Page 1 of 1

Ingot control

Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 9:53 pm
by Alexan
Hey guys,

I know that you can re-smelt lower tier ingots to make higher tier ones, but I was wondering if we can go the other way with it? I know everyone always wants the highest tier ingot they can, but if I'm just trying to make some crappy weapon (just for practice) and I have 3 average ingots, and 1 high ingot, is there a way we could make it so I could either lower the quality, or use the higher quality as a lower quality? I know that might sound silly, but I don't normally have a lot of high+ ingots, so they don't really do me anything when practicing.

Once again, I'd have no idea how to implement it, and I wouldn't suggest making it part of a skill up for smelting, but it would make life easier when trying to use all my ingots to practice on.

Re: Ingot control

Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 2:50 am
by Raona
Er, in other words, allow CONSTRUCT to draw from any ingots you have of a given metal, but treat them as all being of the lowest quality of any member of the set actually used?

What do you smiths out there think about that, prefer the option to do so over the protection against doing so by mistake? It makes IC sense to me.

Re: Ingot control

Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:54 am
by Azgar
I like the theory, however the way i understand it is an ingot or ores quality i.e. average, low, worthless,high etc is refering to the quality of the metal and not the quantity.

Re: Ingot control

Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 11:22 am
by Raona
Azgar wrote:I like the theory, however the way i understand it is an ingot or ores quality i.e. average, low, worthless,high etc is refering to the quality of the metal and not the quantity.
Right. The suggestion here is that if you wish to construct something that requires 5 ingots, you could choose to do so with 4 of high quality and 1 of low quality, but then all 5 would be treated as being low quality; that is, the lowest quality of the batch would hold sway.

Re: Ingot control

Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 11:24 am
by Azgar
Oh ok, i get it now. Was misunderstanding. I would be for that.