@J11 thank you alphabet for adding such an awesome tool to use!
A minor update, I added some extra info on the fellowship page inspired by an another topic on the forums. It now shows how long it has been since a player has been online last. There was also a derp in the way the activity was calculated to begin with, which affected users that had been away for a long time which has now been fixed
Excactly how does it works to determine the last day?
Cause I swear I played last Thursdays (2018-05-17) and have recordingâs of it (I taught I was going mad at first) but itâs saying I didnât play in the last 8 days.
Itâs sayâs 4 for @Logan while saying that he didnât play in his last 7 days on is page. I assume he could have log less then 15 minutes 4 days ago ?
It also says â0 daysâ on me, but last night i logged out a few hours before some players who have â1 dayâ for some reason
Just like with all the data weâve got, its dependent on when its last refreshed. So it does the calculation when the playerâs profile is opened, and it may change after opening the profile.
The way it is calculated is that it finds an entry for the character that is 7 days old, and calculates the difference between that dateâs timePlayed, and the most freshest entries timePlayed. If that difference is equal or greater than 900 seconds (15 minutes in the last 7 days) = you are marked as active
The 1 day / 0 day thing is basically just that nobody has looked up those 1 day players today, where as the 0 day players have been looked up. Iâm in process of writing a background task that automates a lot of these manual, non-API dependent updates, so they should clear out those weird last online days etc
Could we get a feature on each Fellowship page to do a ârefresh all profilesâ ? Or would that be too intensive for the API to handle? I mean, nothing really prevents us from scripting that up on our end⌠but it would be super convenient to have as a button. Perhaps it might have a dialog with âlast time usedâ to let people determine if they want to use the ârefresh allâ button. Or even do a hard limit of once every 12h? I dunno, but it would be a nice feature.
Iâm gonna have a background task dealing with that stuff on a yet undetermined schedule, but at least a few times a day
I actually havenât played more than 15 min in the past 4 days so thatâs accurate lol
New update to the Orbus unofficial armory!
Change log:
-
Added a new leaderboard âRaidsâ. This shows the completed raids for fellowships out there, including fancy ass boss-names by Damage_Da_Mage (placeholders until we get the real ones)
-
Added the raid runs under each fellowshipâs page.
-
Added the raid runs under each characterâs page.
None of these changes yet affect the PVE score until weâve figured out how to do it (whether to separate it from the Shard PVE score or keep them together etc etc)
Forgot to add to the patch notes there that the raid attribution to a fellowship now requires 80% (8/10 people) to be from the same fellowship, unlike the previous 70% (rounded down, 3/5) due to some feedback weâve been getting
Also Damageâs funny names are gone, we got the real ones from the team
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO
But seriously. They where perfect. Thanks for all of this guys!!
Trust me, I was fighting it to keep them, but it wasnât cool apparently
Haha, Iâll be honest, I thought they were just going to be entertaining placeholders for testing the new page at first. I didnât realize the page was going live with those names, but Iâm glad everyone thought they were entertaining!
Agile principles man! No staging env. Straight to live.
waits for scared jumping under table reaction from damage
I appreciate the effort you guys are putting into this resource for the community, but I have to say that it absolutely makes no sense (to me) to put all 5 raid bosses in a single list based on time completed. Doing so makes the right play for anyone invested in trying to top the leaderboard to focus on trying to burn the first Boss down over and over again to maximize the fastest time, and given that one of the mechanics currently isnât working (and will be added back in on Tuesday) it becomes even more problematic.
TL;DR: The raid bosses have vastly different levels of mechanical complexity, (and escalating health) and as such are going to have vastly different times to defeat. As such, I believe they should be tracked and displayed on the armory independently rather than in aggregate.
Unrelatedly, It would also be nice if there was any indication of first-defeat for any given shard or raid target at different difficulty levels for historic record. Given the propensity for many of the top fellowships to post their world firsts, it seems like this would be something everyone would be interested in, but I can also see how me recommending that could be seen as biased.
you can filter by encounter with the textfield.
I agree that the name âleaderboardâ isnât exactly right for the âlistâ of completed raids weâve got out right now, I was thinking about that earlier today to change it about a bit.
What comes to the completion time, since the official API doesnât provide that information, I can only point out when it was added to my database, which of course is tied to whenever people looked it up. Specifically these bosses people have completed now have pretty much the same time right now, because I refreshed every fellowship as soon as I finished the data collection part.
For shard dungeons, the completion time is actually on our backlog, for those it works much better because at the start of the data collection people hadnât completed anything above like level 6 and stuff like that so the âactually relevantâ stuff is still close to valid. At least our members always refresh their profile as soon as something log-worthy happens , and Iâm assuming others have similar habits looking at the logs.
We certainly appreciate the effort you have put into the Armory, but it absolutely baffles me how you guys come up with these scoring systems. Thought Iâd throw some suggestions to help out.
Raid Progression Suggestion:
The raid progression should only be based on when a guild kills the raid boss, especially since there is no RnG to compete with. Everyone is on the same level. If you are saving the information like you currently are, you can easily track the date it was put in. It would be on the guild to look up their name after the clear to get credit for it. That is how every MMO progression list is done that I know of. Having the time on it and doing it the way you currently have it set up makes no sense whatsoever and it appears from any outsider that you did that to try to favor your guild once you found out we killed all 5 bosses quite a bit ahead of you guys. None of us would be surprised if the system was changed tomorrow to have the most kills on all the bosses add up to the #1 spot.
Shard Dungeons Suggestion:
Shard dungeons are RnG and are supposed to clear them in the 30min, so a leaderboard for each dungeon would make the most sense. Right now, the leaderboard is all about trying to get lucky enough to get a Mael Sanctum without the mobile mutation, which is RnG at its finest and not the best way to fairly score anything. Arkness even said himself that he pulled this scoring system âout of his ass.â It seems like every suggestion the community makes, falls on deaf ears or is an attempt to make a whacked-out system where you put yourselves number 1 for no rhyme or reason.
I guess my question is do you want us to make suggestions for improvement to the current system or do you want to keep messing around with the system where you guys can claim a fake #1 spot on something that makes no sense at all? If is it the ladder, please let us know and we will stop making suggestions. If you do want to make it a better system and have everyone use it, you should bring all the top guilds together to discuss possible ways to make a better system so no one is pulling a scoring system âout of their assâ and it actually means something.
Duly noted, thanks
/20 characters