View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0003462Dwarf FortressDwarf Mode -- Jobs, Itemspublic2010-11-06 08:53
ReporterSkivverus Assigned ToLogical2u  
PrioritylowSeverityminorReproducibilityhave not tried
Status resolvedResolutionduplicate 
OSWindows 7 (64-bit) 
Product Version0.31.16 
Summary0003462: Metal floodgate forging orders ignored
DescriptionSpecifically, iron floodgates. Have tried work orders via manager and via q-profile of forges; have not tried reproducing this yet with other metals.
Steps To Reproduce1. Build a metalsmith's forge or magma forge.
2. Enable all metalsmithing labors on a dwarf.
3. Add metal floodgate order to forge queue.
4. Wait.
4a. Use burrow for dwarf limited exclusively to said forge.
Additional InformationHave not done steps 2 or 4a, but did have all metalsmithing labors enabled between multiple dwarves, and was not using burrows to exclude forges; workshop profiles did not have minimums higher than dabbling at the time, either, which rules that possibility out.
TagsNo tags attached.

Relationships

duplicate of 0001294 resolvedToady One Workshop profile min/max skill level setting is off by one (from rust?) 

Activities

Logical2u

2010-10-24 00:02

manager   ~0013489

What happens if you turn off all workshop profiles? Reports say that they are currently broken.

Skivverus

2010-10-24 00:43

reporter   ~0013490

Last edited: 2010-10-24 00:49

Ah, go figure. Turns out it was a minimum-skill profile issue after all.
A bit too hasty on my end; sorry.

Although, it does bring up an interesting (if trivial) side issue: work orders that assign jobs to a workshop whose min/max skill limitations result in no dwarves being able to use it for that sort of task (I'd set the forge in question to Professional dwarves at minimum, with another forge elsewhere for dabblers; had been thinking of my weaponsmiths at the time) will result in the task just sitting there at the top of the list preventing anything else from being done at that workshop.

Logical2u

2010-11-06 08:53

manager   ~0013645

Not a problem. As for your point you mentioned in the note, I guess that's more a suggestion than a bug for now.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2010-10-23 23:39 Skivverus New Issue
2010-10-24 00:02 Logical2u Note Added: 0013489
2010-10-24 00:02 Logical2u Tag Attached: AWAITING UPDATE
2010-10-24 00:43 Skivverus Note Added: 0013490
2010-10-24 00:49 Skivverus Note Edited: 0013490
2010-11-06 08:53 Logical2u Note Added: 0013645
2010-11-06 08:53 Logical2u Relationship added duplicate of 0001294
2010-11-06 08:53 Logical2u Status new => resolved
2010-11-06 08:53 Logical2u Resolution open => duplicate
2010-11-06 08:53 Logical2u Assigned To => Logical2u
2010-11-06 08:53 Logical2u Tag Detached: AWAITING UPDATE