Bring back the wiki!!!

[flameharvester]

Now I know you have read the title and gone NO!... just no..

However, I have some reasoning for my suggestion:

1) The manual is an excellent source of official information and should be retained and maintained.
2) The wiki offers an alternative, unofficial, user based, information source.
3) I personally have always gotten heavily involved in Wiki's for every game I have played, I know for myself (and based on personal experience, others) there is a great deal of enjoyment to be had in building a wiki, it offers a place to become an active member of the community in an alternative to the forums.
4) A wiki can offer many things, its not just limited to information on the game:
a) game information
b) Unit information
c) Game Tactics
d) Round stories, gives them more longevity, makes for an interesting read, etc ,etc


there are many other positive factors and the negatives are canceled out by maintaining the manual as the official resource.


Will expand on this later short on time.

 

[tobapopalos]

No.

 

[Dimitar]

No.

 

[LuckySports]

Wait, why are we against the wiki?

 

[Dimitar]

because it's redundant

 

[LuckySports]

Then get rid of the manual... ? Or expand the manual by adding a place that people can post strategies and advice.

 

[Dimitar]

The manual already has that, albeit outdated

 

[LuckySports]

It has a place where a few have been posted, but you cannot add anymore (without going through a helper)

I'm talking about making a place where anyone can post them.. (with perhaps an acceptance process)

 

[flameharvester]

Indeed, give me a reason why you want something that is admin run instead of user?

 

[Dimitar]

It has a place where a few have been posted, but you cannot add anymore (without going through a helper)

I'm talking about making a place where anyone can post them.. (with perhaps an acceptance process)

How is going through a helper a bad thing? I'd much rather have helpers approve stuff before they're posted as a (somewhat) official guideline. In a place where everyone can post we'd be getting strategies from masterminds like penguin. No, thanks

 

[Davs]

I generally wouldn't be against a wiki, were it not for the fact that there are many people who play this game who think they understand how every game mechanic works, but are simply wrong on several of them. Conversations (read: circular arguments) between such individuals and those who actually know how the game works occur too often for a wiki to really be feasible as people will be constantly "updating" pages with their interpretation of how something does or doesn't work - making it a pretty unreliable source of information (i.e. a waste of everyone's time) unless there are mods who spend all of their time checking any and every update.

Not to mention the fact that we already have a manual that explains how everything works (including, believe it or not, flakking :O) so there simply isn't a need for a wiki anyway.

 

[Alcibiades]

I generally wouldn't be against a wiki, were it not for the fact that there are many people who play this game who think they understand how every game mechanic works, but are simply wrong on several of them. Conversations (read: circular arguments) between such individuals and those who actually know how the game works occur too often for a wiki to really be feasible as people will be constantly "updating" pages with their interpretation of how something does or doesn't work - making it a pretty unreliable source of information (i.e. a waste of everyone's time) unless there are mods who spend all of their time checking any and every update.

Not to mention the fact that we already have a manual that explains how everything works (including, believe it or not, flakking :O) so there simply isn't a need for a wiki anyway.

Agreed in every word. We need an updated, accurate, and clear manual, not a wiki. When we are trying to attract new players, why would we split their attention even further? (Where they would undoubtedly run into contradictory, or downright incorrect, advice?)

No.

 

[Max]

Azzer tried to get the playerbase interested in writing a wiki database. But it NEVER worked. Nice idea - but the playerbase just wasn't interested in dedicating the time, even after Azzer really tried to push for it.

Have players instead contribute to the re-writing of the manual, including refreshed player suggestions for routes! It's always the first port of call when I play a new game (yes, I am a man who always reads the manual first, I know...)

 

[flameharvester]

I like contributing and given the chance I would contribut to the manual I still like the idea of a wiki, but I guess thats just me.

 

[Steve_God]

We've got a back-up of some of the info in the old Wiki (the useful stuff) but even a lot of that is out of date now.