Ludeon Forums

RimWorld => Suggestions => Topic started by: Vas on February 08, 2015, 02:07:50 PM

Title: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 08, 2015, 02:07:50 PM
I would like to see Steel renamed to Iron throughout the game.  My reason, should be fairly obvious.  Iron ore is realistic, and logical.  It is also used to make steel.  However, people have been told that steel is the only metal on this planet and the explanation is that "it is an ancient crashed ship building".  This is not accurate on so many levels, and makes the game highly questionable to the realist.

So I was hoping the community might also agree and hope to see Steel renamed to Iron and Iron to be smelt-able into steel with the current game smelter.  Steel is a strong metal, stronger than Iron.  It shouldn't be used as a base for everything.

I just looked it up and found that all types of steel are less conductive than Iron.  So not only are you using poor conductors of electricity in the game, but you're digging up old parts of space ships with hand tools to build your stuff with?

Anyway.  I'm hoping to get enough votes from the community to show a good opinion of what the community thinks.
So cast your votes!

Iron Ore: The main metal used in making many things, including steel.  Abundant on many many worlds and moons and asteroids.

Steel Ore: Man made metal, the game's explanation is that ships crashed a previous civilization built structures randomly all over the planet to place this man made metal within mountains and other random locations billions of years ago..

If you want an alternate vote tool, try http://strawpoll.me/4471638/
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 08, 2015, 02:14:00 PM
remove ore from at least the steel option. Also its "Compacted steel" to be accurate. The "handtools" remark, i dont see an issue here, why would mining ore be any different to mining rock that has formed around hunks of metal?

Personally I like that this isnt minecraft or any other multitude of games trying to do that production chain (its had its day imo). So my vote is Compacted steel.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: 200Down on February 08, 2015, 02:16:30 PM
Yep or at the very least;
Mountains and hills should contain only rock types
Crashed ships and old abandoned buildings could contain metals

It's just very odd the way it is now. And yes I'm very aware of the "lore" behind it but it still feels just wrong  :)
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 08, 2015, 02:38:45 PM
Skullywag, minecraft used science to determine some metals.  They didn't just decide "iron will be everywhere" just because it's the first metal that popped into their head.  In The Matrix.  The machines were digging a tunnel.  They hit a patch of IRON ore.  Not "compacted steel".  Steel is much more dense than Iron, and made of several things, not just Iron.  Every game I've seen that lets you craft stuff, uses Iron as a base, because it's logical, and reasonable.

If steel is left in the game, you are saying that Iron doesn't exist in the universe.  But ok.  Lets go with your version.  We now have to change the way steel spawns around the map.  You aren't allowed to find it in large chunks anymore.  It has to be the general shape of a ship, and it needs to be made more difficult to mine, because you're now using a steel tool to hit the steel hull of a ship, even if it is an ancient ship.  Lets also make steel objects extremely strong, because obviously this metal is going to withstand a lot.  It should be stronger than all things in the game except Depleted Uranium.  Uranium is in the game, just not depleted.  Bullets are soft lead, and wouldn't even dent a steel wall.

Steel also has a high melting point, conduits can't just explode anymore.  They have to electrify the walls so anyone who touches them is electrocuted to death.  No more exploding fireballs of stupidness!
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: 200Down on February 08, 2015, 02:55:01 PM
It has to be the general shape of a ship, and it needs to be made more difficult to mine, because you're now using a steel tool to hit the steel hull of a ship, even if it is an ancient ship. 

There you go, they already use "torches" for the machining tables anyways. Already a viable method in the game(well, better than "mining" steel). And it doesn't have to be a ship.... any object made of steel would work. Not sure about a "steel" ship now that I think about it haha. Would be a much more advanced material.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: ItchyFlea on February 08, 2015, 03:30:47 PM
This is from the games files regarding the steel you can mine:
<description>The remains of some ancient, collapsed structure. Rich in steel.</description>
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: OpposingForces on February 08, 2015, 03:41:18 PM
the only ores are gold and silver. both compacted steel and compacted plaststeel are supposed to be the remains of ancient structures and / or ships. though i do like the idea of more mineable ores.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: 200Down on February 08, 2015, 03:43:22 PM
This is from the games files regarding the steel you can mine:
<description>The remains of some ancient, collapsed structure. Rich in steel.</description>

Guess I never really read it but an argument still remains......, why isn't that "steel" found in slag junks or something that needs smelting?

I think the whole thing is simply the fact that peeps would like to "work" to get steel and it currently doesn't act like steel. You know... weaker than stone etc..  Hell, maybe the stone walls just need the nerf bat. Might help with some of the issues.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 08, 2015, 03:48:43 PM
Vas im not arguing that you dont have a valid point, infact im not arguing at all, its simply an opinion. What you seem to be forgetting is that its an alpha, Iron could be coming as could other metals, it all depends on Tyans roadmap, for all we know he may have major plans for adding iron. So until we either know that roadmap or we hear from Tynan the topic of what it should be is moot as it has been the other umpteen times its been discussed, as is a poll on it....unless as stated Tynan states that iron isnt coming and this is the end state of this particular part of the game, at that point this thread would have merit imo.

Dont mean to offend or sound rude, just stating what its in my head.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 08, 2015, 04:32:00 PM
Anyway.  When something like this is changed, and changed for too long, people get used to it, and cling to it.  I want it changed before people cling to it.  That's why I'm trying to get it changed now.  I'm planning on a mod that adds lots of new resources at some point.  I just need someone's help making it.  I tend to do my own mods cause I tend not to like the balance other people do with theirs.  Like I do with Space Engineers, trying to keep it as realistic as possible.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: 200Down on February 08, 2015, 04:34:20 PM
200, I think he was replying to me.  :P

Anyway.  When something like this is changed, and changed for too long, people get used to it, and cling to it.  I want it changed before people cling to it.  That's why I'm trying to get it changed now.  I'm planning on a mod that adds lots of new resources at some point.  I just need someone's help making it.  I tend to do my own mods cause I tend not to like the balance other people do with theirs.  Like I do with Space Engineers, trying to keep it as realistic as possible.

Yep just noticed that lolz.. deleted
And yea, I never thought of  people settling into an idea. Interesting way of looking at it I guess.
I already use someone's mod that adds more ore "steps". It's not quite completely fleshed out yet but it works fine. Maybe that's yours?
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Ironvos on February 08, 2015, 04:44:01 PM
I'd certainly like to see a distinction between iron and steel, as i've done it in my mod.
But it does require careful implementation.
Rimworld currently is a simplified game.
Adding too many things could complicate things unnecessarily.

For example, while making my mod, i first intended to let mining drop ores.
However i soon found out that this has a bad effect on the game's pace.
Rimworld isn't that fluent at setting up automation and production since everything is pretty much initiated by pawn actions.

Also, you have to think about what significance a certain change actually has on the gameplay value.
Does it matter much if you have to melt everything down first before you can use it?
If it's something unavoidable, then it usually will make things feel tedious.

So i think in the current framework of the game, iron & steel can be done, however mining ores seems like a step too far for now.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 08, 2015, 04:49:44 PM
200Down; Link it.  :P  I do have one mod out right now that changes steel into iron but it's not quite 100% totally complete cause I  can't change the terrain generator at all.

Ironvos.  I'm not talking about making more things.  I'm talking about simply renaming Steel, into Iron.  A simple change for realism's sake.  That way, if someone wants, they can make a mod that adds steel, and steel type objects.  Stronger metals.  Iron is more of a base metal, found in every planet, in every moon, and in most asteroids.  It just makes more sense.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: 200Down on February 08, 2015, 05:04:00 PM
Looking through the mod list it's ether.....

Nu Metals
or
Stonecutting Tweak

I think it's Nu Metals.. I haven't updated my mods for ages because .. well they worked well enough and only took a few balance tweaks here and there to just not bother :)

EDIT: It's funny that you should mention modding because that's pretty much the entire reason I tried this game out.  I was thinking wow... with Prison Architect's visuals(no animation work) this thing could be endlessly modded eventually.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 08, 2015, 05:09:56 PM
Just a point, it can be endlessly modded now. The joy of being able to add your own dlls. ;)
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: 200Down on February 08, 2015, 05:24:05 PM
True but why bother when the pros might add it anyways. Plus you gotta have the time to update through all those alphas ... not that it's all THAT much time but still. Plus the more core we have to work with the better..., who knows what may be possible by the time it's released :) Start from scratch with all your mods again  ???
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 08, 2015, 05:36:16 PM
And what about thos eof us who can't do DLLs?  Because we don't know C#/C++?  We can only request a mod, and no one will do it cause they are busy making their own mods.  We are left in the dust, doing only the basics.  I also HATE that philosophy.  "Oh, well I don't like this aspect, so instead of asking the developer for a change, I'm just going to make a mod for it." or "Well he doesn't like that thing, so instead of supporting him in his attempt to get a feature changed, renamed, removed, added, I'm going to tell him to make a mod.  And if he doesn't know how, too bad so sad, guess he'll just have to request it."

This happens to me often enough that it kinda makes me hate some modders when they tell me "do it yourself".  That doesn't really happen as often in this community.  In the Kerbal Space Program community, the modding community is full of ....... that tell you "do it yourself." -Don't know how.- "Learn." who don't even offer to really help you at all or anything.  So.  yea.  I get that modding is the core of pretty much all games now because people like changing things but it shouldn't be the core.  Modders shouldn't be telling people "Just make a mod" when they ask for a feature request.  If a modder likes the feature request, he should support it.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 08, 2015, 05:40:41 PM
i know this is off topic but i have to post this, My point about it being infinitley moddable was meant to be a nod to how awesome of a base Tynan has given us, it wasnt meant as a do it yourself comment.

I personally do not mod for glory or anyone else, i mod cuz its fun, if Tynan makes a mod of mine obsolete by adding it to the core game, thats one less thing I have to mess with which means one more new thing I can create and mess with. If the risk of something getting added to the main game stopped modders, then most of the prolific modders here would be gone, no JEllie, Haplo, Mrofa and others, lots of stuff from modders is in the core game now. Also a lot of the content is original stuff not based on anything in core, so again I mean no offence but your point of "why bother" is a bad one.

/offtopic

Back ontopic, if iron is introduced are we going have to refine it into steel? (if not, do we not fall into the same trappings Vas brought up about steel, for example you wouldnt make a solar panel out of iron...) too many processing steps does not work well in this game. I found this out in my material crops mod, your colonists end up doing that and nothing else. Theres other considerations that need to be taken into account here bar the "realistic" argument.

Edit - lol Vas you posted while I was typing that response to 200Down.

Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: elStrages on February 08, 2015, 06:01:16 PM
I would definitely say that iron ore makes more sense in a mining point of view, but I suppose it really doesn't make much difference, I mean you can mine Plasteel anyways. Who's to say on the outer planet that steel hasn't formed naturally.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: 200Down on February 08, 2015, 06:22:21 PM
/offtopic
Back ontopic, if iron is introduced are we going have to refine it into steel? (if not, do we not fall into the same trappings Vas brought up about steel, for example you wouldnt make a solar panel out of iron...) too many processing steps does not work well in this game. I found this out in my material crops mod, your colonists end up doing that and nothing else. Theres other considerations that need to be taken into account here bar the "realistic" argument.

Soo much of the game feels like a placeholder it's boggling sometimes to even decide what to "suggest".  We need a "Tynan Stamp" of approval or disapproval on suggestion threads or just a "yes I've seen your suggestion" stamp bahahahahaha. It's fine if he hates the idea but let us know so we can drop it all together :)

But yea I found out the "Nu Metals" is the one I'm using. Which basically adds "ore" types to just the metals which is just four. I modified the smelting process... faster... more at one time. It's another step but quick enough to not take over the entire beginning of the game. I personally just missed the feeling of progression you got in DF from actual ores.  Maybe things like this should just stay as mods. Donno

Actually, just big red "SCREW YOU" stamp... yea.. that's the ticket
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 09, 2015, 03:39:11 AM
If we rename steel to iron, all items will take iron to craft rather than steel.  It simply makes more sense for a group of people who crash landed in the middle of no where.  Steel is difficult to work with because it has higher melting points and is stronger material.  I don't think 3 naked people starving to death because they can barely get food are going to be working with steel proficiently.

However, this also lets someone make a mod to make steel.  You can't make steel into anything, because Steel is man made, and doesn't go into anything.  It's made with multiple types of metal, main being Iron.  Iron gets mixed with a lot of things to make other things.  Mainly steel.  So if it is renamed, it brings realism back to the game and adds modding options.

Yes, I realize adding a step to refine iron into steel would add more work for colonists, that's why steel should be a sort of mid-late game thing.  Like building gold/silver walls and your ship.

Also, yes, I know Plasteel is minable.  I don't completely like that either but, it is kind of here to stay.  Though I did make a mod that lets you craft it from steel after you craft steel with Iron.  But anyway.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: TrashMan on February 09, 2015, 05:04:05 AM
IRON ORE - mined from mountains

Simple smelter made from stone (stoneworking unlocked immediately? Advanced stoneworking for later?) can turn it into IRON INGOTS.
iron ingots are heavy and durable.
smleting iron again (+ coal?) gives you STEEL
Steel is lighter and more durable.

finally copper for copper wires. No more steel conduits.

Would this slow down the game progression somewhat? Yes a bit. You'd have to depend more on wood and stone early on. So what? Frankly I think the progression is too fast.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Johnny Masters on February 09, 2015, 12:25:49 PM
I too wouldn't mind a slower progression and chain production, although the game would have to be rebalanced around that, perhaps a longer day and raiders take longer to appear: which is something i'd like to see anyway, for a rimworld its too crowded.

I understand wanting a new system, but new for the sake of new does not make a good point, specially if the logic behind is flawed. ie: using compacted steel from crashed ships is 'novel', but the logic behind is IMO a bit silly and feels like a placeholder until a better system comes -which might just be. I actually liked "metal" better.

Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: muffins on February 10, 2015, 05:50:38 AM
It would be interesting if there were several metals, and like stone they're not always on your play map. Imagine having to make weapons out of copper, lead or tin for instance, or having to import steel.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: 200Down on February 10, 2015, 07:21:44 PM
Don't go too crazy now! My colonists won't have time left for.. well.... nothing but waiting for more attacks.

The idea of mining steel from hills/mountains regardless of how you "spin" it is just too hard to swallow. It's the equivalent of telling us that you should crap on a firepit and then say "that's how it works in my "lore"". And while your at it you should wipe with your buddy's beard because it makes it softer in THIS world. Almost as easy to accept as drinking food and eating water.

It would be different if the ENTIRE game was off the rails and completely unrealistic. But it isn't. Nuff said really.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: BetaSpectre on February 11, 2015, 02:03:20 AM
TBH I always thought it was iron ore.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Bitharne on February 11, 2015, 03:30:13 AM
It's not steel ore...that would be silly, and there is no such thing.

It's Compacted Steel, potentially millions or billions of years have passed on some planets with structures or ships getting smushed into the geology. This also allows compacted plasteel on the map.

Now, if in the future the game expands and adds iron, but leavs some compacted steel we might have some talks about that.

In the end, I dont see what iron can add...the game is set in a time where steel is trivial to create from iron and there is far too few pawns for elaborate industrial chains to get from a useless item to a basic item.

It would be similar to arguing that logs can only be used in construction after the were cut into planks. That said, I miss the old log wall :P
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Johnny Masters on February 11, 2015, 03:51:46 AM
I think everyone is aware of the explaining behind compacted steel, perhaps we are questioning its plausibility, which liking or not is important for a lot of people.

The game is set in a time where different tech levels coexist, and you crash on a planet devoid of a significantly advanced civilization, essentially going back to the stone age - if not for the omni-mega-super-tool that does everything and is yet to be addressed in lore. That said, it makes sense to re-do some steps in how we produce things before achieving glitterworld tech. For me, the longer the chain and investment, the greater the reward (mileage may vary).

techtree minami allows for logs to be used in 'raw' constructions and to cut logs into wood planks to make regular wood walls. It works great. But yeah, the more steps we have the longer the days (should) become, the slower the game flows, which is not necessarily a bad thing.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: 200Down on February 11, 2015, 04:51:13 AM
It would be similar to arguing that logs can only be used in construction after the were cut into planks. That said, I miss the old log wall :P

Just out of curiosity, I think I noticed some remnants of cutting logs by hand in one of the xml's. Was that in the game at one time or a planned feature that got abandoned. Don't really care ither way just curious is all.

ok back to the topic at hand;
Ya um... ya.. just can't do it.. no way no how... you guys suck for thinkin in any way differently than I do!  Ok so maybe it wasn't constructive but it was a comment. sorta.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: TrashMan on February 11, 2015, 05:02:56 AM
It's Compacted Steel, potentially millions or billions of years have passed on some planets with structures or ships getting smushed into the geology. This also allows compacted plasteel on the map.

Ever heard of degradation/decomposition?
Steel won't last millions of years.

The whole "we found a million year of spaceship and it still works" is high fantasy.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: TrashMan on February 11, 2015, 05:26:37 AM
Can someone explain to me what's so elaborate about smelting iron ore?
How is that different from cutting stone?
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Cryonist on February 11, 2015, 05:44:45 AM
I vote to have Iron Ore spawn on the map, have Iron drop from these Iron Ore and use that as a first level material. Maybe in the future we can have steel as a more advanced metal but its just weird to mine up steel right from the ground.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 16, 2015, 03:27:04 PM
Ever heard of degradation/decomposition?
Steel won't last millions of years.

The whole "we found a million year of spaceship and it still works" is high fantasy.

Yea!  My space ship only lasted nine hundred ninety nine thousand nine hundred ninety nine years.  :|
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Igabod on February 16, 2015, 04:33:08 PM
I support the idea of renaming Steel to Iron. I also support the idea of adding in multiple metals (which I suspect is coming before too long anyway). I'm not sure I like the idea of having to smelt iron and coal to make steel unless you are also able to build things out of iron (with lower stats than steel) and let steel just be a higher quality building material. It might even be cool if building walls out of steel had a thinner wall graphic than those of wood, stone, gold, silver and iron. Plasteel should also have a thinner wall texture.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Mithradates on February 18, 2015, 12:18:31 PM
Can someone explain to me what's so elaborate about smelting iron ore?
How is that different from cutting stone?

I'll do this as simply as I can.

Steel is Iron with some small amount of carbon in a semi-crystalline matrix. This is usually achieved by burning coal, wood, or charcoal (charcoal is essentially pressure-cooked wood) in furnace made of a material designed to refract heat more than absorb it (effectively keeping the heat in), while the metal is kept in a crucible which is made of a material with a significantly higher melting point that what you are attempting to melt (Kianite clay, for example; run-of-the-mill stone isn't going to cut it). As the iron ore melts, the carbon released into the air from the burning material is mixed with it and forms chemical bonds. Dross (the impurities) are scooped away (almost certainly lighter than the molten iron, so usually on the top), and the molten metal is poured, usually into an ingot mould (ingots are highly pure metal bars/rounds) and allowed to cool until solid. From there they are either dumped into water, or allowed to cool naturally. Slag is the counter to dross - the mixtures of Iron and things which are heavier than it usually stay behind when the pour is made, as they solidify before the pour is made. These can be recast later.

From the ingots, one can resmelt the ingots (which are mostly pure, meaning less 'clean up' time than before), and cast them into various moulds and allowed to cool. As well, Ingots can be smithed, which takes far longer, requiring much more skill, but producing stronger results. I won't go into all the specifics of smithing, but this is the basic principle.

Stonecutting is taking a chisel to a rock. and hitting it with enough force to chip a little away, but not crack the entire stone.

I hope that helps.

Also, just as an aside - did you know that Titanium is actually much weaker than most steels? It is considered to be so 'strong' because it weighs so little compared to steel - and is much stronger than other light-weight metals such as aluminum and magnesium. I especially want Tynan to read this bit, in case he plans on implementing titanium into the game; one of my pet peeves is when people make titanium out to be some super-strong material, when in actuality it is not. Luckily, the actual casting of titanium is a rather difficult process, requiring extremely high temperatures (1600+C) and a low-oxygen environment. Perfect for some late game research.

Unnecessarily moving, glowing super-scripted underlined text complete with its own italicized, emboldened, and subscripted shadow!  Now with Green Stricken-through Text in Andale 8.pt font!
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: TrashMan on February 19, 2015, 03:17:02 AM
I meant from a gameplay/mechanical/micromanagement standpoint.

In both cases you have resource A that you take to crafting station B to make resource C.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Mithradates on February 19, 2015, 09:57:18 AM
I meant from a gameplay/mechanical/micromanagement standpoint.

In both cases you have resource A that you take to crafting station B to make resource C.

Well, this would require two resources, at a minimum. If you're using charcoal, then that is an entirely different step (and trust me; you're using charcoal) that needs to be done beforehand. If you're making ingots (you are), then you have yet another step.

Electric smelters would work for cast iron...and of course there are other ways of melting iron and adding carbon rather than burning the carbon.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 23, 2015, 12:38:44 AM
I'm not sure I like the idea of having to smelt iron and coal to make steel unless you are also able to build things out of iron.
The idea was exactly this sorta.  You make things out of iron, but those stronger type things like guns, need to be made from steel or better.  Iron is a weak metal so things made of iron will also be weakish.  Steel would be sort of optional for many things, an iron bed or a steel bed.  Obviously the steel bed would last longer in a fire or under attack or whatever, but yea.

In both cases you have resource A that you take to crafting station B to make resource C.
Read my reply to the above quote.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Mithradates on February 23, 2015, 02:05:42 AM
I'm not sure I like the idea of having to smelt iron and coal to make steel unless you are also able to build things out of iron.
The idea was exactly this sorta.  You make things out of iron, but those stronger type things like guns, need to be made from steel or better.  Iron is a weak metal so things made of iron will also be weakish.  Steel would be sort of optional for many things, an iron bed or a steel bed.  Obviously the steel bed would last longer in a fire or under attack or whatever, but yea.

Actually, Iron isn't *that* much weaker than steel. It would be more akin to the difference between stone types than anything else.

Regarding Firearms; remember that for a few hundred years, cannons were made of bronze and brass - including the ridiculously big ones, such as the Basilica Cannon of 1453.

Quote
During the autumn of 1452, Orban set to work at Edirne, casting one of the largest cannons ever built, while Mehmed stockpiled substantial quantities of materials for guns and gunpowder: copper and tin, saltpeter, sulfur and charcoal. Workers excavated an enormous casting pit and melted scrap bronze in the brick-lined furnaces, superheating it with bellows and pouring it into the mold.

What finally emerged from Orban's foundry once the molds had been knocked off was "a horrifying and extraordinary monster." It was 27 feet long. The barrel, walled with 8 inches of solid bronze to absorb the force of the blast, had a diameter of 30 inches, enough for a man to enter on his hands and knees and designed to accommodate a stone shot weighing something over half a ton. In January 1453, Mehmed ordered a test firing of the gun outside his royal palace. The mighty bombard was hauled into position near the gate and primed with powder. Laborers lugged a giant stone ball to the mouth of the barrel and rolled it back to sit snugly against the gunpowder chamber. A lighted taper was put to the touchhole. With a shattering roar and a cloud of smoke, the mighty projectile hurled across the countryside for a mile before burying itself six feet into the soft earth.

I'd be fine with them degrading more quickly.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on May 25, 2015, 12:57:00 PM
31 votes for Iron, 11 votes for Steel, why hasn't steel been renamed to Iron yet? >.>  You can't really turn steel into anything.  For the sake of having a metal you can upgrade and realism, steel should be renamed to iron, and then the ability to upgrade iron into steel should be added.  Plasteel however, is plastic steel, and should be made a different way, if we ever add plastic making to the game.

I just wanted to bump this while I have enough internet to actually post and load something.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: SSS on May 25, 2015, 08:15:31 PM
Plasteel isn't necessarily a portmanteau of plastic and steel. It could also be a version of the present-day fiberglass/steel composite, though I don't know how strong that is in comparison the normal steel. (After looking into it a bit, I believe I'm thinking of "metallic glass", which is indeed stronger than steel.)

It hasn't been changed to iron yet because this isn't a democracy. It's a benevolent tyranny. Tynan will change it if he agrees it should be changed.

My take on this is that fun >>> realism, full stop. I don't particularly mind if we call it iron instead of steel (though not everything steel is currently used for would make sense for iron either, such as the solar panels), and I myself have pointed out that using silver would make more sense for power conduits (it's an even better conductor than copper). However, adding multiple steps to getting stuff shouldn't be done unless there's a really good reason from a game mechanics standpoint, in my opinion, or it bogs down the game unnecessarily. This might work if we swapped the roles of stone and steel, but then you run back into the realism argument all over again because (for example) granite is actually harder than steel even though it's more difficult to shape, so giving steel more hitpoints doesn't necessarily make sense. (We could argue this further with blunt vs. sharp damage since granite is more brittle [to my knowledge], but you get the idea.)

I'd rather just chill with the game mechanics than pursue realism, since there's always going to be some relinquishment. Games are like reality unless noted- I see no problem with admitting this isn't like reality, which the game does indeed do. Saying no sort of lore could possibly cover it just seems needlessly stubborn, to me.

tl;dr: While I'm not specifically against iron ore rather than steel deposits, more globally I'm against the idea of pursuing realism if it doesn't enhance the gameplay, which this seems to fall under: How would this enhance the gameplay?
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Kegereneku on May 26, 2015, 08:18:15 AM
Same as above.
Fun > realism

And even if it was Iron it wouldn't change the fact that colonist are molding complex technology, cryptosleep casket, ANTIMATTER REACTOR, without any tools. (and even with tools it wouldn't make it less crazy)
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Matthiasagreen on May 26, 2015, 09:59:07 AM
Same as above.
Fun > realism

And even if it was Iron it wouldn't change the fact that colonist are molding complex technology, cryptosleep casket, ANTIMATTER REACTOR, without any tools. (and even with tools it wouldn't make it less crazy)

I bet they all come with sonic screwdrivers. That is how so much gets done.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on May 27, 2015, 06:17:10 PM
It's not like renaming steel to Iron will change anything for the worse.  It's a realism change that doesn't hurt the game.  :P  Like renaming Metal to Steel, it didn't hurt anything, other than the realism.

I made another poll to hopefully help, because some players aren't registered to the forums and such.
http://strawpoll.me/4471638/
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: keylocke on May 28, 2015, 07:43:27 AM
tl;dr :

i agree that steel ore should be called iron ore, then plasteel can be changed to coal. then in order to craft steel, the players must smelt iron with coal.

i think the forging and smelting process opens up the possibility of creating "stuff" from more types of materials, without having to add more ore "types" to mine. since you can combine different types of materials to produce new building materials.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: DustBust on May 29, 2015, 11:35:07 AM
It would definitely be a nice adder to the vanilla version which you would have to smelt and create bars for products. Just creates more depth in my opinion.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on January 26, 2016, 01:06:26 AM
Funny, 71% of voters want this.  I'm gonna bump again so more people can see and discuss this because in my opinion, it is still a problem and I really don't want people getting used to it even though they already have mostly.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Boston on January 27, 2016, 03:18:41 AM
I also think that the current 'Steel" item you mine should reeealllllyyyy be renamed to "iron ore", mainly for realism purposes.

Also, my health is suffering as a result of facepalming every time I see chunks of steel poking out of rock formations. Steel rusts when exposed to water and air. That is .... that's just what it does. Chemical reactions, science and stuff.

NOTE: Iron rusts as well, just not as quickly as steel. Some types of iron, usually dependent on their chemical makeup, can actually be relatively impervious to rust. A specific type, known as "bog iron" was arguably the most common source of iron worldwide, up until the development of steam technology made actual mining economical.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bog_iron
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Regret on January 27, 2016, 08:14:34 AM
It would be similar to arguing that logs can only be used in construction after the were cut into planks. That said, I miss the old log wall :P

Just out of curiosity, I think I noticed some remnants of cutting logs by hand in one of the xml's. Was that in the game at one time or a planned feature that got abandoned. Don't really care ither way just curious is all.

ok back to the topic at hand;
Ya um... ya.. just can't do it.. no way no how... you guys suck for thinkin in any way differently than I do!  Ok so maybe it wasn't constructive but it was a comment. sorta.
Yeah, there used to be logs and planks in the game, a long long time ago.
It was fun flavor-wise but really annoying gameplay-wise.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Shenpen on January 30, 2016, 03:17:51 AM
There are no really good solutions to this choice, mainly because the use of metal is a bit more complicated than the understanding that the causual gamer is prone to have.

Iron ore: What you find in the underground, containing enough iron to be aviable source of iron.

Iron: The metal and the  chemical element  Fe, used in a lot of products.

Iron: The common name for products based on iron in some form, usually strengthened with a bit of carbon.

Cast Iron or Pig Iron: Used for casting products and has a high amount of carbon, but is brittle.

Steel: Is what is used in most standard production, has a lower amount of carbon and is easy to bend, shape, weld and mill.

Compacted iron: Some alloys of iron (mixes of iron and say titanium and vanadium) have a very high melting point at normal pressure, but putting a poweder in a cast under pressure helps make it bind at a lower temperature. This is called compacting or sintering.
Compacted iron would not be found in nature but is important in modern industry.

Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Toggle on January 30, 2016, 02:48:20 PM
Vas, not supposed to bump threads without actually adding something to contribute. This is part of the game lore, the steel isn't ore because it's not the planets natural resources, it's thousands of years of crashed ships and technology that you mine out of the planet.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on January 30, 2016, 05:57:22 PM
Yes, ships crash and make an ore shape pile of steel, logical.
Or previous civilizations built their homes in ore shape pods.  Logical...
Steel didn't rust over those thousands of years.  Also "logical"....

That was all sarcasm by the way.

----
Also, would you rather I repost my threads instead if I'm not gonna bump it back up to relevance?
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Toggle on January 30, 2016, 11:03:48 PM
Yeah, it's not exactly flawless lore, but it's more to justify the gameplay aspects. As for bumping, literally a rule, if someone was searching for it to discuss they'd search it or ask again, link it back to here, but if the thread dies, the thread dies.

8. No content-free bumping: No posting of content-free posts in topics just to bump them to the top of the page.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: JKTD1919 on January 31, 2016, 01:48:50 AM
The surface steel on the planets are supposed to be crashed ships. Not natural deposits. So it should stay "Compacted Steel" and not mineral iron.

Otherwise, you'd have to smelt iron to use it, which would be horrible early game, where metal is actually needed relatively early.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on January 31, 2016, 06:50:28 AM
Zombie: I didn't post a totally contentless post.  I pointed out how 71% wants the change and said it's still an issue.

JKTD: Are you saying that you can use steel without shaping and cutting it?  Just take down some broken down steel wall that by some freak of physics didn't rust into a pile of dust over 3000 years, and make a bed out of it with no problems at all?  You must be the incredible hulk to bend that steel easily to fit what you need.  Or have tools so advanced that making Iron Ore usable would be a trivial task as well.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vagabond on February 03, 2016, 02:19:31 AM
Vas,

I vote yes to Proposition 26 (Hehe. Anyone?)! Metal you grab out of a mountain should be iron ORE.

Any steel that has been sitting around long enough to get buried under a mountain would have oxidized into a dust. Not "compacted". Plasteel, assuming it is based on real stuff, is a fiberglass/steel composite. Same issue occurs with steel, it'll oxidize and the fiberglass will deteriorate within a century or so to just a pile of hay-like dirty fibers.

There should still be scrap metal available to reuse and map-gen buildings/ruins to cannibalize; perhaps even busted up ships/shuttles/escape pods. Expanding on that, whenever pawns land via shuttlepods, maybe they should stay as physical objects that can be dismantled for metal and components.

Whoever says "Hur hur fun>Realism" offend me on a personal and intellectual level and, in my opinion, have no business making suggestions for a sci-fi survival simulation. It is a cop out, it is lazy, and it totally undermines the nature of the genre. A true travesty of a legacy gifted to us by the brilliantly creative minds of people such as the "Big Three".

Cheers!
Michael

Note: I didn't read the thread at all. . . Until after I posted. It would seem my arguments aren't new. But still valid. Consider this support to what other intelligent people have said.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 03, 2016, 03:14:29 AM
A lot of what people are talking about here is real life. The plasteel here is probably based on the stuff from Dune which is a crystaline material for one. Also having it be ore means having another production step which Tynan deemed too much and i somewhat agree. Having it as compacted steel gets around that issue, is it perfect? No, but having ore is worse.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 03, 2016, 10:53:52 AM
Its the people who like realism and can help make such small changes to keep realism while having fun who are great.  It is offensive that people claim fun beats realism when it's something so small as this.

I mean, how bad is it to have IRON FUCKING ORE?  How does that ruin the game in any way shape or form?  Iron is a metal, it is strong enough to do what it needs to do.  I have a table with Aluminum legs, and it holds up pretty well!  Why is Iron such a bad thing?  Steel is a man made metal and therefor must be constructed, can not be found naturally, and deteriorates and is insulting the intellect of the masses when used like this.  Making uneducated people think "wow, steel can survive thousands of years? That's awesome!" and then find out later it was just a game.  Why can't games have realism and fun?

We don't need to turn into Space Engineers, they abandon all realism in their game and went against their mission statement, lied about everything on their mission statement.  Everything in Space Engineers is a crock of shit, and I know this because I spent years modding for it trying to fix their crock of shit but they hard coded so much of the game, it can't be done.

An iron bed as opposed to a steel bed is not going to break game play in any way whatsoever.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 03, 2016, 12:39:25 PM
Its not the iron thats the issue its simply that iron ore would need processing and that was deemed too costly the games flow.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Thane on February 03, 2016, 12:48:33 PM
I support the change to iron. It seems less of a leap that the magic Omni tool refines mined minerals automatically than that steel can survive that long.

Though I do react to your SE remark. I admit they made concessions for gameplay (Jumpdrives, miniscule planets, sound effects, artificial gravity (that needs to die) and no aero-braking), but overall it is good for what it is (though you need the enterprise to run it well).
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: erdrik on February 03, 2016, 03:09:43 PM
I wouldn't have a problem with adding Iron ore, but also respect the decision of the developer.
Especially since the decision was probably a core decision made very early in development.
(in light of when wood planks were removed)

It sounds to me like you want the game to be something it was never intended to be.
And while I can appreciate the difficulty in finding games that can balance fun without sacrificing realism,
I don't think you should be getting mad or throwing around your frustrations at a developer that has at the end of the day made a good game.

If you want iron ore that badly, there are mod options.
And as someone how has modded the game myself, I can say those options are extensive and accessible.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Boston on February 04, 2016, 02:02:44 AM
Its not the iron thats the issue its simply that iron ore would need processing and that was deemed too costly the games flow.

Weird, the mod "Superior Crafting" had a "mine ore > smelt ingots > make items" mechanic and flow, and it didn't impair my enjoyment of the game at all. It also had a "fell trees < collect lumber < saw boards" thing that was actually rather fun. The finished boards sold for good money, and you could make log cabins from the rough logs.

If anything, it made the game "better". Now, instead of just cranking turrets and killboxes out of my colonists ass, I actually had to plan ahead. Interact with the game-world AND the NPCS. Write a "story".
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 04, 2016, 02:36:24 AM
But thats you. Not everyone. As stated above this decision was made early on, we have had this discussion many times and its always the same outcome, nothing changes because it goes against a decision that was made early in development. It used to be just simply "metal" so its not like this was the first iteration, this was done deliberately. If you guys want it that bad ill throw up a mod that does it, would take 10 mins for a simple change.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 04, 2016, 07:57:13 AM
I support the change to iron. It seems less of a leap that the magic Omni tool refines mined minerals automatically than that steel can survive that long.

Though I do react to your SE remark. I admit they made concessions for gameplay (Jumpdrives, miniscule planets, sound effects, artificial gravity (that needs to die) and no aero-braking), but overall it is good for what it is (though you need the enterprise to run it well).
Yea, the same omni tool we use now could automatically refine Iron Ore, much more realistically than it can refine powdered rusty piles of steel into usable metal.

SE, they sacrificed massive amounts of the game for gameplay sake.  I offered ways to do it realistically while still being fun.  They chose the lazy shit way.  They don't give a shit about realism and science and any of that, their mission statement is totally shit.

I wouldn't have a problem with adding Iron ore, but also respect the decision of the developer.
Especially since the decision was probably a core decision made very early in development.
(in light of when wood planks were removed)

It sounds to me like you want the game to be something it was never intended to be.
And while I can appreciate the difficulty in finding games that can balance fun without sacrificing realism,
I don't think you should be getting mad or throwing around your frustrations at a developer that has at the end of the day made a good game.

If you want iron ore that badly, there are mod options.
And as someone how has modded the game myself, I can say those options are extensive and accessible.

It was named Metal, previously.  It's also not a core game hing.  I can change it easily if I want.  The issue is mods are all based on steel which means it can't be changed by mods without making a mod incompatible with everything out there.  I do think the game is good, I'm just frustrated with developers sacrificing realism for "gameplay".  Like Space Engineers who sacrificed their entire mission statement to turn their game into a big joke, where all you do is make a ship and crash it into another, that's the whole object of that game at this point.  Nothing scientific about it whatsoever.

Now, instead of just cranking turrets and killboxes out of my colonists ass, I actually had to plan ahead. Interact with the game-world AND the NPCS. Write a "story".
Exactly.  Now all I gotta do is construct a bunch of turrets right off the bat and I'm all set.  The game dev keeps nerfing turrets because of this and making the game "harder" and "harder" and in all the wrong ways, because he doesn't want to add this flow to the game that actually makes you wait till you craft steel to get turrets and such.  Game core turrets are total trash and stupid useless piles of scrap now because of how much he nerfed them.  It's illogically dumb.  Might as well use a BB gun, it'll do more damage and be more accurate.  I use a turret mod to have turrets at what they SHOULD have been.  Unfortunately, it's still easy to build turrets because there's no real stage in development that requires me to get steel first.

Chances are after he reads this bit about pill box users, he'll instead of adding this flow you spoke of, make turrets require plasteel.

But thats you. Not everyone. As stated above this decision was made early on, we have had this discussion many times and its always the same outcome, nothing changes because it goes against a decision that was made early in development. It used to be just simply "metal" so its not like this was the first iteration, this was done deliberately. If you guys want it that bad ill throw up a mod that does it, would take 10 mins for a simple change.
It was named "metal" early on because it was more of a place holder till the game was more fleshed out.  Now you can't change it with a mod, because it will literally be incompatible with ALL MODS THAT EXIST and no one will ever use it.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 04, 2016, 08:05:15 AM
unless you make the end product steel.....
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 04, 2016, 08:09:47 AM
Your reply is too short for me to understand what you mean Skully.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 04, 2016, 08:10:57 AM
if you are going to make iron ore a thing, then you also make charcoal or coal a thing then you combine the two to make steel somehow, now you have iron ore and steel with no issues bar an extra production chain.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 04, 2016, 08:29:00 AM
Coal is already a thing for me :P  But anyway.

Steel doesn't need to be the final tier either.  Plasteel is still a light weight steel type object that you can use in the construction of space ships.  You could add rubber trees to the game to get resin from to make plastics with and then make Plasteel with for space ships.  That adds a Tier 3 product to the game for getting ships that let you escape.  Rather than you just making some random ship with random unrealistic ore you find in the ground out of rusty old Steel and partially decomposed thousands of years old plastic steel.

Personally I think the game gets too hard too fast.  The first raid is 1 person, while the second raid is like 5-10 people, the 3rd is "oh my god I'm glad Steel is here so I can have my pillboxes already".  The game is designed as tower defense at this stage.  Designed to either force you to lose the game or tower defense or bunker up inside a mountain and use exploits to survive where sappers murder themselves by grenading their own team.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: lude on February 04, 2016, 08:51:31 AM
If you only change the label it will stay compatible with all kinds of mods, I'm currently testing Hardcore SK and there Plasteel is just Nickel and Steel is just Iron Ore and was removed by hand from all kinds of recipes, which just leads to 'cheap' recipes when you add other mods.

So far I've changed stuff for RTFTJ, Neurotrainer, Powerless, Adaption Refusal and a few other minor to work better with it, but mainly added parts, electronics and such stuff to the recipes.

But before they all kinda just cost iron ore while everything else needs it to be refined.

Anyway, I'm also pro Iron Ore, but also leaving in Steel and Plasteel, perhaps make it visible that it was a spaceship or some such, have an interior, up the drop per block, add some nifty danger, make those relics a bit younger, also steel or iron in anaerobic conditions tends to last some time tho even then microbes and other stuff would slowly turn it into iron again under compaction and stuff.


also

y no Z level :(
okay okay because every tile basically lives

I personally just hope, that no matter what happens, this game continues to be my surrogate for DF2
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 04, 2016, 10:14:29 AM
The problem with simply changing the ID is it one, gets confusing, and two, leads to odd recipes that sometimes make no sense.

If Steel remains in the game, it should be renamed to Stainless Steel, which is stronger and lasts much longer, this would work for some of those ex-buildings from the previous civilizations.  It most definitely shouldn't spawn as if an ore too as it does right now.  Plasteel should be the same way, only more like a crashed ship where it's kind of scattered around this random area, and should be more recent rather than thousands of years old because again, those would decay over time.

On top of that, both should instead of being in an ore like rock, be renamed to "ruined steel structure" "ruined plasteel hull" or some such like that so that you must deconstruct/mine it out to get it.  It would just make more sense than having an ore pocket of "compacted steel".


Z-Levels would be interesting by the way, it was done in Gnomoria and was functional to some extent.  :P  It's just difficult.  I don't mind the game staying on one level, but I would like things to be placed on different levels in a sort of programming aspect.  So I won't see conduits or air ducts anymore, while I can also modify the ceiling to be something different too.  But that's for another topic.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Toggle on February 04, 2016, 01:22:35 PM
use exploits to survive where sappers murder themselves by grenading their own team.

What do you mean use exploits, kill boxes? Because kill boxes aren't exploits. They're defended entrances to a base.

Also, an answer to the steel is that it isn't OUR steel. It could be another type of material that exists in this 3,000 years in the future. Realism in any game that isn't centered on it is generally just an excuse.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 04, 2016, 01:34:17 PM
I had sappers move in to attack my base once, they mined a long straight tunnel to the wall of my base then grenaded each other at that spot and killed themselves and fled.  Doing 2 seconds repair time worth of actual damage.  :P

As for steel that isn't steel, why call it steel?  Our steel wouldn't last that long for sure.  I like games to have some sort of scientific accuracy, it doesn't have to be totally accurate, but making everything up as you go along just gets dumb.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Toggle on February 04, 2016, 01:54:23 PM
Steel would be more recognizable then a random name.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 04, 2016, 01:59:43 PM
It's from a civilization that existed prior to us, ruins of a civilization that was around either before we exited earth, or even prior to us becoming a civilization.

I just think many people here agree Steel is scientifically a bad name for it especially the way the game draws it out in ore piles and stuff.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: erdrik on February 04, 2016, 02:11:11 PM
The issue is mods are all based on steel which means it can't be changed by mods without making a mod incompatible with everything out there.
Your coming at the issue from the wrong direction.
Don't change steel. Because, yea, doing so would make your mod incompatible.
But you can always add iron ore as a separate item from the existing steel that the player smelts into iron and can further process into steel. You can even add the iron item to the Metallic stuff category and give it differing rates of deterioration/ health/ ect than steel. Its not that you can't do it, its that you have to use steel as the baseline.

Then all you have to do is change the world gen options to produce less(or even none) "compacted" steel and more iron ore. Some mods will still be incompatible, but it will mostly narrow it down to only other world gen mods.

SE, they sacrificed massive amounts of the game for gameplay sake.  I offered ways to do it realistically while still being fun.  They chose the lazy shit way.  They don't give a shit about realism and science and any of that, their mission statement is totally shit.
You should probably stop with the disparaging stuff. You aren't going to get any Dev to listen to you if you disparage their work, even indirectly. Anger and frustration is no excuse. You can re-read and change your post before hitting that 'post' button. Devs don't have to listen to you. They are in the position of experience to get things done. They know what they can do. What their teams can do. But they don't know anything about you, and claims of experience from their forums members don't mean much unless it is backed with evidence through reliable channels. Calling them and their work "lazy" and "shit" because they didn't listen to you, only gives more reason to not listen to you.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Toggle on February 04, 2016, 02:18:22 PM
Honestly this topic is a year old. Just let it die. 54 people voted yes, a pretty small amount of the community.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 04, 2016, 03:55:12 PM
Yes, I started the topic.  And 67.5% of the people who voted, voted Yes.  It's only recently that more people are voting no, because all of you come here saying "No steel's fine, screw realism." prior to all you neighsayers coming here to take down my topic, the vote was closer to 75% yes.  And now that it's being talked about, again, I'm not gonna let it drop.  I have tons of suggestions that get ignored because everyone wants to suggest their own thing and even though everyone likes to post 5 word suggestions "I want this thing in game" and is done, I try to balance my idea, explain it in a detailed way, and I make alterations when people point out a flaw.  I do my best to make sure I'm not one of those people who goes "I want z-levels, hover cars, tanks, dragons, etc".
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 05, 2016, 02:37:32 AM
And thats totally fine but us neighsayers have a voice too and i also try to explain why i dont want iron ore. If the person voting no, agrees with one of our opinions is that wrong? They may have just not seen the post until now or are new to the forums, is any vote on this not valuable. All you need to know is that its not a unanimous outcome. So therefore the decision as it did anyway stays with Tynan to make.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 05, 2016, 09:59:09 AM
I'm not saying it's not valuable but suddenly a lot of people start voting neigh, it's as if the neighsayers link the topic to people who will specifically vote no.  And you can't say "Vote fails to pass because only 80 have voted".  Obviously there are more people than that who own the game, even if 10,000 own the game, if only 80 participate in the community, then that is the community's decision and the other 10k should have voted if they wanted a say in it.  Not voting, means you don't care what happens therefor the popular vote wins.  It's the same way when voting in a president.  If you don't vote, you let whoever has the most votes win.  (Which this year it seems it's going to be Adolf Trump)

You explain you don't want Iron Ore, because that wouldn't make sense to use with omni tools that can cut through Steel like butter and bring it back from an oxidized rust dust state when it spawns inside rock in an ore like manner.  Right?  Explain how that, what I just said, makes more sense than Iron Ore and an Omni Tool "refining" it as it mines?  Extracting all the stone from it so it's pure iron.

Keep in mind, even if you were mining undamaged, unoxidized, unrusted Steel, your omni tool would have to be much much stronger to mine it than it would be for Iron.  And in both cases you still need to melt it down in order to re-shape it only one requires a much much higher melting temp.  Both are going to require moldings to shape them and harden in the shape you want.  One will take longer than the other to cool down cause it's so hot.  You'd still need to drill holes into it and stuff for screws to hold the frame work together, of course it'll be more difficult on one of them being a much stronger metal.

The request, is to simply rename Steel, to Iron, and treat it as an ore.  We don't actually need to add new steps.  We can use our imaginations to pretend we are smelting it before we use it.  And mods can add a smelter building if they want to add the extra step.  As it stands, Steel is illogical, impossible, and makes it so no mod can replace it the PROPER way.  I made a mod that changed it once, using only the name thing, it was horrible.  I gave up and abandon the project.  The core game must be altered, and then all mods in the world will be incompatible.  Unless of course I add a new steel, then all mods that add stuff will cost a Tier 2 resource.  But anyway.

Iron Ore can be found in rock.  Compacted Steel (Steel ORE based on how it spawns) can not, not would the remnants of a steel building exist a thousand years later.  It'd be a pile of dust, that blew away in the wind, or you'd find an empty pocket of rusty old dust in the mountain you just dug into.  Or you'd dig into a pocket of rusty old dust with disintegrated plastic (plasteel).  But you can always find Iron Ore.

Imagine if all you could find in the game was the strongest substance, Plasteel.  Now how would you make a mod to replace that and go down to the lowest tier if everything assumes highest tier?  You'll require less plasteel to make something than Iron, so all mods would be requesting a different volume than they should for the resource you are replacing with.  So you replace Plasteel with Iron in the names area but not the code part.  Now the game thinks that Def Plasteel is called Iron.  Instead of your bed costing 6 Iron like it should, it costs 1 Iron, because it was 1 Plasteel before.  And don't say "so change that", think about he other mods using that same method that people are about to use with your mod.  It's a complete disaster for modding for realism.  I think I was happier when it was just called Metal, at least back then I could assume Iron.  Now it makes even less sense than ever.

If Tynan wants us to find remnants of past civilizations, he should put remnants of buildings, not stick steel ore and plasteel ore in a mountain.  I disabled the stone remnant buildings in my map generator because it's kinda ugly to have all over the map.  The past civilization obviously used stone buildings and not Steel according to this map generator.  On top of that I'm pretty sure the civilization didn't build buildings in the shape of ore pockets while building stone buildings in the shape of normal buildings.  It's a cluster of DOES NOT COMPUTE, Bender's head would explode if he tried to understand he game logic where the physics literally makes no sense at all.  I'm really quite annoyed I have to keep explaining this over and over and over again.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 05, 2016, 10:13:54 AM
its not a case of whats right, sometimes a simple business decision is what drives a function. As a small example, cotton plants drop cloth currently, thats even more far removed from realism than steel in rocks, if Tynan changes to Iron ore its then going to be expected that he goes over all the other stuff like cotton plants and fixes all the realism issues there, suddenly 1 change has turned into 20 and its now pushing other content out the way. Trust me when i say im sure Tynan made the decision with a fair amount of thought, but as stated in general its his decision so until he posts here me and the neighsayers will keep butting heads with you and getting nowhere because we both have an opinion and they dont meld. So yeah lets wait for Tynan....

Also I thought the word "compacted" was used to more easily allow the brain to make the link to ruins, or am i wrong here? i.e the buildings crumbled and the steel compacted together into clumps....no?

and finally no need to get annoyed...im not..in the slightest...i like healthy discussion but if its annoying you that much ill stop as thats not healthy.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 05, 2016, 10:43:52 AM
Well it isn't like it'll be hard for him to change that.  Someone else already did and theirs is compatible with everything out there.  Changing what the plant drops isn't difficult because you aren't changing something other objects are using.  He changed plants to drop cotton fiber that is required to make cloth out of and everything that takes cloth still takes cloth and was totally unaffected.  Their Tier 0 resource was upgraded to Tier 1, and now you need to take Cotton Fiber, a Tier 0 resource and turn it into Cloth.  It's not that difficult to do.  It doesn't hurt gameplay all that much, it adds a bit more complexity to the game, and made it more fun to play.

At this point in time, I'm not sure how much thought was put into it.  A lot of the things in the game seem to be split second decisions.  For example, 120 day orbit which is absolutely impossible for any life on the planet to be alive because the planet would be 400 degrees, unlivable.  No matter what size star you're orbiting.  I'm unable to determine much on star temp because that seems to coincide with star size so.  Many things thus far seem to be a "Do it and see how it goes" thing where once the game is complete, you'll edit the storyline and make up a new one to fit the game how it is then to explain all the strange events that don't make sense.

And I mean no disrespect Tynan if you are here reading all of this.  I'm just trying to get more realism into the game and make things make more sense.  I don't like that many games completely throw out all physics and logic these days in favor of getting a game done as quickly as possible.  It doesn't take that much research to find out something you're doing is against the laws of physics and in fact, we've already done that for you.

Again, Compacted, makes no sense.  Because you're still going to dig up a pile of oxidized dust.  Steel is also a very strong substance, if a mountian crumbles over on top of it while it's still solid, it's not gonna splatter into the shape of an ore vein.  If it waits for dirt to form around it in order to make a mountain, then its going to crumble away long before it makes a pocket of "compacted steel" and there will simply just be rock there because no steel will exist to be trapped in the rock.

Compacted Steel also makes no sense out in the open where there is no mountain above it or around it.  Just a random pile of compacted steel sitting out there near spawn always when you spawn somewhere.  I get that it's to make sure you have steel to use but yea, that's just another example of illogicalness because that steel would have blown away n the wind, and you'd just be digging up rock.

Stone structures are what lasts through time.  Metal oxidizes and corrodes and other misc affects based on the type of metal its made of.  Say everyone on earth suddenly died right now.  4000 years from now aliens will get here.  THe planet will be covered in forests, life anew, animals plants and everything will be florishing because we are no longer poisoning the world as we do now.  All metal structures will be gone.  Dust in the wind.  Concrete structures will be broken up but still there.  Wooden structures will have rotted away.  You'll likely find a few piles of what used to be houses, sheet rock and stuff being reclaimed by the land growing up through it.  Glass structures will still be there too, possibly just broken up and stuff.  So all metal structures we made will not stand the test of time and without proper maintenance, they will rust and disappear.  I could be a bit wrong, I'm sure there are some metals that may stand the test of time like Stainless Steel which is specially treated but I'm just not sure if it really would stand for thousands of years.  Who knows.

I also know Tynan is a busy person and may not end up reading all of the posts especially since some are quite big.  So he may miss some of the explanations given for why we either want steel to renamed or why we want it kept the same.  I'll do a quick summery below:

Votes for Iron:
1. Because it is more realistic in multiple ways.
2. Because modders can make a tier 1/2 resource after it without odd bizarre issues.
3. It will allow for us to add new tiers in crafting to make the game harder without you (Tynan) having to make super ultra mega uber game killing game ultra lagging raids of massive ultimate doom (Tribe spawns).
4. Steel Oxidizes and rusts away, iron ore is a naturally occurring substance.
5. Steel in the game currently spawns in ore like pockets, making no sense.

Votes for Steel:
1. It would make the game too difficult, assuming you added a new tier to smelt iron into steel.
2. It is somehow more logical to use your ultimate omni magic tool which cuts through steel like butter to make steel structures, than it is to cut through iron and make iron structures.  Yet to be explained to me by anyone.
3. General claims that it's less realistic than Steel because "you have to refine it" when you'd still have to refine steel too, in order to re-use it.

Honestly I can't type out actual votes for Steel because I don't get any of them and the arguments for it sound silly, the only one that has any merit, is people talking about how if things require steel still after it and there is an extra crafting stage to make steel, it would get harder.  Which is a good ting, it's what you're trying to do with your ultimate doom tribal spawns where you lob hundreds of bodies into people's bases in order to force end the game with the ultimate difficult wave so you can keep people from staying on the planet as long as they want.

If someone wants to retype my "votes for steel" thing, I'll copy and paste it into this post.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vagabond on February 05, 2016, 11:54:46 AM
use exploits to survive where sappers murder themselves by grenading their own team.

What do you mean use exploits, kill boxes? Because kill boxes aren't exploits. They're defended entrances to a base.

Also, an answer to the steel is that it isn't OUR steel. It could be another type of material that exists in this 3,000 years in the future. Realism in any game that isn't centered on it is generally just an excuse.

Zombie2,

Kill boxes are indeed exploits. They are exploiting a stupid AI. A real kill box is an area designated for open weapons fire from several directions and modes (A2A, S2A, ect) meant to blanket an area upon PID. Your enemy either knows it's present and don't go in, they know it's there and they think they can break it, or they don't know its there and stumble in (and then into retreat).

It's an exploit because the AI aren't smart enough to avoid them. To claim otherwise is just fanboy naivety.

"Realism in any game that isn't centered on it is generally just an excuse." Has to be one of the silliest things I've read from you thus far. Realistic mechanics are to hard for casual gamers, that is why they are thrown to the sidelines to appeal to a more broad audience. All games strive for realism, but quickly come to the realization that people cry when realism kicks their teeth in to much. There is an entire literary element based on this: Suspension of disbelief. The more you go off the wall, and the less you try to cope your audience to the absurd, the less they will like it. Unless you are looking for an audience of sparkly vampire worshiping girls, then all bets are off - they are down for anything.

There are ways of making the game work with traditional and realistic production lines. Going from iron ore to iron to steel to plasteel, ect. Even Lumber to logs to boards. It just requires the game as a whole to support it. The production line has to have useful items along the whole chain, either in terms of trade or for use. Cutting down a tree and turning the lumber into logs means you can build a log house, for example. Later you can build a framed structure with boards and planks.

Essentially, the game has to work like real life in order to be realistic. At any technology level people can survive. You shouldn't have to rush to electricity to survive the elements. Cultures the world round prove you can survive many extremes at low tech as long as there are animals/food and water. The pre-electricity part of the game needs massive overhaul to allow for survival without it, is what I'm saying. Once that is accomplished, once the game is properly tiered into technology levels for progression and flow, then it'll be an even better game.

It's certain people, those whom think diamonds make the best armor and weapons, that make a good game bad. Those same people are the ones who think it's imperative to abandon realism for the gameplay, even though it isn't required.

Sci-fi is a genre about realism. It is about prediction, about guesstimating, based on what we know and what we can imagine. Simulations - whether life, colony, ect, are about emulating real world processes.

All evidence points to this game needing a hefty dose of realism. Vas makes more good points in his post before mine.

Thanks.
Michael
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Toggle on February 05, 2016, 12:24:11 PM
Vas, this thread has become less of a discussion on steel vs iron, and more you telling the devs and everyone else it should be iron because steel isn't acceptable. There's nothing new on adding to gameplay, just the same thing of it should be iron not steel.

Vaga. For realism, that was actually meaning to be when the sole reason for something is realism in a game not focused on it, it's generally an excuse. You can add any number of things to a game without reason but for the sake of realism, when it doesn't really add to gameplay and/or makes it worse or just consumes time for no reason. You could prevent punching trees in minecraft so you just slowly starve to death.

I don't really care, I have the flu, so I'm just going.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: erdrik on February 05, 2016, 04:16:25 PM
...  And mods can add a smelter building if they want to add the extra step.  As it stands, Steel is illogical, impossible, and makes it so no mod can replace it the PROPER way.  I made a mod that changed it once, using only the name thing, it was horrible.  I gave up and abandon the project.  The core game must be altered, and then all mods in the world will be incompatible.  Unless of course I add a new steel, then all mods that add stuff will cost a Tier 2 resource.  But anyway.
...
Im guessing you missed my post, since it was the last one on the previous page.

Allow me to repost the relevant section here:

The issue is mods are all based on steel which means it can't be changed by mods without making a mod incompatible with everything out there.
Your coming at the issue from the wrong direction.
Don't change steel. Because, yea, doing so would make your mod incompatible.
But you can always add iron ore as a separate item from the existing steel that the player smelts into iron and can further process into steel. You can even add the iron item to the Metallic stuff category and give it differing rates of deterioration/ health/ ect than steel. Its not that you can't do it, its that you have to use steel as the baseline.

Then all you have to do is change the world gen options to produce less(or even none) "compacted" steel and more iron ore. Some mods will still be incompatible, but it will mostly narrow it down to only other world gen mods.

You don't add a new steel item. You add a new iron item and balance the iron based off of the existing steel.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: BBoulanger on February 05, 2016, 04:41:32 PM
this question has so much bias. Learn how to write a question.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: A Friend on February 05, 2016, 08:24:18 PM
What if we just name it "Metal"
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Zeta Omega on February 05, 2016, 10:39:38 PM
Isnt Steel just Iron with the impurities removed? And I don't see why it would matter, the costs and requirements would still be the same unless they added a station that turns Iron to Steel
Metal = Metal
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: andrei2000pc on February 06, 2016, 04:51:23 AM
I second for Iron. Every other popular game has gone from Iron to Steel. No reason to start skipping a element to make other processes simpler. I am always for the harder route in life. I want this to grow!:)
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Boston on February 06, 2016, 07:07:56 AM
Isnt Steel just Iron with the impurities removed? And I don't see why it would matter, the costs and requirements would still be the same unless they added a station that turns Iron to Steel
Metal = Metal

No, steel is an iron alloy. Specifically, iron with carbon (and other stuff) added, to make it "stronger" ( really, harder). There are different grades of steel, with different levels of carbon (and other materials). 'Building steel" (that is, the steel you use for the frames of buildings) is different from tool-steel, which is different from stainless steel. You don't really want to use one "type" of steel in place of another, because the final product will probably suck.

Humanity has known about steel for as long as we have worked Iron, or roughly 3500 years. It is just that without the Bessemer Process (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bessemer_process), Steel is really hard/expensive (same thing) to make. You need to smelt iron with powdered carbon (usually charcoal), at really high temperatures for long periods of time ( HOURS), in order to create steel alloys. In all seriousness, most of the time when ancient peoples made steel, it was a kinda-sorta accident, due to the complexity of the process.  It was only after the Industrial Revolution (when the Bessemer Process was developed) that tools and weapons were made totally from steel. Before that, tools, armor and weapons were made either from just iron (for cheap versions), or from iron + steel laminates (steel for cutting edges, iron for everything else).

Smelting iron into ingots is comparatively easy, and "cheap". There are many different sources of iron (most common metal in the Earth's crust): hematite, bog iron deposits,etc, and it is relatively easy to smelt. Sure, you have to build a smelter, but it doesn't need temperatures as high as steel. Take iron ore/bog iron, smelt it into a bloom/ingots, then forge it into tools. Those iron ingots can then be smelted again with charcoal to turn them into steel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3rjjpuhCLI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuCnZClWwpQ

Another metal I would love to see is copper. Copper, in some areas, can be found literally sitting on the ground in nuggets. These nuggets can be collected, smelted (fareasier than iron can be), and cast into tools. Native Americans used cast copper for thousands of years. Tribals should, in my opinion, be able to make tools and weapons from copper (90% of the time), and iron (10% of the time)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uHc4Hirexc


Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 06, 2016, 09:51:16 AM
I like Boston's post.  Really good explanation on things.  Also shows how much more realistic Iron Ore would be than Compacted Steel *coughsteelorecough*.

erdrik, the issue is that I would have to rename the SteelDef to Iron, so when you go mining a SteelOreDef you get Iron with "SteelDef" definition.  All mods would then use Iron in their base construction because they'd all still have <Steel>1</Steel> or whatever.  The issue is that, Steel is stronger.  I want things to cost more iron to make something or require a mix of iron and steel.  However everything default costing <Steel> (Iron) kinda screws that up.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vagabond on February 07, 2016, 01:01:37 PM
Vas, this thread has become less of a discussion on steel vs iron, and more you telling the devs and everyone else it should be iron because steel isn't acceptable. There's nothing new on adding to gameplay, just the same thing of it should be iron not steel.

Vaga. For realism, that was actually meaning to be when the sole reason for something is realism in a game not focused on it, it's generally an excuse. You can add any number of things to a game without reason but for the sake of realism, when it doesn't really add to gameplay and/or makes it worse or just consumes time for no reason. You could prevent punching trees in minecraft so you just slowly starve to death.

I don't really care, I have the flu, so I'm just going.

In most cases, when someone suggests something for the sake of realism, it will also improve game flow. The reason for this is simple, processes in real life make sense and work. More often than not, things in real life are challenging. This directly translates to the game, and in this game, the colony sim part is lacking thus far. The only real challenging aspect of the game is surviving nonsensical endless waves of mindless AI npcs bum rushing what you've built.

As for minecraft, a game that sucks the way the developers made it, is improved upon by mods that fix the developer's mistakes. Namely TerraFirmaCraft. Punching trees doesn't do anything in it. You have to make stone age tools before you can can chop a tree down.

"You could prevent punching trees in minecraft so you just slowly starve to death." Making excuses for not fixing bad game design because it'll clash with more bad game design is silly. Punching trees is dumb, so you make trees unpunchable. If trees are unpunchable, you can't progress, so you fix the way you progress. You don't just go "oh, whelp...Guess we keep trees punchable.".

Once again: Science fiction is a genre about making theoretical or imagined things as realistic as possible, and matching our definition of reality. Simulation games are games meant to simulate aspects of real or fictional -Reality-.

-Michael
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 07, 2016, 06:02:46 PM
Thank god, more people who can say it better than I can.  I'm terrible at public relations and saying it in a way others will understand.  I just sound like a bitchy needy person I suppose but then you guys come along and say what I was trying to say so much better than I did.  I hate not being able to say stuff in a good way like Vagabond has.  :|
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: skullywag on February 08, 2016, 02:58:42 AM
I totally get what vagabond is saying but heres my counter...terrafirmcraft is slow and boring. There. Sometimes adding more realism does not make everything better for everyone.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 08, 2016, 09:42:44 AM
I wasn't suggesting that we make the game slower and boring.  Tynan wants the game to be more difficult.  He can't do that by adding more mindless raids.  It just isn't possible, and since the game is single core only, it would be devastating to the game to continue making it harder that way.  He's going to have to make it harder in different ways such as making the crafting system harder, where you can't just construct a bunch of turrets right out of the box.

However.  All I am suggesting is that he rename Steel to Iron and treat the Compacted Steel *coughsteelorecough* as Iron Ore and let us construct things out of Iron instead.  We mine Iron Ore to get Iron.  Make an Iron Bed, Iron Stove, Iron Table, Iron Wall, Iron Cables.

Then, a mod can make the game more difficult and more fun at the same time for those of us who WANT more, by adding Coal to the game and allowing us to smelt coal and iron together to make Steel.  And we can add Resin and Plastic to the game, having rubber trees spawn on the map so we can harvest Resin, and make rubber and plastic with it.  Then we can combine the Plastic with Steel, to make Plasteel.

We can't do this currently, because the game's base resource is Steel, so everything uses it by default and all mods rely upon it.  Where as something currently takes 1000 steel, because it is the Tier 0 resource, in the mod Steel would be a Tier 1 resource and that object should only take 600 steel to make.  For example.

Now if we rename Steel instead to Iron ourselves, some things in some mods should cost Iron and Steel, or less or more Iron than they say.  So if someone had a thing cost 3 Iron (SteelRenamed) when it should more logically cost 7 Iron, or someone has something cost 1000 Iron (SteelRenamed) when it should cost 900 Iron..  You see my point?  Things just get more odd.

If Tynan were to do the idea of adding the crafting system we speak of where you ahve to combine coal and iron to make steel, and rubber to plastic then plastic + steel to make Plasteel.  He can make many things work with Iron only.  Then add a special thing to some stuff, like Turrets for example that will require Steel to make.  Then, we can make Plasteel to make the ships, that's the only reason you NEED Plasteel after all, is space ships.  It's a game ending thing so you should have it as a Tier 2 resource.  Maybe even a Tier 3 resource. (Where you combine Plastic with Rubber with Glass to make Fiberglass, then steel and fiberglass to make Plasteel)

Point is, in order to effectively make a mod like this, the core game needs to treat Steel as Iron, so mods won't be made incompatible all the time and have issues when someone wants to make a mod that will do this.

Most importantly it makes no logical sense of any kind because Steel, even Compacted Steel, will NOT survive thousands of years.  It will, WILL, rust and decay into nothing.  Unless it is Stainless steel, and then it will stand the test of time, I think, but it will not be easy to make beds with and reshape into other things as the game allows you to do right now.

Point is: Steel is illogical, makes the game easy, makes changing it with a mod hard.
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vagabond on February 08, 2016, 11:45:29 PM
I totally get what vagabond is saying but heres my counter...terrafirmcraft is slow and boring. There. Sometimes adding more realism does not make everything better for everyone.

Skullywag,

I accept your counter as opinion. I can certainly see where some might find it difficult to cope with pace. I, however, enjoy the pace. Every time I move forward a step after struggling to simply find food and water, I am happy. I enjoy colony builders, survival games, and sims because (when they are good) I can do things that I can't experience in real life.

If I had the money, legal assistance, time, and resources I'd love to do these things in real life. It's not possible though. I don't know if people would even let me use them as pawns in a real life colony. Being a husband and father of two, it isn't feasible for me to go out into the woods and try and survive. It's to risky, the start-up is to expensive, and I simply don't have the luxury of time to waste - I have responsibilities of taking care of my home and my kids.

With that, as I've mentioned, I enjoy realism. The closer to real life it is, the more enjoyable it is - more often then not, it's a tougher game for it. Since it is a game, I can pause when my daughter (who is potty training) needs to go to the bathroom. I can pause when my son needs to read me his spelling list, or when he needs help with a math problem.

I've made tons of suggestions that add to the depth and progression of the game because like Vas, I don't see the ever increasing "raid" size a feasible method of controlling difficulty. The genre of the game offers many avenues to offer different means of difficulty through colonist interactions, crafting processes, and technology progression.

While steel being steel seem inconsequential, it really isn't. Not based on a human's perception of what reality is - and in the universe of Rimworld, the fact we are playing human's means that their perception of reality should be in line with our's. Now, if we were playing a fictional alien race who had a single word for iron and all it's alloys, that would make more sense. I don't see an alien race capable of space travel being so primitive in their identification of elements, but... Who knows?

At any rate, this will be the last I post on this. We should have Iron ore. Iron ore should be mixed with carbon to make steel. Steel sheets should be coated with glass fibers and coated in plastic to create plasteel. Uranium and lead need to be more controlled. Copper needs to be a thing as well. Copper and tin to make bronze. Silver and gold - their use should be controlled better too. Copper, siler, and gold would be awesome as conductive material. Plastic types would be cool too - PP, PE, PVC. All very common plastics used for everything in your house or office building.

Cheers,
Michael
Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: erdrik on February 09, 2016, 06:00:55 AM
...
While steel being steel seem inconsequential, it really isn't. Not based on a human's perception of what reality is - and in the universe of Rimworld, the fact we are playing human's means that their perception of reality should be in line with our's. Now, if we were playing a fictional alien race who had a single word for iron and all it's alloys, that would make more sense. I don't see an alien race capable of space travel being so primitive in their identification of elements, but... Who knows?
...

Let me just start this with a bit of a disclaimer: Im only commenting on this bit because it kind of strikes a cord with me as someone who has been learning and trying his hand at world building off and on as a hobby for about 22 years.
(started the hobby my freshman year in highschool '94)
I am by no means an expert or professional but I have put quite a bit of thought into it over the years.

Starting with the emphases Ive add to the above quote, the Universe of Rimworld is not our Universe.
Physics doesn't necessarily work the same way in Rimworld as the real world, so their perception of reality definitely does not have to line up with ours.
This idea is one of many core "Pillars" that make creating fiction possible in the first place.

The only perceptions of reality that a creator has to adhere to is
1. Keep it relatable enough to the consumer
2. Keep the fiction's perception of reality consistent(ie: don't break established rules without a valid "In Universe" reason for it)

And #1 is very subjective. Some people only need just one thing to latch onto to make it relatable.
For the vast majority of the time, matching reality in detail is not necessary. It's very cool to do, but is not a requirement of quality fiction.

Title: Re: Do you think Steel ore should be Iron ore instead?
Post by: Vas on February 09, 2016, 04:42:31 PM
Sometimes adding more realism does not make everything better for everyone.
We should have Iron ore. Iron ore should be mixed with carbon to make steel. Steel sheets should be coated with glass fibers and coated in plastic to create plasteel. Uranium and lead need to be more controlled. Copper needs to be a thing as well. Copper and tin to make bronze. Silver and gold - their use should be controlled better too. Copper, siler, and gold would be awesome as conductive material. Plastic types would be cool too - PP, PE, PVC. All very common plastics used for everything in your house or office building.
Vaga, I can add silver, copper, and other metals and minerals if you want.  It will take me some time though, and I might try and add you on steam to discuss it more with you.

You took it a little far though. xP  The only goal here is to get Tynan to rename Steel to Iron, so that he iron ore in the mountains can be a tier 1 resource and you dont have to do hacky dumb things to rename it and make it work in mods and compatibility and also just to make it make sense because in real life steel would not survive this long, it would be a pile of dust.  That's the only objective here.  I can make mods to do all the other stuff once it is renamed.  I may try and make a mod for it anyway and use the hacky dumb way and if people complain, I'll tell them to complain to the modders who haven't made their mod compatible with mine.  :P

I do have to agree somewhat with Skullywag, to the point where realism to the extent you have said would make the game less fun for some.  However, realism where you simply rename a metal to another metal, would not hurt the game play in any way shape or form, and it would make a lot more sense.  Hurting literally no one at all.  Tynan can explain that there used to be a civilization here before using stone as structures, because stone makes sense, and is already a part of the game with ruined structures.  He doesn't need compacted steel that defies the laws of physics to say that a civilization used to live there.