issue 1172

Edit - Wait, you reported the bug? It was fixed and now you report the fix as a bug?

Well, the dipping currently only makes the item rustproof. It probably should remove the rust at the same time?! :)

It is not an oil of rust removal, simply oil. If I take a rusted piece of iron and cover it in a substance that makes it rustproof, it still contains rust, but will not rust further. Thus it is now rustproof yet still rusty. Weird but true.

Kind of makes sense. But still it feels there's something slightly wrong, somewhere... Dipping rusty rustproof item into an oil of rust removal (even non-blessed) removes the rust but keeps the rustproof coating. It also still deals halved damage (and I suppose is broken a lot easier too).

Yeah, I thought about this. If you apply smithing, technically you will also be removing the oil coating to get to the rust. This is something TB will have to decide about. Edit - If smithing already doesn't remove the rustproof status from an item, then he has maybe already decided. :P

Either way, I don't mind if a potion of oil also magically removes the rust, but then we have two "potions" that do the same thing. Or rather, then a potion of oil is better than a potion of rust removal.

I can't argue with this. And I agree removing rust should be limited to the appropriately-named oils of rust removal.

Sorry for necromancy. I wanted to create another thread but actually decided to search first.
In real life, when you have a rusty fence and paint it without removing the rust first, it will eat its way out from within and the new paint coat will not last very long, this is personal experience.

I propose that rustproofing items should ask you to remove the existing rust first, if the item is already rusty.
If you don't do that, I think rustproof status should disappear after a number of hits, similarly to how dipped-in-poison items lose their "poisoned" status after a few hits.