Factorio Forums

Hello, I want to create a fair (neither easy nor difficult) map for myself. Normally I think sticking to the default settings is the surest way around this. But like this: For example, when the train map is set up with default settings:

Frequency: 33%
Width: 300%

It comes with presets. What comes to my mind is this:

a-) Frequency
b-) Size
c-) Richness

Are the multipliers of these three variables equal to each other, what is the ratio between them? Example: If I make the width 200% and the richness 50%; Do I stick to 100% standard presets? (While it decreases by 2 times, the other variable also increases by 2 times)

Example 2:
'Frequency' variable 25%

Size 100%
Wealth 400%

examples can be multiplied. In such examples (What is the strength of the three variables: frequency, breadth, richness; influence (in percent) among themselves?

bad eng. forgive for I hope I was able to explain... Good game, thanks...

Qon wrote: Sun Jun 05, 2022 5:48 pm https://wiki.factorio.com/Map_generator#Resources

''The size setting adjusts the size of the resource patches. Setting the slider to 200% means the surface area of the patch is doubled.''

Thank you, but if the translation doesn't mislead me, the current explanation on the wiki only states "definition". So the information here is extremely superficial, like the explanation of the expressions in the game... If you increase the size, the surface area will increase; I already know that too. What I want to know is, is the effect ratio between them equal?

Sample:
600% frequency, 100% richness, 100% size

with this map:

100% frequency,
200% richness,
300% size,

Are the amount of resources in these two map settings equal? ​​It decreases by 6 times in rate, while it increases (2x3) in the others. The wiki has only explained what frequency means, what width means what richness means. My question is different...

There is no resource width. There is a map Width and a resource Size.

oyunbagimlisi wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 12:09 am Sample:
600% frequency, 100% richness, 100% width

with this map:

100% frequency,
200% richness,
300% width,

Are the amount of resources in these two map settings equal? ​​It decreases by 6 times in rate, while it increases (2x3) in the others. The wiki has only explained what frequency means, what width means what richness means.

Assuming that (as Loewchen pointed out) you mean 'size' when you say 'width', the wiki is quite clear that the total resources in these two cases should be about equal.

Khagan wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 1:06 am

oyunbagimlisi wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 12:09 am Sample:
600% frequency, 100% richness, 100% width

with this map:

100% frequency,
200% richness,
300% width,

Are the amount of resources in these two map settings equal? ​​It decreases by 6 times in rate, while it increases (2x3) in the others. The wiki has only explained what frequency means, what width means what richness means.

Assuming that (as Loewchen pointed out) you mean 'size' when you say 'width', the wiki is quite clear that the total resources in these two cases should be about equal.

Yes, exactly what I meant to say is "size". So "resource size" is "surface area".

What makes me skeptical is this: with the unmodified railroad map (33% frequency, 300% size); it looks like the total amount of resources in the default standard (100%-100%-100%) map is not equal. In the train map, while a variable decreases by 3 (33%), a variable increases by 3 times (300%), although the rate is 1k-1k; It looks like the amount of resources is getting more. (So ​​it seems easier) It seems to me that there are less resources at the default 100% settings. I don't know if I'm wrong, I asked to be sure, but I couldn't understand correctly since the translate translates "width" and "size" the same.

Loewchen wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 12:28 am There is no resource width. There is a map Width and a resource Size.

''resource Size'' that's what i wanted to say.

Without getting into the game to test myself, off hand keep in mind that if a position it chooses to spawn resources has water, thus eliminates part of all of a patch, it will not attempt to redistribute it.

Also, I’m unsure if richness is a per patch or per tile type of thing. This comes into play with size as size determines how many tiles are in a patch. Best way to test that is generate some test maps with low size and others with high size. Leave the richness alone, and see if the resources per tile seem to change significantly.

FuryoftheStars wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 4:07 pm Without getting into the game to test myself, off hand keep in mind that if a position it chooses to spawn resources has water, thus eliminates part of all of a patch, it will not attempt to redistribute it.

Also, I’m unsure if richness is a per patch or per tile type of thing. This comes into play with size as size determines how many tiles are in a patch. Best way to test that is generate some test maps with low size and others with high size. Leave the richness alone, and see if the resources per tile seem to change significantly.

Thank you. I'm assuming you don't have a clear answer. am i right? This is my question
It shows that it is not "nonsense" and the wiki content does not give the "answer I was looking for". What I mean in the question is, for example, in the evolution factor: pollution, time, biting nest destroying; All three of them have a different impact rate. Even if you change the numbers proportionally, the "equality" you are looking for will not be. Because the rate in themselves is NOT "1k-1k-1k". Here I want to understand what is the case for variables in resource settings... (Frequency, size, richness)

RNG is a factor.

Frequency * Size * Richness = Resources available.

So long as you come out to the same Resources amount, then in the game, the total Resources on the map should be the same. But, RNG is a huge caveat :

Water overwrites ores.
Placement is random.
The map is HUGE, 2,000,000x2,000,000 tiles.

Those three things combine to create variances in what you see when you start a game. Is there a mod that tells you the total available resources, waiting to be extracted from the map? If so, combine that with a max range VisionRadar (another mod) and start a few games to check what sort of variance you can expect. The more explored area, honestly, the more I’d expect the RNG to smooth out with regards to resource availability per the Resources figure as determined above.

oyunbagimlisi wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 4:46 pm

FuryoftheStars wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 4:07 pm Without getting into the game to test myself, off hand keep in mind that if a position it chooses to spawn resources has water, thus eliminates part of all of a patch, it will not attempt to redistribute it.

Also, I’m unsure if richness is a per patch or per tile type of thing. This comes into play with size as size determines how many tiles are in a patch. Best way to test that is generate some test maps with low size and others with high size. Leave the richness alone, and see if the resources per tile seem to change significantly.

Thank you. I'm assuming you don't have a clear answer. am i right? This is my question
It shows that it is not "nonsense" and the wiki content does not give the "answer I was looking for". What I mean in the question is, for example, in the evolution factor: pollution, time, biting nest destroying; All three of them have a different impact rate. Even if you change the numbers proportionally, the "equality" you are looking for will not be. Because the rate in themselves is NOT "1k-1k-1k". Here I want to understand what is the case for variables in resource settings... (Frequency, size, richness)

I created a 2000x2000 test map. I made 2 attempts for each try. My observation is this:
Despite the change at the same rate;
Richness > Size > Frequency

Frequency: 0.75x (on average)
Size: 1x (on average)
Richness: 1.5x (on average)

To give an EXAMPLE on the level of evolution, just as the most effective variable is to destroy the biting nest, I think the most effective variable here is richness.

oyunbagimlisi wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 5:40 pm

oyunbagimlisi wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 4:46 pm

FuryoftheStars wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 4:07 pm Without getting into the game to test myself, off hand keep in mind that if a position it chooses to spawn resources has water, thus eliminates part of all of a patch, it will not attempt to redistribute it.

Also, I’m unsure if richness is a per patch or per tile type of thing. This comes into play with size as size determines how many tiles are in a patch. Best way to test that is generate some test maps with low size and others with high size. Leave the richness alone, and see if the resources per tile seem to change significantly.

Thank you. I'm assuming you don't have a clear answer. am i right? This is my question
It shows that it is not "nonsense" and the wiki content does not give the "answer I was looking for". What I mean in the question is, for example, in the evolution factor: pollution, time, biting nest destroying; All three of them have a different impact rate. Even if you change the numbers proportionally, the "equality" you are looking for will not be. Because the rate in themselves is NOT "1k-1k-1k". Here I want to understand what is the case for variables in resource settings... (Frequency, size, richness)

I created a 2000x2000 test map. I made 2 attempts for each month. My observation is this:
Despite the change at the same rate;
Richness > Size > Frequency

Frequency: 0.75x (on average)
Size: 1x (on average)
Richness: 1.5x (on average)

To give an EXAMPLE on the level of evolution, just as the most effective variable is to destroy the biting nest, I think the most effective variable here is richness.

(96M+18M) iron / 76M iron = 114:6=1,5

"richness vs size" in pictures

Taken from richness/size maps increased to 600%, with a frequency of 17%.

I have no CLAIM, I'm just sharing my observation. Rates can of course be misleading.

astroshak wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 5:37 pm RNG is a factor.

Frequency * Size * Richness = Resources available.

So long as you come out to the same Resources amount, then in the game, the total Resources on the map should be the same. But, RNG is a huge caveat :

Water overwrites ores.
Placement is random.
The map is HUGE, 2,000,000x2,000,000 tiles.

Those three things combine to create variances in what you see when you start a game. Is there a mod that tells you the total available resources, waiting to be extracted from the map? If so, combine that with a max range VisionRadar (another mod) and start a few games to check what sort of variance you can expect. The more explored area, honestly, the more I’d expect the RNG to smooth out with regards to resource availability per the Resources figure as determined above.

No. NO mods like RSO mods like rso, or a mod that changes resources (KR2). for the vanilla version.

oyunbagimlisi wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 5:55 pm

astroshak wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 5:37 pm RNG is a factor.

Frequency * Size * Richness = Resources available.

So long as you come out to the same Resources amount, then in the game, the total Resources on the map should be the same. But, RNG is a huge caveat :

Water overwrites ores.
Placement is random.
The map is HUGE, 2,000,000x2,000,000 tiles.

Those three things combine to create variances in what you see when you start a game. Is there a mod that tells you the total available resources, waiting to be extracted from the map? If so, combine that with a max range VisionRadar (another mod) and start a few games to check what sort of variance you can expect. The more explored area, honestly, the more I’d expect the RNG to smooth out with regards to resource availability per the Resources figure as determined above.

No. NO mods like RSO mods like rso, or a mod that changes resources (KR2). for the vanilla version.

I don’t think that’s what astroshak was trying to say. I believe what they were trying to say is if you can find or create a mod that counts all of the resources for you, it’d make it easier to make sure you haven’t missed anything.

I’d also amend their recommended test setup with: run the map gens with water off. I would also only tweak a variable here or there at a time vs adjusting all of them at once.

Edit: And no, I don’t have a definitive answer to the question. I’ve never looked into it. But seems you are curious and want to know, I’m attempting to give advice and recommendations on how to test and figure it out for yourself. (As I imagine some of the others posting here are trying to do.)

oyunbagimlisi wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 1:27 pm What makes me skeptical is this: with the unmodified railroad map (33% frequency, 300% size); it looks like the total amount of resources in the default standard (100%-100%-100%) map is not equal. In the train map, while a variable decreases by 3 (33%), a variable increases by 3 times (300%), although the rate is 1k-1k; It looks like the amount of resources is getting more. (So ​​it seems easier) It seems to me that there are less resources at the default 100% settings.

Don't forget that the whole point of the railworld settings is to encourage you to go further afield to look for your resources. And the further you go, the richer the patches are. So it is quite reasonable that with the same nominal overall density of resources, the railworld feels as if it has more.

Khagan wrote: Tue Jun 07, 2022 7:13 am And the further you go, the richer the patches are.

Does anyone know which parameters affect this?

I think its only based on the richness, not the size of the ore patch.

JimBarracus wrote: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:08 am

Khagan wrote: Tue Jun 07, 2022 7:13 am And the further you go, the richer the patches are.

Does anyone know which parameters affect this?

I think its only based on the richness, not the size of the ore patch.

It's been a long while since I paid attention (and didn't use RSO), but I thought distance affected both richness and size? Just not frequency.

FuryoftheStars wrote: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:27 am

JimBarracus wrote: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:08 am

Khagan wrote: Tue Jun 07, 2022 7:13 am And the further you go, the richer the patches are.

Does anyone know which parameters affect this?

I think its only based on the richness, not the size of the ore patch.

It's been a long while since I paid attention (and didn't use RSO), but I thought distance affected both richness and size? Just not frequency.

Yes, you can be sure of that; The wiki clearly states that the resources will increase depending on the distance (the further you get from the starting area).

''Outside of this, resource patch richness increases by distance.'' (wiki)

Khagan wrote: Tue Jun 07, 2022 7:13 am

oyunbagimlisi wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 1:27 pm What makes me skeptical is this: with the unmodified railroad map (33% frequency, 300% size); it looks like the total amount of resources in the default standard (100%-100%-100%) map is not equal. In the train map, while a variable decreases by 3 (33%), a variable increases by 3 times (300%), although the rate is 1k-1k; It looks like the amount of resources is getting more. (So ​​it seems easier) It seems to me that there are less resources at the default 100% settings.

Don't forget that the whole point of the railworld settings is to encourage you to go further afield to look for your resources. And the further you go, the richer the patches are. So it is quite reasonable that with the same nominal overall density of resources, the railworld feels as if it has more.

It's not normal for me to feel that way. Your view is not correct. Because the increasing wealth due to distance is NOT exclusive to the "railway world" map. Applies to all map settings. I still think my feeling is correct. Frequency does not have as much effect as wealth. So the potency is low; I gave an example of evolution variables above... Richness or size increased/decreased by X times (rate); The increased x times (rate) has a greater effect than the decreased frequency value. (Still not official information, my experience.=