Print

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

[Greiger]

Can't we all just get along?

Anyway it's not like all that stone is disappearing, the miners are just putting all the stone into one much larger boulder.  I think of it kind of like raking a yard.  You don't make one pile of leaves for every square meter do you?  No, you gather up all the leaves into a single pile for a larger area. 

The miners are just doing that, it just treats it as one boulder for FPS and management's sake

[darkflagrance]

One cool thing with minecarts is the possibility of placing passengers on them. This may one day allow us to have Dwarven subways where we load up passengers en masse and have a repeating mechanism send them along the track to another area.

[NW_Kohaku]

I'm already over-arguing this a bit, but a couple quick things...

It's unavoidable that any given feature or design decision will delight some players and irritate others, but mining is such a basic and fundamental part of the game that it would be a mistake, in my opinion, to turn it into a chore.

The difference of opinion here is I don't think rubble adds any chore. 

We already have wheelbarrows, animal-carts, and minecarts and stone to move with them.  Rubble just adds more.

I don't want mining to turn out like pastures, a feature that's too irritating to use on a large scale.

Pastures are annoying because they're bugged into trapping all the creatures in the northwest corner.  Setting up statue gardens and using the meeting zone designation to let grazers roam freely actually solves most of the problems with grazing, and hopefully Toady will eventually make pastures more like meeting zones. 

Many features are bugged when they first come in, but it would be a mistake to say that we should avoid new features because they will be buggy.

The other problems with pastures are micromanagement from a lack of a more automated interface, which wouldn't be applicable to hauling.

[cephalo]

I am concerned about colored stone. Just because I have a hundred times more granite than anyone could find a use for, doesn't mean that I have enough blue, green or purple stone for paving etc. I tend to use all of a particular available color, and I often don't have enough. Maybe it would be good to start with boulders and have someone crack them into 4 'stones' for jobs. That way if you want to use them you still have them, and if you don't there are less items to dump.

Even that is not ideal for things like rutile, which come in very small clusters. I could easily see someone mining out a cluster of 6 rutile and getting nothing because of the diceroll.

[Geb]

Maybe it would be good to start with boulders and have someone crack them into 4 'stones' for jobs.

See the latest dev log entry. This is pretty much what we're getting. It looks like we'll be able to make four blocks from one stone.

[cephalo]

See the latest dev log entry. This is pretty much what we're getting. It looks like we'll be able to make four blocks from one stone.

For paving, alot of times I like to use raw stone to contrast different parts of a road. It seems weired that a rough stone road would be 4x more expensive than a smooth stone road. There are quite a few jobs that don't use blocks. For example flux! I do hope a solution can be found for those.

See how I did my training dojos in my Praisegems fort (link in sig.).

[Geb]

We already know that the ore -> bars reactions have been tweaked to give more bars. I would hope that includes the steel making reactions involving flux too. I'm not sure how that would work neatly though.

4 pig iron + 4 iron + 4 fuel + flux = 8 steel?

That's not pretty.

[Exponent]

We already know that the ore -> bars reactions have been tweaked to give more bars. I would hope that includes the steel making reactions involving flux too. I'm not sure how that would work neatly though.

4 pig iron + 4 iron + 4 fuel + flux = 8 steel?

That's not pretty.

Or alternatively, flux stone blocks could be just as usable as raw flux stone.  In fact, this could apply to a lot of things.  Aside from large furniture, any job that called for 1 raw stone could possibly also work with 1 stone block.

[Yobgod]

I'm not sure what the rubble is supposed to be adding to the game.

Well, if it's a matter of thinking up uses for rubble...

Historically, rubble is both the major component of concrete and used as a filler in large walls. We could actually keep most of the workflow the same by simply introducing concrete as an alternate building source for stone constructions and furniture. It gets a little strange if you (properly) require lime, sand and rubble, but I could see it working well as (sand | rubble) -> concrete item, with the lime assumed to magically come from somewhere like the water does for brewing. Really the only thing that changes are the descriptions.

As a bonus, large outdoor piles of rubble would totally piss off the elves.

[PTTG??]

Rubble is useful for ore but not crafting. In essence, it allows you to have hordes of unskilled coal miners but rewards you for using only the finest miners to extract valuable gems.

[Immortal]

Amazing progress Toady, can't wait to experiment with minecarts.


About rubble

If I had to clear rubble and slow down my hollowing out mountain process to put my towers inside I would probably stop playing. That would absolutely kill the part I enjoy.

I like to create, build, refine the ores, and stockpile valuables while building architectural wonders.
I do not like to be prevented from digging, unless its an enemy or a feature which includes panic. Designating rubble to be moved sounds about as exciting as digging out a room in minecraft...
I currently have no problem with moving the stones from the hallways so it looks nice, but I fully disapprove of anything that functionally stops the mining process, leave the rubble behind and let my dwarves dig please.

[bombzero]

-snip-

well now your actually making a decent case of how rubble adds to the game in a way greater than building walls, one only needs so many walls.
concrete could have a plethora of applications, while rubble walls... you wont need too many.

yes rubble is something to add time to mining, but i fear it will become too tedious as time goes on, or become completely ignored as everyone simply dumps there rubble in a nice big pile.

but now your contradicting the goal of cutting down on items.

the main issue i see, is the rubble idea seems slated towards current game state, not game state one or two years from now. all those systems NW said adding rubble would make harder are getting somewhat significant overhauls in the coming years, and for now if the game is too easy, tough, Toady is working on it.

NW i think you are too set in your desire for this feature, you see an argument and immediately think, "how can I say this is wrong", instead of "well how is this a good idea". in other words, your becoming a U.S. senator 

but for now, I think we should simply leave this one up to Toady for if and how it should be implemented, we have discussed it to death across multiple threads and this thread itself, and none of the positive arguments from either side are actually strong enough to persuade me one way or the other. im rather ambivalent about if rubble should be added, but i feel compelled to say no at least for the time being.

[bluea]

If you think of rubble as "a stack of X stone" treated as a "single object" - much like "pine bolts [25]" is treated as "one object" until items are pealed off and used, that's one way rubble could be used to actually -reduce- the number of distinct items tracked by the engine.

Treated -this- way, "rubble" is just a square with a "stack" of stone that's too full to traverse.

Managing a immediate hovel in the earth -> still easy. Dig a double-size area, shove the stone from one half into the other half. That is: Not 100% rubble-retention.

But it allows a middle-ground between the 10,000 stones in a quantum-stockpile (that is still even passable!) and the one-stone-per-square stockpile.

Instead of thinking this as "OMG, extra work" it instead becomes "So excellent, the goal is to get -stacking- working correctly!"  The only addition being that a -stack- of stone can block a square once it's X high.

On the crafting side: It should use -blocks- anyway. A 2m x 2m x 3m stone converting to a ring is silly. A 'cinderblock' sized block is a decent size for all of the crafts.

[zombie urist]

Will logs and metal bars also give multiple wood and metal blocks?

[MrWiggles]

Will logs and metal bars also give multiple wood and metal blocks?

Logs aren't related to Mining, and these changes are related to the Mining Changes.

I would suspect that Metal Bars won't be creating multiple Metal Blocks due to the fact that Ore will be creating more bars then before. To me, it then going further and creating more blocks is unneeded.