v0.34 Talk:Item value

Why have we made this page less clear than it was? Sure, now we have formulas, but it's also worthless since only weapons are listed.--Girlinhat 18:18, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Was it ever otherwise? Eh, either way I'll put some tables down. --Reilwin 22:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Alright so I plugged in the values from Armor#Types of Protection into the given formulae and put the results into the tables here. Are the formulae accurate? I find it odd that the base value of leather armor is higher than that of a breastplate. --Reilwin 22:55, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, I couldn't find the value for blockchance for the shields, and I'm not sure whether the formula for armor applies to all upper body clothing or just those which fit in the armor layer. --Reilwin 22:57, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

For shields, just look at item_shield.txt - [BLOCKCHANCE:20]. For armor, it applies to everything in item_armor.txt, including clothing. And yes, the forumae are 100% accurate - I determined them back in 0.31.25 by disassembling the code that calculates them, and I've confirmed that it's still correct in 0.34.07. --Quietust 23:45, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

‼Contradiction‼

The table at the bottom of this article contradicts the table in Item quality. I would only trust the table in Item quality as that quotes a forum post by Toady One. I could not find any such post, though. Anyway, why don't we use footnotes pointing to sources of information like the Wikipedia does? I wanted to point to my source of information for an edit in the Wear article but could not really figure out how to do it, so I used {{verify}}. I don't know whether it was the right thing to do, though. --Nagidal 19:32, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Exactly where is the contradiction? The one at the bottom of this page lists the name decoration, description, and value multiplier, and all of those values are exactly the same as the ones on item quality. --Quietust 19:58, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

They are indeed the same, sorry for the false alarm. I only saw that their rightmost column had different multipliers and did not notice that the item quality table has one extra column. Problem solved. This section may be deleted or archived. --Nagidal 02:35, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually, not solved. I still would like to know how we can handle footnotes and sources in a wiki-worthy manner. --Nagidal 02:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)