- v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
- Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
Difference between revisions of "v0.31 Talk:Iron"
Doctorzuber (talk | contribs) |
Mirthmanor (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
IMHO, 0.31.19 is a step in the right direction, but I would like to see a bit more variety. I miss seeing orthoclase,olivine,microcline,etc which seem to be quite rare now. I would also like to see a bit more variety. the current quantities are reasonable enough, but the lack of variety in materials is somewhat crippling. If we instead got 4000 of one ore plus say 500 each of a few others than this would be much more fun to play with. --[[User:Doctorzuber|Doctorzuber]] 20:32, 5 March 2011 (UTC) | IMHO, 0.31.19 is a step in the right direction, but I would like to see a bit more variety. I miss seeing orthoclase,olivine,microcline,etc which seem to be quite rare now. I would also like to see a bit more variety. the current quantities are reasonable enough, but the lack of variety in materials is somewhat crippling. If we instead got 4000 of one ore plus say 500 each of a few others than this would be much more fun to play with. --[[User:Doctorzuber|Doctorzuber]] 20:32, 5 March 2011 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I've generated whole worlds that haven't gotten past the copper age . . . Even the gobbo's come sporting copper weapons. My recent fortress found some tin (which gets you up to bronze) and we are now gods of the battlefield. I haven't seen iron since .18 --[[User:Mirthmanor|Mirthmanor]] 03:02, 6 March 2011 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 03:02, 6 March 2011
Iron or bronze?
It says that bronze is superior to iron when it comes to combat, but I have conducted repeated tests with armor of both materials (using both blunt and edged weaponry) in the arena which show otherwise. Anyone care to show some evidence in support of this statement or should I edit it? --Eepkeep 13:20, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
- Check out Template:L, section "Materials". Apparently bronze was better up to version 0.31.11, whereas from 0.31.12 onwards, iron was better. Looks like this page is just out-of-date. Edit away! Bognor 14:39, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Metals scarce in 0.31.19
This isn't completely accurate. There is a horrible lack of variety in an embark, but what you do get you get in huge quantities. My current embark has an enormous amount of copper ore, plenty of gems, armloads of chalk and marble, and nothing else. Looking into this further using dfprospect and dfreveal shows the following pattern.
shallow/deep metal = one metal. on a 2x2 embark this will be around 4000 ore. Without fail this means one and only one type of ore. Maybe it is copper, maybe it is iron, it could even be something weird like tin or nickel.
shallow/deep metals = two (or more?) metals. on a 2x2 embark this will be around 1200 to 1300 units of ore for each ore. In my testing this always means two types of ore. I do however remain open to the possibility that it might sometimes mean three, but have thus far seen no example of this.
IMHO, 0.31.19 is a step in the right direction, but I would like to see a bit more variety. I miss seeing orthoclase,olivine,microcline,etc which seem to be quite rare now. I would also like to see a bit more variety. the current quantities are reasonable enough, but the lack of variety in materials is somewhat crippling. If we instead got 4000 of one ore plus say 500 each of a few others than this would be much more fun to play with. --Doctorzuber 20:32, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I've generated whole worlds that haven't gotten past the copper age . . . Even the gobbo's come sporting copper weapons. My recent fortress found some tin (which gets you up to bronze) and we are now gods of the battlefield. I haven't seen iron since .18 --Mirthmanor 03:02, 6 March 2011 (UTC)