0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post all other topics which do not belong to any other category.
PTTG
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2017 7:47 pm

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by PTTG » Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:19 pm

Stone is really, really rare by default. Even when I set it to very big, very frequent, it's still tiny resource patches dwarfed by medium copper deposits, or even by uranium patches.

Zavian
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 2:57 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by Zavian » Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:48 pm

I think they looked at how much of each resource you need to research the rocket, and then set stone, coal, copper and iron abundance accordingly. But in doing so they forgot about other stone sinks things like walls, landfill and paths.

Slayer1557
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 7:48 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by Slayer1557 » Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:27 pm

In my experience of generating a map the other day, I was trying to run on mostly default settings at first, and it felt like there wasn't enough water. So I turned up the water to big, turned trees down to minimum. On big water, the area around the starting area became a huge network of water. When I went on medium, it was just like... small lakes. I want some large bodies of water, but also large bodies of land! The coal and stone were also a big problem. I was being a little picky, trying to find a desert start with a convenient layout of resources, and I usually like working with non-optimal starts, but this time, I wanted to be picky. And it was hard as hell to find places with a decent amount of coal or stone. As it is, I'm probably going to run out of fuel before I run out of metal.

As for the trees, it seemed like even on the lowest setting (Other than none), there were too many trees in grassy/forest areas. The desert was pretty good though. Ideally if I turn trees down, I want smaller, infrequent clusters of trees.

Serenity
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 6:16 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by Serenity » Fri Dec 15, 2017 10:02 pm

With the very high frequency of lakes, water over ore deposits is also an issue. Even if the algorithm thinks that it has placed enough ore, the water is done in the next pass (it seems) and can be placed over ore.

As for stone, I found a 26M deposit some distance away :)

DustFireSky
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:51 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by DustFireSky » Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:36 am

I started with the 0.16.0 Version and I have no cliffs. Was it a bug ? Didn't see them.

User avatar
impetus maximus
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1299
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 10:07 pm

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by impetus maximus » Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:39 am

DustFireSky wrote:I started with the 0.16.0 Version and I have no cliffs. Was it a bug ? Didn't see them.
by default i think they are pretty rare.

TheTom
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:33 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by TheTom » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:51 pm

Well, I can not argue about steel and copper, but on half the maps I generate I have HUGH oil fields on the preview. Not talking of 10 dots - 50 or so. Enough to last the game. Or two. Or ten. And quite often I have 2-3 monster patches like that.

Zavian
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 2:57 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by Zavian » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:16 pm

I've also seen oil patches with 15000% yield on the preview even when oil is set to medium patches.

Loewchen
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 4546
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 5:53 pm

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by Loewchen » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:22 pm

Oil seems weird, I see no difference concerning size of fields between very big and very small.

Koub
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 3654
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 8:54 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by Koub » Sat Dec 16, 2017 9:51 pm

I got quite a number of maps with no oil near the spawning point. Last map I played, I discovered that the closest field was under a biter base :cry:. Settings were default with default preset.
Also I have hard time finding coal (I mean more than a few k) in the starting zone.
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.

DustFireSky
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:51 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by DustFireSky » Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:37 am

Koub wrote: Also I have hard time finding coal (I mean more than a few k) in the starting zone.
Interesting. I have copper / stone ore on mass (Railworld Setting), but no iron ore. The hardly searched iron ore field with 14 Million is the only on in a long distance. But Copper ore.... I could eat it. :mrgreen: And u will be laughing. I have 5 BIG URAN fields.... Seems not be rare or the map gen is a bit off.

wren6991
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:56 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by wren6991 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 4:02 am

It is somewhat broken I think. My world settings are Train World, with richness set to Very Rich for all resources. After enough scouting to burn 20 coal in my car (since radars found nothing), here is what I have found:

- Copper 613k
- Copper 66k
- Oil combined yield 7821%
- Stone 66k
- Uranium 12M

and absolutely no iron. It's awesome that they got this release out before Christmas, but it seems like it needed more play testing.

Matthias_Wlkp
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 11:28 pm

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by Matthias_Wlkp » Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:31 am

I like how the terrain looks now. It really feels like going through different areas on a planet.

Everything looks to be sparser than before - which is a good thing IMHO.

Just started the game, so I don't have a solid opinion if the resources are enough. But so far, so good.

Chasseur-
Manual Inserter
Manual Inserter
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2017 12:37 pm

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by Chasseur- » Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:23 pm

wren6991 wrote: - Copper 613k
- Copper 66k
- Oil combined yield 7821%
- Stone 66k
- Uranium 12M

and absolutely no iron. It's awesome that they got this release out before Christmas, but it seems like it needed more play testing.
Yeah kinda same for me. Uranium is broken for sure. I've played 0.15 with default uranium settings and patches were rare, now in 0.16 its like 5-10 times more patches, and each one is much bigger.
Also coal looks bit low, low amount of patches and they are small. Enough for plastic production but not for coal liquification.

wren6991
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:56 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by wren6991 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:27 pm

Yeah, I'm having to resort to using solid fuel for my furnaces and boilers, because I need the little coal I have for plastic :shock:

Seems a little bit back to front.

wren6991
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:56 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by wren6991 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:28 pm

The new terrain looks gorgeous though. In particular, the biomes are great -- they feel like proper regions now, not just random speckles of brown.

mathturtle
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:19 pm

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by mathturtle » Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:09 pm

After a few tries generating maps here is some feedback:

Stone in the starting area is VERY limited. So is coal on most of the maps I've tried. Coal seems to run out about the same time as iron if not before. Uranium seems too common, they removed it from the starting area but I see one uranium patch for every two iron patches on most worlds I generated. For now I'm just setting it to 'very low' frequency.

I want a midpoint between big and very big for water. Big makes a lot of smallish lakes. Very big makes you play on an island chain and use landfill to get places. I want big lakes (see Bentham's Railworld series on youtube for an idea of how big) but I don't want that much water everywhere. Very big seems to put more water than land even with very low frequency (which could be fun too, so keep it, just add a midpoint). ;)

Zavian
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 2:57 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by Zavian » Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:20 pm

I have to agree about wanting to play with on connected landmass, but with really big lakes, meaning that the terrain has lots of natural choke points.

Griggers
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 3:26 pm

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by Griggers » Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:31 am

My personal opinion is that i really dislike the new map generation.
I had really hoped to see a return to the terrain segmentation that was available in 0.12 but was bugged/removed in 0.13
I loved to play with the very low segmentation setting as it gave really massive biomes (it was possible to not see another biome after walking atleast 4000 tiles)
Now the terrain seems even more varied on a very small scale and even the water is way to random.
The removal of the segmentation setting made it really hard for me to jump to 0.13 but I eventually stopped playing 0.12 until late 0.14 and now I seem to face the same dilemma.

I don't really care about the resource generation as I will always use RSO for this to make sure for predictable resource deposits.

Serenity
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 6:16 am

Re: 0.16 Map generation Feedback

Post by Serenity » Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:42 am

Zavian wrote:I have to agree about wanting to play with on connected landmass, but with really big lakes, meaning that the terrain has lots of natural choke points.
It depends on your definition of "landmass". For my taste the land is too small outside the starting area:
Picture
Plenty of chokepoints, but most of the land is small bridges. Not somewhat larger continents. It's interesting, but a bit too limiting. Even the land has smaller lakes in it. Without those lakes in the little useable land it would be pretty decent.

And too many ore deposits (in my case copper) get destroyed by water this way

It seems to be either that or a large landmass with lakes in it
Attachments
Clipboard01.jpg
Clipboard01.jpg (344.16 KiB) Viewed 1215 times

Post Reply

Return to “General discussion”