Divide Weight into mass and volume

[RedKrypton]

I recently started playing some PZ and noticed that bags and especially cupboards can store way too much for their size. That then brought me onto the weight system, which seems a little odd. I know extremly long thing would not make sense in such a system, but planks and such would be carried by hand anyways.

[Drious]

  yes, and i think that the floor shoud have really more space

[RedKrypton]

yes, and i think that the floor shoud have really more space

Doesn't the floor only have 8 units and a cupboard 50? I really don't know what space bending techniques they have developed to be able to store a whole house's crap in it.

[Serrate Bloodrage]

A floor has 50, a corpse has 8. There is currently a bug that makes things have 8 storage, however this can be quickly fixed by going to a container selecting it, the ground, then the container again in the loot window.

[Kajin]

I think the weight system works fine as it is.

[EnigmaGrey]

But we can't stop at mass and volume.

What about shape?

[RedKrypton]

I think the weight system works fine as it is.

I tried craming as much stuff in my schoolbag as in game and it didn't go well.

But we can't stop at mass and volume.

What about shape?

If you can get it to work.

[migulao]

I don't know what's so bad about this system, we shouldn't complicate it too much, it works fine as it is.

[RedKrypton]

I don't know what's so bad about this system, we shouldn't complicate it too much, it works fine as it is.

What would make this more complicated? There is a set amount of volume for each bag to put stuff in and there is weight, which slows you more and more down the more stuff you got on yourself providing a smoother transition, than the current system in which you are sprinting away from zombies with a 20 kg pay load.

[Fryhizzle]

I agree that the system works for what it is. I am also for any, and all suggestions that make sense in a realistic fashion.  I've often thought of the same exact thing Red.  It can seem very odd at times depending on the item.

 

And I don't think this suggestion is anymore complicated than most of the suggestions posted by others.  It makes total sense, but I am unsure if it is practical for PZ.

[migulao]

I agree that the system works for what it is. I am also for any, and all suggestions that make sense in a realistic fashion.  I've often thought of the same exact thing Red.  It can seem very odd at times depending on the item.

 

And I don't think this suggestion is anymore complicated than most of the suggestions posted by others.  It makes total sense, but I am unsure if it is practical for PZ.

That's my point, although my post may not express it very well.

[ApolloDiaspora]

I think the encumberence rating we have so far is working well. The number represents not only the weight of an item, but the awkwardness/fiddliness of carrying and/or storing it properly.

 

That being said, it'd be nice to have those numbers rebalanced, or be a bit more logical. Something that follows a formula like mass*volume+awkwardness_rating or something. Having clear guidelines of certain type thing has a rating of about this would make balancing mod items a bit easier I'd imagine.

[Narri]

But we can't stop at mass and volume.

What about shape?

 

This makes me think about the inventories in Dungeon Siege and such games. Each item would require different amount of slots according to how big it is. Different shapes for items would work easily like that but personally I dunno if there's any point to it. I like the system we have.

 

I think the encumberence rating we have so far is working well. The number represents not only the weight of an item, but the awkwardness/fiddliness of carrying and/or storing it properly.

 

That being said, it'd be nice to have those numbers rebalanced, or be a bit more logical. Something that follows a formula like mass*volume+awkwardness_rating or something. Having clear guidelines of certain type thing has a rating of about this would make balancing mod items a bit easier I'd imagine.

 

I'd also develop the system we got rather than start changing it totally.

[DannikJerriko]

I like the idea but on the same token, I agree with:

 

I agree that the system works for what it is. I am also for any, and all suggestions that make sense in a realistic fashion.  I've often thought of the same exact thing Red.  It can seem very odd at times depending on the item.

 

And I don't think this suggestion is anymore complicated than most of the suggestions posted by others.  It makes total sense, but I am unsure if it is practical for PZ.

 

It would make storage and inventory management a lot more time consuming and I don't feel like that would be all that much fun I know sprinting away with 20kg is ridculous but but on the same token, it would be such a pain in the ass to have to make multiple runs to the same place. This would some shit extraordinarily tedious!

[ORMtnMan]

I'll also throw my hat into the ring and say pretty much EVERY game with an inventory system has this issue... there is a reason noone bothers to make it that realistic.

[kemb0]

I understand the thinking behind this but I think it's fine as is. This suggestion does complicate things. Sure it may only seem like a minor addition but it's a minor addition that you'll need to deal with every time you add something to your inventory / bags.

 

small complication X frequent usage = major complication.

[jeffstaples1982]

I had a whole kitchen cabinet filled up with a pallet of planks, that makes sense, right?

I like it the way it is, but I think the weight needs to be adjusted for some things, right now 2 pots of water weighs more than a log or a corpse, logs weigh the same exact weight as their 3 sawed planks(planks should be 2 weight in my opinion, you have to account for some waste in the sawing process).

 

While we're in the topic of inventory management we shouldn't be able to carry open containers in our backpack or so many on us(I was balancing 10 bowls of water and was still able to equip my baseball bat in both hands, where those bowls of water was at I do not know)

[Suomiboi]

Well I'll just jump in again with a link and a quote:

MashPotato:

 

 

 

We have a lot of the same thoughts as you We are actually in the midst of an inventory UI overhaul, which will make a lot of changes including having pockets, separating out weight vs. size, etc. No ETAs (as always) but it is in the works.

 

 

http://theindiestone.com/forums/index.php/topic/7070-thoughts-on-the-current-inventory-setup/?p=92093

 

So, yeah... Unless something has changed, this should still be valid information.

 

Also to elaborate (from the same link):

MashPotato:

 

The new way is not grid-based   Size will be limited by the container size (via a number, as it is now), but weight will just affect your movement speed.  So light, large items will fill your backpack quickly but not really slow you down much, while you can carry lots of small heavy things but it will affect your speed (the exact amount depends on the weight, your strength, the container, etc).

 

Search and ye shall be set free!

 

I checked and these posts have been done before the 1.0 topic so you can make your own deductions from that.

 

EDIT: Bah, fucked up the quote...

[maharin]

I think the current system works well enough.

 

However, it would be straightforward to add a "size" number to items and containers where the size of a container means it can only carry items of that size or smaller.  That would take care of 99% of the "issues" while not complicating things much at all from a programming perspective.

 

EDIT: That's what I get for not reading the whole thread before posting.  The post above mine quotes a similar idea.