Template talk:Ship weapon nav

Wonder if this template could do with a bit of a cleanup? Lots of missing weapon types...--Walshicus 10:30, 23 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Anyone object to splitting out "Special" into "Hybrid" and "Special"? --Walshicus 19:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. - Mitchz95 21:36, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Just saw the new layout... not sure if it's a bit too cluttered. Also, when viewing any weapons page now, half the icons within the nav table now don't show. Might be better to revert to a text-based nav table for now? --NCODB 23:13, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Would anyone object if this was switched back to a text-based nav? It's causing too many problems with the way it's currently set up. I have one prepared already: User:NCODB/sandbox/Template:Ship_weapon_nav --NCODB 17:02, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Missing weapons
I noticed that the Chroniton Flux Torpedo Launcher and the Bio-neural Warhead are missing from this list. So can somebody add it? 81.242.103.202 09:04, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Clutter and the poor abused parser
By now this navigation panel is so bloated that it can't display a third of the weapon pictures anymore and puts every page it's on in the "too many expensive parser calls" category. What is there to do? My suggestions would be: Any ideas? - Atrayonis (talk) 07:38, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Divide it into an Energy Weapons Nav and Projectile Weapons nav
 * 2) Take a cue from the NPC Ship faction nav and remove the parsed images in lieu of text


 * I have set up an Energy Weapons Nav and Projectile Weapons nav to separate the Template:Ship weapon nav to fix the parser however, if combined on a single page, its still too much.


 * 1) Could put only the nav that is relevant to the weapon on the page and have a link to Ship_weapon instead of having the full nav.
 * 2) I recommend like above NCODB did and make it text-based nav with some clean up and additions, not to hard, since I made an updated text-based nav at Template:Ship weapons text nav.


 * That's a wonderful updated table - I was so bold and edited some parts (put wing cannons into special, because they are a unique gimmick item), but I think if nobody objects that this should replace the current table. - Atrayonis (talk) 18:20, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Well I would say to have a vote on this nav change would be best. Better to go through the right channels and have everyone decide on this matter. I like where the wing cannons are now, it looks neater. --OmegaZeroX (talk) 00:18, 21 July 20013 (UTC)

Bio-Molecular Arsenal
I added all of the new Bio-Molecular Space Weapons, created new lines for Bio-Molecular Phaser and Disruptor. Maybe the same for the Torpedo and Mine Launcher? --Synonymously (talk) 05:38, 16 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Kind of in note to ^, there doesn't actually appear to be a Phased Biomatter Heavy Turret (even though I supposedly just uploaded the icon for it), just the Bio-Molecular Weapons? --LordTrekie (talk) 01:43, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Recent changes
After recent changes, each type has its own row. It maybe introduced easier overview in one way, but now tables have a lot of empty space. That makes initial table design (Beam-Dual Beam-Turret-Single-Dual-Dual H.) not adapted to current state. Or maybe I'm wrong, let me know what you think? --Damixon (talk) 09:27, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, it seems every page having this template is messed up; page elements (like navbar on the left) are missing or they changed location (STO logo is now at the bottom). On quick inspection, I think several  are missing after today's changes to the page. I'm in a hurry and I can't play with it at the moment. --Damixon (talk) 15:25, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The lockbox icons are also out of place, it seems. SFC (talk) 20:59, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I would prefer either the previous version, or the one Damixon suggested, i.e. getting rid of the separate columns altogether. But I do not like this version... even with all the sections collapsible, it just adds too much empty space. DanPMK (talk) 21:29, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I prefer previous version. I don't know if removing columns would look good in the end. --Damixon (talk) 12:09, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * In that case, since we have agreement here I will revert the changes. SFC (talk) 14:45, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Rarity color
Would anyone mind if weapons lose icon rarity color on this page? I know it helps with identifying the items, but I think it would help with page load time + some weapons already don't have rarity. I was thinking of using the iconlink2 template for icons, instead of the current icon2 because it is lighter. Would like to hear your opinion. --Damixon (talk) 18:30, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Technically the upgrade system mooted the reason to put rarity colors in this template, so I'm fine with removing them, though I'd still want it for items that are only available at one rarity, like the the Tempest Tail Gun and the Solanae DHCs... same for the ground template, stuff like the Hirogen Rifle that can't be upgraded yet. DanPMK (talk) 19:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Tested and I don't see an improvement over the table with icon2. Tabber has slow load time in both cases compared to page without ship weapon nav. Maybe I'm exaggerating - if people think that load time is not an issue, I can add ship weapon nav to all other space weapon pages. --Damixon (talk) 20:11, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually, tabber on Phaser weapons (space) has shorter delay when loading a page, compared to Disruptor weapons (space). Can you confirm this? --Damixon (talk) 22:38, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Doing hard refreshes, they seem to be the same for me. DanPMK (talk) 10:42, 19 February 2019 (UTC)