Print

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

[laularukyrumo]

so....

the latest build isn't the 5/23/12 version.

odd.

You should really make a new thread if you've taken the reigns from Hecaterus/DwarfEngineer.

[Lycaeon]

I realize this has been pointed out before, but dwarves that have name changes imposed by the syndrome CE_DISPLAY_NAME:X:Y:Z (Including vampires and werewolves) no longer show up in Dwarf Therapist.

[arclance]

I simply don't care about values relative to the average for that caste. It is absolute values that matter anyway.

I have to agree with this at least on the military screen.
Having both displayed would be nice though so you could compare absolute value between casts and relative values within casts.

[thistleknot]

are you talking about attribute and trait default values? it was a mess tryi g to figure out the default trait values initially.  no work was ever done to categorize the modded castes, everything is scaled against a normal dwarf.

[Maklak]

are you talking about attribute and trait default values? it was a mess tryi g to figure out the default trait values initially.  no work was ever done to categorize the modded castes, everything is scaled against a normal dwarf.

The military screen has a bunch of stats: Strength, Agility, Toughness, Endurance, Recuperation, Disease Resistance. The tooltips display them properly (I think), but the grid view shows some wacky values: {-11, -7, -3, 0, 6, 9, 13, 20}. In the picture below, sorted by Disease Resistance and the order is correct, but the values tell me nothing and are sometimes out of order. I'm guessing they are based on things like "incredibly strong" in the description, which are relative to castes. Having absolute values, such as ((stat + 25) / 50) and 00 for > 99, would be much more useful. Another grid view with just stats, or adding things like Focus, Kinesthetic Sense and Spatial Sense to the military grid view would also be nice. If you want relative values, it would be more useful to base them on average for all current citizens, not castes they belong to.

[arclance]

are you talking about attribute and trait default values? it was a mess tryi g to figure out the default trait values initially.  no work was ever done to categorize the modded castes, everything is scaled against a normal dwarf.

The military screen has a bunch of stats: Strength, Agility, Toughness, Endurance, Recuperation, Disease Resistance. The tooltips display them properly (I think), but the grid view shows some wacky values: {-11, -7, -3, 6, 9, 13, 20}. In the picture below, sorted by Disease Resistance and the order is correct, but the values tell me nothing and are sometimes out of order. I'm guessing they are based on things like "incredibly strong" in the description, which are relative to castes. Having absolute values, such as ((stat + 25) / 50) and 00 for > 99, would be much more useful. Another grid view with just stats, or adding things like Focus, Kinesthetic Sense and Spatial Sense to the military grid view would also be nice. If you want relative values, it would be more useful to base them on average for all current citizens, not castes they belong to.

To add to that it would be nice to have a grid view that shows what cast each dwarf is so you don't have to read their tooltips one at a time.

[splinterz]

right now what's happening is that it's using the caste's defined bins to figure out the attribute descriptor (strong, weak, etc..) so it matches the text in game. for the actual drawing, the value is scaled down between -20 to 20, again based on the caste's bins. the other downside to doing this, other than the obvious confusion, is that the descriptor bins also only range from 0 to ~2500, not the potential cap of 5000.

using an absolute scale of 0-5000 will work, but most a fort's population (especially playing vanilla) will never reach close to that. so you'll have a lot of very small squares, and 4 digit numbers are too big to draw in most, if not all, people's grid cell dimensions.

so i'll try changing the drawing stuff to scale based on the population values, and then draw with 0-99/100 values, as you're right that the current -20 to 20 values are pretty useless for people using numbers in the grid.

a caste column for the grid is interesting as well. i'd like to modify the profession column to allow users to override the current icons with just colors and text or choose an icon and text like the custom profs if they want, and maybe the same sort of thing could be done with castes.

so many ideas, so little timmeee....

[thistleknot]

a work around would b to create roles based on the attributes

[splinterz]

v19.3

• added the conflicting skills and special notes for traits to tooltips, details panel and trait column
• added checks for skills which are losing experience, which are highlighted in orange in the tooltip and on the details pane
• tweaked the skill/labor column sorting to weight skill rates and skill level equally
• skills now show raw levels and correct experience in the tooltips
• removed test roles from the defaults
• when a dwarf goes into a mood, the artifact name is hidden until they've actually completed it

Download (DFFD)


so changing the experience and skill levels to show the actual value rather than capping it had an unwanted side effect for vampires. it's pretty easy to spot them as they'll have crazy large skill ratings and experience values. there's a few ways to handle this, the easiest is simply hiding all the raw and actual values again, and only use the actual xp for the moodable skill stuff. i kind of like being able to see the raw values and the real experience numbers though.

another alternative would be to just set a value in the options to show those numbers, but it still conflicts with hiding/showing vampires. the most complex solution may be to modify the skill experience and rating for vampires if they're hidden. it's only for skills over the max (legendary +5) this has to be done for. any other ideas or input?

the traits in the tooltip is getting pretty huge now with the addition of conflicting skills and notes. is this even useful to have a block of text in the tooltip? should it be in a list like skills/roles? limited to top/bottom 20%? only show traits with conflicts/notes?

[Maklak]

Sorting by skill is still bogus. All it does is it puts those with a selected labour above those with it deselected, but otherwise it is still useless and a regression. I remember some earlier version of Dwarf Therapist that at least were sorting skills by XP.

tweaked the skill/labour column sorting to weight skill rates and skill level equally

I haven't seen the code that does this, but this sounds like an incorrect way to sort by a skill, to put it politely.
The correct way is to divide the dwarves into two groups: labour enabled or disabled, in addition to any other grouping of them (by migration wave or whatever). Then sort each sub-group the following way:

• Put Legendary + 5 on top and don't order them if you want to hide vampires. Otherwise skip this part.
• If skill_rate is set to 0, don't divide by 0 and just put those dwarves last, but sort them by any XP they may have.
• Sort the rest by minimum of (29000 - current_XP ) / (real_skill_rate) If the formulas on how stats affect XP per job and speed of the job are known, those should be factored into the real_skill_rate. 29000 is the XP needed for Legendary +5. If a skill rate is unknown, assume the same as others with that caste or 100% as a last resort.

This way dwarves who will take fewer jobs to make it to legendary + 5 are listed higher, which is exactly what I want. These "Related Roles" and their arbitrarily weighted percent values are bogus. As an example, when I sort by "Marksdwarf", I have a dwarf with 9 crossbow and 85% skill rate on top with 99% and my best marksdwarf with 230% learning rate and 80k XP is listed as 12th with 45% "Related Roles". This is a dwarvenly stupid way to show me who is best for the job!

[thistleknot]

Sorting by skill is still bogus. All it does is it puts those with a selected labour above those with it deselected, but otherwise it is still useless and a regression. I remember some earlier version of Dwarf Therapist that at least were sorting skills by XP.

tweaked the skill/labour column sorting to weight skill rates and skill level equally

I haven't seen the code that does this, but this sounds like an incorrect way to sort by a skill, to put it politely.
The correct way is to divide the dwarves into two groups: labour enabled or disabled, in addition to any other grouping of them (by migration wave or whatever). Then sort each sub-group the following way:

• Put Legendary + 5 on top and don't order them if you want to hide vampires. Otherwise skip this part.
• If skill_rate is set to 0, don't divide by 0 and just put those dwarves last, but sort them by any XP they may have.
• Sort the rest by minimum of (29000 - current_XP ) / (real_skill_rate) If the formulas on how stats affect XP per job and speed of the job are known, those should be factored into the real_skill_rate. 29000 is the XP needed for Legendary +5. If a skill rate is unknown, assume the same as others with that caste or 100% as a last resort.

This way dwarves who will take fewer jobs to make it to legendary + 5 are listed higher, which is exactly what I want. These "Related Roles" and their arbitrarily weighted percent values are bogus. As an example, when I sort by "Marksdwarf", I have a dwarf with 9 crossbow and 85% skill rate on top with 99% and my best marksdwarf with 230% learning rate and 80k XP is listed as 12th with 45% "Related Roles". This is a dwarvenly stupid way to show me who is best for the job!

there sorted by the calculated role fitting, which is based on a combination of skills, attributes, traits, preferences...

if you wanted it to sort by skill, then set the weights of attributes, traits, and preferences to 0.

your other suggestions are good ones, but the way Splinterz Dwarf Therapist is setup is to sort things based on the calculated role %.

There is an option inside that allows you to sort by skill exp (i.e. the old way of doing it).

[Maklak]

I missed this before, but you are correct, thistleknot. These settings are in File->Options->Roles.
I set the values to: Attributes 0.15, Skills 1.0, Traits 0.05 and Role preferences to 0.05 and sorting by skills is now saner, but still incorrect.

My assertion that this method of doing it is bogus still stands, however. Things like Starts, Skills and Traits are fundamentally different and you cannot make a weighted arithmetic average out of them, same as you can't make a weighted arithmetic average of temperature and mass and claim it means something.

Even if you could, there is no way to do it without knowing the formulas or at least substantial research into how skills influence stats. All I ever found was that high stats increase the speed of a job (but by how much is unknown) and of course that agility, strength and carry weight influence walking speed (there are formulas for this somewhere). There is some scattered data on things like "creativity makes engravings more varied" and some old research suggesting that material and item preferences influence quality of the item by a small margin, but beyond that I found nothing.

My conclusion so far is that (at least in my mod's case) skill level and skill rate are everything and stats barely even matter, except for soldiers and for walking speed.

the way Splinterz Dwarf Therapist is setup is to sort things based on the calculated role %.

I've noticed and am very unhappy about it. I'm trying to convince splinterz to fix it. How come no one noticed this bug before?

There is an option inside that allows you to sort by skill exp (i.e. the old way of doing it).

I haven't found it, but setting everything except skill to low weights alleviated the problem.

[thistleknot]

thats why weights r user adjustable.

the option i believe to sort the old way is a checkbox in the options window

update:
mistaken, there is no old option (at least from the version I was using, v16.1), I think the only way to get it to sort by skill only is to set all non skill weights to 0.

the reason we have role %s is because we know some attributes train skills faster & some traits give dwarf's happy thoughts from doing that job.

any dwarf can gain skills, so if you want a great dwarf doing a job, then it's important to take into consideration his attributes which don't change as easily as skills do.

I remember when my highest skilled diagnoser HATED helping people and went insane and killed everyone.

that's why these role calculations exist, to help prevent angry CMD's.

[Maklak]

No. A way to search for a particular trait or material / item preference or sort by them would be useful. Forcing bogus "Related Roles" based on some arbitrary weights is counter-productive. Those values mean nothing and people trust them, so they are misleading. I was mislead by them!

For your CMD example, at the very least you want those weights set per-skill and not globally, but a way to sort the list of dwarves by "finds helping others very rewarding" and "devoted to duty" would be better.

Skills matter. Attributes may increase the speed some things are done, but aren't as important as skills. Heck, with Legendary skill most civilian jobs are blazing fast regardless of stats and military gains the important stats quickly anyway. CMD is an exception rather than the rule (so your argument is invalid) and you still want decent Diagnosis on that CMD, which trains slowly.

we know some attributes train skills faster & some traits give dwarf's happy thoughts from doing that job.

Where is this information? Wiki is useless as usual and I haven't been able to find any conclusive research on the forum.

[splinterz]

wow you're really going off on this stuff eh? alright so first, turn off the role sorting in the roles tab and see if that helps. skill, attributes, traits and preferences mean different things to different people. i prefer something similar to what you've got, with most of the emphasis on the skills. some other people i talked to preferred a higher weight on attributes, so i think i ended up leaving them all equally weighted. this is probably misleading for new users and i'll adjust it. what's really needed is some better documentation so that people can educate themselves on how the roles work.

if you've got any suggestions for changes to the default roles, by all means let me know and i'll make adjustments. it's a lot of bloody roles to go through myself. otherwise, make your own or modify the existing ones, you've got plenty of options! what exactly is your problem with roles that makes them so bogus? is it the default weights? the calculations?

you can find dwarfs by preference by using the preference window and clicking on a preference. traits are more involved in that you'd need to create a new grid full of trait columns and/or create a filter script.