RfC: Improve discovery of multi-unit farming

[Krinkle]

When new players need food, they often go for farming.

It is a separate issue that players are not encouraged to pursue more efficient food gathering methods first (e.g. land animals, fruits, and fish). Perhaps that's something the tutorial mode can caution for.

For this thread, I'd like to focus on when someone is doing farming, to make sure they are given opportunities to learn the mechanics and understand them.

Primary points we want to communicate:

• A single farm can have multiple citizens work on it (up to five even).
• The food gathering rate will increase as you add more workers. (That is, if you want to increase gathering, one should add units, not build a whole new farm).

Secondary points:

Not in scope for this thread per se, might be okay for intermediate players only, but to keep in mind:

• Able to have an expectation of how long it will take to collect a certain amount of food.
• Able to see that female citizens are better at food gathering than infantry.
• Able to see easily which farms are "full" and which are not.
• Able to see (if they are doing these), that from berry bush, fishing boat, or hunt,  food is gathered at a higher rate than on a farm. 

Obstacles:

• Wheat icon for adding gatherer. Selecting a unit and hovering an existing farm shows the wheat icon. But unlike the Hammer and Sword cursors, I'm not sure that the Wheat icon alone explains that it is an "action" cursor that can make the unit do something. It mostly blends in with the background of the field, and even if seen, could be mistaken as meaning you can select the field itself or something.
• Hammer for number of gatherers. With a farm selected, a hammer can be seen with the numbers "1/5". The meaning of this is not clear to new players.
• Wheat or meat icon for carrying. With a farm-working unit selected, the numbers "x/20" are shown next to the meat icon. The meaning of this is not immediately clear either. For one, because unlike other gathering types, the cursor icon to perform the action did not match the resource (wheat icon vs meat icon). Using a meat icon for all food isn't bad per se, but the inconsistency around fields can be confusing. For all other resources, and all other food types we currently have consistency.
• Gathering rate vs walking distance. When closely observing a worker whilst selecting it, one might see the "x/20" go up and roughly deduce its gathering rate from that. But extrapolating that to number units on multiple farms is hard. Another factor is the walking distance. I've seen several new players (myself included), assume that the gathering animations and depositing are mainly just that - animations. And that the gathering rate is more constant internally. Even if you test it with two farms far apart and two different distances farmsteads, it's still hard to see which one is working faster (never mind the why). Also relevant here is that the number of workers (as seen from the field selection panel) goes down whenever a worker is walking to a drop site.

Have you witnessed or experienced other obstacles for beginners around gathering food from farms? Share below! 

I have a few ideas, but I'd like to hear what others think first. And perhaps some prior discussions or considerations.

Edited June 23, 2019 by Krinkle

[Nescio]

8 hours ago, Krinkle said:

The food gathering rate will increase as you add more workers. (That is, if you want to increase gathering, one should add units, not build a whole new farm).

It is actually the other way around: `template_structure_resource_field.xml` has `<DiminishingReturns>0.90</DiminishingReturns>`, which I believe means each subsequent worker is 10% less efficient than the previous, i.e. the first one 0.9^0=1, the second 0.9^1=0.9, the third 0.9^2=0.81, the fourth 0.9^3=0.729, the fifth 0.9^4=0.6561. The total of five workers on a single farm is 4.0951, i.e. 0.81902 on average. This is reflected in the tooltip: `<Tooltip>Harvest grain for food. Each subsequent gatherer works less efficiently.</Tooltip>`.

[Stan`]

8 hours ago, Krinkle said:

Wheat icon for adding gatherer.

Another icon could be made with a scythe or whatever.

[Krinkle]

4 hours ago, Nescio said:

It is actually the other way around: `template_structure_resource_field.xml` has `<DiminishingReturns>0.90</DiminishingReturns>`, which I believe means each subsequent worker is 10% less efficient than the previous, i.e. the first one 0.9^0=1, the second 0.9^1=0.9, the third 0.9^2=0.81, the fourth 0.9^3=0.729, the fifth 0.9^4=0.6561. The total of five workers on a single farm is 4.0951, i.e. 0.81902 on average. This is reflected in the tooltip: `<Tooltip>Harvest grain for food. Each subsequent gatherer works less efficiently.</Tooltip>`.

Fascinating, I had no idea! This offers a new strategy for me to expand my eco mid-to-late in the game, e.g. when one has sufficient wood and can afford the idle time of building farms.

I do think it still stands that early in the game, when given a choice between adding a second unit to a farm vs idling until you have enough wood, that one absolutely should add more units to farms. Combining this with a need to expand population continuously and the speed at which citizens are trained, one should probably only rarely start farms with with less than 4-5 workers. But, that later in the game you can comfortably take one or two units away from a field and assign them elsewhere (e.g. their own farm, or wood/minerals).

Strategies aside, I think what ultimately matters is "give opportunities to learn the mechanics and understand them". In this case, that means being able to see that adding a worker increases the throughput. But you're right that it would also be useful if they can see not only that it increases but also more precisely by how much, and perhaps develop different strategies based on that.

For example, if one were to show some kind of estimate on the selection panel for a farm, about how much its workers currently gather per minute (accounting for number of units, diminishing returns, upgrades, and expected walking distance). That could be shown as a meter / progress bar (from a narrow fill in green, to a maximum fill in red or some such, indicating that it become less efficient), with perhaps a tooltip that shows more accurate numbers and reasons for why.

@Nescio I'm unable to find this tooltip. I've got "detailed tooltips" enabled, but the tooltip only says "Current/max gatherers" on the field panel. I've clicked and hovered around a fair bit, but not discovered anywhere else that would show this information. (A23, Carthaginians). 

 

Edited June 23, 2019 by Krinkle

[Lion.Kanzen]

2 hours ago, Stan` said:

Another icon could be made with a scythe or whatever.

good idea. I saw the perfect icon somewhere.

[Nescio]

Each resource subtype (fish, fruit, grain, etc.) has its own gather animation, action icon, and gather rate. However, the automatically generated tooltips display a single food gather rate, which is the average of its subtypes; this is misleading and incorrect. Perhaps it should display individual gather rates for all resource subtypes; figuring out a way to do so without the tooltip becoming cluttered and potentially confusing is not trivial, though.

And yes, food is now represented by a meat icon; perhaps someone ought to create a new one more representative of its subtypes, e.g. including fish, fruit, grain, and meat; it should remain clear at small size, of course.

13 hours ago, Krinkle said:

Hammer for number of gatherers. With a farm selected, a hammer can be seen with the numbers "1/5". The meaning of this is not clear to new players.

A very good point. What would you think best to replace the repair hammer with, a generic gather icon (e.g. a bucket), the resource icon (e.g. food), or the subtype icon (e.g. grain)?

1 hour ago, Krinkle said:

@Nescio I'm unable to find this tooltip. I've got "detailed tooltips" enabled, but the tooltip only says "Current/max gatherers" on the field panel. I've clicked and hovered around a fair bit, but not discovered anywhere else that would show this information. (A23, Carthaginians). 

You're not mistaken, the farm field tooltip was corrected relatively recently in the devopment version (A24), see https://code.wildfiregames.com/D1803 for discussion.

[happyconcepts]

Just a few months ago, I submitted my first contribution to 0 A.D. as a patch for this issue. It was tagged "beginner" by @Imarok.

But either feature creep or no room for a newcomer like me? Idk I tried. 

So ...metaphorically speaking, and sadly too (which is why I'm expressing it) "Diminishing Returns" seems so far to describe the investment of my interest and time toward 0 A.D. in the less than four months since I came here to be a modder, mapper and FOSS contributor.

I would point out that a more sensible simulation would be to add people to work the land and improve the yield (not diminish it). But that would have been beyond the scope of this issue.

The DR mechanic is being mis-applied as a "feature" when it would be better used to sim other gameplay dynamics.

So yeah, no one else here cares about my contribution, so you probably shouldn't either?

 

 

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

27 minutes ago, happyconcepts said:

Just a few months ago, I submitted my first contribution to 0 A.D. as a patch for this issue. It was tagged "beginner" by @Imarok.

But either feature creep or no room for a newcomer like me? Idk I tried. 

So ...metaphorically speaking, and sadly too (which is why I'm expressing it) "Diminishing Returns" seems so far to describe the investment of my interest and time toward 0 A.D. in the less than four months since I came here to be a modder, mapper and FOSS contributor.

And yet this staff is able to sell itself to boasters and despise the loyal ones.

I don't deny that the new guy doesn't know. But it makes you want to move away from the main project.

I wait for @fatherbushido project... And some mods.

 

On 6/23/2019 at 5:25 PM, Nescio said:

And yes, food is now represented by a meat icon; perhaps someone ought to create a new one more representative of its subtypes, e.g. including fish, fruit, grain, and meat; it should remain clear at small size, of course.

Mini icons.?

[Stan`]

4 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

And yet this staff is able to sell itself to boasters and despise the loyal ones.

What ?

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

Just now, Stan` said:

What ?

 

It's something I smell in the air, it's a feeling about someone.

But I can't tell you Stan, I just have to see if that's true.
 

[Stan`]

Okay then.

[Guest]

41 minutes ago, happyconcepts said:

Just a few months ago, I submitted my first contribution to 0 A.D. as a patch for this issue. It was tagged "beginner" by @Imarok.

Wasn’t that committed?

[Lion.Kanzen]

41 minutes ago, happyconcepts said:

.

I would point out that a more sensible simulation would be to add people to work the land and improve the yield (not diminish it). But that would have been beyond the scope of this issue.

The DR mechanic is being mis-applied as a "feature" when it would be better used to sim other gameplay dynamics.

So yeah, no one else here cares about my contribution, so you probably shouldn't either?

 

 

 

What was your contribution or what were you planning, many of us outside the programming team didn't even know. Don't lower your arms.

[Silier]

55 minutes ago, happyconcepts said:

But either feature creep or no room for a newcomer like me? Idk I tried. 

55 minutes ago, happyconcepts said:

So yeah, no one else here cares about my contribution, so you probably shouldn't either?

It was committed so I do not know what are you talking here about. https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP22203

[Nescio]

2 hours ago, happyconcepts said:

Just a few months ago, I submitted my first contribution to 0 A.D. as a patch for this issue. It was tagged "beginner" by @Imarok.

But either feature creep or no room for a newcomer like me? Idk I tried. 

So ...metaphorically speaking, and sadly too (which is why I'm expressing it) "Diminishing Returns" seems so far to describe the investment of my interest and time toward 0 A.D. in the less than four months since I came here to be a modder, mapper and FOSS contributor.

I would point out that a more sensible simulation would be to add people to work the land and improve the yield (not diminish it). But that would have been beyond the scope of this issue.

The DR mechanic is being mis-applied as a "feature" when it would be better used to sim other gameplay dynamics.

So yeah, no one else here cares about my contribution, so you probably shouldn't either?

What exactly do you mean? Your patch ( https://code.wildfiregames.com/D1803 ) was accepted and implemented in the development version two months ago and your name is in the credits.

[Sundiata]

Spoiler

 

[happyconcepts]

On 6/26/2019 at 11:33 PM, (-_-) said:

Wasn’t that committed?

Was my contribution committed?

Nescio commented to the OP @krinkle on June 23 that (my) patch had been "submitted" so I responded to this thread, and perhaps the genuine disappointment in my voice was felt in that post. I look now at that first post and he said my patch was "submitted".

So yeah, that's a bummer feeling to face on my end. 

From the phab issue discussion it would seem that Nescio has no vocabulary deficiencies and may even be skilled with language.....so why not use "accepted" for my patch in the first place if that was the case on June 23. It would have avoided confusion and coincidentally not made a newcomer like myself feel like this repo might have been taken over by squatting trolls.

Too bad we can't discuss the OP topic here...why not? I would like to, now that you've engaged me.

Aloha

 

[feneur]

1 hour ago, happyconcepts said:

Nescio commented to the OP @krinkle on June 23 that (my) patch had been "submitted" so I responded to this thread, and perhaps the genuine disappointment in my voice was felt in that post. I look now at that first post and he said my patch was "submitted".

Not sure where you are reading that, in his post he says that the issue was corrected, but the first mention of the word submitted in this topic is by you.  

[happyconcepts]

2 hours ago, feneur said:

Not sure where you are reading that, in his post he says that the issue was corrected, but the first mention of the word submitted in this topic is by you.  

So from what ive gathered, you know this place and this repo and this crew.

So I want to underatand, are you indeed confirming that some people can evidently (and quietly) change their posts on this forum?

Because it seems to me that all you have done so far with your reply, really, is to come upon a single voice being raped by many entitled voices, and you have only jumped into line (with a smile emoji) to take your turn too.

That seems self-serving of you @feneur, or covering for your friend, as opposed to being either helpful or investigative for example. Open-minded is a concept, yes?

To be clear, with only about two posts under my belt at the time, I mirrored nescio's language in my reply on purpose. Because I didn't know the markdown for quoting.

@Krinkle perhaps my initial comment was more spot-on than I thought. Has anyone else here beside me given you the DR mechanics feedback you asked for?

 

[Rolf Dew]

This has turned into a rather confusing thread.

[feneur]

I'm really not understanding what you are looking for. What I'm seeing in this thread is someone coming to complain about something not being noticed or cared about, several months after it was cared about enough to be included in the game. And I'm certainly not seeing how people pointing to your contribution being cared about can be seen as something either entitled or rude. People did indeed display confusion and amusement at your angry comments contrasted to the reality being opposite of what you were suggesting, which might not be polite, but which certainly is understandable given how surprising they were.

People cannot edit their posts without moderators and admins being able to see it, so either you are likely to have misunderstood or just misremembered it. Either way, my main reason for commenting was that I was genuinely confused. Especially why you tried to continue making something an issue where there never was one to begin with. At least not apart from possible miscommunication or similar. Which is of course serious, but which certainly isn't going to be helped if you are looking for insults and issues.

[Guest]

Even if nescio said your patch was “submitted”, whats the issue here?

You being the author, is expected to know more about your own work.

[happyconcepts]

Disappointed that @feneur with mod rights can edit people's posts, by @Nescio in this case. Perhaps Nescio has mod rights too and can edit his own.

That would be the issue, although it's also disappointing to be ridiculed.

 

 

 

[feneur]

Not sure what I can say, but in either case I've not edited the post, nor has Nescio. I'm certainly not wanting you to feel disappointed, but I'm not going to lie just to make you feel better.

I hope you will want to keep being a part of the community around 0 A.D. and contribute to it for many years to come, but then you need to be mature enough to admit that things might be different to how you want them to be. There aren't 100s of reviewers for every patch submitted, there isn't the time to write an essay on each and every suggestion or discussion that's posted on the forums, etc etc. The team members are at least as disappointed with that as anyone else, but that doesn't change things. If you have constructive suggestions for how to improve things feel free to offer them, but just complaining about something that then turns out to be the opposite of what you claim doesn't help anyone. 

[Silier]

@happyconcepts can you stop that nonsense please ?

You should think about what you posted at first place.

On 6/27/2019 at 7:51 AM, happyconcepts said:

It was tagged "beginner" by @Imarok.

Did really ? I cannot find single word by Imarok. It was you tagging ticket with keyword beginner. (https://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/4669#no2)

 

btw all that Imarok did was he moved your ticket to the correct groups.

On 6/27/2019 at 7:51 AM, happyconcepts said:

So yeah, no one else here cares about my contribution, so you probably shouldn't either?

Do you get emails ? Or did you stop following your own patch after 5 days from last update?

 

On 6/27/2019 at 7:51 AM, happyconcepts said:

But either feature creep or no room for a newcomer like me?

Even if that change would be rejected, it is not end of the world. I changed hundreds of code, spend hours by testing and implementing and feature was not accepted. And now what.

And there is always room for newcomers. But they should take in mind or they work on something they know is wanted, or they have to be prepared it will be rejected. 

15 hours ago, happyconcepts said:

It would have avoided confusion and coincidentally not made a newcomer like myself feel like this repo might have been taken over by squatting trolls.

Do you mean this repo your patch or this forum thread. In both cases it insults me.

10 hours ago, happyconcepts said:

single voice being raped by many entitled voices

In which way ? Because we corrected you that your patch have been commited ?

15 hours ago, happyconcepts said:

so why not use "accepted" for my patch in the first place if that was the case on June 23

You could just check status of your patch you know.

10 hours ago, happyconcepts said:

Has anyone else here beside me given you the DR mechanics feedback you asked for?

Did you bother to read post before asking that question?