Print

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

[Moogie]

I don't believe I've ever seen such a promising thread get derailed after 1 post by its own author. I was looking forward to reading the experimentations and discussions of this design, but instead we're defending an innocuous comment that could only be seen as pedophillic by someone with a very sick mind.

Sad, OP. You are sad.

[Loud Whispers]

Herp derp inb4 lock

[zehive]

Ignoring the thread catastrophe, I think this proves that what lags the game isn't the 8 billion items but the fact that the game has to track the separate locations of all 8 billion items, then when a dorf wants to go grab a rock it calculates pathing to every single rock on the map. Now when you have over 100 dorfs and most are busy, I imagine thats when it goes batshit crazy

[Callista]

I agree, it was a reasonable assumption.  It is possible that Tarn Adams programmed in an automatic size difference for genders, even though it is not in the raws.

I doubt it, most other dwarf functions are very gender neutral--e.g. the built-in "practice-editing-the-raws" thing Toady added with the option of adding beards to female dwarves by simply adding brackets to existing data. I think it is more likely the sample size was small and only young female dwarves were present. Another question is weight/fatness/diet--were they skinny? What did it say in their description?

wait, you can add beards to female dwarves? How? Show me!

[Loud Whispers]

I agree, it was a reasonable assumption.  It is possible that Tarn Adams programmed in an automatic size difference for genders, even though it is not in the raws.

I doubt it, most other dwarf functions are very gender neutral--e.g. the built-in "practice-editing-the-raws" thing Toady added with the option of adding beards to female dwarves by simply adding brackets to existing data. I think it is more likely the sample size was small and only young female dwarves were present. Another question is weight/fatness/diet--were they skinny? What did it say in their description?

wait, you can add beards to female dwarves? How? Show me!

Go into [CREATURE_STANDARD]. Toady even specifically left a note telling you how to do this.

[lorb]

Necromancy aside: Is this still relevant/true with the latest df? It's been linked to from the wiki.

[Loci]

This particular technique has been supplanted by minecart quantum stockpiling. Presumably the same benefits from reducing stockpile tiles would still apply, if stockpile tiles really are a significant source of lag (I'm not aware of any recent science on the matter). I generally avoid creating stockpiles at all and I still experience lag, so it's fair to say that stockpile tiles are not the only source of lag.

[PatrikLundell]

I doubt general lag is affected by where an item is located, but display lag probably is, i.e. if the area you're currently viewing is full of stuff to render, the FPS decreases, but when you view something else (e.g. a pass through level with only a staircase through unrevealed rock), the FPS increases.
For some strange reason the surface view FPS decreases dramatically over the years. Paving it over (or most of it) helps a fair bit. Using empty stockpiles to suppress growth/maturation does not seem to help the view FPS, so I guess the stuff hidden by the stockpiles still are rendered and overwritten (or possibly processed and ignored).

[martinuzz]

For some strange reason the surface view FPS decreases dramatically over the years.

I've noticed that on my treeless / vegetationless embark, there is no decrease in FPS from viewing the surface, so it looks like that it is completely vegetation related.
(My previous embark had a difference of nearly 15 FPS between looking at the surface or the inside, on a map with suguaros and highwood trees, the map before that, on a dense forest with lots of different types of vegetation, the difference was over 20 FPS. Which is why I have started embarking on treeless sites. Undergound trees seem less harmful so I suspect the biggest culprits are falling leaves and fruits)

[achamalacha]

Nice work OP, but I am wondering what'S the difference to Quantum stockpiling with minecarts and trackstops?

see: http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Exploit#Simple_Quantum_Stockpiles

[PatrikLundell]

The main difference is about 4 years and the introduction of mine carts into DF...

@martinuzz: I agree it's probably related to vegetation, but since stockpiles suppress tree growth and I still suffer severe FPS degradation topside despite covering it with stockpiles as I cut down all trees, and it is reduced whey I finally manage to make a parking lot of it, falling leaves and fruit (which I initially thought were the culprits) can't be the sole causes. I too, usually embark on badlands or on ocean/lake shores. I want SOME trees for beds etc.

[martinuzz]

I've noticed that if you have no wood at all in your fort, the elves and humans will bring some with their caravans.

[PatrikLundell]

Yes, but then you rely both on them showing up, and there not being any black tower/goblin sieges blocking their caravans, and even if they do show up, it takes a year for the elves to show up. I also tend to have aquifers, so it takes some time to get down to the caverns (not to mention being able to enter them in reasonable safety). Thus, I generally try to have one embark tile with trees on it. I also want to do above ground farming for the maximum booze selection.

[omega_dwarf]

The G_FPS_CAP tip in my sig may be of interest if you're having FPS degradation from viewing the surface. The explanation I heard (not sure if it was that thread) was that it basically takes DF a while to sort through all the piles of crap to determine which tile to display, in what color. (And it's limited by the quality - not quantity - of your computer's RAM.) This should hold if you look at a large stockpile as well, if it's the same size as the surface. Not sure if it's more dependent on the number of tiles or the number of items, so idk if it applies to quantum stockpiles or not. Might be worth trying putting quantum stockpiles on a lower level out of sight to check it out. Not aware of anything besides piles of crap that would make the surface slower to look at, although it's certainly possible - maybe all the grass that covers the material underneath is treated in similar fashion?

[martinuzz]

maybe all the grass that covers the material underneath is treated in similar fashion?

That could explain the magnificently good FPS I've been getting in my current fort, with no difference at all between surface and underground; there's only clay, rock and pebbles on the surface, nothing grows there. I do get grass in my channeled out moat though, which is probably not supposed to happen. Apparently dug out soil exposed to sunlight does not get the same biome as the surface layer.