Dwarf Fortress Bug Tracker - Dwarf Fortress
View Issue Details
0005462Dwarf FortressAnimal Populationspublic2012-02-26 10:592014-07-28 12:26
Toady One 
Windows SDL
0005462: Too many animal men, not enough animals?
The proportion of animal men to animals seems way too high. I'm inundated with sparrow men, hamster men, thrips men, etc.; but hardly any animals to hunt.

Granted, this may be as intended, but it just seems to be a bit much.

And I like all the varieties, not complaining about that. It's the total number that's off if anything is.
Probable Quick Fix
Issue History
2012-02-26 10:59HammerDaveNew Issue
2012-02-26 11:02FootkerchiefNote Added: 0020753
2012-02-26 11:02FootkerchiefNote Edited: 0020753bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=0020753#r7722
2012-02-26 11:02FootkerchiefTag Attached: AWAITING UPDATE
2012-04-08 04:33kentoIssue Monitored: kento
2012-10-13 04:02thrush_titanNote Added: 0023653
2012-10-13 07:40ab9rfNote Added: 0023654
2012-10-13 09:03ab9rfNote Added: 0023656
2012-10-13 09:07ab9rfNote Edited: 0023656bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=0023656#r8830
2012-10-13 10:12ab9rfNote Added: 0023657
2012-10-13 10:25ab9rfNote Edited: 0023657bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=0023657#r8832
2012-10-13 13:00kreepergrimmsNote Added: 0023658
2012-10-23 11:57arclanceIssue Monitored: arclance
2012-12-25 09:55DwarfuTag Detached: AWAITING UPDATE
2014-07-13 14:54darchitectNote Added: 0026206
2014-07-13 15:00dree12Note Added: 0026208
2014-07-13 15:01dree12Note Edited: 0026208bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=0026208#r9763
2014-07-13 15:05thvazNote Added: 0026209
2014-07-13 15:52FootkerchiefTag Attached: Probable Quick Fix
2014-07-13 16:19darchitectNote Added: 0026229
2014-07-23 14:57Daw11Note Added: 0027356
2014-07-25 15:47KirkegaardIssue Monitored: Kirkegaard
2014-07-26 14:09Toady OneStatusnew => resolved
2014-07-26 14:09Toady OneFixed in Version => Next Version
2014-07-26 14:09Toady OneResolutionopen => fixed
2014-07-26 14:09Toady OneAssigned To => Toady One
2014-07-26 14:26KirkegaardIssue End Monitor: Kirkegaard
2014-07-28 07:10FootkerchiefStatusresolved => confirmed
2014-07-28 10:37fricyNote Added: 0027788
2014-07-28 10:45thvazNote Added: 0027789
2014-07-28 10:46thvazNote Edited: 0027789bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=0027789#r10493
2014-07-28 12:15FootkerchiefNote Added: 0027797
2014-07-28 12:23Knight OtuNote Added: 0027798
2014-07-28 12:26Toady OneNote Added: 0027799
2014-07-28 12:26Toady OneStatusconfirmed => resolved

2012-02-26 11:02   
We're going to need some actual numbers. You might try looking at region population counts in Legends, etc.

2012-10-13 04:02   
Hi, since the OP never updated this with numbers I will

From legends viewer with a world I recently played:
Top 10 species, starting with the first non-vermin species:
Dingo Men: 1251530
Anchovies: 1238580
Mosquito Men: 1227470
Grasshopper Men: 1222816
Louse Men: 1221392
Tick Men: 1210967
Thrips Men: 1194660
Masked Lovebirds: 1189284
Cockatiels: 1142499
Fairies: 1118376

Beastmen populations are completely outlandish. There are at least a dozen beastmen species that individually outnumber all civilized species put together:
Goblins: 220791
Dwarves: 144009
Elves: 129967
Humans: 123798
With these kinds of numbers who cares about the civilized species? The game should be focused on the beastman races instead.

Many beastmen species outnumber their standard counterpart, and most outnumber the giant counterpart. There are, for example, nearly three times as many dingo men as actual dingos, nevermind giant dingos
Dingo Men: 1251530
Dingoes: 415109
Giant Dingoes: 338809

But really the problem here is that in biomes where these beastmen exist, they exclude other species with their unending numbers, and they are only an irritation to the player since they can't be butchered, endlessly fill cage traps and are only a bother to fight.
2012-10-13 07:40   
This is straight up an issue with the standard raws. The [POPULATION_NUMBER] and [CLUSTER_NUMBER] tags for dingo men and dingo simply call for there to be more dingo men than dingos. I haven't checked the other manimal raws, but I suspect you'll find that most of the manimals have [POPULATION_NUMBER:30:50] while most regular animals have [POPULATION_NUMBER:10:20].

If you want fewer manimals, replace the [POPULATION_NUMBER:30:50] in the raws for each of the manimals with something like [POPULATION_NUMBER:8:12] (or some other configuration that has the population numbers for the animal man variety lower than the pop numbers for the base creature).
2012-10-13 09:03   
(edited on: 2012-10-13 09:07)
I think the problem is that when Toady added the raws for the animal men he picked numbers for POPULATION based on those already extant for vermin birds, and then used those same numbers across all animal men. In addition, the [FREQUENCY] tag is not overridden by the animal man template, so crow men (and other animal persons derived from common vermin) are [FREQUENCY:100], and combined with [POPULATION:30:50] that means these "vermin" men will tend to dominate the animal population in biomes where they are permitted, because those population numbers are larger than most other animals, and few non-vermin animals have frequencies of 100.

It might be nice if the creature variation template for animal person would by default divide frequency by 5 (or even 10), but there does not appear to be a way to do that with the current raw parser. Toady would have to add that, or if it's already there tell us how to do it.

In any case, I am reminded of the giant mosquito problem in 34.01.

2012-10-13 10:12   
(edited on: 2012-10-13 10:25)
I've done some experiments in fiddling the raws, and have managed to reduce giant and manimal populations simply by modifying the animal men and giant animal variation templates. Specifically, adding
to the templates for CREATURE_VARIATION:ANIMAL_PERSON and CREATURE_VARIATION:ANIMAL_PERSON_LEGLESS, and the same thing except with FREQUENCY:10 for CREATURE_VARIATION:GIANT has salutary effects in reducing the number of animal men in the generated world. Alas, not for dingoes, because dingoes are already FREQUENCY:5 (and therefore you might actually get MORE giant dingoes with this mod).

Removing the UBIQUITOUS tag from the giant and animal men variations does wonders to reduce the swarms of mosquito men and thrips men. I think this may be more of the problem here than anything else. All of the top manimals listed in Thrush_Titan's information, except for dingo men, are "ubiquitous". The mod I tested reduced the generated populations of these creatures by 90% to 99%.

If I may make a plea to Toady here, please add a way in creature variations to multiply/divide frequency the same way you have offered a way to multiply body weight. I think that would be beneficial.

2012-10-13 13:00   
there is a way to change the raws to include butchering of animal men, along with all sentients as well, this is the fix i used to counter the abundant animal men due to me embarking on terrifying only, it gives the ability to butcher ogres and trolls as well
2014-07-13 14:54   
Still a problem for 40.02.

From a small world:
Civilized World Population

    9682 Dwarves
    4320 Humans
    1451 Elves
    32667 Goblins
    263 Kobolds

    Total: 48383

    24381 giant thrips
    39738 thrips men
    Unnumbered thrips

    6896 giant cockatiels
    13172 cockatiel men
    167653 cockatiels

    10018 giant rattlesnakes
    34010 rattlesnake men
    2370 rattlesnakes

    7829 giant hamsters
    40617 hamster men
    617366 hamsters

    56318 gigantic squids
    93216 squid men
    548124 squids

    29130 giant sperm whales
    67970 sperm whale men
    33014 sperm whales

Looks like the proportions have been fixed for some of the creatures:
    14364 giant dingoes
    17164 dingo men
    28689 dingoes

Slaves to Armok, God of Blood II: Sperm Whale Man Fortress! :D
2014-07-13 15:00   
(edited on: 2014-07-13 15:01)
I don't think we should even have half as many dingo men as dingoes. Animal men should be rare. I wouldn't mind a world with not a single dingo man as long as there are hamster men to compensate for it, or vice versa. It does not make sense to me for a half or more of the world animal population to be either half-man or much bigger than they should be.

Also, I think neutral areas should at least pass off as semi-realistic. A manimal once in a while is fine, but they should not be as common as some animals.

2014-07-13 15:05   
This is a relatively quick fix for Toady, he just have to change the raws after all.
I usually just take out all animal men out of the raws, and by deleting it manually I don't take more than 10 minutes.
2014-07-13 16:19   
I know this isn't the place for suggestions, but I'd really love it if the RNG would ONLY allow 1-3 animal men populations for each world generated. That way it's actually special when you interact with them or discover them.

The Dimensions of Wind? Famed for its Tigermen. Welcome to Thundara!
The Soul-Universe of Enchanting? Antmen and Pandamen have been fighting since the dawn of time here.

Anyway, you get my drift. Until then, I'll just delete them all so my dwarves will actually have game to hunt.
2014-07-23 14:57   
Animal men shouldn't be more than 1 every 100 normal animal. Having so much of them is annoying, they appear in every embark and ruin the immersion into the game world.
2014-07-28 10:37   
These creatures were missed in the 40.05 fixapalozza, and still have [POPULATION_NUMBER:30:50].

creature subterran:

2014-07-28 10:45   
(edited on: 2014-07-28 10:46)
These creatures are another kind of animal men. They have underground protocivilizations and are evil.

2014-07-28 12:15   
They are indeed different. fricy, are they crowding out underground animals?
Knight Otu   
2014-07-28 12:23   
They shouldn't. They're separate entity populations.
Toady One   
2014-07-28 12:26   
I went ahead and changed the raws, since there is some confusion cause by leaving it, but they are indeed a different thing. I'm not sure what the future holds for all the animal people, but we might end up moving away from these sorts of pops for the underground ones or all of them later on. Leaving it as fixed for 0.40.05 instead of .06 since the main problem fix relates to that version.