Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Putnam]

It takes 15 nanoseconds to access RAM and my CPU can do 8 things every 2.22 nanoseconds, or, in other words, fetching 64 bits of memory takes 7 cycles. The CPU's total CPU cache is 8 megabytes, and anything outside of those 8 megabytes needs to be fetched from RAM. Dwarf Fortress uses multiple gigabytes of data.

[scourge728]

Yeah, nutrition management doesn't seem like it would be very fun in fortress mode, even for people who like micromanagement, I doubt it would be fun when the dwarves would likely not actually seek out the specific vitamins and stuff they need, and imagine doing that for say 500 dwarves, and every one of them needs to keep checking if they need specific vitamins and minerals, and then which food has those, and the path to those specific ones, don't know how much that would hurt frames, but it would definitely not help

[GoblinCookie]

Yeah, nutrition management doesn't seem like it would be very fun in fortress mode, even for people who like micromanagement, I doubt it would be fun when the dwarves would likely not actually seek out the specific vitamins and stuff they need, and imagine doing that for say 500 dwarves, and every one of them needs to keep checking if they need specific vitamins and minerals, and then which food has those, and the path to those specific ones, don't know how much that would hurt frames, but it would definitely not help

They would do the checking themselves, without the player needing to micromanage anything. 

[scourge728]

Those were semi-separate thoughts, with the only thing linking them being if dwarves DON'T do that, or if the food available isn't enough for all the dwarves to get the correct stuff, than it falls to the overseer to check all the dwarves individually to find that out

[GoblinCookie]

Those were semi-separate thoughts, with the only thing linking them being if dwarves DON'T do that, or if the food available isn't enough for all the dwarves to get the correct stuff, than it falls to the overseer to check all the dwarves individually to find that out

It is possible for the entire nutrient value of all the food in storage to be tracked automatically.

[voliol]

Those were semi-separate thoughts, with the only thing linking them being if dwarves DON'T do that, or if the food available isn't enough for all the dwarves to get the correct stuff, than it falls to the overseer to check all the dwarves individually to find that out

It is possible for the entire nutrient value of all the food in storage to be tracked automatically.

True, the question then is how to display it, because I can't imagine 1400s dwarves would know the details of nutritional values or even needs. Well, I guess 1400s humans did know citrus fruits could be used for curing scurvy, so that's at least something to go off.

I have some doubts about this kind of detailed nutrition management, but if we're going to discuss it we might as well go into details.

[Bumber]

True, the question then is how to display it, because I can't imagine 1400s dwarves would know the details of nutritional values or even needs. Well, I guess 1400s humans did know citrus fruits could be used for curing scurvy, so that's at least something to go off.

I have some doubts about this kind of detailed nutrition management, but if we're going to discuss it we might as well go into details.

Knowledge about nutrition could be included in the item description. If dwarves start getting malnourished, medical dwarves could advise that the fort needs a certain class of food. This could benefit from the discoveries of scholars.

[Putnam]

citrus being used for scurvy wasn't until the 18th century afaik

[voliol]

citrus being used for scurvy wasn't until the 18th century afaik

According to wikipedia, there was some basic knowledge about fresh food and citrus fruits being good against scurvy at the end of the 15th century (Vasco de Gama’s 1497 crew apparently figured it out somewhat), or at least people started discovering the cure back then, even if it was mostly forgotten later.
It is true though that the first thorough investigations of the cause and cure for scurvy happened first in the 18th century, and it spread to become common knowledge first a few decades after even that, so they by no means had the full solution by the 15th century.
Vitamin C was isolated first in 1932.

All this considered, maybe a ”freshness” value could be used to indicate vitamin C?

[GoblinCookie]

True, the question then is how to display it, because I can't imagine 1400s dwarves would know the details of nutritional values or even needs. Well, I guess 1400s humans did know citrus fruits could be used for curing scurvy, so that's at least something to go off.

I have some doubts about this kind of detailed nutrition management, but if we're going to discuss it we might as well go into details.

The player isn't 1400s dwarves.  It is simpler to simply give the player the numbers than it would to come up with a more realistic solution, namely have the dwarves demand particular foods that are high in the scarce nutrients "I want X" and then also have to calculate whether the food is also feasible to produce as well.

[voliol]

True, the question then is how to display it, because I can't imagine 1400s dwarves would know the details of nutritional values or even needs. Well, I guess 1400s humans did know citrus fruits could be used for curing scurvy, so that's at least something to go off.

I have some doubts about this kind of detailed nutrition management, but if we're going to discuss it we might as well go into details.

The player isn't 1400s dwarves.  It is simpler to simply give the player the numbers than it would to come up with a more realistic solution, namely have the dwarves demand particular foods that are high in the scarce nutrients "I want X" and then also have to calculate whether the food is also feasible to produce as well.

Which is why I'm suggesting a way to inform the players of vitamin C levels without using modern terms? Dwarf Fortress still has a medieval theme to it, as least for now, so keeping with old terms is something to do not to break the immersion.

[Tristan Alkai]

Getting back to the original topic (meal sizes and stomach capacity varying with creature size), the current STANDARD_GRAZER tag actually has a decent chunk of this.  In particular, the increase in food needs with size is much slower than linear.  You do, however, have a point about variable metabolism rates (also relevant for grazers from harsh climates, like camels, yaks, and donkeys). 

Nutrition has enough other threads that I don't really have much to say on this one (I've done most of my posting on the subject near the end of this thread, starting around page 6). 

I'm also not quite understanding exactly what game benefit the "stomach contents" variable is supposed to offer over the current abstracted "hunger" system.  The GRAZER tag already offers a foundation for variable hunger reductions for a given food type, and the only aspect I really miss is a raw variable for max hunger (as opposed to the current constant hard coded number, which I believe is 100,000), which would be especially useful for species that hibernate.  While we're on the subject of hibernating, the game doesn't seem to be very good about respecting variable food needs based on activity and exertion. 

You might also be interested in DW-Kohaku's Volume and Mass thread.  That seems like the most practical way to track food intake, especially at the low end of the size scale. 

[Strik3r]

Getting back to the original topic (meal sizes and stomach capacity varying with creature size), the current STANDARD_GRAZER tag actually has a decent chunk of this.  In particular, the increase in food needs with size is much slower than linear.  You do, however, have a point about variable metabolism rates (also relevant for grazers from harsh climates, like camels, yaks, and donkeys). 

Nutrition has enough other threads that I don't really have much to say on this one (I've done most of my posting on the subject near the end of this thread, starting around page 6). 

I'm also not quite understanding exactly what game benefit the "stomach contents" variable is supposed to offer over the current abstracted "hunger" system.  The GRAZER tag already offers a foundation for variable hunger reductions for a given food type, and the only aspect I really miss is a raw variable for max hunger (as opposed to the current constant hard coded number, which I believe is 100,000), which would be especially useful for species that hibernate.  While we're on the subject of hibernating, the game doesn't seem to be very good about respecting variable food needs based on activity and exertion. 

You might also be interested in DW-Kohaku's Volume and Mass thread.  That seems like the most practical way to track food intake, especially at the low end of the size scale.

I actually proposed having the stomach be a special container(and be handled similarly to how the game treats things like bags, chests, backpacks, etc.) that is inside a creature and over time digests any food-items eaten. The benefits of this are threefold:
The stomach capacity can be calculated directly from the size of the actual organ, and scales with creature size.

It is the purest way to handle eaten food, closest to reality, any other solution is an abstraction. After all, when you eat food IRL, it doesn't get magically converted into energy, it ends up in your stomach(as the first stop, anyway). While we don't exactly shove whole loaves of bread down our throats, it's still much better than having any eaten food just fill up some hunger meter(s).

Finally, this allows any eaten food to add to a creature's weight. While in a lot of instances, the difference would be negligible, theres a few where it would be very significant. Reptiles and especially monitor lizards are a great example, they can consume a rather large amount of food relative to their body weight, which slows them down pretty considerably.

In summary, my issue with the current hunger system of this game is the title of this thread, specifically that the game does not attempt to model these things at all. I hardly care whether the game has one hunger bar, or a hundred of them, just that the underlying processes be more complex than just hunger bar(s).

[voliol]

Getting back to the original topic (meal sizes and stomach capacity varying with creature size), the current STANDARD_GRAZER tag actually has a decent chunk of this.  In particular, the increase in food needs with size is much slower than linear.  You do, however, have a point about variable metabolism rates (also relevant for grazers from harsh climates, like camels, yaks, and donkeys). 

Nutrition has enough other threads that I don't really have much to say on this one (I've done most of my posting on the subject near the end of this thread, starting around page 6). 

I'm also not quite understanding exactly what game benefit the "stomach contents" variable is supposed to offer over the current abstracted "hunger" system.  The GRAZER tag already offers a foundation for variable hunger reductions for a given food type, and the only aspect I really miss is a raw variable for max hunger (as opposed to the current constant hard coded number, which I believe is 100,000), which would be especially useful for species that hibernate.  While we're on the subject of hibernating, the game doesn't seem to be very good about respecting variable food needs based on activity and exertion. 

You might also be interested in DW-Kohaku's Volume and Mass thread.  That seems like the most practical way to track food intake, especially at the low end of the size scale.

I actually proposed having the stomach be a special container(and be handled similarly to how the game treats things like bags, chests, backpacks, etc.) that is inside a creature and over time digests any food-items eaten. The benefits of this are threefold:
The stomach capacity can be calculated directly from the size of the actual organ, and scales with creature size.

It is the purest way to handle eaten food, closest to reality, any other solution is an abstraction. After all, when you eat food IRL, it doesn't get magically converted into energy, it ends up in your stomach(as the first stop, anyway). While we don't exactly shove whole loaves of bread down our throats, it's still much better than having any eaten food just fill up some hunger meter(s).

Finally, this allows any eaten food to add to a creature's weight. While in a lot of instances, the difference would be negligible, theres a few where it would be very significant. Reptiles and especially monitor lizards are a great example, they can consume a rather large amount of food relative to their body weight, which slows them down pretty considerably.

In summary, my issue with the current hunger system of this game is the title of this thread, specifically that the game does not attempt to model these things at all. I hardly care whether the game has one hunger bar, or a hundred of them, just that the underlying processes be more complex than just hunger bar(s).

Also you could pull it out after cutting open the belly of the beast and empty it to get those (partially digested) items/people back. Or carry it around like an alternative backpack, with an epicness level dependant on whether ”the beast” was a dragon or a cow.

[GoblinCookie]

Which is why I'm suggesting a way to inform the players of vitamin C levels without using modern terms? Dwarf Fortress still has a medieval theme to it, as least for now, so keeping with old terms is something to do not to break the immersion.

So we have a 'demand for freshness' value rather than a Vitamin C variable?  Trouble is there is a whole learning curve there in order to learn what the words actually mean in modern terms.

I actually proposed having the stomach be a special container(and be handled similarly to how the game treats things like bags, chests, backpacks, etc.) that is inside a creature and over time digests any food-items eaten. The benefits of this are threefold:
The stomach capacity can be calculated directly from the size of the actual organ, and scales with creature size.

It is the purest way to handle eaten food, closest to reality, any other solution is an abstraction. After all, when you eat food IRL, it doesn't get magically converted into energy, it ends up in your stomach(as the first stop, anyway). While we don't exactly shove whole loaves of bread down our throats, it's still much better than having any eaten food just fill up some hunger meter(s).

Finally, this allows any eaten food to add to a creature's weight. While in a lot of instances, the difference would be negligible, theres a few where it would be very significant. Reptiles and especially monitor lizards are a great example, they can consume a rather large amount of food relative to their body weight, which slows them down pretty considerably.

In summary, my issue with the current hunger system of this game is the title of this thread, specifically that the game does not attempt to model these things at all. I hardly care whether the game has one hunger bar, or a hundred of them, just that the underlying processes be more complex than just hunger bar(s).

A lot of the complexity you propose is redundant and inefficient resource wise.  Having the food in things bellies, then means we have to continually model the turning of that food into vomit and the transition between the stomach and the guts.  It is surely better simply to record that Creature X ate Y item Z time ago and then create the necessary items when it is needed to do so (a creature is slaughtered or it's stomach is cut open in combat) than to keep track of the whole process at every stage?