Difference between revisions of "Forum:Let's document the PVP side of OSRS"

From Old School RuneScape Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Discussion)
 
Line 34: Line 34:
 
::Regarding the BB comment: I'm aware of that, this thread was more intended as a way to gather ideas on how to approach this kind of project (which is also why I didn't sign the header with the typical <code><nowiki>'''support'''</nowiki></code> of a proposal thread).
 
::Regarding the BB comment: I'm aware of that, this thread was more intended as a way to gather ideas on how to approach this kind of project (which is also why I didn't sign the header with the typical <code><nowiki>'''support'''</nowiki></code> of a proposal thread).
 
::I'm wondering what the best way to contact PvPers would be in order to get some feedback on the infrastructure. [[User:PureF2P]] has helped me a lot in giving me feedback about what he'd find useful for build-specific pages, as well as creating several f2p build pages already. However, I don't really know any pvpers personally, so I'm wondering what the best way to find someone knowledgeable enough about this is. [[User:Joeytje50|Joeytje50]] ([[User talk:Joeytje50|talk]]) 17:40, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 
::I'm wondering what the best way to contact PvPers would be in order to get some feedback on the infrastructure. [[User:PureF2P]] has helped me a lot in giving me feedback about what he'd find useful for build-specific pages, as well as creating several f2p build pages already. However, I don't really know any pvpers personally, so I'm wondering what the best way to find someone knowledgeable enough about this is. [[User:Joeytje50|Joeytje50]] ([[User talk:Joeytje50|talk]]) 17:40, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
  +
:::Have you tried looking for pvp discords? I would think streamers that do pvp content might have some pvpers in their discords. Or you could try tweeting at pvpers to gauge interest. If you don't know any you could try going on pvp worlds. There are probably plenty of people idling there you could ask. I think someone mentioned in Disc that they know some pvpers that would be potentially willing to help. [[User:Andmcadams|Andmcadams]] ([[User talk:Andmcadams|talk]]) 17:52, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 17:52, 18 January 2021

Forums: Redwood Grove > Let's document the PVP side of OSRS


Currently, there is fairly little information on this wiki regarding anything to do with player-versus-player content, speaking from the aggressor's perspective. Basically all we have is the Combat pure article, and almost every pvp term you can come up with redirects there currently. Mauler, Hybrid, Tribrid, Berserk pure, Str pure, etc. Few exceptions exist currently, such as the Defence Pure, One-defence pure and Obsidian tank, but just looking at the categorisation of those articles makes you see right away how much attention this side of the game has had on the wiki. The one category they share is "Culture", which is hardly the best way to describe those three pages in one word.

Recently though, someone created a couple of articles for several PVP pure builds, which sparked some discussion in Discord about what might be a good approach on PVP-related articles. I personally think there could be a lot of value in expanding our coverage of PVP-related information, by firstly splitting up Combat pure into a dozen or more articles, with each generally viable pure having its own article. I think a decent amount of these pures, and possibly some other common pures that might not be on that page as of now, could do with some actual information on how to build them, what to do to build them, etc.

For example, these articles could go in-depth on certain combat level cutoffs (e.g. having as high stats as possible while still being able to kill Black Chin skillers, or something lke that), certain strategies (did you know you can use a cannon at Fight Arena to avoid any hitpoints gained?), and navboxes might be useful to help people find a build that suits them (because to be honest, the way the combat pure page looks right now does not look to me like it might inspire people to explore potential build ideas). Also this probably helps some people get started with becoming active in PVP, which generally has a high barrier of entry to begin with.

Now these are all potential ideas what could be done with a possible expansion into PVP content on the wiki, but the main reason I'm making this thread right now is because I'm curious about what people think. Should we have individual pages about different pure builds? And how do we determine if a build deserves an article? (for example, a 98-defence "pure" probably doesn't, but would a 10-defence pure deserve an article, even if that strategy might be outdated with current knowledge about dps - or so I've heard? And do we want an article about gimmick builds such as Ronan/Gudi's Tactical Nuke?) Also, after creating articles about some of the more obvious builds people might know about (e.g. some of those I linked in my first paragraph), how do we expand this into a more complete picture of OSRS PVPing? And does anyone have a suggestion on how to get some PVP enthousiasts more involved with the wiki, adding information to pvp-related articles?

I'm curious what people think about this. Some time soon I'll probably make a first start on creating some articles about different builds, and splitting them off the Combat pute article (along with making infobox/navbox templates). Joeytje50 (talk) 18:51, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit source]

I've made a start by creating Module:Infobox Pure and adding the infobox to Obsidian tank as a kind of sample article. I've also added it to Skill pure as an example of a non-combat related pure (in case more of those articles will be made). Any opinions? Is there anything that should be added/improved about the infobox? Joeytje50 (talk) 23:16, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

This is awesome - A really nice example of a PVP article I only just noticed (I just hadn't clicked on all of the links at the bottom of Combat pure yet) is Free-to-play combat pure guide. I think if we can somehow get the same amount of information about p2p PVP builds, we'd be able to expand to a much more complete coverage of different build types. I think this is what the Combat pure page should look like, preferably. Right now I feel like three quarters of all builds described on Combat pure are out of date with the current meta; I just don't know enough about pvp to be sure. Joeytje50 (talk) 11:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Very nice - The Obsidian Tank page, whilst I'm sceptical about parts of it information wise, the formatting is very good and would look good if we were to create multiple pages in this styling. Only change I'd make would be to have "buttons=no" as I find it looks better without. The way I would suggest doing these pages would be the broad catagories. A 1 Def pure has one defence, and the page should cover just this, and the same for a Berserker only being on 45 Def builds. At the same time there would be pages for 50 attack "pures" (terminology sucks), 75 attack, 99 attack, ect. This way the pages can mix and match. This doesn't mean the Berserker page cannot mention the benefits of having certain attack values, just that we shouldn't be making "Max Attack Pure" and "50 Attack Zerker" page. - Luna Lana probably mispelt this 14:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

I agree with your point about not splitting up pures too much. It has to remain broad enough for any individual article that different styles of that account build can be explored within the same article, without needing to go to a different article for the same build with 5 more attack levels.
Regarding the buttons=no, the reason I've been working on Items Kept on Death today is because I was planning on creating an IKOD interface that might be able to pop up whenever you click the IKOD button in those equipment interfaces. I think that, because those equipment layouts are intended for PvP, where death is a common occurrence, information on kept items on death would be useful, and I think that interface button would be the ideal way to integrate it.Joeytje50 (talk) 15:58, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


Support - per Joeytje50. The Obsidian tank page is a good start. The wiki should begin by covering the current meta builds. After those are sufficiently covered, we should add some notable historical builds (ie. zerker). The pages should definitely standardize training methods, quest requirements and restrictions, combat levels, and possibly some combat strategies inherent to the build.I am confused as to why the infobox contains a build type field. Where would this be used and why do we need to specify if an account build is Ironman, DMM? Shoyrukon (talk) 17:20, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

My idea behind the build type is to be able to distinguish build types that specialise in wilderness PKing (like black chin killers), or specialise in pvp worlds (like POH rushers). I'm not 100% sure this is going to be relevant information on other articles, but the fact I was able to think of at least two types of PKer that's specific to a type of PvP combat convinced me to add this. Thanks for the question, though; apparently I forgot to actually add a row to the infobox for that parameter... heh...
Regarding Ironman status, there are some PvP builds I've seen on youtube that have 10 hitpoints, and are specifically made to have a very low combat for their damage capabilities. For those kinds of accounts, it's useful to get no xp from PKing by being an ironman, because that allows them to train only the stats they want to get. That's why I included that as an optional parameter, which probably won't see much use, but might be useful in a few situations.
Also, is zerker historical? I thought there were still zerkers around... Well I guess that just shows how little I know about the actual contents of PvP. I'm just trying to make this information I know nothing about available here lol
Anyway, agreed that we need to give the current meta builds an article for each build. Do you happen to have any ideas how we'd get actual information about what the current meta is? :P Joeytje50 (talk) 21:26, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Template ideas. I think we can improve on the pages like Obsidian tank by providing a few build examples for different combat brackets. It could be similar to how different variants of the same monster are displayed with a combat level select (see Skeleton for an example). Maxed stats should probably be displayed by default though. Also, the equipment template lacks a summary of the combat bonuses, which is crucial for calculation of the max hit and DPS. Not only that, but equipment switches should be included as well. PvP builds rarely depends on a single weapon and one set of armour, so it should be possible to display different setups of the same build with tabs. It would be even better if this was connected to the combat level select, so that the equipment changes as you choose a different combat level bracket. PureF2P (talk) 00:30, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Support+comments - this seems like a BB thing to me rather than something that needs explicit support, but I'm not against PVP build pages. I don't think it's a bad thing to have pages on historical builds as long as it's explained in prose that they are no longer commonly used. I'd say no to unique/meme builds because that comes across as against RS:PDA, especially if it's unreasonable to make such an account/set of accounts. I think if you want to determine what builds are used you'll need to recruit people who are actively invested in PVP to edit and keep them up to date. They would know more about the current brackets than most current editors. Andmcadams (talk) 15:09, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Clarification - My advice is to get in touch with pvpers (probably not on the wiki) and ask them what they would want on pages and what they would find useful. If we decide something here without substantial input from a variety of pvpers, I think there's a real chance we decide on formats that don't fit what most pvpers want or need. Perhaps show them some ideas and see what the reception is. Work with them to figure out the content, and then we can figure out how to best structure on the wiki if a forum is still needed. Realistically, if pvpers are not excited about those pages, I think they will end up neglected like the current Pure page. Andmcadams (talk) 16:04, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Regarding the BB comment: I'm aware of that, this thread was more intended as a way to gather ideas on how to approach this kind of project (which is also why I didn't sign the header with the typical '''support''' of a proposal thread).
I'm wondering what the best way to contact PvPers would be in order to get some feedback on the infrastructure. User:PureF2P has helped me a lot in giving me feedback about what he'd find useful for build-specific pages, as well as creating several f2p build pages already. However, I don't really know any pvpers personally, so I'm wondering what the best way to find someone knowledgeable enough about this is. Joeytje50 (talk) 17:40, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Have you tried looking for pvp discords? I would think streamers that do pvp content might have some pvpers in their discords. Or you could try tweeting at pvpers to gauge interest. If you don't know any you could try going on pvp worlds. There are probably plenty of people idling there you could ask. I think someone mentioned in Disc that they know some pvpers that would be potentially willing to help. Andmcadams (talk) 17:52, 18 January 2021 (UTC)