Thanks a bunch!
Would it be possible to show if characters are hit/expertise capped or not?
Hey, this is pretty cool.
A link or hover text of specifically what enchants are missing might be nice, if it doesn't clutter the interface too much.
It probably doesn't need to say "false (3 missing)", just "3 missing" would be sufficient, or even a progress bar (3/10 bubbles filled in or whatever) so you can see at a quick glance how much someone is slacking. Maybe even a red/yellow/green bubble for no enchant/cheap enchant/best enchant.
I'd like to be able to have a URL link to a specific realm and guild. Maybe something like www (dot) wowcheck (dot) com /region/realm/guild, for instance www (dot) wowcheck (dot) com /US/Thunderhorn/Order%20of%20Kayoss. [dot spelled out since I can't post links]
Not sure if it was mentioned, but it would be nice to capture profession bonuses missed as well (Ring enchants, Inscription only shoulder enchants, etc.).
Also, small thing, but it seems sorting by "Is fully enchanted" is backwards for those missing things. It puts it in the order of:
Fully Enchanted -> Missing many -> Missing Few -> Missing 1
as opposed to:
Fully Enchanted -> Missing 1 -> Missing Few -> Missing many
This is an excellent tool, thank you. At this early stage of the expansion, it's very useful to have this information and the tool is exceptionally quick and clean.
Through this tool I can tell I am tied for second place as best geared person in my guild with a warlock. A shadow priest beats us both by 8 ilevels. I am also only one of 2 people fully enchanted. This could be because I am an enchanter XD.
I really like this tool. Tells me some things about my guild that would take a lot more effort to find otherwise. Thanks!
Further to my post praising the tool, a useful feature would be a toggle/tickbox next to each listed character that allowed you to select and or discard them from the display, perhaps with a summary line at the end giving the average ilevel of the selected players. For example, in my guild we have 17 players listed but it would be good to be able to focus on the 10 who will actually be in the raid team and see how we look as a team.
Very nice ! Thank you !
A few ideas that would make your site perfect :
- remove the "false" and "true" if possible
- add a way to see which enchant/gem is missing
- check hit/expertise, don't just check if capped or not but check the value (the %age) (I don't care if someone is at 14,9% hit, but I do care if someone is at say 14% or less)
- any plans to allow us to customize the results (removing people from the list for example) ?
Edit : Oh one last thing, can you check professions ? (Which profession and maxed or not)
Last edited by Recom; 2012-10-18 at 08:49 AM.
The only hassle I have with using that site is that it lists the non-raiders too. Maybe checkboxes at the top with which guildranks you wish to be displayed? (Not sure how easy that would be to code).
♦ Scepticist ♦ Critic ♦
I should have time this week or next to implement some of the features u guys mentioned. All good ideas ! Thanks for the feedback.
Keep the ideas rolling, its better for me to get a big list of them so i can picture the overall result !
---------- Post added 2012-10-19 at 04:45 AM ----------
Hi Everyone, good news, a lot of the new things u guys recommended are now implemented in the latest version of http://www.WoWCheck.com and some extra stuff as well.
Also, we are now IE8 compatible! IE7 should work also.
Recommended browser: Chrome/Firefox
* remove the "false" and "true" if possible -> replaced with Thumbs up, and just missing enchant text with tooltip
* add a way to see which enchant is missing (tooltips, hover over the text)
* check hit/expertise (Hit is percent, but expertise doesn't have a % value in current wow api)
* Only showing members that have a guild rank higher than 5
* Support for bookmarking & linking guilds ex: http://wowcheck.com/?zone=us&realm=K...uild=Existence
* Support for IE8+ (IE7 works but search does not display for some reason)
Thanks a lot for this update!
Plans to customize the results: this was one thing that I forgot to do last night, I'm going to add a rank dropdown box next to the guild search, to filter only players that are above that specific rank.
Also I plan to have some kind of checkbox select, and compare selected members.
Everything else should be implemented in the current version.
Looks like some server are missing in the dropdown. At least mine is missing (EU-Lordaeron).
However when I check my server and my guild manually my character doesn't appear in the list. How do you find out if one is raiding or not?
So none of us is really raiding right now. Some did a few tries on the first boss with random groups, others haven't even entered mogu vaults. I don't understand why there do appear some raiders but me not.
This is my character: http://eu.battle.net/wow/de/characte.../Seraph/simple
And this was my request to your site: http://wowcheck.com/?zone=eu&realm=L...ld=Reminiszenz
You are not in the list because you need to be rank5 or higher in the guild to make it to the list on wowcheck.com, I will include a filter where you can adjust what is the lowest rank you want to be displayed.
Thanks for the feedback.
Just a tiny thing that could be tweaked somehow.
Hi, first of all this is a nice tool.
However i found a bug, as a human i get 1% expertise(=spellhit) wearing a mace.
This doesnt show up for me, it says im at 14%hit and 0 expertise. (I think the problem is that i dont get expertise rating but %-expertise via this racial)
Ps: As others mentioned before, a current spec icon would be nice :P
Last edited by turtlefreak; 2012-10-19 at 03:10 PM.
I like it, nice and simple, and most of all, fast! Armory is so bloody slow for me lately.
I'm liking this so far. Nice work
FeedbacK: you've made a common mistake of sorting by string instead of by numerical value, ie if you sort by expertise then 950 > 1950, as it starts with a "9"
I'll be using your site to name and shame guildies at a glance, especially the casters who don't have enough hit/expertise...
I solo MMO's. Yeh, so sue me