Print

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

[Lightning4]

I just had a thought. I remember something about that bronze was weaker than iron only because of the old version's limitations, where iron would be found deeper in the mountain.

Now that it's out the window, maybe it could better reflect reality? Iron is incredibly common now, but should be weaker than bronze. Steel would still be stronger than bronze. It would serve a balance purpose as well.
I know this takes all of five seconds to do in the raws, but just wondering if there's any official recognition of this or something.

[Align]

That'd be swell. I have zero iron in my mountain but lots of cassiterite and metric tons of copper.

[Tormy]

Bronze is stonger than iron?   :eek:

[Morkilus]

That's some really bizarre logic, L4. In any case, it should be more difficult to find materials for bronze than for wrought iron, but it should be easier to produce than steel. So perhaps bronze items could be worth more than iron, but still is a lesser metal for weapons and armor?

[Poil]

No, bronze is better.

 

quote:Originally posted by Tormy:
<STRONG>Bronze is stonger than iron?     :eek:</STRONG>

Yes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze
"With the exception of steel, bronze is superior to iron in nearly every application. Although bronze develops a patina, it does not oxidize beyond the surface. It is considerably less brittle than iron and has a lower casting temperature."

[ November 20, 2007: Message edited by: Poil ]

[Lightning4]

Well, I'm getting most of my source from wikipedia so it's a subject of debate.

And a direct quote from wikipedia: "With the exception of steel, bronze is superior to iron in nearly every application."
Whether those applications include weapons and armor, I haven't a clue, but I would assume so.

But iron is superior in that it was cheaper and easier to produce. This is reflected in DF as well, since Iron is so incredibly common, and this makes it superior to bronze, which (typically) is harder to make since you need two ores present rather than one.

As for values, I have no idea. Probably higher than iron but less than steel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze

Edit: Damn, you beat me

[ November 20, 2007: Message edited by: Lightning4 ]

[mineditall]

bronze is harder to craft than iron and requires a heavier set of ingredients than just raw iron

imagine the set of this:

zinc, tin, copper, pewter, silver, iron, brass, bronze / gold, platinum, steel

that is the order of difficulty to produce metals

however which came first? the bronze age or the iron age?
and which fantasy world are we living in? the one with 100% real items or one with 50% real items

if you can calculate the real world statistics on bronze and steel in a datasheet then go for it
i wouldnt mind the temperature melting points, bending points, stress tests, and pressure tests in a simple to look up formula

[Wolfius]

More:

quote:Originally uploaded by Wikipedia:
<STRONG> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Age#The_transition_from_bronze_to_iron
Steel weapons and tools were superior to bronze weapons and tools. But steel was difficult to produce with the methods available at the time, and most of the metal produced in the Iron Age was wrought iron. Wrought iron is weaker than bronze, but people switched anyway. Iron is much cheaper than bronze, since it is much more common than copper and tin, which are the ingredients of bronze. Additionally it is easier to resharpen an iron tool, whereas bronze needs reforging.
</STRONG>

So, yeah - turns out bronze beats iron in most applications. Iron's just cheaper, and can be used to make steel, which beats them both.

As for stats, the simpliest thing to do would be to swap the modifiers for iron and bronze.

It also has a nice impact on game play, as material progression wouldn't be so liniar any more.

[MindSnap]

The extra weight to bronze might be a hindrance or a benefit for different uses.

According to the wiki the iron age only came after because trade was limited for bronze-making, and so it was worth the effort to learn how to make iron more efficiently.

I think that concerning nonfiction elements in DF that don't detract from gameplay DF should be as realist as possible.

However, the general mentality is that iron > bronze, so changing that is counterintuitive.

[sluissa]

DF is introducing new things to many of us. Many of these rocks and minerals really had no meaning to some of us before we played this version of dwarf fortress. I say let us continue the lessons with this. Teach people the strength of bronze. It's been looked down upon for too long. VIVA LA BRONCE!

[mickel]

I remember reading that the transition from bronze to iron weaponry was mostly due to a collapse of the tin market leading to a spike in bronze prices. I'm not sure if this is true or not, but I found it amusing to have classical history discussed in the same terms used about modern market economics.

(Yes, I know they had market economics back then, I'm just not used to hearing them discussed like that.)

[Tormy]

quote:Originally posted by Poil:
<STRONG>No, bronze is better.

 

Yes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze
"With the exception of steel, bronze is superior to iron in nearly every application. Although bronze develops a patina, it does not oxidize beyond the surface. It is considerably less brittle than iron and has a lower casting temperature."

[ November 20, 2007: Message edited by: Poil ]</STRONG>

Oooh, pretty interesting.

 :eek:

[Adder]

If I remember right from the history of technology course I took in college, bronze was better for weapons and armor, being the equivalent of mild steel. It was also hideously expensive in the ancient world, since the main source of tin was the in the British Isles. Using iron allowed you to field much larger armies, like the Persians against the Greeks.

[coelocanth]

The other reason iron came later is that iron smelting needs a higher temperature and reducing atmosphere to extract from ore (i.e. a blast furnace).
Copper and tin are relatively easy to smelt and don't need forced air to get a hot enough furnace.

Iron working is difficult because you need to control the carbon content.
Iron straight out of the furnace has a high carbon content which makes it brittle - its fine for cast iron pots but too weak for weapons.
Repeated working in a forge reduces the carbon content, and eventually you end up with quite pure iron which is too soft (although this "wrought iron" is fine for fences, horseshoes and so on).

When forging a blade, a blacksmith beats soot into the surface of the iron bar to try and restore the carbon content to the ideal level.
Pattern welding is a more advanced technique which combines high and low carbon iron bars in the forge to make a high quality blade. (masterwork swords of this construction are actually better than steel, but it's a very labour intensive process better suited for a Strange Mood)

It would be fair to give iron a lower base quality, but higher quality modifier.

[Stof]

Very interesting Wikipedia page. I've learned that Bronze is superior to Iron, that Bronze although often made from Copper + Tin can also be made with a huge variety of secondary metals, including Silicon. And last, that Brass is then just some specific type of bronze, athough stronger.

So, not only should we increase the value of Bronze weapons/armor above that of Iron, but we should ALSO give the same treatment to Brass, maybe even making it slightly better than Bronze.

[ November 21, 2007: Message edited by: Stof ]