0008091: Conflict between seed caps - Dwarf Fortress Bug Tracker

Notes
(0029374) Footkerchief (manager) 2014-08-20 12:58	Even if this were confirmed behavior and not a hypothesis, it seems like an intrinsic, intentional limitation of the seed cap, which is a placeholder feature. The potential fixes seem like suggestions.

(0029433) Loci (manager) 2014-08-21 12:40	I don't think you understand the issue. Consider these three scenarios: Scenario 1: 200 sweet pod seeds at the beginning of year 1 fortress produces 2000 new seeds during year 1 fortress produces 2000 new seeds during year 2 0 sweet pod seeds at the end of year 2 This scenario works as intended; seeds which remain unused will disappear. Scenario 2: 200 sweet pod seeds at the beginning of year 1 fortress produces 2000 new seeds during year 1 fortress plants 10 sweet pod seeds, harvests 40 sweet pods, and produces 10 new sweet pod seeds fortress produces 2000 new seeds during year 2 10 sweet pod seeds at the end of year 2 This scenario mostly works as intended, though the precipitous drop from 200 to 10 sweet pod seeds is less than ideal. If this were the only problem it might be acceptable. Scenario 3: 220 sweet pod seeds at the beginning of year 1 fortress produces 2000 new seeds during year 1 fortress plants 10 sweet pod seeds, harvests 40 sweet pods, and produces 0 new sweet pod seeds fortress produces 2000 new seeds during year 2 0 sweet pod seeds at the end of year 2 This scenario emphasizes the buggy behavior I am reporting. Starting with MORE seeds causes the fortress to end up with FEWER, and in some cases NONE, because of the conflict between the two seed caps. Note this was an actively planted crop, which from all appearances was amply stockpiled right up until all the old seeds expired at approximately the same time (since no new seeds were being generated). As far as "potential fixes" go, I think the way to handle this would be to make the per-plant seed cap behave similarly to the fortress-wide seed cap. When the per-plant cap is reached, instead of producing no seeds jobs would produce new seeds and automatically remove the oldest unplanted seeds of the same type. That way as long as a fortress is actively planting a crop its seed supply will be continually refreshed and safe from mass expiration. Also, I can find no reference of the seed cap being a "placeholder feature"; care to cite your source?

(0029434) Footkerchief (manager) 2014-08-21 12:43 edited on: 2014-08-21 12:46	Has anyone empirically confirmed Scenario 3? Toady's post here suggests that the limits will be more dynamic in the future: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=100851.msg5326971#msg5326971 [^]

(0029440) Loci (manager) 2014-08-21 13:03	Yes. The problematic behavior is confirmed in 40.09. I read that statement as suggesting that the fortress-wide seed cap is the dynamic limit that Toady is experimenting with, not a placeholder feature for a future dynamic limit.

(0031258) TBeholder (reporter) 2014-12-04 11:49 edited on: 2014-12-04 11:57	Either way, since seeds got both total cap and FIFO expiration, it would be nice if the oldest seeds were dropped on appearance of new ones, rather than newest not produced - which is what leaves dwarves holding the bag. Yes, lower limit per plant for seed removal would be nice, too. Perhaps simply (global cap)/(number of plant species) rounded up would do well enough for now?

Issue History
Date Modified	Username	Field	Change
2014-08-20 12:50	Loci	New Issue
2014-08-20 12:58	Footkerchief	Note Added: 0029374
2014-08-20 12:58	Footkerchief	Status	new => resolved
2014-08-20 12:58	Footkerchief	Resolution	open => no change required
2014-08-20 12:58	Footkerchief	Assigned To	=> Footkerchief
2014-08-21 12:40	Loci	Note Added: 0029433
2014-08-21 12:40	Loci	Status	resolved => needs feedback
2014-08-21 12:40	Loci	Resolution	no change required => reopened
2014-08-21 12:43	Footkerchief	Note Added: 0029434
2014-08-21 12:46	Footkerchief	Note Edited: 0029434	View Revisions
2014-08-21 13:03	Loci	Note Added: 0029440
2014-08-21 13:03	Loci	Status	needs feedback => assigned
2014-12-04 11:49	TBeholder	Note Added: 0031258
2014-12-04 11:57	TBeholder	Note Edited: 0031258	View Revisions
2015-01-24 14:45	Footkerchief	Relationship added	related to 0007869
2016-07-07 07:04	Loci	Summary	Potential conflict between seed caps => Conflict between seed caps