Talk:The Tower of Orthanc

Jump to: navigation, search


Place any observations that don't fit in the article right away here.
Loot: Yesterday we got the exact same loot from two different (T1) bosses. It seems the loot table is shared between all of them. --Ravanel (talk) 06:54, 14 December 2011 (EST)

Loot on this article

What does "Loot 1, loot 2 and loot 3" mean? I find it pretty confusing. I found some missing cloaks that drop from this raid (Hethuchol, Loeggol etc), but I have no idea where to place them. --Ravanel (talk) 08:41, 1 April 2012 (EDT)

The Template:Lootbox currently only handles about 30 items. The different parts allow us to display many more than 30 loot items. You need to organize the list into separate parts so casual editors would not have to worry about overflowing a Lootbox when inserting one or two items at the correct alphabetical location. RingTailCat (talk) 11:44, 1 April 2012 (EDT)
I see, thanks for the explanation! Perhaps, if we need to divide them anyway, we could sort them by where they drop? E.g. Lightning + Acid + Fire & Ice / Shadow / Saruman and then T1 and T2 (as that's the way the loot tables are sorted). That way visitors will not get confused by loot 1, 2 and 3 (as I was) and will at the same time get more information. What do you think? --Ravanel (talk) 18:53, 1 April 2012 (EDT)
That sounds like a useful enhancement that will hide the limitations of our template as a bonus. RingTailCat (talk) 20:17, 1 April 2012 (EDT)
I've seen loot separated out by category in other places; would that be applicable here? For example, armour, weapons, scrolls; or epic, legendary, rare, etc? Sethladan 17:09, 1 May 2012 (EDT)


I edited various pages for tower, but then I noticed the T1 pages for each listed on the 'wanted' pages. I copied the information over to the wanted pages as well. If there is a better way to do this, please feel free to modify them Majikk17 (talk) 22:16, 28 April 2012 (EDT)

Hiya! Thanks for your work on this article. I'm not familiar with the raid, but do you think we need separate pages for Tier 1 and Tier 2 descriptions of each section? If the wings are essentially the same, with only different strategies for the bosses, we could probably just consolidate them onto one page for each section, right? Sethladan 17:07, 1 May 2012 (EDT)

I started off with normal pages, but then I saw links for the T1 pages in the wanted pages, so I just copied the information over. The Tier 1 pages had several other pages linked to them, so whatever setup is most efficient lets go with that. (Majikk17 (talk) 09:16, 2 May 2012 (EDT))

Ah-hah. I did a little more reading and it seems like "Tower of Orthanc: Rings of Fire and Frost -- Tier 1" and its siblings are deeds, so they need a little bit of a different format. There's definitely no reason to have the exact same info copied and pasted onto two pages, but now I understand why you did it and why there were in Wanted Pages. :) Unless anyone who knows more about the raid disagrees, I'm going to bring back the consolidated pages for each section, and walkthrough info can go in there. The Tier 1 pages should become Deeds and will get added to the category for that. Turns out there's also an issue with the items - "Deed Required" isn't showing up, oy.
Thanks for the clarification! Sethladan 11:14, 2 May 2012 (EDT)

I've created several Tower of Orthanc deeds, T1 and T2. They now need a home... (Majikk17 (talk) 11:20, 2 May 2012 (EDT))

Thanks for adding those! Looks like Rise of Isengard Deeds has yet to be created. Sadface! If you'd like to create the main page for those deeds, definitely feel free to add it there. You can get some ideas from the other deed pages linked here. Even if you just list and link the deeds, then it's a start. Sethladan 11:36, 2 May 2012 (EDT)
The Isengard deed page is set up like the others and I listed the new pages I created. Are they supposed to be "Rise of Isengard deeds" or "tower of orthanc deeds"? or both? (Majikk17 (talk) 12:35, 2 May 2012 (EDT))
Nice job getting that going. For categorization, follow the structure of the deed log in the game. If a deed appears on the "Dunland" page under "Eriador," then it should go there. Seems like most of the deeds you're working with would be under "Instance" then "Rise of Isengard," and I don't think we need a separate category for "The Tower of Orthanc Deeds." You can definitely list them on Rise of Isengard Deeds under subheadings, though, to keep them organized (since some are for Tower of Orthanc, some for Pit of Iron, etc. etc.).Sethladan 12:56, 2 May 2012 (EDT)
While you've been away, Seth, we have actually structured the deeds more hierarchical. The template was not exactly that friendly so I would suggest having a look at for example Category:Stoneheight Deeds which is an instance, it contains both Slayer Deeds and one discovery-deed. The trick is in how the categories are wired:
"The-instance-slayer-deed" into "Category:Instance-name Slayer Deeds" into "Cat:Its Region Slayer Deeds" into both "Cat:Its Region Deeds" and "Cat:Slayer Deeds". This way the deed may be found both starting at the region deeds category, and starting from the slayer deeds category. Now, with instances comes a special thing, since it also should go into the "Cat:Instance Deeds" one must first figure out if the instance is standalone, or not. For example, the Stoneheight is part of something called "In Their Absence" and is thus put in that Category. Otherwise the following wiring applies: "Category:Instance-name Slayer Deeds" into the region slayer deeds (as said above and into "Category:Instance-name" and the latter goes into all three of "Cat:Its Region" and "Cat:Instances Deeds" and "Cat:World Instances" (or the instance type that applies).
Think this way, we try having as few pages as possible in the most generic categories, such as "Cat:Epic Quests" should only contain chapter categories, and possibly some pages the discusses Epic quests, or NPCs should only have regional NPC sub-categories, and same things for Items, Quests, etc. Having hundreds of deeds Cat:Slayer Deeds is not helpful, but sorting them on instances and region is helpful. At least for the users that start in that end ;)
Just remember, many pages are categorized under several characteristics, for example "type" (slayer deed), "locality" (Pits of Isengard), but it is convenient to merge these deeds to "PoI Slayer Deeds" which is then bound to appropriate parent categories.
A very different case is Items; an item may be "common", "armour", "legs", "level 22", and maybe "quest reward" ... all very different characteristics that apply to the same page, hence many categories. Some categories could possibly be merged, such as Legs Armour, but kids learn to walk one step at a time, they say ;)
@Majikk17, please look at how I did with Abolish Abominations. I added a link to Pits of Isengard, but feel free to use the "| Extra =" to add some locality information, such as "This deed may be completed in the [[Instance-Name]]. {{Tooltip Coords|map|S|N}}". Also, follow the categories and see how I created two new categories for this deed. I begun with Clear-cutter (Deed) but was not 100% certain it is a Fangorn's Edge deed, please correct the link if that is wrong. If it is Fangorn's Edge you may proceed as with Abolish Abominations.
Finally, thanks a lot for your nice work, it is great. Not all of us hardcore editors do those harder instances (and myself is a newbie in Lotro though I like geography and exploring so I basically concentrate on locations, though as NPCs, quests, deeds, and much other things are bound to locations I happen to meddle everywhere it seems .. except crafting maybe :P) -- Zimoon (talk) 03:00, 3 May 2012 (EDT)
PS: Perhaps the "Category:Pits of Isengard Slayer Deeds" should be under "Category:Rise of Isengaard Deeds" rather than "Cat:Instances Deeds"? But it should be under Nan CurĂșnir in any case, to keep the geographical ties. -- Zimoon (talk) 03:14, 3 May 2012 (EDT)
Oh, dear. Thanks for correcting my misconception, heh. I'm going to have to devote a little time to relearning the organization. :-P Sethladan 10:14, 3 May 2012 (EDT)
I will have a look at the Deeds template and see if we can updated the documentation. I guess it all boils down to parameter names that are confusing right now, it would probably be best to copy tweak the template, adjust the parameter names, and to have a bot running over the deeds to "implement" the new parameter names ;) But let us discuss that over a beer at the Deeds talk page. -- Zimoon (talk) 13:17, 3 May 2012 (EDT)
The documentation about new deeds is pretty good actually. Please use Create new deed and see the sample above the edit box. -- Zimoon (talk) 13:48, 3 May 2012 (EDT)