Jump to content

I have not failed to locate Lead, I've simply found a ton of places with none or miniscule amounts!

Vexxvididu

By Vexxvididu
in Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Vexxvididu Ironsmith

Vexxvididu

Posted
Posted

Trying to find lead for windows and more so for a distill.  ....no luck.  Just did a ton of prospecting this morning.  I have a big area near my base with miniscule amounts, but don't think I've ever seen poor or higher of it.

Is there some trick to how it spawns, or is this just pure RNG?  So far nothing else has evaded me so much...

  • Like 1
MKMoose Ironsmith

MKMoose

Posted
Posted (edited)

Galena is a shallow ore, spawning in all types of sedimentary rock only, and it spawns nuggets if it's close enough on the surface. It will likely have very low propick readings, as the highest I've seen personally was just over 1 permille, still classed as "very poor".

I've mostly found galena by chance when exploring, through surface nuggets. Once you get a reading with relatively high lead concentrations (in practice I think anything above "minuscule" should suffice), you can try running around looking for nuggets before commiting to mining - with some luck in a good area you may be able to find a dozen deposits in a two hundred block radius or so this way (I did just that near the 1 permille reading).

If you decide to mine for it, like when you get a good reading but can't find nuggets, just keep in mind that it's in sedimentary rocks only, and you should be good. It has really high spawn rates and should be easy to find once you're looking in a relatively good area with a decent layer of sedimentary material. As a reminder, it's chalk, chert, claystone, conglomerate, limestone, sandstone and slate. You can also find them by searching for galena in the handbook and taking a look at the different chunks or ore blocks that show up.

Edited by MKMoose
  • Like 2
Maelstrom Historian

Maelstrom

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, MKMoose said:

Once you get a reading with relatively high lead concentrations (in practice I think anything above "minuscule" should suffice), you can try running around looking for nuggets before commiting to mining

Surface deposits (indicated by surface nuggets) do not show up on the Density Search mode on the pro-pick.

As @Zane Mordien said, I have never prospected for lead as I usually run into a veritable field of lead nuggets.  In multiple worlds across the last 4-5 updates if I find a surface nugget for lead I will find numerous surface deposits within a 100-200 block radius.  That one field is more than enough lead for my purposes, which usually is molybdechalkos lanterns.

  • Like 5
MKMoose Ironsmith

MKMoose

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Maelstrom said:

Surface deposits (indicated by surface nuggets) do not show up on the Density Search mode on the pro-pick.

Where did you get that from? I don't think it's stated anywhere in the game, the wiki doesn't seem to mention it, and everything that I've found on Reddit or wherever else has absolutely zero evidence and often contradicts other information.

Additionally, you may want to consult the prospecting pick's description in the tooltip, which mentions a few specific deposits but not surface deposits as a whole:

Quote

Detects Deposits that are above 2.5% concentration level. Does not register surface copper, quartz, rock salt or lapis lazuli.

I think that list actually also includes olivine and surface cassiterite, but not galena.

 

According to the wiki, galena only generates as shallow deposits, which may or may not actually be near the surface and be indicated by the presence of loose nuggets (I don't know if that's the same as your "surface deposit"). The primary distinguishing factor is that most shallow deposits only appear in sedimentary rock, while deep deposits primarily generate in metamorphic and igneous layers. If what you're saying is true, then either the wiki is missing a separate generator for deep galena (which would be odd considering that the shallow one already can generate at any height in all rock types that galena can generate in) or the game would have to somehow split "surface deposits" off of shallow deposits when generating the density map (which would be even worse).

The same applies to borax and maybe some other stuff. Personally, I've seen close correlation between readings for shallow deposits and frequency of nuggets on the surface for both galena and borax.

Edited by MKMoose
Maelstrom Historian

Maelstrom

Posted
Posted

My source?   Playing since 1.14

There's a difference between surface deposits and deposits that show up on the density search.  Lead deposits that may show up on density search will be shallow (compared against other ores like iron, ilmenite, etc) but those deposits are not surface deposits which spawn no lower than 10 blocks below the top layer of soil/sand/gravel.  The shallow deposits of lead will likely spawn lower than 10 blocks below the top layer, but not generate deeper.   I once found such a shallow deposit of lead.  It was somwhere around 20 or 25 blocks below the top soil layer.

Ores detected by density search are based off of a heat map.  Surface ore deposits are randomly placed and completely unrelated to that ore heat map.  I've found surface copper nodes in places where the pro pick says no copper exists.

Remember, the wiki is likely to be inaccurate because it is out of date.   Take any info from the wiki with a deposit of halite!

  • Like 4
  • Wolf Bait 1
Slam Potter

Slam

Posted
Posted

Huh, I had similar problem with gold and silver, but I guess the difference is there’s only some in quarts, vs the big veins of regular ore.

MKMoose Ironsmith

MKMoose

Posted
Posted (edited)

@Maelstrom Very well. Let's check out the code, then. This is the entire file that determines the generation of galena deposits, located in assets/survival/worldgen/deposits/metalore/galena.json: 

[
	{
		code: "galena",
		triesPerChunk: 40,
		withOreMap: true,
		handbookPageCode: "item-nugget-galena",
		generator: "disc-followsurface",
		attributes: {
			inblock: { code: "rock-*", name: "rock", allowedVariants: ["claystone", "sandstone", "shale", "chalk", "limestone", "chert", "conglomerate"] },
			placeblock: { 
				code: "ore-*-galena-{rock}",
				name: "grade",
				allowedVariantsByInBlock: {
					"rock-claystone": ["poor", "medium", "rich"],
					"rock-sandstone": ["poor", "medium", "rich"],
					"rock-shale": ["poor", "medium", "rich", "bountiful"],
					"rock-chalk": ["poor", "medium"],
					"rock-limestone": ["poor", "medium"],
					"rock-chert": ["poor", "medium", "rich", "bountiful"],
					"rock-conglomerate": ["poor", "medium"]
				}
			},
			surfaceBlock: {code: "looseores-galena-{rock}-free" },
			radius: { dist: "gaussian", avg: 4, var: 4 },
			yPosRel: {dist: "uniform", avg: 0.5, var: 0.5 },
			gradeDistribution: "RandomPlusDepthBonus",
			thickness: { dist: "uniform", avg: 1, var: 0 }
		},
		childDeposits: [
			{
				code: "silver",
				triesPerChunk: 4,
				withOreMap: true,
				handbookPageCode: "item-nugget-nativesilver",
				generator: "childdeposit-pointcloud",
				attributes: {
					randomTries: { avg: 10 },
					placeblock: { code: "ore-*-galena_nativesilver-{rock}", name: "grade", allowedVariants: ["poor", "medium"] },
					radius: { dist: "gaussian", avg: 2, var: 2 },
					thickness: { dist: "invexp", avg: 1.2, var: 3 }
				}
			}
		],
	}
]

There is one generator for galena, which creates deposits:

  • at any depth below the surface (within allowed rock types),
  • with surface blocks (nuggets),
  • with an ore map, which allows these deposits to be detected by the prospecting pick.

This affirms the strong correlation that I observed between readings and loose ore on the surface, as well as exactly confirms the information available on the wiki page that I linked.

Edited by MKMoose
Remove less relevant information.
  • Like 1
Maelstrom Historian

Maelstrom

Posted
Posted (edited)

I don't know C# so can't analyze the code.   Based on my experience surface deposits generate differently than "deep" deposits as I've described.   And for sure the two are independent, and upon reflection may even be mutually exclusive - probably from the generation code you posted choosing one over the other.

[edit] My comment about the wiki was incomplete.   Some information on the wiki may be out of date while other information isn't would be a more accurate expression of the wiki.   My apologies for confusion my previous comment may have caused.

2 hours ago, Slam said:

Huh, I had similar problem with gold and silver, but I guess the difference is there’s only some in quarts, vs the big veins of regular ore.

Gold and silver only spawn in quartz, which itself may spawn as surface or deep desposits.  If it spawns as a surface deposit the gold and silver may create surface nuggets among the quartz nuggets.

Edited by Maelstrom
  • Like 1
Zane Mordien Steel Worker

Zane Mordien

Posted
Posted

I wonder, does lead have "surface " deposits or does it just spawn so close to the surface that it shows up on the surface as nuggets all the time? I've never paid any attention to the prospecting data. I've always assumed they coded in surface deposits to make it easier to get the copper-lead alloy to make lanterns. That was probably a bad assumption. 

MKMoose Ironsmith

MKMoose

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Maelstrom said:

Based on my experience surface deposits generate differently than "deep" deposits as I've described.   And for sure the two are independent, and upon reflection may even be mutually exclusive - probably from the generation code you posted choosing one over the other.

Your experience is your own and perfectly valid, but your conclusions don't align with the way that the deposits are actually generated. Do note that you are entirely correct about surface copper deposits (or maybe aside from a minute detail or two), it's just that this doesn't carry over to galena.

If I may ask, I would greatly appreciate if you @ or quote me when you are replying to me. I also want to clarify that the reason for my "wolf bait" reaction to your earlier post was that I felt like it didn't address anything that I said and instead went off to explaining basics that I fully understand, but let's put that aside, as I would prefer to try to actually explain how the ore generation works here.

 

2 hours ago, Maelstrom said:

I don't know C# so can't analyze the code.

It's JSON, not C#. My bad for saying it's code, as it technically isn't. JSON is a file format used to store data in a human-readable way, which is useful here as it allows devs and modders to define various elements of the game in a way which is easy to read, interpret and modify, even for someone less familiar with it.

Let me try to break it down in a way which should be as understandable as I can make it, to justify this conclusion that I placed below the code block earlier:

4 hours ago, MKMoose said:

There is one generator for galena, which creates deposits:

  • at any depth below the surface (within allowed rock types),
  • with surface blocks (nuggets),
  • with an ore map, which allows these deposits to be detected by the prospecting pick.

This affirms the strong correlation that I observed between readings and loose ore on the surface, as well as exactly confirms the information available on the wiki page that I linked.

 

First, focusing on this part: 

{
	code: "galena",
	triesPerChunk: 40,
	withOreMap: true,
	handbookPageCode: "item-nugget-galena",
	generator: "disc-followsurface",
	attributes: { ... },
	...
}

I've replaced less important parts with ellipses. The set of outermost {curly brackets} indicates that this entire code block is a single object (it happens to be the only such object for galena), which contains a bunch of  name: value  pairs. The first such pair is  code: "galena" , indicating that this object defines galena deposits (the game knows to interpret this as a deposit generator and not something else because it's coded to expect it in this folder).

We then have a bunch of other parameters, and one of particular interest is  withOreMap: true . This lets the game know to generate a density map for this ore, and this is also how the game knows to detect this ore when using density mode with the prospecting pick. From the  generator: "disc-followsurface"  we can also infer that the game will generate the ores based on the Y level of the surface (as opposed to sea level), which will be relevant in a moment.

Then, we reach  attributes: { ... } , and the value here is another set of  name: value  pairs bundled into a single object using the curly brackets again. The main parameters of interest are these: 

attributes: {
	...
  	placeblock: { code: "ore-*-galena-{rock}", ... },
	surfaceBlock: { code: "looseores-galena-{rock}-free" },
	...
	yPosRel: { dist: "uniform", avg: 0.5, var: 0.5 },
	...
},

Of these,  placeblock: { code: "ore-*-galena-{rock}", ... }  defines the main galena ore that should be spawned by referencing its code (there's some added complexity to account for various ore richness and host rock types), while  surfaceBlock: {code: "looseores-galena-{rock}-free" }  is responsible for telling the game what kind of block it should generate on the surface near the deposit (the surface chunks).

Then,  yPosRel: {dist: "uniform", avg: 0.5, var: 0.5 }  determines the height at which the deposits can spawn. Y level of 0 refers to the bottom surface of the world, while Y = 1 in this case is equal to the surface level (because earlier we set the generator to follow surface). Since the distribution here is uniform and has the average value of 0.5 and variance of 0.5, we can conclude that the deposits are spawned with equal probability at any height between 0 and 1, that is anywhere between the bottom of the world and the surface (as long as it spawns within an allowed rock type).

 

Now, you might be wondering, how is surface copper different from this? The answer is that for copper we have two objects, enclosed into a list using outermost [square brackets]. Each of these two objects define their own deposits, and you should be able to easily distinguish which generator does what based on their codes and a few of their parameters (I skipped over the less critical stuff, as before): 

[
	{
		code: "surfacecopper",
		// Surface copper deposits   <--- note: this is a comment, the game ignores it
		...
		generator: "disc-followsurface",
		attributes: {
			...
			placeblock: { code: "ore-*-nativecopper-{rock}", ... },
			surfaceBlock: { code: "looseores-nativecopper-{rock}-free" },
			...
			yPosRel: { dist: "uniform", avg: 0.965, var: 0.03 },
			...
		}
	},
	{
		code: "nativecopper",
		// Deep native copper deposits
		...
		withOreMap: true,
		...
		generator: "disc-followsurface",
		attributes: {
			...
			placeblock: { code: "ore-*-nativecopper-{rock}", ... },
			...
			yPosRel: { dist: "uniform", avg: 0.3, var: 0.3 },
			...
		}
	}
]

 

I'll also point out that internally there is no technical separation between "surface", "shallow" or "deep" deposits - they're just classified in this way on the wiki based on some shared characteristics. Or actually, surface copper and surface cassiterite are the most distinct ones, as they are named as surface deposits in their definitions (like the  code: "surfacecopper"  above), and they are pretty unique in that the heights at which they generate are always very close to 1 (the surface), though they still rely on the same underlying system and just use slightly different parameters.

Feel free to ask about anything unclear or point out any mistakes.

Edited by MKMoose
Improve formatting.
  • Like 1
  • Amazing! 1
LadyWYT Historian

LadyWYT

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, MKMoose said:

Where did you get that from? I don't think it's stated anywhere in the game, the wiki doesn't seem to mention it, and everything that I've found on Reddit or wherever else has absolutely zero evidence and often contradicts other information.

Additionally, you may want to consult the prospecting pick's description in the tooltip, which mentions a few specific deposits but not surface deposits as a whole:

The description on the prospecting picks' pages mention specific deposit types, yes. However, I think it's worth noting that the handbook might not be entirely up to date either, given that the description doesn't list olivine or cassiterite(tin) at all, and lists halite as "rock salt". Lead deposits near the surface could fall into this category, however...

3 hours ago, MKMoose said:

I'll also point out that internally there is no technical separation between "surface", "shallow" or "deep" deposits - they're just classified in this way on the wiki based on some shared characteristics. Or actually, surface copper and surface cassiterite are the most distinct ones, as they are named as surface deposits in their definitions (like the  code: "surfacecopper"  above), and they are pretty unique in that the heights at which they generate are always very close to 1 (the surface), though they still rely on the same underlying system and just use slightly different parameters.

This is true, that the JSON files seem to make specific distinctions between surface deposits and deep deposits, at least when it comes to copper and tin. Lead doesn't seem to have any distinction between deposit types, which suggests that the propick might be able to detect them with a density search.

However, this is where I'll hop on @Maelstrom's wagon, and point out that based on my experience, prospecting for deeper lead deposits is a waste of time. It's a rather common ore, so it's not terribly hard to find--if you find one deposit there will almost certainly be more nearby. It's also an ore that only spawns in sediment rock, which is only ever going to be found near the surface. The one exception is chunks that have thick layers of sediment, but even in these cases the sediment rock gives way to igneous around the "mid layers", or about Y 40-60 if I had to ballpark a number.

Given that lead ore has a dark color, and most sediment rocks are lighter colors, it's rather easy to spot even at a distance. Thus it's more efficient to canvas the surface looking for bits on the ground or patches of the ore nestled into a cliff face, than it is to spend time actually prospecting for the stuff like one might for other ore.

That's just my two cents.

  • Like 1
MKMoose Ironsmith

MKMoose

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

However, this is where I'll hop on @Maelstrom's wagon, and point out that based on my experience, prospecting for deeper lead deposits is a waste of time. It's a rather common ore, so it's not terribly hard to find--if you find one deposit there will almost certainly be more nearby. It's also an ore that only spawns in sediment rock, which is only ever going to be found near the surface. The one exception is chunks that have thick layers of sediment, but even in these cases the sediment rock gives way to igneous around the "mid layers", or about Y 40-60 if I had to ballpark a number.

Given that lead ore has a dark color, and most sediment rocks are lighter colors, it's rather easy to spot even at a distance. Thus it's more efficient to canvas the surface looking for bits on the ground or patches of the ore nestled into a cliff face, than it is to spend time actually prospecting for the stuff like one might for other ore.

Fair enough, I may have focused a bit too much on the technical side of it, rather than practical. Do keep in mind, though, that the claim that started this was a different one, which I argue was verifiably false in the context of galena (though it would be generally correct if the conversation was concerned with copper or cassiterite):

19 hours ago, Maelstrom said:
19 hours ago, MKMoose said:

Once you get a reading with relatively high lead concentrations (in practice I think anything above "minuscule" should suffice), you can try running around looking for nuggets before commiting to mining

Surface deposits (indicated by surface nuggets) do not show up on the Density Search mode on the pro-pick.

 

I do somewhat agree that "prospecting for deep deposits is a waste of time", because of how thin the sedimentary layers can sometimes be (your estimate for a thick layer ending at Y ~= 50, a bit below half of world height, seems very generous to me). And of course there's the time and resource expenditure necessary for mining.

However, in some cases, primarily when struggling to find surface bits in spite of prospecting pick readings (not unlike the OP experienced), mining for galena may be very useful. I'd like to share my own experimental data (not plentiful, and not insignificant) that I've gathered by digging vertical shafts and using node search (and some sideways digging to actually get to the deposits). The characteristics of the area were as follows:

  • area size: ~250 blocks diameter,
  • peak galena reading: 1.07 permille (very poor), average closer to 0.5 permille (very poor),
  • peak borax reading: 0.73 permille (very poor), average around 0.5 permille (very poor),
  • sedimentary layer thickness: ~20-25,
  • terrain: mostly flat, some parts at sea level, with small hills (has to be very close to sea level to allow borax to create surface nuggets).

With that, here's what I found within 16 mining shafts spaced a couple dozen blocks apart, only digging in the sedimentary layer:

  • 8 galena deposits with no surface bits (I managed to find 4 deposits with surface bits in the same area),
  • 6 borax deposits with no surface bits (I managed to find 3 deposits with surface bits; its generation is similar to galena but doesn't follow the surface, so nuggets only appear very close to sea level),
  • 1 sulfur deposit (it was "minuscule" in a part of the area and I couldn't find higher readings anywhere; it generates almost the same as borax but doesn't appear high enough to create surface nuggets),
  • 1 surface copper deposit with no surface bits (there was one deposit with surface bits, I'll also mention that copper deposits only generate 33% of surface nuggets according to the files).

Was I lucky? Maybe. I could probably do some more rigorous testing if there's demand for it, though that may be pretty time-consuming.

 

This is what I would conclude based on what I know and what I've found:

  • searching for loose galena chunks on the surface does tend to be more reliable than mining in the general case, and it can certainly be cheaper and faster,
  • prospecting can be useful to find areas which have higher frequency of surface nuggets, which can be especially valuable if found while searching for something else,
  • deeper lead deposits can be useful, though it's primarily relevant when in need of exceptionally high amounts of lead or when struggling to find anything on the surface,
  • lead (similar to borax, sulfur and a few other deposits) tends to have very low density readings, and anything above "minuscule" is generally pretty good,
  • mining for galena is only practical in a thick layer of sedimentary rocks, at minimum ~15 blocks, ideally ~30+ blocks thick (though it's generally not practical to deliberately look for such areas - you get what you get, and if it's thick enough you can try mining).
Edited by MKMoose
Better respond to arguments.
  • Like 2
Heart_Afire Copper Caster

Heart_Afire

Posted
Posted

So, to bring all of this home and to a conclusion:

The best way to find Galena isn't by prospecting for it, but just looking for surface deposits in sedimentary rocks.

In other words, stop sitting around and get the lead out! 🙂

  • Like 1
  • Cookie time 3
  • Thanks 1
Maelstrom Historian

Maelstrom

Posted
Posted

@MKMoose  I didn't read the entirety of your tome.  I've limited time resources.  I did read the first paragraph or two and when you mention the "code" was actually just data in a JSON, that tells me a lot.   The data in a JSON does not indicate how the functions invoked in the actual code use that data.  I have experience in coding a number of different programming languages (C# not being one of them, as I previously mentioned) so I can at least decipher some of how the code of the functions would act.   

Experience indicates how the game is coded.  Such as using refactory bricks to create a beehive kiln vs. refractory furnace reveals different functions.   Similarly, my experience with surface or deep ore generation is different indicates different functions in the code that is completely separate from the data in a JSON file.

4 hours ago, MKMoose said:

I do somewhat agree that "prospecting for deep deposits is a waste of time", because of how thin the sedimentary layers can sometimes be

That wasn't my point at all.  My point was that surface deposits are completely invisible to the density search mode of the pro-pick. Come to think of it, the two search modes for the pro-pick lends even more evidence that there are two different functions to generating ore deposits.
And I concur 50 block depth is generous for "deep" lead deposits; I was erring on the side of caution.

MKMoose Ironsmith

MKMoose

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Zane Mordien said:

I wonder, does lead have "surface " deposits or does it just spawn so close to the surface that it shows up on the surface as nuggets all the time? 

You can mostly deduce this from what I was explaining above, but the short of it is that yes, lead spawns at any world height in the allowed rock types, and generates nuggets on the surface if it happens to generate high enough.

 

17 hours ago, Zane Mordien said:

I've always assumed they coded in surface deposits to make it easier to get the copper-lead alloy to make lanterns. That was probably a bad assumption. 

It's not a bad assumption, though I think the devs' reasoning has more to do with the overarching progression of the game. The thing with copper specifically is that the surface deposits allow to easily find sufficient amounts of it when the player is starting out and hasn't touched prospecting yet, whereas the deep deposits actually start spawning relatively deep comparing to many other ores (Y = ~72 and lower, while the sea level is at Y = 110), and mostly serve to create a second layer of complexity that the player can use to find much more copper than on the surface (a single deep deposit will easily have as much copper as 4 surface deposits).

 

12 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

The description on the prospecting picks' pages mention specific deposit types, yes. However, I think it's worth noting that the handbook might not be entirely up to date either, given that the description doesn't list olivine or cassiterite(tin) at all, and lists halite as "rock salt".

Yeah, I did mention that in passing as well. One thing I can do based on the game files is list out all the deposits that are not registered by the prospecting pick's density search:

  • surface copper, surface cassiterite,
  • halite salt beds,
  • quartz, olivine,
  • saltpeter,
  • sylvite.

Interestingly, it does detect lapis lazuli, contrary to what the in-game tooltip suggests (I know in part because I have readings for it in my 1.21.5 world).

I am not certain about gems and child deposits, as they behave in some less predictable ways.

 

6 hours ago, Heart_Afire said:

The best way to find Galena isn't by prospecting for it, but just looking for surface deposits in sedimentary rocks.

Well, except that the key point I've been trying to hammer home here (though may have distracted myself a bit) is that prospecting allows to locate areas where loose galena chunks can generate in the first place. Mining for galena doesn't tend to be efficient, but just prospecting every couple hundred blocks can tell you whether you should search nearby for surface nuggets or just move elsewhere.

Edited by MKMoose
Correction about child deposits.
Maelstrom Historian

Maelstrom

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, MKMoose said:

just prospecting every couple hundred blocks can tell you whether you should search nearby for surface nuggets or just move elsewhere.

This is where I disagree with you, unless you mean using the node search mode (which has a range of no greater than 13 block radius).  Density search mode for the pro-pick is completely blind to surface deposits that generate nuggets on the ground.  I am stating this vehemently, because your satement I quoted is completely wrong.

Any pro-pick reading on density search mode and finding surface nuggets will be completely coincidental.  The only way to find surface ore deposits (the ones that generate nuggets on the ground) using the pro-pick is using the node search mode.

@Streetwind did extensive research and study on prospecting and ore generation before I even started playing (which I haven't mentioned before coz old man brain).  I learned a ton from him.  Search for his posts on this if you want to learn more.

Teh Pizza Lady Steel Worker

Teh Pizza Lady

Posted
Posted

Imma just add my 2 cents here.

While I've never seen Bruce Wayne and Batman in the same room together, I have no proof that one is the other.

In the same vein (pun? yes) I've never gotten a prospecting hit for galena where there were surface deposits.

Zane Mordien Steel Worker

Zane Mordien

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Teh Pizza Lady said:

In the same vein (pun? yes) I've never gotten a prospecting hit for galena where there were surface deposits.

That was my original thought, but then again I've also found  iron where there was no iron hit when I was trying to find something else mining down. Maybe lead is just so common that it appears to not be correlated when it's just the spawn rate is so turned up it spawns anywhere. I'm not saying I'm right, just something I've never considered.

2 hours ago, MKMoose said:

It's not a bad assumption, though I think the devs' reasoning has more to do with the overarching progression of the game. The thing with copper specifically is that the surface deposits allow to easily find sufficient amounts of it when the player is starting out and hasn't touched prospecting yet, whereas the deep deposits actually start spawning relatively deep comparing to many other ores (Y = ~72 and lower, while the sea level is at Y = 110), and mostly serve to create a second layer of complexity that the player can use to find much more copper than on the surface (a single deep deposit will easily have as much copper as 4 surface deposits).

I was talking about lead and not copper. I'm fully aware of how copper spawns. Although I rarely even bother looking for copper after I mine the surface deposits. I usually have more than what I need for the my first copper tools and enough to make some tin to get iron.

Edited by Zane Mordien
  • Like 1
MKMoose Ironsmith

MKMoose

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Maelstrom said:

I didn't read the entirety of your tome.

Take your time. I can wait.

 

3 hours ago, Maelstrom said:

Density search mode for the pro-pick is completely blind to surface deposits that generate nuggets on the ground.

You've stated it multiple times already, and yet my testing and available information suggests otherwise.

You can do a simple test yourself. Load into a new world, go into creative mode, grab a prospecting pick, and start looking for sedimentary rocks. Anytime you find a large area of sedimentary material, take a few samples nearby and check if there are readings for galena. Then run the command  .debug find looseores-galena-{rock}-free  (replacing {rock} with the appropriate type, e.g.  .debug find looseores-galena-limestone-free  if you're above a patch of limestone) and see how many nuggets it finds.

I've found very strong correlation this way - the better readings I get, the more nuggets it tends to find. There are some areas which give no galena readings, and the command consequently doesn't yield anything. Sometimes I get no reading initially but it finds just two or three nuggets, then I fly to their locations, and sure enough, there's always a galena reading at the nugget's location.

I'm trying to explain to you that there is only one type of galena deposits, backed up by a highly accurate and frequently updated wiki page and based on the actual definitions for ore generators, and with a few other minor points. I can consistently see strong correlation between loose ore and readings in my experimentation. And you're completely ignoring almost all arguments I'm making, or making excuses for why they're supposed to be less reliable than your "experience". You're clinging to a rule which is only accurate for two specific types of deposits which are implemented in a more complicated way, which I acknowledged as the exception.

Edited by MKMoose
Maelstrom Historian

Maelstrom

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Zane Mordien said:

That was my original thought, but then again I've also found  iron where there was no iron hit when I was trying to find something else mining down. Maybe lead is just so common that it appears to not be correlated when it's just the spawn rate is so turned up it spawns anywhere. I'm not saying I'm right, just something I've never considered.

That is an example of how deep ore generates compared to the pro-pick on density search mode.  The results from taking a sample in density search is the probability of finding ore.  You don't actually know if the reading is true or not until you mine for it.   To confirm your observation, I stumbled upon a deposit of magnetite caving under my base.   I took a pro-pick reading and it came back as very poor probability.   Many other reports from a few years ago reported that they found no results for iron for anything less than very high.

The density mode reads the ore heat map and returns the the value from the map.  The per mille number associated with the reading is basically a dump of debug info indicating how much ore could spawn in that chunk IF a deposit of ore spawns in that chunk.

 

39 minutes ago, MKMoose said:

You can do a simple test yourself. Load into a new world, set creative, grab a prospecting pick, and start looking for sedimentary rocks. Anytime you find a large area of sedimentary material, take a few samples nearby and check if there are readings for galena. Then run the command  .debug find looseores-galena-{rock}-free  (replacing {rock} with the appropriate type, e.g.  .debug find looseores-galena-limestone-free  if you're above a patch of limestone) and see how many nuggets it finds.

a highly accurate and frequently updated wiki page

I'll have to test that when I get a chance (assuming I remember to the next time in VS as well).    I'm curious what wiki page you refer to.

  • Like 1
Vexxvididu Ironsmith

Vexxvididu

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

WOW!

I made this thread to vent about bad RNG.  I've still not found any lead through prospecting or surface deposits.  I wasn't expecting a war to break out!  haha.

Edited by Vexxvididu
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
MKMoose Ironsmith

MKMoose

Posted
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, Maelstrom said:

I'm curious what wiki page you refer to.

This is the main page I'm referring to, which explains the generation mechanics and details the generation parameters of all deposits: https://wiki.vintagestory.at/Ore_Deposits.

Granted, "highly accurate and frequently updated" is somewhat relative, for the standards of the wiki. Some pages seriously lag behind the game's development and miss important details, but there seems to be a bunch of pages about core systems which are generally maintained quite well.

And there are also two other, related pages that I've found quite reliable and useful:

Edited by MKMoose
Teh Pizza Lady Steel Worker

Teh Pizza Lady

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, Vexxvididu said:

WOW!

I made this thread to vent about bad RNG.  I've still not found any lead through prospecting or surface deposits).  I wasn't expecting a war to break out!  haha.

The problem is that there are those of us who are right and those of us who are diplomatic. They seldom intersect.

  • Like 2
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.