# Talk:Missions

I'm happy with the table format and will use it so long as everyone else is on-board. --Azbats (talk) 07:20, 22 January 2016 (MST)

Tables look good to me. Will be very useful once the info is filled in. -- 08:27, 22 January 2016 (MST)
Thank you, I am new to using a wiki as an editor so please feel free to give me any pointers when I make a mistake. Having said that, I have my doubts about Tomvilfroy's revision of 20:00, 23 January 2016. I think the added information might be incorrect. What is the correct way to handle a situation like this? --Captain deMarco (talk) 12:57, 24 January 2016 (GMT+7)
If you can confirm the information is correct feel free to remove it. He may be a bit mixed up. -- 11:28, 26 January 2016 (MST)

## Format Discussion

For a discussion about mission page format, please take a look here. -- 11:28, 26 January 2016 (MST)

This seems to be a circular link. The place you link to just references this page. Joker41NAM (talk) 08:43, 29 Sept 2016 (CDT)

## Remarks column

I thought I should start a discussion about what information we would like to display in the remarks column.

Currently we are showing:

• Missions with good XP/Chr ratios
• Comments about which characters can help beat certain reward nodes, or at the very least that some nodes require specific traits
• Bug notes
• Ship schematic drops (recently added)

It should be noted that everything listed on each row is a duplicate of some piece of information on the mission page. As a summary page, I like the idea of having the schematics listed here so I can quickly find where to farm for them, without having to search each page.

--Jruff (talk) 08:14, 10 March 2016 (MST)

## Episode 2 Mission 16

136 skill required to pass epic level?

From the mission page: "Epic is currently bugged, and only requires a skill check of 136.", info is from April 30th. --Crunch (talk) 17:08, 26 May 2016 (CDT)

## Item Drop Rates

Id like to suggest adding data boxes for users to add data for drop rates of particular items (with the general guideline of not adding before getting 3 stars on a mission AND only if they attempt 10+ missions to prevent misleading data being entered, i.e. all rare items obtained). An example of something that I'm talking about can be found on the Runescape Wikia: http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Abyssal_demon#Charms and click on "add data to log". I think this MIGHT use the templates http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Charm_log_submission and http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Charm_data however as there are so many templates on that wikia, I'm not 100% sure. Regardless i think this could be implemented very well here, with exact drop percentages. I do not know how to implement this, however I'm hoping someone who sees this idea does :) --Admiral Titan (talk) 00:32, 13 May 2016 (CDT)

I think it would be a great idea, and I think CodeHydro is possibly working on something like it here: Template:DropTest/A_Tale_of_Forgotten_Lore/1 or Template:DropTest/multi. I don't see anything yet on how to submit additional data like the Runescape wiki. I'll see if I can get CodeHydro to comment here. Jello (talk) 04:12, 13 May 2016 (CDT)
Hmm, the possibility of Runescape-wikia-style "add data" would depend on if Javascript is enabled on this wiki build. I could definitely look into it eventually, though right now I'm focused on simply gathering initial data... additional data isn't even in the picture yet, though you can hack the template to keep data sets distinct:
 Item Units / unit Runs/Drop Mission tested: Example  By: 1st Date(s): May 2016 Runs: 20   Cost/Run: 1 Basic unwanted thing 14>>Basic unwanted thing Average (mean) runs per drop: 2 Based on test averages, to get one more drop,you may need to do another: 1 runs in 50 percent of cases (median) 2 runs in 10 percent of cases 4 runs in 1 percent of cases That is, 1 in 100 players may not see this itemdrop at all even after 3 runs. Also, a run dropping only this item is expected per 1.4 runs or so. 1.4Statistical Strength: Fairly reliableRange of average cost perBasic unwanted thingwithin 2 standard deviations(~95.5% confidence):1.1 — 2.04>> 1.4 Rare ★★★ 6>>Rare ★★★ Average (mean) runs per drop: 4 Based on test averages, to get one more drop,you may need to do another: 2 runs in 50 percent of cases (median) 7 runs in 10 percent of cases 13 runs in 1 percent of cases That is, 1 in 100 players may not see this itemdrop at all even after 12 runs. Also, a run dropping only this item is expected per 3.3 runs or so. 3.3Statistical Strength: Very unreliableRange of average cost perRare ★★★within 2 standard deviations(~95.5% confidence):1.96 — 11.14>> 3.3 Average cost per unit assumes 1 standard rewards per run.Please Do NOT include results from "Double-Up" Adwarps.   Double-Up results are not random and will skew results.
 Item Units / unit Runs/Drop Mission tested: Example  By: 1st & 2nd Date(s): May 2016 & Jan 2017 Runs: 40   Cost/Run: 1 Basic unwanted thing 32>>Basic unwanted thing Average (mean) runs per drop: 2 Based on test averages, to get one more drop,you may need to do another: 1 runs in 50 percent of cases (median) 2 runs in 10 percent of cases 3 runs in 1 percent of cases That is, 1 in 100 players may not see this itemdrop at all even after 2 runs. Also, a run dropping only this item is expected per 1.3 runs or so. 1.3Statistical Strength: Very reliableRange of average cost perBasic unwanted thingwithin 2 standard deviations(~95.5% confidence):1.08 — 1.49>> 1.3 Rare ★★★ 8>>Rare ★★★ Average (mean) runs per drop: 5 Based on test averages, to get one more drop,you may need to do another: 4 runs in 50 percent of cases (median) 11 runs in 10 percent of cases 21 runs in 1 percent of cases That is, 1 in 100 players may not see this itemdrop at all even after 20 runs. Also, a run dropping only this item is expected per 5 runs or so. 5.0Statistical Strength: Very unreliableRange of average cost perRare ★★★within 2 standard deviations(~95.5% confidence):3.05 — 13.91>> 5 Average cost per unit assumes 1 standard rewards per run.Please Do NOT include results from "Double-Up" Adwarps.   Double-Up results are not random and will skew results. Original 20 runs suggested a 30% chance. Second set of 20 runs experienced only 10% chance of 1st got lucky.
{{dropTest|mission=Example
|date=May 2016
|by=1st
|runs=20
|cost=1
|{{item|unwanted thing|basic}}|14|
|{{item|1st got lucky|rare}}|6|
}}
{{dropTest|mission=Example
|date=May 2016 & Jan 2017
|by=1st|by2=2nd
|runs={{#expr:20 + <!--2017-1-1-->20}}
|cost=1
|{{item|unwanted thing|basic}}|{{#expr:14 + <!--2017-1-1-->18}}|
|{{item|1st got lucky|rare}}|{{#expr:6 + <!--2017-1-1-->2}}|
|note=Original 20 runs suggested a 30% chance. Second set of 20 runs experienced only 10% chance of 1st got lucky.
}}
CodeHydro (talk) 07:10, 13 May 2016 (CDT)

## Transcludability & HTML instead of Wiki markup

I made it so that sections of this page can be transcluded onto the pages of each episode. This will make maintenance easier as we will don't have to update both pages anymore. A downside of this is that I had to kill the wikitable markup. Also lost the ability to edit each section individually, but I think the gain of one fewer page to maintain outweighs any drawbacks. One other thing: I didn't check each episode page before blanking it. If anybody is willing to look through the page history, please do so. Once you've done so please comment down here saying "I checked Episode 1" or something. CodeHydro (talk) 15:18, 26 May 2016 (CDT)

Perhaps then, it should be the other way around, each episode's mission list, is on there indivual page, and have the Mission page call for those lists? Similar to how the cadet challenges are done? Eeb3 (talk) 15:23, 26 May 2016 (CDT)
I fixed it so that we can edit sections individually; still forced to use html, but that's not nearly as big a deal. I didn't opt for the cadet missions way because it seems the majority want all missions in one spot considering this is really the only missions pages outside of cadets that gets updated.CodeHydro (talk) 15:45, 26 May 2016 (CDT)
• Episode 6 checked. Only piece of info that this page didn't have was something that was clearly mistaken (person added first completion captain XP instead of repeat XP to the episode page)CodeHydro (talk) 15:50, 26 May 2016 (CDT)
• Currently checking all. The individual Episode page had almost always the more outdated info. Done: DE, EP1-3. I am also currently in the process of syncing the rewards and XP values from the Missions page vs. each individual mission page. Completed so far: DE, E1, E3. --Crunch (talk) 15:58, 26 May 2016 (CDT)
• OK, completed the sync main page vs. old indiv. episode pages: DE, EP1-6. I ignored all Credits from the indiv. page for E5, as they were just based on chrons*75, which isn't always exact. There are still some bugs (first XP vs. repeat XP, a few missing numbers), which will be consolidated when I finish syncing main page vs. all indiv. mission pages. Not yet synced are: EP2,4-6.

==> There is one problem remaining that needs to be checked - I haven't unlocked that episode yet: E5-M08 claims it has a locked Empath/SCI node, the main page said the same. However, the old Episode page said it was Empath/DIP, and Commander Troi would work. This was probably bugged and got fixed, but I can't be certain. So if it was fixed, the mission page E5-M08 needs to be adjusted as well. --Crunch (talk) 16:59, 26 May 2016 (CDT)

For E5-M08 the first locked node is Empath with DIP. The second locked DIP node is Communicator or Crafty. --Elemntee (talk) 17:29, 26 May 2016 (CDT)
Thanks. I corrected that page. --Crunch (talk) 18:42, 26 May 2016 (CDT)

## All multi-drop items gone?

Many mission rewards came in packs of 2, 3 or even 4. However, since a few days, this is no longer so. Do we know whether these multi-drops have ALL been reduced to single drops, and whether this is a bug or not? --Crunch (talk) 13:51, 3 June 2016 (CDT)

Yeah it seems like all components are now single drops. Ship schematics remain as plural drops. The drop frequency doesn't appear to have changed however. That is, if a mission used to reward x3 alcohol 50 times per 100 runs, it seems like it would probably still rewards alcohol 50 times per 100 runs, but only x1 per reward. It's hard to tell for sure due to randomness but I'm fairly confident. — CodeHydro 16:04, 10 June 2016 (CDT)

## Credits

The last few epic missions I've completed have given less credits than the elite level. Am I being dumb and missing something? --Elemntee (talk) 17:25, 4 June 2016 (CDT)

Can you give an example? And how does the amount you got compare to the values given here in the wiki (if any) for these missions? Also, I assume you didn't use Warp? ;-) You will receive fewer credits (-30%?) at Warp. --Crunch (talk) 17:42, 4 June 2016 (CDT)
No warp :) Cytherian Highway and another mission I've only just managed to complete on epic, can't remember which one, sorry --Elemntee (talk) 18:15, 4 June 2016 (CDT)
Ah, then you probably passed only 2 of the 4 nodes of Cytherian Highway. Usually, the credits you get is chrons*75, in your case 1350. 676 is 50% of that. Credits and Crew XP are per successful node, Captain XP is always the full amount. --Crunch (talk) 18:53, 4 June 2016 (CDT)
Thanks. I'm correct, I was being dumb :D --Elemntee (talk) 19:03, 4 June 2016 (CDT)

## New Mission Drop Ratios

Hi there. I'm new to contributions but I've been using the wiki for months. With the announced item drop changes, I was wondering if the plan was to delete the old results and do new runs and is there a way to track which pages have been updated.

I am happy to contribute some runs, but I want to do it right for you.

Thanks so much. Kordex (talk) 11:48, 24 August 2016 (CDT)

Hm, good question. This wiki now has almost 250 different DropTests, so it would be a pain and a waste to lose these - especially since probably 99% of them are unaffected. On the other hand, drop rates will get skewed for those tests they actually did change.
Unfortunately the base templates for the DropTests are already quite bloated, it might not be possible to simply/quickly adapt them for different "sets of runs".
For now I suggest you add your data normally. However, if you suspect a DropTest to have changed, the best approach is probably to comment out the old data (but keep them in the source, for comparison) and restart these tests with post-2016/08/23 data.
Note I added a disclosure note that can be used for DropTests that definitely (or possible) changed. You'll still need to remove old data manually, but the disclosure note will provide a standardised notification, as well as the possibility to list the "old" drop rates. See here for documentation and usage. See here for an example of an affected Drop Test, as well as application of the note. --Crunch (talk) 18:41, 1 September 2016 (CDT)
Concerning "is there a way to track which pages have been updated": Yes, in the menu on the left there is "Recent changes", which displays the most recently modified pages. You can also filter the results (for example, select "Namespace: Template", to only show DropTest changes (and unfortunately also lots of ItemX changes...)). --Crunch (talk) 18:04, 25 August 2016 (CDT)

## Rare Reward Requirements

Would it be possible to add the value necessary to be eligible to win the rare reward to the mission pages? I was thinking it could be added as a number in parentheses after the rare reward's name in the Walkthrough section. Obviously this would have to be figured out for each mission/difficulty, but I think it would be helpful for players. -- Joker41NAM (talk) 08:51, 29 Sept 2016 (CDT)

## Mini-Maps

I wanted to start replacing the screenshot maps on more mission pages with the wiki-generated maps (see, for example The Wrong Crowd), because I thought it was a neat and useful feature - they're cleaner looking than a lot of the screenshot maps, and contain more at-a-glance information (all the reward nodes, for a start, since many of the screenshots were taken after some or all of the nodes were unlocked), plus hover-over info on locked nodes and rare rewards. When I went to edit one of the pages, though, I saw a user had actually commented out the map on several pages because the collapsible hovering mini-map doesn't work properly on mobile browsers. Setting aside the fact that the entire site is a pretty crappy experience on a mobile browser, I think I could edit Template:Map enough to suppress the hovering mini-map, while retaining the larger map above the walkthrough. The code that generates these maps is Greek to me, but throwing "visibility:hidden" into the styling for the hovering portion seems to suppress it, successfully (at least on preview; I didn't commit anything, and couldn't say with certainty that it won't still do something funny on mobile). I'd say comment out the mini-map portion of the code, but I can't honestly tell what generates the big map and what generates the small map. Any objections to going ahead with that? -- Azkar (talk) 01:36, 11 December 2016 (CST)

Setting visibility:hidden will still cause the map to render, but invisibly. Any space allocated to it on the page is still there. Instead, if you're going to go that route I would suggest using "display:none" instead. This completely suppresses anything with the tag. Does that make sense? If not, here is a quick visual aid. I personally hate the floating mini-map. I'm sure it was a cool idea when it was first being developed, but the end result is just... annoying. I personally will not mind if it were removed. And I know what you mean about mobile. Whenever I browse the wiki on my phone or iPad, I always set it to retrieve the desktop version of the page instead of the mobile version. Feel free to fiddle around with it, but I'd recommend doing it in your personal User space. Just create a new page somewhere like User:Azkar/MapTest and copy/paste the code in and play around. While I have a background in coding, I had zero experience with MediaWiki before I started editing this wiki and it took a little bit of time to learn. If you need a reference, just Google "MediaWiki" plus whatever problem you're having or solution you're trying to find and look for a result on MediaWiki.org. --Darxide (talk) 20:37, 11 December 2016 (CST)
Right, display:none. I had a momentarily lapse in my CSS memory ;-). I'm relatively experienced with wiki editing, but never really delved into conditional templates and whatnot. Some of the more advanced templates would take a good while to decipher the workings of. I'd like to pitch in where I can, though. I recently came back to the game, and have been leaning pretty heavily on this Wiki .. so wherever I can give back. :) -- Azkar (talk) 21:03, 11 December 2016 (CST)
Much of the templates is straight forward. The only things I had to learn were #if, #ifeq, and #switch. That's 98% of conditional template creation right there. This one page has everything you need to know about those three parser functions. The other functions on that page aren't used very often at all, but it's nice to have as a reference. --Darxide (talk) 12:45, 12 December 2016 (CST)

## Bug in drop-rate reliability calculation?

In Template:DropTest/1, the computation of the high and low arguments passed to Template:DropTest/4 doesn't seem to make sense to me when I do some dimensional analysis. Within both computations is the term {{{runs}}}*{{{rewards}}}-{{{2}}}/{{{3}}}. Here is what I can gather based on the chain of calls from Template:DropTest to Template:DropTest/3 to Template:DropTest/1:

• {{{runs}}} is the total number of runs recorded for the mission,
• {{{rewards}}} is the number of reward nodes passed in all recorded mission runs,
• {{{2}}} is the number of copies of the item obtained in all recorded mission runs, and
• {{{3}}} is the quantity of the item that can be obtained per reward node.

Then, the {{{2}}}/{{{3}}} part makes sense: it's the number of reward nodes that dropped the item. But {{{runs}}}*{{{rewards}}} is an odd quantity that I can't make sense of. The number of runs times the number of reward nodes passed? Moreover, subtracting the two quantities doesn't seem to type check.

I imagine the intent is to take the standard deviation across all reward nodes. That is, each reward node that we record is a sample. If so, it seems that {{{rewards}}} may have been misinterpreted as the number of reward nodes per mission run?

--Tribble (talk) 16:05, 17 May 2017 (CDT)

{{{rewards}}} is the number of reward nodes passed PER run (it is divided by {{{runs}}} in Template:DropTest, before being passed to Template:DropTest/1), i.e. 3 for most missions, and 4 or 2 for some. That makes {{{runs}}}*{{{rewards}}} the total number of rewards received (excluding the <tt{{{3}}}</tt> multiplicators), while {{{2}}}/{{{3}}} is the total number of a specific item received in all runs (again excluding the <tt{{{3}}}</tt> multiplicators). So {{{runs}}}*{{{rewards}}}-{{{2}}}/{{{3}}} is the total number of reward nodes that did NOT yield the current item type. --Crunch (talk) 17:13, 13 October 2018 (CDT)

## Episode 8: The Killing Syndrome

So I'm new to editing wikis, but I have referenced this one for quite a while. Has anyone else unlocked Episode 8 yet? I just unlocked it, but I don't know how. The most recent things I did were: -Immortalize 10 crew- -Complete Shuttle missions for Auguments & KCA- & -Level up Mirror Tucker to 70- The first mission is: "Evacuation Orders" -Preamble: Idrin says "This Alpha Quadrant may not be our home, but we intend to make the most of this unexpected vacation. We will hunt the most exotic and elusive prey-such as your Xindi." -Mission Briefing: Hirogen hunters are headed for Xindi space. Defend this Federation member against the invaders! So how would I add the rest of the mission data to fill the wiki page out?

## Mission 2: Rabid Fans - Distress Calls: Celestial Temple

I have noticed that there is a node missing in this mission. In node 4, there should be another "SEC" option at the bottom, as shown in the picture below.

--Captain Spirk (talk) 08:11, 25 April 2018 (CDT)

Where is it missing? 10:52, 25 April 2018 (CDT)
In Step 4, I think Step 4A needs to be moved down to the middle row. I hope this makes sense.
--Captain Spirk (talk) 11:45, 25 April 2018 (CDT)