Quenching?

[mac1969]

You couldnt resist it, could you? You had to add RNG to the game in a big way!

First off, to put a layer of fire clay on something you have to cool it down and then reheat for quenching, wasting time and coal in the process.

Second, I broke a shovel head 5 times in a row at 10%.

I know what your going to say - dont quench and it wont break. The answer is, if its in the game why shouldnt I use it???

Please reconsider the RNG, or at least lower the odds of breaking. I almost rage quit after those 5 breaks in a row!

As one of my VS friends said - realism is OK, but too much realism make the game no longer a game, but a real life sim. We dont want that!

Please, dont turn this awesome game into another hard core survival!

[williams_482]

As discussed previously, the quenching RNG isn't even realistic. I'm not a big fan of the new implementation and would be much more interested in a realistic system. The devs are aware of the linked post, so although I wouldn't expect to see much change in 1.22 they might move in that direction in the long run. Personally I'm hoping a mod for more realistic heat treatments comes out once 1.22 is released.

With that said:

7 minutes ago, mac1969 said:

I broke a shovel head 5 times in a row at 10%

You should only get a 10% break chance on a second quench. It's not clear to me right now if the first quench is risk-free or a 5% break chance, but for most things you are only going to want to quench once, especially if quenching for durability and not power. Quenching for durability (assuming 5% shatter chance) is a pretty good choice, you get 20% more durability at a 5% chance of losing the tool. Quenching for durability a second time is pretty much net neutral and thus not really worth it, quenching three or more times is just burning metal. 

The intention under the current system is that the player choses how much risk of shattering they are willing to accept in exchange for increased stats. There is no limit on how many times you can quench, only progressively greater shatter chance and reduced benefits to each successful quench. 

13 minutes ago, mac1969 said:

Please, dont turn this awesome game into another hard core survival!

I think most players would already describe Vintage Story as a "hard core survival" game, regardless of the quenching mechanics. It's explicitly advertised as "uncompromising wilderness survival."

[LadyWYT]

1 hour ago, williams_482 said:

The intention under the current system is that the player choses how much risk of shattering they are willing to accept in exchange for increased stats. There is no limit on how many times you can quench, only progressively greater shatter chance and reduced benefits to each successful quench. 

Pretty much this. I've had pretty good luck with a handful of quenches in a row, boosting tool power by around 25%, durability around 20%. While I could push the numbers higher, I also don't want to spend that much time at my forge, nor break multiple items trying to get the "perfect" one. A weapon that can kill enemies with one less hit or a tool that can last longer/work a bit faster is more than sufficient for an upgrade.

[Emeal]

A quick googling says quenching was mostly only done once to three times historically and then with risks. I think we probably hit the nail the right way with an RNG system.
I don't see how this is bad, you have a choice to invest your hard earned material or not. Unless you really really really want a Sword that is super good.

6 hours ago, mac1969 said:

The answer is, if its in the game why shouldnt I use it???

Poisonous Mushrooms are also in the game.

Some things are just the way they are because that's realism.

6 hours ago, mac1969 said:

As one of my VS friends said - realism is OK, but too much realism make the game no longer a game, but a real life sim. We dont want that!

Please, dont turn this awesome game into another hard core survival!

But that's why I bought the game because it promised to be a hardcore survival...
The trailer tagline literally says, "prepare for uncompromising wilderness survival"

[KahvozeinsFang]

9 hours ago, williams_482 said:

There is no limit on how many times you can quench, only progressively greater shatter chance and reduced benefits to each successful quench.

Literally what's the point then? High risk with almost no reward. That is completely the opposite of what it should be. Higher risk deserves higher reward. 

[Tabbot95]

I think quenching should be more abou "heat treating" metal work objects.. perhaps with harder options not allowing for the player to accurately tell temperature from sight alone..

 

possibly this might incentivize a tech tree of forges, and etc.

 

[Athowar]

On 3/30/2026 at 5:45 PM, KahvozeinsFang said:

Literally what's the point then? High risk with almost no reward. That is completely the opposite of what it should be. Higher risk deserves higher reward. 

I'm pretty sure that the damage (or durability) boosts and shatter chance from quenching stacks with each sucessive quench you do, but the magnitude of the added quench buff decreases as the number of quenches increases. While you could quench until you make an amazing weapon you would have to succeed an equally horrible amount of rng. Which is pretty much high risk and high reward.

[YOOOOOOO]

On 3/30/2026 at 2:47 AM, mac1969 said:

You couldnt resist it, could you? You had to add RNG to the game in a big way!

First off, to put a layer of fire clay on something you have to cool it down and then reheat for quenching, wasting time and coal in the process.

Second, I broke a shovel head 5 times in a row at 10%.

I know what your going to say - dont quench and it wont break. The answer is, if its in the game why shouldnt I use it???

Please reconsider the RNG, or at least lower the odds of breaking. I almost rage quit after those 5 breaks in a row!

As one of my VS friends said - realism is OK, but too much realism make the game no longer a game, but a real life sim. We dont want that!

Please, dont turn this awesome game into another hard core survival!

Legit the percentile chance to shatter for a bonus that more often shatters than not is beyond stupid. The quenching isn't even done correctly for the risk anyone takes. You can't give people a low number for something that'll snap on the very first quench. Literally after the update which introduced the system you had like two or three mods that made the process much, much easier to work with just because it wouldn't shatter hard work in an instant. Makes it to where the majority of players (who are casuals which simply want to have fun after work) become unmotivated as fuck. It's not a good implementation of a well-intended mechanic. Not to mention the devs got the temps wrong. 

[YOOOOOOO]

On 3/30/2026 at 3:06 AM, williams_482 said:

"I think most players would already describe Vintage Story as a "hard core survival" game, regardless of the quenching mechanics. It's explicitly advertised as "uncompromising wilderness survival."

It's not hardcore. It's tough but it isn't ball crushing tough. Believe me bud, you do not want the devs to make this realistic to the point where you need to constantly maintain your windmill just to keep it functioning. Let alone the off chance a hit will "bypass" certain armors. You're making an argument in bad faith taking something at face value rather than realizing why people are playing. They want something with far more depth than minecraft while not being something like the crazy craft modpack. 

[YOOOOOOO]

On 3/31/2026 at 7:45 AM, Tabbot95 said:

I think quenching should be more abou "heat treating" metal work objects.. perhaps with harder options not allowing for the player to accurately tell temperature from sight alone..

 

possibly this might incentivize a tech tree of forges, and etc.

 

Exactly. The devs really should have thought this out more and waited. Tempering is not heat treatment. Tempering steel relaxes grain structure or outright removes micro-stresses you can't see. So, either tempering significantly reduces shatter chance and I don't mean some malarky two or three percent. Heat treatment for steel is hyper specific allowing you to adjust toughness and hardness. Hardness is only a factor in sharpness/rigidity and that's a whole discussion.
 

Point being, it's not a fair system for the amount of risk people take. 

[SnapJelly]

On 3/30/2026 at 9:47 AM, mac1969 said:

wasting time and coal in the process

Time sure if you just stand there and do nothing, you could easily be forging something else while your first item air-cools
Wasting coal though? You only need 1 charge of coal to heat something, you can easily chop down a massive 2x2 oak tree and burn it to get several stacks of coal in 1 day, I don't really thing this is a problem, and again you could still be using that burning coal for something else while you wait.

 

On 3/30/2026 at 9:47 AM, mac1969 said:

Second, I broke a shovel head 5 times in a row at 10%.

That is very unfortunate but that is the risk you take when you flip a coin

 

On 3/30/2026 at 9:47 AM, mac1969 said:

or at least lower the odds of breaking

The thing is this won't fix your problem... that's the thing with odds is they are random, the odds are already really low but like what happened in your case if the change is a random percentage then there will always be a player at some point in time who is the unluckiest and will have the current longest streak of random breakages, that is how randomness works. You only feel like the odds need to be lowered because you happened to get unlucky, but with lower odds people still get unlucky and feel the same way (or even worse because the odds are lower)

 

On 3/30/2026 at 9:47 AM, mac1969 said:

The answer is, if its in the game why shouldnt I use it???

You SHOULD use it... most other people do use it with great success, you're only feeling this way currently because you got unlucky

 

On 3/30/2026 at 9:47 AM, mac1969 said:

but a real life sim. We dont want that!

''We'' is subjective here, personally I wouldn't want that either but you can not make that claim for everyone.

Also the game isn't striving to be realistic, it's striving to be a: ''uncompromising wilderness survival sandbox game inspired by eldritch horror themes'' People put the realism tag on it themselves but many things about this game aren't realistic, they are game mechanics.

On 3/30/2026 at 7:45 PM, KahvozeinsFang said:

Literally what's the point then? High risk with almost no reward. That is completely the opposite of what it should be. Higher risk deserves higher reward.

Your claim that it is ''high risk'' doesn't really hold up that well considering you can literally dig out tons and tons of iron ore in a single day and still be home before nighfall, the risk is not that high. If it breaks you just make a new one.

The reward however? 30% extra durability on my tools is extremely worth it!

On 3/30/2026 at 9:47 AM, mac1969 said:

Please, dont turn this awesome game into another hard core survival!

It has literally always been a hard core survival game, again: ''uncompromising wilderness survival sandbox game'' is the first line on the homepage.

[SnapJelly]

On 3/30/2026 at 10:06 AM, williams_482 said:

but for most things you are only going to want to quench once, especially if quenching for durability and not power.

Hard dissagree, I go for 3 or 4 at least. Making a 2nd tool head literally only takes a minute and you can get tons of iron in a single trip to the mine, I don't understand where this ''risk'' idea comes from, it's just another way to spend the night like so many other thing in game are.

 

On 3/31/2026 at 2:45 PM, Tabbot95 said:

possibly this might incentivize a tech tree of forges, and etc.

I don't understand this, you want to add a tech tree? For what? you can tell the temp by looking at the tooltips top of the screen, else you can just wait until it's very bright glowing. That's how blacksmiths used to to it; by sight

 

13 hours ago, YOOOOOOO said:

Makes it to where the majority of players (who are casuals which simply want to have fun after work) become unmotivated as fuck.

Sorry but I don't really see how this applies? The quenching mechanic is a bonus for those who are willing to take the risk of their tool breaking, it's not even required.

 

13 hours ago, YOOOOOOO said:

Believe me bud, you do not want the devs to make this realistic to the point where you need to constantly maintain your windmill just to keep it functioning.

You say this but in the previous post you complained: ''Not to mention the devs got the temps wrong.''

So is realism desired or not? I haven't seen the devs mention realism much... ''Realism'' is mostly a tag the players put onto the game themselves, the game is full of game mechanics that aren't realistic that no one minds but when new game mechanics are introduced which are likewise not realistic (because the game never tried to be) people complain?

13 hours ago, YOOOOOOO said:

So, either tempering significantly reduces shatter chance and I don't mean some malarky two or three percent.

Yeah but again this is not about realism, this is about making a game mechanic that works well with the other mechanics already in place, the tool durability is not realistic, the quenching is based off that, not on how much quenching iron in real life affects real iron.

 

13 hours ago, YOOOOOOO said:

Point being, it's not a fair system for the amount of risk people take. 

Everyone in here complains about the risk... what risk??? Having to make another tool head takes a single minute??? Having to use another singular unit of charcoal to heat up the forge? Wowie, how could I ever recover

[LadyWYT]

10 hours ago, SnapJelly said:

Everyone in here complains about the risk... what risk??? Having to make another tool head takes a single minute??? Having to use another singular unit of charcoal to heat up the forge? Wowie, how could I ever recover

I think it's more that the benefits from only quenching once, at least in terms of power, aren't very noticeable, so it generally takes another quench or two to get something with a definite advantage. The shatter risk, I think, remains under 25% in this case, so it's usually safe, but it's also high enough that the player can get pretty unlucky. Which feels even worse if you are the kind of player to wait until the last minute to try to craft things(this has been me several times).

In short, I don't think it's the worst system ever, but I also don't think it's the best either. Having a "pick one and done" system, with the shatter risk scaling somewhat with the potential benefits, feels better to me. Hence why I made a mod so I can play that way: https://mods.vintagestory.at/improvedquenching

[MKMoose]

On 8/26/2026 at 7:03 PM, SnapJelly said:

The reward however? 30% extra durability on my tools is extremely worth it!

The maximum average effective durability gain (controlling for material loss due to shattering) is ~19.4%.

 

On 8/26/2026 at 7:33 PM, SnapJelly said:

On 3/30/2026 at 3:06 PM, williams_482 said:

but for most things you are only going to want to quench once, especially if quenching for durability and not power.

Hard dissagree, I go for 3 or 4 at least.

One of the main reasons why I believe the current system is flawed is that it is frequently unclear or even misleading, and individual decisions barely matter in it. Whether you should or shouldn't do something or the order in which you should do it cannot be determined intuitively based on the information exposed to the player - it can only be determined mathematically, and most people won't bother. It's largely the same issue that prospecting has, where the average player simply has no reasonable means to stop themselves from shooting their own foot without a guide.

Do you know, for example, how many times and at which point in the sequence it's optimal to temper when going for power? No, you probably have no clue, because most people haven't run the simulations.

The biggest mistake you can make in the system is quench too many times with at least one durability quench, and people do it all the time just because the game never prevents them from it and even rewards them with a cute durability buff which seems like it should be beneficial.

 

On 8/26/2026 at 7:33 PM, SnapJelly said:

Everyone in here complains about the risk... what risk??? Having to make another tool head takes a single minute??? Having to use another singular unit of charcoal to heat up the forge? Wowie, how could I ever recover

What trips you up, it would seem, is that the objective state of mechanics is borderline irrelevant in many cases. How people feel about them is a different matter, and understanding why people feel the way they do is absolutely critical to designing enjoyable mechanics.

So, what is this risk? When a player makes a tool head, they tend to operate on an implicit assumption: the forging process is done, and the item is practically complete. This is partly influenced by the fact that it used to be always true prior to quenching being added. Shattering the tool head, especially on the early quenching iterations where the chance is low, breaks the expectation that the player will obtain the tool shortly, and forces them to go back to the beginning - hence the frustration.

 

On 8/26/2026 at 7:03 PM, SnapJelly said:

It has literally always been a hard core survival game, again: ''uncompromising wilderness survival sandbox game'' is the first line on the homepage.

Standard hardcore survival as it is most commonly defined requires or at least is strongly associated with:

• permadeath or other heavily punishing death penalty, 
• no handholding, no tutorials, no guidebooks, no conveniences like a minimap,
• severe resource scarcity, often remaining a significant concern all the way into the endgame.

On standard settings, Vintage Story doesn't meet any of these criteria. Even on Wilderness Survival it is rather debatable. It is, as far as survival games go, a pretty easy game - most "difficulty" in VS tends to come down to issues with accessibility, approachability, mechanical clarity and randomness-driven scarcity. I've personally found it much easier than all classic survival games I've played like Project Zomboid, Don't Starve or The Long Dark.

The idea of an "uncompromising wilderness survival" is on the website and is all too often used to dismiss criticism, but it is not actually supported all that well by the existing game mechanics - the jump from that to "hardcore" is even less justifiable. For most purposes, I've come to describe VS as an "immersive homesteading sandbox", as that seems to be what the devs increasingly support and what a large portion of the playerbase is here for.

Edited August 28 by MKMoose

[SnapJelly]

6 hours ago, MKMoose said:

Do you know, for example, how many times and at which point in the sequence it's optimal to temper when going for power? No, you probably have no clue, because most people haven't run the simulations.

what do you mean ''optimal''? there is no objective optimal amount because the optimal amount of quenches is going to be whatever the amount of quenches is required for the exact amount of power that you want.

If I want 4 lvls of power increase then the optimal amount of quenches is 4, simple as that. It doesn't matter the likelyness of breakage means that statistically it's less likely that that would happen and I might lose more material than the benefit would gain because it's the only possible way for me to get the power to the desired lvl.

Also this would hold way more water if material was rare which it isn't, you can het 10 stacks of ore in a single day so ''optimising for material lost'' is a waste of time imo, just get more. Its super easy to get more. Then you can quench to whatever lvl your heart desires.

6 hours ago, MKMoose said:

So, what is this risk? When a player makes a tool head, they tend to operate on an implicit assumption: the forging process is done, and the item is practically complete. This is partly influenced by the fact that it used to be always true prior to quenching being added.

But it still can be? It's a players own choice. They didn't introduce a debuff to unquenched weapons as far as I'm aware so the experience can be exactly the same as it was prior to the quenchin being introduced, the choice to quench and the risk involved is completely up to player choice like with anything else. If you attack a bear you might get hides and fat but you might die or lose durability on your armor, this is a choice you make to see if the risk is worth it and you can fully choose not to. Go into a cafe you might encounter monster yadda yadda.

 

6 hours ago, MKMoose said:

Standard hardcore survival as it is most commonly defined requires or at least is strongly associated with:

• permadeath or other heavily punishing death penalty, 
• no handholding, no tutorials, no guidebooks, no conveniences like a minimap,
• severe resource scarcity, often remaining a significant concern all the way into the endgame.

On standard settings, Vintage Story doesn't meet any of these criteria.

Oke sure but onder those criteria the OP's worry about this game turning into a hardcore survival based on a percentage chance does also not apply, cuz that has nothing to do with these criteria.

[LadyWYT]

7 hours ago, MKMoose said:

Standard hardcore survival as it is most commonly defined requires or at least is strongly associated with:

• permadeath or other heavily punishing death penalty, 
• no handholding, no tutorials, no guidebooks, no conveniences like a minimap,
• severe resource scarcity, often remaining a significant concern all the way into the endgame.

On standard settings, Vintage Story doesn't meet any of these criteria.

In fairness, Vintage Story isn't advertised as hardcore survival either, but rather uncompromising survival. Which isn't quite the same thing. But I do think it still matches the three settings you listed here, even on Standard settings, at least somewhat, since respawning in a specific spot isn't a free action, there is no direct walkthrough on how to play the game, and resources can be hit-or-miss.

"Hardcore survival", at least to me, tends to actively stack the deck against the player, and doesn't play fair. "Uncompromising survival" gives the player a relatively fair playing field, so it is quite possible for the player to easily succeed at the game, but how successful the player is depends heavily on how sharp their critical thinking skills are. And I think that's where a lot of modern games have failed--they have too many failsafes built in to ensure the player always succeeds, and don't really allow the player to actually fail, suffer negative consequences, or otherwise push the player to really think through what they're doing.

24 minutes ago, SnapJelly said:

If I want 4 lvls of power increase then the optimal amount of quenches is 4, simple as that. It doesn't matter the likelyness of breakage means that statistically it's less likely that that would happen and I might lose more material than the benefit would gain because it's the only possible way for me to get the power to the desired lvl.

Sure, but I think this is one of those times where if you really don't want the player trying to min-max their equipment stats, it's better to just say "no, you can't do that" rather than give them a tedious treadmill so they can technically achieve it if they're willing to sink in enough time and resources. For weapons specifically, it's not until you get around a +25% power boost that you can actually notice a difference, since that's about the point it starts taking one less hit to kill most targets.

Most player complaints I've seen about the system aren't about the game loop itself, but rather the implementation. Many don't like the treadmill, and would prefer some kind of "do it once and you're done" system, with the resulting stats being more heavily reliant on precise temperature control or something to that effect.

[dyrran]

With all due respect OP, the game is already very much hardcore. The process to enter the clay age could take days for a new player, just because the process is actually involved. Not to mention, you are anchored to your spawn point pretty heavily and have a limited amount of spawns to your "new" spawn with a temporal gear. The game is so hardcore that my friends won't play with me unless there are mods to make it a bit easier. Having kids and full time jobs lessens the appeal of a super grindy game in all fairness.

[PhotriusPyrelus]

34 minutes ago, dyrran said:

With all due respect OP, the game is already very much hardcore. The process to enter the clay age could take days for a new player, just because the process is actually involved. Not to mention, you are anchored to your spawn point pretty heavily and have a limited amount of spawns to your "new" spawn with a temporal gear. The game is so hardcore that my friends won't play with me unless there are mods to make it a bit easier. Having kids and full time jobs lessens the appeal of a super grindy game in all fairness.

None of that has anything to do with a no-skill RNG mechanic.

[Mac Mcleod]

On 3/30/2026 at 7:47 AM, mac1969 said:

You couldnt resist it, could you? You had to add RNG to the game in a big way!

First off, to put a layer of fire clay on something you have to cool it down and then reheat for quenching, wasting time and coal in the process.

Second, I broke a shovel head 5 times in a row at 10%.

I know what your going to say - dont quench and it wont break. The answer is, if its in the game why shouldnt I use it???

Please reconsider the RNG, or at least lower the odds of breaking. I almost rage quit after those 5 breaks in a row!

As one of my VS friends said - realism is OK, but too much realism make the game no longer a game, but a real life sim. We dont want that!

Please, dont turn this awesome game into another hard core survival!

I don't see how you lose the ENTIRE piece of steel.  At least when it shatters you should be left with 15 to 17 steel bits you can reforge.

[Mac Mcleod]

On 3/30/2026 at 8:06 AM, williams_482 said:

As discussed previously, the quenching RNG isn't even realistic. I'm not a big fan of the new implementation and would be much more interested in a realistic system. The devs are aware of the linked post, so although I wouldn't expect to see much change in 1.22 they might move in that direction in the long run. Personally I'm hoping a mod for more realistic heat treatments comes out once 1.22 is released.

With that said:

You should only get a 10% break chance on a second quench. It's not clear to me right now if the first quench is risk-free or a 5% break chance, but for most things you are only going to want to quench once, especially if quenching for durability and not power. Quenching for durability (assuming 5% shatter chance) is a pretty good choice, you get 20% more durability at a 5% chance of losing the tool. Quenching for durability a second time is pretty much net neutral and thus not really worth it, quenching three or more times is just burning metal. 

The intention under the current system is that the player choses how much risk of shattering they are willing to accept in exchange for increased stats. There is no limit on how many times you can quench, only progressively greater shatter chance and reduced benefits to each successful quench. 

I think most players would already describe Vintage Story as a "hard core survival" game, regardless of the quenching mechanics. It's explicitly advertised as "uncompromising wilderness survival."

By the odds, with average luck, two quenches is the sweet spot for durability.

[Mac Mcleod]

On 8/26/2026 at 12:33 PM, SnapJelly said:

Hard dissagree, I go for 3 or 4 at least. Making a 2nd tool head literally only takes a minute and you can get tons of iron in a single trip to the mine, I don't understand where this ''risk'' idea comes from, it's just another way to spend the night like so many other thing in game are.

 

You can do that but anything past two durability quenches results in a net loss of tool steel.   The third durability quench averages a 500ish use loss for iron, a 650ish use loss for meteoric iron, and a 1.5ish use loss for steel (at a cost of time, fire clay, and extra charcoal).

Quenching weapons for damage as much as possible makes sense tho but it's complicated.
The mobs in VS have fixed hit points.  
10 < needs 5+ to kill in 2 hits
12 < needs 6+ to kill in 2 hits
20 < needs 10+ to kill in 2 hits but 6.7+ to kill in 3 hits

Hitting less IS THE SAME as higher durability.  If you kill it in 2 hits instead of 3, you just increased the number of kills from 1000 hits from 333 kills to 500 kills.

Having 6.2 vs 6.5 damage probably doesn't matter on most mobs.  But if they had 63 hit points, you'd get them in 11 hits vs 9 hits.   Which also means they are hitting you less (so less armor and shield durability lost) and might keep you from dying.

Here are the drifter hit points.

Spoiler Surface Drifter 12     Deep Drifter 16     Tainted Drifter 22     Corrupt Drifter 30     Nightmare Drifter 40     Double-headed Drifter 54

 

So 6.0 attacks will kill the 4th in 5 hits vs 6 hits (standard 5 point attacks).   And that doing 7 points, still takes 5 hits.  You need 7.5 to kill the 4th one in 4 hits.

Some people say (and I haven't tested it) that they think it's best to go for damage and then if you make it, to do one last quench for durability.

Also, I'm told (but haven't personally tested yet) that tempering a weapon reduces it's damage.   But this doesn't matter IF you reach the threshhold value with tempering.
Best to run some tests in a testing environment.   I'm thinking about starting to do some videos on this but I'm dealing with a lot of medical issues right now (hopefully will be okay again by end of October so not life threatening just annoying).

Edited August 28 by Mac Mcleod

[SnapJelly]

24 minutes ago, Mac Mcleod said:

You can do that but anything past two durability quenches results in a net loss of tool steel.   The third durability quench averages a 500ish use loss for iron, a 650ish use loss for meteoric iron, and a 1.5ish use loss for steel (at a cost of time, fire clay, and extra charcoal).

Sure but this is not a concern at all because I can literally get 10 stacks of iron ore in less than a day and a single 2x2 oak tree drops more wood than I can carry in a single inventory so... why would I care about a net loss of steel or coal? I can get mountains of it in like 20 minutes should I run out

[qualicabyss]

On 8/26/2026 at 12:33 PM, SnapJelly said:

Hard dissagree, I go for 3 or 4 at least. Making a 2nd tool head literally only takes a minute and you can get tons of iron in a single trip to the mine, I don't understand where this ''risk'' idea comes from, it's just another way to spend the night like so many other thing in game are.

past 2 durability quenches the chance of breaking outweighs the gained durability even with tempering

[SnapJelly]

1 minute ago, qualicabyss said:

past 2 durability quenches the chance of breaking outweighs the gained durability even with tempering

Why? just make a new one... it takes 1 minute and I have 10 stacks of iron ore stored

[qualicabyss]

1 minute ago, SnapJelly said:

Why? just make a new one... it takes 1 minute and I have 10 stacks of iron ore stored

...because you just wasted time and resources?
And not everyone is you, we don't all have 10 stacks of iron we don't mind wasting for no reason