v0.31 Talk:Item value

Clothing value

Clothing value seems to be almost random, apparently calculated based on the actual properties of the item. For example, a shirt has value 22 and a tunic has value 16, while the only actual difference between them is that a shirt has UBSTEP:MAX and LBSTEP:0 while a tunic has UBSTEP:0 and LBSTEP:1. --Quietust 18:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I think the intrinsic value for different items got reworked along with the weight calculations. We will need original research to correlate the value calculations I am afraid. What were you examples made of and what was there anything else interesting about them? Such as quality or decorations? --PencilinHand 04:39, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Trade multiplier

Is it ( ((base item cost X material multiplier) + decoration) X trade multiplier )

or just ( (trade multiplier X base item cost X material multiplier) + decorations )

iow, if the Outpost Liason Officer offers you 200% on tables, does encrusting the tables effectively double the price of the gems, or just the table?

It seems to me that the answer is yes, the decoration value is also multiplied. I had (thanks to an unfortunate accident involving traders) a diamond-encrusted poor metal weapon with ~200% markup, reporting a "basic value" of 3k+, and the trader was offering me 6k+. However I can't be completely sure, since the reported "basic value" of an item seems to only have a loose relationship with the actual trade value. At one point I was offered a good (180-ish or so) markup on bodywear, so I spent the year whipping up and decorating a load of cloaks and robes, etc. The actual trade values were up to 3 or 4 times the reported "basic value"; other no-premium (mainly cloth, IIRC?) items had lesser values, but still well over the "basic values". 202.156.10.234 00:16, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Bones, etc.

Do different animals' or creatures' bones carry different values for crafts and decorations, or are they all the same value? Also, what is that value?

Different. See the "Animals" part of the "Material multipliers" section; a beak dog (x2) earring is worth twice what a puppy bone earring of identical quality is worth. More dangerous critters, bigger multipliers, generally. (However, as far as I have seen, an earring made from the bones of the forgotten beast which just chewed up half your dwarves gets no bonus - it's worth no more than the puppy bone earring.. presumably because FBs are (now) auto-generated, so its level of danger/deadliness is harder to evaluate up-front) 202.156.10.234 00:16, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

HAH! Base item value formula discovered

Well this is rather funny. Someone on the forums just noticed that base item values is a function of Item size. Specifically, (size rounded down to nearest 50)/25 + 2. So a battle axe size 800 is (800)/25 + 2 = 34. The exceptions being trap components which seem to have bugged out. This size formula also accounts for the odd differences in clothing values. Greep 10:48, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Hmm this actually is not correct nevermind for all items nevermind. However, (size rounded down to nearest 50)/25 + 2 works consistently for changing an axe's size in the raws. At 200 size a battle axe is value'd at 10 e.g. Other items are also size dependent but it looks like they have different formulas based on their size. The importance of this is of course that item values are now completely moddable. And likely we are only missing one variable for the formula Greep 10:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Values for items are determined as follows:

• Weapon: 10 if it's a ranged weapon; otherwise, ((SIZE / 50) + 1) * (HAS_EDGE + 1)
• Trap component: ((SIZE / 50) + 1) * (HAS_EDGE + 1) * HITS

? Armor: ((UBSTEP[3] + LBSTEP[3]) * 3) + (LAYER_SIZE[100] / 5) + (COVERAGE[100] / 10) + 1

• Ammo: (SIZE / 200) + 1
• Gloves/Shoes: (UPSTEP[3] * 3) + (LAYER_SIZE[100] / 5) + (COVERAGE[100] / 30) + 1
• Shield: (UPSTEP[3] * 3) + BLOCKCHANCE[100] + 1
• Helm: (LAYER_SIZE[100] / 5) + (COVERAGE[100] / 20) + 1
• Pants: (LBSTEP[3] * 3) + (LAYER_SIZE[100] / 5) + (COVERAGE[100] / 10) + 1

For the above, numbers in brackets indicate maximum values (e.g. if something has [COVERAGE:150], it'll use 100 instead), and all divisions are rounded down. --Quietust 18:59, 30 December 2011 (UTC)