User talk:A2plis

From Fallen London Wiki

Welcome[edit]

Hi, welcome to the Fallen London Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Blast the Ravenous Lifeberg with all you've got (The Sea of Voices) page.

To find out more about how to contribute to the wiki, please visit Editing Guidelines. You can ask questions and discuss the wiki on the Forum or on the wiki Discord. Check out the Quicklist page for a quick reference to rewards and icons.

Happy Editing!

P.S. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything else! -- Asarta (talk) 11:19, 4 May 2022

The edit you made to https://fallenlondon.wiki/wiki/Offer_a_Hooded_Lady_your_Strange_Catch on 18/08/2022 was incorrect. Please ensure you are reading brackets correctly if you edit/add formulae. Alvis1218 (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Wilson1218
Hi! I do see that now, I have also made a change in the same range in https://fallenlondon.wiki/wiki/Fruits_of_the_Zee_Festival_(Guide)#The_Wreckers%27_Cove, however, there, brackets are done correctly now, so my formula is different, but correct. If you think it's still the wrong way to write it, you can revert my edits there as well.

Do you know if there's a specific reason for scaling the whole range, instead of just scaling specific endpoints of the range? E.g. 2 x [a to b] instead of [2 x a] to [2 x b]. I feel it hurts readability, because many people misinterpreted this specific range, but perhaps there is a reason in game mechanics, or for readability in other cases?

Of course I will be more careful while editing in the future, sorry for this, and I appreciate you notifying me. a2plis (talk) 12:36, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure why it was done that way in the first place, but my guess is because it could hurt readability in another way - multiplying the first term specifically by 2 may result in confusion as to whether the '+1' is multiplied as well. It could also be to make it clearer that only even results are possible. The different types of brackets, to me specifically, generally make it obvious, though of course not to everyone. Perhaps if the formula was formatted (font/text-wise) differently, on a different line, it might be clearer? But then that interferes with the precedent set. In short, I can't think of a perfect solution. Also, sorry if I sounded rude/short, reading back my comment it sounds like it could be taken that way - not my intention at all! Alvis1218 (talk) 22:31, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Oh yeah, now I see that it's definitely the only way to emphasise that only even results are possible. You're totally right, I wanted to change the guide page back, but I see you've already done that, thank you. I'm thinking of phasing it " Picking Through the Wreckers' Cove is set to ( Strange Catch + 1) to (2 × Strange Catch) and multiplied by 2", which is different only in writing "and multiplied by 2" instead of "2 x", or perhaps, most clearly "even numbers from (2 x Strange Catch + 2) to (4 × Strange Catch)". But then it conflicts with precedent, idk what's more important, probably consistency is more important than readability, but I don't know. It's definitely a really complicated case, and not only I got confused.
Also, it's no problem about the message, it's me who made the mistake, and it's really good that you were there not only to notice it, but to notify me, that's what a great wiki editor does. But I still really appreciate you clarifying that you didn't mean to be harsh or anything.
Also, before the edit, I really did try to read through the page, and I wanted to find out a reason why the original wording might have been correct, it's not just carelessness, but it seems I still failed lol, didn't manage to see what was going on. I'll try to be much more careful in the future, at least it's a good lesson for me, cause I'm just getting started with editing.
Overall, thanks for both the messages, I really appreciate them. Keep doing the good work!
Cheers! a2plis (talk) 00:29, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
The main issue I can see with that wording is that it could easily be missed by someone skimming the formula, at least on the Guide page, as well as the fact it doesn't clearly show what it's referring to (though I could see how to fix that bit fairly easily). However, on the action's page, I think displaying it as a formula is the best idea for consistency, as well as to show that nothing complex is really happening behind the scenes (it might seem like a two-step process otherwise).
I took a crack at making it readable but also still be purely a formula just now, and I think a large part of the problem is a) the formula spanning two lines and b) the bracket at the end of the formula that closes off the Gain description. I could get the formula into what to me looks like a very readable state, given that we can have the Gain description say something along the lines of "this quality increases according to the formula below" and then have the formula display properly and clearly below on its own line.
What I came up with is something along the lines of:
PTtWC = 2 * [ ( SC + 1) to (2 * SC) ]
Unfortunately, I am not a master wiki editor - I mostly make small corrections, updates, and ease-of-use edits when I come across them, and I'm not sure what modifications to the Gain description would need to be made to say this, nor how I could make the formula stand out properly below it. Alvis1218 (talk) 03:38, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
Oooh, I really like that one, it's much more readable. Although it seems like "x" as multiplication is standard on this wiki (I hate that lol, it's my pet peeve, in my country this only means the dot product of vectors, not multiplication). Writing anything with words also wouldn't sit right with me, it's too far from the established method of doing this. I'll list all the possibilities I can think of, see which one looks best. I've just used forced line breaks, not that elegant, but it's not a standard case. If you could offer an opinion on whether you think any of those is good, I'd be grateful.
^I like the above one most I think
Or I guess
lol
PS. It is a two-step process though, the game first picks the value, stores it somewhere in memory, then multiplies by 2, there's no other way of efficiently doing that when it comes to game code. That's actually the very reason why writing is as formula is tricky, because it is not technically a formula, it's a two-step algorithm, and I feel like understanding it as a formula is what causes misunderstandings. a2plis (talk) 07:55, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
For the algorithm I know that's how it'd work behind the scenes, my point is that it all happens in one step for the player - one click. Unlike, for example, opening A Surprise Package. For your examples, the first two and the fifth and sixth seem to not have forced line breaks, and also I think removing the internal brackets is a bad idea - it could very well be interpreted as 2 * (SC + (1 to (2 * SC))) that way. The third one looks good though, as does the last one especially. If there weren't precedent for otherwise I'd put the last one on the page tbh - maybe worth doing anyway?
Also yeah for the multiplication sign I forgot that it seems consistent on action pages - for guides and some other pages '*' is used often. Alvis1218 (talk) 18:50, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://fallenlondon.wiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A2plis&oldid=1102894"