Salem

Why would you be able to?
Imagine this (if you haven't have had this problem before): you put lime into your ore smelter, then coal and light it. Oops! You forgot the ores! Just put it out with water.
Makes sence, right?

EDIT: Read this instead: viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1039

why not just add the ore and another piece of coal so it burns long enough? I've seen things like this suggested in other games and people seem to think wetting charcoal and then trying to light it is fine. you wet charcoal you get mush...and its really hard to get rid of mush!

You can't interact with the smelter at all once you light it.

staxjax wrote:You can't interact with the smelter at all once you light it.

ohh then that does suck...haven't worked metal here yet, but again using water isn't the way to go in a situation like that(you need to somehow suffocate the fire)

I've got an idea, I'll make a new thread about this. After I've put a link to it in this post, please lock this thread.

EDIT: New idea here: viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1039

This thread can be locked now

Seems like there could be some useful thought about the problem presented here, which is the issue of the smelter not allowing you to change things if you screw up. Maybe there was other thoughts about being able to put out a fire that needed to be applied somewhere?

Why not just make the smelter "idiot proof" and put a check on it so you can't light it without at least something in it? Devs don't like that, though, so doubt it would happen, and what about when you put 1 ore in but not, say a full load or forget the lime before lighting so you have, for example, 20 ore but 0 lime?

MagicManICT wrote:and what about when you put 1 ore in but not, say a full load or forget the lime before lighting so you have, for example, 20 ore but 0 lime?

People are already intentionally smelting 13 ore with no lime to get a full purity bar.

I realize this as that is how the mechanic works. That's what complicates "idiot proofing" the system.