[Brainstorm] Boss folder organization

[Evil Puncker]

Hello everyone, I was going to ask this on github but seems like people are kinda dead there, so here I am, I'm working on updating the monster files and it will come a time where we will have LOTS of bosses, and right now they all go to only one folder and it will be a nightmare in a soon future, so I'm asking for both devs and community for ideas of organizing them so I can start doing it already!

 

[BahamutxD]

Could just use the same classification used for monsters. Every? boss in Tibia Wiki is classified this way.

So have a boss folder and inside it every single classification used/needed following the same criteria as monsters.

 

[Ochman]

Call me old-fashioned but only alphabetic would be clear AND will not need in-game knowledge to know what are we looking for.

At the same time it is alphabetic order already without this organization so I guess it's not that bad duh?

 

[Evil Hero]

Well either we categorize them through "zones" which still could possibly lead to questionmarks for users who are not familiar with the different zones or we align them to the different "quests" they appear in, other than that we could only rely on no organisation at all and keep it alphabetical which it already is.

 

[Evil Puncker]

yeah indeed, alphabetical is the best at all, this can be closed

 

[Demnish]

I always remove the monster folders and put them into the main one, then I take all trap monsters and give them their own and then put the bosses in their own as well.

Alphabetic is king!

 

[Evil Puncker]

Organized monster folder alphabetically by EPuncker · Pull Request #2974 · otland/forgottenserver

Now it is easier to browser through the files, we have only 3 folders now: Bosses, lua and Monsters... all sorted alphabetically, and the monsters.xml file has been divided into two parts, bosses a...

github.com

 

[Lessaire]

I myself have no horse in this race, because I have no issues writing scripts to warp upstreams divergence into whatever shape I prefer locally. But....this seems like the sort of thing a bash script could fabricate by way of symlinks for anyone who desired to browse it in such a fashion, whereas the reversal does not have such a programmatic solution. (Because a reverse map of this would become maintenance overhead) And symlinks exist in NTFS as well, so such a solution is not Linux specific.

However, I do like monsters categories. I guess the real issue I have with the current system is sometimes monsters belong to more than one category, and the hierarchical nature of common filesystem will never do such things justice.

If you are going to do this, I propose the creation of a category tag container element for monsters, to facilitate a tagged monster browser. Those who don't care would simply be able to ignore the tag, as it would be completely optional.

 

[soul4soul]

I myself have no horse in this race, because I have no issues writing scripts to warp upstreams divergence into whatever shape I prefer locally. But....this seems like the sort of thing a bash script could fabricate by way of symlinks for anyone who desired to browse it in such a fashion, whereas the reversal does not have such a programmatic solution. (Because a reverse map of this would become maintenance overhead) And symlinks exist in NTFS as well, so such a solution is not Linux specific.

However, I do like monsters categories. I guess the real issue I have with the current system is sometimes monsters belong to more than one category, and the hierarchical nature of common filesystem will never do such things justice.

If you are going to do this, I propose the creation of a category tag container element for monsters, to facilitate a tagged monster browser. Those who don't care would simply be able to ignore the tag, as it would be completely optional.

I do prefer a flat system myself as it's non biased. As you mentioned some creatures belong in multiple categories unless we have a very well defined system we will continue to have that issue. My second favorite system is to follow cipbia bestiary. All of this I already mentioned in the github issue.

To your concern. It would make sense to have a bestiary tag and bestiary difficulty tag. It would server the purpose your looking for and be made use of in tibia 12 client should we ever get there as a community. At least in cipbia bosses and quest monsters are not in the bestiary. However we already have a tag indicating which creatures are bosses. So the only monsters which would lack a unique tag are quest only monsters. Through the use of the IsBoss, Beastiary, BeastiaryDifficulty Tag, and lack of any of these tags a programmatic solution for sorting a flat structure would be possible.

 

[Lessaire]

Aye, but I'm thinking a container that could hold an array of tags. I could think of immediate use for such a thing for those who have a set of monsters that only get used in a certain dungeon, who are easy to find now, but would be lost in a flat folder.

Like "Summon, Humanoid, Undead, Reptile, Dragon, My Custom Dungeon: Dracolich Tower" for some Undead Lizardmen Summons.

Tracking Cipbia is great, but our scope should always be slightly wider, at minimum.

 

[Marco Oliveira]

Hello, on the rlmap server that I belong to, we chose to separate by categories and races, as I will show in the images below.