Terraria Wiki:Community noticeboard

Removal of Pre-Hardmode as both a page and concept
For almost a year now, I've been trying to rewrite the Pre-Hardmode page in a way that isn't just a series of lists of game entities. I've thrown away drafts that attempt to treat it as a stage of progression, a difficulty option similar to "cores" and a property of the world, but none of them have made for suitable articles. In attempting to write it as "what hardmode isn't" it dawned on me- pre-hardmode and Hardmode are not two sides of the same coin, but the presence or absence of a state.

Here's my case. Hardmode is set by a flag, so the game basically considers hardmode to be "on" or "off". While this flag is set, hardmode items and enemies are available, but they serve to supplement the existing content, not to override. Aside from minor points of contention such as the Viking Helmet- many of which are still disputed, even- there's no content unique to a world in which the Hardmode flag is not set, unless the absence of functionality like spreading biomes counts as notable content. Almost everything on this wiki that's listed as a pre-hardmode item can be acquired through the exact same means in Hardmode, and those that can't are certainly so few in number than they can be noted individually.

This might be a big step, but I believe that the "hardmode" qualifier denotes well enough that certain items can only be obtained in Hardmode, such that an exclusive-sounding distinction doesn't need to be made for items that can be obtained either before or after it starts. Pre-Hardmode is currently defined entirely by the absence of Hardmode anyway, so it's not too outlandish to assume that the absence of the "hardmode item" note means that it can be obtained without activating Hardmode. Gearzein (talk) 21:19, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind this. I don't see anyone benefiting from the page as it currently stands, nor is it used much for such a 'big' concept. I can't come up with any use for this page, other than a list of pre-hardmode items, another starter guide or a page listing how pre-hardmode differs from hardmode, which is already explained on the hardmode page. None of those uses feel worthy to keep this concept alive. --0icke0 (talk) 00:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I actually use this page quite often when looking for a list of weapons obtainable before Hardmode. I find this a useful page and I don't see any reason to just thor away all the hard effort it's been put on it.
 * The Weapons page already has sections dedicated to weapons only available before hardmode, and at a glance the only difference between them is slight discrepancies in list order. As stated before, all information on this page is redundant with other pages, where it's usually better categorized. You may find it useful to have this information where you prefer it, but that's not justification enough to have it duplicated across the wiki. Neither is the hard work put into this page- if the effort put into something were factored into its usefulness, there would still be categories for fan fiction and player art. Gearzein (talk) 20:00, 4 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I just started playing Terraria and this page was exactly what I was looking for, please consider keeping this despite the items/boss information being able to be found elsewhere on this wiki. I found it to be straight to the point.
 * I see your point, unsigned person, but as mentioned above this article is already a huge messy duplicate list of items from other articles. My experience with wikis makes me wonder "hey, is this up to date?" because I don't know whether the info here is linked via scripts to the actual articles or simply hard duplicated. Personally, I agree the info is useful but I don't agree it should be presented like this. Instead I'd rather it be a signpost of links to the actual categories in question. "For weapons, click here (link to weapon article)". That way I can see what categories I should be concerned with ("there are pre-hardmode crafting stations? i didn't know that"), without having to scan multiple long lists. - Spinfx (talk) 01:54, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * They're handmade tables. Their format is also pretty outdated- few other articles use that style of three-column list now. Even if the page were kept, it'd need significant work; I've considered just replacing it with a guide that properly categorizes the items and content and uses more modern sortable tables. Based on some of the input here, the information on the page isn't entirely useless, and it's obvious that at least some people are still getting use out of it. Gearzein (talk) 02:17, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * So a dpl call for each category? Those would be tables that can be expanded/hidden as well as sorted, right? Yeah, that would work. Not to sure about the guide vs article thing though, maybe leave it as an article since Hardmode itself is also an article. - Spinfx (talk) 02:33, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Dpl can only add ALL pages from a category. As we don't have separate categories for pre-hardmode only items, so this wouldn't work. --0icke0 (talk) 19:45, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

OBJECTION! unless if merging counts as deletion i would prefer merging with the hardmode page --MC Criamond (talk) 22:24, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

The page answers the question we are looking for, what is available for me at the beginning? The page is complete and full of information that make sense towards the title everything that can appear or be made at the pre-hardmode state of the game, concept and information is just right.

OBJECTION! for a player with pretty much everything, this is a really useful tool on "what gear I can bring to friends servers" without having to look up the items individually, of course itrs not a perfect system, but it works well.

OBJECTION! For some beginning players it is really useful to have a single overview of all items and entities that are available to them before hardmode, if they get confused by all the articles that keep mentioning "hardmode item" and want to progress the game in a more controlled way than going straight for the wall of flesh to get them. Agreed some of the info might easily get outdated and duplicate, but for those people it just needs to be a categorized overview of the item/entity with the name and image. The links to the appropriate pages/categories would be there to easily get to the more detailed table that is also updated. The current individual descriptions of the armour, bosses and npcs are unnecessary here for that purpose, as long as the sorting remains the same. -Jack 89.98.217.183 01:56, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I haven't really commented on this for a while, but needless to say several months have gone by with no significant change. I still think the concept needs to be reworked a bit, but a lot of points have come up to the contrary, so for the time being it'll stay largely as is. Gearzein (talk) 02:02, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Gardening Guide flagged for deletion?
Moved to Guide_talk:Gardening.

Idea for a new format(ish)
I have an idea. What if every time we had a recipe or page we had to put a little icon that represented if it is exclusive to the crimson or the corruption? For example: Celestial Cuffs(of course something smaller). Should there be an icon or header representing the corruption and crimson independently? ZambeeZlayer (talk) 04:10, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm wondering how useful this would be, but I don't think it's a terrible idea at face value. Of course, I'd recommend such an icon only be used in tables or other places where textual clarification isn't possible. There are only a few items that aren't obviously exclusive to one biome or the other- it's immediately apparent that Ichor can't be found in the Corruption, for example. If it could be made less obtrusive than the current version icons I'd say go for it. Gearzein (talk) 02:49, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * There aren't all that many items for which this is the case and, if you ask me, introducing a new format for a few pages isn't a good idea. It forces the reader to learn more of these 'shortcuts', which add little value to the wiki compared to just stating it in the text. --0icke0 (talk) 19:45, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

PvP guide rewrite
I've rewritten Guide:PvP over here. The idea behind this rewrite is simple: only put in the stuff relevant for PvP. Rather then listing all weapons/armor/etc only list those that for some reason work better or worse then during normal gameplay. Furthermore, I've removed all the classes. While they may be useful on a role playing server, they felt completely useless for competitive PvP gameplay. Last of all I've removed some traps that were either way too much work compared to what they did or just duplicates of other traps. However this is a significant change, the current guide is the 3rd largest page on this wiki, with 99,922 tokens. They new guide is a 'mere' 20,732 tokens. So I'm posting it here for feedback and anyone is free to make changes to the new rewrite. If there are no major problems I'll replace the guide with the new version and it can be improved from there. --0icke0 (talk) 18:00, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll just voice my approval for this change, even though I'm not very active when it comes to most Terraria guides nor even Terraria PvP. Many of the guides are bloated and/or outdated and thus in bad need for a rewamp. I really don't see much benefit in keeping the PvP guide as it is. NoseOfCthulhu (talk) 22:53, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Sidebar redesign
I have a feeling the the Sidebar of our wiki could be more useful than it currently is. Mainly the link to Terraria Wiki:Projects doesn't seem particularly useful to me and I would rather see it replaced with a link to Help:Contents and/or Category:Things to do, which may bring more editors in. Furthermore, half of the guides links link to a page that is targeted for rewriting or deleting. Especially the link to Guide:Gardening doesn't feel right there, while a link to Guide:Making money sounds a lot more useful to me. Any other thoughts on this matter and what links do you like to see removed/added? --0icke0 (talk) 19:28, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

consider having a regex-based bot exchange most instances of "Demon Altar" for "Altar"
The Crimson has been around since 1.2 yet I'm still finding myself making edits like this one. I know it's a small matter to remove "Demon" from the link markup, but that makes it all the more surprising to me that it hasn't been dealt with by now. Surely a regex bot would be able to make the necessary edits? I can't really think of any complications to regexing it besides not editing The Corruption and Altar and maybe being careful not to replace " Demon Altar/Crimson Altar " (and vice versa) with " Altar/Crimson Altar " (rather replacing it with just " Altar "). What do you guys think?--Macks2008 (talk) 22:42, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Overall, thats actually not that bad of an idea. It would add clarification to the corruption/crimson exclusive pages and any to page that mentions altars. Along with my suggested edit, it would be a big clarification project, but it would be more clarifying and pleasing to the eye for all readers of the wiki. ZambeeZlayer (talk) 23:40, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

is there a "not finished" thing for the top of a page like there is for"this is candidate for deletion"?
well, the title says it, im wording on dutch wiki and sometimes have to leave thing onfinished so this would be nice. superstrijder15 19:45, 17-11-15 (UTC(i think, might be 2 hours wrong))
 * You can use stub or in case you plan on finishing it shortly construction. --0icke0 (talk) 22:00, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Allright. thx Superstrijder15 14:32, 21-11-15 (UTC)

Blood Moon
In my mobile game, it says the blood moon is rising. Do I need to be careful of something? 115.135.115.60 09:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * That would be the purpose of this wiki; the Blood Moon article has everything you need to know. Gearzein (talk) 09:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Defense
Hey guys i was recently looking at the article on defense in the wiki. the equations and examples provided don't match up. according to the equation (net damage=damage-(defense*(0.5 or 0.75 depending on if you're looking at expert or normal mode))) you would save the same amount of HP from every attack, but according to the examples, the amount of damage you take varies with the attack. Is the equation wrong, or are the examples? i would really appreciate any help i could get on this :)
 * Both are correct. You save the same amount of HP from every attack, but a higher damage attack has more damage remaining after that reduction. --0icke0 (talk) 11:40, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

New Update for Console 12/17/15
Hey so a few days ago my console updated terraria (Xbox 360) This update is the 1.2.4 PC equivalent (Fishing, Duke Fishron, minecarts, mounts, etc.) Can someone please review the change log and update the wiki (Or show me how so I can do it?)
 * It has been updated. --0icke0 (talk) 23:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, everyone. Can anyone confirm if the Moon Lord will ever come up in the iOS version of Terraria?

Thanks!

Yeah, I would like to know that too. Rob4sian (talk) 00:31, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

encountered a hallowed chest mimic boss that's not even on the wiki?
hey i was throwing bombs down to the under world for ease of access but on the way down i saw a strange chest then i went near it it turned into what said to be a hallowed chest mimic it had 3500 hp and had attacks such as a slam attack and more i hit a water cave before i found it so before i saw it i was already drowning i saw this boss in the hallow cave biome in hardmode the only boss i beaten before was the wall of flesh if anyone else have seen / beaten this mob let me know what it drops or if it had any more attack's then i saw I'm quite curious about this boss ok thanks

sorry about the lack of evidence i really did see this boss and i hope someone else has found it to Syres345 (talk) 22:20, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


 * update* wow i'm so sorry i posted this turns out it was on the wiki and i mis spelled it sorry about that...

May I suggest adding, "Each of the Bubble Gun's bubbles do normal damage, with a maximum of 3x the damage. If the Bubble Gun does 74 damage, then if all 3 bubbles were to hit an enemy, it would deal around 222 damage. If all hits were to be critical, it can deal around 444 damage. Not to mention the rapid fire and low mana cost, if you were to fight the Eye of Cthulhu using the Bubble Gun alone, from the second of first bubble contact with the Eye to it's death, it can take less than 4 seconds."

Just a suggestion, from my own personal Terraria adventures and observations.

Also, i defeated the twins before the night was 25% done with it alone :)

Curse-produced videos
It appears Curse has begun producing Terraria videos for embedding at the wiki.

This was discussed a long time ago as a possibility, and from what I remember, there was some general agreement in the community that we'd go ahead with including these in mainspace (only Curse-produced videos, not player submissions).

I'm going to assume that this first video, posted to Ankh Shield, is the promised sample video. If anyone has feedback on the video and the prospect of including more of them on other pages, feel free to make your thoughts known here. In the meantime, let's please leave the video up on that page. Thanks. Equazcion ( talk ) 10:07, 5 Jan 2016 (UTC)


 * The quality of the video is good, so I'm happy with that. However it contains multiple mistakes: Cobalt Shields can not be found in underground chests, Blindfold does not drop from Light Mummies or Pixies and Armor Polish does nor drop from Rusty Armored Bones, Angler Fish or Werewolves. I hope for the next videos some more fact checking is done. --0icke0 (talk) 11:26, 5 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Hate to be an agitator, but I was under the impression these videos were going to be on guides, not necessarily in main articles. The production quality is good, errors aside, but part of my reason for wanting them to be guides was so that the videos seemed necessary to explain the more complex or in-depth topics that guides tackle. I'm not recommending it be moved, because the Ankh Shield is suitably complex to need a video explanation, but I'm just hoping this doesn't mean we'll eventually have minute-long videos on sand and dirt.
 * I also realize this is probably a bit too much to ask, but for multiple reasons, I wish someone here had been contacted before the video was added to a main page. I mean, as it is now, it needs to be replaced, but it's put us in kind of an awkward position to go back and remove it again. Gearzein (talk) 12:49, 5 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Contacting us first was the original plan, but that seems to have gotten lost along the way. User:CrsDash had asked to contact me via email (brief discussion), but I never got anything. My suspicion is that my suggestion that these things be discussed on-wiki wasn't taken well. Which is sort of understandable... they may not have wanted to deal with whatever drama might ensue.


 * Either way, due to the errors that have been pointed out in the video, I think we're pretty justified in removing it from the article -- at least until it's fixed. Hopefully Dash will let us know if/when that happens, and maybe do at least some coordinating with the community before making the next video. Equazcion  ( talk ) 12:12, 6 Jan 2016 (UTC)


 * Also just wanted to point out another little error in the video: It implies that the Ankh Shield was added in 1.3, but it was actually added in 1.2. Equazcion  ( talk ) 12:19, 6 Jan 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I'm User:Aengelmann, the new(ish) head of the Curse video team. With the new year, we are making a push to collaborate with a bunch of Curse based wikis to create video content for each wiki. As your team has pointed out, there should probably be some sort of process in place so we can reduce errors, and cover content relevant for the community. I'd love to discuss that process with your team. What works best for you guys? Is the wiki best for you, or could we do something like Skype? Thanks! Aengelmann (talk) 22:44, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * At last recollection, there was consensus among the acting admins that handling it here on the wiki was best. I personally believe that if creating content for the community is the first and foremost goal of this effort, then it's not possible without some degree of transparency. I'm not necessarily saying that this should be a matter of mass collaboration, but the majority of this wiki's contribution ultimately comes from non-staff users, and to keep them entirely out of the loop seems not only unfair but ill-advised- after all, I wasn't able to spot those errors off the top of my head. Having these discussions be publicly visible would also make it completely unambiguous that these videos are being done in an official capacity, and that the presence of videos on some pages is not an invitation for individual users to promote themselves.
 * This is entirely personal opinion, though, and I'm willing to hear points to the contrary. There are certainly negative points to having this all take place in a publicly visible space, but I believe those aspects to be outweighed by the positives. Gearzein (talk) 03:54, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I understand where you are coming from, and also think it's important to keep the wiki involved in the pre-production to keep things relevant and accurate. The transparency isn't much of a concern for me, however the technical issues are. Our scripts usually go through a bunch of revisions, have comments and notations on certain parts, are often worked on by multiple people simultaneously, and are linked in with our project management software. I'm not sure if hosting the script on the wiki could handle all that without trouble. We typically use google docs for our script writing process. Is that something you guys are open to? Could we post a link to the script on the wiki somewhere and allow members to look it over, suggest edits, and approve before production begins? I think that could be a good mix of transparency for wiki members, and solving technical issues on our end.
 * That being said, any discussion before pre-production begins (e.g. figuring out what topics to cover, what takes precedence for videos) could be handled here on the wiki completely.Aengelmann (talk) 14:34, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * That's what I had in mind, yeah. I don't think the script should be written by committee, nor does it even seem necessary for the wiki at large to have access to a near-finished script. I mostly mean the broad strokes where a subject is chosen, a loose framework is laid out, and facts are checked. Gearzein (talk) 02:49, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * That works for us. We were thinking for a new video to do a "Cellphone Build Guide" similar to the Ankh Shield video. We thought it might be handy as it's one of the most complicated items to get in the game. However we are open to topic suggestions. Do you (or anyone else for that matter) have any thoughts on topics that'd be appropriate for video?Aengelmann (talk) 17:29, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Horned God set
Ok, so, im bored, I beat most of the game, just looking for stuff to do, so I see this Horned God armor, km like "Cool, a new vanity armor, I like it." I beat the 3 hardmode bosses (Mech Skull, Destroyer, Twins) and got nothing, though the page says 100% chance to drop, and im pretty sure iOS is at 1.2.4, so is the page wrong?
 * Horned God set doesn't actually say 100% chance to drop- it doesn't mention a drop rate at all. Drop rates are normally pulled from the code, but 505 has forbidden us from using the source code of the mobile version. All those values are determined by testing, and in the absence of testing they're omitted. It's currently not correct, but without testing the numbers it can't really be fixed. Gearzein (talk) 20:58, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I should apologize for this- while the Horned God page itself didn't mention a drop rate, the three mech bosses did indeed specify 100% drop rates. This is likely because the template wouldn't accept an empty entry. Now that some testing has been done it's been corrected. Gearzein (talk) 01:48, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Why won't my mobile device let me create Sunplate Blocks?
So I got all the ingredients to make the sunplate blocks. Some stone, a Fallen star, and a Sky Mill. What's wrong? Rob4sian (talk) 07:20, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Crafting it is only possible since version 1.3.0.1, while mobile is at 1.2.4. I've updated the page to make it clearer. --0icke0 (talk) 09:30, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I have been wondering that too. Thanks! Rob4sian (talk) 00:35, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Horned God set testing
I don't know how to use these things, but um... here goes. So I was playing around with the horned God set, trying to get a set for different things, anyway, I figure the chance of the drops from the pieces are all about 1/300. Should I change the page to say so? BTW I'm on console, (xbox).
 * Don't change anything just yet. 1/300 is around a .3% chance, which seems improbably low. It also seems to go without saying that in order to test this you've had to kill each boss more than a thousand times just to have a suitable sample size. It might be more helpful if you just give us the results of your testing. How many test runs did you do, and on how many of them was the item dropped? Gearzein (talk) 05:11, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Me and my friend killed the Destroyer about 1200 times, nothing to do over the summer. We got the robe 4 times. We then proceeded to kill the twins about 1200 times, got the boots twice. Then Skeletron Prime 1200 and got the mask 3 times. "Why did you mass kill them?" You might ask, the answer is because my other friends dared us to, kind of weird dare, but whatever. If they all have the same chance, I assume they do, then 3600/ 9 = 400, um whoops yeah, 1/400 sorry. Me and my friends say weird dares, but for the better, right? Houly
 * Well, I said improbable, not impossible. I assumed a shifted zero gave a result that was an order of magnitude off, and had to check to be sure. If you really tested it that many times I'll take your word for it. Thanks for providing us with this information! Gearzein (talk) 01:15, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Using old file versions
Is it possible to use an old version of a png file? An editor tried to show what the old Nazar sprite looked like, but since the older version is now archived, is it inaccessible? Ferretwings (talk) 02:27, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I think that if you want to use the old nazar sprite and put it in an article, you would have to make a new file in upload file. I think you could download the old sprite from the Nazar.png if you really want to, it's still in there. P.S. I'm bad with links, I wanted to make it say Nazar File, but you have to click the image, I guess. Mythteller (talk) 15:52, 27 January 2016 (UTC)