Forum:Battle Companions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Layout Discussion
I'm trying to design a new "standard" for companion pet pages due to the MoP Battle Pet System and i would like to ask your opinion on a few potential design changes:
- They all have to have: Lore, Type, Location, Abilities, Image and maybe Stats too.
- There would be a new article for each pet and should be split from the items and mob articles that are related to, in my opinion, avoid confusions.
Here's a sample using Bananas pet has a example:User:Ashbear160/Sandbox2.
What do you think.--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:42, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- I myself would prefer the hundreds of battle pets just use their respective source (the item from which they are learned or the NPC from which they are captured). We already have most of the companion articles created and this would only serve to double the work than is necessary. My example is located at User:Coobra/Adder to show how the info can be shared on the same article as the NPC.
- I haven't decided if we should make the ability pages or just have them on the pet articles, so I placed both options on the page.
- Option 1 is if we do make the ability pages.
- Option 2 is a rough idea for just having the info on the pet page itself.
- On a related note, if we do decide to create the ability pages, one example can be found at
[Vicious Fang]. 
(Sssss/Slithered) 04:35, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- There's a few problems with your options.
- The Icons used by battlepets don't appear in the links (unlike most things in this wiki)
- Sharing Articles would eventually cause the articles to have both infoboxes
- You abilities don't show what type of attack they are (Abilities are not strictly limited to their type (ex: http://mop.wowhead.com/npc=62181))
- You didn't consider stats. (ex: http://i.imgur.com/gjMjn.png in the middle left)
- I wouldn't mind making all of the pet articles, if that's the problem.--Ashbear160 (talk) 12:24, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- There's a few problems with your options.
- I numbered the problems you listed so I can address each of them:
- I'm not sure what you mean by this, I see icons on everything
- What do you mean both infoboxes, there's only one
- These are just rough drafts, I'm not going to go all out on creating something that hasn't been decided to keep or not.
- See #3.
- (Sssss/Slithered) 02:07, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
- I numbered the problems you listed so I can address each of them:
- Ok.
- I mean when linking to the pet article(ex:Adder) it would appear as a normal link, while battlepets have icons (as shown in this page [1]), also since a lot of pets are going to be tradeable i think they will also be turned into items. (Sorry if i'm sounding annoying with this pet naming thing, i just want to get this decided in a comprehensive way so i can organize the template and journal links correctly.)
- Yeah... I was thinking that one would probably end up being created...
- I know they are rough drafts, and i think we shouldn't apply these until the release of MoP(or at least until a more stable version), I just want to hammer out some details, so later we don't have problems, that's all.
- --Ashbear160 (talk) 02:31, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
- Ok.
- Well, the Adder like many others aren't items, nor spells, so like every other NPC they won't display an icon when linked. Honestly we don't need to display icons when we link them anyway, and if we do, then they likely already have an icon that can be used by {{RaceIcon}}. The companion template should also be like the mount one and just display normal links to save on load times. We can work on this more, once they work out all the bugs and get it working properly. (Sssss/Slithered) 00:03, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- Well, the Adder like many others aren't items, nor spells, so like every other NPC they won't display an icon when linked. Honestly we don't need to display icons when we link them anyway, and if we do, then they likely already have an icon that can be used by {{RaceIcon}}. The companion template should also be like the mount one and just display normal links to save on load times. We can work on this more, once they work out all the bugs and get it working properly.
- Ok we better wait... But don't forget that pets like Adder will be sellable so they will probably be converted to a item in some way.--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:45, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Created {{Pet Battle}} to be placed on top of the wild pet articles, also created {{Pet Type}} for the battle sections of the companion articles, which displays their passive buff. (Sssss/Slithered) 04:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
- I'm guessing by your example,
[Core Hound Pup] is now correctly formatted. - Maybe {{Pet Type}} should auto-categorize the article? For example
{{Pet Type|Elemental}}puts it in the category Category:Elemental companions. --g0urra[T҂C] 07:45, 14 August 2012 (UTC)- Sounds reasonable to me. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 09:05, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- I noticed that it's already added by {{Companions}}, but it's highly impractical because the category is under the subpage (for example {{Companions/Beast}}) which makes
|doc=not work. I'm working on phasing that out. --g0urra[T҂C] 09:35, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- I noticed that it's already added by {{Companions}}, but it's highly impractical because the category is under the subpage (for example {{Companions/Beast}}) which makes
- Sounds reasonable to me. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 09:05, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Ability Discussion
Since there is going to be hundreds of battle pets, each mostly having unique abilities, with only a few of them shared among each other, the question is... should we create the individual abilities (like [Vicious Fang]) to be linked on the battle pet's page or just use a template similar to {{abilities}} on their pages like we do with the bosses, mobs, vehicles, etc.? I'm personally in favor of doing them similarly to how we do the bosses. Any thoughts? (Sssss/Slithered) 00:09, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- I put my opinion on individual articles for each spell for the following reasons:
- They are usable by the player and not by a mob, so you can't apply the same logic as mobs/boss spell logic.
- Different pets have the same abilities, so you can't apply the same logic since bosses never share spells.
- If there was any change in the ability(much like a change in player spells/abilities) it would make us run trough every single creature article everytime a change happened.
- My opinion--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm in favor of creating articles for each ability. --g0urra[T҂C] 21:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Templates
This is a list of some templates created just for these battle pets, they might need work or deleted depending on if we decide to create the abilities or not.
Template:Infobox companion ability- Template:Elinks-petability
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Coobra (talk · contr).
- I created Template:Pet abilitytip to make a custom tooltip for pet abilities. --g0urra[T҂C] 21:05, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- An example can be seen at
[Lift-Off] (along with a customized defaultlink). --g0urra[T҂C] 21:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- Looks good, we should probably include the level it's obtainable at as well, unless we'd rather just have that in the intro for the ability page, since I agree at this point it would be best to make each one. (Sssss/Slithered) 22:11, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- I had originally added the level, the problem is though that some abilities are learned at different levels depending on which pet it is - for example Lift-Off is learned by Ancona Chicken at level 4, while it is learned by Tickbird Hatchling at level 20. --g0urra[T҂C] 22:17, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- Looks good, we should probably include the level it's obtainable at as well, unless we'd rather just have that in the intro for the ability page, since I agree at this point it would be best to make each one.
- I was going to vote 2b because it looked like it had more info but then i noticed you already made the pop-up ability ballons appear when hovering over links, so my vote goes to 1. Trough i prefered if it was in the form of a list. --Ashbear160 (talk) 00:08, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Like this:
| Level | Ability |
|---|---|
| 1 | Enrage (beast ability) (has new name) |
| 1 | Bite (beast ability) |
| 2 |  [Hiss]
|
| 4 | [Vicious Fang]
|
| 10 | [[]] |
| 15 | [[]] |
| 20 | [[]] |
- Using the option 1 has a example. --Ashbear160 (talk) 00:12, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- A list is fine and such, but sometimes you just want to look at a page and see all the info, rather than hovering over words to see the tooltips. (Sssss/Slithered) 00:35, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- More Information i vote 2b, simplicity and bubble i vote 1(with the changes i suggested) --Ashbear160 (talk) 01:37, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- It looks good, however it's not clear that you'll have to choose either level 1 or 10 ability, level 2 or 15 etc - pets can't have all 6 abilities to choose from every fight. --g0urra[T҂C] 16:21, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- A list is fine and such, but sometimes you just want to look at a page and see all the info, rather than hovering over words to see the tooltips.
Conflicting information
I have conflicting information on the types of two pets, so i need for someone with the beta if they could check them out:
- Fetish Shaman and Sen'jin Fetish.
Thanks --Ashbear160 (talk) 00:08, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- What do you mean? They're different pets. --g0urra[T҂C] 00:49, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Pets Types: i have one list that says one is magic and the other mech, and another that says those two pets are both undead. --Ashbear160 (talk) 01:38, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Me too i guess Spirit magic or dark magic or something count as undead. --Ashbear160 (talk) 12:46, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Journal entries
I finished transcribing all current lore entries from the Pet Journal pets into the list of companions. Pet Journal pets can now be deleted(unless anyone wants to confirm).--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:23, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Final Touches on the list
- I've already finished the lists, these are the final touches to complete it until release (or the next build):
- Delete Companions by source and Companions by expansion since the info there is already transcribed to the List of companions.
- Fill the Holes(mentioned in the topic below)
- Double check the lists and templates by someone other than me
- Thanks!--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Minor Problems
I have these minor problems in the list, as i've finished the rest that somebody with the beta should check out. Thanks!
- Gilnean Raven - cost?
- Green Balloon - lore?
- Yellow Balloon - lore?
- Jungle Grub - lore?
- Macabre Marionette - lore and trade status?
- --Ashbear160 (talk) 19:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
- Ok thanks, i have updated the list with what's missing.
- --Ashbear160 (talk) 18:51, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
- Well blizzard seems to remove incomplete pets in one build and add it back complete in the next so i wouldn't exclude it's re-addition.--Ashbear160 (talk) 14:02, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Ability naming
For abilities that has a unique name it's pretty obvious to add it to that page, but what about the others? Should it be like [[Burrow (beast ability)]] or [[Burrow (Battle Pet ability)]]? I'm learning toward the second option. --g0urra[T҂C] 11:17, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- I would go for [[Burrow (beast ability)]] since it's shorter, article names shouldn't really be testaments.--Ashbear160 (talk) 15:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- Then for the others it would be, for example, [[Cyclone (flying ability)]] and [[Death Coil (undead ability)]]? --g0urra[T҂C] 19:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- Unless different pet types have different abilities with the same name, I think (Battle Pet) or (Battle Pet ability) would be a better parenthetical. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- I myself would prefer the simpler way of <Ability> (<type> ability), but if we do use (Battle Pet ability) instead, shouldn't it actually be (battle pet ability). We could always shorten that to (companion ability) as well. (Sssss/Slithered) 21:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- I think (battle pet ability) or (companion ability) would be simpler than going by the ability type, since it doesn't require you to know what type of ability it is. For instance, Frosty is undead, but has elemental and dragonkin abilities. Unless there are two powers with the same name anywhere, let's not get more specific than we have to. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- I don't like (companion ability) as if it's something to companions in general. I think (Pet Battle ability) (alternatively "pet battle" or "battle pet") suits it better. --g0urra[T҂C] 23:06, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, now that you mention it, (pet battle ability) sounds better than (battle pet ability). That gets my vote. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 23:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- I don't like (companion ability) as if it's something to companions in general. I think (Pet Battle ability) (alternatively "pet battle" or "battle pet") suits it better. --g0urra[T҂C] 23:06, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- I think (battle pet ability) or (companion ability) would be simpler than going by the ability type, since it doesn't require you to know what type of ability it is. For instance, Frosty is undead, but has elemental and dragonkin abilities. Unless there are two powers with the same name anywhere, let's not get more specific than we have to. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- I myself would prefer the simpler way of <Ability> (<type> ability), but if we do use (Battle Pet ability) instead, shouldn't it actually be (battle pet ability). We could always shorten that to (companion ability) as well.
- Unless different pet types have different abilities with the same name, I think (Battle Pet) or (Battle Pet ability) would be a better parenthetical. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- Then for the others it would be, for example, [[Cyclone (flying ability)]] and [[Death Coil (undead ability)]]? --g0urra[T҂C] 19:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Verification
If someone could verify that the pets that are on the ability pages and "<type> companions" pages actually exists (using the Pet Journal), that would be great. --g0urra[T҂C] 06:57, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Balloons and Kite
Are the Balloons and Kites still Flying pets or has pet categories been removed from non-battle pets?--Ashbear160 (talk) 18:47, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- So the categories have been removed? because before they had categories. Which Wowhead still lists Ballons and Kites as Flying pets and Kids pets has Humanoids.--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:01, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- Well that's a good way to make the combat tag that coobra made completely useless... Well i guess it needs to be done to all non--combat pets.--Ashbear160 (talk) 11:15, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
- I made a example User:Ashbear160/Sandbox is there any problems with it?--Ashbear160 (talk) 11:25, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
- Ok i'll add them to the templates again then.--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:08, 21 August 2012 (UTC)