v50 Steam/Premium information for editors
- v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
- Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
This notice may be cached—the current version can be found here.
Difference between revisions of "40d Talk:Granite"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (More or less, yep) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Granite more productive? == | == Granite more productive? == | ||
| − | + | It tends to be one of the more productive of the stone layers. | |
| + | Is it true? Something 'raws-related'? | ||
--[[User:Haspen|Haspen]] 22:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC) | --[[User:Haspen|Haspen]] 22:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::I think that's my phrase, so I'll address it - first, I tried to use very qualified language - "tends", "one of", and "more", rather than "is" or "most" or other absolutes. It may be because of the spectrum of ores and gems that can appear, or some other reason, but granite reliably seems to be a better bet than, say, any of the igneous ''extrusive'' stones as far as number (and variety) of veins and small clusters of gems and ores. This is admittedly more anecdotal than code-proven, but many users who compare and notice such tend to agree, and I've yet to see someone who has a strongly differing opinion. (See?, there're those pesky qualifiers again!) --[[User:Albedo|Albedo]] 23:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 23:14, 18 September 2009
Granite more productive?
It tends to be one of the more productive of the stone layers.
Is it true? Something 'raws-related'? --Haspen 22:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- I think that's my phrase, so I'll address it - first, I tried to use very qualified language - "tends", "one of", and "more", rather than "is" or "most" or other absolutes. It may be because of the spectrum of ores and gems that can appear, or some other reason, but granite reliably seems to be a better bet than, say, any of the igneous extrusive stones as far as number (and variety) of veins and small clusters of gems and ores. This is admittedly more anecdotal than code-proven, but many users who compare and notice such tend to agree, and I've yet to see someone who has a strongly differing opinion. (See?, there're those pesky qualifiers again!) --Albedo 23:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC)