Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Project Eternity: Wiki
Posted 22 October 2015 - 11:09 PM
I also think Obsidian, because nobody else can tell for certain on this, should provide some data on attack/recovery/reload speeds calculation, so it can find its place in the wiki.
- gogocactus likes this
Posted 14 January 2016 - 03:23 PM
Anyone know of any good methods for getting the icons for new abilities/items? I'd like to add images for the new content in White Marches, but I'd rather not upload screen shots of the icons.
I checked the data files, but the only usable images I found were character portraits.
Posted 14 January 2016 - 03:58 PM
You need to use Disunity to unpack the corresponding .unity3d file. They are located in Pillars of Eternity\PillarsOfEternity_Data\assetbundles\prefabs\objectbundle.
Edit: Also, the icons, if a recall correctly, are .dds files.
Edited by Lychnidos, 14 January 2016 - 04:08 PM.
- sp3cw4r likes this
Posted 15 January 2016 - 12:14 PM
I'll check that out, thanks!
Edit: Okay, so the whole thing disunity is rather technical, with batch files and jar executables and whatnot. I'm not computer-savvy at all, so I think I'll leave this to more qualified people.
Edited by Mechalibur, 16 January 2016 - 11:49 AM.
Posted 25 July 2016 - 01:07 AM
Is the wiki still getting updated?
For instance, I came across an extra option for Lord Sidric visiting the Stronghold, that isn't mentioned in the Wiki.
Don't recall exactly which missions it was now, but some I checked out in the wiki didn't have much details.
I'm wary of messing up things, but could try to add if the usual maintainers are inactive now.
(edit: I've added the little piece to Caed Nua: don't kill me!! :D)
Edited by PangaeaACDC, 25 July 2016 - 01:29 AM.
Posted 25 July 2016 - 03:23 AM
The wiki is fairly inactive as far as I'm aware. So if you have something to contribute to it, I'd say go for it. It's a wiki after all.
It could actually use a complete overhaul I think, with all the changes that have been made since the original release (in particular with regard to the gritty details of how things work; eg. attack speed mechanics and modifiers). Have been contemplating doing that myself, but the scope of the task has been stopping me so far.
Posted 25 July 2016 - 04:22 AM
What do you have in mind in terms of a complete overhaul, apart from attack speed and such?
It's cumbersome to edit pages, and it must be quite a job if making for instance changes to the set up of loads of pages, e.g. to include more information about weapons and armour. One thing I miss there is the relevant weapon specialisation. And it's probably time to remove the "Legendary" lines from enchanting, as it looks like that has been removed from the game at an early stage. But doing more systematic stuff than single page edits is going to be... wikid hard work.
Posted 25 July 2016 - 05:44 AM
Mechanics generally, really. I see plenty of posts on these boards of people asking about how stuff is computed (or implicitly showing that they have misunderstood it). For attack speed, but for example also just simply how damage is computed with all the modifiers and lashes and DoTs, that sort of thing. And building on top of the more purely mathematical/mechanical side of things, also more on the practical implications of that (eg. the merits of dual-wielding vs one-handed vs two-handed style in terms of damage output). This is the sort of thing that comes up frequently and there is a lot of info in older threads on it, but it would be nice to have it all together in a nice, accessible format.
But yeah, it's a lot of work to compile that sort of thing and probably much more so in the wiki format, as you mention; the more applied part is perhaps also more of a guide than pure description, so probably not entirely appropriate in the wiki anyway. So if I would do something like this, I'd probably be inclined to put it on the forum here and get it stickied in any case.
Edited by Loren Tyr, 25 July 2016 - 05:45 AM.
Posted 04 April 2017 - 05:35 PM
Never understood why developers don't support these things, just as paradox does. Just in case Feargus is reading.
Posted 04 April 2017 - 10:55 PM
Well... time is scarce and it's a community wiki. So maybe we as community should put more efford into it. But it's true that OBS could pay a little more attention than to other things - like Something Awful or whatnot.
I, for myself, have to admit I find it too cumbersome to edit that wiki. Although I write a lot here and it's mostly about builds and items and mechanics I somehow don't want to work on that wiki. I'm not willing to find out what the common "structure" on those pages is, how I can edit stuff without breaking the existing formats and so on. It's easy to edit a few numbers and minor stuff and I did it, but creating a whole new page is so much fuzz (or it feels like it) that I don't do it - although I know what has to be put there. So blame my lazyness I guess.
I would have totally flooded the wiki with info if it was a Dokuwiki by the way. I love that simple approach. Honestly who needs all that design fuzz in a wiki - I just want info.
If somebody would pay me for it I would update the wiki to 3.05 all by myself.
Edited by Boeroer, 04 April 2017 - 10:57 PM.
Posted 05 April 2017 - 05:16 AM
Ye it would be nice if the dev put out a wiki instead of a manual for the next game
Posted 07 April 2017 - 10:58 AM
I've started to edit the wiki here and there...
It would be cool if more people would contribute too.
- Labadal likes this
Posted 10 April 2017 - 12:41 AM
Actually I was just talking about running a page for it, while the community still do the dirty work, just like the Paradox stuff. But the wiki stuff instead of the manual is a great idea!
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users