Form talk:Duty officer

them bugs
The unique power descriptions do not save when using the form. You need to add them manually. --Dukedom 22:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure it's fixed now. Had powerdesc1 listed twice by mistake. &mdash; Eyes  [[Image:User-Eyes-Sig.png|link=User talk:Eyes]] 08:19, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

little request
Is it possible to implement a section in the form, to select, if it is a "regular" aquired DO, if he is from the vendor or from a special mission/assignment? Maybe this leads to a "how to aquire whom"-page. Skydragon 16:30, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


 * We only need that information for a rather small fraction of all duty officers. It's maybe 300? you can 'buy' from the commendation officers, a handful ultra rares out of the officer packs. 4 special doffs each star cluster for the colonial chain. And last but not least the defectors which are pulled from a unique table as well. In my opinion that does not warant yet another line where unfamiliar users can put in the wrong information. --Dukedom 17:18, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


 * But its a worthy information, and something expierenced players, might search for. If i look at me, its nice to have a wiki containing all the base informations of the game, but in my opinion, it is most important to have such special informations, for players who want to get "deeper into the mystery" (pun intended) of STO. Skydragon 13:18, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * For now, I would suggest putting that in as a bullet point in the notes. No doubt, we'll eventually get around to creating semantic properties for vendors and what they sell, and then I can modify Template:Doffpage to automatically query that information. Doing this the other way around is possible, but I think spreading that info across all the doff pages would simply create more potential for error. Making the vendor page the home for the list of doffs available through a vendor will be easier in the long run. &mdash; Eyes  [[Image:User-Eyes-Sig.png|link=User talk:Eyes]] 16:15, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * It is worthy information to point out on duty officers that follow special rules. If you want to add 'is obtainable by assignment x, by assignment y, by assignment z' for every duty officer I have to call a stop. We have something under 2.000 duty officers currently on the wiki. That is if we are lucky 20% of the possible duty officers in the game. Without sounding to preposterous I think I can claim that close to 90% of the existing duty officers on the wiki were entered by me, so trust me if I assure you that it is simply not manageable to add that information to each duty officer. We can manage the 'exceptions' that are like I pointed out earlier 'just' a few hundred. --Dukedom 16:39, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

unique powers
After the recent new 'additions' I commented the unique powers out of the form for the time being. I hope that didn't break anything. --Dukedom 06:57, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I used the hide/show code instead so that the fields are still available, but new editors will be less likely to notice them. If they do click the link (or have Javascript disabled so that they see them immediately anyway), the new warning is more prominent. &mdash; Eyes  [[Image:User-Eyes-Sig.png|link=User talk:Eyes]] 09:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Should we continue trying to track these?
Per Heretic when speaking about doff names:


 * Since there are literally tens of thousands of duty officers, we can't do them by hand. Unfortunately, changing the names of offenders is problematic, because anytime a change is made to duty officers it will regenerate those names, and since they are based on the same seed, the offending names reemerge.

Given that there are tens of thousands of doffs, that names are regenerated anytime a change is made to doffs, and that Heretic indicates that much more are coming, is this a futile project?

--Celendis 14:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * It's not futile, just imagine what a pain finding colonists would be if they weren't listed here. --Dukedom 16:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

More Thoughts
First of all, it currently is very hard for me to not feel insulted, lucky there is PDNBTN. With that innocent little question a huge chunk of my wiki edits in the last 3 months just got moved from 'worker bee' to 'possible trash bin'.

Things to consider:
 * Heretic 'honored' the commitment of STOwiki by pulling some strings to possibly get us a full doff list in the future (when the tech permits it, there are some hurdles to jump AND it isn't exactly a scheduled project)
 * If we decide it's not worth the effort trying to keep track of the duty officers, why should they spend their spare time to help us?
 * Regenerating duty officers will redo all the names thus making a huge chunk of our entries obsolete.
 * First: That happened once during f2p beta with all female humans.
 * Heretic announced it would happen to all Federation Scientists because of logistical reasons a few days into Season 5 but they found another solution.
 * Thus I assume that regenerating duty officers is a) something they don't do on a whim and b) they can use on fairly small portions of the duty officers. We can deal with a regeneration of all Caitian Projectile Weapons Officers, even more so if we get an advance warning.

Conclusion: If Heretic manages to give us a master list at some distant point in the future it's all fine, because suddenly all the doff managment becomes something a bot can handle. Until then we (or for that matter mostly I) continue adding them manually.


 * --Dukedom 17:29, 26 January 2012 (UTC)