- 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:Gem"
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| − | A dwarf caravan sold me an "large native gold". Bug? | + | A dwarf caravan sold me an "large native gold". Bug? --[[User:Niggy|Niggy]] 19:58, 22 May 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:58, 22 May 2010
Have any new gems been introduced, and have gem values been verified?
The values of many things have changed. – unsigned comment by The Architect
- I personally verified the name, value, and location of every gem in the list when I imported this page from 40d. Everything that hasn't been verified has been marked with a "Verify" note, including the gem colors and a few commented-out sections at the top of the page. --Quietust 21:00, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
I have found gems to be more valuable than listed. For example, although pink tourmalines are listed at a value of 15 I am finding rough pink tourmalines valued at 45, and once cut they are valued at 75. Has anyone else found this? --Monk12 20:00, 11 April 2010
- To obtain the value of an uncut gem, multiply the value of the gem as listed on the page by 3. Multiply by 5 to obtain basic cut values.
Glass value seems the same still. I tried to verify if crafts and large gems are still at the same rate, but I can't completely confirm yet. I got large gems, but no crafts. Roughly 1/3rd rate... I doubt anything has changed though. --Lightning4 02:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- I also get no crafts. Minus 14:48, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
A dwarf caravan sold me an "large native gold". Bug? --Niggy 19:58, 22 May 2010 (UTC)