Talk:Tutorials/Mining

I think the article should be renamed to "Mining Techniques"

About the term "efficiency"
The term efficiency is often used to describe how many blocks the player observes compared to how many they mine. This is fine if your objective is to observe every block, but it is incredibly inefficient if you want to get as much ore as possible. Because ore bodies are almost always larger than 1 block, if you go round trying to observe every block possible then you will always observe the same ore body at least twice, and this is inefficient.

So I've added a mining efficiency section to the page, under "horizontal mining" for the moment. It describes the phenomenon and includes results of a mining model. It shows unequivocally that mining efficiency is maximised when two tunnels are completely independent of each other, and this occurs (for diamonds) when tunnel spacing is about 6 blocks or more.

Although I've added it under the horizontal mining section for the moment, the principle applies to other mining methods too. I think we should consider a move towards avoiding the term "efficiency" for anything other than actual mining efficiency, where

efficiency = (ores collected / blocks mined)

in other words an efficiency of 0.017 (about the maximum for diamonds) describes 1.7% of blocks recovered being an ore.

If anyone is interested in looking at the matlab model I wrote, I can send it to them. Piesforyou 11:19, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I disagree with your conclusion that a spacing of 6 is the most effiecient (though I agree with trying to shift the terminology). Since diamonds spawn only once per chunk, the chance of 2 diamond veins fusing into one is even lower than in your model. The biggest diamond vein I've ever seen had a total "length" of 4. (it was a cube with 2 one-ores sticking out).  So, a spacing of 5 gives you essentially no interference, while hitting all the big horizontal veins.  A 5-seperation lends itself more readily to stacking, too.
 * I ran an analysis of my own; as long as source veins that don't fit into a cube occur negligibly often-ignoring coal, they certainly aren't exactly common-a 3-space mine done at layers 12, 8, and 16 will be both reasonably thorough and reasonably efficient-it will certainly hit any 2x2x2 cube of diamond, as long as it's not sitting on bedrock. 24.18.8.160 02:02, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

About branch mining
IMO mining a "branch" every THIRD block is the best method as then you will check all blocks between the branches.


 * This is extremely inefficient because you will just end up coming across the same ore body twice, resulting in wasted effort. See the efficiency section.Piesforyou 11:21, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

However, most diamonds comes in 2x1 / 2x2 or 2+1 (not 2x2x2, it is so rare to find a 8-diamond ores), if you emphasized on efficiency, you will miss many diamonds. I will have to say, for other ores, use wider separation between branch. But mining for diamonds, use 2 blocks separation. (sig=?)


 * 95% of what you THINK are 1x2 are actually 2 parralell 1x2 veins, attached diagonally. The only exceptions occur when attaching to dirt/gravel/caves/bedrock... so a guarantee of finding cubes of ore will find many of these, if not all.   24.18.8.160 03:48, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Strip mining
What's the advantages/differences compared to branch method? And why is it called "Strip mining"? Strip mining is referred to surface mining IRL. --Slider2k 01:30, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The advantage to branch method is that it reveals every block in a certain area, and a difference is that it is usually done from a single room as oppsed to from a tunnel. It is called strip mining because it 'strips' the rock so you can see every square. –The preceding unsigned comment was added by Quornslice (Talk . Please sign your posts with   !
 * Let's analyze here. Does your method reveals every block in area? As you can see it does not reveal blocks in corner areas. - So answer is no, it does not reveal every block. On contrary, a branch method lets you inspect every block in an area if you make 2 block spacing between tunnels.--Slider2k 23:07, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, "strip mining" is a poor/confusing name for a technique that isn't actual strip mining. In Minecraft, the closest thing to a real stripmine is a quarry. Besides that, this just seems like a more complicated variant of a branch mine. It probably doesn't need to be here at all, and if kept should at least be renamed. Phasma Felis 01:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I like to make a quarry 10x10 and have strip mines around the sides. It gives lots of minerals.

More efficient method of strip mining
[[Media:ImprovedStripMine.jpg|Picture]]. Once multiple levels are considered, strip mining could be more efficient if you had 3-block thick walls instead of 2-block. After mining out a room, mine again below the room. This time center your mined hallways on the center of the three blocks of the first room, and mine again. The next level down, mine in your original arrangement. You'll alternate patterns with each level this way. The middle of the 3 blocks is exposed as the roof of the hallway below and the floor of the hallways above. Chris3145 09:17, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Just to add to this, a few staircases in front of this makes for easy access to all corridors in such a set-up:


 * [[File:Mining_example.png]]

--Stephen304 16:10, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm quite sure someone else thought of this before, but at least this could form a nice example of how to set such a mine up.
 * EDIT: ladders might actually work more convenient,, I just liked the look of this.Roady1990 21:20, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Please put this in the main article - it makes the idea so much clearer that the existing diagram with the green lines! --Adje 09:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I would like to share my set up for navigating the tunnels of this method. I needed a way to easily select a level and navigate along the tunnels at that level. (The diagonal staircases were confusing) A ladder can be placed which allows navigation up and down.



--Stephen304 16:10, 24 November 2011 (UTC)


 * This method is undoubtedly "efficient" if your objective is to get every single ore out of an area. But it is not an efficient mining method because the vast majority of blocks you remove are are removed for no reason. See efficiency section Piesforyou 11:24, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Adding a cosmetic mine design section
It looks slightly out of place with only one entry. If you have any ideas for better organization feel free to change stuff around
 * It needs screenshots, also it would probably be better as a series of tips on how you can make a mine look better.Roady1990 13:10, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I disagree, mining techniques implies methods, tactics would be the individual points to think about when making a mine, also thanks to whoever added to it. clc02

Tips Misinformation
There is no correlation between dirt, gravel, or lava, and the frequency of ore spawning. I think that portion should be removed. NZPhoenix 07:08, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Layer Strategy
I would like to add a 'best layer' section for finding diamonds. With regard to layer 12 mining, and utilizing the large number of exposed blocks every time you come across a magma lake. I would also like to contribute 2 mining designs of my own, but am unfamiliar with how Wiki's work and don't know if I need permission first or not. NZPhoenix 07:15, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

1x1 Shafts
Anyone who has played Minecraft for at least a day knows not to dig down. But if you do the math, it might actually be a better strategy.

This only works if you have most of your items in a chest. Just take out an iron pickaxe and a couple torches,m and start mining down.

The risk of dropping into a lava pit is very small, and insignificant considering how many iron you will get while mining down.

And yes, it does give you a better yield. If you mine 1x2 shafts, you are mining 2 blocks to reveal 8. This gives you a 4:1 ratio of revealed blocks to mined blocks. If you dig 1x1's, you are revealing 5 blocks and mining 1. That's 5:1.

Also, when mining 1x1's, you can keep holding your mouse in one place. Almost no errors can happen because of your faulty mouse controlling.

One more thing : It gets you down to the bottom faster.

Because of these three things, I think 1x1's are worth the risk.


 * I suppose it is certainly a viable option, particularly if you bank your inventory every time you go back up. It could be made at least a little safer if you bring water for when you hit lava since it is slow enough that you could actually get the water down before taking any damage.


 * I still regard it as incredibly hazardous to use very much. If you're just looking for a quick way down to deep levels you could employ it and only suffer occasionally. But if you are using it to shaft mine all the way to bedrock to remove all resources from an area then your chances of hitting deep drops through cavern roofs and lava pits goes from very small to 100%. It's going to happen, and a lot. I would suggest wearing good armor and carrying lots of food, as well as good weapons for fighting your way out of caves full of enemies... unless you just allow yourself to die. If so then carry as little as possible and don't mine any resources on the way down. Dig them out when you tower back up so you don't lose any. If you dig through some just dig out some adjacent wall and plop them in there if you can.


 * You could also fill the hole with water and use air bubble techniques to stay alive. This would likely snuff lava and prevent you from falling to your death, though it would also prevent you from using torches for light. Then again you don't really need light if you're just digging down. Though it would make the trip back up rather annoying unless you periodically pickup and replace the water. Unfortunately mining under water is also quite slow.


 * There's just no perfect way to mitigate all of the downsides of 1x1 shaft mining under your feet without creating other disadvantages as well.


 * Also consider that it is actually possible to mine 2x1 shafts without having to move your aim. The easy way to set this up is to start by digging one of the blocks for your shaft then standing on the next one to dig. Crouch and edge off over the hole either sideways or backwards and aim for the side of the block you're standing on. Viola, you can now hold down the mouse button and dig a 2x1 shaft all the way to the core of the planet... or well, to bedrock anyway. As long as you react quickly enough you can always prevent yourself from falling directly into lava or a cavern, and can deal with any lava you may dig into as well. I generally just use water to harden lava safely without having to manually place blocks. It's easy peasy and only a little slower than 1x1 shafting, but just as easy and a LOT safer.

Mannon 18:50, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

UrsaArcadeus's Strategy Efficiency
When I first read this I really liked UrsaArcadeus's Strategy for both speed and efficiency, as well as not needing to figure out complicated layers of alternating patterns. It also seems quite nice for mining below the lava layer as mining 2x1 shafts down is actually quite safe if done properly and does not risk spilling lava out onto a wider area of floor as horizontal mining would.

But it strikes me that this pattern is sub-optimal. In the UrsaArcadeus's Strategy example the 6 single blocks between the top and bottom rows of shafts are viewed from two different shafts which cuts the efficiency of the shafts in those rows down to about 7 blocks revealed for every 2 mined. (It varies depending upon how long the row is starting at the normal 8:2 or 4:1 for the first shaft with each shaft added to the row only getting 7:2 efficiency thereafter.)

It seems to me that the following pattern would be more efficient since no single block is visible from more than one shaft, which means that each and every shaft dug enjoys 100% (4:1) efficiency.

I made my example the same size, though a smaller example would clearly demonstrate the simpler pattern. If merely counting the blocks in the square example UrsaArcadeus's Strategy appears to be more efficient, but this is merely because it fits better within a square boundary. In fact the example given shows 10 blocks in the pattern which are only revealed by shafts outside the example, while having only 4 blocks that would be revealed by shafts in the pattern which fall outside the borders of the example. If we instead count exactly the blocks revealed by the given shafts in the patterns I show 82 revealed for 22 blocks dug or ~2:7.45 for UrsaArcadeus's Strategy and 96:24 or exactly 4:1 for mine.

Obviously I'm not the first to come up with this pattern, I'm just wondering why it isn't mentioned while UrsaArcadeus's Strategy is? I could add it, but I'm new here and wondering if I'm missing something.

In fact it's the same pattern as above in More efficient method of strip mining, just turned 90 degrees to dig down instead of across.

Mannon 09:09, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, this method is more efficient, and it is also applicable to horizontal mining. Good job. Mister Tesseract 10:50, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


 * It as efficient as it is possible to be IF AND ONLY IF one has demanded finding every last ore. It's really better to sacrifice a tiny bit of thoroughness in exchange for much higher efficiency by adding one more layer of vertical spacing.
 * I have thus transmuted one of the sections into a "tiering" section, including three examples; one that is equivalent, and two that are MUCH more efficient, albeit less thorough.24.18.8.160 23:04, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Who Actually Plays Like This?
Is this article really necessary?

Don't most people just mine until they have what they need to build cool stuff?

Who feels the need to cut say, a 16x16 shaft down to the bedrock? I bet no one actually plays like this.

I do, actually. Mister Tesseract 10:49, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Is this article necessary? you bet. you could just "mine randomly" untill you get what you need-but then you risk mining yourself into a tight spot etc.  besides, while "mine down to bedrock and start mining" works sortof....most of the diamons occur just a little above bedrock; it's nice to know where to start looking (aka y=12).
 * while I don't make huge quarries, I DO use a variation of the pheonix mine-in single player. It would've taken me a LONG time to invent the variation without this page, and I might waste more time mining as high as, say, y=25. 24.18.8.160 02:29, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Last section
In the last section it mentions to eat food to delay your death because eating is instant. Eating is not instant anymore, so it should be changed, but I'm not sure how it could be re-written and still make sense. -Cubs197 02:27, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Buggered Diagram
I tried to fix the diagram for UrsaArcadeus's Strategy, but it still shows up with a "Maximum number of loops have been performed" error. KaizenNeko ( T &#124; C )  11:33, 10 April 2012 (UTC) 05:14, 24 March 2012 (UTC)