Re: The Artifact Tier List
 

ok, that drivel is deleted.

i'll get my list back up there when i get the chance

Re: The Artifact Tier List
 

Seriously Omnikron, wtf? I can understand if you don't think its accurate, but don't **** with our guide/tier list/whatever. There are plenty of guides on the wiki that are written with CBM in mind, so that excuse doesn't work. If you have issues with it then make your own damn list.

Re: The Artifact Tier List
 

You are offended? You think I spent 8 or more hours of my evening to offend you? If I wanted to do that, I would have just insulted you here, which I never did. Instead, my work gets dismissed by you as "drivel," which is offensive. My writing style is my writing style, if you find it grating, sorry. Others find it hilarious.

I did my changes with one purpose in mind, to create a more informative list for the Dominions community, because I enjoy Dominions, enjoy Dominions strategy, and want others to have an easier time to come to that enjoyment. My improvements had numerous clear advantages, the descriptions being paramount, and the rearrangement into purpose categories. The problem was never that your list was "wrong," but it gave readers no information on how to properly use the Artifacts. The Chalice without a Tatarian summoner looses a lot of its utility, for example.

Though, really, we appear to have a fundamentally different conception of what a wiki is. I learned from wikipedia that they are COMMUNITY collaborations to create informative content. The fact anybody can edit any page is not just so somebody can catch a contributor's grammar mistakes. It is there so others can make improvements, sometimes deleting and re-arranging content whole scale until consensus is achieved. For example, back when Troika's Bloodlines was released, I probably wrote half of the early content. Today, my words probably count for less than 10% of that Wikipedia article. I certainly never received any personal credit for that work.

Admittedly, there is a place for posting individuals work and not having it be rewritten in typical wiki style, but the fact your list got a front page link (which is how I came upon it) and has very little original input (other than the ordering and the description of the Tiers), it never occurred to me your list was such a work. Sorry, it just didn't. I saw your list on the wiki as nice start but with room for improvements, which I invested my time to do. I was kind of hoping you guys would be impressed with the direction I took it. I stand sorely disappointed.

I had sent Lch a PM explaining my thoughts and suggesting a compromise position which would serve the community best and let you two keep your list intact, but then noticed he has not been here since September and I have no idea if he is still the lead behind the wiki. I'll post my suggestion in the discussion section later, probably tomorrow as it is now late.

Re: The Artifact Tier List
 

Look, adding descriptions and pointers for use is one thing, but radically altering the entire format is not something you do to someone's work w/o so much as a "by your leave." If you want to add your descriptions and pointers then please do so. Just don't go and completely change the format and focus of the guide please.

Re: The Artifact Tier List
 

I put most of Omnikron's descriptions in each artefact description page.
Thanks Omni for writing these.
I believe Omnikron's list is infinitely better than the original list, because it explains why each item is useful. Without that, the list is mostly useless.
Ranking of items and listing them either by category or tier is more debatable.
In my opinion, the tier listing is of rather limited use, and Omnikron's organisation was way better.
As for the actual ranking for each item, it's a case by case thing.

Anyway, the wiki is collaborative work, so it is not the place to put "someone"'s list. It's also linked directly from the wiki first page, so the best list should be linked from there. If you want to have two lists, definitely make two pages, but link to Omnikron's from the wiki'ss front page because its organisation and content are more useful than the tiered list.

Re: The Artifact Tier List
 

Agree that Wiki is not a place for cookie-junkies and credit mongers, the forum is a far better place for people to put a guide with their name on it.

I can only applaud when someone improves the content on the wiki.

Re: The Artifact Tier List
 

Thank you LDiCesare. That is how i intented to end up have it looking like. i saved omnikron's descriptions so that i could add them to the link like that.

I dont know about the front page link. Maer put that there.

and yes, catagory/tier is debatable. and i'm debating it.

I might have been a little less drastic if omnikron had you know, asked, before he rewrote the entire thing.

I think now the list is in a pretty good spot. its still the same list, but omnikron's useful descriptions are now on each individual item's page. so thank you again Omnikron for the descriptions and LDiCesare for adding them to the item pages.

oh, and to get a hold of 1ch i suggest IRC (sometimes) or asking for her email from sombre or llamabeast

Re: The Artifact Tier List
 

Is there a link to OmikronWarrior Vanilla list/ranking, too?

Hope it didn't die in data nirvana.

Re: The Artifact Tier List
 

My wiki coding is saved in the history of edits section. Here is a direct link: http://dom3.servegame.com/wiki?title...ts&oldid=23485 .

If that wasn't enough, you better believe I did my version in notepad before copying and pasting onto the wiki.

Which makes the immaturity of the parties involved really obnoxious (and by parties, I really mean Maerlande).

Re: The Artifact Tier List
 

But why replace it rather than add your own list as well? Easily separated as: CBM / VANILLA or the like. Or post your suggestion to the authors and ask for their opinion?

I'd be pretty upset if someone replaced my Agartha guide with their own on the wiki for example, even if I myself thought it was more up to date or better I'd feel belittled if not asked.

I do agree your way to organise it is better though (exept I beleive CBM is dominant enough to be considered the norm these days, but that's a whole different discussion), so the issue isn't the quality of your work but rather the insensitivity in it's execution.