Increasing the believability and satisfaction of mining

[ECC 508]

and blue, that sounds game breaking.

[Srgnoodles 1,030]

Sorry if I didn't explain that picture properly. The nuggets would be practically useless. They would contain such a small trace/amount of the said metal that unless you had stacks of them, they wouldn't be practical to use. It is better to look at the 'nuggets' as 'clues' Upon finding a nugget on the surface you'd know an ore vein may be close, and finding one further underground would mean an ore vein is practically inbound.

I guess another image is required,

http://imageshack.us...splacement.png/

yeah, honestly this would kind of remove all use for the prospectors pick if you can just walk around on the surface and be like "hay theres some copper under me" and start digging

[Guest Blue_Beluga]

Prospecting via nuggets would not replace the prospecting pick. It would be a much more laborious and luck-based system. If anything it would be a counter-part to the prospector's pick, so that prospecting isn't just done at random, but by estimating a spot to prospect based on concentration of nuggets. Sort of like a dodgy indicator. And even then, when you found a nice concentration of nuggets, there's no guarantee that there will be ore, just a better chance than prospecting wildly.

However, if you think having the nuggets above ground is gamebreaking, then discard the idea, and just consider underground nuggets as an indicator, this could be a way of making caves useful (without going 'here you go, here's a free ore vein')

[splatman1981 44]

in my opinion this idea is fantastic and also a game breaker! if TFC becomes too "difficult" people will not be able to enjoy it, others will make addons to counter the difficulty, and the end result would be an overall lower quality of fun while playing.

i have spent hours prospecting vast amounts of gabbro in the second layer attempting to get garnerite, and i have had so little luck i found nothing, not even useless minerals. i've done sluice prospecting thousands of meters of area, and come up empty. with the system that is being suggested i would absolutely never be able to find any ore unless i opened a spreadsheet and notepad and perhaps a web based utility to jot down and figure out all the information i would be gathering, and sifting through all the false positives to attempt to find anything... it would never be able to work ...in my opinion that is.

[renadi 258]

I think there's no difference in the nuggets idea and the system we have currently with loose rocks, your picture wouldn't be a straight example of every deposit obviously. You can't just look on the ground, find a perfect spot and dig straight down. You'd however be able to tell what ores and how many may be in a certain area, something I think makes a great deal of sense.

[LordOfWolves 514]

I think there's no difference in the nuggets idea and the system we have currently with loose rocks, your picture wouldn't be a straight example of every deposit obviously. You can't just look on the ground, find a perfect spot and dig straight down. You'd however be able to tell what ores and how many may be in a certain area, something I think makes a great deal of sense.

Yeah, but you should consider the 3D aspect of the game. In a 2D picture it's easier to find ores, but in TFC sometimes they can be not below you, but a bit on the left. Also the deposit can be composed by 2 or more small deposits. There can even be a branched deposit.

[Just_Another_Guy_:) 1,066]

with the system that is being suggested i would absolutely never be able to find any ore unless i opened a spreadsheet and notepad and perhaps a web based utility to jot down and figure out all the information i would be gathering, and sifting through all the false positives to attempt to find anything... it would never be able to work ...in my opinion that is.

Actually, from what i understand, you would be getting ore from anywhere even if there isn't that ore nearby. mining gabbro would give you reaaaaaally small amounts of garnierite even if there isn't a vein there... so it would actually make the obtaining (not finding a vein, just getting the ore) of really rare ores a bit easier ._.

[renadi 258]

I'm not sure splatman understands what the idea is, or I REALLY don't see where they're coming from with their idea about a spreadsheet and notepad...

[puxapuak 232]

A condensed reply to a few things...

Prospecting via nuggets would not replace the prospecting pick.

I agree with renadi on this. It sounds like you're describing what is largely already in place, with the exception of depth. But the thing is that loose nuggets are not at all believable at depths. Most such loose nuggets are caused because of surface erosion (atmospheric effects). Erosive processes can occur at depth, but it's pretty rare and doesn't really result in small nuggets anyway.

But also as JAG later points out, it's not really necessary anyway because if you want to find some -equivalent-of-nuggets- at depths, you just use your prospectors pick on the nearest rock. When you pick a rock, you will always get some shards. They might not be the shards you're interested int, but they are definitely giving you information about the geology of the local area. So there's really no need for anything else.

in my opinion this idea is fantastic and also a game breaker! if TFC becomes too "difficult" people will not be able to enjoy it, others will make addons to counter the difficulty, and the end result would be an overall lower quality of fun while playing.

Finding the rich veins that currently exist would be more difficult, yes, but as JAG points out, you're not completely out of luck using my proposal either. In all rock, you've got the chance to find tiny shards of ore of the type you're seeking if it has a chance of spawning in that rock family. You won't find much, and it will take hella lotta pro-picking to do it, but you'll eventually collect enough ore shards to make an ingot. (If it's a rare ore you're after though... I reeaallly mean a lot of propicking.)

I'm not sure splatman understands what the idea is, or I REALLY don't see where they're coming from with their idea about a spreadsheet and notepad...

I think he meant keeping track of what shards correspond to what ores in what conditions. You could maintain that on a spreadsheet... but I don't think it would be the best way to learn how to mine effectively using this proposed change. This is actually the kind of thing our brain already does quite well, but we have to give it a lot of information. In other words, experience is going to be much better than bogging yourself down in the numbers game.

[splatman1981 44]

in almost every situation its best to simplify rather than to complicate.

if this system was put into place, the second we decide to delve into mining and prospecting we would get a double chest full of small bits of ore.... nvm i have tons i'd like to say, but the words arent going to convince anyone that an overcomplicated system leads to pointlessly boring tasks. TFC is already straddling the line of fun vs boring. because of the believable vs fake elements.

[renadi 258]

I don't think most of us think this would be boring, or we wouldn't be advocating it.

[puxapuak 232]

in almost every situation its best to simplify rather than to complicate.

That is definitely true of systems that a person or persons are trying to make that is aimed at making something easier. It cannot at all be said about something where the designers are trying to implement something that needs to be learned and that is not at all inherently obvious at first glance. If the long term plan is to make TFC a believable and rewarding mod where people specialise at tasks by learning them, then this proposal is consistent with that goal. Put another way... we're trying to create problems worth solving, not solve problems for people.

If you do not enjoy activities that have a learning curve, then I don't think you're going to particularly like the direction of TFC. Because it is definitely the direction every system in the game is moving towards. (Consider agriculture, meals, etc.)

[splatman1981 44]

That is definitely true of systems that a person or persons are trying to make that is aimed at making something easier. It cannot at all be said about something where the designers are trying to implement something that needs to be learned and that is not at all inherently obvious at first glance. If the long term plan is to make TFC a believable and rewarding mod where people specialise at tasks by learning them, then this proposal is consistent with that goal. Put another way... we're trying to create problems worth solving, not solve problems for people.

If you do not enjoy activities that have a learning curve, then I don't think you're going to particularly like the direction of TFC. Because it is definitely the direction every system in the game is moving towards. (Consider agriculture, meals, etc.)

i dont think your suggestion on changing mining is creating a learning curve it simply adds confusion. if i wanted to learn how to prospect for ore in real life i would go to school for a few years and learn it. this is a game! i want to play and have fun, i'll learn what it takes to be able to succeed only if it doesnt take a college degree to figure out. false positives are fine sometimes, but if every prospect attempt you get a small amount of every ore it seems impossible to find what your looking for.

[renadi 258]

It is a game where you're supposed to learn how to play, puxapuak has a very valid point, it isn't an arena game where you just jump in and -play- You're supposed to get invested in what happens in your world, and learn to do what you can to better it. This takes nowhere near a college degree to figure out even.

Also I am fairly certain nobody proposed you get every ore every time you look you get a sample of what's in the area, this is pretty much exactly the system we have in place now for small rocks.

[Menoch 335]

For what is implemented now, i think the system we have to use is quite effective and, while complex, not over complex.

I dont think getting a piece of ore, even in trace amounts, regardless of where you dig and with every swing of the pickaxe would be nothing more than unecessary(sp?) and take up a heck of a lot of space in an already limited inventory.

Mining for ore right now works, and i think trying to redefine an area that already works effectively would take precious time away from other areas of the mod that definitely do need attention... Like wgen, mobs, and a plethora of other areas still to be implemented and refined.

[renadi 258]

I agree that this area is good enough that it should be left for now, I however don't think it's a bad idea to keep in mind once those other things are up to scratch.

[puxapuak 232]

i dont think your suggestion on changing mining is creating a learning curve it simply adds confusion. if i wanted to learn how to prospect for ore in real life i would go to school for a few years and learn it. this is a game! i want to play and have fun, i'll learn what it takes to be able to succeed only if it doesnt take a college degree to figure out. false positives are fine sometimes, but if every prospect attempt you get a small amount of every ore it seems impossible to find what your looking for.

For what is implemented now, i think the system we have to use is quite effective and, while complex, not over complex.

I dont think getting a piece of ore, even in trace amounts, regardless of where you dig and with every swing of the pickaxe would be nothing more than unecessary(sp?) and take up a heck of a lot of space in an already limited inventory.

Splatman, I can see why you feel the way you do if this is how you understood my proposal, but renadi is correct again, I'm not proposing anything particularly different fundamentally than what is already in place, and it certainly doesn't require anything but a bit of experience to get good at. So it appears that you and Menoch may have both misunderstood something. With respect to the emphasised portions in your posts, this is not at all what I am proposing. If you are confused on this, please re-read my posts. If you still have questions or if it still sounds like this is what I am proposing to you, then let me know what is giving you that idea so that I can clarify it for you and for any others who may be carrying the same false impression.

My goal here is for people to understand the idea. If you still disagree even after you understand, that's fine too, I'm cool with that. But I want to make sure that you are at least disagreeing with something I've said.

[ECC 508]

I think what people dont understand here is the fact that in filling a chest with ores you are prooving the fact you should NOT be mining the whole thing. what would you need with enough ore to build a battleship anyhow? If all you need is enough to build and maintain armor, weapons and tools, WHY continue to mine? build an outpost, mark down your cords on a minimap or paper and begone with it until you NEED the metal.

[Pakislav 120]

Well... When I found a vein a 100 blocks wide of cassiterite and native silver(Right when I only needed cassiterite to make Bronze), I have felt and adreniline rush when I have fallen for the gold (tin) fever.

I've prepared 50 chests and begun mining.

I have never finished. My world got corrupted due to the bloomery bug.

;(

[ThinkTank 77]

Complicated maybe, but good (as long as finding ore can become more standerdised by the time your emergant civilization has moved on from beating pigs to death with rocks and is reaching desperatly toward its own little industrial revolution), I think that arguments regarding 'this is to much work, not enough fun' could be worked out by introducing later devices which simplify the whole process, but require you to do a bit of work to get there. Thus players are rewarded for their troubles with what they were after, and easyer ways of getting what they were after.

I would like for large scale mines to still have little bits of ore in them even after they have officaly 'dryed up'.

As always, when mucking about with ore gen, remember that a large vein needs to be large enough to justify expenditure in materials to create a mine to dig the stuff out. (the 'rails aint cheap' argument), so having a huge cloud of 'little bits of ore' giving rocks around the vein itself goes some way toward providing for that, as with a area that size to hack happly away at a shaft mine is entirly worth the effort.

I think what people dont understand here is the fact that in filling a chest with ores you are prooving the fact you should NOT be mining the whole thing. what would you need with enough ore to build a battleship anyhow? If all you need is enough to build and maintain armor, weapons and tools, WHY continue to mine? build an outpost, mark down your cords on a minimap or paper and begone with it until you NEED the metal.

Generaly I find that I need all that ore for use in other mods, which are very metal hungry, also as above, to support the construction of a shaft mine to make getting the ore out from bedrock level less of a slog.

[renadi 258]

Well... When I found a vein a 100 blocks wide of cassiterite and native silver(Right when I only needed cassiterite to make Bronze), I have felt and adreniline rush when I have fallen for the gold (tin) fever.

I've prepared 50 chests and begun mining.

I have never finished. My world got corrupted due to the bloomery bug.

;(

OI!

I had this happen on my server, someone on irc helped me find a tool that you can use to replace all bloomeries(or any other block) on your map with anything else

http://code.google.com/p/midas-gold/

it saved my world(though I kind of wanted a fresh start anyway...)!!

[Menoch 335]

Ok. So i have read, again, the post. You smash two rocks together, some of the smashed rocks you are able to gather useful shards from... Ok... What about the rest of the smashed rocks?

You work on the shards (most of which are un-usable), but find that some melt. So what is that, 25% of the rocks you smash with another rock are salvageable shards, but only 25% of those are useable? ( just throwing a random % in ther to represent "some".

And then You have to melt those shards down in "vast" quantities to make a pickaxe.

My understanding of your idea is that it is well thought out. It has validity in the scale of being useable in some sense of a mining equation in a game. But i hold firm to my opinion that if it isnt broke, dont fix it. Mining is challenging enough to a lot of people as is, myself included. Adding more work (which it will regardless of whether it is initially or over the longrun) risks the chance of crossing the fine line between working hard for an achievable goal in a "game" and striving through tedium in what some may percieve as a "sim".

If this idea is added, then i would still play, of course. But after that, someone else comes along with a better idea for mining, then someone else... And then a year later we have flawless mining and thats about it.

Again, my friend, i do indeed get where you are going. But the car runs fine. Why add another engine?

[renadi 258]

This isn't a new engine, the engine is the same, this is a paint job and a tune up to make it run more smoothly.

This isn't -more- work, it's more ways to accomplish your goal of(mainly) getting your first pick.

[puxapuak 232]

Lots of stuff in there, Menoch, I will try to address it. But first I will comment on your final question there.

I don't think it does run fine. That is, stemming from the conversation in the other thread that I referenced at the outset, the current system of mining / propick mechanism violates the believability+fun principle that TFC is trying to follow. Further, it doesn't really require any skill at all. Once you read the forums and realise the principle it operates on, you're pretty much instantly a master miner. Since TFC is also trying to move towards a multiplayer 'specialist' model, the current simplicity of the propick is an impediment to the stated goals of TFC.

In short, this isn't a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Because it is broken. I don't enjoy mining in TFC particularly... it feels to me to be a bit of an irritant because there's just no complexity to it. Every effort to find a mine is exactly the same puzzle, over and over, because you have a space-aged piece of ore-detection equipment even though we're in the pre-bronze era.

You smash two rocks together, some of the smashed rocks you are able to gather useful shards from... Ok... What about the rest of the smashed rocks?

What about them? If you don't think they're useful, do with them whatever you want. If you think they might be useful, make a mental note of where you found them. What do you do with copper nuggets you find when scavenging rocks after you've got a full suit of steel and several boxes of limonite?

The value of the shards is not the shards themselves except when you're really resource strapped. The value is the information provided by their context and number.

You work on the shards (most of which are un-usable), but find that some melt. So what is that, 25% of the rocks you smash with another rock are salvageable shards, but only 25% of those are useable? ( just throwing a random % in ther to represent "some".

The point is that you don't know what is useful and what isn't until you learn the trade. Remember, we're trying to create a puzzle to be solved. The shards are not the resource, they're the roadmap. Just like nuggets are now, but not as super-obvious.

And then You have to melt those shards down in "vast" quantities to make a pickaxe.

The first time, for your first pickaxe, yes. Just as right now you have to scavenge around for a pile of ore to melt or sluice for a few game weeks. If you're already beyond the stone age, this is just information telling you more about your geology.

It's not really any different except that more shards are required for both the sake of believability and because shards can be more easy to come by than nuggets (though this is geologically dependent to some extent).

Mining is challenging enough to a lot of people as is, myself included. Adding more work (which it will regardless of whether it is initially or over the longrun) risks the chance of crossing the fine line between working hard for an achievable goal in a "game" and striving through tedium in what some may percieve as a "sim".

Well, again, I think this is an advantage of this proposed system over the current. At present, the system is easy enough that there is nothing there to master. You just simply can't have a 'specialist' system when 80% of the population of a server can do it at the top tier of effectiveness. It just doesn't work.

Now for those of us who don't tend to play multiplayer (myself included), this doesn't matter, but then it's more a matter of what kind of game you enjoy. If you enjoy figuring stuff out and working through a puzzle, then this will be right up your alley. If you don't, and you just want to be guided and directed through puzzles, well then this wouldn't be as interesting. But the advantage there then is that... mining is hard, you will value your equipment and tools more if it is even harder for you, and it's not like you don't have options here because if you don't want to figure your way through the puzzle, then you can still grind through rocks to find what you're looking for.

Survival is supposed to be hard, so if a person doesn't want to learn the ways to make it easier on themself, then they have to accept that they are playing a survival game without any interest in the premise of survival.

[Menoch 335]

How long did it take you to learn all the recipes for food? How long do you think it will take an individual, considering your implimentation of mining, to find his first metal vein? What about the next one? Once done with that, how long will it take to master agriculture and Animal husbandry when that is in full swing?

Once tailoring, leatherworking, woodworking, alchemy, herbalism, etc, etc, etc... Is implemented, do you think that one person on his own will be able to accomplish all of this to the utmost, while still trying to build a civilization, fend off hostile mobs, and explore a world that is one big mystery?

Well of course! It just depends on time spent. Regardless of how difficult you make something in a game for the sake of believability in a survival game, over time, 80% of the server just MIGHT be able to do everything themselves regardless.

But whether or not this game is designed focusing on multiplayer, there will always be single players in their own world.

I would be lying if I said this idea you have didnt intrigue me. I would be interested to see how it would play out in a beta.

But remember we are in a beta and half of the game is still missing!

You mentioned, that your idea would add more of a challenge. Im all for it. But implementing this, after taking into scope all that is yet to be added, would seem to me to say, well player, take your pick in your single player world, cuz you cant learn it all. If you dont have a job, then thats cool! But the casual gamer like myself, wont be too happy. ;)/>

Im all for a challenge, dude. But when push comes to shove, a balance has to be made.

I just wish we could all see where this game is a year from now, because it would shed so much light on whether or not an idea like this would be worth the time to code.

Again. Cool idea.

If I had my way, everyone would have to condition their hands like kungfu masters before they could chop down trees.... I wouldnt let them use stone tools. And they would have to bake bread on their backs in the hot sun as they built fruit trees out of love and bat poop!!!!! Thats right! Bat poop!!! ;)/>