Legacy talk:Pickaxe

Q influences the hardness of rock.

I could mine with a stone axe Q53. Equipping my pickaxe Q13 and trying the same tile i got the message "that rock is much too hard for you to mine". i have 60STR after bonuses. After getting "A glass to keep the cold out" and sniffing some boar tusk snuff, at 114 STR with the pickaxe i get the message "that rock is slightly too much hard for you to mine." --MamaMantis 17:15, 16 December 2011 (EST)

Quality of Pickaxe

Is there any source or test data on the new quality weights? --Rook (talk) 11:06, 26 August 2013 (EDT)

OK, so the source is

http://www.havenandhearth.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17871&start=10

with following test data:

1. Q22 iron (x4) + Q10 Branch +q43 Anvil +q35 Hammer : Q25 Pickaxe
2. Q26 iron (x4) + Q10 Branch +q43 Anvil +q35 Hammer : Q27 Pickaxe
3. Q33 iron (x4) + Q10 Branch +q43 Anvil +q35 Hammer : Q28 Pickaxe
4. Q26 iron (x4) + Q20 Branch +q43 Anvil +q35 Hammer : Q30 Pickaxe
5. Q37 iron (x4) + Q10 Branch +q43 Anvil +q35 Hammer : Q30 Pickaxe
6. Q41 iron (x4) + Q36 Branch +q43 Anvil +q35 Hammer : Q38 Pickaxe

Now the pairing of results 1 and 2, and 2 and 3 indicate that the data is wrong or capping is involved. Either way no formula can be reliably deducted from it.

ok i'm wrong here, formula can possibly exist for this set of data (with on the razor-edge rounding), but it can't be weight of 2/7 for ore, number crunching now --Rook (talk) 13:04, 26 August 2013 (EDT)

So with the above, iron ore weight is ${\frac {4}{15}}<W(i)<{\frac {2}{7}}$ but for that range remaining components' possible ranges are mutually exclusive giving same conclusion, corrupt data or something extra involved (mid-way rounding down seperatly on components and tools doesn't solve this either), giving up for now --Rook (talk) 14:13, 26 August 2013 (EDT)

Qore*2 + Qbranch*2 + (QAnvil+Qhammer)*1.5 /7 <-this was sugested one but no real data to confirm it. --Rook (talk) 11:41, 26 August 2013 (EDT)

Old formula is wrong. Working with mine now and fits everytime. Yes i think i was capped somewhere in the old data where i was still leveling my stats..new data i have confirms my formula which im using and everytime its the right calculated quality where the old formula doesnt. There might be some smalkl rounding in the ore part. but pff..dont share it then --Kortak (talk) 17:26, 29 August 2013

I'm all for sharing information, but also all against sharing missinformation. That's why i strive to verify "facts" presented to me. Results you've posted on the HnH forum are contrary to the formula you've sugested. All i'm asking for is, if there is a subset of that data (including something with varying tools QL as well) that you consider accurate or if you have made more pickaxes and have such new data, that you present it here so all can indeed confirm correctness of your formula or work out one that is more precise if need be. Untill such time it's a theory and proper place for it is this talk page. --Rook (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2013 (EDT)