Steel Tools, Are They Based On Wogic?

[Object 281]

I've used steel to make tools before but I didn't really document the ratio, while I was reading some wiki stuff I noticed on the steel lump page these two interesting points.

"Steel pickaxes take 20% less damage from use than similar quality iron pickaxes."

"A success will result in 0.4kg of steel per 1.0kg of iron and 0.5kg of coal."

Now I'm going to hope somehow that at least one of these two facts are wrong, because it really doesn't seem right that a 20% damage reduction requires 60% more material.

Please, someone tell me I'm wrong somewhere with my assumptions because it seems to me this is arguable the best definition of wogic I've ever seen in Wurm.

[whykillme 1,621]

I think it should require more material, steel is better in different ways, so it should be harder to make and not something everyone can get his hands on in no time at all.

[Makarus 458]

i don't think he's arguing that point, WKM.

I think it's the cost/reward ratio here.

20% bonus would seem appropriate at a 40% or less cost increase. 60% makes it worthwhile to just spam iron tools.

[Eobersig 1,005]

Pure Wogic.

Or rather what I consider to be the main development problem in Wurm: releasing a feature into the game but never balance, finish and polish the feature. In this case steel tools and weapons. The feature is there - but it's unbalanced, unfinished and unpolished.

[KunAlt 844]

Well at least you gain that 20% less dmg, bronze and brass are equal or worst to make and give no benefit at all exept a different look.

[whykillme 1,621]

i don't think he's arguing that point, WKM.

I think it's the cost/reward ratio here.

20% bonus would seem appropriate at a 40% or less cost increase. 60% makes it worthwhile to just spam iron tools.

That's because you don't know what it does besides 20% bonus.. and I think that counts for most people here.

[Sandyar 524]

Imo there doesn’t need to be a linear connection to cost and advantage there isn’t between other items. Actually it usually cost a lot for a little benefit in what you can consider luxury items.

[Cerberus 247]

The 20% damage reduction is far from correct in the first place. somebody.......... decided that 1 action done with a 1ql steel pickaxe, was enough of a test to then proclaim on wiki that the results are fact. Testing steel items needs much more before any percent is tagged to them and posted as gospel and the poor people say "but wiki says!". I have been using a steel pickaxe that started off as 80ql, has not dropped below 70ql yet after 4 months of use, those who know me know I mine for stats, massive caverns and after that much use, I had destroyed many 90ql iron picks in less time. Heres your pickaxe back Ari! "it was 91ql when you started using it, its now 60ql, your banned from ever using iron picks ever again."

[Elen 1,013]

If steel is supposed to be 20% cooler to use, I think the buff should be expanded: 20% easier to imp, 20% less decay, 20% lighter weight, and so on, if not more.

[Ayes 3,715]

To repair and improve iron tools I can easily mine the iron to do so. Contrast this with steel tools and it is easy to see why they are not popular and mainly avoided. All other comparisons are made moot by this imposition, as I see it. I have no steel tools nor any interest in them for this reason.

=Ayes=

[Rathgar 959]

I've used steel to make tools before but I didn't really document the ratio, while I was reading some wiki stuff I noticed on the steel lump page these two interesting points.

"Steel pickaxes take 20% less damage from use than similar quality iron pickaxes."

"A success will result in 0.4kg of steel per 1.0kg of iron and 0.5kg of coal."

Now I'm going to hope somehow that at least one of these two facts are wrong, because it really doesn't seem right that a 20% damage reduction requires 60% more material.

Please, someone tell me I'm wrong somewhere with my assumptions because it seems to me this is arguable the best definition of wogic I've ever seen in Wurm.

You are absolutely wrong, and its not a matter of "wogic" vs Logic, it is a matter of balance.

I cant go into really deep details, but that extra 20% resistance over the average, is actually worth more than 20% the cost of the vanilla (iron) item.

Anything that goes above standards of quality usually has an increased cost. Are nine quality 10 shovels worth the same as one quality 90 shovel? no? WOGIC !!!!

[Laiwyn 188]

That's because you don't know what it does besides 20% bonus.. and I think that counts for most people here.

Care to enlighten us then? Seems like a post to stoke a feeling of elitism otherwise, imo.

[Bagsecg 110]

I think its silly that so little steel is returned for used iron. Steel forging with correct technique wasn't really all that difficult, and working with it was easier than slag-filled iron, the only difference for high quality steel was that you add in a bit of charcoal, some sillicates to bond with and remove slag, and heat it up with bellows to a temperature where the slag and iron will seperate and bond with the sillicates and charcoal, respectively. iirc thats how damascus steel was forged, I think they mightve even put a small amount of glass in too. What resulted was lighter weight and sturdier weapons. No more shattering swords in combat. So the less damage makes sense, but such a small return of steel to iron doesn't make much sense.

[Keldun 335]

Another problem is that it always of lower ql, or same at best as the iron you made it out of, so it's susally easier to make high ql iron that high ql steel items.

Not to mention that the skill needed to get that top ql stell from the iron is pretty difficult to get.

[Object 281]

You are absolutely wrong, and its not a matter of "wogic" vs Logic, it is a matter of balance.

I cant go into really deep details, but that extra 20% resistance over the average, is actually worth more than 20% the cost of the vanilla (iron) item.

Anything that goes above standards of quality usually has an increased cost. Are nine quality 10 shovels worth the same as one quality 90 shovel? no? WOGIC !!!!

It's actually worth more then 20%? If it's worth more then 20% then it's actually more then 20%.

And why can't you go into deep details? That was the purpose of me making this post.

The 20% damage reduction is far from correct in the first place. somebody.......... decided that 1 action done with a 1ql steel pickaxe, was enough of a test to then proclaim on wiki that the results are fact. Testing steel items needs much more before any percent is tagged to them and posted as gospel and the poor people say "but wiki says!". I have been using a steel pickaxe that started off as 80ql, has not dropped below 70ql yet after 4 months of use, those who know me know I mine for stats, massive caverns and after that much use, I had destroyed many 90ql iron picks in less time. Heres your pickaxe back Ari! "it was 91ql when you started using it, its now 60ql, your banned from ever using iron picks ever again."

Thank you for this reply. There are a lot of people who are turned off from even bothering to make steel due to the documentation on the wiki. If the information is incorrect I'd like to update it, and I'm already in the process of raising coal-making, metallurgy and blacksmithing to test this extensively myself to figure out if these figures are actually correct.

It seems so odd to me that steel would be implemented in this way, but if what your saying is true then the damage reduction is far higher then 20%. I'm guessing there is also something behind the damage reduction, like maybe a damage negation algorithm. So maybe steel tools have a 20% reduction but also maybe a 50% damage negation chance.

A lot more testing is needed to confirm this, and I am making this my current goal for now because it seems to me like steel is worthless beyond a few things (dredge, armour, etc)

[Wiro 370]

Care to enlighten us then? Seems like a post to stoke a feeling of elitism otherwise, imo.

Lol dumb plebs know nothing!

[Fireflyb 920]

It's not 20%, it's 33%... someone tested it thoroughly back when steel tools were implemented.

[Telurius 52]

Steel and oakenwood reduce a value I call perishability by 20% (to 80% of what it would otherwise be) for items made from them. This reduces damage per use tick for them by 20%. For item types with normal QL-based decay it also reduces damage per decay tick by 20%. Damage to practice dolls is also reduced by 20% per hit from being oakenwood.

A decay tick simply refers to when an item takes damage from decay, and normal QL-based decay refers to decay in which an item takes ( perishability / EffectveQL ) damage per tick. Most item types use normal QL-based decay, though there are also other decay types. A use tick refers to the damage items take periodically throughout actions with timers when used as tools, and many action types have an initial use tick at the start of actions as well.

Steel and oakenwood also supposedly reduce damage weapons and armour take from combat (but not when using them on a practice doll), though testing would be needed to verify the exact extent of that reduction. There may also be other benefits from the reduction to perishability (For example, I suspect it reduces damage to vehicles when attacked by creatures.), though that would require testing to verify.

Damage from decay ticks for item types which do not use perishability in their decay formulas, such as the constant decay damage (10 damage per tick) used by many raw and intermediate materials (and some other things), will be unaffected. When observing damage from use ticks, it's much simpler to observe either at low QL or using item types you can see more than two places beyond the decimal point for, as with other items the rounding of the values will tend to interfere. For practice dolls, it's simplest to see the 20% reduction in the minimum damage they take per hit when using a weak weapon, and it can be difficult to see in hits above the minimum damage due to the randomness to the exact damage per hit. The large number of factors that influence damage from combat and the fact that one of them is some randomness would make determining the extent of the reduction to damage items take from combat fairly complicated and time consuming.

Comparing nonequal numbers of ticks will probably distort results. When comparing equal numbers of ticks of the same type, the overall reduction over multiple ticks should be greater than or equal to the reduction per tick.

It's also worth noting that rarity reduces perishability, with the reduction from rarity stacking multiplicatively with that from material. For example, a rare item's perishability is reduced by 10% to 90% of what it would otherwise be, and a rare steel or oakenwood item's perishability is reduced by 28% to 72% (80% of 90%) of what it would normally be for that item type.

Oakenwood items can be improved using logs of any wood type, while steel items specifically require steel lumps to improve. Oakenwood is definitely worth considering for tools or things that use normal QL-based decay in order to reduce the rate at which they take damage. You may find some of the items that specifically require steel to make useful, but it's largely a matter of preference whether steel is worth using for items that can be made using other metals. You may find steel particularly useful in cases where you plan to keep an item at low QL, as the reduction to damage per decay tick can help avoid accidentally losing such items to decay.

[Laiwyn 188]

It's also worth noting that rarity reduces perishability, with the reduction from rarity stacking multiplicatively with that from material. For example, a rare item's perishability is reduced by 10% to 90% of what it would otherwise be, and a rare steel or oakenwood item's perishability is reduced by 28% to 72% (80% of 90%) of what it would normally be for that item type.

I've never heard this to be true. Do you have any data to back up the assertion that rarity reduces damage to an item?

[Guest ForsakenPolakkk]

a

[Keldun 335]

Where do you get your info from that oak reduces decay? Afaik only cedar is supposed to do that, while oak only reduces damage on use.

I have no clue on steel, but that could actually have both effects.

[Raybarg 436]

Stop this madness!

20% bonus for a comparison of;

1. Mining skill; Mine Iron -> go smithing that good iron item.

2. Mining skill + Wood Cutting skill + Digging skill + Coalmaking skill + Metallurgy skill; Chop Logs, Dig Dirt, Make Piles, Mine Iron, Use Coal+Iron -> go smithing that good steel item (after you actually had to make 5k lumps of steel to get to the skill levels to even have daydreams about competing the imping levels with iron items)

If you want to bring out the "wogic" absurdity of "I get 20% for X amount more effort" then atleast put the X out somehow accurate.

And... its not wogic, its not even unrealistic, because its FUN the way it is. You dont like it? Then its not fun for you, but if its fun for me so it is fun. I like slapping people in the face when I get upset but I've been told its not fun to them, so I give them the privilege of respect and not slap them in the face... See? Not fun, no slapping. Slapping faces... I actually never did that. But the idea seems nice in my mind.

[Cedric_Scott 4]

If you dont like it dont use it. 20%+ damage reduction or whatever it is isnt intended to be easy to get. Plenty of people already use steel tools and like them; nobody is forcing any of you to make and use them.

Also I like how it takes a large set of skills to make high quality steel items, that way not everybody is spamming them and the people who can make them have something special.

[Keldun 335]

This is not a case of don't like it don't use it, or the bonus being a bit more difficult to get. Yes people use them because there are people stubborn(stupid?) enough to make them, but the effort is rediculous.

It is far simpler to make three 90 ql iron tools than to make a single 70 ql steel tool, but even one of those 90 ql is already superior to the steel tool so the damage reduction is pointless.

[Telurius 52]

I've never heard this to be true. Do you have any data to back up the assertion that rarity reduces damage to an item?

I chose to mention that due to the way the damage reduction from rarity interacts with that from steel and oakenwood. The damage reduction from rarity has been mentioned in a few threads by different people, though you'll see different values stated by different people for the same reasons you'll see different values stated for the reduction from steel and oakenwood. My numbers come from my own testing. I do have some data and continue to collect more, though I later discard much of the data I collect (There's not much point in hanging onto large amounts of raw data when I already have formulas that produce results matching that data.). If you want detailed information about it, I suggest PMing me, as I don't want to send this thread too far off topic.

Where do you get your info from that oak reduces decay? Afaik only cedar is supposed to do that, while oak only reduces damage on use.

I have no clue on steel, but that could actually have both effects.

That information comes from my own testing. As said, oakenwood and steel reduce perishability. One of the effects of that is reducing damage per decay tick for item types with normal QL-based decay, and another is reducing damage per use tick. Cedarwood slows decay tick frequency, though there's also some randomness to decay tick frequency. For example, oakenwood doesn't slow decay of a log (which uses constant damage per decay tick) although cedarwood does, but both oakenwood and cedarwood slow decay (just in different ways) of a mallet, and oakenwood also reduces damage a mallet takes from use compared to other wood types. In terms of damage reduction steel and oakenwood basically work the same, though they differ significantly when it comes to producing the materials and working with them. Steel takes a lot of work to produce, especially if you want large quantities at high QL. I would expect many people to find oakenwood worth using, but few to find steel worth using for item types that can be made using other metals, though it is largely a matter of personal preference.