Dragon Cave Wiki

[Fuzzbucket]

Wonderful to see the back of the rarity thing. It confuses new players most horribly!

[Stromboli]

Hello again,

 

Currently working on an update to the Dragon Rarity Guide.

 

The draft (found here!) isn't finished yet, looking to get it squared away this weekend, but I wanted to put it around for general feedback. Let me know if there's any other information that would be useful to have in this guide, or suggestions for organization. (also right now i'm just running with the rarities that are already in the guide, some of them are likely in need of updating, if you have suggestions in that department, drop a note on the talk page.)

 

Thanks!

[HeatherMarie]

I peeked at the draft, I'm not totally knowledgeable about the wiki stuff but it feels like lineage-rarity doesn't belong in that first paragraph? The rarity definitions/explanations in that paragraph all have to do with in-cave mechanics, like eggs being picked up faster or breeding results being affected. And then suddenly there is one sentence about lineage, which doesn't really seem to belong, and is very vague (and possibly confusing?) in regards to lineages being 'uniquely classified'. I think it would be better if purely subjective things like lineage would be in a different paragraph than actual in-site mechanics. 

 

I'm curious how the list of dragons is sorted within the rarity filter/sort? I clicked the bold 'rarity', and I see it listing very common, common, uncommon, etc, but within those designations the breeds seem to be randomly organized? (Example: The first 'Uncommon' listed with that sort is the Floret Wyvern, then we have more 'F' breeds, and then there is an 'E' (Ember), etc).

[Stromboli]

I'm not sure about the sort issue that's causing Florets and Embers to jump up above, like, the Avatars which I think should be the start of the Uncommons is. The rares are also sorting weird.... I'll check how Fandom implements their table sort and see what's causing the weirdness.

[Stromboli]

Updates:

 

It appears that the js that Fandom uses for sortable tables doesn't stable sort. To sort by both rarity and alphabetically, you can use the secondary sort feature: Click the "Rarity" column to sort by rarity, then hold shift and click the "Breed" column to alphabetize within each rarity.

 

The Rarity Guide draft should be more or less done now. I think I've got all the breeds in now. I also reorganized the rarities based generally on market value (with some exceptions, such as Xenos, which are known to have a lower market value than the user experience of rarity would suggest).

My table for price -> rarity was:

0 – Very common –           100 shards
1 – Common      –   200 -   400 shards
2 – Uncommon    –   500 - 1,500 shards
3 – Rare        – 1,600 - 2,500 shards
4 – Very Rare   –      >= 2,600 shards
5 – Extremely Rare – Reserved for highly limited or hard to obtain non-market dragons (ie, neglected, prize, GoN) 

I'm gonna ask that any discussion of fine-tuning specific breeds' rarities hold until after the more macro-level organizational discussion can happen. I personally don't spend much time watching the market/trade hub, my goal's mostly to get the rarity guide set up in a more user-friendly pattern and then throw it to the userbase at large to keep the values in check with market demands. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Finally, since tinypic has died, I'm gonna try to replace some of the small wiki badges/banners for those who'd like something in their signature. So far I've got this:

[URL=http://preview.tinyurl.com/yetost8][IMG=https://i.imgur.com/WaqXjLS.png][/URL]

 

Edited October 4, 2019 by Stromboli
u rite

[Ruby Eyes]

Lovely! Though I think the "very rare" tier should use ">= 2,600 shards"

 

This may be a stupid question, but why won't wiki banners be hosted on the wiki itself?

[Stromboli]

56 minutes ago, Ruby Eyes said:

This may be a stupid question, but why won't wiki banners be hosted on the wiki itself?

 

The new one definitely is, it's just also on imgur for url shortening (and to ensure normal image quality, Fandom has a weird habit of compressing images that shouldn't need it). If the old ones are as well, I haven't been able to find them yet in the absolute crush of images we have on this wiki, lol

 

but mostly, https://i.imgur.com/WaqXjLS.png is just nicer than https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/dragcave/images/f/fb/DC_Wiki_badge.png 

 

ETA:

Oh! I also forgot in my update, I'm also working on an update to the Dragon Release Timeline. Currently, the DRT is a bullet list. Looking at putting it into a series of tables. apparently I just really like tables, idk what to tell y'all. Drafting happening here: https://dragcave.fandom.com/wiki/User:RinasaurusRex/Draft:Dragon_Release_Timeline

Edited October 4, 2019 by Stromboli

[Stromboli]

Hey folks,

 

Just a heads up, Fandom is going to be deprecating their forum platform starting in January. Currently planning on transitioning us to their Discussions feature.

 

Good news: Discussions is more user-friendly for our visitors who aren't super comfortable/familiar with wikitext (which is a lot of our visitors!)

Bad news: Discussions does require you to be logged in, so if you do not have a Fandom account and want to participate in discussions on the wiki, you will need to sign up.

 

More details here: https://dragcave.fandom.com/wiki/Thread:27331

 

If you have any questions/comments/concerns, just let me know.

[Stromboli]

Hello friends, the 2019-2020 holiday season is over, so I'm gonna be back on my reorganization nonsense. Here's some rambling notes:

 

Fandom forums have not migrated to Discussions yet. Seems there were still some features to hammer out to make the transition better for Fandom wikis that use their forums extensively. Haven't seen an updated ETA on when the migration will be comin'.

 

We're past the half way point for aligning release categories with the new naming convention of "[YYYY-MM-DD] - [Release Title]". Next on the docket will be aligning the rest of our categories to proper naming convention (mostly making sure they're sentence case and plural), and aligning them to on-site terminology. Further down the line is reorganizing the event categories and establishing some definitions for what they should include. Right now we've got a lot of stuff going on like Valentine's Day dragons that are double categorized as "Valentine's Day" and "Valentine Dragons", etc., etc.

 

On the article front, I'm gonna be getting back to fixing up the Dragon Types article, since it's currently organized vaguely by rarity. Since rarity's really subjective, I'd rather not rely on that for much.

My current draft is organizing things by breeding groups (Standard dragons, two heads, pygmies, etc.), but I've seen talk that people would like a way to see things in the order they display in the on-site encyclopedia. Been considering just consolidating the tables to display like the encyclopedia would.

 

Finally, still thinking about what to do about the Rarity Guide. My intention was to use the market prices as a guideline during the restructuring, and then toss it to the userbase to fine-tune those where the market price doesn't really align to the end user value. So far, fairly few requests for specific changes, but many people have mentioned around the community that rarities are wrong in a general sense 😅So, casting the net for feedback on this issue once again. If it's actually a metric that people would/do find useful, we can look at easier ways for people to give feedback since the talk page method isn't working. Maybe a survey, or a regular rarity review? Alternately, if it's just going to forever be inaccurate since it's so opinion based, we can look at possibly deprecating rarity rather than keep inaccurate and potentially confusing information around.  

 

tl;dr/community feedback portion:

• Would you prefer: Dragon Types organized by type, or listing all dragons in Encyclopedia order without type divisions?
• Is rarity a useful metric to include on the wiki? Suggestions for improving the accuracy of the rarity guide?

 

[Ruby Eyes]

I think a future Rarity Guide could simply be an informative text on how to interpret current Market prices, with a note that prices at 100 shards could mean anything from common to super-duper-freshly-released-common.

 

I like how the Dragon Types page had holidays and unbreedables listed separately, but I don't think "rares", "trios" and "metallics" really need their own table.

[Pourlemoment]

To me the issue is that rarity is one thing and value is often a very different thing.  If it were possible to get the exact ratio from TJ, it would be interesting to know the comparative rarity of the different breeds, if only for information. Like @Ruby Eyes  said, something may be very common at release while its actual ratio dictates that once it has reached its balance it might be considered uncommon for example.

 

If it's not possible to get exact ratios, and since rarity seem to often be confused with value, which is very subjective and fluctuates a lot, I don't think it can be either exact or very useful in the long run so I would dispense with it entirely.

 

As for the Dragon Types page, I do like some subdivisions, and I think others aren't necessarily useful.  That said, it's unlikely that you can get everyone to agree on which subdivisions are useful so the simplest way to manage it might be to match it to the Encyclopedia as you've mentioned.  If you do prefer to keep some subdivisions you could always do a multiple choices poll to see what users prefer.

 

 

[Stromboli]

Cool cool cool, thank you for the feedback.  Think I may just keep Dragon Types split by... y'know, type. Just because that table does have a bit of information beyond just having the dragon sprites, and putting all the dragon breeds into one table just gets unwieldy.

 

Will probably add a subpage to the article about the encyclopedia to display the sprites in the way they appear in the encyclopedia. Been thinking of teaming up with the folks on the Encyclopedia Helper thread as well, might be useful to include just a handful of dragon links for each breed on the wiki, just so people can at least get the top level unlock. idk.

 

I don't think it's possible to get the real ratios since that'd probably have to come from TJ, and even if we did, it'd mean having to bug TJ every time a new dragon's released for their spec, which isn't super sustainable. And I just generally don't love including a bunch of data that isn't publicly verifiable, y'know?

[HeatherMarie]

A bit late here, but I figured I might as well give my 2cents. The first thing I thought of when you were talking about changing the Dragon Types page was to group them by body type (Eastern, Western, etc). Grouping by breeding type, ie two-heads etc, is alright but since the 'normal breeding group' is pretty massive it doesn't really include any type of organization for the majority of breeds. 

 

As far as any sort of rarity guide and the potential inaccuracy, I had a thought about kind of consolidating everything except super-rares? Like, it could still be helpful to know that Golds/Silvers/Prizes are more or less the most rare breeds in the game. And that all the Unbreedables are fairly rare just because of only being in the biomes. But then there could just be an 'uncommon to very common' section with something like 'these breeds' rarity vary depending on multiple factors and can change over time' or something. (I'm not including things like trios/xenos/etc in the 'rare' category because they really aren't very rare anymore.)

[Stromboli]

5 hours ago, HeatherMarie said:

The first thing I thought of when you were talking about changing the Dragon Types page was to group them by body type (Eastern, Western, etc).

 

We do have an article for that under Dragon Sub-Types, which is also kind of a mess right now because it treats "Pygmy" and "Two-Headed" as sub-types, which creates double entries in cases like Two Headed Lindwyrms. Part of organizing Dragon Types by breeding group was to be able to designate that top-level type as separate from the body morphology sub-types.

 

Does leave drakes in kind of a weird spot, since their breeding group is their body morphology but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Stromboli]

Hey folks, it me, your friendly neighborhood wiki admin, checking in with what's new!

 

Alas, category renaming and updates to the Dragon Types articles are still in progress. Went down a few experimental rabbit holes that I didn't mean to, which slowed things down. But it did give us some cool things like the new Egg Template, which makes it much easier to find the egg sprite you're looking for! Hatchling and adult versions of this template are coming soon, as well as a nice Sprite template to wrap 'em all up in

 

Also, coming soon is the very latest in 'Boli's attempts to make rarity more accurate to community opinion: Rarity polls! Soon to be featured on dragon articles near you!

 

 

The big notice should only be around for a little while, once we have some initial readings the polls will be shifted down into the article bodies to live somewhere near "Trivia"

 

And if this doesn't help get rarity to a more agreeable place, whelp, we tried folks. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[ValidEmotions]

Hey! : D 

Popping in because I noticed:

Can we get proper credits mentioned for DuskOfTheStars as concept creator and Royal-Tentacle as responsible for the sketches on the Aether Wyvern page?
There's also some lore for them that isn't part of their page

 

 I didn't want to make any edits to the page because I don't know if there are any specific things that need to be done and I didn't want to accidentally break something. :'D

[Stromboli]

Aw, please never worry about accidentally breaking things. We can tell the difference between good faith, but imperfectly executed edits and vandals, you won't get in trouble if something "breaks".  

 

Extra non-in-cave lore usually goes in the "Additional Information" section. If the header's removed because the section was empty, you can always add the header, usually at the bottom of the article.

 

Thanks!

 

ETA: While I'm here, we're coming up on 4 weeks that the rarity polls have been active! We've got pretty good numbers so far, a lot of breeds have pretty clear leads, so I'll be making sure rarity categories are in line with public opinion probably starting this weekend. The giant notice about voting will be going away soon, thank you all for your help and your patience.  

Edited April 30, 2020 by Stromboli

[Stromboli]

Alright friends, finished aligning rarity categories and such to the poll results from the last few weeks. Thank you to everyone who voted!

 

As part of this process, we also implemented a separate Very rare dragons category for those things deemed particularly rare, as well as a Limited release dragons category for dragons that are only available for a limited time.

 

I personally don't intend to do another full sweep through all the polls to confirm everything's still aligned for at least a couple months, so if you see a dragon's rarity results have shifted greatly (or i missed something while doing the alignment) and doesn't match the current categories, please make a note on that dragon's Talk Page and we'll check it out as soon as possible.  

[Fuzzbucket]

Is it actually worth having shimmers and tins listed as very rare, as they can't be found in the cave or the market at all... but they really aren't that hard to breed.

Edited May 6, 2020 by Fuzzbucket

[Stromboli]

To try to remove as many variables as possible, the rarity polls included the following instructions:

 

Quote

Please base your vote on the rarity of the lowest-available generation (cave-born, or second-generation for hybrids) of the most common variation of this breed.

 

Ideally, breeding behavior shouldn't have been the basis of people's votes.  But y'know, at the end of the day I just went with what the polls said, and both those breeds were significantly in the "very rare" category.

Edited May 6, 2020 by Stromboli

[Stromboli]

Hello everyone, checking in with some wiki updates.

 

I'm thrilled to announce that our release categories have been aligned with the "YYYY-MM-DD Release Title" naming convention and can now be easily found by date.

 

Up next, we're going to be setting up some clearer definitions for our event-related categories and doing some reorganization there. Right now we've got a lot of double-tagging things like Holiday dragons as "Christmas" and "Christmas Dragons" which I hope to clear up.  Under the spoiler is my table of planned category definitions and updates.

 

Spoiler

 

Category	Purpose/contents
Events	High-level event categories (Halloween, Holiday, etc.)
Halloween	High-level event category for Halloween subcategories
Halloween events	Event articles for Halloween-related activities/mini-games (plus ToT category)
Halloween event images	Files for Halloween event articles (plus ToT image subcategories)
Halloween releases	Halloween release categories
Halloween dragons	Halloween dragon articles
Holidays	Previously Christmas, renamed to match in-game terminology. High-level event category for Holiday subcategories
Holiday events	Event articles for Holiday activities/mini-games
Holiday event images	Files for Holiday event articles
Holiday releases	Holiday release categories
Holiday dragons	Holiday dragon articles
Valentine's Day	High-level event category for Valentine's Day subcategories
Valentine's Day events	Event articles for Valentine's activities/mini-games
Valentine's Day event images	Files for Valentine's event articles
Valentine's Day releases	Valentine's release categories
Valentine's Day dragons	Valentine's dragon articles
Festival of Eggs	FoE event articles, top-level FoE images category
Festival of Eggs images	Files subcategories for Festival of Eggs events
Festival of Eggs ${YEAR} images	Files from a particular year's FoE event
Trick or Treat	Trick or Treat event articles, top-level ToT images category
Trick or Treat images	Files subcategories for ToT events
Trick or Treat ${YEAR} images	Files from a particular year's ToT
April Fools' Day events	April Fools' Day event articles
April Fools' Day event images	Files for April Fools' Day articles

 

 

Other than that, I'll be continuing to work on some drafts, particularly for cleaning up Dragon Types and Dragon Sub-Types.  

[Kurokosworth]

Hello! I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but I noticed Venturis and Xol were missing from "Dragon Types"

[Dirtytabs]

It's just a matter of who's willing to add them. I added them.
 

I question why "The Dragon Encyclopedia" has the The. It's titled Dragon Encyclopedia. The Dragon Encyclopedia as the site feature is primarily what the article should be about, while The Dragon Encyclopedia April Fool's joke is secondary.

Edited June 9, 2020 by Dirtytabs

[Fuzzbucket]

From TLQ: 

I do agree - I went to comment there and I couldn't manage either. PLEASE leave it as it is. "Which egg is which ?" - how much more obvious could it be ? I have relied on it by that name since the day I started to play. And as a mentor - my students seem to be OK with it, too.

[purplehaze]

I have to agree with orphaned and Fuzz. There is no need for changing the name. It is totally descriptive of the article and some things are just best left alone.