I just finished updating them all. Each verb needs to be defined separately.
See alpaca for comparison.
I just finished updating them all. Each verb needs to be defined separately.
See alpaca for comparison.
Also |page verified for version requires the whole page to be verified, not just the infobox
Sorry about that, I hadn't realised.
I think I see how the attack types are meant to be set out now, with each of them that have multiple verbs getting their own attack. How does that work with the chance factors? If an attack is split up its verbs, do we halve the chance factor?
Also, sorry about the |page verified, I'll revert them now.
Its ok I just spent a while going through each animal and panicked at having to ether revert your edits or do it all over again. Wrt the chance factor, it'd be applied to both verbs, though I don't think any pawn actually has a chance factor applied to a body part with two capacities. At least not afai remember.
Thanks for understanding, it just needs to define each verb so it can link to damage type correctly and so that templates can work with the data properly inc. Template: True Melee DPS Calculator and some others that are coming.
Huh, so when there are two capacities/verbs for a pawn's attack, is it actually two separate attacks, each of which getting an equal weight to an attack that only has one capacity/verb? It's not that after that attack is selected, one of the two capacities/verbs are chosen at random? This isn't an area I've investigated much, so I'm a bit lost.
edit: I did some poking around, and that is indeed how it works. I'll change my infobox updater script to account for it. Good job on the Melee DPS Calculator btw, it's looking really good :)
I have a question on the topic: for the attack[n]part fields of the infoboxes. Should they take from the xml's "label" tag (e.g. claws, right hoof, left fist), or the "linkedBodyPartsGroup" tag (e.g. Feet, FrontRightLeg, LeftHand)? It seems to be a mixture at the moment - Alpaca has linkedBodyPartsGroup, Monkey has label.
Another thing I inherited. Atm theres a soft standard of body part made human readable and so where I've been adding to it, I've been mostly following that. But tbh it probably makes more sense to be the label and would be easier to read. I don't think we're ever going to need to make the body parts automatically reference and humans can work out that "claws" are on the feet. If you want to update it, or follow one standard over another, please feel free.