0.16 Map generation Feedback

[orzelek]

long time no played.. just install patch.
make about 50 maps with to low oil and no uran.
Check forum

go back to 0.15.x

how you get a bad desing decision like tihis?

Mentioning used settings would help. Generation did change and it has been discussed few time - fixes for it did not make into 0.16 and will be in 0.17. If you consider mods then RSO or Pretty Fair Resources might help.

[Puma]

So now that the 0.16 is no longer experimental, I'm also going to give feedback on the resource generation. It sucks... and blows... at the same time... and no, those don't cancel each other out.

First I played a game with the standard "rail world" settings. And there was 12 million iron right next to the starting area, and 20 million copper and enough uranium to power the base for 3900 hours. Instead of rail world, it was don't-need-to-go-anywhere world. I launched the rocket having never been further than 60 second walk from the starting spot.

Then I made a new game with the following settings in the map-gen-settings.json

Code: Select all

{
  "_comment": "Sizes can be specified as none, very-low, low, normal, high, very-high",

  "terrain_segmentation": "normal",
  "water": "high",
  "width": 0,
  "height": 0,
  "starting_area": "low",
  "peaceful_mode": false,

  "autoplace_controls":
  {
    "coal": {"frequency": "very-low", "size": "low", "richness": "normal"},
    "stone": {"frequency": "very-low", "size": "low", "richness": "normal"},
    "copper-ore": {"frequency": "very-low", "size": "low","richness": "normal"},
    "iron-ore": {"frequency": "very-low", "size": "low", "richness": "normal"},
    "uranium-ore": {"frequency": "very-low", "size": "very-low", "richness": "low"},
    "crude-oil": {"frequency": "very-low", "size": "very-low", "richness": "low"},
    "trees": {"frequency": "normal", "size": "normal", "richness": "normal"},
    "enemy-base": {"frequency": "normal", "size": "normal", "richness": "normal"},
    "grass": {"frequency": "normal", "size": "normal", "richness": "normal"},
    "desert": {"frequency": "normal", "size": "normal", "richness": "normal"},
    "dirt": {"frequency": "normal", "size": "normal", "richness": "normal"},
    "sand": {"frequency": "normal", "size": "normal", "richness": "normal"}
  },
  "cliff_settings":
  {
    "name": "cliff",
    "cliff_elevation_0": 10,
    "cliff_elevation_interval": 10
  },

  "_comment_seed": "Use null for a random seed, number for a specific seed.",
  "seed": null
}

And blam-o, 6+ million iron field and a 9+ million copper field right next to the starting area. Was it not so that previously the resource field would start small and get progressively bigger as you ventured further from the spawn point? If I'm just having bad luck, I feel like the randomness and inconsistency of the resource generation is taking away quite a bit of the sense of progression, and by extension the fun from the game.

Also the water settings in the map-gen-settings.json file don't match the ones in the gui interface.

Edit:
Venturing just a little bit outside the range of the very first radar I built, I also found an oil field with a combined yield of 10825%. And the setting for oil are very-low/very-low/low. This can't be the intended behavior. This is so obviously broken.

[Serenity]

Railworld wasn't a railworld in 0.15 either. You always needed RSO for that

But the amount of oil in particular is indeed ridiculous

[zOldBulldog]

Railworld wasn't a railworld in 0.15 either. You always needed RSO for that

But the amount of oil in particular is indeed ridiculous

Not necessarily. My 0.16 world only had one oil field reasonably close, with capacity for exactly 3 pumpjacks, and this was with the settings for Max richness of deposits!!! I had to go quite far before I found a decent size oil field. And my ore resources were quite small on rich settings, forcing me to rail long before I would have liked it.

I would have to try making quite a few maps to say it for sure, but my gut feel is that 0.16 map generation has problems.

[Tolham]

A-ha!, so I'm not crazy.

Ok, so after reading the last page here, I tried making a railworld, and sure enough, it looks like a much more "normal" map from what I remember. I'm gonna give that a try when I have proper time to sit down and play.

[gsezz]

This map looked really great in the preview.....

[Jap2.0]

This map looked really great in the preview.....

These posts never get old. /s

[bobucles]

I mean. There must be an algorithm for identifying softlock island spawns BY NOW.

[Jap2.0]

I mean. There must be an algorithm for identifying softlock island spawns BY NOW.

There ought to be an algorithm for identifying island spawn posts by now

[Hedning1390]

Why doesn't any of those "bugs" happen to me? I mean I have generated a few maps...

I mean with randomness comes random outliers. Over a longer games exploring a larger area it should even out though.

In my current map I have explored from x+-6000 to y+-4000 and it looks really good. A lot less resources than previously, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

[bobucles]

There ought to be an algorithm for identifying island spawn posts by now

Can't identify the posts without first identifying the spawns!

As long as island spawns exist there will be players to remind the devs that indeed, a blatant and silly soft lock at 0 seconds is a concern worth addressing. Don't pretend it isn't.

[Jap2.0]

There ought to be an algorithm for identifying island spawn posts by now

Can't identify the posts without first identifying the spawns!

As long as island spawns exist there will be players to remind the devs that indeed, a blatant and silly soft lock at 0 seconds is a concern worth addressing. Don't pretend it isn't.

True - it should be remarkably easy, even something like "generate 1-9 chunks (depending on how through you want to be), pick a few random land points at the edge of those chunks, if you can't pathfind to any of them, then regenerate the map" should catch most of them. If they wanted to keep a fairly similar map (for the sake of previews - though they could even do this before previews, or give a warning - with options to genereate the map anyway, generate a similar map, or generate a random map with the same settings - if you put in a specific seed and it fails the island test), I've heard that changing the seed by 1 or 2 results in a similar but somewhat different map.

[AcolyteOfRocket]

can we agree that the new 'Generate preview' button is freaking awesome?

Well it doesn't seem to work with modded ores (I'm using angel/bobs), so I guess the answer to your question is no

As for the OP, I like big ore patches, far apart. I can never get them big enough or far apart enough using the vanilla mapgen no matter how extreme I make the settings - had to go back to RSO.

I my latest game (angel/bob/rso) I set the start area to very big, but some biter bases still started fairly close by. Not overly impressed, but is not a gamebreaker either.....

[zOldBulldog]

After playing well over 100 hours on two 0.16 maps I think I am ready to give additional feedback.

- The 0.16 map generation is pretty.
- The 0.16 map generation seems to pay no attention whatsoever to user ore choices. You can ask for large/rich ore fields and get tiny patches.
- Sometimes the 0.16 map generation gives too much of an ore. Dumb, but not a problem. Other times it gives too little.
- 0.16 map generation seems to have a special problem with stone. My current map is a stone nightmare. The initial patch was tiny, and I ended up having to go on a huge walkabout (maybe an hour) to scout for stone. I found 2-4 patches, not terribly big, and all quite far. Previewing the map didn't help, stone often looks like some of the desert patches in the map.

I suspect that asking for lots of water might be part of the problem... I bet the patches of stone are there... Under water.

My suggestions:.
- To players, avoid cliffs and keep the default water settings.
- To devs, for God's sake, don't release 0.17 until you fix this mess.

Questions:
- is there a way to get a good 0.15 style map from someone, be able to set alien settings as I prefer, then play it? Guessing no
- Is the 0.17 experimental version available, and have the map generation issues been fixed in it? I'd gladly live with some bugs if I can generate a decent map.

[Jap2.0]

Questions:
- is there a way to get a good 0.15 style map from someone, be able to set alien settings as I prefer, then play it? Guessing no
- Is the 0.17 experimental version available, and have the map generation issues been fixed in it? I'd gladly live with some bugs if I can generate a decent map.

The only thing you can do is generate a map in 0.15, explore an area to generate chunks, then update to 0.16.
0.17 experimental isn't available yet, but map generation will be fixed in it.

[Mike5000]

is there a way to get a good 0.15 style map from someone, be able to set alien settings as I prefer, then play it? Guessing no

I'd suggest using RSO in 0.16.

I gave up on Vanilla 0.16 map generation as it would typically take more than an hour to find a decent map. With RSO I've only ever had one minor annoyance - not much copper ore in the starting patch and half an hour searching before finding another.

I concur with your recommendation to turn off cliffs as they are a subtle trap. They can be interesting in the early game but clearing larger spaces in the later game is just a tedious chore.

[zOldBulldog]

It just hit me like a ton of bricks that the general lack of stone in 0.16 does not go well with map options for "a lot of water".

If you have a lot of water you'll need a lot of landfill to place your solar arrays, which in turn needs lots of stone... that is inlow supply.

Suggestion to devs:
- In addition to all the other needed chagnes, modify the 0.17 map generator to boost stone deposits when there is a lot of water being generated.

Suggestion to players:
- It's already been said before, but avoid any amount of water beyond normal like if it was the plague!!! I made the mistake of choosing the "lots of water" option and I truly regret it. It is almost unplayable.

[Hedning1390]

It just hit me like a ton of bricks that the general lack of stone in 0.16 does not go well with map options for "a lot of water".

You know there was a time before landfill. How do you think players managed then? There's plenty of room to palace solar while avoiding water. Check the top right section of this map. Totally free from cliffs too.
https://i.imgur.com/CAWgZPe.png


I really have nothing against current map gen. The cliffs could use a smooth brush to avoid unrealistic formations, but other than that resources seem balanced and the map looks natural.

[zOldBulldog]

It just hit me like a ton of bricks that the general lack of stone in 0.16 does not go well with map options for "a lot of water".

You know there was a time before landfill. How do you think players managed then? There's plenty of room to palace solar while avoiding water. Check the top right section of this map. Totally free from cliffs too.
https://i.imgur.com/CAWgZPe.png


I really have nothing against current map gen. The cliffs could use a smooth brush to avoid unrealistic formations, but other than that resources seem balanced and the map looks natural.

Depends on your map choices. I stupidly asked for "a lot of water".

map.jpg (147.97 KiB) Viewed 6213 times

There are some places where to put solar panels, but I pretty much need at least 4 times the panels I currently have. I can scatter the panels all over the map, but I don't really like that. There are other areas near the base, but I would use space I have planned for other things.

Frankly, at least during 0.16... it is better to use default amounts of water.

[Hedning1390]

Yes, well, it is a little strange to ask for a lot of water and then landfill it all. At least I don't think it's something they should increase stone availability to support.

In any case there's always more room if you just explore further.