View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0001178Dwarf FortressLegends Mode -- Historical Figurespublic2014-09-03 10:44
Reporterslink Assigned Touser6 
PrioritylowSeverityminorReproducibilityhave not tried
Status feedbackResolutionreopened 
Product Version0.31.03 
Fixed in Version0.34.01 
Summary0001178: Immigrant Children's Birthdates Differ in Legends vs in Fortress Mode
DescriptionI have had three pairs of children come as migrants. Below is the comparision of the birthdates of the six children in legends mode (abandoned fortress to obtain) and fortress mode. They are listed by mother's custom tag. The birthdates of the parent(s) agree, but those of the children do not.

MF-1 married
legends: born 966 husband born 985 children born 1047 and 1048
in-game: born 966 husband born 985 children born 1046 and 1049

MF-2 married
legends: born 966 husband born 967 children born 1044 and 1048
in-game: born 996 husband born 967 children born 1048 and 1052

MF-3 widowed
legends: born 996 children born 1040 and 1043
in-game: born 996 children born 1048 and 1051
TagsFixed in 0.34.01?

Relationships

related to 0003752 acknowledged Child immigrant only 4 months old 
has duplicate 0003945 resolveduser6 Migrant children born in the future. 
related to 0002739 confirmeduser6 Migrant baby was born in the future / has negative age 
related to 0003272 resolvedToady One Birth month of child incorrectly displayed. 

Activities

slink

2010-04-18 17:40

reporter   ~0004147

Not exactly the same thing, or maybe it is, but I now have one couple who had a baby the same month they got married and another couple whose children were born 3 months apart.

slink

2010-06-28 10:15

reporter   ~0009251

Last edited: 2010-06-28 11:06

This continues in 0.31.08

I have screen dumps to illustrate the issue. I will arrange them tastefully and post the link.

Edit: Well, the bug area seems to be closed at the forum. I guess I will just post the links here.

Mother with four children listed in legends mode.
http://www.drislink.com/slink/dwarffortress/Mother_In_Legends.jpg
First-born son in legends mode. Note DOB given as 1051.
http://www.drislink.com/slink/dwarffortress/Son_1_In_Legends.jpg
Second-born son in legends mode. Note DOB given as 1043.
http://www.drislink.com/slink/dwarffortress/Son_2_In_Legends.jpg

Mother with four children listed in the fortress from which the legends version was obtained by abandoning a copy. First two immigrated with parents. Second two were born in the fortress.
http://www.drislink.com/slink/dwarffortress/Mother_In_Game.jpg
First-born son in game. Note DOB given as 1047.
http://www.drislink.com/slink/dwarffortress/Son_1_In_Game.jpg
Second-born son in game. Note DOB given as 1050.
http://www.drislink.com/slink/dwarffortress/Son_2_In_Game.jpg
Third born son in game. DOB agrees with legends mode.
http://www.drislink.com/slink/dwarffortress/Son_3_In_Game.jpg
Daughter in game. DOB agrees with legends mode.
http://www.drislink.com/slink/dwarffortress/Daughter_In_Game.jpg

slink

2010-06-28 13:27

reporter   ~0009266

Here is some more strangeness. The most recent four infants born in my current fortress have the following birthdates. According to the log they were all born in this season (Spring).

Current date: 24th Felsite 1056 Late Spring

Atir Kirar/01/M born 27th Limestone 1056 25 days old (DOB Early Autumn)
Erush Kirar/13/F born 7th Felsite 1056 17 days old (DOB Late Spring)
Tobul Kirar/12/F born 13th Timber 1056 11 days old (DOB Late Autumn)
Asen Rurast/07/M born 22nd Galena 1056 2 days old (DOB Late Summer)

user11

2012-01-11 16:07

  ~0019355

Last edited: 2012-01-11 16:09

This and the relations are possibly fixed per today's DevLog:

"I fixed up a few problems with migrant birthdays..."

http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/index.html#2012-01-11

JayJayForce

2014-08-21 15:54

reporter   ~0029463

With the improved pop tracking in 0.40 this should have been fixed.

Can anyone say otherwise?

Also I think the relationships are duplicates, but it's too late here for me to check them myself.

user6

2014-08-21 16:03

  ~0029464

Last edited: 2014-09-03 08:43

Thanks!

edit: given that 0002739 hasn't been fixed, this one is also in doubt.

Add Note

Note

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2010-04-14 19:50 slink New Issue
2010-04-18 17:40 slink Note Added: 0004147
2010-06-28 10:15 slink Note Added: 0009251
2010-06-28 11:05 slink Note Edited: 0009251
2010-06-28 11:06 slink Note Edited: 0009251
2010-06-28 13:27 slink Note Added: 0009266
2010-11-29 07:31 user6 Relationship added related to 0003752
2011-02-12 07:43 Logical2u Relationship added related to 0003945
2011-02-19 23:13 user11 Relationship added related to 0002739
2012-01-11 16:04 user11 Relationship added related to 0003272
2012-01-11 16:06 user11 Tag Attached: Fixed in 0.31.26?
2012-01-11 16:07 user11 Note Added: 0019355
2012-01-11 16:08 user11 Note Edited: 0019355
2012-01-11 16:09 user11 Note Edited: 0019355
2012-02-14 05:12 user6 Tag Renamed Fixed in 0.31.26? => Fixed in 0.34.01?
2014-08-21 15:54 JayJayForce Note Added: 0029463
2014-08-21 16:01 user6 Relationship replaced has duplicate 0003945
2014-08-21 16:02 user6 Relationship replaced has duplicate 0002739
2014-08-21 16:03 user6 Note Added: 0029464
2014-08-21 16:03 user6 Status new => resolved
2014-08-21 16:03 user6 Fixed in Version => 0.34.01
2014-08-21 16:03 user6 Resolution open => fixed
2014-08-21 16:03 user6 Assigned To => Toady One
2014-09-02 08:02 user6 Relationship added related to 0008221
2014-09-03 08:42 user6 Relationship replaced related to 0002739
2014-09-03 08:43 user6 Assigned To Toady One => user6
2014-09-03 08:43 user6 Status resolved => feedback
2014-09-03 08:43 user6 Resolution fixed => reopened
2014-09-03 08:43 user6 Note Edited: 0029464
2014-09-03 10:36 user6 Relationship deleted related to 0008221