Suggestion for stockpiles that should solve a few problems.

[Noah]

Stockpiles are somewhat difficult to control in detail but they work great right now from an overview standpoint.

So to make them more flexible for the times you need it without sacrificing simplicity I suggest a number available for each item type in a stockpile (like there is with containers).

They would be optional and generally wouldn't be used, but if you assigned a number it would be added to the number in the main manager window--so if you had 100 wood set in your manager window and made a new stockpile and specified 20 wood in that stockpile, the total would be 120 wood.

It would also start moving wood to this pile from other piles as a low priority task (if anything else wanted to actually use the wood it would take priority, but all new wood delivery would prefer this stockpile until it reached 20 wood and idle goblins might just steal from other stockpiles to fill the new one's quota)

This allows you to play in quite a few different ways and solve various problems:

- You could use everything the same way it's used now.
- You could create a special stockpile for each item and never use the manager window at all.
- If you wanted to change a full stockpile to another item you could create a new stockpile that wanted that item, they would be moved over when the goblins had nothing better to do.
- If you wanted a temporary stockpile (for instance to create a fence) you would create a pile demanding 100 wood, the extra wood would be created and delivered, deleting the pile would reduce the wood requirement back to what it was.
Sacks could work exactly the same way (Consistency!)

It might be a good idea for the current allow/disallow choice to mean to allow "infinite/exactly" the number instead of allow/disallow. this would still work the way it works now (Exactly 0 is still disallow, infinite is still allow) but it would also give you the ability to "Cap" an item count in a shared pile. So if you specify "Exactly 20" it would try to keep it at 20 (Since this is a lowest priority task it wouldn't really cause thrashing..), but you could also have it checked and specify 20, this would mean that you want at least 20 of the item but you would accept extra. This would work really well for containers, keeping exactly the number you want in one stockpile, but allowing another to hold extra for distribution.

Finally (Sorry to throw this at the bottom of a long post)--are containers broken in 1.4.1? I think I read that I should be able to select that I want to store sacks but specify 0 for "Unlimited" in order to store the item for use elsewhere instead of as a container, but when I select any container it immediately sets the number to keep at 10--if I set the number back down to 0 it deselects it. Makes it really difficult to work with containers as a supply item (Sacks to use for flower).

[Mike-al]

They would be optional and generally wouldn't be used, but if you assigned a number it would be added to the number in the main manager window--so if you had 100 wood set in your manager window and made a new stockpile and specified 20 wood in that stockpile, the total would be 120 wood.

This would just make things hideously confusing. Why would the overall stock manager number change?

- You could create a special stockpile for each item and never use the manager window at all.

Given that the stock manager is pretty much intended to be the key interface of the game, this wouldn't be desirable at all.

Overall, to me this sounds too micro-managey and confusing.

[AndrewR]

I haven't seen a post of yours before Noah, so welcome to the forum!

I was confused by most of the post, and most of the points that didn't confuse me seemed unnecessary to me.

One thing that I did think was interesting was any mechanic that allows a certain stockpiles to be preferred over others. I would like to make a wood stockpile that was near the woodcutting, and stuff would be brought to first. However, it would be interesting if there was a stockpile further near the saw pit that goblins would move logs to from the further out stockpiles as a lower priority task. THIS is the most interesting idea I liked in this post.

[Noah]

Sorry I was confusing--I have this tendency to ramble--simply put treat everything in stockpiles the way very close to the way containers are currently handled.

One difference I'd suggest is that when adding a number of items to a stockpile, it should add that number to the main manager panel--sum them up with a display like: 4(3) in the main panel if you've requested 4 in the main manager and 3 in stockpiles. I'd suggest this anyway for containers even if you don't do anything else because it seems like every time you add a container to a stockpile you have to remember to jump right over and add it to the inventory manager.

Beyond that it was just clarifications and kind of thinking out loud--
- prefer any stockpile below it's count over one that just allows that item
- use a low priority task any time you transfer between stockpiles so they don't thrash
- in a stockpile an unselected item means store "exactly" that number
- a selected item means to store the set number or more.

I suppose my observation was confusing--that since the number to store defaults to 0 it stores exactly 0 for unselected items, and for selected you store 0 or more. SInce that makes it identical to the way stockpiles it works now, the interface could be hidden ("Advanced" setting?) so there would be no added complexity until you needed it.

Hopefully that's more clear--put the rest down to late-night ramblings.

[Maklak]

Uhm. This suggestion is hard to follow, and I generally disagree with it, but it seems to make a few good points. Hopefully my comment will be less confusing.

I find it simpler to just make small specialized stockpiles rather than bigger ones, that accept many categories of items. Making several custom stockpiles rather than one with item caps seems to be about as much work. The biggest downside I see to this method is that in a big stockpile you can set quotas which sum is bigger than the stockpile size, so you could save space as long, as you don't overflow many allowed items at once. (If what I wanted to say is not clear, consider how quota on shared disk space works in UNIX - sum of quotas for all users can be bigger than disk size, and it works as long as too many users don't use up too much of their allowed disk space at once.)

While I agree, that keeping track of the number of containers needed in stockpiles and in stock manager is annoying, I'd prefer a different method of handling it than automatic increasing of stock manager orders. Some kind of information about sum total number of containers assigned to stockpiles would be better. This very problem with managing containers has contributed to seedsplosion for me, btw. While it was safe to order more crates and baskets than I currently needed, doing that for sacks lead to empty sacks in my flour stockpile, and stopping flour consumption.

Some kind of stockpile priorities or "take from a stockpile" / "move to this stockpile" would be nice, but not that important for me. It could also have bad effects on fort efficiency without better handling of jobs first.

- You could create a special stockpile for each item and never use the manager window at all.

I agree with Mike-al on this one. Stock manager is a big part of the game. It is also preferable to have global quotas for items to setting them for different stockpiles. It is also better to have all the numbers in one place rather than trying to remember which stockpile accepted 50 metal plates.

- If you wanted to change a full stockpile to another item you could create a new stockpile that wanted that item, they would be moved over when the goblins had nothing better to do.

Goblins moving items to appropriate stockpiles as a low priority job would be good. I agree.

- If you wanted a temporary stockpile (for instance to create a fence) you would create a pile demanding 100 wood, the extra wood would be created and delivered, deleting the pile would reduce the wood requirement back to what it was.

Stockpile priorities (including taking from another stockpile if there are no items of required type outside of stockpiles) would handle this. I still prefer manual setting stock manager rather than automatic. I'd prefer some kind of info on maximum number items of selected type, that will fit in current stockpile rather than automation of stock manager.

Sacks could work exactly the same way (Consistency!)

If moving a container to/from stockpile would change quotas on seed or flour, it would lead to too much ?fun?. I'm against it even more.

Having minimum and maximum numbers for items in stockpiles could ease management somewhat, but current system of exactly selected number of containers and infinite of all other allowed items works OK. Changing it would also lead to more interface clutter, and IMO is not really worth it at this point.

0 containers means exactly this. It even makes sense. Zero is an abstract number, and I'd be surprised, if Goblins could grasp the concept of "none at all iz same az lotza". For "infinite" set the number of containers to some number obviously above stockpile size. It works fine the way it is. What I'd like instead is for stockpiles and farm plots to display their current number of tiles.

[Mike-al]

This very problem with managing containers has contributed to seedsplosion for me, btw. While it was safe to order more crates and baskets than I currently needed, doing that for sacks lead to empty sacks in my flour stockpile, and stopping flour consumption.

So in other words, ordering more sacks than you need caused problems. That's your decision, not something the game forces you to do. The fix is easy: stop producing too many sacks! If you set up your seed stockpiles the way I explained in another thread on the same topic, you shouldn't have this problem.

In all fairness, I don't see what the problem with the way containers and stockpiles behave is. Maybe I'm playing the game wrong, but I've never encountered these insuperable problems that would "make a logistics analyst cry himself to sleep" or whatever.

[Maklak]

This very problem with managing containers has contributed to seedsplosion for me, btw. While it was safe to order more crates and baskets than I currently needed, doing that for sacks lead to empty sacks in my flour stockpile, and stopping flour consumption.

So in other words, ordering more sacks than you need caused problems. That's your decision, not something the game forces you to do. The fix is easy: stop producing too many sacks! If you set up your seed stockpiles the way I explained in another thread on the same topic, you shouldn't have this problem.

I knew You would say that. I still think, the game shouldn't punish me for having some surplus sacks, tough. I've learned working stockpile management techniques by now, but would still prefer more automated handling of moving stockpiles, for example. I predict other players will bump into whatever problems started this thread, and complain.

In all fairness, I don't see what the problem with the way containers and stockpiles behave is. Maybe I'm playing the game wrong, but I've never encountered these insuperable problems that would "make a logistics analyst cry himself to sleep" or whatever.

No, You are doing what works for You, and You certainly played long enough to learn what and how to do in this game. I wouldn't say You play the game wrong, it is more that you got used to how things work, and seem to consider it good enough not to need improvements. Managing the number of containers is doable with little headache if someone almost never relocates stockpiles and keeps track of demand on containers, by adding number of containers recently allocated to a new stockpile to total container number in stock manager, like in video tutorial. Its just that less bookkeeping-inclined types might just want to make a few basic industries, play with military exterminating everything on the map. It should be less efficient, but still work.

I'm not surprised DF people get confused by this, in DF there is no fort killing downside to having a few surplus bins and barrels.

I still think, 3 tweaks would make managing stockpiles easier:
- Display size of stockpile / farm plot in tiles in stockpile / farm plot window.
- Display total number of each type of containers allowed in stockpiles
- Move items to where they belong as a low priority job.
- Even stockpile tile with an item in it can accept a container to store that item.

I believe the basis for our disagreement on many issues is this: There are some things, that make the game frustrating if not handled properly (seedslposion, building too many roads at once, ordering too much of a single type of metal item, and a few others), and proper handing of them requires workarounds. You see them as challenges to be overcome by players by learning proper management techniques. I think some of this stuff is just annoying and unfun to handle the micro-mangy way, and propose fixes to problems You don't see.

[Noah]

Not to prolong this topic but the only point of my suggestion was to balance multiple small stockpiles containing the same item--like if you have a wood stockpile and want to send some of the wood to new ones in preparation for palisades, or you want each carpenter shop to have 2 crates of planks right next to it but you want most of your planks centrally located for building duckboard.

I don't know where "One giant stockpile" entered into this--in fact my proposal would be useless in this case. I apparently have developed a complete inability to communicate a concept over this medium.

[Mike-al]

Not to prolong this topic but the only point of my suggestion was to balance multiple small stockpiles containing the same item--like if you have a wood stockpile and want to send some of the wood to new ones in preparation for palisades, or you want each carpenter shop to have 2 crates of planks right next to it but you want most of your planks centrally located for building duckboard.

Having lots of small stockpiles seems just as pointless as having few huge ones.

I knew You would say that. I still think, the game shouldn't punish me for having some surplus sacks, tough.

It's mismanagement. If the game doesn't punish mismanagement, then it sort of stops being a resource management game. That's not really so far off from saying that a racing game shouldn't punish you for driving slowly.

I've learned working stockpile management techniques by now, but would still prefer more automated handling of moving stockpiles, for example.

I don't find moving stockpiles to be so impossible, but then again, if one places stockpiles well, there's rarely any need to move them.

I predict other players will bump into whatever problems started this thread, and complain.

I don't mean to be rude, but recruiting fictional people to support your argument isn't very convincing.

No, You are doing what works for You, and You certainly played long enough to learn what and how to do in this game. I wouldn't say You play the game wrong, it is more that you got used to how things work, and seem to consider it good enough not to need improvements.

Not at all. There are a lot of things in the game that could work considerably better.

Managing the number of containers is doable with little headache if someone almost never relocates stockpiles and keeps track of demand on containers, by adding number of containers recently allocated to a new stockpile to total container number in stock manager, like in video tutorial. Its just that less bookkeeping-inclined types might just want to make a few basic industries, play with military exterminating everything on the map. It should be less efficient, but still work.

It does work. Again, I don't see why you need to relocate stockpiles, or how it can possibly be so hard to keep track of container numbers.

I'm not surprised DF people get confused by this, in DF there is no fort killing downside to having a few surplus bins and barrels.

Nor in Goblin Camp. Or would you like to explain how the "few surplus bins and barrels" kill your camp?

I still think, 3 tweaks would make managing stockpiles easier:
- Display size of stockpile / farm plot in tiles in stockpile / farm plot window.

I'm not really opposed to this, but can you not count?

- Display total number of each type of containers allowed in stockpiles

I don't see any reason why not. But I also don't see how one fails to keep track of this.

Maybe put it in the user-defined display suggested elsewhere?

- Move items to where they belong as a low priority job.

How do you define "where they belong"? If this means that unchecked items will be moved out of a stockpile, I'm not in favor of it. Say you have a stockpile with 20 clubs and some leather, and you want to keep the clubs there and store more leather. If we did this, then unchecking the clubs would mean all the clubs get moved out. What if I want to leave them there?

- Even stockpile tile with an item in it can accept a container to store that item.

Sure, why not. Although I don't see this as a huge problem.

I believe the basis for our disagreement on many issues is this: There are some things, that make the game frustrating if not handled properly (seedslposion, building too many roads at once, ordering too much of a single type of metal item, and a few others), and proper handing of them requires workarounds.

It doesn't require workarounds at all; it requires playing the game properly. Your position seems to be that you should be able to do anything at all and everything should still work.

You see them as challenges to be overcome by players by learning proper management techniques. I think some of this stuff is just annoying and unfun to handle the micro-mangy way, and propose fixes to problems You don't see.

I'd be a lot more receptive to these ideas if you could persuade me to see the problems that you keep referring to.

[Noah]

How do you define "where they belong"? If this means that unchecked items will be moved out of a stockpile, I'm not in favor of it. Say you have a stockpile with 20 clubs and some leather, and you want to keep the clubs there and store more leather. If we did this, then unchecking the clubs would mean all the clubs get moved out. What if I want to leave them there?

First of all, why wouldn't you leave clubs checked? If you are saying you want to stop storing clubs but keep 20 there as a reserve, that's the whole point of my post--uncheck it and set the number to keep to 20. It will keep 20 there and place new ones elsewhere.

I don't know why you don't get the container issue--they are just terrible to work with. Can you explain to me how you store containers for future use--like sacks for flower? I'm at a complete loss for this one. I don't want any number "held" there, I just want a stockpile that stores nothing but empty sacks for flower or empty crates prepared for instant use when I create a new stockpile.

Honestly it seems like you should just be able to check the box, but when I do it "Holds" 10 (I don't want any kept in that stockpile). When you set it to keep 0 it deselects it. I guess I could set it to keep 1 and keep the box checked, but that's confusing.

Also, along these lines, if I want a 3x3 stockpile to hold 4 containers, How do I keep excess containers from piling up in this stockpile? I want the boxes to go to the stockpile I designate for storage.

You seem like you have played the game enough to be comfortable with the UI as it stands which is great but you should recognize that your experience will make it difficult for you to judge what actually does and doesn't make sense to someone who doesn't already understand the inner workings and quirks of the game.