Minus worn weight not calculated properly when using item quantity > 1

[freeedom67]

Hi,

as written in the title I noticed, that the minus for the worn weight is not calculated properly, when using item quantity > 1.
Its always calculated as you would wear only 1 of the items.

TY for sharing this great software!

[ZkilfinG]

I can confirm this. Works for consumables thou.

[binoyte]

From the Help

Quantity and worn values

If you have multiple quantity of an item and mark that item as worn, only the first quantity will count towards your worn weight. The rest will count towards your pack weight. This is because most items you have multiple of, you only wear one at once. This means you can't list your shoes/trekking poles with weights as individual weights and quantity of two - you should list as the combined weight with quantity of one.

[matthew-sharp]

IMO the current behaviour is the desired behaviour. If I put a quantity of 2 underwear, I'm wearing one and packing the other.

[darkraisisi]

IMO the current behaviour is the desired behaviour. If I put a quantity of 2 underwear, I'm wearing one and packing the other.

What about two trekkingpoles.

If you wear one pair of underwear and have that in a worn clothing section you could add another or two to you packed clothing.

It makes more sense to digitally split items that are physically split then the other way around.

[matthew-sharp]

What about two trekkingpoles.

Trekking poles, gloves, socks, contact lenses, earplugs, etc, put them in as a pair. I'm sure there's a hiker out there who carries one pole and packs the other, or some hiker that packs 3 poles, but it's not that common.

It makes more sense to digitally split items that are physically split then the other way around.

They may be physically split, but how often are they split between being worn and carried? Do you put your socks and gloves in as singles? This is a tool for measuring trail weight, not a world simulator.

The cases where "fixing" this "issue" actually helps are vanishingly small, and I dare say contrived. OTOH it definitely makes more work for the not uncommon case of "wearing one, the rest are in the pack".