Thing to add to the Wiki

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Thing to add to the Wiki

      I'm going to guess that you folks at Dorado know the Wiki doesn't include some important information that would help new users, and that you know new users who can find information that they want to learn are more likely to become paying customers than new users who feel frustrated.

      So, Dorado, would you like to use some of your copious spare time to set up a place here in the forum where current users can point out what's missing from the Wiki?

      KFG

    • playbabe wrote:

      well let start here! what’s missing?
      OK

      1) A proper explanation of what the Arms Industry % Bonus means. if an unmodified city produces 1000 XYZ/Day, how much XYZ will that city produce with an Arms Industry Level 1, 2, 3, 4, 5? Use a table of numbers, not just words.
      2) The same as #1 for all % Bonuses used anywhere in the game.
      3) A downloadable table/list of all unit information combat capabilities, resource costs, terrain effects, required buildings, required tech, radar signature & detection, etc.
      4) For every unit describe whether it is considered armor, infantry, or air during combat
      5) Describe what determines whether a Tomahawk is intercepted when it's fired at a (stack of) ship(s)
      6) Initial VPs available on each Map
      7) A list of the playable positions in each map, accompanied by basic initial stats for each (cities, resources, provinces, neighbors, shoreline, area).
      8 ) An explanation of how the map's distances work near the poles (with a few examples that compare the time needed to move one screen pixel at a pole to the time needed at the equator).
      9) A mention that traveling through enemy terrain is slower than moving through friendly (I don't recall seeing any mention of that).
      10) A description of how the NPC AI behaves.
      11) For each income type (resources, manpower, cash) and morale, give the formula describing all the factors that affect the item.
      12) etc.

      Now ... Knowing how forum threads work, and how forum users behave, I know this is *not* the right place to record this sort of thing. So, unless something unusual motivates me, I'm going to put my pen down and wait for a a proper place and method to record additional items.

    • KFGauss wrote:

      4) For every unit describe whether it is considered armor, infantry, or air during combat
      that is info already available in the unit descritpion tho? okay yes if you want to be very technical that's not part of the wiki

      KFGauss wrote:

      5) Describe what determines whether a Tomahawk is intercepted when it's fired at a (stack of) ship(s)
      that is already sorta explained tho? wiki.conflictnations.com/Comba…ir_vs_Missiles.2FAircraft while its kinda lacking the details it covers the important info


      KFGauss wrote:

      9) A mention that traveling through enemy terrain is slower than moving through friendly (I don't recall seeing any mention of that).
      funny thing is: it is actually mentioned exactly once in the wiki wiki.conflictnations.com/Unmanned_Ground_Vehicle

      tbh a lot of the stuff you've listed are pretty small details and imo adding all this info into the wiki would just clutter it, maybe even make it harder to navigate... true the current one doesnt really have that much detailed info, but the info it has is kinda vital and with the wiki having so little content it makes it a lot easier (and i'd argue beginner friendly) to actual find relevant information

      on a sidenote: i seriously doubt getting the wiki filled with all the information you could have for con is anywhere near priority, it's probably somehwere on the list between "we'll do it at some point, maybe" and "we'll do it when we fix the legacy code (never)"
      btw: nobody is stopping you from creating your own, more complete wiki^^
      I am The Baseline for opinions

    • Teburu wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      4) For every unit describe whether it is considered armor, infantry, or air during combat
      that is info already available in the unit descritpion tho? okay yes if you want to be very technical that's not part of the wiki

      KFGauss wrote:

      5) Describe what determines whether a Tomahawk is intercepted when it's fired at a (stack of) ship(s)
      that is already sorta explained tho? wiki.conflictnations.com/Comba…ir_vs_Missiles.2FAircraft while its kinda lacking the details it covers the important info

      KFGauss wrote:

      9) A mention that traveling through enemy terrain is slower than moving through friendly (I don't recall seeing any mention of that).
      funny thing is: it is actually mentioned exactly once in the wiki wiki.conflictnations.com/Unmanned_Ground_Vehicle
      tbh a lot of the stuff you've listed are pretty small details and imo adding all this info into the wiki would just clutter it, maybe even make it harder to navigate... true the current one doesnt really have that much detailed info, but the info it has is kinda vital and with the wiki having so little content it makes it a lot easier (and i'd argue beginner friendly) to actual find relevant information

      on a sidenote: i seriously doubt getting the wiki filled with all the information you could have for con is anywhere near priority, it's probably somehwere on the list between "we'll do it at some point, maybe" and "we'll do it when we fix the legacy code (never)"
      btw: nobody is stopping you from creating your own, more complete wiki^^
      funny thing is: Thank you - I wrote that I didn't recall seeing it. What my original post implied, but I didn't write explicitly in my item #9, is that I've grown tired of being disappointed looking through the current Wiki for info like that, and I've almost completely stopped using it. Currently, for me, the ROI on a Wiki search is low. I know it could be a powerful tool, but right now it's falling short.

      imo: Hyperlinked web pages such as a Wiki are a lousy way to organize some types of information, and I definitely know t's easy to use them to create a pile of information that resembles the hair in a shower drain (the pages describing how to use AWS cloud computers (the last time I looked) come to mind); but I also know that using them to put pages of detail underneath well-organized summaries is something they are well-suited to. A poorly organized Wiki or other game description could very well drown readers in details. A well-organized one could be a delight to use and contain full details.

      tbh - There are two kinds of people in the world, those who don't appreciate how frustrating it is for a non-trivial number of potential customers to not know a game's rules, and the other people. Beats me how many of each type exist in CoN's potential customer base. I do know how I feel about it.

      on a side note: I seriously doubt CoN will get much more money out of people like me if describing how their game works (so that it's easy possible to learn the rules (not the strategy and tactics) by a method other than trial and error, or word-of-mouth, or forum spamming) to exactly the people they want to recruit into becoming paying customers is low on their todo list.

      btw: Life is too short for me to do their work for them for free. There are other fish in this online wargame sea. I understand that some might be willing to do it as a labor of love for a while, and I'm also confident that that when that hypothetical person tires of doing it the result will likely be a half-baked mess that further confuses new players as it ages and grows increasingly wrong.

      YMMV

      KFG

    • How about bringing back the nations guide so I know which nations have which doctrine. I made a thread, complete with corrections needed for each entry, and they yanked the whole thing and never brought it back.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD

    • KFGauss wrote:

      playbabe wrote:

      well let start here! what’s missing?
      OK
      1) ...

      Now ... Knowing how forum threads work, and how forum users behave, I know this is *not* the right place to record this sort of thing. So, unless something unusual motivates me, I'm going to put my pen down and wait for a a proper place and method to record additional items.
      Maybe if you stop mentioning and acting like a persecuted newbie and just get on with what you have to say without the "woe is me, they are going to trash what I say" nobody will treat you that way. Of course, stupid ideas will still be made fun of, but you haven't presented any of those, ... yet. :)
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD

    • Dealer of Death wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      playbabe wrote:

      well let start here! what’s missing?
      OK1) ...

      Now ... Knowing how forum threads work, and how forum users behave, I know this is *not* the right place to record this sort of thing. So, unless something unusual motivates me, I'm going to put my pen down and wait for a a proper place and method to record additional items.
      Maybe if you stop mentioning and acting like a persecuted newbie and just get on with what you have to say without the "woe is me, they are going to trash what I say" nobody will treat you that way. Of course, stupid ideas will still be made fun of, but you haven't presented any of those, ... yet. :)
      So... you're back (already)

      How was your 2-day break?
      "CoN is a game of 80% skill and 20% luck" - Tifo_14

      "I don't get paid enough to do anything" - Germanico

      Nothing stops the Tifo :thumbup:

    • Tifo_14 wrote:

      Dealer of Death wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      playbabe wrote:

      well let start here! what’s missing?
      OK1) ...
      Now ... Knowing how forum threads work, and how forum users behave, I know this is *not* the right place to record this sort of thing. So, unless something unusual motivates me, I'm going to put my pen down and wait for a a proper place and method to record additional items.
      Maybe if you stop mentioning and acting like a persecuted newbie and just get on with what you have to say without the "woe is me, they are going to trash what I say" nobody will treat you that way. Of course, stupid ideas will still be made fun of, but you haven't presented any of those, ... yet. :)
      So... you're back (already)
      How was your 2-day break?
      No, not "back" yet, because I didn't take my break yet. I decided to test a game on mobile before / as I started my break, so maybe that would shorten my break when I took one.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD

    • Dealer of Death wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      playbabe wrote:

      well let start here! what’s missing?
      OK1) ...

      Now ... Knowing how forum threads work, and how forum users behave, I know this is *not* the right place to record this sort of thing. So, unless something unusual motivates me, I'm going to put my pen down and wait for a a proper place and method to record additional items.
      Maybe if you stop mentioning and acting like a persecuted newbie and just get on with what you have to say without the "woe is me, they are going to trash what I say" nobody will treat you that way. Of course, stupid ideas will still be made fun of, but you haven't presented any of those, ... yet. :)
      Nope - You are in charge of your own perceptions, but persecuted newbie isn't the vibe I'm feeling. Instead I'm simply making the point that ordinary forum threads like this one are a lousy way to keep track of a clean, well-organized list of Wiki improvement suggestions.

      You, Tifo and some guy calling himself KFGauss are now dragging this thread off-topic.

      That's also exactly what just also happened in the three off-topic posts at this link into another thread.
      What is the State of the Game, Compared to What it Once was?

      Expecting users in this sort of unmoderated forum thread to stay on topic is like herding cats, or expecting that a snake won't bite you, or maybe like trying to sweep back the ocean. Regardless of which is the best metaphor, the point is that it's not going to happen.

      So, if Dorado wants to improve the Wiki, I'll be glad to recommend subjects I think should be added or improved, but if folks think a forum thread like this is a good long-term way to organize those suggestions, well ... I disagree.

      YMMV

      KFG

      The post was edited 3 times, last by KFGauss ().

    • (1) (2) (3)

      fine details are too much burden, i disagree that, the info already available in game so it will be redundant.

      (4)

      This info already in game, but there is issue, not all stay to same type all the time. this indeed should be detailed but it actually a few of them

      (5)
      well this is AA issue. we are struggle to explain AA mechanic since the beginning. it sure need better explaination

      (6)
      VPs available? ahhhhhh weird but it going to be too painful to do

      (7)
      too much. not gonna do it

      (8)
      it work the same though out the map, yes the map is distorted but the game don't have any mechanic to counter it

      (9)
      agree

      (10) (11)
      These are details they explicitly will not give away.
      This post was made by Leader of the Church of ROAD

    • KFGauss wrote:

      Nope - You are in charge of your own perceptions, but persecuted newbie isn't the vibe I'm feeling. Instead I'm simply making the point that ordinary forum threads like this one are a lousy way to keep track of a clean, well-organized list of Wiki improvement suggestions.
      You, Tifo and some guy calling himself KFGauss are now dragging this thread off-topic.

      That's also exactly what just also happened in the three off-topic posts at this link into another thread.
      What is the State of the Game, Compared to What it Once was?

      Expecting users in this sort of unmoderated forum thread to stay on topic is like herding cats, or expecting that a snake won't bite you, or maybe like trying to sweep back the ocean. Regardless of which is the best metaphor, the point is that it's not going to happen.

      So, if Dorado wants to improve the Wiki, I'll be glad to recommend subjects I think should be added or improved, but if folks think a forum thread like this is a good long-term way to organize those suggestions, well ... I disagree.

      YMMV

      KFG
      robert downey.jpg
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD