Print

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

[i2amroy]

I'm wondering if it might (eventually) be more fruitful to reconfigure the voting into something like a "Single Transferable Vote" system - in essence where people rank their votes. A voter's first priority would be worth 1 point, his second 1/2, his third 1/3, etc. You could even set it up so people get "unlimited" votes, just that every additional vote is worth 1/X. This would probably yield a more accurate result as to what people want as immediate priorities and as long term visions.

I also like the parent-child idea to break up large conceptual suggestions into smaller, more meaningful priorities.

This idea is cool, but it would probably be easier if instead everyone got like five votes and the first one was 5, than 4, than 3 and 2 and 1, that way the voting page itself didn't have to deal with all of those weird fractions.

[Granite26]

Not that I like the fractions idea, but... math is what computers are good at, y'know?

[Draco18s]

Not that I like the fractions idea, but... math is what computers are good at, y'know?

Actually...fractions are really difficult for computers, especially things like 1/3 or 1/9.  Doesn't store in binary very well (1/9th in decimal is .111111 repeating, in binary the same thing happens: .000111000111 repeating; even nice fractions like 1/5th are repeaters in binary: 00110011...).  A tiny tiny amount off after where the end of a Double gives significance to is truncated and lost.

[Granite26]

Well within a reasonable error tolerance still...  We aren't working for NASA here....

[i2amroy]

With the fraction thing, when you combine them you get fractions that have bigger numbers, for example, 1/2 + 1/5 = 7/10. This means you can get some pretty large fractions tacked on to the end of you numbers. This means it is less aesthetically pleasing. I mean, which would you rather see on the eternal voting page, 545698, or 140867+193847930/39282736478. It is just nicer on the eyes to see the first one. I know this is a little of an exaggeration, but still...

[Faces of Mu]

Would there be a way to vote *without* seeing who else has voted, and randomizing the order of the entries as well?

You think that some players are being influenced because of the current voting system? [IE. some escaped lunatic will vote for the most popular suggestions for example?] Well in some extreme cases this might be true, however I doubt that this should be a problem at all...

Popularity bias is probably less likely in the case of this voting than the appetizer menu effect:
Everything looks good, and you tend to be unconsciously biased towards the first few items on the list.  People who are impulsive will most likely vote for the first fun sounding options and never reach lower options on the list, which just exaggerates the scores of the things at the top of the list.

I think these are serious issues. I didn't bother to vote for any suggestion that was more than a fifth of the way down the list as I expected my votes to lose power the further down the list the suggestion was.
Later suggestions will hardly get a look in. I wonder if, after the next release, whether Toady should give a two week window (or x amount of time) for players to list suggestions and then it gets locked so that there is a limited number of suggestions and that all suggestions a more likely to get a look-in?

[Faces of Mu]

I'm wondering if we don't need to improve the granularity of what we are asking for.  What, exactly, does "improved hauling" entail.  I did a quick search and couldn't find anything other than the general description of the voting item but I swear I read it somewhere on these forums.  I figure the list has to exist somewhere.
...
So, this could then be refined to:

Improved Hauling

• Single Dwarf Job Queueing
  
  • I processed Rope Reed leaving 4 or so seeds.  This caused one-dwarf-per-seed to grab a seed and carry it three steps to the seed stockpile I placed by my farmer's workshop.
  • I would expect one dwarf to move all the seeds to the seed stockpile.
  • If there are x number of same-typed tasks (like Move Seed to Storage) where the items and the storage location are all within a certain range of each other one dwarf will queue up several of the tasks.  Since DF players really enjoy tweaking how their dwarves work the RAWs are a good place for the thresholds that would be used in such logic.  Something like SINGLE_DWARF_JOB_QUEUE_DISTANCE=5, SINGLE_DWARF_JOB_QUEUE_MAX_CT=4 would allow dwarves to queue up moving up to 4 empty bags from a kitchen to a bag stockpile if the distance from middle of the kitchen to the middle of the stockpile requires 5 or less moves.
• Job Item TSKing
  • I queued a rock table to be built expecting to get a dirorite door.  My mason grabbed an olivine rock that was further away from the workshop than the diorite in the stockpile adjacent to the diorite.
  • I would have expected him to take the stone from the stockpile adjacent to the workshop rather than what was closest to him when he decided he'd get around to building the door.
  • When TSKing an item for a job a dwarf should pick the item of that type closest to the workshop he will be working in, not closest to him when he decides to build the workshop.  This, of course, would be limited in use until pathing/distance calculating to be fixed.

I would like Improved Hauling to also include pitted stockpiles. I would like to be able to place a stockpile over an edge and have dwarves throw the nearest qualified item over the edge and have the item end up on the floor below. That way dwarves on the surface could toss objects to the workshops below. This is really only valid so long as objects don't suffer damage from falls.
Then, to stop dwarves doing this in an endless cycle we could just place a stockpile where the objects land. If we wanted those objects to be tossed over another edge (say for a cascade effect to work around rooms and floors) we just get the next pitted stockpile to (t)ake from the previous stock pile and dwarves would be able to move them from one floor to the next.
Anyone know if objects take damage from falls? If so, and they take a minute or negligible amount from 1-z fall, this would still be useful.
If people like this idea, can the suggestion be changed to show this?
Cheers!

[Draco18s]

Later suggestions will hardly get a look in. I wonder if, after the next release, whether Toady should give a two week window (or x amount of time) for players to list suggestions and then it gets locked so that there is a limited number of suggestions and that all suggestions a more likely to get a look-in?

After the next release many many of those huge top votes will be deleted and remade (with a note: "don't waste your votes here, it's already been done for now, pick something else").

I control 16 of the top 30 / 14 of the top 20 / 7 of the top 10.

[Silverionmox]

I think these are serious issues. I didn't bother to vote for any suggestion that was more than a fifth of the way down the list as I expected my votes to lose power the further down the list the suggestion was.

On the contrary, you can really make a difference there. Twenty votes don't mean much for the first ten spots, but it really makes a difference down the list. Some suggestions have been gaining votes one by one, and it will at the very least put them in a good poll position after the votes of the handled suggestions are reset.

Also, I think Toady is just as, if not more likely to put in a suggestion with few votes, but easy to implement than a suggestion with a lot of votes that will be a bitch to code.

Finally, campaigning a bit to give a suggestion that deserves it some attention can't hurt.

[zagibu]

He has a point, though, many people are sheep that just go with whatever is most popular. I don't think there is an easy solution to make sure every suggestion gets enough attention. Every layout has a hierarchy, and even if you randomize its order, fairness is not guaranteed.
I think the biggest problem is the sheer amount of suggestions. Maybe categorization could help.

[Granite26]

We don't have to run statistics on it.  If it gets voted for, it's supported.  If it happens, everyone who voted for it is happy.

If a popular suggestion gets an extra bandwagoner who might otherwise have voted for something he wants more, what's the real cost?

Clearing UD votes will change the outlook more than any optimization of presentation possibly could

[Silverionmox]

Hiding the tallied votes would give a more objective picture. But it would remove a lot of the interest too

[TinyPirate]

Hi folks. Bit new here, but a couple of things I'd like to see - which I'm sure have been mentioned before:

1) I'd like to be able to play in the same region as a friend, and between us, send each other trade liaisons (at some big cost and hassle). Think Dwarf Fortress with a bit of Harvest Moon? I like a little multiplayer, even if it's meta-multiplayer. No need for the multiplayer to be synchronus.

2) Better control over sparing vs. warfare military weapons/kit. 'Nuff said. Think this may be on the list etc.

[G-Flex]

Many aspects of #2 there are definitely on the list.

Any form of multiplayer is a long, long way off, and the only type you're ever likely to see is the kind of meta-multiplayer which you just mentioned, and even that is ridiculously unlikely, and if it does happen it would be extremely low priority. Currently the game can't even handle history advancing during gameplay or a fortress still existing as a settlement after you abandon, never mind two active ones at once.

Not that it's an inherently bad idea or anything.

[TinyPirate]

Hehe, fair cop!