Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Relative "Tile size"  (Read 1593 times)

Iden

  • Bay Watcher
  • Legendary Speardwarf
    • View Profile
Relative "Tile size"
« on: October 31, 2008, 02:57:03 pm »

I gave a quick search, but didn't find anything specifically related to this, and I was a tad bit curious. Forgive me if it has already been asked and I missed it somewhere.

I've been trying to determine a rough estimate for the relative length/width/height for tiles, in-game, in feet. What i'm curious about is there any indication towards a potential length/width of rooms? I have my own theory on height that seems to work out just fine. But are tiles considered to be perfectly square? Or not? Any ideas?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

So according to this theory the average height of a tile is approximately 7 feet. Should we assume tiles are considered perfect cubes, and a tile must be 7x7x7? This would certainly account for being able to have multiple items, people, and pets all in one square. What about stockpiles then? More specifically seperated for organization purposes?

One section of wall would then become 7feet thick. That is a lot of wall. This can be a good amont of wall however, especially to keep invaders from busting down walls too easily. Thick walls would be necessary in a fortress. As for siege engines potentially breaking walls -- A layer of 3 walls put together.. 21 feet thick.. should be enough to reinforce walls from being completely destroyed by siege weapons.

So a 7x7x7 cube seems logical to me. Anyone else? Feedback/opinions?
Logged
Legendary Conversationalist
Legendary Persuader
Legendary Writer of Epics

I support AMMDF!

Random832

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #1 on: October 31, 2008, 03:07:05 pm »

I gave a quick search, but didn't find anything specifically related to this, and I was a tad bit curious. Forgive me if it has already been asked and I missed it somewhere.

I've been trying to determine a rough estimate for the relative length/width/height for tiles, in-game, in feet. What i'm curious about is there any indication towards a potential length/width of rooms? I have my own theory on height that seems to work out just fine. But are tiles considered to be perfectly square? Or not? Any ideas?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

So according to this theory the average height of a tile is approximately 7 feet. Should we assume tiles are considered perfect cubes, and a tile must be 7x7x7? This would certainly account for being able to have multiple items, people, and pets all in one square. What about stockpiles then? More specifically seperated for organization purposes?

One section of wall would then become 7feet thick. That is a lot of wall. This can be a good amont of wall however, especially to keep invaders from busting down walls too easily. Thick walls would be necessary in a fortress. As for siege engines potentially breaking walls -- A layer of 3 walls put together.. 21 feet thick.. should be enough to reinforce walls from being completely destroyed by siege weapons.

So a 7x7x7 cube seems logical to me. Anyone else? Feedback/opinions?

I think tiles are taller than they are wide. Maybe, say, 5 feet wide, 7 feet high. (also, how thick are floors?)
Logged

Iden

  • Bay Watcher
  • Legendary Speardwarf
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #2 on: October 31, 2008, 03:23:50 pm »

I think tiles are taller than they are wide. Maybe, say, 5 feet wide, 7 feet high. (also, how thick are floors?)

Floors? Floors as in....

  • the area between two Z-Levels constituting the ground dwarves walk on?

I really have no idea. It would need to be thick enough to support what is on top of it. It would need to be at least a foot or two thick, perhaps more, but i'm not sure.

  • floors that you place down on top of existing groundwork?

Well, I picture flooring as being much as it is today, just simply tiles or planks placed ontop of floor -- so an inch or two at best probably.
Logged
Legendary Conversationalist
Legendary Persuader
Legendary Writer of Epics

I support AMMDF!

MagicJuggler

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #3 on: October 31, 2008, 04:18:42 pm »

The problem with making any volume equivalencies is that tiles are effectively pocket-dimensions of their own. Through use of dumps/pits/etc, one can effectively throw an infinite number of objects in the same pile...unless Toady decides to create a system for garbage heaps...which admittedly would be awesome.
Logged

Tormy

  • Bay Watcher
  • I shall not pass?
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #4 on: October 31, 2008, 04:21:04 pm »

Wait what? There is no tile size in DF right now. You cannot calculate it at all. Just think, 1 tile can hold unlimited number of megabeasts. So what are we talking about?
Logged

Terbert

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #5 on: October 31, 2008, 04:39:42 pm »

I think tiles are taller than they are wide. Maybe, say, 5 feet wide, 7 feet high. (also, how thick are floors?)

If tiles were taller then they were wide carts would have a hard time using ramps.
Logged

JoRo

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #6 on: October 31, 2008, 05:16:24 pm »

I think tiles are taller than they are wide. Maybe, say, 5 feet wide, 7 feet high. (also, how thick are floors?)

If tiles were taller then they were wide carts would have a hard time using ramps.

If tiles were taller than ~1/5 their height, carts would have a hard time using ramps.  I've learned to simply accept tiles as an abstraction.
Logged
You have been struck down.
The giant cave spider spits out your head.

mythmonster2

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #7 on: October 31, 2008, 08:34:28 pm »

Course, there's always the problem of the infinite hyperspace storage cube known as a cage, not to mention this means that the maximum amount of dwarves on a tile (I believe this is 3) are the same size as a bronze colossus with 20 dwarves wrestling it simultaneously.
Logged
Personally, I can't wait for doctors to get possessed and start surgically attaching axes to champion soldier's arms.
And neither can I...

sbr

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #8 on: October 31, 2008, 09:42:38 pm »

Someone had a brilliant response to a similar question, probably a year ago, shortly after the introduction of Z levels.  My answer is based on a very vague memory of that.

A tile is 1 Dwarfometer(Dm) in width, 1 Dwarfometer in depth and 1 Dwarfometer in height, making the volume of said tile 1 Dm3

Logged

Iden

  • Bay Watcher
  • Legendary Speardwarf
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #9 on: November 01, 2008, 02:30:40 am »

Someone had a brilliant response to a similar question, probably a year ago, shortly after the introduction of Z levels.  My answer is based on a very vague memory of that.

A tile is 1 Dwarfometer(Dm) in width, 1 Dwarfometer in depth and 1 Dwarfometer in height, making the volume of said tile 1 Dm3

Now... normally I would be forced to shut my mouth and simply say "You win, good sir."

However. I was looking for the "relative" size of tiles. Sure its all good and swell, the size of a tile is relative to 1 Dm3.

But what is 1 Dm3 relative to in feet?

That's what I was looking for. Though I must say: Very awesome answer, sir.
Logged
Legendary Conversationalist
Legendary Persuader
Legendary Writer of Epics

I support AMMDF!

Tormy

  • Bay Watcher
  • I shall not pass?
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #10 on: November 01, 2008, 11:55:07 am »

1 tile is "full" when it holds 7/7 water. so...
Perhaps take a look at this thread:

http://www.bay12games.com/forum/index.php?topic=1906.0
Logged

Kidiri

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #11 on: November 01, 2008, 12:17:00 pm »

Since you estimate a Dwarf 5' tall and Dwarves are of size 6 according to the raws, 1 foot is 1.2 size-units (su) and 1 su is 0.8333... feet. If you take a block as 7' by 7' by 7', it's about 8.4 su high. This is obviously not high enough to hold a Titan (20 su or 16.666...'), or even a Minotaur (9 su or 7.5').

This is why I prefer to look upon a block as a quantum cube. It can hold as little as a seed to basically everything in the world. Literally.
Logged
Veni, Vidi, Pompeii.
Soylent Green is kittens!
Sometimes, when my Dorfs are exceptionally stupid again, I wonder what exactly the [INTELLIGENT]-tag does.

Keolah

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #12 on: November 01, 2008, 01:47:52 pm »

A tile is as wide as a kitten's whisker, as long as a dragon's tail, and as high as a pile of 10,000 pieces of stone.
Logged
There's no use crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of *cat tallow roast*.

Soadreqm

  • Bay Watcher
  • I'm okay with this. I'm okay with a lot of things.
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #13 on: November 01, 2008, 02:46:28 pm »

How many angels can dance in the food stockpile?
Logged

sbr

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Relative "Tile size"
« Reply #14 on: November 01, 2008, 04:14:01 pm »

Now... normally I would be forced to shut my mouth and simply say "You win, good sir."

However. I was looking for the "relative" size of tiles. Sure its all good and swell, the size of a tile is relative to 1 Dm3.

But what is 1 Dm3 relative to in feet?

That's what I was looking for. Though I must say: Very awesome answer, sir.
What I , and other are pointing out is that there is no set relative size.  An empty tile can hold, depending on how it is stacked, anywhere between 1 single seed and all of the items on earth.

The stone you get when mining out said tile is enough to build either three earrings, or the entire workshop you need to build said earrings.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2