Suggestion for stockpiles that should solve a few problems.

[Walker]

This is why I don't like the use of the word 'intuitive'. It often just means 'what I expect'.

I have to agree with Burningpet in that it isn't how I would have expected it to work
...
To me the stockpile UI represents a statement of your intent in what should be stored in that stockpile, and when you mark an item not to be stored in a stockpile, you don't expect your intent to be ignored and for it to continue to be stored.

Whereas, I expected the 'accept' to refer to future activities, and I still think that is a natural expectation. A stockpile is, in my mind, for storing things. It seems very desirable to be able to say: "Okay, we have enough of that item, take the rest someplace else" rather than being forced to choose between them either being constantly carted in, or constantly carted out.

Individual expectations are clearly not a good basis for choosing between the two, though, as they seem split. I would argue, however, that the current system with accept/hold is superior to accept/remove, as it supports use cases accept/remove doesn't, while accept/remove doesn't add any functionality that can't already be accomplished with the current system.

I do agree that any solution might as well go the full way towards having logistical chains between stockpiles (moving food out to outposts, bring resources towards where they are consumed) if that can at all be managed cleanly (what is that, four states? Accept, Accept and Export, Hold and Remove?).

Of course, a system that supports all three plus redistribution would be superior to both, provided it wasn't too clunky or confusing.

[Walker]

So then why are you forced to enter a number of sacks to save if unfilled sacks are simply for storage,

You appear to be confused. The number isn't for the sacks to save, it is a limit to how many sacks will be accepted in that stockpile at any given time. If you want to fill the stockpile, set a number equal to, or greater than, available space.

The reason the quotas are there is to make it easier to distribute containers between multiple stockpiles. The system isn't entirely clear at first sight, but once learned it does make life easier compared to previous versions.

(When the limits were first introduced, "0" meant infinite, but based on user feedback it was changed so "0" means "0".)

and why does the system treat sacks differently than everything else (in a very unintuitive way)?

It doesn't intentionally treat sacks different from other containers. It treats filled containers differently from other items because of their role as containers.

Does the number stop the sacks from being released? (Is the answer obvious?)

No. (The answer isn't entirely obvious, and the game is currently poorly documented. So, it's trial and error or asking somebody.)

Also, why can't you pre-store crates? You pre-store Every Other Item in the Damn Game, but containers--no (Well, maybe you can if you set the number to keep and just write ten (or at least one) of them off (What the hell? How random is that).

I don't understand what you mean by "pre-store". Also, there is no "number to keep".

Between this and the obvious need to transfer items between stockpiles, it's a problem.

What is this obvious need to transfer items between stockpiles?

My solution was clean, elegant and simple,

It was none of these things.

In fact, it's simpler than the existing UI for containers (Because it eliminates that stupid link between enabling a pile and "keeping" some in it, clarifying what it does),

There is no "keeping" some in it. I don't know why you imagine there is.

[thealien666]

Between this and the obvious need to transfer items between stockpiles, it's a problem.

What is this obvious need to transfer items between stockpiles?

You have an extension of your camp (iron bog collection, clay + charcoal factory), but you want food in this extension without having to farm there.
Easiest would be to transfer some food from existing stockpiles...

[kvzp]

About distribution of the items in the stockpiles : "make it goblinish."

Randomize it, with maybe some reduction in chances the farthest the delivery is.. For more fun factor, you may even consider using the goblin's traits as a way to have them favor in long distances or short distances hauls ? ("the Strong", "the Fearless", and why not the "the Traveler").

This way, it makes everybody happy, long distance distribution happens.. sometimes...
That's pretty much how a goblin would handle this, anyway.

[Mike-al]

About distribution of the items in the stockpiles : "make it goblinish."

I'd say the new stockpile system has pretty much achieved this, making this discussion somewhat moot. Personally, I feel the idea of "sub-camps" is a little too fiddly.