{* cut} for fish?

[phoenixshenanigans]

Hi, just a quick modding question.

The modding possibility for using random cuts instead of a raw and weighted option, is {* cut} when creating the recipe. Is there a similar command for fish instead of meat?

[Privateer]

I believe it would be:

Code: [Select]

{Raw fish}and a weight amount.

Fish cook whole and are not divided into a standard portioning like cuts.

[phoenixshenanigans]

I believe it would be:

Code: [Select]

{Raw fish}and a weight amount.

Fish cook whole and are not divided into a standard portioning like cuts.

I see. There isn't any way of going around the weighted amount? So it would just be for example 2 fish, no matter the size of them? Is it only because of the same weight, that the {* cut} works in the first place?

[Privateer]

I believe it would be:

Code: [Select]

{Raw fish}and a weight amount.

Fish cook whole and are not divided into a standard portioning like cuts.

I see. There isn't any way of going around the weighted amount? So it would just be for example 2 fish, no matter the size of them? Is it only because of the same weight, that the {* cut} works in the first place?

 A count of raw fish or a weight amount of raw fish would both work.
The reason {* cut} works is due to "name pattern matching". Since mammal meat is all converted to "something cuts".
Fish retain their original naming; roast trout, roast pike etc etc. making a pattern match impractical.

[phoenixshenanigans]

I believe it would be:

Code: [Select]

{Raw fish}and a weight amount.

Fish cook whole and are not divided into a standard portioning like cuts.

I see. There isn't any way of going around the weighted amount? So it would just be for example 2 fish, no matter the size of them? Is it only because of the same weight, that the {* cut} works in the first place?

 A count of raw fish or a weight amount of raw fish would both work.
The reason {* cut} works is due to "name pattern matching". Since mammal meat is all converted to "something cuts".
Fish retain their original naming; roast trout, roast pike etc etc. making a pattern match impractical.

Oh I see. That worked.

Last question. The {* cut} option makes you able to use dried and smoked meat as well, instead of just raw meat. Is there any way to use a count of fish, that takes in both raw, roasted, dried and smoked fish? Just two of them of one of the options, or does it always have to be raw fish?

Thanks for the helpful answers so far Privateer.

[koteko]

You'd have to use specific fish types for that, as far as I know. Eg, {*pike*} should work both pike and pike-perch, but most others have unique names.

[phoenixshenanigans]

You'd have to use specific fish types for that, as far as I know. Eg, {*pike*} should work both pike and pike-perch, but most others have unique names.

Okay, I see. Thank you very much! 

[tukkipuu]

You can also use whole fishes. Use the () tag.

Here's my "Angler's soup" example. Often you get some small fish with the fishing rod, but not enough for the original fish soup recipe. This recipe needs only one tiny fish, the second is optional  Be careful though, if the fish does not fit in the pot the extra disappears, so do not try cooking 15kg salmons with this recipe.

Code: [Select]

.TinyFIshes.  *COOKERY* /10/  \20\ %20% :148
{Raw fish} (1) [remove] [boil]
{Raw fish} (1) [remove] [boil] [optional] '+ More up to 4lbs total'
{Water}  #2# [remove] [boil]