Posted under General
I'm not familiar with the structure of gacha cards in Idolmaster Million Live! Theater Days, but if it's anything like my experiences with Umamusume, this is easily something that can be a "character_name pool:26160" search if you want to see a specific character's cards. I don't see the point in separating them by character (whereas I can at least see the argument for splitting by rarity).
Alixiron said:
@fuzzbawlz Has made pools for SSR gacha cards for characters in Idolmaster Million Live! Theater Days:
pool #26160 - Kisaragi Chihaya SSR Collection
pool #26467 - Kitazawa Shiho SSR Collection
pool #27067 - Kasuga Mirai SSR Collection
pool #27686 - Julia SSR Collection
pool #27690 - Hakozaki Serika SSR Collection
pool #27003 - Tanaka Kotoha SSR Collection
pool #27693 - Suou Momoko SSR CollectionCan't these all just be in one pool?
That wouldn't make sense to me because then you wouldn't have a way to search for the card art that belongs to a specific character, if you did a search for "pool:combined_pool character_name" you would get all the art where they appear in the background of other characters' card art too. And what would be the correct order for a combined pool, by the dates the cards were released or coming up with a specific character order? How would the character order be decided?
fuzzbawlz said:
That wouldn't make sense to me because then you wouldn't have a way to search for the card art that belongs to a specific character, if you did a search for "pool:combined_pool character_name" you would get all the art where they appear in the background of other characters' card art too. And what would be the correct order for a combined pool, by the dates the cards were released or coming up with a specific character order? How would the character order be decided?
I don't think it matters much if they show up in the background in some cards in that search. Date the cards released seems good for ordering and it'd be easier to update for future cards that way too
Alixiron said:
I don't think it matters much if they show up in the background in some cards in that search.
And it's my opinion that I do think it matters. If you wanted to search all the cards a character appears in even the background of, then something like "character_name official_art ratio:16:9" works well enough (ratio is a free tag).
Alixiron said:
Date the cards released seems good for ordering and it'd be easier to update for future cards that way too
If this is really going to happen then I'd prefer them to be in character order, so it's still possible to find all the card art belonging to one specific character grouped together somewhere in the pool.
Is there supposed to be like some rule or precedent against having too many pools? It's not like there's server storage limitations. A pool can't just be ~25 posts limited in its focus? And it's not like it's arbitrary to say "this pool is for official card art belonging to this specific character so they can be viewed in release order". There's 52 characters in Idolmaster Million Live! Theater Days, if all their card art were uploaded eventually it would total over 1200 posts in one pool.
fuzzbawlz said:
That wouldn't make sense to me because then you wouldn't have a way to search for the card art that belongs to a specific character, if you did a search for "pool:combined_pool character_name" you would get all the art where they appear in the background of other characters' card art too.
You've been putting the card titles in the commentary, which includes the character's name, so it actually is possible to search for them, especially if they get translated.
Take pool:24394, for example. I added the card title in a comment under each post, so a search for pool:24394 comment:"Asakura Mihono" will show only her character cards instead of all cards in which she appears.
Side note: I put mine in comments instead of the artist commentary because the latter technically isn't supposed to be used for this kind of thing (topic #23655). But I realize after a couple years of uploading this kind of art that it comes with disadvantages, mainly that only I can translate them if they're in my comment, unlike commentary translations which can be edited by anyone. I think allowing at least the card title for uploads from a third-party wiki or game rip in the commentary would give you the search functionality you're looking for, but I think the pools should be combined regardless.
BUR #52390 has been rejected.
nuke pool:27800
This pool is easily covered for by twincest + character tags for the twins in question.
Knowledge_Seeker said:
BUR #52390 has been rejected.
nuke pool:27800
This pool is easily covered for by twincest + character tags for the twins in question.
None of those posts are tagged with incest (which twincest implies) and after taking a quick look, I don't see anything that suggests they should be tagged as such. There are no character tags either.
Blank_User said:
None of those posts are tagged with incest (which twincest implies) and after taking a quick look, I don't see anything that suggests they should be tagged as such. There are no character tags either.
Yeah, I think it's just the pool name throwing me off. I personally wouldn't tag any of those twincest either, I don't mind seeing them at all. I think the solution is just to create character tags for them, but I don't follow this artist at all, so idk what some good names for their tags would be (assuming they don't have names we can just use instead).
Knowledge_Seeker said:
Yeah, I think it's just the pool name throwing me off. I personally wouldn't tag any of those twincest either, I don't mind seeing them at all. I think the solution is just to create character tags for them, but I don't follow this artist at all, so idk what some good names for their tags would be (assuming they don't have names we can just use instead).
Hey, thanks everyone for the discussion. This is one of my first attempts at organizing related images, so I apologize if the pool comes across as unnecessary or improperly set up.
As far as I can tell, these are OCs without official names, while some traits or themes can be inferred from the artist’s comments and designs (for example, the sun/moon motif in post #10476338).
I don’t think they warrant the twincest tag either. To me, their relationship feels more like a close, harmonious twin dynamic rather than anything romantic or sexual.
I’m happy to adjust or reorganize this if there’s a better approach—please let me know what would make the most sense.
Harrinive said:
Hey, thanks everyone for the discussion. This is one of my first attempts at organizing related images, so I apologize if the pool comes across as unnecessary or improperly set up.
No worries! As I've seen you around before, I figured it was lack of experience talking rather than...Well, the usual reasons for nuking pools here lol. Generally speaking, there has been a huge movement away from collection pools in favor of creating tags for whatever was the pool's subject.
As far as I can tell, these are OCs without official names, while some traits or themes can be inferred from the artist’s comments and designs (for example, the sun/moon motif in post #10476338).
In an ideal world, we'd have names for every OC that we can use. But we don't live in an ideal world at all, so generally speaking, what is usually done is giving the OCs tags based on certain traits of theirs, and if the OCs ever get proper names, the tags can be aliased to those. Plenty such examples you can find, and names like "Brown-Haired Girl (Artist's Name)" are perfectly acceptable.
I'm just not very familiar with these OCs, and as I see you rather enjoy uploading the works by Karintoun, I was hoping you can help come up with some good tag names, especially since they are very often drawn by this artist. This is especially useful for if the OCs get drawn by other artists, so the tag set-up is way better here.
I don’t think they warrant the twincest tag either. To me, their relationship feels more like a close, harmonious twin dynamic rather than anything romantic or sexual.
Yeah, I think it was just the name of the pool that made me leap to the tag name lol. I think just giving them tag names would be the most ideal for everyone here.
I’m happy to adjust or reorganize this if there’s a better approach—please let me know what would make the most sense.
It's okay! The main point of this BUR was honestly to just act as an alert that this isn't how we generally do this sort of thing, and to hash out a good solution with multiple people involved. What do you think of my solution? The goal here is to let the twins and their dynamic be searchable at the end of the day, and if an approach doesn't work to the people who want to search that, it doesn't work.
Thanks! What you said makes sense and I would like to spend some time comparing and tagging these OCs.
In the same sprit of the current discussion, I think this pool #27766 I created is actually pointless. Is this correct? I just tagged them chinese zodiac.
[update]: OCs in pool #27800 are now all tagged with some names I came up with…
Updated by Harrinive
BUR #52433 has been rejected.
nuke pools:27766
All posts in the pool are tagged with chinese zodiac so the pool is now pointless
Harrinive said:
In the same sprit of the current discussion, I think this pool #27766 I created is actually pointless. Is this correct? I just tagged them chinese zodiac.
Actually, I don't think it's terribly pointless. While it'd definitely be best to add specific tags (i.e year of the rabbit)), this pool would work great as a series pool, as it serves the purpose of tracking chinese zodiac art by a specific artist (which we have several such pools for). A tag simply can't replicate that purpose here, or at least not in such a way to put in order.
Pools can be tricky to learn, so take your time. It's based on determining when and when not to pool with these sorts of things. In pool #27766's case, I think it is a correct use of a pool, just improperly labeled as a collection pool lol.
Knowledge_Seeker said:
Actually, I don't think it's terribly pointless. While it'd definitely be best to add specific tags (i.e year of the rabbit)), this pool would work great as a series pool, as it serves the purpose of tracking chinese zodiac art by a specific artist (which we have several such pools for). A tag simply can't replicate that purpose here, or at least not in such a way to put in order.
Pools can be tricky to learn, so take your time. It's based on determining when and when not to pool with these sorts of things. In pool #27766's case, I think it is a correct use of a pool, just improperly labeled as a collection pool lol.
Hmmmm! Thank you for answering.
BUR #52541 has been rejected.
nuke pool:1574
A little late, but it turns out this pool is basically the deprecated action tag as a pool. Any of the replacements for that tag would no doubt work better for finding what you're looking for than this pool.
BUR #52547 has been rejected.
convert pool:2413 -> clone_army
convert pool:1008 -> everyone
I'm pretty sure these two groupings of Touhou characters can be safely nuked. The first one can be covered by a tag specifically for clone armies (a tag I propose with this BUR for the exact scenario described in pool #2413, but more generalized). While the second is easily covered by the everyone tag.
Though I will note that apparently the second pool here is for a specific Pixiv trend??? Idk a lot about it, but alternatively we can convert that one into a tag for it...
Should pool #22339 (Teratophilia) be gardened away into interspecies and bestiality and deleted? Or is it worthy of its own tag? Not really my area of expertise given how rating:e heavy the pool is.
NiceLittleDan said:
Should pool #22339 (Teratophilia) be gardened away into interspecies and bestiality and deleted? Or is it worthy of its own tag? Not really my area of expertise given how rating:e heavy the pool is.
As someone with interest in this sort of subset, I've found that's generally kinda it's own kink. Teratophilia/monsterfucking is kinda its own vibe, which the pool demonstrates well. Notice how it says monstrous in the description. An interspecies search would catch things like furries and very human monster girls/boys (which people with this fetish just plain don't want), and bestiality is generally just plain wrong.
I personally would recommend it be converted into its own tag. It's a concept that I know has an audience for it. "Teratophilia" would be the better name, but since apparently "somnophilia" was too technical (which is fucking stupid as that is generally the accepted term for that fetish), the equally used "monsterfucking" would make for a good tag name.
Knowledge_Seeker said:
As someone with interest in this sort of subset, I've found that's generally kinda it's own kink. Teratophilia/monsterfucking is kinda its own vibe, which the pool demonstrates well. Notice how it says monstrous in the description. An interspecies search would catch things like furries and very human monster girls/boys (which people with this fetish just plain don't want), and bestiality is generally just plain wrong.
I personally would recommend it be converted into its own tag. It's a concept that I know has an audience for it. "Teratophilia" would be the better name, but since apparently "somnophilia" was too technical (
which is fucking stupid as that is generally the accepted term for that fetish), the equally used "monsterfucking" would make for a good tag name.
From the more sfw (well, not rating:e) examples I saw, there appeared to be some stuff in there that needed gardening. Since you're interested in it more than I am, do you mind checking it then BURing it for me please?
NiceLittleDan said:
From the more sfw (well, not rating:e) examples I saw, there appeared to be some stuff in there that needed gardening. Since you're interested in it more than I am, do you mind checking it then BURing it for me please?
Yeah, I can do a once over of the pool if someone else doesn't beat me to the buzzer. NSFW isn't my area of expertise either admittedly however. But it's nothing I can't handle.
