Print

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

[jez9999]

I think I'm correct in assuming that the max. depth of water at any given z-level is 7.  So why does the game always say 7/7, 4/7, 2/7, etc.?  Why not just say 7, 4, 2?

[Crashmaster]

because then people would post questions asking, "Why won't my river fill up past 7?"

[Fen]

I'm not sure, but going by fractions it could be said that the amount of water in a tile is calculated in sevenths- a tile filled with water is at 7/7, which as a fraction is equal to 1, so it has 1 tile's worth of water in it, while 6/7 is ~0.857 of a tile, 5/7 is ~0.714 of a tile of water, etc.

Or, I could be totally incorrect and it's something completely different.

[oxiboost]

I think I'm correct in assuming that the max. depth of water at any given z-level is 7.  So why does the game always say 7/7, 4/7, 2/7, etc.?  Why not just say 7, 4, 2?

You're mistaken: the max depth of water at any given z-level is 1, that is, the entire tile being filled of water. The confusion lies in the fact that Dwarf Fortress divides the amount of water in a z-level in sevenths, in such a way that 1/7 of water in a tile is the minimum possible.
To explain it better:

Consider this a whole Z level
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////

where this would be 1/7 (one seventh) of the Z level filled with water.
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////

where this would be 2/7 (or two sevenths)
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////

and so on.
Quoting the DFWiki:

Dark-colored water symbols indicate the water is one Z-level below the camera level. Water has 7 depth levels per tile, with 1 being a shallow puddle, and 7 filling the tile completely. Dwarves can safely walk through water up to a depth of 3 - at depth 4 or higher, a dwarf will cancel jobs due to "Dangerous terrain" and begin to gain swimming experience. At depth 7, any dwarf that does not have sufficient Swimming skill will drown.

[jez9999]

I think I'm correct in assuming that the max. depth of water at any given z-level is 7.  So why does the game always say 7/7, 4/7, 2/7, etc.?  Why not just say 7, 4, 2?

You're mistaken: the max depth of water at any given z-level is 1, that is, the entire tile being filled of water. The confusion lies in the fact that Dwarf Fortress divides the amount of water in a z-level in sevenths, in such a way that 1/7 of water in a tile is the minimum possible.
To explain it better:

Consider this a whole Z level
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////

where this would be 1/7 (one seventh) of the Z level filled with water.
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////

where this would be 2/7 (or two sevenths)
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////
///////

and so on.
Quoting the DFWiki:

Dark-colored water symbols indicate the water is one Z-level below the camera level. Water has 7 depth levels per tile, with 1 being a shallow puddle, and 7 filling the tile completely. Dwarves can safely walk through water up to a depth of 3 - at depth 4 or higher, a dwarf will cancel jobs due to "Dangerous terrain" and begin to gain swimming experience. At depth 7, any dwarf that does not have sufficient Swimming skill will drown.

Yes, I'm aware of this.  I meant that when "7" is displayed, the tile is at its highest water level.

[oxiboost]

When 7/7 is displayed, the tile is completely submerged in water, that is, it's highest water level. What's your doubt then?

[itg]

I think I'm correct in assuming that the max. depth of water at any given z-level is 7.  So why does the game always say 7/7, 4/7, 2/7, etc.?  Why not just say 7, 4, 2?

The interface is full of inefficiencies which Toady doesn't plan to address until much, much later. This is hardly the worst of them.

[Solon64]

Frankly I think the op is just having some minor OCD issues with it and, as the poster above me said, this is hardly the fiddly-est issue with the interface.

Also, consider that seven is an important number in this game, hint: how many dwarves does every embark begin with, by default? Ayup. That's why Toady picked seven, at least in my interpretation. Seven clearly is Armok's Holy Number.

[jez9999]

Frankly I think the op is just having some minor OCD issues with it and, as the poster above me said, this is hardly the fiddly-est issue with the interface.

Also, consider that seven is an important number in this game, hint: how many dwarves does every embark begin with, by default? Ayup. That's why Toady picked seven, at least in my interpretation. Seven clearly is Armok's Holy Number.

It's not really OCD - I don't have a "problem" with it.  :-)  It's just that it had me confused for a while because I was waiting for the shallower water to come along before I realized that there is no such thing.  It's ALL 7 deep (until drained etc. obviously).

[SharkForce]

Frankly I think the op is just having some minor OCD issues with it and, as the poster above me said, this is hardly the fiddly-est issue with the interface.

Also, consider that seven is an important number in this game, hint: how many dwarves does every embark begin with, by default? Ayup. That's why Toady picked seven, at least in my interpretation. Seven clearly is Armok's Holy Number.

It's not really OCD - I don't have a "problem" with it.  :-)  It's just that it had me confused for a while because I was waiting for the shallower water to come along before I realized that there is no such thing.  It's ALL 7 deep (until drained etc. obviously).

well, as was said, 7 is not a very intuitive number to be the maximum. if it just said 7, there would probably be people trying to fill it up to 8

[Kofthefens]

Also, consider that seven is an important number in this game, hint: how many dwarves does every embark begin with, by default? Ayup. That's why Toady picked seven, at least in my interpretation. Seven clearly is Armok's Holy Number.

I think it's to make things easier on the computer. In the current system, there are 8 possible states (including empty), which is 2^3. This allows him to designate the variable as having one less digit, slightly improving performance.

[Hamiltonz]

I think it's to make things easier on the computer. In the current system, there are 8 possible states (including empty), which is 2^3. This allows him to designate the variable as having one less digit, slightly improving performance.

I believe this (above).  I don't know how Toddy does this but I would make the water depth a three bit field in a 'struct'.  Structs are an excelent way to interact with bits inside of an integer (or byte, etc.).  Care has to be taken.  If your data moves between big-endian and little-endian systems (the intenet is big-endian, btw) the bit fields can map to the wrong end of the integer.

I'm not sure where, but I read that the levels are 10 deep, and that the floor is 3 deep, leaving only 7 for the space water flows in.  I think it was in the Stonesense thread.  None of that makes sense to me as water on top of water is still only 7 deep.  Maybe it could be 3+7+3+7 and so on, and only the 7s are displayed.

The answer is probably that it had to be something and Toddy just picked 7 for whatever reason.

[Drazinononda]

As far as the "fractional tiles" vs. "units of water" debate goes, remember that the unit systems are currently all over the place for liquids and thus it's a bit silly to try to find The Answer. When a dwarf fills a bucket from a pond, it then contains "water [10]" which if poured into a pond results in 1/7 water and if dumped on the ground (i.e. by [f]orbidding the water and [d]umping the bucket, not poured out as a pond-filling job) creates a water 'contaminant' that in adventure mode represents an infinite source.

Keeping in mind, though, that Toady canonized the size of a tile for purposes of calculating minecart physics -- if I remember correctly it is two meters square by three meters tall -- and seven bucketfuls of 'water [10]' fill that volume completely. So it's actually quite simple to develop a consistent unit system for liquids that we can then compare the exceptions to. Intuitively we could call these units "Drink," "Bucket" and "Tile" and say that 10 Drinks = 1 Bucket, and 7 Buckets = 1 Tile. These would fit relatively closely to real world equivalents of 'cup,' 'gallon' and 'barrel,' if that helps you visualize them. Using the Dwarven Standard system, along with the fact that 1 Tile converts to a real-world volume of 12m^3 we could then determine through various comparisons the volumes of many other objects in the game -- for example, a calculation could be performed using the weight and material density of a forgotten beast (currently only possible in corpse form, but still) allowing us to determine its volume easily. Similar comparisons would settle a number of questions in the minds of a number of players as to the absolute and relative sizes of various creatures and objects.

[BoredVirulence]

As far as the "fractional tiles" vs. "units of water" debate goes, remember that the unit systems are currently all over the place for liquids and thus it's a bit silly to try to find The Answer. When a dwarf fills a bucket from a pond, it then contains "water [10]" which if poured into a pond results in 1/7 water and if dumped on the ground (i.e. by [f]orbidding the water and [d]umping the bucket, not poured out as a pond-filling job) creates a water 'contaminant' that in adventure mode represents an infinite source.

Keeping in mind, though, that Toady canonized the size of a tile for purposes of calculating minecart physics -- if I remember correctly it is two meters square by three meters tall -- and seven bucketfuls of 'water [10]' fill that volume completely. So it's actually quite simple to develop a consistent unit system for liquids that we can then compare the exceptions to. Intuitively we could call these units "Drink," "Bucket" and "Tile" and say that 10 Drinks = 1 Bucket, and 7 Buckets = 1 Tile. These would fit relatively closely to real world equivalents of 'cup,' 'gallon' and 'barrel,' if that helps you visualize them. Using the Dwarven Standard system, along with the fact that 1 Tile converts to a real-world volume of 12m^3 we could then determine through various comparisons the volumes of many other objects in the game -- for example, a calculation could be performed using the weight and material density of a forgotten beast (currently only possible in corpse form, but still) allowing us to determine its volume easily. Similar comparisons would settle a number of questions in the minds of a number of players as to the absolute and relative sizes of various creatures and objects.

While I admit I love the analysis you performed, if the 12 cubic meters is to be believed to be true, that results in 3170.06463 US gallons according to Bing. Making a bucket equal to 452.8 gallons, and a "drink" = 45.28 gallons. According to my "research" there are about 4.7 to 5 liters of blood in the average human body, which is about 1.3 gallons.

I realize the abstract nature of these calculations, but that really made me laugh. Of course the solution is to make a bucket hold, say 500 "drinks" where each "drink" would be only .9 gallons, which is much more reasonable. Granted, each dwarf only has 1 drink per season, in which case 45 gallons seems much more accurate.

More on topic, I see the 7/7 as a fraction equal to 100%. Honestly I think a 7 would be more confusing than 7/7, because 7 is such an odd number I'm sure people would be confused and try to fill it to a more natural number such as 10.

[Minnakht]

More on topic, I see the 7/7 as a fraction equal to 100%. Honestly I think a 7 would be more confusing than 7/7

Those are my sentiments as well. 7 divided by 7 is 1, and that means 'full'. Less divided by 7 is a fraction, and that means 'only that much water'. Makes perfect sense.