v50 Steam/Premium information for editors
  • v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
  • Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
This notice may be cached—the current version can be found here.

Editing 40d Talk:Item value

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Warning: You are not logged in.
Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.

You are editing a page for an older version of Dwarf Fortress ("Main" is the current version, not "40d"). Please make sure you intend to do this. If you are here by mistake, see the current page instead.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 13: Line 13:
 
:::Wait, what am I saying, it's a Wiki.  I can go ahead and change it myself. [[User:LegacyCWAL|LegacyCWAL]] 14:26, 2 October 2008 (EDT)
 
:::Wait, what am I saying, it's a Wiki.  I can go ahead and change it myself. [[User:LegacyCWAL|LegacyCWAL]] 14:26, 2 October 2008 (EDT)
 
::::I can agree with that modification. Shortening the list is always a good thing. --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 15:32, 2 October 2008 (EDT)
 
::::I can agree with that modification. Shortening the list is always a good thing. --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 15:32, 2 October 2008 (EDT)
::::lol--[[User:Mrdudeguy|Mrdudeguy]] 07:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 
  
 
== value of clothes/shoes ==
 
== value of clothes/shoes ==
Line 398: Line 397:
 
::::::I think we're violently agreeing here. All these things are in the base item tables, and no-one is suggesting they be removed from there. [[User:Hussell|Hussell]] 17:34, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 
::::::I think we're violently agreeing here. All these things are in the base item tables, and no-one is suggesting they be removed from there. [[User:Hussell|Hussell]] 17:34, 4 February 2009 (EST)
  
==== Subsection1.1 ====
 
 
:Listing leather as a material is more transparent. With silk as a guide, we can say the multiplier of leather could just as easily have been 2 or 5 rather than 1. I agree that listing leather as both a base object and a material may elicit some confusion, but this is nothing that the behavior of stone (resp. metal) doesn't already cause. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 10:31, 5 February 2009 (EST)
 
:Listing leather as a material is more transparent. With silk as a guide, we can say the multiplier of leather could just as easily have been 2 or 5 rather than 1. I agree that listing leather as both a base object and a material may elicit some confusion, but this is nothing that the behavior of stone (resp. metal) doesn't already cause. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 10:31, 5 February 2009 (EST)
  
Line 404: Line 402:
  
 
:::I think your decision is (in general) the correct one. If we knew less about the underlying mechanics I would wholeheartedly support it. However, because of soap and silk, we do know that there is another multiplier (of 1) acting there. I think it is wrong to list misinformation just because it is convenient and gives consistent results. It's like the difference between teaching mathematics by explaining the underlying structure or just 'teaching' mathematics by providing a list of steps that need to be followed to reach the correct answer. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 02:16, 11 February 2009 (EST)
 
:::I think your decision is (in general) the correct one. If we knew less about the underlying mechanics I would wholeheartedly support it. However, because of soap and silk, we do know that there is another multiplier (of 1) acting there. I think it is wrong to list misinformation just because it is convenient and gives consistent results. It's like the difference between teaching mathematics by explaining the underlying structure or just 'teaching' mathematics by providing a list of steps that need to be followed to reach the correct answer. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 02:16, 11 February 2009 (EST)
 
::::However, I think silk and soap might be exceptions in the code, too. Unlike all the other material multipliers listed, we cannot verify the existence of the ones you want to include, because 1. they have no effect on value, if they exist, and 2. we can't mod their values to give them an effect. I also think it's wrong to list misinformation. I just think it's you who's doing it. :-) [[User:Hussell|Hussell]] 11:50, 11 February 2009 (EST)
 
 
:::Ah, I was under the impression our disagreement stemmed from something different.
 
:::Ok, I'm going to try to convince of my view of the structure. If I can do that (or if you can push yours), then that will settle it.
 
:::We know that before settings started moving into the raw files, all of the material multipliers were hard coded, and those that aren't in the raws (yet?) still are. We also know that things with a raw data entry but no specified value (like most stone) default to 1.
 
:::Let's assume that one of our two schema would be implemented if (when?) silk and soap values stop being hard coded and move into the raws. By your view (if I understand it correctly), silk and soap would be the only two animal products that can have entries. By my view, any might have a value entry, and any without one would default to 1. This is consistent with how stones behave. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 14:46, 11 February 2009 (EST)
 
 
::::No, I view animal products as already having a value in the raws: the animal modvalue. I believe silk and soap (if soap is, in fact, a block, and not a separate base item with value 25) are exceptions in that they have an '''extra''' multiplier. This is consistent with the way stone products behave: stones, and everything made from stones, get a material multiplier from a particular type of stone. Animals, and everything made from animals, get a material multiplier from a particular type of animal. [[User:Hussell|Hussell]] 15:52, 12 February 2009 (EST)
 
 
:::If you could have it any way you wanted, how would you handle putting silk into the raws? [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 19:35, 12 February 2009 (EST)
 
 
::::I think I would remove the hardcoded x2 multiplier for silk, and double the modvalue of cave spiders and phantom spiders (from 1 to 2). GCS silk would have half the value it has now, but the whole system would be simpler and more consistent. [[User:Hussell|Hussell]] 12:52, 14 February 2009 (EST)
 
 
:::::Hmm. Ok, let's do it your way. I strongly suspect it will change in the near future, but I think this is the best fit right now. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 09:15, 15 February 2009 (EST)
 
  
 
::In other news, I've confirmed that animal traps have a base value of 10. No news yet on ballista arrowheads. I think animal traps and cages should be added to the base items with material and quality table, since they end up in their own stockpile, not with furniture as you might suppose. Also: this talk page is getting too long. I suggest removing the draft versions of the material tables. [[User:Hussell|Hussell]] 00:34, 11 February 2009 (EST)
 
::In other news, I've confirmed that animal traps have a base value of 10. No news yet on ballista arrowheads. I think animal traps and cages should be added to the base items with material and quality table, since they end up in their own stockpile, not with furniture as you might suppose. Also: this talk page is getting too long. I suggest removing the draft versions of the material tables. [[User:Hussell|Hussell]] 00:34, 11 February 2009 (EST)
 
::Ballista arrowheads have a base value of 10. They're considered furniture, so I'm leaving the table alone. Note: assembling a non-wooden ballista arrow uses a log and an arrowhead, and gives you a ballista arrow made from metal. E.g., a +Steel ballista arrow+ is worth 1800, which is what you'd expect (20 * 30 * 3). [[User:Hussell|Hussell]] 23:08, 16 February 2009 (EST)
 
  
 
===Subsection2===
 
===Subsection2===
Line 454: Line 435:
  
 
::Yes. So I guess you should use all that no-quality cloth the traders bring to decorate bags, and only use your own quality cloth to make bags. [[User:Hussell|Hussell]] 11:16, 5 February 2009 (EST)
 
::Yes. So I guess you should use all that no-quality cloth the traders bring to decorate bags, and only use your own quality cloth to make bags. [[User:Hussell|Hussell]] 11:16, 5 February 2009 (EST)
 
== Incorrect Information on Engravings ==
 
 
This article mentions that engravings add the base value for decoration (10) with the standard material modifications.  However, I have not found this to be true.  I ran a test for my ice fort (see notes in glacier:talk) to see what the value of ice engravings were.  First I smoothed three sections of regular rock (value 1), then engraved them, then smoothed 3 sections of Obsidian (value 3), and then engraved them.  The results were identical for both types of stone (each smoothing added 4 to the value and each engraving added 10 - all were base quality).  Interestingly enough, the ice smoothings were worth 8 and the ice engravings 10.  Can anyone else verify this (don't worry about the ice part, unless you want to)?  --[[User:Frewfrux|Frewfrux]] 06:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 
:I'm not sure about fortress wealth, but engravings in more valuable stone definitely contribute more to room value/quality.  I have a lot of grand 1x3 bedrooms in flux layers without really trying, and I have satisfied many nobles' requirements with otherwise modest rooms in valuable (iron or better) ore veins.  --[[User:LaVacaMorada|LaVacaMorada]] 07:20, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 
::I had been assuming they would be the same thing (room value and fortress wealth), minus any dwarven preference bumping the 'percieved' room value up. Are you sure your rooms are grand and not great?  (Grand being one step down from royal.)  And by "not really trying" I am assuming you just have beds in these rooms in addition to the engravings?  Grand rooms have a value of at least 2,500.  A 1X3 Room, that was side by side with other 1x3 rooms, would have it's walls shared with the other bedrooms.  So, if:
 
:::*only half (lets round up) of this rooms walls will count towards value,
 
:::*the material counts towards the value,
 
:::*and all the engravers were better then Lengendary +5 and did masterful work half the time,
 
 
::you would have:
 
 
:::*6 walls and 3 floors (9)
 
:::*5 masterful engravings worth (5 engravings * 10 base value * 12 masterful work * 2 flux stone) = 1,200
 
:::*4 exceptional engravings worth (4 engravings * 10 base value * 5 exceptional work * 2 flux stone) = 400
 
 
::for a total of 1,600 from engravings.  You bed would have to be worth 900.  Hmmmmm.  I think I need to test this out more. --[[User:Frewfrux|Frewfrux]] 17:07, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 
 
:::Hmmmm, testing, right.  How is one able to tell what the value of a room is, exactly?  What I mean is, how do I tell what the *exact* value of a room is (as opposed to its general rating of meager, modest, etc) without checking the "created wealth" section of the stats menu?  --[[User:Frewfrux|Frewfrux]] 18:00, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 
::::Let the Economy start, then put the room up for rent - it'll show the room's exact value under (q) status. --[[User:Quietust|Quietust]] 18:42, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 
:::::I was afraid of that. Unfortunately I don't have a fort for which the economy has started yet with which to test.  I guess I'll just have to keep this in mind to do when my glacier fort gets there.  If it ever does (terrifying biome) --[[User:Frewfrux|Frewfrux]] 19:09, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 
::::::By "not really trying", I mean that I don't go out of my way to make them valuable.  The fortress in question has well-established textile and glass industries, so I do have some valuable furniture - it's just that valuable furniture is all over the place in this fortress.  A sample bedroom with a rent of 2536☼ contains 1130☼ worth of furniture, 10 exceptional marble engravings, and 5 masterful marble engravings.  By comparison, I have a room with 1450☼ worth of furniture, 9 exceptional diorite engravings, and 6 masterful diorite engravings, and a rent of 1997☼.  So I don't know exactly how the rent is calculated, but marble engravings definitely contribute more than diorite.  --[[User:LaVacaMorada|LaVacaMorada]] 06:00, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 

Please note that all contributions to Dwarf Fortress Wiki are considered to be released under the GFDL & MIT (see Dwarf Fortress Wiki:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Please sign comments with ~~~~

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

Template used on this page: