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 v0.31 Talk:Experience
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 "v0.31"). 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 14: | Line 14: | ||
:::::I most definitely have a Legendary +5 Gem Cutter, if that means anything. | :::::I most definitely have a Legendary +5 Gem Cutter, if that means anything. | ||
::::::Why do we still have the verifies? It's in the memory, so I guess we can at least say the skills are 'assumed' to have an effect instead? Also, skills go up to skill 255, after that it either overflows to dabbling (skill 0) or there is code to prevent that (which the disassembler does not show, leading me to believe it does infact overflow). The adventure mode statistics are, memory-wise, correct, but the thing that needs to be verified is wheather those higher skills have '''any''' use. Looking at my craftdwarf's workshops, it seems that the 40d Leg+x skill bonuses still apply, but that may be statistical error. --[[User:Dree12|Dree12]] 21:25, 4 September 2010 (UTC) | ::::::Why do we still have the verifies? It's in the memory, so I guess we can at least say the skills are 'assumed' to have an effect instead? Also, skills go up to skill 255, after that it either overflows to dabbling (skill 0) or there is code to prevent that (which the disassembler does not show, leading me to believe it does infact overflow). The adventure mode statistics are, memory-wise, correct, but the thing that needs to be verified is wheather those higher skills have '''any''' use. Looking at my craftdwarf's workshops, it seems that the 40d Leg+x skill bonuses still apply, but that may be statistical error. --[[User:Dree12|Dree12]] 21:25, 4 September 2010 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
==Experience amounts== | ==Experience amounts== | ||
Line 33: | Line 32: | ||
::I put a debugger trap on experience gain and ran a new fort for 5 seasons.{{Version|0.31.12}} I filtered out all gains of 30 points, gains of 10 points associated with mining and engraving, gains of 1 point associated with masonry, and all military and social skills.<br/>The trap caught gains of n*500 to random skills when migrants, merchants, and liaisons were generated, and one gain of 20,000 to carpentry when a strange mood succeeded. No bonuses for creating or engraving a masterwork were detected.<br/>—[[User:0x517A5D|0x517A5D]] 06:47, 5 September 2010 (UTC) | ::I put a debugger trap on experience gain and ran a new fort for 5 seasons.{{Version|0.31.12}} I filtered out all gains of 30 points, gains of 10 points associated with mining and engraving, gains of 1 point associated with masonry, and all military and social skills.<br/>The trap caught gains of n*500 to random skills when migrants, merchants, and liaisons were generated, and one gain of 20,000 to carpentry when a strange mood succeeded. No bonuses for creating or engraving a masterwork were detected.<br/>—[[User:0x517A5D|0x517A5D]] 06:47, 5 September 2010 (UTC) | ||
:::As someone unfamiliar with the mechanics behind the system, these numbers mean little to me. Can you explain your conclusions based on this data? --[[User:Romeofalling|Romeofalling]] 19:54, 29 September 2010 (UTC) | :::As someone unfamiliar with the mechanics behind the system, these numbers mean little to me. Can you explain your conclusions based on this data? --[[User:Romeofalling|Romeofalling]] 19:54, 29 September 2010 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− |