This thread is starving! Feed it feedback!
I know you're there Bopp. I saw you just a minute ago in another thread.

Still hungry~

What about the icon visuals (the purpled armor icon for shadow and the status-colored armor pics etc.?) You said the page looks great, I am just makin sure I'm not jumping to conclusions about things.

I've found that quantifying the bar visuals is fairly easy - the game only uses 22 of what I call "extremely detailed values" - and only a few of these 22 are used for the higher-star items. I felt like I could discern the value of the bars at a glance, didn't need to count pixels every time, but that's just me and how my brain works. This system remains solid unless the game changes these visuals (which it didn't even with the UI update), or someone uploads an image that isn't at heat level 1. The value of these entries is to sort the most intense armor items to the top - dread skelly has a little more than, say, divine. We know from previous comments in this thread that these tiny stat differences don't really matter when taking a fiendish stapler to the face, but I'm very certain that gamers out there concern themselves with being "maxed out to the max" would appreciate this sort of data. And tbh, with other games and wikis, the sort of user that even bothers to look at a wiki tends to be this type of gamer.

I'll clean up that documentation page more later.

yeah the shadow contrast also bothers me, was using the same two colors that the purple shadow damage icon uses in-game. But since we're throwing "using real icons" out the window for the sake of consistency in a user-made table, I can make the colors a bit more...obvious.

Significant changes have been made.

It's been a while...because reasons! The system has been worked on today. Please read the notes below and make sure you are seeing the most recent version of this page.

===============================================================================================
Changes:
===============================================================================================

- Replaced various custom icons with functional CTRL+F functionality. Sorting and list entry were getting a little complicated . This change improves functionality as well as ease of new item entry to the list. A side note, penalizing ability texts are pink to match in-game text color and draw attention to them.

- went back to using perks for defenses and status resistances. In-game icons are just better than custom ones, as discussed in this thread and in-game.

- status weakness icons are significantly smaller than the resistant icons, to enable easier visual distinction. They are roughly the same size as the relevant visual within the perk icon shield. Thoughts on this?

-Show/Hides in the name column and simplified tooltips in the other icon columns provide comparability, while the table simply groups properties together in a rather binary fashion. The reason for this is emphasized above the table.

-Extensive explanation about how to use the list has been made in relation to these changes, at the top of the page.

-These changes mean the minimum ideal functionality of the table as it is now requires around 1127 pixels, which isn't too many more than the goals mentioned previously in this thread. This is simply unavoidable in a table with this much information, especially if you want to keep it as functional as possible for most browsers.

===============================================================================================
Suggested:
===============================================================================================

- Add star levels below the item name in the name column to the right of the icon. There's room for it and it should help keep the lists very clear if all star levels are all on the same page. This would be more useful to new players who are not aware of item patterns and typical naming. IMO this would just add clutter.

===============================================================================================
To Do:
===============================================================================================

- Possibly have all armor items on one page, vs. Armor/5 Star, Armor/4 Star, etc. This will increase load time for some users but be generally more convenient for ability searches and general comparisons. We can test this after the other items have been updated to reflect template changes. EDIT: changes have been made. There are still individual pages with armor items, but I have fused them all into one as well - test your load times here. If all goes well, we will replace the list on the Armor page with the lists in Armor/All. Various notes will be retained, of course. Just focus on the lists.

- Improve table header (yellow row at top of table). The text bores me, but if other people like it, it will be left as is.

- Get feedback on these changes. This part is up to you guys. Thoughts?

- If you think it is good (well, the entries shouldn't change much from this point on, so we need help with that regardless) and want to help, please help make entries for helmets and shields. This will not only reduce the workload, but also find kinks in list entry that might not be as intuitive as we thought. Just generate a page like Helmet/5 Star and work with examples to build the lists. We can merge/delete as needed.

Documentation so far can be found here.

My current most major concern is the table sorting the items - should it sort by intensity, or not? Many people whom I've asked to look at the table are instantly confused by this, but then understand quickly once they read the "about gear lists" thing.

Pros for sorting by intensity: obviously, instantly find "the most powerful" item. This is more important for certain weapons than defensive items. This is also just generally fun information.

Cons for sorting by intensity: for larger lists, sorting for multiple aspects can shove stuff near the bottom because it is (even if slightly) weaker. This is especially apparent with the snarbolax coat and poison/ice searches.

Pros for sorting binary (simple yes/no grouping, but retaining tooltips of course for those who still like their numbers): items are clustered together clearly and consistently across multiple column sorting.

Cons: people are going to assume it sorts by intensity, because most people do not read the directions for things (the "about gear lists" thing at the top). Also, this is just a standard thing for lists to do. It is expected.

I am in favor of the binary sorting (as it is now) for several reasons:
1) the point of the table is to find things with properties you desire, THEN compare them. If items don't group together clearly, this contradicts the goal.
2) the minor differences between items of the same damage defense type are typically insignificant. Consider also the factors of heating and depth and stratum fallout issues. We want players to understand that you go after basic defenses X(s), if there are X monsters dealing dmg type X with X status, with preference for abilities over defenses in most cases. Thus a "does this item have this and this" search is ideal.
3) many of the weapon stat bars are horribly misleading considering the differences in combat style (like the haze bomb damage bar, or charge attacks). Sorting these by intensity would be largely pointless.

We would have to make the "warning" about how the list does not sort by intensity very clear at the top of the page if we stick with the way it is now.

Thoughts?

Most inputs for lists are done, only shields remain. What's left is to tweak aesthetics and then we can publish.

I have finally decided, after much thought and feedback, to let the table sort ascending/descending based on value, except for the status resistance values. This is just expected behavior for a sorting table.

But why exclude the status resistance values from this behavior? Because the darn thing just groups so weirdly if you don't equate everything to the same value (thus making it essentially binary) - since most items offer the same level of resistance, and mousing over/comparing items is prudent to do, this is for the best of everything. The other option shoves items like the Snarbolax Coat (which has high status resistance, not max like most items) way down into a confusing mess and the table is much less useful this way. Another option is to sort lowest values to the top, but that is out of the question by this point - too many feedbackers want highest to sort to the top first. What's worse - missing an item alltogether, or choosing an item that has a few pixels less of a resistance, when that doesn't make a huge difference anyway?

Here are visuals showing the different sorting behavior for the status columns. This is clicking freeze first, then poison for both "sorted" examples.
Note: browser is zoomed way out to get the bad sorting of the snarbolax coat within the screenshot range, and they're all the same zoom for easy comparing. So they shouldn't be used to compare sizing issues, JUST sorting issues.

Default Order (unsorted)

Sorting BAD - snarbolax shoved all the way down there because it has slightly lower values

Sorting GOOD

I can think of a few ways to fix this, but none that I know how to code (like, prioritizing matches with previous sorting commands within the page). Or let it be "binary" - this solves the grouping problem. The problem persists with the other columns, but due to the nature and large amounts of those values, missing items doesn't seem to be a problem.

The convenience of sortable lists degrades with higher item population numbers, at some point in the distant future (if more items continue to be released), we'd need to seriously investigate the ability of our wiki to have a search query, which I mentioned here.

Please scan these lists for errors. My friends and I have already found a few, there are likely more. I'd like to publish this so that it's immediately accurate and functioning correctly.

An important change: I'll be changing the output values to be whole numbers to feel "more like SK," since SK doesn't really use decimal numbers for anything that players see. These whole number values are the exact, total pixel count for the bar it represents.