Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]

Author Topic: Mineral Occurrence Setting  (Read 43655 times)

Shandra

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #120 on: March 10, 2011, 08:05:09 pm »
Damned, using dfprospector -ab was a bad idea :(
Should have recognized that during the early phase - later I was to occupied with the procedure and the observation that for high enough occurrence values there are ranges where the map results are the same.... nevertheless, the type data should still be worth something...

first the setting - I used my latest embark position (as I like that spot and the full prospector output is therefore at least useful to me)

Spoiler: worldgen (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: Embark Spot (click to show/hide)

Here the Data for 108 samples - tab seperated cells, so not really readable inside the browser - just copy and paste into something like calc or excel.

Spoiler: plot of amount and types (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: plot for just types and shortend range (click to show/hide)

I can't negate the assumption of some logarithmic curve, but IMHO a potential based curve is more fitting.
And the data for the total amount - well, haven't thought about that in detail - but my 1st guess is that it should have been all the same (pure volume of stone/ore/minerals) and the difference is only accounting to the various layouts (empty spaces) of the caverns.

Ok, here is the plot for all entities from inorganic_stone_layer and inorganic_stone_soil removed from the data

Spoiler: final plot (click to show/hide)

For further tests I think more samples for the lower values are needed - and I am not sure what to do with all the noise for the higher ranges (no, no fourier or higher degree polynomal operations please)
« Last Edit: March 10, 2011, 09:06:25 pm by Shandra »
Logged

white_darkness

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #121 on: March 10, 2011, 09:07:43 pm »
108 samples and plotting.  Remind me not to make you or DaVinci mad.   Never mess with thorough people. :)

I'm amazed you went through so much, just doing 9 the first time had my eyes crossing, but half of that was probably the swapping stuff around so I could match it to its native raw file (except slade and cotton candy)

Just looking at the raw data caused my head to hurt.

Still it's interesting, and it follows his findings as well.  Hmmm, pretty much everything after 20k could be considered so much nothing. 

Logged

Jeoshua

  • Bay Watcher
  • God help me, I think I may be addicted to modding.
    • View Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #122 on: March 10, 2011, 10:00:36 pm »
Quote from: arkhometha on March 10, 2011, 05:32:19 pm
I found some odd situations as to find iron ore on a shore, and I'm sure this is not the kind of biome for it.

Actually, realistically black sand beaches are rich in minerals... and red sands even more so.  But you probably found it deep underground, which wouldn't necessarilly be BAD but not exactly common.  It happens, tho.  Iron is everywhere.
Logged
Quote from: Encased in burning magma on March 27, 2011, 02:11:50 am
I like fortresses because they are still underground.

arkhometha

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #123 on: March 10, 2011, 10:10:51 pm »
Quote from: Jeoshua on March 10, 2011, 10:00:36 pm
Quote from: arkhometha on March 10, 2011, 05:32:19 pm
I found some odd situations as to find iron ore on a shore, and I'm sure this is not the kind of biome for it.

Actually, realistically black sand beaches are rich in minerals... and red sands even more so.  But you probably found it deep underground, which wouldn't necessarilly be BAD but not exactly common.  It happens, tho.  Iron is everywhere.
\

you don't find an iron vein, but ironsand. Also, black sand is rare and a special case. =P
Logged

Reelyanoob

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #124 on: March 17, 2011, 04:50:43 am »
Quote from: parlor_tricks on March 08, 2011, 02:11:16 am
Wow thats pretty cool. What/how did you use to import his data ?
I've not tried any of the higher scarcity values at the moment.

On a seperate note - has anyone taken a dfreveal look at their sites? On all the worlds I generated, the  stones which are found in clusters/ovals (such as microline) are all placed according to a grid layout. Is this a new addition or was it always there?

I saw this behaviour in 31.18 in a modded worldgen (replaced layer stones with metals, maxxed out size of all clusters and rplaced all veins with clusters. After genning the world and using dfreveal it was very clear that the clusters were centered in the 4 quadrants of the map (on a 2x2 embark), so i guess a cluster is centered in each map square
Logged

Shandra

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #125 on: March 31, 2011, 05:39:10 pm »
Damned....

V.25 changed not the landscape.... but the minerals found with the same setting as V.21 [Edit: ok, for this par: 100 the minerals are somewhat unchanged and just shifted numbers... but it get worse with numbers above 100]

Spoiler: Compare V.21 vs V.25 setting 100 (click to show/hide)

Sorry for the missaligned text - it was tab seperated....

and here is another graph for V.25 limmited to 20000.... the spread within the first thousands is just too much too me, no pattern regocnition is clicking in :( From the types of stones/gems whatsoever.... I think if one find a good way to display those - there may be a pattern! Somehow the general layers seem to shift within a given range, and therefore the ores and gems that may be found.... and that shift shifts over decades or centons to another set.... but I still am not able to grasp a pattern... [and maybe the prospector -ab option would be usefull here, wich I spared in the new limited x range test -- and that for particular interests of types values above 5000 may make sense....]

Spoiler: Gems&ore only vs. MO Setting (100-20000) (click to show/hide)

Edit: Next time maybe a limit to MO up to 5000 is reasonable.... but I don't think we may capture the pattern as I assume that there are more then just a few parameters involved.... Besides the fact that within my data some settings had a cave in and others not, and that alone may break the whole statistic :(

Spoiler: same set of data limited to 10k (click to show/hide)

[whisper=Ral]If you want/need the pure date, just PM me again[/whisper]

[Edit: Ok, no whisper tag in this forum... sigh..... I still leave it unedited to be recognizable]
« Last Edit: March 31, 2011, 06:16:58 pm by Shandra »
Logged

ral

  • Bay Watcher
  • Praying to arm_ok
    • View Profile
    • Steam Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #126 on: March 31, 2011, 06:57:10 pm »
Thanks! This is what I have put on the wiki.

http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/DF2010:Advanced_world_generation#Mineral_Scarcity

BTW, let me know if this statement is still valid:

"The default value will result in a maximum of 2-4 metal ores per map (assuming you choose a good embark location) which may be limiting until the economy is fully implemented and desired metals can be traded for."
Logged

wuphonsreach

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #127 on: April 03, 2011, 03:48:14 pm »
So if I want roughly double that different types of ores I should divide the MINERAL_SCARCITY by 2 or about 1.8 or maybe 2.5 or even 3.0?

2500 = default
833 = double that roughly?
278 = double again?

I've heard rumors elsewhere that setting MINERAL_SCARCITY below 1000 causes other issues?  Or are folks using numbers below that point and not having issues?
Logged

Sunday

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #128 on: April 03, 2011, 04:09:51 pm »
Quote from: wuphonsreach on April 03, 2011, 03:48:14 pm
So if I want roughly double that different types of ores I should divide the MINERAL_SCARCITY by 2 or about 1.8 or maybe 2.5 or even 3.0?

2500 = default
833 = double that roughly?
278 = double again?

I've heard rumors elsewhere that setting MINERAL_SCARCITY below 1000 causes other issues?  Or are folks using numbers below that point and not having issues?

My current fort is in a world with 100 mineral scarcity (max possible; got tired of my copper-only embarks). No problems, just such insanely high amounts of a ton of different ores that I'm not going to do it again—I like some scarcity.
Logged

Shandra

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #129 on: April 04, 2011, 12:49:29 pm »
Quote from: ral
"The default value will result in a maximum of 2-4 metal ores per map (assuming you choose a good embark location) which may be limiting until the economy is fully implemented and desired metals can be traded for."

For my test side it is 3 metal sources (+ Adamantine), haven't checked any other maps for the default setting - so I can neither confirm nor disagree to that statement.

Quote from: wuphonsreach
I've heard rumors elsewhere that setting MINERAL_SCARCITY below 1000 causes other issues?  Or are folks using numbers below that point and not having issues?

Though I am currently playing with a value around 1200, for some older version I used a value around 850 and had no problems... though I also cannot agree to some of the newer threads about flux and iron and availability, etc. but that's maybe because I use a custom worldgen profile (wich may have an influence on the numbers/types I got for the test, but IMHO not for the pattern/used algorithm during creation)
Logged

Juason

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #130 on: April 04, 2011, 12:58:38 pm »
Quote from: wuphonsreach on April 03, 2011, 03:48:14 pm
So if I want roughly double that different types of ores I should divide the MINERAL_SCARCITY by 2 or about 1.8 or maybe 2.5 or even 3.0?

2500 = default
833 = double that roughly?
278 = double again?

I've heard rumors elsewhere that setting MINERAL_SCARCITY below 1000 causes other issues?  Or are folks using numbers below that point and not having issues?



I have been having a problem where scarcity < 1000 results in the embark FINDER not accurately identifying Flux locations, and fewer locations having Flux called out in the embark window.  Oh, and coal is also less plentiful with a low mineral scarcity :/

Logged

white_darkness

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #131 on: April 04, 2011, 02:35:50 pm »
Except I'm fairly sure that coal is still treated as a mineral.  Which I'm on a 100 map, that had coal and lignite.
Logged

ral

  • Bay Watcher
  • Praying to arm_ok
    • View Profile
    • Steam Profile
Re: Mineral Occurrence Setting
« Reply #132 on: April 04, 2011, 05:13:47 pm »
Quote from: Shandra on April 04, 2011, 12:49:29 pm
Quote from: ral
"The default value will result in a maximum of 2-4 metal ores per map (assuming you choose a good embark location) which may be limiting until the economy is fully implemented and desired metals can be traded for."

For my test side it is 3 metal sources (+ Adamantine), haven't checked any other maps for the default setting - so I can neither confirm nor disagree to that statement.

Ok, but that includes both a "deep metal" and "shallow metalS" layer? I think I got 2-4 assuming you get a site with either "shallow metal, deep metal" or "shallow metals" with no deep metal, etc. So I guess if you end up with a site that just says "shallow metal" it would be 1 metal not counting adamantine....

i suppose in theory you could get a site with both shallow metalS and deep metalS with the default setting but I've never found one at least for the few times I played before you could change the setting....

Anyway, am I probably still usually correct in saying that metal = 1 and "metals" = 2 given the default setting?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]
« previous next »