Print

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

Yes

12 (60%)

No

8 (40%)

Other (below)

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 20

[PTTG??]

I would suggest that if an appropriate pathing solution could not be found, (for instance, having dwarves wait a few ticks when a path becomes blocked), then have everything short of a full-square obstruction only slow dwarves, and have Units never block a square to the point of blocking.

[Warlord of Woe]

This is an argument I see a lot and doesn't really make sense ("your suggestion makes things hard if I build things like this").  If it causes jams, don't build one-tile-wide hallways.  Suggestions that change how fortresses are designed shouldn't be criticized for it unless you demonstrate that, in this case, building halls two or three tiles wide is unconscionable.

Also, given your signature I only find it fair to point out that your semicolon should be a comma.

(You got me with the semicolon  . Truth is, I'm not much of a grammar Nazi, just a spelling Nazi.)

As for my arguement: I didn't intend for that to be criticism at all. It's just to be pointed out what problems can arise, as some of us tend to do. The idea is great, but it is necessary to explain/notify to others what difficulties may arise, perhaps to better prepare them for what could happen (assuming this was in effect).

[Havlock]

This is a fine idea PTTG??, and fits with the spirit of Dwarf Fortress. It would create realistic challenges to be overcome, and could be used by the player in interesting and novel ways to their benefit.

One way I imagine it could be used to the player's advantage would be to create emergency barricades to clog hallways and other choke points, just in case the fort defenses are breached. Just designate a furniture or other large item stockpile where the barricade is to go, then start deconstructing furniture based buildings or set it to take from other stockpiles. The obstruction would slow down enemies and give defenders cover from ranged attackers. It wouldn't be as good as fixed fortifications of course, but it's better than nothing.

There is something that could use some clarification: Is the obstruction scale more linear or logarithmic in shape in relation to the size of the objects? Say, for example, there's something that'd cause a obstruction level 1, like a plump helmet, in the same tile as something that'd cause an obstruction level 6, like a dragon (I'd imagine it'd be big enough.) Would that tile become completely impassable (1 + 6 = 7), or just remain nearly impassable (0.0000001 + 6.9, or something like that)? I'm thinking it's more towards the latter, since being able to form a total obstruction from just seven plump helmets would be stretching the limits of sensibility just a wee bit too far, even for Dwarf Fortress.

[Draco18s]

Hence my suggestion for [SIZE]

First off, a [SIZE:7] item wouldn't block a tile by itself (a bed is [SIZE:7]) but two or three might.

It'd take twice as many [SIZE:6] items to block the tile (four).

It'd take twice as many as that [SIZE:5] items to block (eight)

and so on.

4: sixteen
3: thirty two
2: sixty four
1: one hundred and twenty eight.

A [SIZE:1] item would be a sock.

[winner]

interesting
so each square has 128 degrees of full

[korora]

Possibly, 5 or 6 units in a tile act as a ramp so one could stack crates to climb a wall, for instance.

I like this a lot -- particularly for the image of goblins climbing over the corpses of their fallen comrades and pouring over your walls. 

One (potential) issue, though.  If you have 5 obstruction in one tile, and 5 obstruction in an adjacent tile on z-level up, can you move between them?   If you go with the metaphor of stacking objects up to climb on them, this is like moving between two unobstructed tiles on different z-levels, so making 5 obstruction == ramp doesn't quite work.

If you model the obstruction like fluids, with the number corresponding to height (and a tile having a total height of 7), then you could have a traversable height distance (let's say it's five).  Then you could climb up a 5-tile, but not to the next one since there's a total height difference of 7 (2 in your tile + 5 in the next tile).  So you'd have to have the tile in the next z-level up be 3 or less obstructed.

One other thing with this "fill height" model is that an underground tile that's full to 5 only has 2 height remaining, so a dwarf would have to crawl through, increasing the movement penalty.  Outside, though, the penalty would only be incurred for climbing up the stack since you can walk freely once you're up there.

I'd also like to note that I agree with Draco's [SIZE] suggestion, but think it should be quantified in terms of the familiar 0-7 like water and magma.  Much like clutter in workshops, it would take a certain number of objects to increase the obstruction level by 1, based on size.

[Havlock]

For obstruction levels 1 through 5, I'd imagine that it would only cause movement penalties. However, for levels 6 and 7, the obstruction becomes more like a wall surrounded with ramps. At level six, the obstructed tile can only be crossed by crawling, if the creature is small enough. It would be slow to climb, and the footing on top would be lousy, but the tile above can now be treated like it's a floor for movement purposes. And at level seven the obstructed tile is impassable, and the penalties for moving up and standing on it are reduced, but it's still not as good as a real ramp and floor. Of course this doesn't apply if the obstruction is in a one tile high tunnel. Perhaps a clarification from PTTG would be helpful in figuring this out?

[Puzzlemaker]

bitshift 1 over SIZE-1 times for each item, adding the numeric value of each calculation.

AKA a sock would be shifted over 0 times, making it's value 1.  A thing with size of 2 would be shifted over once, making it's value 2.  It would be 2^(size-1) is how much to add; beds would be shifted over 6 times for a value of 64.

255 would be the max available space; the size stored in a byte.

More examples of fun:

A bed!

0100 0000


Two Beds!

1000 0000


Three beds!

1100 0000


Or, Two beds and 64 socks!

1100 0000

Maxed out pile!

1111 1111

THE SYSTEM WORKS!

Then if it's above or equal to 128, treat it like a ramp square!

[Align]

I don't quite see how that's different from just making it 1-256 with each SIZE value being a power of 2 larger than the last.

[Havlock]

Or just throwing out the limitation that an object has to have a SIZE value of one through seven, and allowing any integer from 1 to 255. Maybe there could even be a SIZE zero, for stuff that's so small even 255 of it wouldn't offer any obstruction, such as seeds.

[Puzzlemaker]

Align:  It isn't!  But this is in computer terms.

Havlock:  that's another way to do it.

[Techhead]

The problem with inaccessible squares could be fixed by item flows, so that one could clear half a square by clearing everything out of the next square.

[Lazer Bomb]

Though it isn't truly accurate, I would suggest using weight as the value. In general, heavier items are more difficult to pass, even if they are smaller- in a narrow corridor, it takes more time to pass an anvil than it would to pass an equal-volume pile of feathers.

You said weight but then equal-volume.  I'm pretty sure that an amount of feathers equal in WEIGHT to an anvil would fill a room.

Correct. So, a 5 cubic foot block of feathers is less of an obstacle than a 5 cubic foot block of iron, despite the fact that they are the same size.

"Correct"?  Which is it, weight or volume?  Do you mean density?

If this was implemented (weight controlling obstructionness), it would be just as hard to pass a 1000 weight anvil as 1000 feathers weighing 1 each.
1000weight (anvil) = 1000 weight (1000 feathers). So they're equally hard to pass, even though the feathers have a greater volume.

PTTG??'s first example was that it would be easier to move past an anvil sized pile of feathers, than an anvil. The feathers would be about 200 or so feathers, and weigh 200 total. The anvil weighs 1000. The feathers weigh 200. Much easier to move past the feathers.

[korora]

The problem with inaccessible squares could be fixed by item flows, so that one could clear half a square by clearing everything out of the next square.

Interesting, but how would you restrict this so that you don't end up with all your items spread out all over the place? You'd need a distinction between an orderly stack and a jumbled pile, or something.

[Draco18s]

If this was implemented (weight controlling obstructionness), it would be just as hard to pass a 1000 weight anvil as 1000 feathers weighing 1 each.
1000weight (anvil) = 1000 weight (1000 feathers). So they're equally hard to pass, even though the feathers have a greater volume.

PTTG??'s first example was that it would be easier to move past an anvil sized pile of feathers, than an anvil. The feathers would be about 200 or so feathers, and weigh 200 total. The anvil weighs 1000. The feathers weigh 200. Much easier to move past the feathers.

I counter:
Just push them out of the way.