Talk:Patch 0.3.0

Forum Thread
Updating this wiki to reflect all the changes in 0.3.0 will take some effort. I suggest that until 0.3.0 is fully deployed, we only update articles about things that were not implemented in earlier versions. I've started a Forum thread to discuss this. Cheers, CWC 15:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I'm for having the changes be done. Just not on the main page. For example, when updating Academy, place the 3.0 version as Academy\3.0. Then once 3.0 hits the main servers, just rename the old files pre 3.0, and the 3.0 files to the regular name. --Bloodhound 00:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Pyratic has done the pages as Patch 0.3.0\**Building Name** so as Bloodhound suggested we can Move (rename) the Old Academy to something like  Academy\Old  and the new 3.0 to Academy and modify  the template to show  the \Old  -- so we can keep the old pages for now - always remove them later - to use them for references  and such ?? - or is that bad idea ? -- ( Morph  | Contribs | Talk ) 16:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Bloodhound's approach is better than mine. (But please use forward slashes, like URLs do: Academy/0.3.0, not Academy\0.3.0.) Also, I like the idea of keeping the old pages around somewhere. It would be easy to create a template and stick it at the top of the old pages.
 * We should also create a template for articles about buildings saying something like "the following costs assume no Carpenter or Architect's Office is present". BTW, I've recorded my findings about consumption-reducing buildings at Talk:Carpenter.
 * Since the articles about army and naval units will also require drastic revision (almost every number has changed for every unit ... sigh), should we save a copy of the current versions somewhere, as for the building articles?
 * Cheers -- CWC

Unless the changes are going to be reflected in new documentation, they should necessarily overwrite the existing documentation, IMO. Once things are obsolete, they should certainly be deleted and not archived and reachable. This, not because of space consideration, but simply to remove the inaccurate material from others who might be interested in "helping" clean up the old data, again, or inadvertently relying on the old data as valid, even if CLEARLY marked as old. Strange that we've been fortunate to date that people haven't overly "helped" the math on the /Geometry, /Spirit Level, etc. --Crythias (Contribs | Talk) 03:24, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

"Wine Cellars" problem fixed
"Wine Cellars" is no longer both a research and a building. Gameforge have renamed the research to "Wine Press House". (Yay!) Unfortunately, I moved "Patch 0.3.0/Wine Cellars" to "Patch 0.3.0/Wine Cellars (building)" and started editing linking pages before I noticed this. I think I've undone everything; please fix anything I missed.

We probably should delete Wine Cellars (building) and Patch 0.3.0/Wine Cellars (building), which are now useless redirects.

Cheers, CWC 11:58, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Moving pages
I'll start now to move the 0.3.0 pages too the right places in the wiki. So there will be much broken links soon. --Tezexlo 14:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Only an admin can move the pages to overwrite already existing ones. So, can an admin plz move the pages, I'll help then to correct the links. --Tezexlo 14:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Maybe instead of moving, update the current pages to indicate the 3.0 changes?


 * I can just copy&paste the pages, but then the history wouldn't be accurate. --Tezexlo 17:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The idea was to change the previous pages to separate pages and then update the current pages with the 0.3 info. However, that may be delayed due to information confirmation or consistency compliance among the pages. As I haven't been working on the v3 pages or work related to it, I cannot say authoritatively that the information should be updated just yet. My main niche is working on mechanics/algorithms, in particular espionage, and wiki cleanup/improvement/consistency compliance. Several of the Bureaucrats and Sysops have lives, and especially anyone going to college will have been starting back in courses and such. Personally I have not had enough personal time for leisure, so it will probably go slowly, but all of the v3 pages are available already - I will add a link to the pain patch's directory page from the main page and update any notifications to direct people to the v3 pages for the latest 'beta' articles. ~ ( by Eliria )(Msg) 20:30, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

The question is, do we really need the outdated data? Like Crythias mentioned, I prefer the replace of the old data, too. --Tezexlo 02:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe it would be nice to keep the "Outdated" data at least untill all of the other servers have been updated. Even if under a similar heading to "Patch_0.3.0" such as "Patch_0.2.8". Not indefinitely mind but still give enough time for all of the "back country" servers (such as .ro) to be updated. DocOctavius 10:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll move the old pages too Patch_0.2.8/* and then the new pages to the old places and make a link to the old pages. Due to anti-spam, I can't make it instantly. --Tezexlo 12:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Can't move the pages on empty pages, so I'll just make redirects and an admin must move them later. --Tezexlo 13:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Finished moving the old buildings and start now with the new ones. Does anyone want to move the units and ships? --Tezexlo 16:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)