Talk:Unique item

From Path of Exile Wiki
Revision as of 16:13, 11 February 2013 by >FaceLicker329@legacy41643848 (→‎Proposal to break up the page)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This talk page is for discussing the article Unique item.

  • Sign your posts using four tildes (~~~~)
  • Start a new topic at the bottom under a ==level 2 heading==
  • Indent replies using colons (:)
  • Keep it civil
  • Assume good faith
  • Don't remove past discussions

Once Open Beta starts I will be very, very busy. I work 12 hour days and in my spare time I plan on sleeping, playing a lot of Path of Exile, and updating the unique items list on the forum. It's twice as much work for me (and half as much play) to update the wiki in addition to that. I'll do my best to keep on top of things but if anyone would like to take control, please be my guest :) --FaceLicker (talk) 16:49, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

No worries, you've done loads so far, I'll pick up the slack where I can do! Iamacyborg (talk) 17:29, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


Am I right in assuming that implicit mods like +resist all elements on shields should not be listed on this page? Ayro (talk) 13:27, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Probably best to leave them off, at least for the time being. Danny (talk) 14:28, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Editing the uniques.

Hey all, I just got a Unique Glove and came to check if its on here and it was. But the values I have on my glove are higher than the range listed.

My Aurseize Steelscale Gauntlets have 48% Increased Rarity when the range is 20-30 on the wiki. What's the SOP on this?

EDIT: Additionally the flavor text is wrong, it now reads "Wealth is not to be borne lightly." Hailjh (talk) 16:47, 25 January 2013 (UTC)|

Post on the forums so that facelicker is aware of new mods and update the stuff that needs updating! http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/12056 Iamacyborg (talk) 17:58, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Many uniques have been re-balanced, and in many cases the flavour texts have been modified. What you could do is to add the new text and note the version next to it. Zharmad (talk) 18:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Wanderlust

Page:

   +5 to Dexterity
   20-40% Increased Mana Regeneration Rate
   100% Increased Energy Shield
   20% Increased Movement Speed
   Cannot be Frozen 

Mine:

   +5 to Dexterity
   24% Increased Mana Regeneration Rate <-- sucks, but fine
   +20 Maximum Energy Shield <-- ...not sure if it's static or a range of values!
   20% Increased Movement Speed
   Cannot be Frozen

If someone finds another wonderlust with +20 I guess it's static.

You can find a Wanderlust with +13 Maximum Energy Shield in the forums --Goliath (talk) 02:38, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Easter Eggs/Homages

Quite a few unique items could be considered to be easter eggs or homages to other series. Would it be worth adding a section at the bottom of the page to list these? For example, Terminus Est and Infractem being an anagram of Minecraft? Iamacyborg (talk) 19:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't see why not although most of these reference items are all created by Diamond Supporters who I'd like to create a dedicated section/page for anyway. One exception would be 'Facebreaker', created by Brotherlaz, an homage to his Median XL mod for D2. So.. I suppose an Easter Egg section is the way to go. --FaceLicker (talk) 21:07, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
The other route would be to make an individual page for each unique item, and put all that stuff in there. That could also be a good way to link to builds that can be built around certain items, like Facebreaker. Iamacyborg (talk) 21:17, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Individual pages is probably going to be ideal and was my originally my intention for unique items. The current format as is does not leave a lot of room to provide all the information we need to convey, it was merely a quick setup to get the basic info out there. With individual pages we can tailor the info to each item such as variable and fixed values, creator and/or easter egg info, build info, etc. The forum list is nearly complete so I'll get to work on this right away. Too bad my old item template is useless now thanks to GGG, lol.--FaceLicker (talk) 22:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I'll get started on some of them too. We can always use Template:Item to display the item. Iamacyborg (talk) 22:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion on sorting uniques

I'd like to change the layout by splitting out 2 handers from 1 handers. ie there's no info on the unique swords if they are 1h or 2h. What do you think? I'm a novice when it comes to wiki editing so if someone more experienced feels obliged :) Pjar (talk) 12:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Goldrim

Hey guys,

I traded a Goldrim with 40% resist all, so the cap is at least 40% and not 35%. Trying to edit the wiki but it's giving me errors.

Just try a few times, the unique article is a bit stubborn --Goliath (talk) 10:18, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I think it's just getting a bit too big for it's own good. We may need to break it up into multiple articles. Iamacyborg (talk) 10:29, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


Proposal to break up the page

The page is getting just a bit too big for it's own good now, and is only going to keep on getting bigger. What does everyone think about moving armour and weapon types to their own individual pages? For example: Unique Swords? Iamacyborg (talk) 19:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

We could have both? The list of everything would include each of the divided pages. I like browsing the full list of uniques. -AnnanFay (talk) 07:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
I agree. We should have a way to view items together as well as individual pages. —Vinifera7 (talk) 08:38, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
What about making the "full view" page just like a gallery, moving the item stats out to type-separated pages? I dont think its useful (for update efforts) to have the full data twice. --Mr.Cee (talk) 08:47, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
The problem is that we're going to be listing 200+ unique items here eventually. It's not going to be a good user experience at all I don't think. We can keep as is for now and also create the separate pages, and see how big the whole list gets. I kind of like the way Uniques were shown on the Arreat Summit. Iamacyborg (talk) 09:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
I had something like that in mind. Rather than showing ALL OF THE THINGS on a single page, they can be broken down into pages like Unique Helmets or Unique Staves. —Vinifera7 (talk) 09:28, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
"It's not going to be a good user experience at all I don't think". It will be terrible user experience, the page will take ages to load and will be hard to find anything. However, under normal circumstances people would use the smaller sub pages. All searches made would link to the sub pages. Could even call it "Full Textual Index of Uniques (Long page load)" :P-AnnanFay (talk) 13:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
"I dont think its useful (for update efforts) to have the full data twice". We would only be having the data once but displaying it twice. "The list of everything would include each of the divided pages." By include I meant programmatic transclusion of the data. The data would only be stored once. -AnnanFay (talk) 13:47, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough, that seems to make a lot more sense. I'd also suggest changing the link on the homepage to be a general unique item page that links to the more specialised pages, the full list shouldn't be the main focus point. Iamacyborg (talk) 14:00, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Alright, building upon the Arreat Summit idea.. how about something like this: Unique Swords? Of course, it's just a rough copy so don't worry about the formatting too much.
We really do need to make subpages; one giant list containing hundreds of uniques just is not going to cut it. The only reason the Unique Items page looks as it does now is because it was relatively fast and easy to throw together when this Wiki was just starting out. Now we're into Open Beta and we have a lot of skilled editors working on the Wiki so there's no reason not to do it properly. I think the Arreat Summit format is a good basis for us to follow considering PoE's fanbase. Giving people something familiar to look at can only be beneficial for everyone I think.--FaceLicker (talk) 16:13, 11 February 2013 (UTC)