Talk: War table

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the War table article.
General discussions not pertaining to the improvement of the article should be held in Discussions instead. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes! (~~~~) Do not edit another editor's comment.

Editing

Two things: First, I'm unclear as to how to add additional rows in the tables, so I haven't made any additions to the page yet. If someone could explain how, that'd be appreciated. Second, I think it'd be a good idea to add a column giving the prerequisite for a war table mission to show up(if there are any). For example, the Red Jenny quests require Sera to be a companion, and "Deal with the Relatives of the Trevelyans" is a human-only War table mission(elves get one called "Contact Clan Levellan"). I can make these edits myself if there's no objections, but I'll need to get an explanation on how to add a column to the tables, as well. Thank you. --Ashenendymion4 (talk) 06:20, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

The table is custom rather than from a template, which is why I dont think it's so easy to add rows. I'll add a bunch of random empty rows. Best way to add rows would be to edit the page, then edit Source, you'll see a lot of | lines and a |- line, just copy all of those and paste them below (if you see |-, |, |, |, |-, you'd copy the 3 | and the last |-) which should add the rows and columns. I'll go ahead and also add the extra column (I'm pretty new to the game, didn't nkow there were prereqs :)..) (KHShadowrunner (talk) 13:02, December 4, 2014 (UTC))

Thank you. If I find it's too difficult(I'm new to editing wikis, but I've read this one since DAO), I'll just wait for someone to add new rows.--Ashenendymion4 (talk) 20:55, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

As someone has begun to try and do - anyone have any suggestions on how to handle spoilers in terms of when missions become available? Would giving mission names be too much of a spoiler or are they considered safe? (KHShadowrunner (talk) 13:16, December 4, 2014 (UTC))

Nice job starting with the missions. There's however one thing I'm wondering about, and that is the time required to complete it. As you know, the recruited agents affect the mission completion time for respective advisor. So are these times that you currently put in, the default times, ie. the longest possible it takes to complete?

And while I'm here, a second question - do we use only "missions" to describe these events, or is "operations" also okay? Ingame it is "new operations are unlocked", yet at the War Table you see "missions" and "scouting". Kewpies (talk) 13:40, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

Per your second question, should we be including Scouting operations on this page, or do those go elsewhere? For instance, I've just unlocked the "Red Templars on the Storm Coast" scouting missions which gives access to the cut off section of the Storm Coast, but I'm unsure whether that should be listed here or not. Maybe a section at the top/bottom specifically for Scouting missions, so that they can have their own template seperate from Operations?Eunoshin (talk) 22:39, December 7, 2014 (UTC)

I'm only putting the times I see, and I know that for some of them (if not all of them) they are modified by agents. That said - anyone can edit the time for max, I'd just have to restart to do so and that would take a good chunk of time. (when I finish this playthrough, perhaps I'll edit them). In regards to operations, as long as it is a prereq, I'd go ahead and put it. We can always just change the column name to Prereqs and that'll encompass everything. (KHShadowrunner (talk) 13:56, December 4, 2014 (UTC))

I'm editing the page in a moment, and I intend to add a note to the top indicating that the completion times on the page should be without agents. But since it's going to take a while to go through the game with zero agents, if agents are affecting the time, I think it should just be noted that those are adjusted times with X many agents are affecting it.--Ashenendymion4 (talk) 20:55, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

I think it's going to be unavoidable to put spoilers on here in order to be accurate, so I think we should be ok putting the mission names even if they're spoilers. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 19:42, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

Mission timers

I've stumbled upon some information we may find useful. The timers for the missions operate independently of time put into the game, even when that particular file is not loaded.

For example, Josephine takes 45 minutes to perform Gather Coin, any save made after that will tick down the mission time, even if it's not your active file. Saving outside the Haven War Room immediately after starting the operation, reloading that save after 15 minutes showed that Josephine only had 30 minutes to go.

When I reloaded from prior to starting the mission and sent Cullen, the same scenario played out. Cullen takes 60 minutes, but 10 minutes later he had 50 minutes left, even after reloading.

Then, I went back to the Josephine file and found that another 10 minutes had been deducted from her time, even though the playthrough has technically diverged into two different states.

I'll update you when I finish my "Application not running" test." RShepard227 (talk) 03:26, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

No, you're right. It's pretty obvious when you start running missions that take longer than 30 minutes, and you log out of the game, only to log back in and be given 1-3 messages about operations being completed. Otherwise, pulling 24 hours missions (there's at least one) would get kind of ridiculous.Eunoshin (talk) 03:38, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

UPDATE: The timer continues to run even when the PS4 is turned off and unplugged. Not sure how it's technically possible, but this is definitely useful for missions like Tyrrda's weapon. I think we should include these mechanics in the intro section. Agreed anyone? RShepard227 (talk) 04:39, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

I'm on the Xbox One and the timer definitely still counts down while I've got the system off. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 05:32, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Sounds like an admin's seal of approval. :) RShepard227 (talk) 06:09, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

The timer associates itself with the system time. If you change the time of the system to 3-4 hours later, the 3-4 hours will pass with the time of the mission, regardless of whether or not that actually happened. If you change the system time to 10 minutes after you saved the game, then when only 10 minutes will have passed on the time remaining for the mission. Even if it's really 3 days later. Most consoles that connect to the internet, though, will automatically correct the date/time upon startup. That's why the timer "continues" while the system is off/unplugged. --Ashenendymion4 (talk) 02:56, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

I...thought so. At the very least we can use this mechanic to quickly gather details on operations, but I fear putting this on the front page will just encourage using it as an exploit. RShepard227 (talk) 06:25, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

To further this, rolling back the clock actually increases the time requirement. Ha ha stupid me. :D RShepard227 (talk) 07:01, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

The article was recently changed from "The times presented here are without Agents, unless otherwise indicated." to "The times presented here may vary slightly than what is presented in your own game due to each individual's unique game play." I'm unclear as to the reasoning behind the change. Yes, the times will vary based on each unique game, but if the wiki don't specify the tables contain a time unmodified by agents, I fail to see a reason to even include the time to completion in the tables at all. After all, people would be far more likely to complain that a time on the Wiki is less than what they're seeing in the game, than if it's more... Or am I alone in this? --Ashenendymion4 (talk) 04:59, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

I agree. There needs to be some context for the times listed, otherwise there's not really a point to them. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 05:08, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

I completely agree with you. I just so happen to find myself at a 3/4/3 split on agents, so I have the modifiers memorized in order to convert backwards to full length (except on weird non-quarter-hour increments). I would prefer the old way it was prefaced, by saying these were the unmodified times. Eunoshin (talk) 05:10, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Pre-Skyhold missions

I didn't complete Part II of the "Secrets of Andraste" mission chain, and I couldn't find an option for it when I relocated (it was replaced by the 'searching Haven' chain). Can anyone confirm that? And when exactly does Part III begin? RShepard227 (talk) 04:49, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

I didn't check the Cult of Andraste mission-line to see if any can be done after moving into Skyhold. That said, Part 3(Upon the Waking Sea) didn't appear until after I reached Level 4 in Inquisition Influence. Since part 1 and 2 are located around Haven, it'd make some sense that they can't be completed after moving, if they aren't showing up. Presumably, though, part three should appear if part 2 is done. --Ashenendymion4 (talk) 02:56, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw the Level 4 note after I wrote this. But considering how difficult it is to raise your Influence pre-Skyhold (at 24 hours in I only got up to Level 5), I can't imagine Part III has to be done before the relocation. RShepard227 (talk) 04:48, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

No, it doesn't have to be done prior to relocation... But I thought the purpose of having a Haven table was to include all missions that can be available before relocation, rather than just the missions that are only available there. If it's the latter, most of those missions need to be moved.--Ashenendymion4 (talk) 04:51, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Agreed, I think it's better to go with the former. If it carries over to Skyhold, the player can see it plainly on that War Map. If not, we'll have the note for it. RShepard227 (talk) 06:20, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Also, the "Investigate Serault" and "Utilize the Grey Warden Treaties" missions 'can' be done even after the re-location. I'll go ahead and remove those notations. RShepard227 (talk) 06:37, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Race Specific Missions Section

I did not roll a Quinari Inquisitor, so I may be mistaken. However, was the "Contact with the Valo-Kas Mercenaries" operation added at the bottom of the page merely the equivalent to "Deal with the Relatives of the Trevelyans" and "Contact Clan Lavellan" for the other origins? If so, then I would get rid of this section and merge it into the Haven - Ferelden section. Eunoshin (talk) 05:14, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

I think it is the equivalent to the Human/Dalish missions... But since I haven't rolled my Qunari Inquisitor yet(I'm doing that after I finish my Dalish playthrough), I'm not going to change it on my own, on the off chance that there's something special about it.--Ashenendymion4 (talk) 05:30, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Doubtful, if it's anything like the others, it's a warmup operation in Haven with a followup in Skyhold. I've been tripping over it all night with the edits and would rather it go away entirely. RShepard227 (talk) 06:57, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Scouting Missions and Repeatable Missions

Eunoshin asked this earlier, but I believe it deserves it's own section. Should we have a table specifically dedicated to scouting missions -- the missions that have only one purpose/reward: area/quest unlocks in the specific region(usually, but not always, started by planting a marker in said region)? I think such a table should exist. If only to separate them from the other missions that actually offer item/gold/influence rewards. Thoughts?--Ashenendymion4 (talk) 05:56, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Additionally, I think there should probably be an added table that holds only the repeatable missions. The gather coin ones, gather materials(for each region), and the ones obtained through securing the Keeps in Crestwood, Western Approach and (I forget the third area).--Ashenendymion4 (talk) 05:56, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Access to Inquisitor's Bedroom Prerequisite

A couple of operations were added with the Prerequisite condition of "Access to Inquisitor's Bedroom". Thinking back to when I first gained access to Skyhold, I know that there were a bunch of ruins, then when I talked with Solas and we had a conversation while the Inquisitor is dreaming, I woke up in the bedroom. Upon leaving the bedroom, I found that the first set of renovations to Skyhold were complete (less rubble all over the floor, repairs had started, etc.) I would have thought that this change would also occur if you were to use the world map to travel to a different region and then come back to Skyhold. Anyone know if this is the case, so tha the prerequisite isn't that you enter the bedroom, but that Skyhold begins the first set of renovations? Eunoshin (talk) 13:13, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

I added that. And you're right, the first set of renovations is the prerequisite(which occurs the moment you return to Skyhold from somewhere or into the Inquisitor's Bedroom via Solas or Josephine interactions). But I figured that some people may interpret "first set of renovations" as needing to upgrade one of the three sections of Skyhold, rather than just "scaffolding in the main hall". Thus the general "access to bedroom".--Ashenendymion4 (talk) 15:54, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

New Category and development of War Table Quests

I'd like to propose we create a unique category for War Table quests and also just for clarity, i strongly think we should create individual articles for war table quests rather than relying entirely on the war table to accommodate all the information. - 12:20, December 10, 2014 (UTC)

I think it's more appropriate if we do it at a later time though. At the moment, the war table allows us to look up and fill in the missing info quicker than going into individual articles. Weisswolf (talk) 21:19, December 10, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with the original poster and with the others in this discussion who think we should eventually add individual war table quest pages. Although it may be too early to start that process now, there are a couple of quests in particular whose details will be really useful to players already, such as "Investigate Hunter Fell." It's a logic puzzle, but after you've gotten past the first stage, there's no way to recover the clues without loading up an old save and running it again. It caught me (and other folks in the forums) off guard. So I'm doing the helpful thing and putting together a page with all the details for people who want to solve the puzzle, spoiler-free, instead of being handed the answer. 76.104.218.92 (talk) 11:29, December 14, 2014 (UTC)

I've created new topics Investigate Hunter Fell, Continue Investigation, and Identify Venatori Agent to cover this logic puzzle. They use a modified version of the standard Quest template. 76.104.218.92 (talk) 23:30, December 14, 2014 (UTC)

Summaries

Maybe we should add quest descriptions. What does anyone else think?--Observer Supreme 01:17, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

I don't really see summaries of each mission working on the War Table page. The War Table page, in my mind, should just be the basics - Requirements, duration, rewards, and special circumstances. Not to mention that the tables, as they appear now, don't look like they'll fit a sixth column without serious appearance issues. At least when I look at it. I think mission summaries(or just copy/paste text from each mission preview) would probably be better served if one creates a page for each individual mission.--Ashenendymion4 (talk) 01:35, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

Okay.--Observer Supreme 01:44, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

Adding another column isn't really difficult. As other's have pointed out though, when I created them, I just didn't see it as pertinent information. Eventually all of them should have a unique page with all of the details of them, including all of the given statements by the commanders and all of the responses for ultimate lols. Buuut that's down the road. For now it's more of a "I really dont want to have to navigate between 4 different pages and hope I find my entry - and oh that entry is not quite accurate"

Need confirmation

Discovered a new (to me) operation "Secure More Lyrium for the Templars." Requires the Underworld Knowledge perk and the proper dialogue choice, "Not now. They need lyrium." The perk adds a similar dialogue choice for In Hushed Whispers, "We'll need lyrium. I can help," but no new operation. I was fully expecting a "Secure More Lyrium for the Mages" (or something similar) operation. I tested after making mages allies and conscripts. It's bothering me that the dialogue option exists for both quests but only has a practical effect for one. So if people could be on the lookout, try it out for themselves just in case I'm missing something, that would be nice. --TubbyM0ph0 (talk) 04:06, December 18, 2014 (UTC)

Got another. The "Investigate the Strange Chalk Markings" operation disappears when Leliana completes an operation. I did one of the instant DLC operations with her, Red Hart, and the little black piece vanished from the table, although the yellow marker for it was still pulsing. Backed out of the war room, and immediately reentered and it was gone completely. So my first thought was, ok, maybe it's a bug related to the DLC. Loaded a save and tried doing the same instant DLC operations with Cullen and Josie and it never vanished. So, I put Leliana on a short operation, and when she finished, the Chalk operation disappeared again. I've also noticed that the Chalk operation always pops up after Leliana finishes an operation. So, here's my theory: Chalk pops up after Leliana completes, I dunno, 2-3 operations. And it goes away if she completes even one more. Get to checking, people. --TubbyM0ph0 (talk) 04:41, December 18, 2014 (UTC)

Completed the "The Chantry Remains" War Table mission this morning and sent Josephine in hopes to net some approval from Cassandra as the main page points out, but I my screen featured "Cassandra Slightly Disapproves" instead of the approval the table suggests. (99.120.172.165 (talk) 16:54, January 1, 2015 (UTC))

Hard in Hightown: Unsavory Parallels

Josephine is not locked for this (PC), but the outcome is the same as leliana. --Ra1n (talk) 13:06, December 18, 2014 (UTC)

You're right. Corrected the issue on the page. Should be accurate now.--Ashenendymion4 (talk) 17:09, December 19, 2014 (UTC)

Missing operation: "Smash"

(First time using this so not sure how to do this, if anything is done wrong please edit.) The war table operation "smash" in not contained in this wiki article. This operation likely requires the inquisitor to be a Tempest(Rogue specialization) to be active, as the operation giver is Kihm, the Tempest trainer. Another requirement seems to be a high level of influence, likely 10 or more.

I'm currently playing through as a rogue, so I'll see about nailing this down. --TubbyM0ph0 (talk) 23:00, December 20, 2014 (UTC)

I had this mission on one of my playthroughs. I chose Cullen for the task since he was the quickest. It came back with 10 Masterwork Pyrophite as reward. -- 151.224.108.98 (talk) 08:50, December 27, 2014 (UTC)

watcher in the wings

watcher in the wings

Leliana - send agents to investigate: 5.5hrs

Cullen - send guards to protect the cathedral: 6.5hrs

Josie - n/a

The Chantry Remains

Can somebody check Josephines Choice, i could have sworn that Cassandra "sligthly disapproved" on completion, but I'm a Mage (PC) --Ra1n (talk) 14:57, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

I was very methodical about that one when I saw it was significantly different... I used a Female Elf Mage. Josephine resulted in approval on six different reloads, with the other two options always resulting in "slightly disapproves". The reason Cassandra seems to approve is because Josephine's choice seems to respect the sovereignty of the Chantry, while Leliana takes more, unsavory, actions, and Cullen sends in troops. That said, I intend to go through each of these missions again with a Qunari(female warrior) to see if any results change based on the Inquisitor's make-up. But I likely won't get around to that until the new year. --Ashenendymion4 (talk) 15:22, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

I was playing while logged out of the Dragon Age servers (on Xbox 360), and I got slight disapproval from Cassandra even when choosing Josephine's diplomacy; I tried this multiple times. I cleared the cache (when in doubt...) and restarted the game, logged in this time, and reloaded that save. I got the operation update along with Cassandra's approval this time. Didn't have to reload to a save very far back; the operation had already been completed, I just had to go to the war table to receive the report. Something to bear in mind if you're noticing wrong approval/disapproval notices? --orbatrix (talk) 18:12, January 7, 2015 (UTC)

You are correct, it was definatly not the war table mission --Ra1n (talk) 18:39, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

Ben-Hassrath Mission Sequence

For "Stop Venetori Fire Ship" mission, someone recently added that Josephine fails to stop the fire ship... This is contradictory to what I had achieved in my own playthrough, and I'm wanting to "fix" it. I went Josephine for "Failed Assassination Attempt Inquiry", Cullen for "Follow Venetori Assassins", and Josephine for "Stop Venetori Fire Ship", and the Arls managed to successfully stop the Fire Ship from burning Denerim(the text was distinctly different from Leliana's "Denerim is on Fire" text, and the text included that the Fire Ship was stopped). So I'm curious as to how it was achieved that Josephine fails. Could the Ben-Hassrath mission lines be like the Grey Warden mission line? In which if you fail to choose the "lower casualties" options(or choose a "higher casualties" option), you will run out of Grey Wardens? If so, then even Leliana may succeed in stopping the Fire Ship depending on the options taken before then. Perhaps this(and the Tracking the Spies sequence as well) should be looked into before they are edited further.--Ashenendymion4 (talk) 18:31, December 27, 2014 (UTC)

Grand Cleric Iona Mission

The last Haven/Orlais mission is called Grand Cleric Iona. After having played through the Haven section for a third time, I have yet to see this mission appear(I have yet to see it appear at all in any playthrough). So, I'm curious as to what it's mission requirements are, as there are none listed at the moment. I can only assume the mission requires a choice in Dragon Age Keep in order for it to appear, but I have no idea what it would be.--Ashenendymion4 (talk) 18:25, December 29, 2014 (UTC)

I just wanted to add a note for anyone working on the war table, but the operation "Red Templars on the Storm Coast" unlocked for me when I closed a rift and hit level 16. I got it at the same time as the "Support from Nevarre" operation, which supposedly requires you to seal 40 rifts, so that may be a prerequisite, or it's the level 16 thing. Can anyone confirm getting it prior to level 16? 76.100.234.66 (talk) 11:14, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

Grand Cleric Iona's prerequisite is definitely not based on DA Keep since my 3rd playthrough cause the mission to appear after I get the fail (slight disapproval from Cassandra) when I use Josephine to complete The Chantry Remains. Also I saw a post mentioning that whether we ally or conscript the mages or templars have any effect and my reply is "False". I have always allied with the mages and the mission appeared. Seems like a random or rare chance to get the Grand Cleric Iona mission for me. The only diff was that I was playing as a female inquisitor for the first time (in forever). -:)-122.11.216.24 (talk) 12:28, August 7, 2015 (UTC)

Creating individual pages

I noticed someone is creating lots of individual pages. So, perhaps it's time to begin reaching a consensus on how they should look? There are at least 3 different looks going on right now: Investigate Hunter Fell, A Battalion for Sera and Verchiel, Deal with Relatives of the Trevelyans for examples. Admittedly, I created the battalion page, but it was more of a placeholder, because I didn't want an empty link for The Verchiel March. Or maybe that's what's going on now? Just filling in information until the aesthetics are finalized? Regardless, in the end I believe acquisition, operation text, the tarot cards with the advisor suggestions and mission times, and then results should all be included. Maybe it's still too early to be discussing this, but I just hate to see someone do a bunch of work just to have to go back and do it over again. And should they be called operations or missions? The game always says "New operations available," but whenever you select it at the war table, it says "Mission" over the description. Damn devs.--TubbyM0ph0 (talk) 22:25, January 4, 2015 (UTC)

This is a good point to raise as I have been creating pages myself, trying to match, mostly, what has previously been done. I agree with the heading suggestions - Acquisition, Operation Text, Advisor Suggestions and Times, Results, Rewards (unfortunately I haven't been including times myself to date). I'm personally of the thought that they are all "operations". As it's described in the tutorial in-game, they refer to them as "scouting operations" and "mission operations" so that's what I've been working with Ness csr (talk) 09:35, January 7, 2015 (UTC)

War table capitalization

Why "War table"? It's not capitalized in-game:

• The war table allows you to apply the power of the Inquisition throughout Orlais and Ferelden.
• Go to the war table to ...
• Power can be spent at the war table ...

– mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 10:35, January 7, 2015 (UTC)

Operation list dump

Might be useful: User:Mostlyautumn/Sandbox1 I will try to extract the rest of the information (description, time, rewards, etc.) later. – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 20:16, January 8, 2015 (UTC)

Name

I think we should come up with a standardization of what we are calling these on the individual articles. I've seen "quest", "mission", and "operation", and the category name is [:Category:War table quests]. Personally, I like "X is a war table operation" best, as that is what they're mostly called in game. And we could rename the category to "War table operations". --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 00:11, January 13, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah I brought this up earlier. At the war table it says "Mission" over the descriptions. But I think using "Operation" to refer to them in all respects is the way to go as well.--TubbyM0ph0 (talk) 00:31, January 13, 2015 (UTC)

Agree with both comments above. Ive also seen "side quest" category added to these and my opinion is that it is a bit misleading. Kewpies (talk) 00:39, January 13, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, regardless of what we decide to call these, the side quests category shouldn't be on any of them. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 00:48, January 13, 2015 (UTC)

The info box displays "Quest" ... is there an option to modify that?--TubbyM0ph0 (talk) 01:21, January 13, 2015 (UTC)

i think supertitle can, but im not sure what description you agreed upon.. Was it operation? "|supertitle=Operation" then. Kewpies (talk) 13:10, January 14, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I had User:Mostlyautumn fix up supertitles for the quest infobox (I try not to touch the complicated templates ). So it can look like this Support Vivienne, with whatever word we decide upon. Leanings seem to be towards 'Operation", at the moment. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 15:55, January 14, 2015 (UTC)

Apologies if this has been mentioned elsewhere but I have seen the quest infobox location as "War table|War room" (example: Scout the Hinterlands) which I think is appropriate. Shall we run with this? -- Ness csr (talk) 05:43, January 20, 2015 (UTC)

I definitely prefer "War table|War room" to "War table". – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 08:16, January 20, 2015 (UTC)

I could see how that would make sense if this page was called War room, but the operations take place at the war table. I say keep it simple. --N00bKing (talk) 11:24, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

These are operations started at the war table, in the war room. So I think it's quite okay to change the location. What about leading sentence tho? Personally I don't see anything wrong with location=war room and description "X is a war table operation", unless others think its confusing. Kewpies (talk) 11:51, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

I think the |location= should be "Skyhold" and "War table" should be populated in the |start= or |end= fields, like it is in the Dagna: Mind Your Mentor operation. --N00bKing (talk) 12:13, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

I like "war room" because it feels more like a location.

N00bKing, I think your suggestion is appropriate for that one as Dagna most definitely starts the operation. A lot might end up saying "start=war table; end=war table" though which I'm not crazy about personally. We know it's a war table operation after all. I think start/end should be avoided unless, like the Dagna operation, it clearly starts (or ends) somewhere else. That's my two cents anyway. All these suggestions make sense - just need to pick one for consistency -- Ness csr (talk) 12:28, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

"Hard in Hightown: A Worthy Dwarf" with Leliana: No Bianca Upgrade.

Finished "Revenge of the Merchants Guild" with Josephine => Varric Approved and i got "Hard in Hightown: A Worthy Dwarf." Finsihed "Hard in Hightown: A Worthy Dwarf" with Leliana => Varric Approved, BUT I GOT NO REWARD at all (especially no BIANCA UPGRADE). ((just finished "Seeing Red" during the time of the quest ... maybe that is why?))

I don't believe completing Seeing Red would have affected the outcome. I created the page for Hard in Hightown: A Worthy Dwarf myself and added the result/reward upon completing the quest - literally adding the details with the game running dual-screen - so I definitely received the reward. Not too sure what might have affected your outcome honestly - definitely no schematic (not the actual grip)?? -- Ness csr (talk) 03:55, January 14, 2015 (UTC)

Just wanted to note that I also finished this and did not receive an Ornate Bianca Grip Schematic.--N00bKing (talk) 14:30, January 18, 2015 (UTC)

Have tested this again, same result (see images) -- Ness csr (talk) 08:08, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

Just realized this may be due to already having the schematic before doing the quest. --N00bKing (talk) 10:45, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

Was thinking the same thing as I never buy schematics. Wasn't sure if this one could be purchased. I'll update the war table & the page for the operation. -- Ness csr (talk) 10:53, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

The University of Orlais

I believe this is actually available much later after relocation to skyhold not a pre skyhold mission

Choose Successor in Lydes (Parts 1 & 2) 'See Page'

Choose Successor in Lydes (Parts 1 & 2) - 'See Page'
(As one example anyway)
This used to be clear and concise, and now it is broken up onto multiple pages, if you really want this to NOT be listed in the chart for some strange reason, then please, at least make the quest page include both, parts 1 and 2. I much preferred the way it was, all short, sweet, and to the point in the table, were it was easy to read, and figure out how to get the result you wanted. I think it is great to have the page, so you can expand on the text, give the full conversation, that is great, but the chart should still have the abbreviated form. If I do not want to have to read the full text on the site here to figure out what is happening, I shouldn't have to, that is the point of a reference chart. If I am doing the mission, I want to read the text in the game, I am checking here for the 'CliffsNotes', but there are other times, when I missed something, and want to come back and read the full text, and that is where the full page comes into play.
So, please revert the chart back to the way it was, or something similar. The chart should never say 'see page' unless it is followed by '...for more information'.

Added times and rewards back to "Choose Successor in Lydes (Part II)" -- Ness csr (talk) 20:58, January 15, 2015 (UTC)

Opening the Roads

I added the bug with the merchant being invisible the other day and someone has advised there is a patch fix? Can anyone confirm this on PC as I still have this bug as at January 17? -- Ness csr (talk) 07:35, January 17, 2015 (UTC)

Style suggestion

I think we may want to restructure based around how the mission chains relate to the characters, such as qun related ones you would only get with iron bull staying qunari. the examples from the sites below may help.--FossilLord 21:04, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

http://dragonage3.wiki.fextralife.com/side+quests

http://segmentnext.com/2014/11/27/dragon-age-inquisition-war-table-operations-and-missions-guide-tips-rewards-how-to-unlock/

http://segmentnext.com/2014/11/27/dragon-age-inquisition-war-table-operations-and-missions-guide-tips-rewards-how-to-unlock/2/

http://segmentnext.com/2014/11/27/dragon-age-inquisition-war-table-operations-and-missions-guide-tips-rewards-how-to-unlock/3/

http://segmentnext.com/2014/11/27/dragon-age-inquisition-war-table-operations-and-missions-guide-tips-rewards-how-to-unlock/4/

That would make for a pretty big restructure but I can see the appeal -- Ness csr (talk) 22:05, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

Most of that re-ordering under various categories isn't particularly useful. There seem to be only two things those listings make a lot clearer than the current one here: the sequence of mission chains and the association with companions. 88.152.225.138 (talk) 14:23, January 24, 2015 (UTC)

Advisor times

I think we should come up with a uniform format for the advisor times on the individual operation pages. They're always under Advisor suggestions but I have seen them (a) in italics next to the advisor's name e.g. Deal with Relatives of the Trevelyans (b) on a separate line under the advisor's name e.g. Dagna: Overdue Penalties and (c) at the end of the suggestion e.g. Choose Successor in Lydes. I have been using (a) but I'd be happy with (c). I think (b) adds unnecessary space. Any other thoughts? -- Ness csr (talk) 09:23, January 23, 2015 (UTC)

I second the use of the "Deal with Relatives" format, since I've used it a couple times myself. The <blockquote></blockquote> helps frame it like the actual letters used for the mission reports. Although I think agreeing on a format and re-tooling the existing articles should come before crunching the numbers on mission times. I would advise HH:MM:SS as a format, to be consistent with the game displays, rather than 'x minutes' like it says on some articles. RShepard227 (talk) 01:06, January 24, 2015 (UTC)

I admit I have been using x minutes on articles but I agree the format should be HH:MM:SS -- Ness csr (talk) 05:23, January 24, 2015 (UTC)

How about a template then? It could look like this: {{Mission|01|00|00|6|Gold (42-60)}}
The parameters would be Hour(s)|Minutes|Seconds|Number of Agents (optional)|Reward
(It might also be possible to add a Javascript that would allow the user to specify how many agents he has and recalculate the time...)
88.152.225.138 (talk) 10:30, January 24, 2015 (UTC)

Restructuring

There've been a few proposals to restructure this page. I don't find the current structure overly useful myself. Assigning the missions to either Haven or Skyhold and subdividing them into Orlesian, Ferelden, etc. missions doesn't seem to to organize the data along the lines users would search for it. I don't see how this structure makes finding a particular mission or series of missions any easier. The fextralife wiki has a more intuitive way of dividing the missions:

• Area Unlock Missions
• General Missions
• Special Missions
• Race Missions
• Inquisitor Path Missions
• Inner Circle Missions

The "Special" category would be the exception though. Since that wiki has no way to show sequences, forks and prerequisites they were forced to create this category for everything they cannot neatly put into one of the other categories. The "Race" category also seems a bit superfluous since it's such a small one. But overall I like their structure better.

My suggestion would be:

• All Missions (this would simply be a flat, unstructured list)
• Area Missions (contains unlock missions but also all other area-specific missions - all those gather-missions e.g.)
• Inquisitor Missions (contains the main quest-related missions and all missions that become available as a result of player choices - the racial missions would go here, but also the Ser Morris mission line e.g., since it only becomes available if the player sides with the templars and keeps him alive)
• Inner Circle Missions (probably obvious)

The flat list with all missions would be mainly for the benefit of users who don't have Javascript enabled. The other lists would be generated on the fly with Javascript. Missions could be part of more than one dynamic list. The dynamic lists should also be able to represent forks (side with mages or templars e.g.) in some way - maybe by using the Tabber Extension...

In any case: I've written a short PHP script that parses the whole page into an array. That should make it easy to restructure and reformat the data however we like. Let me know what you think, please!

(I'm terribly bored at the moment, so take advantage of that and give me something to do, please ;)

5.146.209.112 (talk) 11:44, January 26, 2015 (UTC)

Alright, I made an account now. The above post is mine. And I've also tinkered with the idea a little. Here's a little proof of concept. I've poured all the mission data into a template that looks like this:

{{Mission | title = Contact Clan Lavellan | prerequisites = [[Scout the Hinterlands]]<br>[[Dalish]] Inquisitor only | connections = {{RewardMission|0:15:00|10 [[Blood Lotus (Inquisition)|Blood Lotus]]}} | secrets = {{RewardMission|0:15:00|10 [[Blood Lotus (Inquisition)|Blood Lotus]]}} | forces = {{RewardMission|0:12:00|30 Influence}} | notes = Dalish lives are lost if you choose Cullen | tags = }}

The most important bit is the "tags" parameter. Tags can be an arbitrary number of keywords that are used for sorting and can be associated with tabs. In the demo I've added the tag "area" to 3 missions and created a tab called "Area Missions" for them. If you check out the demo, take note of your browser's url-bar too, please. It should change with the tab that you choose, which means you can link to them.

Let me know what you think! Yes, that happened (talk) 10:16, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

We should use the transformer template, something like:

<onlyinclude>{{QuestTransformer
|style       = {{{style|}}}
|supertitle  = Operation
|name        = [[Contact Clan Lavellan]]
|icon        = Quest icon DAI.png
|image       = Dalish Quest Banner2.PNG
|px          = 270px
|prereqs     = [[Scout the Hinterlands]]<br>[[Dalish]] Inquisitor only
|josephine_time   = 0:15:00
|josephine_reward = 10 [[Blood Lotus (Inquisition)|Blood Lotus]]
|leliana_time     = 0:15:00
|leliana_reward   = 10 [[Blood Lotus (Inquisition)|Blood Lotus]]
|cullen_time      = 0:12:00
|cullen_reward    = 30 Influence
|notes       = Dalish lives are lost if you choose Cullen
|tags        = 
|location    = [[Haven]], [[Skyhold]] - [[War table]]
|next        = [[Protect Clan Lavellan]]
|appearances = [[Dragon Age: Inquisition]]
}}</onlyinclude>

– mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 10:34, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

It sure makes sense to use a template/design that's already in use all over this wiki. I gotta admit though, how to use this template isn't quite obvious to me. You've left out a few of the parameters I see on the template's help page and added a few new ones... How does that work? Yes, that happened (talk) 10:46, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

Transformer template selects a template based on the "style" parameter. For example, to display a table of war operations we'd create a "Template:WarTableOperationRow" that displays a single table row and add "wartableoperationrow=WarTableOperationRow" style to the switch statement in the transformer template. After that {{:Contact Clan Lavellan|style=wartableoperationrow}} would call "Template:WarTableOperationRow" template with the parameters of the QuestTransformer specified on the Contact Clan Lavellan page. – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 10:58, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

Um... and why not use Template:WarTableOperationRow directly? Yes, that happened (talk) 11:01, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I see the template pulls the data from the mission's page into the main table. Okay, I get the basic idea. I still don't know how to use it, but I get the basic idea Yes, that happened (talk) 11:04, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

So that means: Instead of editing the mission/operation data on War table, we'd have to edit on all of the ~300 individual pages that provide details about operations. That would be a little complicated, no? It also would require a bot edit.

If you mean initial data transfer, I can do it (with a bot of course). Actually, I'm going to try this later today since it's not something directly related to the restructuring. – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 11:30, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

How about my JS idea then? That idea requires tags for sorting. And it would certainly be easier to edit those tags on one page instead of 300. Also: Do you want my PHP script for extracting the data or do you have some code already? Yes, that happened (talk) 12:10, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

Tags can be specified on this page. Changing time and rewards requires editing two pages currently, this is the main reason to put them in the transformer. – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 12:54, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

Hm. I'll just wait and see what you do then... Yes, that happened (talk) 13:00, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

Update: I'm still going to do it, just wanted to do some cleanup first. I'm also verifying all data against the game files. – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 11:14, January 29, 2015 (UTC)

No rush :) I can work on the JS for the moment. It'll take a few more days before the mockup showcases my proposal clearly enough to discuss it. I'll keep you in the loop though. Currently I'm working on a search function... Yes, that happened (talk) 14:14, January 29, 2015 (UTC)

I've updated the JavaScript just now. Check it out at User:Yes,_that_happened/Wartable, please!

What the script does: It takes a page where all operations are presented as a flat and unstructured listing and adds menus to it. The operations are moved to tabs depending on the tags they have. The tagging can only start in earnest once War table is restructured however. For the moment I've only tagged a small handfull operations for testing purposes, so most tabs are empty or contain next to nothing. But that doesn't matter. The demo is already good enough to show you what tagging could do. Not present in the demo - but possible with a few minor changes - are submenus. The "Inner Circle" tab e.g. would contain a submenu for all of the companions and advisors. Story forks could also be visualized with submenus. And do keep in mind: The menu structure isn't hardcoded. You can change it by editing the page. Editing the JS won't be necessary once it's complete.

I've also added a search to the first tab. That's the "all" tab that shows every operation. All by itself it pretty much shows the page as it would look like without the JS. But type anything into the search box and the page will be reduced to a handfull matches. The minimum word length is currently two. The index is made up of the tags and the text contents of the operations - minus stop words like "of", "in", "are", etc.

Another feature is the activation of the URL bar. You can link to tabs now. It took me quite a while to get this feature to work, but I'll probably remove it regardless. It didn't occur to me while I was making it, that it would pollute the browser's history. But it does. Badly. Maybe I can think of a way to make at least the search possible via the URL, but that may not reduce the pollution...

The code was developed in Firefox 35 and briefly tested in Internet Explorer 10. It may not work quite as well in other browsers yet.

Things I still want to add: Tags (well, d'uh) and some AJAX. It would be cool to add a show details button to the operations that would load the contents of their respective pages on demand... Yes, that happened (talk) 13:18, February 1, 2015 (UTC)

I know nothing about coding, but when you say it might not work as well in other browsers, does that mean this page may not be viewable in other browsers? --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 22:06, February 1, 2015 (UTC)

It just means I haven't tested it yet. It should work in all browsers, but you never know... Yes, that happened (talk) 22:44, February 1, 2015 (UTC)

I think we need to be absolutely certain before doing such a major restructuring, then. There shouldn't be any circumstance where an article on the wiki isn't accessible to everyone. It's part of why we haven't implemented other things that would interfere with web browsers or mobile usage, such as tabbing. I get wanting to make the wiki look better, but I would think there are ways to do it without losing acessibility. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 22:53, February 1, 2015 (UTC)

It's just an expriment for now. Give it a little time, please! I do plan on creating something that either works everywhere or degrades gracefully. But this is just a little toy project for me. If it ends up as something you guys don't want, I won't raise a fuss. Yes, that happened (talk) 23:29, February 1, 2015 (UTC)

I certainly can't fault anyone for wanting a pet project (lord knows I've got too many ). I'll sit back, then, and let y'all work on it. We can see how it looks at the end. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 23:32, February 1, 2015 (UTC)

Removing "Notes" column, rename "Rewards" to "Result"

Right now we are rather inconsistent about what to put in the notes. I suggest we remove this column altogether and move all operation unlocks, results and approvals to the "Rewards". "Repeatable" note can be added under the name of the operation. "Unavailable after moving to Skyhold" note belongs to the "Prerequisites". – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 11:19, January 28, 2015 (UTC)

How about the little outcome tips like "Dalish lives are lost if you choose Cullen"? Rewards as well? -- Ness csr (talk) 11:47, January 28, 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Some operations already use this format, for example, Val Gamord mission chain. – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 12:01, January 28, 2015 (UTC)

Most of the contents of the Notes column should be in the Prerequisites or the Rewards columns. There's a very small number of notes that can not be moved into other columns, but they seem to be the exception. Since every operation has its own page, there's plenty of room there to add all kinds of free-form notes there. So just drop those out of the table! We could pull in all those details from the mission pages on demand with AJAX. Yes, that happened (talk) 15:26, January 28, 2015 (UTC)

Notes removed (provided my edit sticks), information moved either to the prereqs or rewards. All the notes were retained, but some were obvious or unnecessary, and should probably just be removed. It needs a few formatting fixes, too.--ShiftyApparition (talk) 20:24, January 28, 2015 (UTC)

Individual pages

So with the restructure, is there anything different we should be doing on the individual operation pages as there are a lot of differences between them with respect to formatting? -- Ness csr (talk) 03:33, February 3, 2015 (UTC)

I think we should decide on a uniform formatting. Two things I'd like to see: Josephine/Leliana/Cullen headings as actual headings and consistent duration representation. It's also possible to template the whole page like it's done with the codex entries but I'm not sure it's worth it. – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 10:03, February 3, 2015 (UTC)

I've started a forum page if people would like to take a look and comment/contribute Forum:Consistent individual operation page format -- Ness csr (talk) 11:30, February 3, 2015 (UTC)

Lasting Effects

I noticed that some missions get cleared up from the table and some persist with the symbol of the agent that you used. I assume these count toward defining the type of power your inquisition is associated with at the end (but I could be wrong). It might be a good idea to put a label on these, if that is in fact their purpose.

So far these are the ones that have remained on my table after completion:

- An offer to help, on their terms
- The Tevinter resistance
- House Amladaris
- Investigate the strange chalk markings
- Grand Cleric Iona
- Truth or Dare: The Endgame
- Support Cassandra* (in my case)
- Alliances From the Heart
- All that glitters
- A Golden Opportunity
- Red Jenny and the Tantervale Cherade
- Delicate negotiations
- To serve any master
- Locate weapon of Tyrdda Bright-Axe
- Reparations for Redcliffe

added 2 confirmations - didnt dare to edit the page

didnt dare to edit the page's source, but i can confirm: Leliana finishing Restore Order in Wycome unlocks Protect Clan Lavallan and Wycome Cullen finshing Hard in Hightown: A Dagger in the Back unlocks Hard in Hightown: No Dwarf Less Worthy

added Leliana Reward for No Dwarf Less Worthy

Hard in Hightown: No Dwarf Less Worthy Leliana reward: Varric approves + Firm Bianca Grip Weapon Upgrade Schematics (9 Leather)

Could someone tell me how to edit the rows of the tables in the War Table page? I wanted to add a "note!!" in the Weapon plans mission to warn people that the Anderfels Cleaver is rewarded by another mission, so that one knows it is better to choose Josephine, for the shield schematic.

Extra warning in "Negotiate a deal for weapon plans" mission

Hi, Tried to edit said mission reward for Leliana to warn people that the Anderfels Cleaver can be gotten from another mission as well, so there is no reason to forfeit the shield for the cleaver. But I can't find the source for that particular table row (nor many other, btw). Can anyone enlighten me on how to update such table entries?

You need to edit the infobox on the mission page ("leliana_reward = ..."). But I don't think you should add this note to the table. It's supposed to be concise, and a lot of rewards can be received via other means. If anyone wants details, they would read either the mission page or the schematic page. – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 17:36, February 12, 2015 (UTC)

Well, I won't do it then, but the reason is I did that mistake and only discovered it 20 gaming hours later, and I am pissed about it. If people use that site like I do, they check each mission to see what choice gives the best reward, possibly following different paths if the mission splits. But I don't think they check for every reward if you can get it another place. Maybe instead you/we should mark each thing that is "missable" by with an astrix, a cross or something, so people can see that "this is the only way to get that item". --Gudal (talk) 20:49, February 12, 2015 (UTC)

Are there actually any non-unique items that can only be received though a specific war table mission? – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 20:52, February 12, 2015 (UTC)

what's happened?

was gonna edit the operation "Reports of Darkspawn Activity", and add the requirement that you have to reach skyhold to unlock it. but can't seem to write anything anymore. what gives?

The information on this page now comes from the individual operation pages. For this, you would need to edit the prerequisites field in the QuestTransformer -- Ness csr (talk) 07:37, February 13, 2015 (UTC)

thank you. i have no idea what the quest transformer is though :)

Ahh. You would see it if you were editing the page but your information has been added to the page now -- Ness csr (talk) 09:36, February 13, 2015 (UTC)

Locate Ryhs and Evangeline

On the tables, under Josephine's it just has the time, doesn't say what the rewards are or if it opens up the next mission. The mission's solo page says its all the same though. I don't know how to do anything with charts/tables on wiki. Gladion20 (talk) 07:02, February 13, 2015 (UTC)

This has been corrected, ty -- Ness csr (talk) 07:37, February 13, 2015 (UTC)

Haven Specific Operations

So I've seen note on this page and the Haven quest page that some war table operations are only available at Haven and become unavailable if not completed before moving to Skyhold. However, I don't see any quests on this page being marked at such. Do such quests exist? 104.129.194.59 (talk) 19:21, February 23, 2015 (UTC)

Rescue the Spy

Tried to edit it myself but it's a bit confusing. Rescue the Spy states that using Leliana or Cullen results in the spy being discovered. In actuality, this is Josephine or Cullen. Leliana results in her escaping safely.

Patch 5

New operations appeared after patch 5. Has anyone seen "Diverting Soldiers in the Frostbacks" before?[File:New_op.png|thumb|right] Alex Hawke (talk) 15:54, March 9, 2015 (UTC)Hawke

Yup, it was there before the patch. --Keladin Storm 17:23, March 9, 2015 (UTC)

Times on articles

This was brought up before, but never fully resolved. The way times are listed on the individual operations vary wildly--in italics, in parentheses, next to the advisor name, below the advisor name, etc. What do y'all think about making each advisor into a subheading and putting the times in the subheading? So it would look like The Carta Gets Its Cut. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 21:02, June 6, 2015 (UTC)

Not seeing any objections, so I'm going to go ahead and start reformatting all of the articles. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 03:34, June 29, 2015 (UTC)

Contact Hero of Ferelden

This can also be started under the following conditions: Alistair is the Warden, Alistair romanced the Hero of Ferelden, the Hero of ferelden survived DA:O (obviously). Under this condition, you can get the War table quest by talking to Alistair either at Crestwood (after initial contact) or back at Skyhold. You do not have to have completed the Abyss. I did not edit the table as I didn't want to mess with it. :) ~ Bethgael (58.107.28.231 (talk) 15:15, July 5, 2015 (UTC))

I had updated the article with that, but forgot to fix the note, thanks for pointing it out! --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 17:57, July 5, 2015 (UTC)

Times for Diverting Soldiers in the Frostbacks and Pursuit Through the Mountains

I cannot for the life of me figure out how to edit this table. I think something is wrong with my flash but either way, I have times available if anyone can insert them correctly in my stead:

Diverting Soldiers in the Frostbacks Josephine 0:57:00 Cullen 0:39:00

Pursuit Throgh the Mountains Leliana 3:00:00 Cullen 3:24:00

Thanks 198.53.200.112 (talk) 22:45, July 25, 2015 (UTC)

You have to update the individual operation articles to make the table on this one update. I can take care of that, but are the times you listed with or without agents? We've been listing times without agents and according to the data I have, Diverting Soldiers actually takes 1:00:00 with Josephine (see further up on this talk page "Operation list dump") --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 00:14, July 26, 2015 (UTC)

A question

How to check completed operations? Or are they uncheckable? {{SUBST:User:Finchelfanno1/Sig|08:07 am,Jul/30/15}} 08:07, July 30, 2015 (UTC)

Change in rewards

So several rewards have been changed for different operations--does anyone know was this the result of Patch 10, or is it from Trespasser? It'd be good to know so we can note it on the separate articles. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 05:59, September 15, 2015 (UTC)

Could someone update the page?

Could someone update this page changing the prerequisites and rewards for The Chantry Remains, The University of orlais, Grand Cleric Iona

The Chantry Remains has a chance to either succeed or fail. If succeeded you will get the university of orlais and approval from cassandra. If failed you get Grand Cleric iona and dissaproval from Cassandra.--MrGrimz 20:11, October 13, 2015 (UTC)

You need to edit the individual pages rather than this one. On each article there's an infobox at the top, with fields for josephine_result, cullen_result, and leliana_result. Those are the ones you'll want to edit with the correct info. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 20:34, October 13, 2015 (UTC)

Done thank you :) --MrGrimz 11:11, October 18, 2015 (UTC)

Anyone know why the formatting at the end of the page is so buggered?

NT38.125.163.196 (talk) 19:29, March 16, 2016 (UTC)

This is a known issue, Kelcat has been working on getting it resolved. --Zj24 (talk) 21:29, March 16, 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, unfortunately I have no idea what the actual problem is, which makes it difficult to fix. I've asked some other people to look into it, but we haven't had much luck so far. --♫ Kelcat ^Talk 21:10, March 18, 2016 (UTC)

Split

I think it would be a good idea to just have an article about the room itself. We could talk about the actual table in that article, and how it was made from a tree that once stood where Skyhold is now, and we could put those screenshots I just took there. I think here they will get lost. henioo ^{(da talk page)} 00:48, August 31, 2017 (UTC)

I would vote against because aside from a few cutscenes and dialogs, nothing happens in the War Room that doesn't involve the War Table. I think splitting them just makes finding related information harder to find. DaBarkspawn (talk) 03:28, August 31, 2017 (UTC)

A split seems useful, regarding the sheer length or size of the page and the time it needs to display or edit it. But a separate War Room doesn't contribute to this because there's not much content that could be moved. A split into Haven… and Skyhold operations might be a better idea for this purpose.

@henioo: As you are making wonderful images of several locations – do you still have a savegame from before moving to Skyhold, so that you could add a better and larger version of the Haven war room? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 14:54, September 1, 2017 (UTC)

Bodahn Feddic, at your service, once again. None of these contain Inky, so I guess they'd all be good enough. henioo ^{(da talk page)} 17:50, September 1, 2017 (UTC)

I don't find the time it takes to load the page to be significantly different than any other page. Perhaps this is a networking issue? I think edit speed might be improved with more subsections, since sections have their own edit link. DaBarkspawn (talk) 15:08, September 1, 2017 (UTC)

I think it's the shear amount of data, some of which is written in a coding language, that makes it take a lot of loading time. It's a minor inconvenience now that it's all but finished, but I don't know how you guys managed to edit all of it thus far when it takes so long to load. henioo ^{(da talk page)} 17:50, September 1, 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Bodhenioo. Wanna take a look? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 10:02, September 2, 2017 (UTC)

Rewards

I am writing this topic in regards to this edit.

As you can see it doesn't add any new information, it simply repeats again what was mentioned one sentence above. Thus I find this addition, especially to an inexperienced reader to be confusing, misleading and repetitive.

Repeating the same thing is also against general wiki editing standards.

It should be reverted back to its previous form, as it happens with hundreds of other War table operation pages. 07:25, September 19, 2019 (UTC)

Hi Viktoria, I agree with you; I noticed there are multiple war table operations that have information repeated. I have been moving all duplicate info to notes as I've come across it as I was unsure why it was there to begin with. How would you like me to proceed with irrelevant or repetitive information?

Zj24 (talk) 15:19, September 19, 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Zj24. Please do not go forward with anything until this is resolved. Also, please see rebuttal below. DaBarkspawn (talk) 15:33, September 19, 2019 (UTC)

Rewards Rebuttal

Overview

The above is incorrect is several ways. First, we have to look at the problem being solved. An operation can have up to three advisors (marked C,J,L below) provide a result and each of those results can link to a different operation which in turn can have three options and so it. Graphically, it looks like this:

                                   First Operation
                                      /     |   \
                                      C     J    L
                                    / | \  /|\  /|\ 
                                    C J L    ....   
                                      :
                                      :

with up to nine branches at every level, an arbitrary number of levels and with rewards being granted at both intermediary and end nodes.

The most important benefit of these notes is that it tells the player at the beginning of the operation tree how to strategically decide on their first and following choices. Otherwise, they may make a choice early on that they regret at the end. The other option is to force each and every player to search out each and every path through the tree each and every time they play. So, these notes are a considerable time saver for players as well.

Rebuttal

To the points raised above:

First, it does provide new information because it sums the rewards over a particular series of war table operations. Going with Cullen, then Josephine, then Leliana for some operation tree will likely net a different sum than going with Cullen every time or some other combination.

Second, if this is repetitious, then the entire war table page is repetitious. Summaries are useful in and of themselves.

Commentary

Lastly, I would make two points about DA Wiki standards.

The first is that we already do something similar in a different way with a different war table operation, specifically Investigate Hunter Fell in which we lay out the rules for the logic grid at the start, so that the player can make strategic choices for the following operations. No one has complained about those notes and the same should be true of the rewards notes.

Secondly, while the current edit is new, there are many other similar edits going back a long time, to at least early November of 2017 and they have stood the test of time, with no complaints of confusion or other counterfactual suppositions made above. It is only the most recent edit that has somehow sparked something.

DaBarkspawn (talk) 15:32, September 19, 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps for further clarification the note could be changed;

from: All three forks will eventually lead to 30 Influence regardless of which advisors are chosen.

to: All three operation forks will eventually lead to an additional 30 Influence regardless of which advisor is selected.

Zj24 (talk) 15:46, September 19, 2019 (UTC)

Those say pretty much the same thing to me, but if you like the latter wording, I'm okay with that. DaBarkspawn (talk) 16:02, September 19, 2019 (UTC)

Ok sounds good, but before I proceed I will wait for everyone to chime in to the converstaion.

Zj24 (talk) 17:00, September 19, 2019 (UTC)

Agreed, consensus is important. DaBarkspawn (talk) 18:41, September 19, 2019 (UTC)

Again, I need to ask. Why do we need to repeat the same info again? With a quick look (~1 second) at the Rewards page you see 30 influence under each Advisor's name. Why do I need a note after that to tell me what I just saw?

If the page was far more complicated, such as this one, I wouldn't have a problem but it is ridiculous to claim that the rewards of this page are somehow convoluted.

If a war table operation comes up after completing 2-3 other operations and its rewards are significantly different from other operations of the same tree, then I'd agree since you will be talking about rewards from previous operations not featured in that page. 05:28, September 21, 2019 (UTC)

Hi Viktoria, take a look at the adjusted notes verbaige for Deal with Relatives of the Trevelyans war table operation, perhaps this is a more acurate reflection as to what is trying to be conveyed.

Zj24 (talk) 05:42, September 21, 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that works though it is a little vague especially to a less knowledgeable reader. Perhaps adding links might help. 07:41, September 21, 2019 (UTC)

As I said before, Zj24's rewrite says the same thing to me, so I'm fine with it. DaBarkspawn (talk) 18:09, September 21, 2019 (UTC)

I made an additional edit, I'm not sure if the notes can be expressed any clearer for a less knowledgeable reader. Viktoria you mentioned adding links, what did you have in mind?

Zj24 (talk) 20:02, September 21, 2019 (UTC)

Better to show exactly what I mean. What do you think about this edit? 21:29, September 21, 2019 (UTC)

I feel the following are both representations of the same thing:

• All of these three subsequent operations which are unlocked provide the same reward, an additional 30 Influence upon completion.
• All three unlocked operations will eventually lead to an additional 30 Influence regardless of which advisor path is selected.

I don't have an opinion one way or the other. Zj24 (talk) 21:58, September 21, 2019 (UTC)

War Table Operations category

I can't leave a message on an unregistered user's page so I'll just leave this here, but the reason this war table page shouldn't be added to the War table operations category is that there are no actual operations on this page. This is just a disambiguation page. It'd be much appreciated if you could stop re-adding it to the category when other editors remove it. If you feel that this page really should belong to this particular category, you're welcome to leave a comment here to discuss the subject, 68.145.130.159. Evamitchelle (talk) 01:57, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Agree completely. DaBarkspawn (talk) 03:16, 3 April 2021 (UTC)