Print

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

show levers / name levers / blink connected

35 (6.4%)

excavate - mine without stone production

32 (5.9%)

stop dwarven entrance dance when ordered inside

73 (13.4%)

forbidden area designation

20 (3.7%)

more raw files

50 (9.2%)

job priorities

55 (10.1%)

combine stacks / better stack handling

65 (11.9%)

more underground diversity

93 (17%)

improved sieges

48 (8.8%)

framerate improvements

75 (13.7%)

Total Members Voted: 545

[Puzzlemaker]

What about dynamically loading small portions of the layers when you dig down?  Or dynamically creating them, or whatever?

[Footkerchief]

you are correct, but aren't they quality-less items designated only by material and year?

Yes, so they're probably the easy case.

I guess for me restacking would ideally be implemented in two different ways:

1. actual restacking of truly identical items, i.e. two indistinguishable *turtle bone bolts* would be combined if they ended up in the same tile, container, or creature inventory

2. "virtual stacks" that would act like fake containers, i.e. if a dwarf throws 12 iron bolts and 10 bone bolts in his quiver, if you looked at the quiver you'd see "mixed bolts [22]".  You could view its contents like an actual container to see the separate stacks of iron and bone bolts. 

The issue would be how much items could differ in a "virtual stack," i.e. do they have to be the same item and material or just the same item type?  Maybe there could be a tag in the item definition for stackable items, like [STACK_BY:ITEM], [STACK_BY:MATERIAL] (and item), and [STACK_BY:QUALITY] (and material and item), from least restrictive to most.  The tags would also dictate how descriptive the virtual stack's name could be:

[STACK_BY:ITEM] -> mixed bolts[14]
[STACK_BY:MATERIAL] -> mixed iron bolts [19]
[STACK_BY:QUALITY] -> +mixed iron bolts [21]+

Ideally dwarves would also be smarter about splitting up stacks.  Obviously they have SOME capability of this kind, i.e. firing a single bolt.  But they don't know how to take a single bone from a stack for decorating, or how to split up *elephant meat [16]* so they can fit it into a barrel, or how to split off 25 bolts from that stack of 80 elephant bone bolts.

Wow that got long, sorry.

[Granite26]

My 7:30AM bedtime take.

combine stacks / better stack handling
-- this has been a problem since before the first public release, and the two ideas were basically to actually do it and to fake doing it via interface presentation of item lists etc.  Actually combining items would virtually require losing information, or you'd almost never do it (most items carry a lot of info), so I've grown to dislike this option.  The other option is to make the player think its happening more or less, and that's fairly easy in the interface lists.  The problem comes with jobs -- dwarves need to learn how to use multiple item stacks and consider it in all of their thoughts, which makes it sort of a pervasive rewrite.

Toady's comment was that mixed stacks would either involve losing information (very bad from his point of view) or creating a new code object for aggregating the information and having the dwarves think of the aggregates correctly.  (The correct answer, but a collosal pain in the ass that would take forever and a day to code)

The reason listed for not combining exactly like and only exactly like items is that it wouldn't happen often enough to be a noticable improvement.  I'm politely disagreeing, because the major catagories of 'stackable' items don't actually come in as many varieties as all that, since they are divided stacks in the first place.  Namely coins and, more dear to my heart, piles of used bolts laying about the countryside from the last goblin raid.  (Now that I think of it, seeds are also qualityless, but I think they have a 'rot' timer, so they probably couldn't be stacked.

[Dame de la Licorne]

Even just restacking identical items into a single stack would be an improvement, imo, since bolts tend to be the items that most often end up in single item stacks.  And it would be a good start, even if Tarn wants to expand it, as he implied.

[isitanos]

stop dwarven entrance dance when ordered inside
-- I've seen at least three interpretations of what this means.  If the main issue is something like paths crossing outdoors between two indoor areas when the standing order is on, the issue is very difficult to solve while maintaining the standing order.  Was thinking of scrapping/changing the order entirely when safe area/burrows/etc come in.  Only fast workaround I can think of is allowing them outside during the walks between areas.  Not sure that would satisfy people at all depending on what they mean when they bring this up.  I saw other reports of dwarves actually taking jobs with destinations outside when they aren't supposed to go outside, but I can't get that to happen since the mentioned jobs do permitted area checks.  Then there was something about avoiding enemies or something.

I think the option you just added to forbid items dropped from corpses will help a lot.
Still, if you don't use that option, the concept of a dwarf trying to rush past invaders to clean a trap or pick up a sock is a bit crazy. Why not have a "siege mode" where most menial jobs are temporarily deactivated, so that dwarves don't do stuff like cleaning, hauling, and can concentrate on defense, pulling levers and so on. The jobs that are allowed to go on should probably be customizable in-game by the player, so he can choose to keep making booze, food, and haul stone to build emergency fortifications. The siege mode should probably be enabled manually, as well.
This could be expanded into flexible job groups that can be enabled and disabled at will.

Another solution would be to allow the player to designate areas that are "considered as outside" for "dwarves stay indoors" standing order purposes. I know I would apply that designation to my traps inside, so that dwarves don't rush to clean them as soon as a goblin dies there.

In the same way, couldn't you designate areas that are "considered as inside" for "dwarves stay indoors" standing order purposes? This would allow the player to designate a safe outdoors area (presumably walled) where dwarves can go and keep chopping wood, for instance, even though there's a siege going on.

[Mephansteras]

That would make things much better. Along with anything already designated "inside" by the game being considered inside for that order. Right now, my civilians won't go into my above ground buildings during a siege, even though they don't have to go outside to get to them. The buildings themselves are still counted as Outside for some reason.

[Exponent]

That would make things much better. Along with anything already designated "inside" by the game being considered inside for that order. Right now, my civilians won't go into my above ground buildings during a siege, even though they don't have to go outside to get to them. The buildings themselves are still counted as Outside for some reason.

The "All dwarves stay inside" order really means "All dwarves stay underground (i.e., in subterranean squares)".  Your buildings, while inside, are also above ground, so they don't count as safe.

[Mephansteras]

I realize what it does, my point was that the name of the order and the actual behavior of the dwarves doesn't match up. Besides which, I WANT my civilians to be accessing my towers during a siege. They need to haul off injured dwarves, give water to ones whose barracks is in the tower, restock the ammo piles, etc. Having "Stay inside" mean stay inside and not stay underground will give me a lot more flexibility in what I do.

I also really like the idea of having "safe zones" that are outside. If I have a walled in garden, it's pretty safe for my farmers to go out there even during a siege. But I don't want my dwarves to go out in the areas that aren't walled in safely, since they're risking running in to my enemies while they're out there.

[Toady One]

Coins have their coin batch index (year for dwarves) and the material, but there's also ownership, contaminants, temperature, damage, age, storage information, maker id, flags based on if your fort owns/made it, melt/dump/forbid/hide designations, job information...  and probably more.  Some of it can be scrapped or otherwise dealt with, but it's not a triviality if you want to keep track of things.  Even if it checks all of these things and consolidates equal stacks (which would be rare -- or with age+maker id, virtually impossible), seeing it happen in some cases and not others with identically named objects would lead to false bug reports, I think.  Probably more profitable is addressing the main concerns in other ways -- getting dwarves to grab all the bolt stacks they need when they go to get a one bolt stack or making coins work in a sensible fashion don't really depend on stacking so much.  Increased CPU drag from broken stacks is probably the main thing that can't be dodged without some direct handling, and I'm leaning toward not suppressing the information by using some extra objects (could use the same ones as the interface would I guess, though there are all sorts of ways to think about it).

[Othob Rithol]

Thanks for the quick responses Toady... I hope I didn't come across as demanding.

Now that we have Toady's input on the current list, we can more intelligently decide to start an new one up. Regardless, we prolly should decide to 'table' some of them (stacks, forbidden areas, entrance dance) since clearly these can not be resolved so simply.

According to the log, one common complaint issue with stacks (seed bags) seems to have been resolved for next release.

[Granite26]

Coins have their coin batch index (year for dwarves) and the material, but there's also ownership, contaminants, temperature, damage, age, storage information, maker id, flags based on if your fort owns/made it, melt/dump/forbid/hide designations, job information...  and probably more.  Some of it can be scrapped or otherwise dealt with, but it's not a triviality if you want to keep track of things.  Even if it checks all of these things and consolidates equal stacks (which would be rare -- or with age+maker id, virtually impossible), seeing it happen in some cases and not others with identically named objects would lead to false bug reports, I think.  Probably more profitable is addressing the main concerns in other ways -- getting dwarves to grab all the bolt stacks they need when they go to get a one bolt stack or making coins work in a sensible fashion don't really depend on stacking so much.  Increased CPU drag from broken stacks is probably the main thing that can't be dodged without some direct handling, and I'm leaning toward not suppressing the information by using some extra objects (could use the same ones as the interface would I guess, though there are all sorts of ways to think about it).

Wow...  I'm constantly amazed by how much stuff is going on behind the scenes.  You are (of course) correct, and I apologize for doubting...

[Impaler[WrG]]

How about a 'purse' item which acts as a quiver for coins, dwarfs carry their purse around with them all the time and store unto say 100-1000 coins in it (rather then dumping them all over the floor in their rooms) but the player sees the total VALUE of the coins, when 'opened' the normal stacks are visible.  The purse doesn't fill the 'hauling' slot for the dwarf so they can continue to do normal work when using one.  If a dwarf is rich enough that they fill up multiple purses they will place the filled purses in their chest or if they lack one their rooms floor.  The coins belonging to the state/fort would continue to be placed in coin stockpiles and the purses placed in Bins.  Bags might also hold coins perhaps up too 5000 coins.  Purses are made in groups of 4 using one unit of cloth.  A variety of other objects might be carried in purses too and in all such cases the dwarf can carry one full purse without losing normal hauling ability.

[Guilliman]

Fire.

A campfire requires 2 wood to build, and 1 wood every season to keep burning. This requires some job skill.

A torch requires 1 wood, build in a carpenters or craftsworkshop. Torches can only be lit in campfires. Torches are used to set things on fire.. (err not out on this one Oo)

Fire can be made (on a campfire) with flint and tinder. Flint and tinder is made from a craftsdward workshop, needs 1 stone and 1 wood. Can be used forever?

A kitchen needs 1 fire (torch). torche is hauled from finished good stockpiled, lit and used at construction material in kitchen.
Same for woodfurnace, melter (to light the coal!) and forge.

Fat can be used to "smear" pieces of ground with it. 1fat per 2-4 squares. Fat can be lit by torch. Burning goblins hmm.

Just a few ideas .

"Urist suïvlugêar has enjoyed a warm talk around a campfire."

"Goblin spearman cancles siege, spear on fire."

[zagibu]

The fat + fire idea is cool. It should be possible to brew "liquid fire" at the alchemy with fat + booze. Maybe call it balefire.

[Draco18s]

A torch requires 1 wood, build in a carpenters or craftsworkshop. Torches can only be lit in campfires. Torches are used to set things on fire.. (err not out on this one Oo)

Can't use a torch to light a torch?