docs: Update timeline guide #5734
Conversation
docs/TimelineGuide.md
Outdated
| * if you do sync a phase with rp text, add a large window sync for an action | ||
| * use original names for ability text as much as possible | ||
| * loops should use `jump` instead of having previous abilities have large windows | ||
| the first auto-attack, or at least the first "starts using" line. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should change this to say start on combat if there's only one boss fight in the zone.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe something along the lines of:
If there is only one boss in a zone, the timeline should start on entering combat.
(The timeline utility should handle this automatically.) Unless there's a pressing reason not to,
add a wide sync to the first usage of a skill that isn't an auto-attack.
This ensures that even if combat entry is early or late, the timeline will still be synced correctly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think combat entry should be pretty reliable? Certainly more reliable than auto attacks. I guess my thinking is that with auto attacks, you'd want a wide sync, but ideally we shouldn't need to start from autos any more. The other reason for a wide sync is if you are starting from a combat log line (zone seal?) and you're worried people might not have their combat log turned on.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess I'm mostly thinking of situations where the boss is pulled but the first auto timing, and therefore the entire timeline, is different depending on whether the pulling tank runs around or not. I've made an update that should probably be close to what you're thinking?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, this is what I was looking for! And, re: tank running around, if you don't sync on autos, is this still an issue? Like, if the boss casts a raidwide at t=11, won't it still do that regardless of how many autos occurred? In other words, even if no autos, my understanding is that "modern" fights are still on script and won't adjust. I'm thinking of the video where people were pulling p5s very carefully with provokes and running and rescue and shirk to avoid any autos until the raidwide so that fflogs didn't start the fight until then and so two minutes didn't line up in awkward places and they'd still get a fast kill time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know. I haven't specifically checked whether it was changed recently. I know there were some timelines since Endwalker started where I noticed some slippage in the time to the first raidwide, but presumably running multiple times and verifying should catch any such slip. Regardless, the updated wording should cover it.
| NOTE: When this guide was originally written, | ||
| Cape Westwind was a standard 8-player trial. | ||
| This was removed in Endwalker, and that version of the encounter is no longer accessible. | ||
| However, the timeline creation process for it is still valid, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This doesn't have to be done in this PR, but I think it would be useful to pick a fight (it doesn't have to be Cape Westwind) that can have an example log from content that people can run solo (unsynced) such that they can use the example log to make/test.
I think the Cape Westwind example is a little outdated, personally. I think an example that shows off as many of these as possible would be good:
- starting from in combat
- at least one loop
- autos that should be ignored
- multiple abilities, e.g. left OR right cleave
- maybe abilities that should be commented out for noisiness (like exaflare hits or something)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agreed. I would have liked to have something like that to go along with the rest of this PR, but it's a lot of work to build that all out and I wasn't really in a place to do that here. I'm hoping that with just "replace the timeline to something modern" outstanding it will be easier to get that change made.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh yeah, for sure it's a lot of work. That's why I haven't done it either. Just thinking about the future, but this is a really good change on its own to not mislead people.
|
One other thing that occurs to me, do we want to modernize the entries appearing at lines 158-168? (I didn't modify those so I can't add a comment in-line from Github's interface.) 677.0 "Heavensfall Trio"
1044 "Enrage" # ???
35.2 "Flare Breath x3" duration 4
1608.1 "Petrifaction" sync /:Melusine:7B1:/ window 1610,5
1141.4 "Leg Shot" sync /:Mustadio:3738:/ duration 20
# I am just a comment
hideall "--sync--"
28.0 "Damning Edict?" sync /:Chaos:3150:/ window 30,10 jump 2028.0
524.9 "Allagan Field" sync /:The Avatar:7C4:/ duration 31 jump 444.9
1032.0 "Control Tower" duration 13.5 sync /:Hashmal, Bringer Of Order starts using Control Tower on Hashmal/ window 20,20 # start of cast -> tower fall |
Ah yeah, I think that would make sense to do! |
This is (probably) not a complete modernization, but it should be a good first pass. I tried to structure the commits to be sensibly distinct for review and rollback purposes. 7848349
This is (probably) not a complete modernization, but it should be a good first pass. I tried to structure the commits to be sensibly distinct for review and rollback purposes. 7848349
This is (probably) not a complete modernization, but it should be a good first pass. I tried to structure the commits to be sensibly distinct for review and rollback purposes. 7848349
This is (probably) not a complete modernization, but it should be a good first pass. I tried to structure the commits to be sensibly distinct for review and rollback purposes. 7848349
This is (probably) not a complete modernization, but it should be a good first pass. I tried to structure the commits to be sensibly distinct for review and rollback purposes.
For readers' convenience, the formatted revision can be viewed at https://github.com/JLGarber/cactbot/blob/update-timeline-guide-new-table-key/docs/TimelineGuide.md.