Its screwing up the manuel entries and doesn't make any sense to me. Discordance 19:38, 14 December 2012 (CET)

Reading some of the above I'm getting a better idea, the main problem here is the mismatch with the manuel pages. Can we not just use the defense values from the manuel and compute the other values from there? Discordance 19:40, 14 December 2012 (CET)

This has been discussed at Discussion#Monster_data_and_caching. The 90% scaling assumption is wrong and not universal, someone with admin needs to fix this template. Possibly pending further discussion but my solution seems simplest.

{{#switch:{{{defense|?}}}|?=''unknown''|!=Indeterminate|Scales|scales=Scales with player stats|#default={{#iferror:{{#expr:0.9*{{{defense}}}}}|{{{defense}}}|{{#ifexpr:{{{defense}}}<0|{{{defense}}}|{{ceiling|{{#expr:0.9*{{{defense}}}}}}}}}}}}}

needs to be changed to:

{{#switch:{{{defense|?}}}|?=''unknown''|!=Indeterminate|Scales|scales=Scales with player stats|#default={{{defense}}}}}

Discordance 18:49, 17 January 2013 (CET)

Monster Manuel

Could we add the Manuel-related drops to this, similar to the pickpocket/bounty items? —Yendor 04:21, 31 January 2013 (CET)

Suggest changing a link

Rather than linking "Drops" to the disambiguation page Item Drops, shouldn't this link to Items from Monsters? --timrem (talk) 17:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

"Physical" (physical/elemental resistance)

The Physical field seems weird to me. It doesn't allow any elegant way to document the monster's elemental resistance. Some monsters just have elemental resistance under Notes, while others have something like "Physical: 50% physical + 25% elemental" in the infobox. I suggest changing the label to Resistance. --Greycat (talk) 16:20, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

• This has been talked about 'recently'(within a few months). Something about changing the field to 'resistance', don't remember what happened to it. — Cool12309 (talk) 17:03, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Monster body parts, and ID

Now, from the last Twitch event, it is clear that monsters have body parts. There are a few ways to find these parts, like the Reanimated Reanimator testing for 4 parts and an 'other' category, and the small golem, which can name any body part. Not entirely sure how it could be tested for multiple parts; maybe uneven distribution with the golem? Anyway. That is something that I think the wiki should have, as it's useful for reanimator strategy and identifies the monsters those various combat skills Mutant Couture grants works on. Also: Monsters by number. Items have item ID. Effects have effect ID. --KingBobson (talk) 09:16, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

• Monster ID seems easy enough, we can add a "monsterid=" at the very top. As for the parts, I'm a bit confused on how we would list them. Just a comma separated list ("head, arm, leg")? And should we link the "Monster Parts" to anything? Maybe we could make a page which lists all of what you said above. I really want these too. — Cool12309 (talk) 14:21, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
• Body parts would be great, except that I'm concerned that TPTB haven't been accurately determining body parts. I started with the Copperhead Club and discovered that apparently the waiters, fan dancers, and penguins have no heads, legs or arms (only the penguin not having arms makes sense). Now it could very well be that KoL offers headless, legless, armless fan dancers...-Foggy (talk) 18:00, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
• Huh, good news: there aren't any duplicates[1]. But just adding them so it looks the same as it does there (a comma separated list) would be best, probably. --KingBobson (talk) 20:29, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
• I went ahead and added the "monsterid" and "parts" fields to the INFOBOX template (which I gave an uninformative summary, it should have said that we needed to move the monsters by number page to have a capital N, but whatever). Monster ID links to Monsters by number and Monster Parts should link to somewhere. Again, probably its own page. Let's get some opinions on this before we move further. — Cool12309 (talk) 21:50, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
• Some quick noodling with a small golem/Mutant Couture/Reanimator: You can use the Combat Bar and the Mutant Couture to quickly see whether the monster has a head (skull for the reanimator), arms, or legs. Set Reanimator to collect wings only, and he will apparently collect them if the monster has them, and do nothing if not. The small golem uses the same body parts, except it also will list torso. Testing the junkyard sprites, the bender and melter have all five possible body parts, the sharpener has four (it has no legs, supposedly). The small golem, against the waiters mentioned above, replaces body part with "body part" in the message, indicating they are messed up somehow. (The reanimator can still collect weird parts from there) (I'm also guessing this whole discussion would fit better on a new page.)-Foggy (talk) 22:04, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
• Small golem works with 100% accuracy, I think. I've used it when towerkilling, and fancy bath slug has an 'eyestalk' part, and Fickle Finger of F8 has a 'cuticle' part, suggesting it picks a random part and names it. So yeah, I've submitted a bug report for the Copperhead Club. --KingBobson (talk) 22:30, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
• I had done a bug report as well and heard back from HotStuff that the Copperhead folks now have bodyparts. I've also created a page Monster Parts to summarize it.-Foggy (talk) 21:36, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

I noticed that Fig just allowed "none" to be used in place of "!" and an empty list for the "parts" tag. I think we should stick to one to be consistent. Maybe we can split "none" to be none, "!" to be indeterminate (such as uncopyable monsters that haven't appeared since 2005), and an empty list would go into the missing parts category. Thoughts? — Cool12309 (talk) 15:54, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

• I think we agree; "none" is a new possibility that means the monster explicitly has no body parts (ie small golem uses "body part", and I suppose this also indicates a game bug/error, given the comments above). Oh, and "?" is the same as an empty list (unknown/to-be-spaded). --Fig bucket (talk) 20:15, 28 June 2014 (UTC)