Print

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

[Arkenstone]

So I was thinking about something Toady said about having multiple items merge into an 'amalgam' that'd be hard to climb over as an anti-quantum stockpiling measure, and figured "why not expand the concept"?  Now would probably be the time to do it too, seeing as Toady's currently working on hauling.


I think that there should be a movement peanalty for moving over stones, and perhaps other objects as well.  If all objects were assigned a 'size', then large objects (especially a multitude thereof) could impede the progress of units moving into a tile, possibly forcing a crawl if the pile is big enough.  This would also provide foundation for future item interactions, for instance:

If there are many items in a tile then they might run the risk of slumping if a unit (or another item) moves into the pile.  The 'landslide' check could be made every time a unit or projectile enters said tile, and would scatter items into adjacent tiles.  If there are already items in adjacent tiles, then they could 'funnel' a landslide in another direction and/or have landslides of their own triggered.  Woe betide the hauler who brings *one rock too many* to that quantum stockpile...

Also, there's the possibility of tripping.  Risking a dwarf go prone with a bad thought occasionally should be enough of a reason to keep major hallways free of clutter for most.  The trip check could also take liquids into account (if it doesn't already!); however, a soldier with any level of confidence shouldn't risk tripping over a corpse unless dodging. (Perhaps a skill, [climbing?] or maybe only civilians should risk non-dodging trips?)


In any case, this should fix quantum stockpiling by making it risky, add yet another dimention or realism, and perhaps make for nice landslide traps.

[Sus]

If there are many items in a tile then they might run the risk of slumping if a unit (or another item) moves into the pile.  The 'landslide' check could be made every time a unit or projectile enters said tile, and would scatter items into adjacent tiles.  If there are already items in adjacent tiles, then they could 'funnel' a landslide in another direction and/or have landslides of their own triggered.  Woe betide the hauler who brings *one rock too many* to that quantum stockpile...

I... don't think that would be such a hot idea. Think of the FPS. 
I mean, if water and magma are giving your processor a hard time, imagine having to track a bajillion falling objects from a pile your cat just tripped over, spilling onto the next pile, causing it to topple over onto the next...

[NW_Kohaku]

Fluids are a problem because they are checked every odd frame for every non-still tile of fluids.

A pile that falls over when tipped would only need to check that one tile when a creature is moving into that tile.

That said, I don't necessarily believe that we should have a random check of spreading, but rather have a possibility of just making a tile so "full" that it will not accept any more items, and either shift items into adjacent tiles to fill those tiles, or else start filling the next tile upwards when it completely fills a given tile's area.

If, say, 5 stone fills a tile, then you start dumping stones into a pit, it might create a functional wall when 5 stones are dumped into one pit tile, and then the stones bounce over into nearby tiles before filling up the tile above it in the pit, and eventually, the pit is just plain full. 

Partly filled tiles slow down movement.  Completely full tiles occlude movement, and count as a wall.  In fact, for some items, just declaring they become "amalgam" wall terrain where they are simply a compacted wall of garbage that cannot be separated out into useful items anymore, and where those items are deleted from memory (and as such, creating a dwarven "landfill") would be a useful game feature to stop the FPS drain to excessive item creation.

[Andeerz]

Excellent suggestion.  Combine the OP with what Kohaku said, and I don't see how there could be a significant FPS drop.  I could be missing something, though.

I don't quite agree with the deletion of items... but perhaps that would be acceptable to me if only certain kinds of items are deleted, like things that rot or break easily...

And "landslides" would be frikkin' awesome. 

[NW_Kohaku]

So long as Toady uses STL vectors tens of thousands of members long to store item data, we're going to need item deletion.  If it makes you feel better, it's going to be the items that are getting dumped in the first place, though.  If rotting vermin corpses, nervous systems, and excess microcline get deleted when you quantum stockpile them, what's the downside?

[Andeerz]

Point well made!  That actually makes me feel 100% better.

[Gitaxias]

I personally like the system the way it is. there are way worse exploits and cheats than quantum stockpiling, and I don't wan there to be a way to possibly accidentally destroy items. that being said, Landfills and landslide traps would both be pretty awesome.

[GreatWyrmGold]

I'm not big on the "permanent deletion" idea. Maybe, instead, the game just remembers that tile X has item X, at least by item type and material, and miners have a chance of releasing each item if they mine the tile? (Assuming the item hasn't rotted or something in the meantime.) Also, we have to consider artifacts here, too.

[NW_Kohaku]

You shouldn't be quantum dumping things you still want in the first place, though...

This game really does need a delete button, one way or another.  Even if you hide trash items, they kill your FPS over time.  Large parrot leather loincloths from the human sieges are only going to burden your fortress and accumulate over time.

[Jeoshua]

There should definitely be an option to actually delete things, past the use of magma or atom smashing.  Something that really puts those unwanted items through the bit grinder and leaves no trace whatsoever.

[JohnieRWilkins]

No, I think magma/smr should be the only real bit-grinder. Just think about it, how would you destroy a piece of iron armor in the middle ages? You'd melt it down. (an equivalent of magma)

There is one other way to get rid of unwanted junk though. You could order your dudes to haul it off-map. But that might require army-arc.

I don't like the idea of being able to store 5 mined rocks per tile. Maybe it'd make sense with soil if you could actually mine soil chunks. You could compact them in that case. Rocks? You should be forced to haul the entire boulders out. (it's not that bad, I've done it.) That's the only real non-cheating solution. And I think it would make for the best game.

[King Mir]

So long as Toady uses STL vectors tens of thousands of members long to store item data, we're going to need item deletion.  If it makes you feel better, it's going to be the items that are getting dumped in the first place, though.  If rotting vermin corpses, nervous systems, and excess microcline get deleted when you quantum stockpile them, what's the downside?

Then maybe Toady should not use STL vectors of thousands of elements. Usually a STL deque works better with that many elements, possibly having several other arrays to index the larger segmented array. There are algorithmic ways to make simple data structures faster, particularly if there is a single task that's slowing it down.

[thisisjimmy]

So long as Toady uses STL vectors tens of thousands of members long to store item data, we're going to need item deletion.  If it makes you feel better, it's going to be the items that are getting dumped in the first place, though.  If rotting vermin corpses, nervous systems, and excess microcline get deleted when you quantum stockpile them, what's the downside?

Then maybe Toady should not use STL vectors of thousands of elements. Usually a STL deque works better with that many elements, possibly having several other arrays to index the larger segmented array. There are algorithmic ways to make simple data structures faster, particularly if there is a single task that's slowing it down.

Of course, these kind of things are general optimizations that Toady works on when he has time.  These optimizations also depends on how the code is used.  A deque may not perform better than a vector if most of the time is spent accessing the items and not inserting items.

[King Mir]

With "thousands" of items a deque is still better, because it allows non-continuous memory, and fewer reallocations. But the rest of your point is valid.

[Jeoshua]

Well if you would melt it down in any realistic view of things, why are we then currently unable to do that without the help of !!MAGMA!!?  It's not super-hard for Dwarves to get, but what about Elves or Humans?  Are they to drown in their unused socks and such?

It would make sense if there were an above-ground way to remove objects from the game.  The benefit is that they disappear and stop slowing down the game, bloating your save, etc.  The drawback is, of course, they are gone for good and can never return.  Burning/Melting/Destroying them would be the best option there, so it makes sense.