Talk:Glowstone/Archive 1

Light level
The description says it gives off a "soft light," then says "(level 15 light.)" Those two together don't make sense. Level 15 light is sunlight. So the 'soft light' is brighter than torches? I haven't been down to the nether yet, so I can't check which of those contradicting statements is true. Kmach 04:30, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Could someone confirm if it's really level 15 light? I did some testing of my own and thought it was level 14 instead. - Tanjy3 09.40, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

It does appear to be one level higher than the torch. Levy 10:38, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah right I forgot to count the block itself. -facepalm- My bad. - Tanjy3 11.30, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Name
Why not call this sulphur? Has Notch named it? The dust is sulphur yellow, it looks like brimstone.. --NelsonMinar 13:49, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sulphur doesn't glow. Levy 17:19, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I think it should be called Peanut Brittle. <3 Ibutton77 21:31, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I actually started calling it a name I came up with using a combination of Illuminate and -ium. Illumidium. Sounds alot cooler than lightstone anyway. >_>

How about illuminum? Illumidium doesn't flow as well.
 * probably cause it sounds the same as Aluminum.Toadbert
 * In my opinion, the best name I've seen for it so far is Luminite. With that name, the yellow powder would be Luminite Dust. I think both have a nice cadence to them. BobSalawalatski 08:30, 17 Nov 2010 (UTC)

@Notch Named it "Yellow Dust" in reply to @Jeb_ See Tweet Br4indead 12:55, 13 December 2010 (CST)

Name has been confirmed, 'Glowstone' and 'Glowstone Dust' has been confirmed in Beta 1.0, I've edited most of it, bar the title and possibly some parts I missed. JKGallagher 18.:05, 20 Dec 2010 (UTC)

Does this page really need six alternate names listed, including one that is now the name of something else? JaffaCakeLover 11:49, 21 December 2010 (CST)

Destroying tool
"It has been found that Glowstone does not need a tool to be harvested, and when destroyed uses the same sound glass makes when shattered. Using a sword will harvest the material much faster."

Wait, has this actually been tested or is this edit just random? I will test this right now. Levy 01:36, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, definitely confirmed that, but I am going to reword it for easier comprehension. Levy 20:50, 31 October 2010 (CDT)

If you get a moment could you also just verify that a pick is indeed the "correct" tool to use? That is, it only damages the durability by one point. I imagine the sword is taking two points in the same manner when using it to remove leaves rapidly. --XipXoom 20:53, 31 October 2010 (CDT)


 * Test- Wood Pickaxe destroyed 33. Test- Wood sword destroyed 17
 * Conclusion: Pickaxe IS the correct tool, but the sword is faster at breaking it. Levy 02:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Excellent testing. Thank you. :)  --XipXoom 02:36, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Further testing. Test- Wood Spade & Wood Hatchet both destroyed 33. I believe there is no ideal tool. It is a choice between speed collecting the items, or how many items you can collect. In the end, just using your fist would be the best option to harvest Illumidium.

"Melts ice/snow"
This isn't true, unless this is a glitch.

The room is full of ice blocks (4 snowballs). Maybe the ice blocks don't melt?

Not sure how to embed picture, so here's a link.

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc152/Copkid2/Minecraft/Lightblockdoesntmelt.jpg


 * Snow blocks (NOT ice blocks, that's when water freezes) do not melt. My original map was a snow world so infront of my base is a :giant lake of ice, and placing a "Lightstone" block on it makes a decent area (something like 4 radius) melt.  Also tested on a brand :new world in an winter type biome against snow and ice, melts both. --HandOfCode 17:15, 4 November 2010 (UTC)