Print

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

[FantasticDorf]

With a top down approach (100 to 0 rather than vice versa), i think this would help flesh out the processes of certain materials rather than the "one object, one product" ratio we have now by employing a similar but different system to metalworking


Breaking down a object into 'Dwarven Cubits' (referred to as 'dc') as a new measurement of materials universally, a log may have a density of so many cubits and as such be suitable for making a object and still having some left over, using the log decreased the 'dc' of the log, and it'll lose weight and size which can be seen when it's observed with K.

- Butchery, based on the skill of the butcher, they will carve off more meat by working like a real butcher, joint by joint accruing a pile of meat, bones etc with a degree of accuracy and speed, a large animal like a whale for instance can be worked on by novice butchers for practice because it would take a LONG time to process, even if the butcher isn't cutting articulate strips. Cutting off small and large 'dc' portions until the entire creature is processed for whatever the butcher can salvage.

- Masonry, woodworking and crafting jobs from raw materials, showing during the process the material given being broken down. ivory being a good example because often a elephant tusk is physically large enough to make many objects but only counts as 1 object, with the remainder of material dissapearing after use in current workshop ratios.

- On smaller objects, them being stored collectively onto the next object as a addition of the dwarf cubit internal storage of the workshop, and feasibly the existing smelting system can also be replaced by cubits, since it fulfills the same function.


Partially the reason i suggest a dwarf cubit especially is because a cubit is a generic method of measurement by measuring the distance of the middle finger to the elbow, and on dwarves with stubby limbs, that amount is so feasably small that it qualifies for articulate work. Besides from that, every significant historical culture has a variation of cubit as a generic method of measurement so without that specific reasoning we can define the dwarven standard tool-less measurement flexibly and easily.

The endgoal is to smoothen out how workshops process materials and bypass many of the presented issues we see in regards to item size being ignored, and add a bit of depth to workshop processes.

[Putnam]

Volume is already taken into account by the game. There is no particular reason to introduce a new unit of volume when the game's current internal units, centiliters and milliliters, work fine already.

[FantasticDorf]

Perhaps you're right that volume, might not have to be changed but it wouldn't be possible for the presented methods i propose to really work properly because we only use exact volume amounts. Measuring everything with a new volume standard seemed like a good solution for following the size increase/decline of objects.

game's current internal units, centiliters and milliliters, work fine already.

Ill agree to disagree that it works 'fine'

1 elephant tusk is more volume required than the product it is making, but is wholly consumed by the workshop, what i was proposing was that instead of storing the entire tusk in a buffer creating a spam of products afterwards, we simply take off part of it and keep it in the workshop (or have it sorted back into the pile/quantum stockpiled)

• [93/100 *cubits or preferred volume measurement] of elephant tusk is left from making 1 small figurine to the volume measurement of the object that was made versus the material.

Like i mentioned in my butchery example, skill going into how much efficiency is applied, with a small amount of wastage.

• [75/100 cubits] left of a elephant corpse hanging in a butchers workshop, with the butcher gathering materials beneath themselves as they strip meat & bp components gradually from the corpse, as you might think they are cutting & quartering it.

[Putnam]

The fact that products often have different total volume than reagents has absolutely nothing to do with the choice of units involved. It's a separate problem entirely. Wanting products to match up volume-wise to reagents is a good suggestion, though.

Like I said, items already have their volume stored in the game. It's just not taken into account by reactions, which is the problem being referred to. Converting the units from milliliters to some entirely new system won't change the fact that reactions simply are not set up to have equal volume before and after.