Dwarf Fortress Wiki - User contributions [en]

Talk:Main Page/archive2

2009-08-05T22:08:09Z

LogicalDash: /* Not a Roguelike */

{{Archive|
# [[Talk:Main Page/archive1|Archive 1]]
}}

== World Painter Page ==
The wiki has needed a page on the [[World Painter]] for a while, so I've started one. The information in there is decent, but I'm relatively new to wiki editing, so the formatting probably isn't. If someone wouldn't mind cleaning it up a bit for me I'd really appreciate it. --[[User:Timmeh|Timmeh]] 01:15, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

== French language wiki ==

Can we have interlanguage links with the [http://www.dwarffortress.fr/wiki/ French wiki]? -[[User:Alan Trick|Alan Trick]] 17:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

== Add a CptnDuck page? ==

Captain Duck is a DF video tutorial maker, which an impressive collection of 40 videos on youtube (and a few extra videos of sieges and arenas and whatnot), and explains how to do most everything, from magma forges to Dwarven justice. He adds humor to it and he's the reason a lot of people understand the game...I think we should give him a page. – [[template:unsigned|unsigned]] comment by [[User:Blackdoggie998|Blackdoggie998]]

:As it is insanely easy for anyone to sign up for editing priviledges on this site (I managed to, after all), I see no need to make one for him when he could make one for himself. However, if you wish to add user:CptnDuck, or invite him to make one himself, feel free. He can link to all of his tutorials from his user page. They even be searchable through that lovely little box to the(my) left. (Who knows where it is on your skin.) -- [[User:Teres_Draconis|jaz]] ... on this day, at this time.

:P.S. Does it seem odd to you to have it say "unsigned comment by [username]"? Or is that just me? -- [[User:Teres_Draconis|jaz]] ... on this day, just a little after the previous one.

:We don't need a userpage for him, but a page with the assembled listing of all his (and others of equal quality) video tutorials wouldn't be a bad idea at all. -[[User:N9103|Edward]] 16:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

== Articles on Olivine and other generic stones ==

There is a current discussion as to whether or not [[Olivine]] (and perhaps some few other stones) are duly covered on the current [[stone]] page, or are truly worth having their own article/page. This relates to a larger question of how this wiki is organized, and "What deserves a page" in a general sense. Any interested are encouraged to chime in, if only with a "me too" post pro or con. See [[Talk:Olivine]] for an idea of the issue. I'd like to have the debate move from the specific Olivine page to here since this is a more general issue that affects many potential pages. --[[User:Senso|Senso]] 21:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

:I'm not really sure which way to go on this one. A lot of otherwise useless stones would need their own articles if the guidelines were expanded... and yet, there's a good amount of useful information that's not on the main pages, that would further clutter them if it were added; And permitting more individual pages would solve both those problems. I guess this ends up being a vote both ways, with provisions on each. -[[User:N9103|Edward]] 23:54, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

:My vote is, if someone can make it amusing, then sure. If someone is of the bent to enjoy making such a page, then again, sure... otherwise, leave it at the bottom of the pile of "things that someday we might get around to if we feel like it" and don't stress. The relevant data is covered (or will be when someone notices it's not), and everything else is gravy. Beside, what would you rather do, play the game, or figure out how to make a whole page of jokes about how gneiss nice is.... (or did I get that backwards?)... ? --[[User:Teres_Draconis|jaz]] ... on this day, at this time.

::All relevant information is covered, yes. But not necessarily on a relevant page. Before the Olivine page was made you couldn't learn that olivine may contain native platinum from any page related to olivine or stone in general.
::Another example is kaolinite. You can look it up in the table of Other Stone to see it can be found in sedimentary rock. But in order to see that it may itself contain alunite and marcasite you have to go through the entire table (or use the browser search function). Now, in order to see if it may contain anything else, you have to notice the note at the top of the page (just above the table of contents) that points to Metal Ore and Gem, whith another two tables you have to search through. (Kaolinite may contain turquoise). --[[User:Nahno|Nahno]] 21:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

:It's not just about "which stones" - it's a larger question of how the wiki is organized and presented. Should each separate and distinct item get its own page, like the current one- or two-line articles on [[vial]]s, [[instrument]]s or [[Restraint|chain]]s, (just as random parallel examples of some [[finished goods]] that have their very own, very short, very dull, and predictably repetitive articles.) Surely the [[Masons guild]] and [[miners guild]] don't deserve or need separate articles. Do we need a separate and largely redundant article for every trap weapon? What about the cookie-cutter articles on ''every'' individual animal? The GCS deserves its own, and many others, but one on each separate type of shark and hunting cat? There is no actual article there, only a template.

:Quivers and bolts are sub-sections of the [[crossbow]] article, and I think that's a ''great'' call. Olivine, talc and kaolinite are merely similar examples, distinct enough to warrant special treatment, but on the borderline of being so small to each only represent a stub. Ultimately, I don't think a functional formal definition would be easily achieved - rather guidelines and a fuzzy target, combining related info into groups with optimal size limitations (both lower end and upper end). Perhaps a template should not be forced on every lesser example, but they could be grouped into a table on their own article, "other stones of note" or "sharks" or "finished goods" or whatever.

:In many ways, our only current guidelines are "what has been done so far" - and that varies widely and wildly. Too often, pages are cobbled onto related ones, or split off just because its a new topic, if a brutally short one. Myself, I'd like to see most related articles of less than 4 lines or so get grouped into larger, more universally informative articles, and anything larger than maybe 5 full sub-sections be considered for splitting up. If an item stands out from the rest, it should stand out somewhere, in an article - but that doesn't mean it has to have its very own, or invite every similar item to do so as well.--[[User:Albedo|Albedo]] 03:30, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

:: Please check out the (no longer) current [[Chalk]] page and tell me what you think. ... which is to say, it doesn't /have/ to be a stub, does it? It can be rich and detailed and sadly unamusing. It would please me to continue to do all stones in this manner, or another manner of your choosing.... Thus negating fussing over "this one was done this way, that one was done that way" arguments. I'll get to them all, in the order they appear on the [[Stones]] page. ... assuming you guys are ok with that. --[[User:Teres Draconis]] 08:28, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
:: P.S. Who's the outpost manager of this place, anyways? I'd like to know to whom I should be pandering. --jaz

::: I think 1) you should take time to read, if not learn the wiki format guidelines, 2) you should sign with your REAL user name, and stop using a pseudonym, and 3) you should not break someone else's post with yours in between their paragraphs. As to the chalk page, I think it's over-enthusiastic and pays no attention to previous article style or formatting precedent - which may be a good thing or a bad thing, depending. --[[User:Albedo|Albedo]] 09:33, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

:::: 1) You're right, I'm sorry.
::::2) We've discussed user names on [[User_Talk:Teres_Draconis#Naming Conventions|my talks page]]. (Also, <nowiki>~~~</nowiki> still puts "jaz"... why bother with the link when it's just a P.S.?)
::::3) I'm sorry. I was (apparently) trained wrong, and that was a /long/ time ago. I was taught (20 years ago) that when responding, to do so in-line, so that people can tell what the response is actually relating to. (Like an actual conversation, except with a time warp. You say something, I respond, someone else adds, we all move on to the next topic.) It supposedly adds clarity. The style and curtesy rules of such things has changed. I can see I'll need to update myself. Thank you for pointing that out. =)
::::4) I was hasty. I had to have meatspace people explain to me why, as wiki-''writers'', you would not want so much detail on a page. Especially when, with every new game release, any given page on the wiki might need an over haul. I was only looking at it from the end-user perspective of "If I'm looking for information, I don't want a page that just tells me to go look at the three pages I've already looked at. I want a page that reduces the noise of the irrelevant, and distills to just that specific (sub-)topic." I /don't/ see the point of six pages that are identacle except for title, and all only three lines long. If it's got it's own page, it should have it's own page. If it just links back to the three pages that linked to it, and they all link to each other already, what's the point? If the only thing Chalk has going for it is that it's flux, why not just make a note on the [[Stone]] page reading, "These three rocks can be used as flux" and link to the flux page from there? Why should chalk have it's own page, if it's not going to be richly detailed and, you know, informative? - [[User:Teres Draconis|jaz]] 18:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

::::The templates are there because they are pretty, detailed, and condensed ways to display some key information. Rather than expanding existing information so that it takes up more space, it's more productive to add things that you think are lacking. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 12:15, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

::: I changed the other [[Stones]] table to allow for interesting minerals that are in other[[Stones]] to be posted.--[[User:Mrdudeguy|Mrdudeguy]] 22:17, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
:What would actually be helpful is a [[Geology]] primer, indicating how layers and inclusions are placed, where, and what the implications of "You have struck XXX" are. I know, now, that if it's olivine, I have a chance of finding veins of native platinum. One good page explaining what all of the geological processes mean would be a lot more useful then all of the various descriptions of exploratory mining. [[User:Decius|Decius]] 22:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
::That sounds like a great idea.--[[User:Mrdudeguy|Mrdudeguy]] 22:46, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

:::I agree! But I have no idea how to write it. Most of what I know about geology I learned from looking at the raws. Everything else is "OMG, is that a ''rock''?! I've heard of those!" - [[User:Teres Draconis|jaz]] 18:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

::"More useful" to some, but I agree it would be a great addition. Also, the more I think about it, the more I like what MrDG did with the table in Other Stone - tables could condense any and all small, individual articles into single pages w/ (sortable?) tables where all these various similar objects could be compared/contrasted at a glance. Templates are perfect when there is a lot of various info, but if the different topics (semi-generic stones, animals, finished goods) all differ only in one or two details, and there is just not that many variables to begin with, a Table would be (imo) preferable. ''(And imo that table now covers such stones as Olivine well, to get back to the original example that sparked this discussion.)''

::As an additional example of how current stub-articles could be combined into a simple table, I've made this page - [[Example - some fish]] - which could be a model for such. (A page/table with all the "Sea-creatures" would be more likely approp, but this was faster for now.) It would replace every stub-article on related "generic" items, but any truly noteworthy items would still have their own full articles for expanded information and commentary (here, "carp"). It still has 100% of the prev information, but also allows immediate comparison and contrast, and, if sortable, allows a User to more easily compare relations between similar aspects (like "biome", in this example.)--[[User:Albedo|Albedo]] 00:13, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

::: Is it possible to put the expandable version of the raw ("game object data (show)" seen at the bottom of the [[carp]] page) inside the table, instead of the whole thing? Or does the one preclude the other? - [[User:Teres Draconis|jaz]] 18:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

:::Actually, if someone finds it easy to extract that information from the .RAWs, I would find that an improvement on what [[Creatures]] currently has. [[User:Decius|Decius]] 17:52, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

::::If someone here knows PHP they may be able to write a new wiki hook that pulls information from raw entries. That would make many things much easier. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 22:22, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

:::Which information do you want extracted? I can probably do it for you, but you may have heard, I'm in the doghouse for not paying attention to style and formating rules. =/ Show me what there is, and one example of what you want, and I can probably do it for you with a minimum of stupid questions. ... ''Probably.'' - [[User:Teres Draconis|jaz]] 18:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

::::@ jaz, Dec - Did either of you look at this sample table? [[Example - some fish]] Does that cover what you were envisioning? It's just a rough idea - but it could work the same way that the table on the [[stone]] page currently does, to cover all the generic, almost-identical objects. Same w/ finished goods, weapon traps, probably many other sim categories of like items.--[[User:Albedo|Albedo]] 22:52, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I've read this sort of. My view is, wikis add value to the game far more for noobs than they do to legends who have been around since when the z-axis was just an idea. With this in mind, I reckon if everything with a name in the game had an article that would be *A Good Thing* (tm). Just my own opinion, feel free to disagree. Ideally, articles for things like stones should contain a template constructed from the raws, with prose/dialogue manually added.
Even things like [[screw pump]] could have a template driven section, advising what the components are / who makes it etc. Maybe <nowiki>{{building|Building Name|Component 1:Component 1 name|Component X| component X name|Constructed by|trade}}</nowiki> or similar.[[User:GarrieIrons|GarrieIrons]] 08:45, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

:I agree, probably, although that sounds like a lot of work. I think the stone templates and articles could do with a bit of a cleanup and more in-game information. I mostly use the articles to see if there's anything notable about a particular stone and then check out the wikipedia page. Some of the wikipedia links are broken or indirect now because disambiguity pages have been added since. Also, the wikipedia links are right at the bottom of very long boxes listing ores and gems and the like - I suggest adding drop down boxes to the templates that contain all that information but which are minimized by default. Or changing the template so that the wikipedia link wraps around the stone name at the top. --[[User:Harmonica|Harmonica]] 01:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Way late to this party, apologies. Tables are no good (to me) if they aren't sortable. The World Ends With You (a Nintendo DS game) Wikia portal/wiki thing has an ''awesome'' method for adding sortable tables. Some gadget called [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki Semantic MediaWiki] that hooks into the Wiki to automatically pull data out as you request it, then display it in easy-to-read and use sortable tables. The TWEWY Wikia has [http://twewy.wikia.com/wiki/The_World_Ends_With_You:Semantic_MediaWiki a page on it] for their editors, giving a few examples of how powerful it is. Their use of the tool is to easily pull information from a table of 304 items, each containing 30 attributes, to generate lists comparing and compiling various items. Hugely powerful, extremely flexible.

This type of tool would work wonderfully with a PHP RAW parser, or even simple dumps of the RAWs to the Wiki. Think of how easy it would be to update the entire Wiki across the board when new versions come out. New critters? Changes to existing critters? Update the information in one spot and it trickles down through the entire Wiki! That's in addition, of course, to being able to, say, generate tables listing how many bones each creature drops when killed, then sort to see which one drops the most. Pretty sweet stuff.

With some sort of system in place for wading through all the data on the wiki, one wouldn't have to worry about having too much information, right? -- [[User:Blank|Blank]] 04:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

== Not a Roguelike ==

Dwarf Fortress only resembles a Roguelike in the sense that everything kills you. ASCII graphics haven't connoted Rogue-resemblance since Diablo came out with modern 3D graphics and was still considered a Roguelike.
[[User:LogicalDash|LogicalDash]] 22:08, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Main Page/archive2

2009-08-05T22:07:53Z

LogicalDash: /* Not a Roguelike */ new section

40d Talk:Screw pump

2009-08-01T02:17:50Z

LogicalDash: /* "Natural" walls and floors */

{{archive|
#[[Talk:Screw pump|Current discussion]]
#[[Talk:Screw pump/archive1|Archive1]]
}}

== Archiving ==

See [[/archive1]] for discussions before July '08.
Most discussion was regarding page development which has been implemented. There are a few comments which might help people trying to work things out but most of it is in the article.[[User:GarrieIrons|GarrieIrons]] 00:56, 5 July 2008 (EDT)

==Two versions of the L-shaped tunnels design==
As I said when I removed it, there is no point having two. Do not add mine back in again. --[[User:Juckto|Juckto]] 21:57, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

You'd also cut how to set up water wheels & connect them to the pump tower. I wasn't 100% certain how to diagram connecting the wheels to the smaller tower design so I thought it best to restore the whole section until someone added that into the L-shape design. [[User:Calenth|Calenth]]

== Pumping Magma? ==

Would this work if the pump was made of magma-safe materials? --[[User:Mizzy|Mizzy]] 21:10, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

:Please check a talk page's [[Talk:Screw_pump/archive1#Materials_for_magma_pumps|archives]] before asking a question. --[[User:N9103|Edward]] 02:46, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

:An edit to the [[Stupid dwarf trick]] page implied that only the blocks need be made of magma-safe materials. This needs to be studied further. --[[User:Raumkraut|Raumkraut]] 17:28, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
::I have been building magma pumps out of wood (pipe/screw) and stone blocks for ages now; there are no detrimental effects. Since non-bauxite/non-raw adamantine stones are not magma safe, presumably a wooden block will work as well (a waste of logs if you have stone, though). It is only an issue if any part of the pump (namely, the walkable end) is going to be submerged in magma. You're probably working with a poor design if your pumps are submerged in what they're pumping, but whatever. In that case your best bet is to use green glass tubes/screws/blocks, if you have sand. Metal is a last resort. --[[User:Pavlov|Pavlov]] 20:59, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
:::Wait - glass is magma-safe? what's its melting point? [[User:Random832|Random832]] 23:29, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
::::Glass itself appears to be hardcoded and from what I can tell does not have a melting point. Pretty sure glass is magma safe. I have never had problems with it. It's a nice way to get infinite tubes and corkscrews. --[[User:Pavlov|Pavlov]] 23:27, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
::::Just tried to build a pump using a nickel block with a wooden screw and a wooden tube. All it created was a huge mess and a bit of smoke and fire. Luckily, the pump is separated enough from my fort that I can just let the magma cool before moving back in.--[[User:Alkyon|Alkyon]] 00:57, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
:Did you make sure the magma coming out of the pump (on the same z-level of the pump) couldn't go back around and over the back of the pump? [[User:Random832|Random832]] 08:56, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
::Hmm...actually, I had to cut a whole because the dwarf who constructed it had the bright idea to get himself stuck by standing on the walkable tile. I guess maybe I should put a door there to allow access while blocking the magma next time to make sure it work.--[[User:Alkyon|Alkyon]] 12:59, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
::Tested this again. There is no problem using a wooden Archimedes screw (giant wood screw+giant pipe) to pump magma as long as the block used is magma proof and magma does not leak around to the passable tile. The second that happens, though, the pump bursts into flame.--[[User:Alkyon|Alkyon]] 02:29, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
:::Upon further testing, it seems that wooden magma pumps can work, but only for so long. As soon as the magma reaches a certain height, it burns up the wood and pushes the burn-proof block out of the way. I just lost about 10 worker dwarves in a accident trying to create an above ground lava cistern for my glass fortress, as soon as it reached an average level of about 5, the pump gave way. Between those deaths and the ones from the recent goblin ambush, I fear my fortress will devolve into madness and tantrums any day now. ADDENDUM: I would also like to add that the magma has just ''burned a hole through 2 z-levels of sand'' and is now flooding my workshops. It seems that the red liquid deserves a lot more respect and caution in the latest release. --[[User:Alkyon|Alkyon]]

== Self powered pumps ==

So I'm just starting a new fortress, its got everything but an easy to make moat, but there is a river start to the east a little and two or three levels lower than my entrance. So, what I'm wondering is, is there some easy way to get a hydraulic powered pump going off of the power of the water being pumped (after the dwarves do the initial pumping). Also if anyone has diagrams or something of how to easily bring water up two or three levels (or possibly higher if theres some advantage to having water fall from a height). Sorry if this is kind of stupid or answered or anything, last time I played the game it had 1 level and I never got too much into mechanics farther than floodgates (lots of complicated and redundant floodgates as I recall) so I've never tried a pump or waterwheel. I'd rather not screw up this map (its just short of perfect, major magnemite deposits with limestone being the main component to the mountain overall, access to every civ, its Cold [I'm from Canada so I like the cold], has good hunting and a major river start). Thanks --[[User:Lowlandlord|Lowlandlord]] 15:43, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

:Place a waterwheel in the original river to supply power. You can raise water multiple levels by the methods described [[Screw_pump#Multiple_Levels|here]]. --[[User:Juckto|Juckto]] 20:01, 31 July 2008 (EDT)
::Thanks --[[User:Lowlandlord|Lowlandlord]] 01:57, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Note that if you bring the water up higher than the moat, it '''will''' (not might. will.) overtop your moat. That's a good way to flood your fortress. [[User:Random832|Random832]] 16:07, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

An example of the [[Screw_pump#Multiple_Levels|multi-level pump]] including power source, gear assemblies and axles would pretty much make my entire month. Anyone up to the challenge? Pretty please? [[User:RomeoFalling|RomeoFalling]] 22:09, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

Wait, the stacked pumps transmit power upwards ''through themselves''? I didn't realise that - if it's true, then the whole L-shaped tunnels section is unrequired and should probably be removed. --[[User:Juckto|Juckto]] 06:05, 6 November 2008 (EST)

: I've been playing around with this for the last week or so. I completely missed the bit where you need to have a channel underneath the front end of the pump in order for power to transmit (you put the channel under the front end so that the pump blocks the water). You can also draw water from a stairway or into a stairway. And since water pressure will push water up z-levels, you don't actually need to stack your pumps. In other words:

0-lvl all others levels
~www~ ..... www a waterwheel
..|.. ..... | pumps from
.#V#. .###. v the north
.#X#. .#X#. X into up/down stairway
.###. .###. # surrounded by walls
..... .....

That should work for a substantial height. Sadly, my current river is filled with carp, so I won't be able to find out for a while. --[[User:RomeoFalling|RomeoFalling]] 08:49, 6 November 2008 (EST)

:Pumps only push fluids up to their height. --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 21:47, 28 November 2008 (EST)

== Front vs rear ==

Do I understand correctly that the 'front' tile (i.e. blocks water flow) is the one where the water comes out of?

Sort of - it actually just 'spawns' water in the tile on the opposite side of that tile from the rear walkable tile, an amount equal to that which is removed a z-level down. --[[User:Sukasa|Sukasa]] 16:19, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

But either way, the output side blocks flow (so if in a narrow channel water cannot backflow through the pump if it is turned off), right? I need to know this for a design. [[User:Random832|Random832]] 16:31, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

: Yes, you are correct. I too was confused by the use of the word "front", as my perception is that the "front" of a pump would be where the water goes in, not out. --[[User:Raumkraut|Raumkraut]] 04:14, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

== Alternate vs. other ==

Alternate generally means "in turn" or "in place of" -- not "as an alternative".[http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000296.htm][http://cjrarchives.org/tools/lc/alt.asp] But "alternative" can have its own problems,[http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/alternate.html] which is why I would recommend "other uses" here.--[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 20:05, 22 October 2008 (EDT)

:While I appreciate the need for clarity, I don't think either word particularly changes the scope, knowledge, breadth or content of the page. I suggest that both words work equally well. --[[User:RomeoFalling|RomeoFalling]] 21:31, 22 October 2008 (EDT)

::May I ask for people's permission, then, to change it to 'other'? The function of the page may not be substantially affected by it, but I hate to be unable to correct what I understand to be an error. 'Course, if no one agrees, I'll let it drop.--[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 11:28, 23 October 2008 (EDT)

:::I support other! [[User:Milskidasith|Milskidasith]] 14:09, 11 November 2008 (EST)

== Pump + Stairs = Win? ==

Is there any reason why I can't use the stairs as the open space that I'm pumping water from?

Side View Top Views Key
###### ######
#v->__ #v->^# -> or <- : Direction of pump
#^<-v# ###### v : down stairs
#v->^# #^<-v# ^ : up stairs
#^<-v# ###### # : Wall
____^# _ : space

I came up with this right after exiting the game. I'll try it out soon. --[[User:RomeoFalling|RomeoFalling]] 10:02, 23 October 2008 (EDT)

:No reason you couldn't, but it'd be rather silly as your dwarves can't walk through the pump. [[User:Random832|Random832]] 08:58, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

== /fail at pump stacking. ==

I'm trying to construct a pump stack as shown in figure 2, which says 'notice how the front of the pump doesn't need a floor'. If I have open space there, it says it's blocked, 'needs ground or near machine'. I can't build the bottom one to go up. So I tried the top down; same problem. To (badly) diagram it vertically; (_= floor, .= space, %=front of pump over space, @=pump on solid floor) 

.@@_ <- Pumps from left to right onto solid floor
_@%. <- right to left.
.%@_ <- left to right.
wmwm <-water

I can't build any of the pumps if either of their Xs are sitting over an open space. If I build a gear, it won't let me build on top of it. The diagram doesn't seem to show a need for gears, anyway, which is what I was trying to do. Just for laughs, I closed off one of the two holes on the bottom, built the pump and had someone pump it. It quickly (Almost immediately) filled the room with 1/7 water, so I got that right... how do I build the next level up so it connects to the one below, then the one on the surface that will begin the perpetual motion through the attached waterwheel? Trying to give the ungrateful little buggers a waterfall in the statue garden...--[[User:Azaram|Azaram]] 01:41, 30 November 2008 (EST)
:Ok, I now got the whole stack built...for some reason, it wouldn't let me when I tried it previously, but now I have it going... but they don't seem to all operate when one is manually pumped to prime. --[[User:Azaram|Azaram]] 02:12, 30 November 2008 (EST)
:Or when temporarily powered with a windmill. As soon as the gear and axle gets wet, it stops working. With three guys pumping, the waterfall runs for a little bit, half flooding the statue garden. :-p Why are they not connecting to power each other vertically?

You need to put the power-transfer hole under the output end of the pump. The impassable part will prevent backflow. Also, from your diagram it looks like the top pump isn't getting a power hole while the bottom onw is. Thta should be reversed. --[[User:Bilkinson|Bilkinson]] 08:35, 30 November 2008 (EST)

:Aargh. I tore the whole thing down, built floors over everything, then very, very carefully figured out where I needed holes. I removed the floors so that the dark green Xs were over the open spaces above the light green Xs of the pump below, and still nothing. I gave up on the water wheel idea because I didn't have enough vertical space to channel beneath it, so I set up a windmill on a roof on top of built walls above the top pump, very carefully making sure to leave space above the dark green X on the pump... and STILL nothing. -- Hm. Just went to tear down the windmill and it says 'has 20 power, need 30'. (Spends two hours fiddling around adding walls in the wrong place, tearing them down, rebuilding them, convincing a bunch of doofuses to move the mechanism that is there to make a gear out of the way of the axle) Success! Finally got it... was a lack of power. One dwarf is capable of running one pump (until he nearly drowns himself. :p) but apparently they don't run each other in that configuration. That's what was foozling me. And yes, I screwed up on what I diagrammed above...which was part of the problem. The diagram was accurate to what I'd built...(Edited to add what I forgot: Thanks for the help, Bilkinson. :D) --[[User:Azaram|Azaram]] 05:51, 1 December 2008 (EST)

== Pump Rate ==

Does anyone have a good estimate of the pump rate? It doesn't have to be accurate 7ths of a tile per step, but maybe enough to say "if you're building a waterfall that is x tiles across, and the fall is fed from a reservoir of y tiles, you need z pumps operating to maintain constant water flow, and z pumps operating to keep the upper reservoir full" or something...
--[[User:Yidda|Yidda]] 00:58, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

== Water Purifying / Desalting ==
Can someone better explain how exactly one must dig/build a water purifier to turn salt water into drinkable water? My last 3 tries have failed miserably...[[User:Kenji 03|Kenji 03]] 03:36, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I just built an entire zone out of wood and stone, it stands free of all walls. I dug a chasm out for the entire thing, I even built the floor of the screw pump out of wood floor just to be safe. The moment I turned that pump on it was salt water (double ~) so I don't know how old this information is but unless I'm missing something you cannot de-salt water with a screw pump [[User:Kenji 03|Kenji 03]] 09:15, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Alright, I figured it out. I added a video to make sure there is no confusion on how to do this for newbies. [[User:Kenji 03|Kenji 03]] 00:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

== "Natural" walls and floors ==

''Salt water pumped through a pump will become drinkable if then kept separate from natural walls, natural floors, other salt water or an aquifer.''

I dug out a reservoir, pumped some water into it, and put a well on top of it. The dwarves drank from the well.

I didn't build the reservoir's walls or floor. I just dug them out. I didn't even smooth them down. They are natural.

What is meant by "natural" walls and floors?[[User:LogicalDash|LogicalDash]] 02:17, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

40d Talk:Screw pump

2009-08-01T02:17:33Z

LogicalDash: /* "Natural" walls and floors */ new section

40d Talk:Bituminous coal

2009-05-01T18:09:33Z

LogicalDash:

This is known ingame as "Bituminous coal", not the other way around, and the article name should probably be changed to reflect that. Anyone with the know-how and/or privilege want to do the honours?

==Coke ratio?==
Has the "3 for 1" coke ratio been tested with the new version yet? I have been trying to create coke from bituminous coal in my current fortress since there is no wood... I've created one coke from one tower-cap wood purchased from the dwarven caravan, then wanted to start out metal production with the mass produced coke from the coal... But whenever my furnace operator take one bituminous coal to the smelter, it only result in one coke. Normally there should be a net gain of two coke for each smelting, no? --[[User:Eagle of Fire|Eagle of Fire]] 22:55, 10 November 2007 (EST)

:[[http://www.bay12games.com/cgi-local/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=001388]] Seems like a great case of someone just copying from the old wiki without checking first... -_- --[[User:Eagle of Fire|Eagle of Fire]] 23:13, 10 November 2007 (EST)
::Well, scratch that. My meticulous side forced me to triple check everything, and I finnaly noticed that I somehow didn't know there was a new version out already... I'm still using 32a. -_- I'm sorry for that... At least in the process I learned a thing or two on how formats and templates... Time to generate a new world!--[[User:Eagle of Fire|Eagle of Fire]] 23:50, 10 November 2007 (EST)
:::The 3 for 1 is taken from the reaction_stadard.txt raw. It should also hold for 32a [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 01:14, 11 November 2007 (EST)
::::There's a bug in 32a so that smelting coal ore only resulted in one coal, which naturally would be used in smelting the next chunk of coal ore. It's fixed for 33a. --[[User:WyldKarde|WyldKarde]] 01:47, 11 November 2007 (EST)
:::::I can confirm there was a bug in 32a. Since the fortress I now created have ample wood supply, I probably won't be able to confirm that the coal bug been fixed but I guess the countless other people who already tested it at the beginning of november are a voice to be reckoned with. I just can't beleive that Toady got a new version out so fast and that I was so busy IRL that I didn't even notice, nor did I see people talk about it in DF threads... Strange. --[[User:Eagle of Fire|Eagle of Fire]] 02:08, 11 November 2007 (EST)

== '''Must have coal fuel''' ==

I have surrounded a [[smelter]] with Bituminous coal.

When I try to add a task to the smelter I get the message:
''Must have coal fuel''.

What am I missing here?
Thanks,[[User:GarrieIrons|GarrieIrons]] 08:46, 8 January 2008 (EST)

:In order to be able to start, you need one fuel unit. Which is usually coal. --[[User:Eagle of Fire|Eagle of Fire]] 08:59, 8 January 2008 (EST)

::Oh. Well that's me totally screwed then! Here I was thinking my 30+ units of bituminous coal would get me started with producing some pig iron or something.
::Back to the prospecting I guess! Is coal usually close to bituminous coal or what?[[User:GarrieIrons|GarrieIrons]] 09:25, 8 January 2008 (EST)
:::Don't you just need to turn the Bituminous Coal into coke by smelting that, it needs a fuel to do as well mind you, unless you have a magma furnace. To get your first unit of coke turn wood into charcoal in a wood burner, then you can turn your coal into three bituminous coke. (This is from memory, it's been a while since I've played, don't ask why) --09:41, 8 January 2008 (EST)
:::—Preceding [[template:unsigned|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:shades|shades]] ([[User talk:shades|talk]]•[[Special:Contributions/shades|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}
::::Opps must have missed a ~ --[[User:Shades|Shades]] 18:00, 8 January 2008 (EST)

:[[Bituminous coal]] is not [[fuel]]. It is a material used to produce coke, which is a type of fuel. The act of creating fuel from bituminous coal takes fuel. Does that clear this up? [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 10:47, 8 January 2008 (EST)

== It's not showing up on the task list ==

I've got bituminous coal in one stockpile and charcoal in another. I'm at the smelter, and I hit A to add a task. "Burn bituminous coal" doesn't show up. Other smelting tasks do, and they use materials from the same stockpile that the bituminous coal is in. What the hell?[[User:LogicalDash|LogicalDash]] 18:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

40d Talk:Bituminous coal

2009-04-30T16:02:22Z

LogicalDash: /* It's not showing up on the task list */ new section

40d:Tree

2009-02-18T07:09:16Z

LogicalDash:

Across the [[world]], '''trees''' can be found littering the landscape. They are a great renewable source of [[wood]], and there are many different varieties that grow in different [[biomes]]. While [[tower cap]]s grow indoors, every other variety occurs only outdoors.

''Trees'' are a type of [[map tile]], not [[construction]]s, similar to solid [[rock]] or [[bush]]es. They must be designated for removal from the [[designations|{{Key|d}}esignations menu]] chop {{k|t}}rees, which will instruct [[dwarves]] with the [[woodcutter]] skill to grab an [[axe]] and begin chopping down the tree.

Trees grow from saplings, which start growing randomly on tiles of a suitable biome. Saplings can be destroyed by heavy [[traffic]]. To grow from a sapling to a tree takes about a year and a half.

Trees viewed from one tile above look like coloured [[stone]] [[block]]s floating in the air. Also, deciduous trees will change colour to red or yellow in [[autumn]], and lose their leaves in [[winter]]: {{tile|╞|#770}}.

Trees also gain names near [[elf|elven]] settlements. Although it is unclear what effect this has on gameplay, if any at all.

Trees ''will not'' as of yet be destroyed by [[magma]] or [[fire]] (nor will [[water]] damage them in any way).
Saplings can 'drown' in water and magma, though.

== List of Trees ==

{| {{prettytable}}
|- style="background:#ddd"
! Tree Name
! Habitat !! Tile !! Alignment !! Density !! Deciduous
|-
! id="mangrove"|Mangrove
| Mangrove Swamp (Wet) || {{tile|♣|green|black}} || All || Default (500) || No
|-
! id="saguaro"|Saguaro
| Any Desert (Dry) || {{tile|╞|green|black}} || All || Default || No
|-
! id="pine"|Pine
| Taiga Forest (Dry) Temperate Conifer Forest Tropical Conifer Forest || {{tile|↑|green|black}} || All || 560 || No
|-
! id="cedar"|Cedar
| Temperate Conifer Forest (Dry) Tropical Conifer Forest || {{tile|↨|green|black}} || All || 380 || No
|-
! id="oak"|Oak
| Any Temperate Broadleaf Forest (Dry) || {{tile|♠|green|black}} || All || 700 || Yes
|-
! id="mahogany"|Mahogany
| Any Tropical Forest (Dry) || {{tile|♠|green|black}} || All || 600 || No
|-
! id="acacia"|Acacia
| Tropical Dry Broadleaf Forest (Dry) Tropical Grassland Tropical Savanna Tropical Shrubland || {{tile|♣|green|black}} || All || Default || No
|-
! id="kapok"|Kapok
| Tropical Moist Broadleaf Forest (Dry) || {{tile|Γ|green|black}} || All || Default || No
|-
! id="maple"|Maple
| Temperate Broadleaf Forest (Dry) Temperate Grassland Temperate Savanna Temperate Shrubland || {{tile|♣|green|black}} || All || 755 || Yes
|-
! id="willow"|Willow
| Any Temperate (Wet) Any Tropical Forest Tropical Grassland Tropical Savanna Tropical Shrubland Tropical Freshwater Swamp Tropical Saltwater Swamp Tropical Freshwater Marsh Tropical Saltwater Marsh || {{tile|⌠|green|black}} || All || 420 || No
|-
! id="tower-cap"|[[Tower-cap]]
| Subterranean Water (Wet)(Dry) || {{tile|♣|green|black}} || All || 600 || No
|-
! id="glumprong"|Glumprong
| Not Freezing (Dry) || {{tile|┤|green|black}} || Evil || 1200 || No
|-
! id="feathertree"|Feather tree
| Not Freezing (Dry) || {{tile|♣|green|black}} || Good || 100 || No
|-
! id="highwood"|Highwood
| Not Freezing (Dry) || {{tile|¶|green|black}} || Savage || 500 || No
|-
! id="larch"|Larch
| Taiga Forest (Dry) Temperate Conifer Forest || {{tile|↑|green|black}} || All || 590 || Yes
|-
! id="chestnut"|Chestnut
| Any Temperate Broadleaf Forest (Dry) || {{tile|♠|green|black}} || All || 500 || Yes
|-
! id="alder"|Alder
| Any Temperate Broadleaf Forest (Dry) || {{tile|♣|green|black}} || All || 410 || Yes
|-
! id="birch"|Birch
| Any Temperate Broadleaf Forest (Dry) || {{tile|♣|green|black}} || All || 670 || Yes
|-
! id="ashtree"|Ash
| Any Temperate Broadleaf Forest (Dry) || {{tile|♠|green|black}} || All || 620 || Yes
|-
! id="candlenut"|Candlenut
| Any Tropical Forest (Dry) || {{tile|Γ|green|black}} || All || Default || No
|-
! id="mangotree"|Mango tree
| Any Tropical Forest (Dry) || {{tile|Γ|green|black}} || All || Default || No
|-
! id="rubbertree"|Rubber tree
| Tropical Moist Broadleaf Forest (Dry) || {{tile|Γ|green|black}} || All || Default || No
|-
! id="cacaotree"|Cacao tree
| Tropical Moist Broadleaf Forest (Dry) || {{tile|Γ|green|black}} || All || Default || No
|-
! id="palm"|Palm
| Any Tropical (Dry) || {{tile|Γ|green|black}} || All || Default || No
|}

[[Category:Map tiles]][[Category:Trees]]

40d:Exploit

2008-11-17T22:07:43Z

LogicalDash:

An '''exploit''' is a quirk of a game that allows players to gain what other players may consider an unfair advantage, usually by making use of a feature that is not working properly or which defies logic. 'Exploiting the game' is distinct from '[[cheating]]' because exploits occur within the game as written and do not need any external [[utilities]] or [[modding]]. Whether a player chooses to make use of an exploit or not depends on their personal taste; given that [[Dwarf Fortress]] is a single-player game, the user alone can decide what liberties to take and what options to shun.

Some exploits are listed below.

== Self-powered pumps ==

It is possible to produce a perpetual motion water pump where the act of pumping actually powers itself! See [[screw pump]] and [[water wheel]] for details.

== Atom Smasher ==

A [[drawbridge]], when rapidly triggered on and off, can be used to obliterate any creature or item beneath it. Nothing short of a [[demon]] or [[megabeast]] is capable of withstanding a drawbridge crush.

== Trap fields ==

Laying a field of [[trap]]s with a significant-enough depth can protect your fortress from all invaders with no need to maintain a [[military]]. Traps are somehow intelligent enough to distinguish between [[pet]]s and allies while being dangerous to enemies and wild animals.

Many players do not consider this an exploit.

== Get back to work! ==

When a dwarf is "On Break", it is possible to draft this civilian into the military and then undraft the civilian in order to get him to cancel the break. This does give an unhappy [[thought]] (but only if the dwarf has no military and/or civilian skills), so it is not a significant exploit and some may consider it a perfectly acceptable gameplay method.

== Quantum stockpiles ==

By designating a garbage pit [[zone]] instead of a [[stockpile]], you may store an infinite number of objects in a single tile by dumping them, then reclaiming them when you want to use them.

A similar effect may be achieved by building a wall two tiles in front of a catapult and digging a channel between the wall and catapult. By firing the catapult at the wall, the stone falls into the trench. The stone will pile up in the channel, putting it out of sight and out of mind. Not only does this train [[siege operator]]s, but it clears the stone that your legendary [[miner]]s leave.

== Cooking alcohol ==

[[Alcohol]] can be cooked without requiring many other ingredients, producing solid food that is eaten and not imbibed. Doing so is a highly efficient means of producing food, as each plant produces five units of alcohol.

Though undeniably an exploit, many people make use of this feature. It will eventually be plugged with [http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev_req_101-150.html Req129]:
<blockquote>Req129, IMPROVE COOKING, (Future): More food. Food should require a substrate, rather than just being seeds etc. Seeds, syrups, drinks and other such objects can contribute to the likes/dislike checks as they do now, but they shouldn't add to the number created. A good roll could lead to the recipe being given a name and saved to the entity definition, where it can then be encountered in other cities in subsequent games.</blockquote>

==Bling Bolts==

Adding a [[decoration]] to a stack of [[bolt]]s causes a huge [[value]] increase. The value of the decoration is multiplied by the number of bolts in the stack. This is considered a [[bug]].

==Bookkeeper Exercise Program==

Changing your [[bookkeeper]]'s settings to maximum accuracy causes him to work furiously in his office, training quickly up to [[legendary]].

==Nudist Fortress==

Dwarves get a bad [[thought]] from having [[clothing]] [[wear]] out, but nothing happens if they can't find replacement clothes. As long as you don't make new clothes, they will happily go naked. This also avoids the problem of messy dwarves leaving clothing strewn around the fortress.

==Recycling Archery Range==

In an [[archery range]], [[bolt]]s that hit the target are are always destroyed, but bolts that miss can be saved. Build a [[channel]] between the [[archery target]] and the back wall of the range, and [[stairs]] to get into it. Amazingly, the bolts will no longer shatter on impact with the wall, but fall intact into the channel. Reclaim the bolts, and your dwarves will re-use them for target practice. This exploit has the unfortunate side effect of splitting up [[stack]]s of bolts, so your dwarves will make a separate trip for each individual bolt.

This trick will work for a [[ballista]] as well. Be careful for friendly fire.

==Merchant Swindles==

There are a variety of ways to cheat [[merchant]]s out of their cargo without seizing it. Tearing down the [[trade depot]] while the merchants are there is the easiest way.

Also, marking items for [[dump]]ing, using view creature mode ({{key|v}}), the stocks menu ({{key|z}}), or items in room mode ({{key|t}}), lets you relieve merchants of their goods. Just reclaim the items from your garbage dump [[zone]] later. You can even take clothing and equipment off merchant and guards this way.

The merchants will still leave disappointed if they have less value in goods when they leave the map than when they entered {{verify}}.

== The Castle of Ice in the Lake of Fire ==

[[Construction]]s are indestructible, regardless of material, and walls of wood and ice easily stand up to [[magma]]. Entire fortresses can be built of ice in temperate climates equally impervious to catapults, the summer sun, or a thousand tons of boiling lava.

On a similar note, all buildings and furniture are equally strong - indestructible to most creatures, nothing at all to others. Witness a single troll bashing through a multilayered set of [[adamantine]] and [[steel]] doors, while an army of Hammergoblins are stymied by a [[glass]] [[portal]].

40d Talk:Brook

2008-11-05T09:08:10Z

LogicalDash: /* What the hell? */

===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)

40d Talk:Brook

2008-11-05T09:07:52Z

LogicalDash: /* What the hell? */

===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)

40d Talk:Brook

2008-11-05T03:51:48Z

LogicalDash: What the hell?