View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0005987Dwarf FortressWorld Generation -- Generalpublic2012-06-07 02:00
ReporterDwarvenVoyer Assigned Touser1294 
PrioritynormalSeveritytweakReproducibilityalways
Status resolvedResolutionno change required 
PlatformPCOSWindows 
Product Version0.34.10 
Summary0005987: Standard Mineral Count -- Low Minerals
DescriptionI have made multiple worlds, and it does not appear that seed count has made any difference in number of minerals found while digging. I switched from the .31 to .34, and it appears that changing the mineral count does not affect mineral frequency.
Steps To ReproduceMake a new world set minerals to everywhere. Dig a great deal. Marvel at the infrequency of stone.
Make an advanced world. Set mineral count to 100, dig a great deal. Marvel at the infrequency of stone.
TagsNo tags attached.

Activities

Quietust

2012-06-04 18:25

reporter   ~0022853

I'm not seeing this - I generated a world with minerals set to "Everywhere", and pretty much every embark square has both "Shallow metals" and "Deep metals". Upon embarking along a mountain range, I saw lots of varied minerals in the exposed hillside.

Upon generating a world with minerals set to "Very Rare", most sites only had "Deep metal" and nothing else.

DwarvenVoyer

2012-06-05 16:02

reporter   ~0022862

I think I posted in the incorrect section. I was speaking to the lack of total stones when compared to version .31 while digging during the game.

Quietust

2012-06-05 16:43

reporter   ~0022863

The "mineral count" has never had anything to do with mining yields, only the frequency of mineral inclusions appearing within the ground.

It sounds like what you're complaining about is that the act of mining only produces a boulder 25% of the time, rather than up to 100% of the time based on the skill of the miner. This is intentional and has been the case since version 0.34.08.

DwarvenVoyer

2012-06-05 17:22

reporter   ~0022864

Ah, that makes sense then. I jumped from .34.07 to .34.10. Is it possible to delete this post then?

user1294

2012-06-06 07:56

  ~0022871

I'll mark this off as no change required, then.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2012-06-04 18:15 DwarvenVoyer New Issue
2012-06-04 18:25 Quietust Note Added: 0022853
2012-06-05 16:02 DwarvenVoyer Note Added: 0022862
2012-06-05 16:43 Quietust Note Added: 0022863
2012-06-05 17:22 DwarvenVoyer Note Added: 0022864
2012-06-06 02:18 Buglist Tag Attached: CLOSE THIS
2012-06-06 02:19 Buglist Tag Attached: Intentional/Expected
2012-06-06 07:56 user1294 Note Added: 0022871
2012-06-06 07:56 user1294 Status new => resolved
2012-06-06 07:56 user1294 Resolution open => no change required
2012-06-06 07:56 user1294 Assigned To => user1294
2012-06-07 02:00 Buglist Tag Detached: CLOSE THIS
2012-06-07 02:00 Buglist Tag Detached: Intentional/Expected