Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[WanderingKid]

Heya folks,

A confusion has cropped up for me, and I'd like to understand the previous science done on this topic a little better.

If you look at the Advanced World Mineral Scarcity information and the research behind it for Mineral Scarcity, at http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Advanced_world_generation#Mineral_Scarcity, there's a comment that you can increase ores, types, and #/type of gems.  My understanding on this was that gems are on a separate inclusion indicator for the scarcity value, but it's been brought to my attention that I've possibly been reading this wrong.

So, does anyone know for sure?  Do gems take positions of metal ore inclusions?

Appreciate the assistance.

[Melting Sky]

I remember reading an old science thread on this years ago. Sadly my recollection is hazy at best, but I seem to remember somebody telling me that if the mineral frequency is cranked up high enough eventually it starts to become counterproductive to finding things like flux. I'm not absolutely sure of how it effects gem scarcity but I believe the two values are connected. I think if you crank up mineral frequency you will also get more gem deposits. I'm not sure if the gems and ores are distributed under the same inclusion indicator or not. In other words I don't know if having another type of gem deposit takes the place of an ore deposit slot or not. I wish I could find that old thread.

[WanderingKid]

Connected, yes, I agree.  However, I'm trying to determine if, for example, a gem can take the place of a metal ore or not if you crank it down.  I've always understood them to be separate inclusions.

To rephrase, if I have average which gives 2-4 metal ores and some x number of gems, is the list generated as
ores: 2-4, Gems: 3-7  OR
or Inclusions: 5-11

... and ores are just lucky results out of the list?

To help in regards to the flux concern, some science Quietust did a while back is at the bottom of this thread:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=122446.0.  You won't kill your flux.  You might not locate it while site selecting because of how the find component works when a layer has inclusions, but it won't disappear.

[Melting Sky]

Looks, like you responded before I could finish editing my initial post. I basically went back and answered your question in my original post by saying I have no idea. My gut instinct based on tinkering with mineral frequency and seeing the results is that ores and gems do not occupy the same slots and are both linked to mineral frequency.

I think increasing mineral frequency will give you more of both and they do not compete with each other beyond the obvious competition for space. There are only so many spaces on a map square and obviously if a square has a gem on it then it can't also have an ore.

[WanderingKid]

Ah, edit ninja!

I agree, and that's been my understanding too.  Here's hoping Q or someone who's gone code diving can stick their head in and confirm/deny the facts on this.