I've put a temporary (1 week) protect on Tailoring so only Admins can edit it. I'm working on a copy in my Sandbox (Tailoring1) and would like comments.
Firstly I've altered the section order because I find the current order to be unhelpful. Usually I want to find a crafting location with an apprentice and that requires scrlling up and down the page comparing the two sections. Putting the sections next to each other alleviates that. It's still not ideal since both pieces of information are really locations and I'd like to find a nice way to combine them. For tailoring it would be quite easy since the apprentice and dummy are always in the same spots, but for say farming or woodcutting (and probably others) that's not true. If I find something that I think works I'll post here, otherwise having the sections next to each other seems like a 'good enough for now solution'. Comments? Objections?
Secondly I've started entering information into collapsible tables. That's why I locked the original page, so that someone didn't duplicate that effort. (Page hasn't been edited except by me since Feb but you never know). I have used the table style recently used in Achievements since I think that looks better than the + style table in say Category:Bows and crossbows. Again comments? Objections?
Thirdly I've deleted the "Leveling" section and just included the info above the tables. There's hardly enough to justify a section and you really want to know the info before you see the list of items. I have been keeping track of XP for Tailoring and the table could use say a light gray background to highlight the best XP/cloth items. Maybe.
Fourthly, a question. Presently we are grouping information like in the Crafting interface: Levels 1-10, levels 11-20 etc. For general equipment that seems fine. But for crafting would it make sense rather to group things according to the material required? So for tailoring have a table for "Coarse Cloth" and a table for "Linen Cloth" etc. (Weapon/Armorsmithing by copper, bronze etc).
I can make different versions of the page so the different options can be seen side-by-side so to speak if that would help.
It does make much more sense to have the crafted items grouped in order of the material required but I'm not sure that naming those tables "Coarse Cloth" etc would be a good idea. Naming them "Levels 1-15", "Levels 16-31" etc might be even more confusing.
Best XP/cloth items will always be those involving a Rare Unusual component or an Element Flake. And to think that people give away their Rare Unusual components! ;) Also doesn't the XP rate change as you level, so it will always be the highest level item you can craft that will grant you the best XP rate? I've never actually checked.
Yay for those shiny collasibles! However I don't think it's needed in this case. Perhaps sortable tables would be a better option?
It just seems like an odd set of figures to look at. 1-15, 16-31, 32-47, 48-50. Oh well. "1-15 Coarse" > "Coarse" > "Levels 1-15".
You would be surprised how many players do not know what to do or where to go once they reach level 16 in a profession. There are even some professions which don't follow the same rule. For example Fishing XP rates change at 8, 16, 24, 32. I reached level 25 fishing before noticing my XP rates while catching level 16 fish when I should have been catching level 24 fish which I then had to hunt down where and what they were.
Your rare materials do have a value, just very few people realise that they are significant and decide to just vendor/destroy/give them away.
With sortable tables I had the thought of many columns which can be sorted. This could include: Price of the item crafted (free/sub), Profit/Loss per item crafted when sold to a vendor (free/sub), number of materials required can be sorted, name of the item crafted can be sorted (e.g. filtering Crafted/Basic/Improved).
I do not intend to try quoting XP rates and I think it is a bad idea to try to do so for many reasons:
they vary according to supporter/non-supporter
they vary as you skill level changes even within a "band" e.g. from level 26 to level 27 the XP for refined linen gloves changes from 539 to 556, and trying to capture that is next to impossible.
and when you change up to the next material the XP drops
they change in updates. The latest update claims to have made the XP drop-off less severe but has no details: patch notes so if we had tried to document XP what would now be out of date? Maintainability is an important consideration especially as we have so few editors.
I don't see the advantage of sortable tables unless XP, price or stats are included. But again, prices have changed in the past so unless we can be sure that they are going to remain stable keeping them in the body of the wiki is making a rod for our own backs. For now prices are getting added to the comment section and I don't have the time or inclination to buck that trend. Even profit/loss is not that obvious. Did you buy scarecrows, crop dust and manure? What average yield did you get from your seeds?
I don't intend to include stats either. The increase isn't quite linear since "crafted" equipment can be better in some respects than higher level regular equipment, but the right place for stats is in tables for individual armor categories ("Light armor head equipment" etc) since when considering new armor you should look at all the available options. Also, there is the same issue of wide tables as we had with say Bows and crossbows: Thread:7548 so if that main stats are in a combined vertical format I'm not sure they'd even sort correctly.
I do see the advantage of collapsible tables because once I reach level 36 I don't want to scroll past tons of low-level dross to find what I'm looking for. Right now the table only has a few items but it's surprising how big the tables get once you add everything. However, it's easy to change in the future.
If doing things by cloth/ore or whatever is controversial then I am happy to stick to 1-10, 11-20 exactly as in the game. It should be pretty obvious from the table that you start Linen at 16, Cotton at 32 etc. Once the items are actually added then it would be easy to move the table start/end markers and re-title them "Coarse Cloth level 1-16" etc *if* in future that was seen as the way to go.
I can reword the description to mention rare materials earlier. However. It is not obvious that these rare items always offer *significantly* better XP without actually crafting them all. Refined Linen Gloves give me 53.9/cloth while a crafted linen chest gives me 58.65 which is a marginal improvement for the extra effort and the cost in flakes. I've reached 29 Tailoring without bothering much with rares. Only when I needed a picture for the wiki, or actually wanted to wear the crafted item, did I bother. For example, right now I'm farming at Greenreef and Tailoring in Illaneska. But I can only buy flakes in Eldevin City. So the time and effort to go to Eldevin to get my flakes in my view isn't worth the effort even if I wanted to spend my Artisan Points.
Elnestor, I do take your point about rare materials. Some people will have loads. But if you haven't bought much or any extra storage space then you may not keep them. Also not everyone will have the time or patience to do dailies to get the artisan points to buy flakes. I tried to word things to cover multiple playing styles, but if you think it could be improved then I will try to do so.
(The original wording on the page just says to craft boots, and that's just wrong. I started keeping track of XP once I hit linen, and it's clearly a bad strategy to stick with boots. However, if you ignore Rares then sticking with boots/belts/gloves always gives the best XP/linen though not always the best profit).
Anyway, thank you both for the input. I'll post again when my changes are more complete and you can comment if you think anything still needs changing.
I think one of the main reasons to keep the 1-10, 11-20 style, is to keep the tables manageable. Using 1-15, 16-32 (or Coarse/Linen/...) makes the tables that much bigger. Besides that, the game uses the 1-10 style, so that might make it easier to find what your looking for. Of course, splitting the tables by type of cloth has advantages as well. I don't really care either way.
Combining the locations of the mannequins and the apprentices is a good idea. I always wondered why they were separate. Especially because the mannequin locations were mentioned somewhere at the bottom of the page.
About the styles of the tables, while it is a matter of opinion which one looks better (I prefer the style of Category:Bows and crossbows), it might be a good idea if we pick one of them as the standard.
I do agree that it is unnecessary to make the table sortable. What would people want to sort? The amount of cloth needed? It's just not possible to add all the extra info that would make it necessary to have sortable tables. There is only so much space on our screens.
I noticed the second point too. I don't know why that happens though.
I prefer the other collapsible style, because I find the headers of your table to be very predominant. The +/- is very easy to change into expand/collapse or something else that's easier to see and hit.
OK, I've finished User:Spooky Xero/Tailoring1. If no-one has any final objections then I'll put it live tomorrow. I think the other Crafting profession pages should also be modified to combine Locations with Apprentice Trainers (though for other professions the two are *not* always located in the same places so some care is required). I will edit them too and fix up Apprentice redirects, if no-one has objections.
Two of the gathering professions have no related equipment (Fishing & Foraging). What are people's views on what to call the sections describing Apprentices? Should it stay "Apprentice X Trainer" as it does now? Or rename it "Locations" as well for consistency? I think I'd just stick with "Apprentice X". For the other gathering professions it would also be nice to carefully combine the trainers and "workbench" locations juts like crafting professions.
PS If anyone wants to proof-read all the Tailoring tables then please do so! I tried to check them all as carefully as I could while entering the info, but I wouldn't be surprised if some mistakes crawled through.