Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
I'll agree with you that bronze weapons were easier to make granted you could find tin and copper. But Bronze did NOT replace Iron. ?????
http://study.com/academy/lesson/iron-vs-bronze-history-of-metallurgy.html
http://science.howstuffworks.com/sword-making2.htm
Iron itself isn't actually that strong, but when you start mixing carbon into it (aka coal) then it becomes stronger, but at that point, you basically have some low-grade steel on your hands.
That is where the game takes it from.
Take a look at this article:
http://www.differencebetween.net/object/difference-between-iron-and-bronze/
You just answered yourself with that video and also I told you before, to make bronze you need copper and tin which are rarely found together, a civilization would need access to both either by trading or having it in their territory (which was rare). Iron ended up replacing bronze only because it was cheaper and plentiful, and steel ended up replacing iron because it was better.
Iron is actually much harder to work than bronze requiring more heat and is also harder to refine from it's natural raw form. On the other hand bronze can be worked at lower heats having a melting point almost 600f lower than iron. When properly worked however iron and bronze have similar mechanical properties when it comes to those important to ancient weaponsmithing. I will concede however that very early in the iron age bronze did outperform iron due to most smiths having not yet developed the skills to properly refine and work it as they had with bronze.
As for the OP. Game balance I guess? Were smacking undead and dragons I don't think worrying about the realism of the materials our weapons are made out of is particularly high in the devs list.
If you are talking to me that is basically what I meant, It's also stated exactly like that in the OP's video (the trade routes thing), I assumed he watched it.
Also a quote from wikipedia that resumes all this.
"Though bronze is generally harder than wrought iron, with Vickers hardness of 60–258 vs. 30–80,] the Bronze Age gave way to the Iron Age because iron, was easier to find than copper and tin, and iron was easier to process into a usable grade of metal than bronze (iron can be made into higher grades, but doing so takes significantly more effort and knowledge of techniques). Pure iron is soft, and the process of beating and folding sponge iron to make wrought iron removes from the metal carbon and other impurities which need to be re-introduced to improve hardness. Careful control of the alloying and tempering eventually allowed for wrought iron with properties comparable to modern steel.
Bronze was still used during the Iron Age, and has continued in use for many purposes to the modern day. Among other advantages it does not rust. The weaker wrought iron was found to be sufficiently strong for many uses. Archaeologists suspect that a serious disruption of the tin trade precipitated the transition. The population migrations around 1200–1100 BC reduced the shipping of tin around the Mediterranean (and from Great Britain), limiting supplies and raising prices.
As the art of working in iron improved, iron became cheaper, and as cultures advanced from wrought iron (typically forged by hand – wrought – by blacksmiths) to machine forged iron (typically made with trip hammers powered by water), the blacksmiths learned how to make steel, which is stronger than bronze and holds a sharper edge longer."
In fact Bronze is a very sturdy alloy that beats Iron in every category except for magnetism.
But it is also a much more expensive metal, what made it bad for business and equipping great numbers of soldiers.
In fact the combination of properties in Bronze made it superior due to hard, cutting edges and soft bodies, which could deal better with stress. It is what makes the Samurai-Swords superior as well, a very hard edge and a pretty soft inside. (As far as metals go...)
Got it. So basically Iron is garbage.
One iron node can make 2.5 ingots.
One copper node can make 2.5 bronze ingots.
Bronze is given about a 20% buff of iron, and Steel gets a about a 10% buff over bronze
So basically skip iron, there's no point in having it in the game because nobody is going to make it.
Anyone with any common sense playing is going to upgrade to bronze, and then go directly to steel. Since in this game steel can be made from the same resources required by iron. Because nobody would downgrade there equipment and waste resources on iron.
See where I'm getting at here? Just doesn't make sense. This got into a debate about RL (real life) and I was asking about SL (Savage Lands).
If the devs wanted to continue to theme of upgrading tiers. Based on what you find first in the game. Stone<Tin<Copper<Bronze<?Downgrade Iron?<Steel.
I don't know about you guys. I've logged over 200 hours on this game. So I've been around the block in this game. Just starting back up since U5 rebuilding everything and when I got to Island 2 for my first trip, found nothing but copper to combine with the tin from island one. It wasn't until my 2nd trip to the Island 2 and hard look that I found iron nodes. Which by that time I had upgraded my "tools" to bronze. So I'm standing here at the Forge scratching my head as to why I'd waste iron on iron and not just go to steel??
Just think about Alloys as the high tier stuff and pure metals as the low tier stuff and Iron makes sense again...
In regards to the Iron Hammer... just a strange bug that started recently, there is supposed to be one though.
So lets say you need to use either 4 bronze or 4 iron bars for a weapon.
That takes 16 coal for the bronze, 4 for the iron.
Huge diference there.
Bronze is made of easier to obtain metals, granted, but uses more coal. If you know where the iron is, you spend more time hunting for the tin, copper, and coal for a Bronze set than you do for the iron and coal for a Steel set.
If you need non-game-mechanical reasons for Iron being worse than Bronze, it's easier to make a decent bronze blade than a decent nonsteel iron blade with primitive tools.
Idk where you get 16. Because its 4. One for tin ingot, 2 for 2 copper ingots, and one for a bronze ingot. so 4 coal = one bronze ingot. By your standards steel would be equal to bronze because it takes 4 coal to make one steel ingot 2 for 2 iron ingots and 2 for one steel ingot. So Bronze = Steel?
I don't need non game mechanical reasons, people just started debating real life versions. I'm just saying there's hardly a point in making iron because is sucks in this game, in terms of advancement and progression.
Nonetheless, you are not incorrect that there are ingame progression balance issues. This is actually a more difficult thing to address on the development side than you'd think.
Gathering-base progression is difficult to make entertaining and interesting, and most games opt to use the boring and simple lineir progression. Even then, you can still overcome any ramped-numbers threat by just being mildly cunning and going for gathering-tool upgrades to skip tiers until you can no longer overcome threats with simple evasion while gathering.