Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 19

Author Topic: Realistic Mining Suggestion  (Read 43839 times)

Andeerz

  • Bay Watcher
  • ...likes cows for their haunting moos.
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #180 on: February 23, 2010, 02:12:49 am »

Neato!  That sounds hella-dwarfy and very very implementable!!!  A sieve out of metal or wood-plus-cloth could be used as well, I bet.  I should look more into this...

With regard to the chemical stuff I posted earlier, I was mainly referring to aqua regia.  This and perhaps other chemical methods of which I am not familiar with could be an alternate method for extracting ores mayhaps... I'm not sure if the majority of these methods would be medieval enough for the game, though.  I am pretty sure that aqua regia was known about since the 1300's, and that the info in the wikipedia article dating it to 800AD is likely false... but I don't think it was actually really understood until the 1600's.  Again, I should look into this.  Does anyone know about purification methods for mercury?  I know that that stuff has been known about since the Qin dynasty in China...

That said, I would like to mention that certain ores, like gold for example, should probably not be able to produce as much metal per unit mined as others.  I don't know how this could be modeled in-game though.  Looking into gold and related metals, I found that such metals are normally found in such small quantities in their native or sulfide ores, that if these realistic amounts were reflected in DF there probably wouldn't be enough to make, say, a sarcophagus out of these metals even with all of the metal purified from all the ore of one of these metals in a normal map.  I could be wrong about that, but I can say for certain that it would take a whole heck of a lot more gold ore than iron ore to make something useful out of it, and that is what directly plays into gold's much higher value than that of iron and other metals in real life.

 
Logged

Impaler[WrG]

  • Bay Watcher
  • Khazad Project Leader
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #181 on: February 23, 2010, 03:27:39 am »

I've done some mods that partly addresses this by removing the [ORE] tag and adding a custom reaction that 'smelts' each ore with a different output from each one, I can thus created different bar counts from different metals and have made the previous metals less rich as they are logicaly still 'worth' mining even if the bar count is lower per stone.

As for chemical mining, I think it has its place in Dwarven Alchemy but it should be period accurate and a high level matured fortress activity and not used for huge mass leaching of low grade ore as is done today, but rather as a way to get a little extra gold/silver from the ore that were already processing.
Logged
Khazad the Isometric Fortress Engine
Extract forts from DF, load and save them to file and view them in full 3D

Khazad Home Thread
Khazad v0.0.5 Download

SirHoneyBadger

  • Bay Watcher
  • Beware those who would keep knowledge from you.
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #182 on: March 01, 2010, 09:34:45 pm »

Gravel as an (generic) item would be nice to see.

Is there a good enough reason for different types of gravel to be kept track of?

I understand about issues of whether or not it will burn, etc. as pertains to realism, but I can't think of that many uses for different types of gravel, compared to the uses for a generic "gravel" item.

Atleast not that many uses for the differentiation, in comparison to the trouble it will cause to portray that degree of accuracy, even to the players themselves.
Logged
For they would be your masters.

lucusLoC

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #183 on: March 02, 2010, 02:17:28 am »

i think there are a few good reasons to keep gravel separate, at least when first mined. grinding to dust for pigments or reactions is one decent reason. making specific stone jewelry is another. making that marble gravel path in the royal gardens may also be desirable. modders can also use the specific stone in custom reactions, as they desire.

however having gravel instantly go to a generic when mixed would significantly ease the item tracking needs of the game, and to a certain extent mimics the difficulties in keeping gravel pure in real life. great care would have to be taken to keep you specific gravel stockpiles from getting contaminated.
Logged
Quantum dumps are proof of "memory" being a perfectly normal dimension in DF. ~Gazz

Safe-Keeper

  • Bay Watcher
  • "Situation normal; all ****ed up"
    • View Profile
    • FS Mod tester
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #184 on: March 02, 2010, 04:43:46 am »

I'm surprised no one has suggested explosive coal dust fires yet. Read a novel some time ago that was set to the island of Svalbard, which has (or perhaps used to have) many coal mines. It talked about how in a coal mine the coal dust gets everywhere, and floats around in the air. One of the characters in the book had been badly injured by an explosion caused by ignition of the coal dust.
Logged
"Sieging humans brought some war polar bears, and one of them started a camp fire. Highly trained!" --Today One accidentally introduces the panserbjørn into Dwarf Fortress lore

SnopyDogy

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #185 on: March 02, 2010, 05:33:35 am »


That said, I would like to mention that certain ores, like gold for example, should probably not be able to produce as much metal per unit mined as others.
 

Actually it depends on how rich the deposit/vein is. I grew up in a “gold rush” town and some the mins here could pull out 500Kg+ to the ton, not the 10oz+ that most modern mines talk about, and as recent as 20 years ago. I always thought that the ore deposits in dwarf fortress were the 500Kg to the ton sort.
Logged

Draco18s

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #186 on: March 02, 2010, 02:12:28 pm »

Actually it depends on how rich the deposit/vein is. I grew up in a “gold rush” town and some the mins here could pull out 500Kg+ to the ton, not the 10oz+ that most modern mines talk about, and as recent as 20 years ago. I always thought that the ore deposits in dwarf fortress were the 500Kg to the ton sort.

The biggest copper mine in existence (Kennecott Utah Copper's Bingham Canyon Mine) used to haul out something like 60% copper ore (IIRC), currently it pulls out 0.63% Cu, 0.057% Mo, 0.49 g/t Au and 3.5 g/t Ag.

And it's still the world's largest copper supplier.
Logged

DDR

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • Frogatto
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #187 on: March 02, 2010, 04:30:33 pm »

Taking into account that sieges and ambushes will come with a shovel someday, I think gravel could be used as a 'loose tile', rather like sand but much, much more unstable. You simply _can't_ dig out a tunnel from a rubble tile, unless it has been compacted by a dwarf. This emerges the behaviour of making a wall, with a rubble filling, so that the goblins can't just smash through the thing. As they dig out rubble in attempt to get through to the other side, you can pour more rubble into the top - provided they don't snipe you. Could also be useful for setting up traps in the entrance way - rubble, when stacked in a straight column, will fall down and form a 45deg hill. (Rule: A rubble tile on another rubble tile will fill any clear adjacent non-rubble tiles.) Therefore, you simply open up a floor hatch beneath your rubble pile when the goblins are coming in your entrance, and - voila! A goblin paste rich in iron! You could also put the hatch above your trading depot, just in case... you know... it gets 'invaded'.

Rubble: easier to clean up, less effective at smushing stuff (an enemy on the edge or a rubble cave-in might only be stunned, so when your haulers uncover him... Fun), and, perhaps, it causes cave-ins beneath it in that chain reaction we are all so fond of.

Any objections? :)
Logged
Il Palazzo: "Urist, quick, grab your ax! There's a troll rampaging through the decimal conversion chambers!"
melomel: DF is like OCD candy, isn't it? existent: No, DF is like the stranger in the trench coat offering the candy.

teloft

  • Bay Watcher
  • We found the zirilid stream
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #188 on: March 02, 2010, 07:27:21 pm »

I'm surprised no one has suggested explosive coal dust fires yet. Read a novel some time ago that was set to the island of Svalbard, which has (or perhaps used to have) many coal mines. It talked about how in a coal mine the coal dust gets everywhere, and floats around in the air. One of the characters in the book had been badly injured by an explosion caused by ignition of the coal dust.

There are 2 towns in Svalbard, one is run by Norway and the other by Russia.  A thick smoke from coal heating is over the russia own, and it still mines it coal.  The norwegian town has no coal smoke. 

The islands  are rich. Only a small fraction has been mined out.
Logged
We found the zirilid stream

katzebar

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #189 on: March 03, 2010, 10:14:45 pm »

Alright, I decided to swallow my fear and give this a try; forgive me for being something of a forum noob, but I read through the entire thread, and decided to attempt crafting a solution that could (hopefully) satisfy the needs of more efficient CPU usage; more accurate attempts at simulating mining/quarrying and the resulting products; and the current problems with legendary versus dabbling miners. My suggestions, however, require a complete overhaul of how mining works and how certain professions interact with them. On the plus side, however, I aim to avoid the whole improved hauling conundrum altogether. Hopefully.

First, instead of having one Designation, there are now three available for mining: Pulverize, Mine, and Quarry.

Pulverize is a setting that digs out the designated square without creating any stone. However, if one was to create a "Gravel Pit" (a new workshop; I know adding another workshop is less than ideal,) then when a dwarf smooths a Rough Stone Floor, the game handles the aggregate in a similar way to the "meta-bars" that are created when a player melts an object but lacks enough metal to make a bar. In other words, all aggregate is treated as a single integer stored within the Gravel Pit workshop rather than a series of objects that have to be hauled and tracked. This solution then doesn't create any new game objects that have to be tracked except an integer without a map location or anything. It doesn't spawn troublesome hauling jobs; it simply increases the integer stored in the Gravel Pit.

Now, I understand that creating a new object without an implemented use is an overall bad idea, so then, aggregate will then be used for creating roads and constructions. When a dwarf goes to construct a wall, or a road, they simply subtract whatever arbitrary integer Toady or someone more anal than I decides on per square. Ideally, I would like that simple gravel roads wouldn't require an architect, but that's a whole other discussion entirely and beyond the scope of this post.

Mine is more or less exactly how it works now: Inexperienced miners have a chance of leaving behind a Rough Stone Floor, instead of a stone, while legendary miners always produce stone.

Quarry is the final designation. When a miner digs out a square designated as a quarry, it attempts to make a rock block on the spot. Inexperienced miners have a chance of digging out a stone instead of a block, but legendary miners always produce blocks. Quarrying will never produce blocks out of gemstone (though it can create blocks of ore...) but instead will allow inexperienced miners the ability to produce gemstone and ore despite their relative inexperience.

As one final comment before I disappear whence I came, the different designations require different amounts of time to perform: pulverize is the fastest, mine the current speed, and quarry slower, all being used to represent the amount of care and accuracy the miner is attempting to produce the various products.
Logged

ungulateman

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING: haunting moos]
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #190 on: March 03, 2010, 11:37:30 pm »

I like that idea a lot.
Logged
That's the great thing about this forum. We can derail any discussion into any other topic.
It's not an embark so much as seven dwarves having a simultaneous strange mood and going off to build an artifact fortress that menaces with spikes of awesome and hanging rings of death.

Impaler[WrG]

  • Bay Watcher
  • Khazad Project Leader
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #191 on: March 04, 2010, 03:31:28 am »

Ok let me get this strait, in order to make mining more realistic your proposing their be an even faster method of mining that also instantly teleports the rock produced to another location?  Frankly that would constitute a massive step backwards and the attempted end-run around the need for hauling is simply incompatible with realistic mining because realistic mining consists of a lot of hauling, this is why everyone in favor of more realistic mining admits better hauling methods (wheel-barrows) are a necessary pre-requisite.
Logged
Khazad the Isometric Fortress Engine
Extract forts from DF, load and save them to file and view them in full 3D

Khazad Home Thread
Khazad v0.0.5 Download

zwei

  • Bay Watcher
  • [ECHO][MENDING]
    • View Profile
    • Fate of Heroes
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #192 on: March 04, 2010, 05:10:03 am »

Quarry is the final designation. When a miner digs out a square designated as a quarry, it attempts to make a rock block on the spot. Inexperienced miners have a chance of digging out a stone instead of a block, but legendary miners always produce blocks. Quarrying will never produce blocks out of gemstone (though it can create blocks of ore...) but instead will allow inexperienced miners the ability to produce gemstone and ore despite their relative inexperience

I only really like this idea. Blocks made on spot & ore/gem preservation in one go.

As far as others go, i would like actual realisting mining because, well:

* Making wheelbarows and wheelbarow tracks sounds fun

same way like:

* Having to have supports and
* Having to have proper illumination

sounds fun because it adds strategy to digging (which is now just about reuse of dug areas as rooms.)

katzebar

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #193 on: March 04, 2010, 11:21:16 am »

Ok let me get this strait, in order to make mining more realistic your proposing their be an even faster method of mining that also instantly teleports the rock produced to another location?  Frankly that would constitute a massive step backwards and the attempted end-run around the need for hauling is simply incompatible with realistic mining because realistic mining consists of a lot of hauling, this is why everyone in favor of more realistic mining admits better hauling methods (wheel-barrows) are a necessary pre-requisite.

It seems that you misread my post. It doesn't teleport rock; it simply sits there until it's smoothed. Considering the time that it takes to smooth walls, one player noted that it took longer to smooth walls than it does to mine them out, it can easily represent the time it took to haul the aggregate.

It's a little difficult to explain my rationale here: people want mining to do more than create one type of stone (Rough Stone) and yet don't want to create massive amounts of hauling. In addition, improved hauling is pretty far off (though I think that this will probably be even further either way.) However, we also have the CPU toll to consider. Dwarf Fortress is a game, it needs to run well, and CPU cycles shouldn't be devoted to what I think most would feel is an ancillary addition at best.

Thus, we come to a very simple answer for developing a solution to those quandaries: abstraction. Abstraction already exists within Dwarf Fortress to either make things easier on the player or to save frames. Right now, farming on soil doesn't require water...or fertilizer, and despite smelters, wood burners, hell, the hot stoves of a kitchen all create a certain amount of smoke, heat, and/or dangerous gasses, we see none of those elements introduced into the game.
Logged

lucusLoC

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Realistic Mining Suggestion
« Reply #194 on: March 04, 2010, 12:31:35 pm »

its not just the teleporting materials i have a problem with. even if the smoothing job "simulates the time taken to haul" the dorf does not actually have to travel the distance. that and how is the mass stored on the gravel pit? is there some way to represent the volume?

i agree with Impaler[WrG], realistic mining will require better hauling, and i can wait till we have that for its implementation. something that attempts to abstract out something as visible as hauling dirt is going to adversely affect the flavor of the game.
Logged
Quantum dumps are proof of "memory" being a perfectly normal dimension in DF. ~Gazz
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 19