Print

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

[GreatWyrmGold]

More or less...
No G1.

[D34dlock]

How about setting a stockpile to accept the stuff the one you want to clear out isn't supposed to have. Then have it take, or be given to, from the other stockpile? It's a bit more work but this is DF. Would that work to do G1?

[GreatWyrmGold]

I was reminding you of what the post above yours said.

[Michael]

I already knew about the new Give/Take system, and even acknowledged it in my first post-coma post.  But as I said then, it doesn't replace Greediness.

My main use for G1 would be to clear the stone off of freshly dug out stockpiles.  To emulate this with Give/Take would require explicitly wiring every new stockpile up to the pseudo-G1 stockpile.

Also, don't forget about the two side proposals and the GS extension.

Side proposal 1 (do not treat a stockpile as any greedier than the minimum necessary to generate jobs) would save much aggravation without the user ever needing to explicitly set greediness or Give/Take.

Side proposal 2 (provide a dump-like flag to mark items on the ground for priority hauling) is also not covered by DF2012.

[zilpin]

... To emulate this with Give/Take would require explicitly wiring every new stockpile up to the pseudo-G1 stockpile.

Yes.  This is DF.  Link them up.
Or don't.  Unwanted items in a stockpile eventually make it to a stockpile that permits them.

But don't worry, I'm sure dfhack will eventually have an auto-link feature at some point.
It already has a «copy stock settings» function (which is awesome!), so copying give-take relationships is sure to come.

Although I like City-Builder-series style stockpile greed, it just isn't needed.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Needed? I guess not. Useful? Circus yes.

[Michael]

There's still no substitute for Side Proposal 2, the "collect" flag.  That is, a designation similar to dump that allows specific items to be directed to G1 stockpiles.

Although with the other changes in DF2012, that proposal may no longer be enough.  Now that wheelbarrows and other changes make it less efficient to ship all raw stone to a central processing area, I feel the need for a way to define "catchments" for stockpiles, so that I can have a stockpile and block-making workshop at the beginning of a tunneling project, and have the dwarves only haul stone "inwards" to this node, never pulling stone away from the core of the fort.

Catchments could be defined using the burrows infrastructure.  Using burrows directly would not suffice for two reasons.  First, the Wiki says there's a bug that causes job cancellation spam if you try to do this by assigning haulers to a burrow.  Second, a sustainable burrow has to include access to sleeping and eating points, which you may explicitly not want to include in a stockpile's catchment.

[Michael]

How about setting a stockpile to accept the stuff the one you want to clear out isn't supposed to have. Then have it take, or be given to, from the other stockpile? It's a bit more work but this is DF. Would that work to do G1?

I just tried this, and it didn't work.

Specifically, I noticed a bag wasn't being hauled to the seed stockpile, which had a vermin corpse on the only slot unused by other bags.  (Barrels were disabled for this pile).

I tried making a one-square refuse pile and setting it to take from the seed pile, with "take only from links".  Nothing happened.

[therahedwig]

I think that may have been because the vermin corpse wasn't stored in the stockpile, but just lying there.

This is what dumping is useful for.

[GreatWyrmGold]

I still think an option to, say, haul stone out of the new food stockpile and to the stone stockpile would be nice.

[Michael]

I think that may have been because the vermin corpse wasn't stored in the stockpile, but just lying there.

That would be fair if the dwarves would ignore the corpse and drop a bag on top of it when filling the stockpile.