Dwarf Fortress Wiki - User contributions [en]

40d Talk:Soaper

2009-09-18T21:58:35Z

Kaius: /* Soap in the future */

I once saw soap as a building material for a workshop. Not sure if it works like wood or stone. I guess dwarfs like good-smelling workshops. Still, any rain ( if the building is outside ) would wash it away. Maybe make that a new game goal: Clean City, made of soap as much as possible. --[[User:Karpatius|Karp]] 04:06, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

:Heck, I make massive impregnable ballista-deflecting fortresses out of glass! Don't you go telling me what will and what will not wash away!
:In other words, "DF =! terran common sense" --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 09:08, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

::Yep, a wall of soap can stop a flood, just like a wall of ice can block magma. Also, I believe a soap fortress is already in the [[Challenges]] page. --[[User:Smartmo|Smartmo]] 15:07, 13 January 2009 (EST)

== Alternate use for a soaper ==

somehow, my soaper immigrant managed to go into a fell mood before I could draft him. He took over a kitchen where he created a felsite bracelet, becoming a legendary stonecrafter.

So not all soapers should be drafted apparently! he is now turning out masterful+ obsidian short swords.
[[User:GarrieIrons|GarrieIrons]] 05:48, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
:He likely was more skilled at something other than soapmaking that resulted in him making this artifact. [[User:Shardok|Shardok]] 02:10, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

== Flow of page ==

I'm not sure that the page flows very well. The argument runs:
a) soap is very hard to make and has no quality modifier;
b) it can be very valuable and is a good use of megabeast fat;
c) therefore soapers often move into the military.
Surely b) argues against a) and c) - that is to say, despite it having no quality modifier and requiring a lot of effort to produce, and despite many soapers going straight into the military, it is still worth having one for fast production of megabeast soap. Thoughts please? --[[User:Zooeyglass|Zooeyglass]] 13:54, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
:Not quite. The argument runs: a) soap is mostly ''useless'' and has no quality modifier, so don't make any. b) any dwarf is equally competent to make soap cos no quality is produced, megabeast tallow is rare, time not a factor. c) In very special situations soap is very valuable and is a good use of (megabeast) fat d) therefore soapers often move into the military, cos you dont need a dedicated one, any dwarf will do.

The whole hard to make (and resource waste) is actually missing, but then again this is the soaper page, not the [[soap]] page. --[[User:Birthright|Birthright]] 14:12, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

== Soap in the future ==

Given Toady's announcement in the [http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev_now.html#2009-09-17 recent developments] that soap will no longer be 'useless', should we update the pages on soapers and soap? --[[User:Kaius|Kaius]] 21:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

40d Talk:Soaper

2009-09-18T21:58:22Z

Kaius: /* Soap in the future */ new section

40d Talk:Brook

2009-08-12T17:51:56Z

Kaius: /* Walls over brooks */ new section

===Fishable?===
Might be worth mentioning if brooks are normal water with respect to fishability, or whether a channel needs to be dug first. [[User:Runspotrun|Runspotrun]] 16:31, 11 November 2007 (EST)

I suppose so, since it is a potential source of confusion.
--[[User:Dryn|Dryn]] 22:23, 28 November 2007 (EST)

== damming ==

# How do I know which side of my dam is going to be dry, before I dam a brook? (ie which way does the water flow, if the entire z-level is level, and the brook stays on the whole z-level from one edge of the screen to the other??)
# Will it cause a flood, when I dam a brook, if I don't leave a spillway?
# If I channel my brook so it is non-walkable, will it still freeze in winter?

[[User:GarrieIrons|GarrieIrons]] 07:37, 9 February 2008 (EST)

:#Check the edges of the brook that meet the map, one of them will be losing water. That's the downstream side.
:#Assuming this is the same level brook, no, as the dam would be at the same level as the source.
:#Channeling will simply remove the brook floor tiles, the brook itself will still freeze, like any exposed water.

[[User:N9103|Edward]] 07:36, 13 February 2008 (EST)

== Magma vs. Brook ==

So I've been playing around with magma and a brook, and in addition to setting about twenty dwarves on fire, I discovered some interesting things. The first I posted to the [[magma]] article a few days ago: namely, magma coming in contact with a brook will cause the water below the brook to harden to obsidian, but does not seem to produce steam. When I dug the obsidian out, I discovered WHY: magma falls through the brook floor tiles (and onto my miners, who of course catch on fire, and go back to their barracks to "sleep it off". Yeah. That went well). This also gives the brook tile the appearance of a boulder, but it does not obstruct wagons, and if you {{k|k}} over it, the description is still "brook". So now I'm curious: Does water fall through the brook floor tiles as well? Once I've finished draining the brook, perhaps I'll build a water pump and find out. If so, that would mean that brook "floor tiles" act like floor grates, or possibly floor bars: that is, solid things (or solid things larger than vermin) cannot pass through, but fluids can. Which kind of makes sense. Any thoughts? Has someone already done this? --[[User:Zombiejustice|Zombiejustice]] 01:17, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

:While the end effect might be the same I think you would find that when the magma comes in contact with the brook, some of the '''magma''' is turned to obsidian boulders by the '''water'''. The rest of the magma then falls through the boulders to the next level. The water would not become obsidian. Possibly the water is not even destroyed, just displaced... that would probably need source diving to work out. (I would guess that when a channel of magma reaches a brook tile there is infinately more water than magma - there would only be 1 x 7 units of magma but every brook tile and every aquifer tile is a gate to the elemental plane of water)[[User:GarrieIrons|GarrieIrons]] 02:11, 15 June 2008 (EDT)
:My second point is, there is a huge difference between the natural surface of the brook and a ground layer scattered by obsidian boulders. You can tunnel under a brook, if you keep resetting all the "wet rock detected" stuff. I think magma would be destroying non-magma safe surfaces it is resting on that would be why it is "falling through".[[User:GarrieIrons|GarrieIrons]] 02:14, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

::Research, continued:
::(1)Water will, in fact, pass downward through the surface of a brook. I dried up a brook, then pumped water onto its surface. The brook got muddy, and the tiles below suddenly had water.
::(2)If you dry up the water under the brook floor, the brook tile dries up; the character for a dry brook is the same as that for a boulder. This same character is visible on the tile below the brook floor (that is, at the level where the actual water would otherwise be). If you turned the water to obsidian with magma, you can mine it out to form an obsidian floor, but the upper tile will still be the dried brook character. If you run water over the floor, the dried brook character above turns back to a flowing brook character.
::(3)Dwarves do not appear to be able to walk on the bed (that is, the lower level) of a dried-up brook. A player can designate these tiles for digging (as in {{k|d}},{{k|d}} - which strikes me as weird) but dwarves will not dig them out.
::Addressing Garrie's points above:
::(1)It's my understanding, based on reading the wiki and my own observations, that any amount of water in a tile and any amount of magma in that same tile produces obsidian (and steam, which in the case of brooks appears trapped under the surface of the brook). The fact that the water replenishes does not affect this. I've dammed my brook in this manner twice now.
::(2)There is indeed a huge difference between the natural surface of a brook and a field full of boulders; my further research has shown what is going on here. As to magma destroying non-magma-safe surfaces: I believe (though I've not tested it) that this is the case for constructed surfaces. Magma will not melt naturally occurring floors, even if the area below has been mined out (this I have done myself). The fact that water also passes through the surface of the brook, and that the surface of the brook remains after the magma passes through it, leads me to believe my original analysis is correct.
::Oh, erm, I sound so severe. --[[User:Zombiejustice|Zombiejustice]] 15:48, 18 June 2008 (EDT)

== Wagons ==

Can wagons travel along non-dried-up brooks, or do they need to be dammed up first? My latest fort is in some rough terrain, so I was thinking the local brook would make a good substitute for a road, and I didn't feel like wasting any dwarven human resources. --[[User:Toastdieb]]

:Brooks are small rivers that have a floor on top of them. So, yes. --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 00:10, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

== What the hell? ==

If he wanted to simulate a shallow river, why not just have a bunch of depth-2 water tiles flow through the map? Why have a bunch of depth-7 tiles with a floor on top of them? When you cross a brook, you're wading through the water, not walking across the top. And the game already simulates wading through water.

Can someone explain why it works this way? --[[User:LogicalDash|LogicalDash]] 04:07, 5 November 2008 (EST)

: I see it as representing a mass of loose mud/gravel that's saturated with water. It's effectively solid when walking over the top, but if you dig a hole in (channel) or around it, the hole floods. That's good enough for me, at least. --[[User:Bilkinson|Bilkinson]] 23:07, 4 November 2008 (EST)

:: Taking a guess, I'd say that it's because of the way water pressure works. In order to auto-generate a tile like you're talking about, the game would have to make sure that 9/7 strength water enters the map from the upstream edge, one z-level below the top of the brook. The computer would then have to calculate what happens to that extra pressure. Because of the way water flows, it is not guaranteed to go directly up. Each edge of the brook tile would splash in a randomly chosen direction, and ultimately eat up a lot of processing power. Many slower computers will quickly lose framerate on a map with any kind of running water, even given the current setup.
:: Oh, and please remember to sign your posts with {{k|-}}{{k|-}}{{k|~}}{{k|~}}{{k|~}}{{k|~}}. This makes the wiki a friendlier place all around. --[[User:RomeoFalling|RomeoFalling]] 23:09, 4 November 2008 (EST)
::: done --[[User:LogicalDash|LogicalDash]] 04:07, 5 November 2008 (EST)
:::: If you just added depth 2 water, it could/would go anywhere, and quickly flood the map. Unless you put it in a channel, and now you have a nice little hole running through your map, which you can't walk over, which only has depth 2 water in it. So, in order to best approximate a brook (shallow water you can walk through which follows a set path through the map) He created what he did. Tis the only way I'm afraid. --[[User:Hkidnc|Hkidnc]] 15:00, 5 November 2008 (EST)

:The best possible explanation for this is as such. A shallow brook filled with depth 2 water would be several feet below ground level. Because the game does not have fractions of ground depth, the brooks are simply thin rivers with floor tiles above. PS: RomeoFalling, try <tt><tt><nowiki>--~~~~</nowiki></tt></tt>. <_< --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 15:56, 5 November 2008 (EST)

:: @ GreyMaria: I like my version better, but thanks for the info :) --[[User:RomeoFalling|RomeoFalling]] 19:00, 5 November 2008 (EST)

==Swimming==
While my adventurer was adventuring through the mountains, he came across a brook that made a waterfall. The water at the base of the waterfall above the brook was deep enough to swim in, so I figured I could swim up this waterfall by alt moving upwards. However, when I got to the split in the brook, I alt moved and went underneath the brook instead of over accidentally. While under the brook, my (human) adventurer had vision range 1 and was drowning. He was at adept level, so it wasn't panic. The same way the brook acts as a floor from above, it acts like a ceiling from below, and one cannot swim up to the shore from under the brook. Strangely, despite liquids going down through brook tiles, light and air don't. :> I edited the article with this very recent discovery.
 [[User:Matt S|Matt S]] 00:38, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

== Walls over brooks ==

If you build a stone wall tile over a brook tile, and then deconstruct it, the 'surface layer' of the brook changes to a rough stone tile of whatever you used for building the wall, at least in 28.181.40d13 windows version. Bug? What about wood? --[[User:Kaius|Kaius]] 17:51, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

40d Talk:Dwarven economy

2009-08-08T16:29:53Z

Kaius: /* Economy stoppers? */ new section

1) Wages paid --- dwarves gain credit for tasks completed. Credit is either maintained or transferred into physical value when the dwarf in question claims coins.

2) Rent --- bedrooms have a rent assigned to them based on their room value. The rent schedule is unknown. How the dwarves physically pay the rent is unknown. If a dwarf cannot pay the rent an eviction notice is placed on the room. The specifics of eviction are unknown. Dwarves that cannot afford one of the available bedrooms will sleep in available barracks.

3) Shops --- Once the economy begins, shops may be constructed. There are several types of shops - clothing, general goods, exotic clothing and possibly others. A type of shop may not be specified; it seems to be selected randomly. Shops have an associated cost, which is assumed to be paid by the dwarf that takes control of the shop. Once a shop is owned, items will be moved to the shop corresponding to which type of shop it is. Dwarves then may buy items for the shop, presumably using the same credit system that may or may not correspond to actual physical coins.

4) Item cost - all physical items are given a cost, whether for sale or in a shop. It is unknown if dwarves pay a cost for an item picked up that was not for sale in a shop.

also - kids have combined wealth of their parents, which can lead to paris hilton-syndrome in DF - children with wealth of several thousand buying out the noble/admin rooms and owning shops filled with =giant cave spider silk dress= --[[User:Frostedfire|Frostedfire]] 04:07, 20 November 2007 (EST)

----

It seems that the dwarven economy is now triggered by the coming of a Baron /Baroness. I haven't seen it for myself but it's what I gather from the forums. There also seems to be a bug where all coins minted appear as the same coin type (e.g., copper, silver, and gold coins all appearing as silver) on the economy window. --[[User:Keizo|Keizo]]

Just got the dwarven economy started for the first time. The game is a bit tricky to play in wine. ^^;;. Anyway, since there isn't any page here yet, I'm sort of lost, so I've added what I already know so other folks will be at least a *little* less lost :-P

Typically a page will be expanded a lot more quickly if you actually already have some content on it,.Please expand! --[[User:Kim Bruning|Kim Bruning]] 19:48, 1 December 2007 (EST)

None of my legendary dwarves have an account in their status screen.
Does this mean that they are exempt from prices or something?--[[User:Pigbuster|Pigbuster]]
:They always have been.--[[User:Heliopios|Heliopios]] 01:05, 6 December 2007 (EST)

== Wages ==

What is the deal with "- haulage being a major exception - "? Last time I checked there were some wages for item hauling, furniture hauling, food hauling,... on the in-game {{key|j}}{{key|m}}{{key|w}} wages info page. Of course a dwarf can spend a month hauling a rock to a stockpile and get his 1* for it, but a job of taking food from a stockpile and relocating it to an adjacent stockpile can yield a dwarf dozens of * in quite small period of time. Place 10-20 medium sized stockpiles accepting all furniture in a line and set them to take from each other in chain so that the first small stockpile is the closest to your workshops and your last large main furniture stockpile is the closest to your currently furnishing rooms. Watch your haulers' bank accounts sky-rocket.--[[User:Another|Another]] 05:24, 10 January 2008 (EST)

Who and whern/how can change wages percentage on first "Wages" screen? It's always 100% for me--[[User:Dorten|Dorten]] 06:53, 14 February 2008 (EST)
:one of the nobles can, but rarely does so (bookkeeper?)

== Soldiers ==
Will the soldiers pay for getting armor or weapons?--[[User:Dorten|Dorten]] 05:10, 11 January 2008 (EST)
:No, they don't own them.--[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 18:11, 11 January 2008 (EST)

== No Coin Economy==

How does an economy work without any coins? Do they use pretend money or something?
:Every dfwarf starts an account in DwarfEcoBanc, and is always carrying his/her credit card. But if you will be stupid enough to give them money (like I did last time), they would prefer to use money instead of card. In case you don't get it: you don't want them to use money, really.--[[User:Dorten|Dorten]] 23:59, 21 January 2008 (EST)

:It works just the same as in the Real Life. As opposed to the economy of the old, when coins were units of precious metals, with real actual value attached to them, currently all money is created as a credit from the central bank (which is paid by taking a new credit). Dwarves get credit from you for work they do, and you can pay it back by providing them with goods other dwarves produced (for another credit). For coins, you must mint actual metal. For going into infinite debt, you don't need anything, and you can never run out of it (gold bars go down to zero, debt goes to minus infinity). But without inflation, it doesn't really hurt in the long run like it does in the Real Life.

:I would personally like to see coins better implemented, i just like the idea of coffers full of gold and actually having a hoard to protect. Maybe each dwarf can have a 'Moneybag', which is like a quiver or waterskin, but for coins. They'll carry around in it their 'spending limit' for shops, the rest of their money being locked up in their coffer, if they have one, or maybe at a bank; a bigger personal hoard means more happy thoughts!. Other than those direct purchases, all earnings/expenditures is totaled up over a month, season, or year and the net result is transferred by the Tax Collector, who meets with each dwarf and gives (or takes) the appropriate amount of gold. The money owned by the government(controlled by you) is stored in either The Bank or The Hoard. The Bank is for day-to-day activities and exchanges; The Hoard being a designated area where goods are taken out of the economy. Weapons are in racks, armor on stands, furniture and crafts displayed; but most important of all are the piles of coins and gems! Active traps and proximity to magma and water help too. The size and value of The Hoard has a significant impact on fortress wealth, and increasing it is a common Noble Demand; a big hoard makes ALL of your Dwarves happier and vice versa.

== How is this a feature? ==
I dig the realism and all, but the only effect the economy has had on my fortress is that my hard working dwarves now can't afford the rooms they've been sleeping in for the past ten years, while my nobles and champions (junta?) live in solid gold mansions. I went straight to the .ini and turned economy off. [[User:Ripheus|Ripheus]] 18:49, 6 March 2008 (EST)
:Yeah, well, the pricing of those rooms doesn't work by supply and demand for some reason, they have fixed cost. But still I kind of like the idea of an economy, and it seems a bit odd to "strongly recommend" that you shouldn't mint coins etc. I haven't even seen them hauling any of those coins. --[[User:Magirot|Magirot]] 09:18, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

It's ironic that without coins, the economy actives better. Kinda like using credit cards instead of coins (Maybe a hint to the government to stop making coins?!) --[[User:AlexFili|AlexFili]] 04:17, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

== Economy Trigger(s) ==
We know what triggers the economy, but what does having an active economy trigger? The most obvious is nobles, but there are a couple other things I've noticed. First, whether it's related to the economy or not, my only fortress that's ever been under siege has had an active economy, while my others that only get random goblin attacks did not. Likewise that fortress is my only fortress that has gotten megabeast attacks. It may or may not be related, as most of my fortresses before it didn't get as big as it is. (80 or so highest vs 110) --[[User:Eurytus|Eurytus]] 22:09, 21 April 2008 (EDT)
:Both of sieges in my current fortress (40c) were prior to the economy starting, so I don't think the economy is causal. I think it has to do with population and wealth. More dwarves attract more attention and the pickings are better with more wealth. -[[User:Fuzzy|Fuzzy]] 12:02, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
I don't believe its a trigger for anything. My current fortress has been besieged five times and attacked by a Dragon. All this happened before I unlocked the economy.--[[User:Max Dougwell|Max Dougwell]] 07:08, 3 December 2008 (EST)

::as soon as i got my economy up and running, i had my first siege, then my first (ever) megabeast attack straight after. similar to Eurytus, it's never happened in any of my other fortresses (only one siege prior to these two attacks, in a different fortress).
::however, i will add that in the year before, i was producing native platinum statues, increasing the fortress wealth considerably (native platinum = 120, native platinum statues = 3k), so what's the formula for it? is it:
Wealth = Attacks?
Economy = Attacks?
Wealth = Economy = Attacks? or maybe
Wealth = Attacks + Economy?

== Starving ==
"Dwarves will not starve because they cannot buy food; they just choose whatever's cheapest." - Is this true? It seems that dwarves whitout money die from either hunger or thirst. --[[User:Mizipzor|Mizipzor]] 14:16, 24 April 2008 (EDT)

:I do believe eg plump helmets are 1* per unit, they only need to move a couple rocks ;) --[[User:Frostedfire|Frostedfire]] 10:30, 20 June 2008 (EDT)

== Setting economy to NO (ini file) stop immigration ? ==

Hello, because I really dont like economy (I want to assign bed manually !), I've desactivated it in the .ini files... but now, I haven't receive any migrants for 2 years, and my population is slowly reducing 'cause of the accidentals death.
Anyone know if desactiving the economy (just before the arrival of the baron which trigger economy) also desactive immigration ?

Again, sorry for my imperfect english. [[User:Timst|Timst]] 08:59, 26 April 2008 (EDT)
:caravan reports summon migrants, large numbers of deaths or lack of wealth stop it

== Childrens' accounts ==

"Normal" children are really wealthy - they sleep in rooms for nobles, eat roasts and buy golden things. I heard that they have combined wealth of their both parents. It's pretty crazy.
On the other hand noble children... My baroness has a son, who has 3 (yes, 3) monies on his account...
Isn't it really strange? --[[User:Someone-else|Someone-else]] 06:52, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
:His parents has no money, really. So, he has only three pennies he got hardworking in the fields, harvesting...--[[User:Dorten|Dorten]] 05:04, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
It appears Legendary Dwarves still get paid, despite being able to take whatever they please. My child of two Legendary Dwarves has 256 in her account. Either that or she's doing odd jobs when I'm not watching.--[[User:Max Dougwell|Max Dougwell]] 07:13, 3 December 2008 (EST)

::That may be leftover from before the parents were legendary. I've seen children of two legendary dwarves maintain a constant or decreasing cash supply following the ascension of the second parent to legendary, despite abundant in-profession work for both parents which should rapidly provide a huge influx of cash. I can only conclude legendary dwarves no longer earn money. --[[User:Squirrelloid|Squirrelloid]] 05:47, 29 December 2008 (EST)

:::They don't need money, they're exempt from the economy. Also, the children of nobles NOT BEING NOBLES THEMSELVES can create the amusing situation of the baron's son dying of hunger, if you keep churning out *plump helmet roast*s.--[[User:Zipdog|Zipdog]] 06:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

== Necessary for nobles? ==

It's currently not very clear whether or not the economy needs to be enabled in order for nobles to continue arriving. For instance, the hammerer, barons, etc. Is there any confirmed knowledge of which nobles will or won't come depending on whether or not the economy is enabled in the init file? [[User:G-Flex|G-Flex]] 22:09, 6 June 2008 (EDT)

:All right, a friend of mine just confirmed through play that such nobles, even the tax collector, will still come even with the economy disabled. He's got a count (and consort), hammerer, tax collector, dungeon master, and philosopher (at least those are the ones I know of). [[User:G-Flex|G-Flex]] 04:25, 16 June 2008 (EDT)

== Effects of turning it off, once it's on? ==

Changing ECONOMY to NO in the init.txt file after the economy has kicked in doesn't seem to keep dwarves from spending already-earned credit at shops. (I haven't seen them paying for drink, so it may be that food and drink are now free; I'm not sure, though, because I haven't yet watched them pay for drinks while the economy is turned on, so I don't know when that happens.) --[[User:Sev|Sev]] 17:00, 28 August 2008 (EDT)

== Effect of turning it on, once it's off? ==

If you turn the economy off and get the tax collector, baron, etc... what happens when you turn it back on? Does the economy start back up, or do you only get one shot at it? I don't think I want the economy but if I miss the opportunity to ever turn it on, then it becomes a tough choice. --[[User:Sowelu|Sowelu]] 02:22, 27 November 2008 (EST)

== Tips for living with economy? ==

I just read a suggestion on the forum, and was going to add it to a list of economy-survival tips, but there doesn't seem to be one. [http://www.bay12games.com/forum/index.php?topic=29016.msg373478#msg373478 here's the forum post]. Shouldn't there be such a page? [[User:Solarshado|Solarshado]] 21:57, 25 December 2008 (EST)
:There's a couple tricks for this. The casino mentioned there, triangle stockpiles (3 stone stockpiles that are all taking from eachother, making constant hauling work), etc. However, everything like this is classifiable as an exploit since if you put it in the context of an actual economy it would cause gigantic economic inflation and currency devaluation almost overnight. Really that's all you're doing with techniques like this; you're devaluing what a single ☼ means until it's basically nothing, and taking advantage of the fact that the DF engine doesn't currently have a way to adjust for inflation.

:Really, living with economy in a legit, as-intended manner is just making sure there are enough meaningful jobs to do. Growing [[dimple cup]]s and starting a dyeing attachment to a fully blown clothing industry can employ dozens of dwarves around the clock using only the caravans as resources (for importing cloth and the appropriate volume). Skilled work like sewing clothes, dying cloth, sewing leather/cloth images, etc all give 20☼ or more for a single job. A dwarf can afford a very nice apartment and very nice food, with enough money left over to go shopping, if they have a skilled-labor job to do.

:Alternatively, you can just provide a way to become legendary easily. Screw pumps connected to nothing will make Pump Operators legendary pretty quickly, especially if other duties are minimized.

:Anyway, it might be worth adding this as a few notes, but I'm not sure there's enough to say to make a full section about it. --[[User:ThunderClaw|ThunderClaw]] 23:03, 25 December 2008 (EST)

::Its hard to talk about exploiting an economy which actually operates under an absolute theory of value rather than supply and demand. Once you assume an absolute theory of value as your model of economics, inflation simply cannot exist and the concept doesn't even make sense.

::Ie, meaningless hauling jobs -> inflation is only an exploit if the price of goods fluctuates because of supply and demand. Or you can just look at it as making dwarves do non-productive wage-paying jobs compensates for the unavoidable 'exploit' that is the stupidity of there being abundantly available rooms of quality X remaining at a stupidly high value instead of having their price become more affordable in the absence of sufficient demand for them at their current price.

::--[[User:Squirrelloid|Squirrelloid]] 05:44, 29 December 2008 (EST)
:::This is exactly what makes it an exploit. If the system took into account inflation and supply and demand, then this would not be an exploit. The fact that it does not count these things means that the infinite hauling jobs pay out pleanty of cash while achieving no net bennefit to the community, but are still not effecting the value of money. :P It is like turning your dwarven colony into a welfare state without the economic drawbacks! [[User:Burlingk|Burlingk]] 20:39, 11 February 2009 (EST)

::::No. Ok, lets be perfectly clear here, while there have been many theories about what creates value, the real economic model has always been supply and demand in the real world. You have just at various times had people pretending that other things were true (and generally not those whose business involved intimate interaction with said economy, who have always understood how supply effects price, if nothing else). So in the real world when you try to pretend something wrong is true there are horrible consequences.
::::Enter DF, which specifically institutes as a law of nature a theory of value totally at odds with supply and demand. Given the existence of that Truth of the DF world, nothing involving it can be an exploit because it does not and cannot behave like any real economy. Fact: DF posits a world with an absolute theory of value. Fact: given an absolute theory of value, pulling a lever really does have a set value even if pulling it accomplishes nothing - because the act of pulling that lever has been defined by the laws of nature as being worth a particular set amount. That action has an absolute value, just like every other action.
::::What it comes down to is the DF theory of value is *stupid*. However, all these exploits are actually such a thing working exactly as intended, its just the intention is stupid. But as such its not an exploit - an exploit requires something working differently than intended. The moment you assume an absolute theory of value, you necessarily intend for things like this to happen.
::::--[[User:Squirrelloid|Squirrelloid]] 04:25, 14 February 2009 (EST)
:::::It's an ALPHA. The entire game engine is just a placeholder. Nothing can be taken as cannon at this stage. --[[User:Zchris13|Zchris13]] 17:48, 25 February 2009 (EST)
::::::....I'm confused. Are you saying its an exploit because sometime later the design of the economy might change and lever pulling for cash would be an exploit of some presumed future system? That would make every use of the current economy an exploit. When the economic engine is fixed, if it is fixed, then doing the listed 'exploits' won't even be possible. Yes, my position is that an economic engine is impossible to exploit, because its rules are necessarily the rules its implemented to use.
::::::But there's no evidence that any change is coming. Not that i've read every feature goal and power goal, but i don't recall incorporating a supply-demand system is on Toadyone's list of priorities at all. And the fact that its an alpha just means he isn't done implementing what he considers basic features, according to his own design plan.
::::::--[[User:Squirrelloid|Squirrelloid]] 04:15, 26 February 2009 (EST)
:::::::The same "impossible to exploit" thing applies to all other imperfect simulations, though. By the same logic, you could say that a drawbridge deleting things isn't an exploit, because that's how drawbridges work in DF, or using one block of aquifer stone to produce unlimited water isn't an exploit, because that's how aquifers work in DF. Triangle stockpiles to generate unlimited money are just as much an exploit as running a waterfall from one block of aquifer stone through a water wheel to a drawbridge. It's not a matter of "some future version", it's a matter of "the thing the game's trying to simulate".
:::::::Notably, the lore doesn't include the dwarven economy operating on a labor theory of value, and the liaisons and guildmasters even use a demand/supply theory of value. So the absolute system is just an alpha-quality simulation of a demand/supply system, and taking advantage of that is an exploit.
:::::::Of course, this cuts both ways. For example, a proper economy uses mass action, similar to "the wiki magic"; but in DF as it stands, the player has to assign labors and order workshops built - a dwarf who sees a need can't just buy some space, some tools, and some materials, and start fulfilling it. So the economy also exploits you. But that doesn't make exploiting it back into any less of an exploit.
:::::::But hey, I've modded in some supermetals, and just by not taking the midnightsteel battleaxes I embark with loads of points for equipment, and I bring tetrahedrite and smelt it into billion. I just accept that I'm exploiting flaws and bugs in the game. [[User:Darekun|Darekun]] 19:28, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

== Are there any profits? ==
Is there any reason NOT to turn economy off, other than the extra challenge it creates (plus happy thoughts from shopping for those who can afford that)?
It looks that the original communism the Dwarves start with, serves them much better, especially that there seems to be little special profit from very happy dwarves, while there's a lot of trouble for the unhappy ones, and economy seems to create more of both extremes.
Also, slaughtering of the noble or the tax collector won't reverse to the no-economy, will it?
[[User:Sharp|Sharp]] 11:43, 26 January 2009 (EST)

:How can there be profit in a system of absolute values? What do you mean by 'profit'? The only profit in the game is the value added by labor, which isn't really profit but the value of the labor itself. Basically, the game operates under some rather strange economic assumptions (an unholy marriage of the labor theory of value and mercantilism). So no, there is absolutely no benefit to the dwarven economy, especially as its hardly worth the name economy. (Economics is about differential rarity and preferences, neither of which the game's economic engine takes into account). --[[User:Squirrelloid|Squirrelloid]] 01:17, 27 January 2009 (EST)
::I think you misunderstood me, I didn't mean "Profit" by economic meaning, I meant "changes in the mechanics of the game the player benefits from", "Profit" as opposed to "Trouble". [[User:Sharp|Sharp]] 13:05, 27 January 2009 (EST)
: You mean benefits? Extra complexity and [[fun|challenge]], of course! You get shops, coins with value, and an answer to the question, "My dwarves are all happy, what do I do now?" I have it disabled in the .ini, like any sane dwarfmaster. Oh wait, that's a contradiction in terms. But I still have my Baron->Count->Duchess and my Incoming King (pop limit 140). --[[User:Jellyfishgreen|Jellyfishgreen]] 06:12, 12 February 2009 (EST)

==Fake Deaths==

Toady should add a mechanic where a brewer pretends to kill himself in a pub fire to claim the insurance cos he can't afford a room.--[[User:Warlordzephyr|Warlordzephyr]] 16:29, 24 February 2009 (EST)

:Affordable life insurance couldn't possibly exist in a Dwarf Fortress. They die too easily. --[[User:FJH|FJH]] 17:11, 24 February 2009 (EST)
::Affordable life insurance. Classic. oh, this place cracks me up...--[[User:Zchris13|Zchris13]] 17:51, 25 February 2009 (EST)
:::In Dwarf Fortress, affordable life insurance is an [[artifact]] [[adamantium]] [[flail]]. --[[User:Jurph|Jurph]] 01:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
::::One word: Magma--[[User:Zipdog|Zipdog]] 06:29, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

== Economy stoppers? ==

Is it possible to stop the Dwarven Economy once it starts by killing the Tax Collector/Baron?