Can't remove stunted sapling

[firemage]

I've planted a tree a few weeks ago, and I accidentally placed my boat on top of it.
Of course it didn't grow, but now I can't chop it down anymore.

Could you remove it for me, Loftorb?

[jorb]

Hmmhmm. That would be a problem, indeed.

[kimya]

you know, that was SO cruel and heartless, you probably deserve it.

[firemage]

Damn Jorb!
Don't confuse me with your new Rorschach avatar! For a moment I thought it was just another not very helpful comment.
I live right west of RoB, forumname=charname. You can't miss it.

[jorb]

I'm not going to set a weird precedent by going in and deleting it manually. I'll make a mental note of the problem, though.

[Peter]

Would it be at all possible to either delete all stunted trees at once, or to at least force all trees to try to grow again, and then delete the stunted ones?

[jorb]

Would it be at all possible to either delete all stunted trees at once, or to at least force all trees to try to grow again, and then delete the stunted ones?

Obviously it is possible, but that behavior is at least partly there by design.

[kimya]

i suggest to change the code. cause its ridiculous that a rat stops a tree from ever growing. jorb is hereby dismissed.

[loftar]

The behavior is there for a couple of reasons:

• First of all, it has to be true that a tree cannot grow if something is in its way.
• I took it a bit further to ensure that player-grown forests cannot be too densely populated, since that should, indeed, impair tree growth. More precisely, a tree doesn't grow if there is anything else within an area three times the size of the size of the tree itself.
• It is true that it might be a bit annoying that trees stop growing just because there's a rat in its way at the time quantum when it tries to go through the very realistic atomic growth operation. However, I cannot currently think of any good way for the trees to see a difference between a rat and a house or another tree. I'm not going to increase the combinatorial complexity of the game by tagging each type of object by the otherwise useless metric of whether it stops tree growth or not.
• It can be argued that it is not entirely unreasonable that vermin not taken care of would stunt tree growth. The vermin/realism argument aside, it is not entirely unreasonable that not every tree planted would grow up to the proudest form its species can possibly reach, and the rats kind of take of that. :)

Either way, the real bug in this case is the fact that the first stage of the trees cannot be chopped down. I'll try to fix it.

[jorb]

It is true that it might be a bit annoying that trees stop growing just because there's a rat in its way at the time quantum when it tries to go through the very realistic atomic growth operation. However, I cannot currently think of any good way for the trees to see a difference between a rat and a house or another tree. I'm not going to increase the combinatorial complexity of the game by tagging each type of object by the otherwise useless metric of whether it stops tree growth or not.

I was otherwise thinking that it is perhaps best set up as lists of boolean DIM SHAREDs, one for each object type in every relation to every other. Say

Code: Select all

DIM SHARED cangrowfir-2-rat = 1
DIM SHARED cangrowfir-2-cauldron = 0
DIM SHARED cangrowfir-2-fir = 0

etc. etc. Obviously one might want specific growing conditions for each specific growth stage of the fir, but I was thinking that if one simply considers each growth stage a unique object type -- fir00, fir01, fir03 ... firNN -- then it would simply be a matter of writing.

Code: Select all

DIM SHARED cangrowfir00-2-rat = 1
DIM SHARED cangrowfir00-2-cauldron = 0
DIM SHARED cangrowfir00-2-fir00 = 0
DIM SHARED cangrowfir01-2-rat = 1
DIM SHARED cangrowfir01-2-cauldron = 0
DIM SHARED cangrowfir01-2-fir00 = 0

etc. etc.

Then each growth operation can simply check against these lists to see if its valid or not. I was furthermore thinking that it could be saved per tile. What could be saved per tile, you ask? Everything. Everything could be saved per tile.

EDIT: Furthermore, I do think that the deconstructivist critique of early feminist authors -- assuming an intersectional perspective -- indeed does reveal a thing or two about the failures of early progressive thought in integrating basic marxist understandings of dialectics into its habeas corpus, most likely due to the relative blindness to the norm-creating, and -recreating, syncretisisms so inherent to pre-industrial bourgeoisie society. The issue of global warming is really just a red herring -- a lure thrown by the pharaohs of the technocratic patriarchy -- in the ongoing (class) struggle for the complete equality of an undifferentiated chaos, so dear to us all.