Bay 12 Games Forum

Dwarf Fortress => DF Suggestions => Topic started by: Orange-of-Cthulhu on October 04, 2020, 04:11:34 pm

Title: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Orange-of-Cthulhu on October 04, 2020, 04:11:34 pm
I personally find it tedious to have to designate trees to be cut down in a repetitive fashion, whenever the log stock is depleted, over and over and over again.

And then I look how wonderfully automatic my herbalists work. I create the zone when I embark, and fruits are picked by the dwarves for the rest of the game, with no need for me to bother about it.

I would LOVE if you could make a woodcutting zone, so the woodcutters simply go and cut trees in this zone forever after the zone is created.

The woodcutting zone should have options - it should be a list of the tree species in the zone, and you should be able to specify which trees you want cut and which you don't want cut. This is because, if the trees you want to log are mixed up with fruit trees you don't want cut as your booze comes from them, it would be tedious to create a bunch of small zones around the trees you want to cut - much easier to create a big one and then remove the fruit trees. (Or whatever else trees the player is not into cutting. Some people are maybe very picky about what types of wood they make beds from?)

I'd love this, as it would remove one of these boring repetitive things from the game. You'd still have to manage your logging, the same way you have to manage the herbalist zones by throwing more or fewer dwarves into and and by sometimes changing the zones if your need changes.

(No reason not to keep the d method of cutting trees as well, maybe some players like it for some reason.)
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: A_Curious_Cat on October 05, 2020, 01:12:18 am
Have you tried autochop?
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Shonai_Dweller on October 05, 2020, 01:42:47 am
Have you tried autochop?
That's not a vanilla game option, so not really relevant to a thread asking Toady to consider chopping zones.

Sounds like a pretty reasonable idea. Especially underground where trees seem to grow back pretty quickly.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Ulfarr on October 05, 2020, 05:42:51 am
I'd love to see such an option in the game!

As a player that like to build above ground forts, keeping my fort's perimeter clean of trees is almost always a chore.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Uthimienure on October 05, 2020, 09:45:04 am
The zones need to be 3-dimensional too! 
Designating for each z-level on a mountainside would be tedious.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Azerty on October 05, 2020, 05:44:26 pm
And could some trees be protected?
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: muldrake on October 12, 2020, 09:24:21 am
And could some trees be protected?

The autochop dashboard allows for protecting fruit generating trees, edible product generating trees, and I believe nut generating trees.  It's a mod, and it's based on burrows rather than zones, with the nuisances burrows offer.  However, it's a reasonably good management tool, cuts trees only when you're lower than a certain level, and stops when you hit max.  In actual practice, it's efficient for keeping wood around especially if you consume it with things like job manager directed ash/charcoal/pearlash production processes automatically.

I'd hope if it were placed directly into the game, though, it would be zone-based.  I find burrows buggy and confusing.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Shonai_Dweller on October 12, 2020, 03:55:43 pm
And could some trees be protected?

The autochop dashboard allows for protecting fruit generating trees, edible product generating trees, and I believe nut generating trees.  It's a mod, and it's based on burrows rather than zones, with the nuisances burrows offer.  However, it's a reasonably good management tool, cuts trees only when you're lower than a certain level, and stops when you hit max.  In actual practice, it's efficient for keeping wood around especially if you consume it with things like job manager directed ash/charcoal/pearlash production processes automatically.

I'd hope if it were placed directly into the game, though, it would be zone-based.  I find burrows buggy and confusing.
Mods aren't ever placed into the game. With all the work in zones recently and basically none in burrows, I can't imagine Toady choosing burrows as a way to make a zone.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: muldrake on October 12, 2020, 09:42:02 pm
Mods aren't ever placed into the game. With all the work in zones recently and basically none in burrows, I can't imagine Toady choosing burrows as a way to make a zone.

I should have been more clear, when I said "should be put into the game," I mean a similar feature, not literally transplanting the mod into the game (which I don't even know is possible).  But that's what I said so I'll take the correction.  If there is something similar to autocut actually implemented in the game it should be a zone and not a burrow.  IMO of course.  (I think I'm right though or I wouldn't have said it.)

My opinion is also that zones are generally good and burrows are generally bad.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Shonai_Dweller on October 12, 2020, 09:56:41 pm
Mods aren't ever placed into the game. With all the work in zones recently and basically none in burrows, I can't imagine Toady choosing burrows as a way to make a zone.

I should have been more clear, when I said "should be put into the game," I mean a similar feature, not literally transplanting the mod into the game (which I don't even know is possible).  But that's what I said so I'll take the correction.  If there is something similar to autocut actually implemented in the game it should be a zone and not a burrow.  IMO of course.  (I think I'm right though or I wouldn't have said it.)

My opinion is also that zones are generally good and burrows are generally bad.
Oh yes, you're not wrong. Zones over burrows for sure.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Splint on October 13, 2020, 04:32:03 pm
I'd love to see such an option in the game!

As a player that like to build above ground forts, keeping my fort's perimeter clean of trees is almost always a chore.

+1 for the same reasons. I've given up on keeping the vicinity of my walls and roads clear of trees because of how tedious it often is.

It'd definitely help with keeping supplies of charcoal up as well, reducing the amount of oversight a non-magma metalworking industry needs from the player.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Starver on October 13, 2020, 05:40:40 pm
And then I look how wonderfully automatic my herbalists work.
...first thought was "But they are the same. You need to (re)designate for plant-gathering."
Quote
I create the zone when I embark, and fruits are picked by the dwarves for the rest of the game, with no need for me to bother about it.
Then I realised you didn't mean ground-herbalism, but tree-harvesting.

(I would designate a 3D box of Gather Plants (if necessary, due to terrain not being flat), and can always do it again regularly. Multi-level trees meant I no longer felt safe doing that with Woodcutting (was there an early bug that meant choosing to cut part way up did something bad?  ...I can't remember why, but I just have a bad feeling akin to cave-in aversion which means that for a long time now I pick and choose tiles individually). Yes, Autochop might help, but as I'm so used to using Designation Priorities to quick-clear places where I need trees cleared ASAP to make the ground easier to dig through/under.)


Given how much other micromanagement I do, I don't entirely miss a sand-gathering style zone-sourcing. But I could see its use (with appropriate additional config options, like priority/tree-type candidates/specific-workers) being useful for others.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Maximum Spin on October 13, 2020, 05:50:34 pm
(was there an early bug that meant choosing to cut part way up did something bad?
Yes, I remember it distinctly.

Personally, I don't like using zones and would prefer to keep using the old UI.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Bumber on October 13, 2020, 05:53:34 pm
was there an early bug that meant choosing to cut part way up did something bad?

The only issue I'm aware of is that only one tile can be designated for chopping per tree, and if they can't reach it, they won't chop the tree. Designating via 3D box prioritizes the top northwest tile of the tree, which tends to be unreachable.

There were crashes for building stuff on them, vanishing trees when roots were mined, and collapses that happened regardless (due to cave-in info not being updated when trees were chopped.)
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Starver on October 13, 2020, 08:29:30 pm
My habitual embark these days is a totally flat plain (sunken pools are a pain, rivers are avoided), anyway. So I could just single-Z (d)esignate(t)reecutting the trees away over the planned trench-digging, wall-building and road-laying zones (plus buffer tiles each side of the exact footprint - Progressively paint Priority N+1 for N tiles over-width for 3-ish down to 0, like I do with (d)(p)lantgathering...) But I like to check what trees they are, there and within possible enclosable orchard areas, in case it changes my overall designs. And if I find I have a lot of (say) featherwood in those footprints, I'll make that my community's 'signature' wood for all beds and anything else that could be generic wood and not (similarly artificially fixated to a single type) generic stone/metal/whatever, and thus probably target every other featherwood on the map (outside necessary felling) for lowest-priority cutting down.

So while I'm sure there were problems, as Spin suggests confirmed even if Bumber suggests something not really as actively dangerous as I half recall (and if digging in immediate subsurface, I'll stop any soil (d)esignate(d)ig that is revealed to have roots until I remove the tree, for hole-in-ground avoidance reasons, as well as actual possible cave-ins), I think the particular issue was fixed... But once(/twice/a handful of times at most)-bitten, twice(/...) shy.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Maximum Spin on October 13, 2020, 10:42:03 pm
as Spin suggests confirmed even if Bumber suggests something not really as actively dangerous as I half recall
What Bumber mentions is exactly what I remember, yes. I'm pretty sure it did get fixed though, as the last time I designated tree cutting I didn't have this problem, but maybe dfhack was fixing it or something.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: Starver on October 14, 2020, 07:21:24 am
Well, I guess it is Vanilla-fixed, then, though I still avoid trying to invoke it - and don't work that way myself anyway.

Back to the suggestion, though:

Beyond the basic "clear this area, keep it cleared" I can see a need to sub-specify (either negatively or positively, perhaps in the dwarves-for-Burrow manner, but defaults to all active) tree-types to harvest, or not to. A fully-complete list (not like the Food-to-cook-with chooser that only picks up new things that now exist) so people can exclude fruiting trees that they may like growing there.

And though it is a comparatively recent addition, I would be personallg inconvenienced to lose the Priority level on (d)(t). Others may dislike losing the (M)ark-only element, and I can imagine that flooding a 3d box then vetting every marked-highlit tree is a viable practice at the moment, for those that don't mind/prefer doing this micromanagement.

The 3d boxing or terrain-following specification[1] would be good but I would be loathe to lose the (d)esignation control of such things, at the expense of the zone/area-based method (which I know Toady is looking at for all kinds of new things, possibly even workshops).

That said, in the UI shake-up, alongside/subsequent to the Steam expansion, it might be time to separate the non-digging (d)esignation items. I imaging many think (d)ig-c(h)annel, already ('digging' traditionally being downward process)  and maybe (d)ig-(d)riftmine.  Zoning the (d)(t) and (d)(p)lantgathethering (similar plant-type specification options?) might work. The (d)(s)moothing and (d)(e)ngraving could be revamped to better deal with the tricky wall-side nature of these[3] into a new submenu (and Track-carving, to make this linear-feature easier, but still allow the intentional disconnects currently exploited?). Traffic priority could be zoning, entirely and...what else? *flexes fingers to activate muscle-memory* ...ah, yes, (d)(b)ulk for melt/dump/etc or to undo those.  That'd be another cursory wiping (mouse or keyboard!) that might be .

So some sort of making (d)(p) equal to treefruit-picking, we say? And (with qualifications) tree-felling at least given a constrained auto-generation method of some kind (I know of Autochop, obviously, but it won't be a direct integration; likely more a similar system with slightly different focii). It might even be being already considered in the UI-shuffle (perhaps ask Threetoe on his relevent thread, that I've not read for a while), but with an eye for not totally ruining it for the more stuck-in-the-mud old-guard of players, hopefully. ;)



[1] Maybe a combination of both? In cavern situations, an X/Y-floodfill that rolls over connected floors could easily (and should?) pick up two 'tree'-bases on the same X/Y tile but differing Zs. But avoid mid-trunk (woodcutter-accessible) tiles. Maybe. What of those growing out of the bottom of freshly filled cave-pools?

[2] (no longer footnoted!)

[3] Specify as a 'room' that applies the task to the walls it touches? Or even/additionally add it as an automatically area-decined task to the actual Room Designation that you're trying to improve, as that's quite often what you want it for. So long as you retain "free-zoning" for independent/preparatary smoothing/etc.
Title: Re: Woodcutting should be done by zones and not by designation.
Post by: PatrikLundell on October 15, 2020, 08:52:11 am
I don't think you can replace the current tree cutting designation scheme with zones without losing a lot of existing functionality. That does not mean tree cutting zones might be worthless, only that they can't be replacements.

Someone indicated cavern trees regrow faster than surface ones. The don't. They take the same 3 years to mature. However, they're not subjected to the sky visibility restriction (obviously) that the surface trees operate under (but still a two tile headroom one), so a lot more underground sapling become eligible for maturation.

My latest attempt to cut a tree above the surface level (a few months ago, using the latest DF version) ended in disaster as the moron decided to stand on the branch being cut rather than on the adjacent wall.

When clear cutting the caverns (which cannot be selected to get absolutely flat ones), I designate cutting from one corner of the embark to the opposite one on the highest cavern surface level, repeated for each lower level until reaching the bottom one. The newer designation on each tree replaces the older one, resulting in designations only at the surface level, regardless of what that level happen to be. An improvement to that logic so you can 3D designate with a useful result would fit the designation format, and so wouldn't need a zone one.

I can see a use case for zones to keep certain areas free of trees (using zones), but as soon as you want to tailor it it gets messy rather quickly. You could, of course, have a setting where you'd specify the keeping of all fruit brewable trees, all fruit trees, all seed bearing trees in some combination, or green list trees species by species, but you'd then most likely be pruning the result using individual tree designations, because you get more than enough of that species, or this tree, while of a desirable species, is located in an undesirable place, or simply too close to other trees.