Print

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

[Saiko Kila]

I don't really expect anyone to take this advice, but I like to play without QSPs for RP reasons.  What I do is to place a mason near the rock and build blocks.  You can then put the blocks in bins and move them around fairly quickly.  Of course, it means you have to find a way to use thousands and thousands of blocks.  Building above ground structures is a way to do it -- and it's more reasonable now that constructed above ground areas are cleaned.  But you could also pave all your corridors with block floors (which would be pretty cool if you colour coordinated them).  The downside is no engraving (which I do rarely anyway).

I routinely go out of stones for making my favourite blocks, and have to dig only to get boulders, to have building material. Removing stones by building blocks is so effective. Though I prefer them to be brought near the mason shop, not otherwise. Several small stockpiles with 3 wheelbarrows each, every one donating stones to a nearby quantum stockpile, are good for it.

If anyone wants to just remove stone, not to process it, then building a catapult or two nearby, and ordering them to fire at the wall, does the trick.

[anewaname]

You get about 1 stone for every 4 tiles dug. So if you want to use wheelbarrows and you do not want to use a minecart quantum stockpile, then you need to use 20% of the area you dig out to both store the stone and clear the room. [...]

Shouldn't that be 25%?

Yes it should, I was looking at the 80% being the main stockpile room and 20% being the stone stockpile rooms, but there will be more stone.

But the main concept I'm pushing is that if you already have stone stockpiles elsewhere with enough wheelbarrows, they will quickly clear out a large room as it is being dug without the need to use bulk dumping or micro-manage, and the stone will be moved to where it will be used.

[HerbalistRanger]

..how did I get here

[mikekchar]

You're quadrupling your item count by making blocks. Ten thousand blocks will murder your FPS.

I know this is the conventional wisdom, but my guess is that since blocks don't degrade, the impact on FPS will be minimal.  Archchrystal has many more blocks than I will ever use.  You still have the option of atom smashing them.  Unfortunately the game pretty much makes you choose between atom smashing or QSP given the amount of non-degradable garbage...  Anyway, as I mentioned in a different thread, I've never had a fortress that had lower than 100 FPS as far as I know, although I cap at 20 FPS because I prefer to play like that, so I don't check that :-)

[Bumber]

You're quadrupling your item count by making blocks. Ten thousand blocks will murder your FPS.

I know this is the conventional wisdom, but my guess is that since blocks don't degrade, the impact on FPS will be minimal.

Can't find the post, but somebody paved the surface of their embark with constructed floors and their FPS died. Could be temperature calculations.

[Dunamisdeos]

..how did I get here

You're looking for the religion thread.

[Fleeting Frames]

@Bumber: Interesting; for paving has been often recommended to raise FPS (by blocking out plant growth). What was the size of embark?

[Bumber]

@Bumber: Interesting; for paving has been often recommended to raise FPS (by blocking out plant growth). What was the size of embark?

IDK, but if my math works out, 10K would require at least a 6x6 embark.

[anewaname]

Comparing floored tiles versus paved roads; one is a construction and the other is a building. Doesn't this mean that surface temperature calculations would check each block in the paved road (as it is a building that can be destroyed by heat) but would not check each block in the floored (as it is a construction that cannot be destroyed by anything except deconstruction or a cave-in)?

[Rafatio]

What annoys me most about roads is that everything on it blinks, yes game there is a road, I don't need to see it every other second. I don't suppose there is a way to turn that off?

[PatrikLundell]

Comparing floored tiles versus paved roads; one is a construction and the other is a building. Doesn't this mean that surface temperature calculations would check each block in the paved road (as it is a building that can be destroyed by heat) but would not check each block in the floored (as it is a construction that cannot be destroyed by anything except deconstruction or a cave-in)?

Without knowing, I would expect each road segment to be tested, and the blocks within it only if there's something to do after the first check. However, I believe roads keep the vegetation under them in check (like stockpiles do: in a sort of stasis, but still there), while floors kill vegetation that was on the tile. Also, it seems roads are permeable enough to have mud seep through (and thus not be visible), while muddy floor allows plants to grow on top of them.

[Fleeting Frames]

In my tests with bridges, the bridges only melt if center tile gets hot enough. A 3x3 wooden bridge can hold magma, as long as the center is obsidian-cast. I suspect roads follow same rule (though I'd expect fire to still spread from edges and light whole road on fire).

Of course, roads are unsightly and uneffective, as detailed above.

[Pvt. Pirate]

You're quadrupling your item count by making blocks. Ten thousand blocks will murder your FPS.

might be one of my probs.
i build forts aiming to use ALL of the available ressources, not wasting any, so i never atomsmash and i always make my furniture from the same stone. so i have to build the fort and see which stone is most common and worth for furniture - and which is magmasafe for the drawbridges etc. that leaves me with exactly that: Ten thousand blocks

[mikekchar]

It would be very interesting to see what effect atom smashing them would have.  I think I'll commit to testing that out in my current game.  As I have no real problem with low frame rates it won't be bad for me to try :-)  Just have to find a place for all those damn blocks.  I just sold a few hundred to the caravan, but I'll start stockpiling them for the moment.  If my FPS gets down to 20 or 30 without capping it, I'll try atom smashing them and measuring the result.

My suspicion is that it will have an effect, but not an order of magnitude effect (or possibly even a binary order of magnitude effect).  Whereas I believe that poor pathing *even for a handful of dwarfs* can easily have an order of magnitude effect on FPS.  I mean, we see that already with pets and impassable doors.

[anewaname]

Those ten thousand blocks will not hurt your FPS if you use them for constructions (walls, floors, stairs). You could create a pathing nightmare with your constructions, which would hurt FPS. Once a block is used to build a construction, it is no longer on the item list that is cycled though many times over (which also means it is not checked during temperature calculations and not checked during any job creation).

It does hit FPS when you go to the Stocks menu and you get to the entry for blocks.