Print

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

[UristMcVampire]

WE DON'T NEED AIR PHYSICS, JUST GIVE VANILLA GAS A SYNDROME -_-

[scourge728]

WE DON'T NEED AIR PHYSICS, JUST GIVE VANILLA GAS A SYNDROME -_-

shhhh this is fun

[Starver]

I think nitrogen also dissolves in small quantities into the blood, which is why we have to pee; the yellow in the urine is actually a nitrogen compound.

Urea? That's formed by the liver metabolising ammonia, itself the by-product of amino-acid/protein processing.

Nitrogen in the blood is something you mostly hear of in the context of "the bends", where high pressures cause an unusual diffusion and dissolving of nitrogen across the lung manifold, if a standard atmospheric composition is maintained for that high pressure (the common replacement, helium, migrates quicker still but also more readily migrates back as pressures decrease, reducing - but not removing - the possibility of coming out of solution within the blood vessels and other tissues). It tends not to happen (certainly as significant precursor to the urea process) under normal conditions. Nitrogen-fixing biologies (commonly seen in the vital element of crop-rotation) or chemistry (the Haber process, towards making fertilising compounds) take the largely inert atmospheric N₂ and convert it into the active nitrogenous compounds that build up our food plants, our food's food plants, etc, to be consumed as proteins/etc.

A particular test for lung function is the Nitrogen Wash method. Giving pure oxygen breaths to someone and then measuring the proportion of nitrogen that appears when deeply exhaling (compared to that expected from normal composition) indicates the amount of 'dead air' contained within sub-par lungs. This only works because there's no significant migration of nitrogen either way across the pulmonary membrane compared to the transposition of the oxygen and the carbon dioxide.


That's from some A-Level (secondary education) Biology/Chemistry, and perhaps some later intellectual osmosis, so may not be as comprehensive a description as it could be from a proper medically-trained person, but nothing I've just skimmed to check seems to suggest I'm too far off reality.


Anyway, how have Dwarves started smoking, without there being any Hobbits to introduce them to it?

[Ninjabread]

The burning corpses of hemp-wearing elves?

[Grand Sage]

Classic example of the Morbid-yet-funny humor of the Bay12 Community...

[Bumber]

WE DON'T NEED AIR PHYSICS, JUST GIVE VANILLA GAS A SYNDROME -_-

You mean like clouds of random suffocation around fires?

[GoblinCookie]

Your economy of scale only works if the increased airflow outpaces smoke production. And considering smoke production is the whole point of the fire...

All I can say at this point is that you should start a fireplace and throw a whole bunch of leaves on it, and see how well it works out for you. That alone will probably cause smoke to start filling your house.

Smoke disposal is just as important as smoke production.  The smoke production is the result of raw amount of fire the ingredients being the same, but the funny thing here is that the bigger the fire the greater the air flow, but the same increase in air flow does not apply to an equivalent number of smaller fires which do nothing to improve air flow by contrast. 

WE DON'T NEED AIR PHYSICS, JUST GIVE VANILLA GAS A SYNDROME -_-

We don't need actual tissue layers, we can just use hit-points.   

[Grand Sage]

True GC, but i think there is a cost/benefit difference between implementing almost full scale anatomy that can be used in the combat system, and implementing largely invisible gas-physics. when designing a game (or any program), full scale realism isn't always the best option. I'd argue that you, as a player, don't really want to have to deal with smoke. The tissue system on the other hand, everyone loves.

[Bumber]

...an equivalent number of smaller fires which do nothing to improve air flow by contrast.

But they aren't equivalent. As I said way back at the beginning, your central fire is a horribly inefficient delivery method.

[UristMcVampire]

We don't need actual tissue layers, we can just use hit-points.   

That's a completely different thing.

[thompson]

If you don't understand why calculating fluid dynamics on every open tile isn't a good trade-off try draining the ocean. Problem should become obvious very quickly.

[Bumber]

You don't really need constant fluid calculations. If you can figure out the oxygen capacity of an area and how quickly it replenishes, you can just track the quantity of gases.

[thompson]

True, but does anyone here actually believe this will ever be implemented? Hypothetical discussions about what would be cool in game are fine, but lets keep this in perspective.

[GoblinCookie]

That's a completely different thing.

Analogically it is.  Do we use a simplified smoke mechanics that serves the function of carrying the syndrome or realistic smoke mechanics in general?

True GC, but i think there is a cost/benefit difference between implementing almost full scale anatomy that can be used in the combat system, and implementing largely invisible gas-physics. when designing a game (or any program), full scale realism isn't always the best option. I'd argue that you, as a player, don't really want to have to deal with smoke. The tissue system on the other hand, everyone loves.

The only cost benefit to tissue layers is that one deals with violence and the other with (mostly) non-violent stuff; interesting how violence is given priority for cost/benefit calculations.  There really isn't any mechanical purpose to tissue layers that isn't equally well served by hit-points.  I hit a leg and it loses a certain amount of hit-points against I hit a leg and I mash up a certain amount of layers of muscle, skin and bone is mechanically very similar as far as the game is concerned. 

But they aren't equivalent. As I said way back at the beginning, your central fire is a horribly inefficient delivery method.

A room pumped full of smoke is a pretty efficient delivery method, perhaps overly efficient.  Better if we use a valve and open the valve to the chimney above the fire.  Having all the individual dwarves smoke individually is by contrast not really an option for any large number of dwarves, it works poorly even if we have a designated smoking room.

True, but does anyone here actually believe this will ever be implemented? Hypothetical discussions about what would be cool in game are fine, but lets keep this in perspective.

The devs have a history of ultimately favouring realism.  Being able to have underground forges and smelters with no drawbacks at all, is not very realistic. 

[Kyubee]

How about we combine the idea of using pipes, with the occasional use of paper-wrappings (IDK if its particularly historically accurate, but it could be, and it works for my next idea)

And dwarves who are either prone to unconciousness, or who are smoking after a long time without sleep (assuming youre like me and dont set up beds too much) run a risk of catching fire while unconcious, based on what theyre smoking and how long it's been lit. Fires from this of course would spread over wooden furniture... or through the booze stockpile...