View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0005778Dwarf FortressCreaturespublic2012-04-06 07:20
ReporterSyndic Assigned Touser6 
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityalways
Status resolvedResolutionno change required 
PlatformPCOSWindowsOS VersionXP Pro
Product Version0.34.07 
Summary0005778: Animals grow too fast OR butchery doesn't take actual creature size into account
DescriptionIf I'm not mistaken, the raw entries (taken from monitor lizard) are to be read as follows:

[CHILD:1] counts as a child until it reaches 1 year in age

[BODY_SIZE:0:0:60] is born as size 60
[BODY_SIZE:1:0:50000] jumps to size 50000 at age 1
[BODY_SIZE:2:0:100000] jumps to size 100000 at age 2

Now I set up a breeding program for monitor lizards, and butchered the hatchlings that weren't gigantic and muscular as fast as I could. a size 60 animal shouldn't be able to produce any meat AFAIK, and yet I got 6 meat from a few, and 12 from most of them. All of them were butchered while still hatchlings, meaning less than 1 year old. Waiting for three years (just to make sure they're fully grown) and butchering a few adults then led to 12 meat too, no difference between the (supposedly) size 100.000 to the (supposedly) size 60 ones I butchered earlier.

My guess is that the game either calculates the body_size entries as months instead of years or that butchery doesn't take the current creature size into account, leaning towards the first because the 6 meat results were from the first few I butchered and I didn't get any stacks of 6 meat at all later on.
Steps To Reproduceget a baby animal that's considerably smaller than the adult version, butcher a baby and an adult.
Additional InformationI had been suspicious of this for a while when most puppies already gave the same amount of meat as full-grown dogs, but with the monitor lizards' size 60 hatchlings it finally became obvious that something was wrong and I didn't just get more or less returns due to different attributes.
TagsNo tags attached.

Activities

user6

2012-04-06 07:20

  ~0022121

If I'm not mistaken, the raw entries (taken from monitor lizard) are to be read as follows:

Nope. It interpolates between those points, plus there's individual variation. I'm resolving this report due to the flawed assumptions. Any bugs here are probably already covered by 0003357 and 0003993:0016775.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2012-04-06 04:32 Syndic New Issue
2012-04-06 07:20 user6 Note Added: 0022121
2012-04-06 07:20 user6 Status new => resolved
2012-04-06 07:20 user6 Resolution open => no change required
2012-04-06 07:20 user6 Assigned To => user6