Print

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

[Haruspex_Pariah]

A while ago I read on the Internet somewhere that corridors a tile wide were good for FPS because they minimized pathfinding. But it also seems to slow down actual movement as the dwarves (based on my observation) bump into each other. So which is a more efficient choice, narrow corridors to reduce pathfinding lag (?) or wide corridors to prevent bumping?

[NecroRebel]

I've always heard that wide corridors are better for FPS, since every time your dwarves run into each other while going through a narrow hallway they'll both stop and repath. If they're in a wider hallway, the repathing process is much less intensive since they can get back onto their original path easily, but in a narrow hallway they'll have to path through the whole map. Given that wide corridors are also more efficient to move through, wider corridors are probably better.

[AngleWyrm]

I bet that each dwarf recalculates his path every time he has to move.

[Haruspex_Pariah]

I bet that each dwarf recalculates his path every time he has to move.

You mean in a normal situation?

[blue emu]

I make my busy corridors 5-wide, less travelled ones 3-wide. I use 1-wide corridors only for exploration, in out-of-the-way places. Not sure if that helps or hurts my FPS.

[Lagslayer]

I tried making my corridors 3 tiles wide, and now I'm experimenting with 2 tiles wide. They seem to be pathing just fine, but 1 tile wide was just bad.

[Randy Gnoman]

I think that having lots of creatures crawling over one another is bad for FPS.

I almost always use 2 tile wide corridors in the living areas, and regular working areas.  I sometimes build larger halls in areas with lots of hauling traffic.

2-wide corridors have a non-FPS related advantage over wider halls:  you can put lots of doors in.  That can help control flooding and miasma, and makes it easy for you to restrict traffic to specific parts of your fortress by locking doors.

[Weirdsound]

I make alot of my corridors two tiles wide, with every other diagonal tile walled off like this:

XO
OX
XO
OX
XO
OX

I doubt it is good for FPS, but it does mean I'm less vulnerable to enemy archers. I've had enough archers camping and racking up a kill count to the point where I am paranoid about it.

[ext0l]

Why are there enemy archers in your corridor 

[slothen]

Why are there enemy archers in your corridor 

yeah really.

2-wide corridors have a non-FPS related advantage over wider halls:  you can put lots of doors in.  That can help control flooding and miasma, and makes it easy for you to restrict traffic to specific parts of your fortress by locking doors.

there are workarounds for this.  You can leave pillars up and build doors.  It just means its a bit narrower at the parts with the doors.  A 5-wide corridor can have 1 pillar and 4 doors, a 3-wide corridor can have a pillar and 2 doors. You can also deconstruct the pillars and replace them with doors, so you can have a long string of doors as long as you want, although this is slightly more effort.

[Bordellimies]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The main hall is 5 tiles wide so dwarves have room for bypassing each other. When i have large areas mines out there or find large metal veins from somewhere else, the dwarves use that corridor quite much and I don't want it to get jammed.
The corridors for the bedrooms, workshops, storage rooms etc. are 2 tiles wide, as they aren't in constant use.

[nanomage]

as for me, i tend to avoid having corridors at all, except one from the outside to the fort gate. my dwarves don't usually walk there.

[Urist Da Vinci]

I make main corridors 3 tiles in width, as I don't notice traffic jams in them unless I am dumping a lot of stone. Some bedroom access corridors are 1 tile in width if they lead to only a few rooms.

I put the meeting zones, dining hall, food, booze, and party rooms at the core of my hallway system. I also use a combination of stairs, ramps, regular halls, and diagonal halls so that dwarves can walk in straight lines to their destinations. Diagonal ramp tunnels are possible.

The pathfinding function does take more time and cpu exploring "dead end" tunnels like mined-out ore veins that could lead in the correct direction, but actually don't.

[Marthnn]

The pathfinding function does take more time and cpu exploring "dead end" tunnels like mined-out ore veins that could lead in the correct direction, but actually don't.

By using traffic areas, can't you reduce that useless computing? High traffic area for a hallway center, Restricted traffic area for mining tunnels no longer in use... Hell, just put a door and lock it when you're done. But you could probably restrict all bedrooms, since they are quite consistently dead-ends. Any thoughts on that?

I make alot of my corridors two tiles wide, with every other diagonal tile walled off like this:

XO
OX
XO
OX
XO
OX

I doubt it is good for FPS, but it does mean I'm less vulnerable to enemy archers. I've had enough archers camping and racking up a kill count to the point where I am paranoid about it.

Your dwarves, by ziggy-zagging like that, travel more than with a straight line. Moving 1 square in diagonal is longer, taking into account basic geometry (takes about 1.4x more time). I remember seeing an actual test for it in this forum.

[Illanair]

I use 5 tile wide corridors for the main/highways that span out in all four direction from a central staircase (which looks like it is a giant spiral staircase going down through the burrow), 3 wide for any corridor that isn't a peasant area, and 1 tile wide for the peasant slums where I put my smallest bedrooms and such.