Minerals

[Seravy]

We had that discussion about minerals last month.

Current system generates this many minerals per 100 map tiles (note that this includes ocean tiles - Ores placed on water or other invalid tiles are simply skipped and don't appear) :

Poor Arcanus :2.77 (1 in a 6x6)
Fair Arcanus : 6.25 (1 in a 4x4)
Rich Arcanus : 11.11 (1 in a 3x3)
Poor Myrror : 4 (1 in a 5x5)
Fair Myrror : 11.11 (1 in a 3x3)
Rich Myrror : 25 (1 in a 2x2)

Easy to see what's the problem.

I'll redesign the code to allow replacing these numbers freely.

I think we should use these new numbers :

Poor Arcanus :2
Fair Arcanus : 5
Rich Arcanus : 8
Poor Myrror : 3
Fair Myrror : 7.5
Rich Myrror : 12

[Seravy]

Testing some rich dry huge lands with with new system. Specifically will pay attention to gold/power production only, as those are the ones responsible for balance problems.

Map 1 best spots :
-2 Crysx and a Quork
-1 Gem, 1 Gold, 2 Quork
-1 Gem, 2 Quork, Coal, Adamantium

Map 2 best spots : 
-2 Gold, 1 Gem, 1 Quork (two places)
-2 Gems, 1 Quork

Compared to the old maps with the best spots having 5-6 ores, and average was like these best spots, this is quite some improvement.

[Nelphine]

I'd be inclined to reduce the bonus from myrror to +25% (I've always the discrepancy huge; yes you're reducing it, but it's still big; and myrror also only costs 1 pick now), and increase arcanus so that the mirror numbers are slightly higher than what you proposed .

So it would be 

4/7/10
5/9/13

However, if that isn't possible, because it must be done by the grid sizes, which obviously have limited numbers, then yes your suggestion seems good.

[Seravy]

I can use any number I want, it's as simple as swapping it in a table of 6 words of data.
Accuracy is 0.025 ores/100 tiles.

I want to keep Poor significantly less than normal, where finding any decent ore at all is a special thing. I'm ok with reducing the difference between Rich and Fair, or Arcanus and Myrror but I'd be very cautions with that - reducing it too much might reduce the relevance of these features to the point of "no one cares". So I prefer to keep it safe and have about 50% more for each, which is still not very much but at least enough of a difference for a human player to notice. (I'd say 25% might not be, even if noticed, it's easy to attribute that much to luck.)

[Nelphine]

Hum. Well I guess about the 50%. Can at least try it a while and see.

And my issue is that rich arcanus is the same as fair myrror. That is noticeable, and makes me go 'huh' every time.. and leads back to either playing poor arcanus to deny AI minerals, or play myrror because it's just so much more than arcanus.

But I already live in the camp of myrror is too good not to pick, so any reduction here is worth exploring.

[MrBiscuits]

I find on smaller maps there aren't enough minerals as it is. I've played on tiny/small maps with no adamantium or mithril at all anywhere.
Could the numbers be increased for smaller maps?

[teelaurila]

Isn't Myrror also more likely to generate the better ores (gold etc) than the worse (silver etc)? Or are those numbers taking it into account (gold counting for 2 silver 1)?

Also, for those without transmute, would it be possible to reduce the effect luck has on total relative amounts of the different minerals (so that there would not be a map with massive amount of silver but no iron or mithril)?

[Seravy]

Isn't Myrror also more likely to generate the better ores (gold etc) than the worse (silver etc)? Or are those numbers taking it into account (gold counting for 2 silver 1)?

Also, for those without transmute, would it be possible to reduce the effect luck has on total relative amounts of the different minerals (so that there would not be a map with massive amount of silver but no iron or mithril)?

Yes, it's more likely to generate better ores, no that's not included in the numbers.
No it isn't possible to reduce the effect of luck.

[teelaurila]

Counting in the better Myrran ores, the ores on Myrror then have something like twice the value of Arcanus? And I'd claim the human puts more emphasis on good ore spots than the ores really help, so the subjective feel of the effect can be more.

The Myrran game already is quite the bit easier than the Arcanus, although mostly it comes from the AI starts. Still, I would see room to make the ores quite the bit more even. But it is true that the feel of distinction is important. But distinction need not be different total values, but different types? Particularly adamantium (and maybe orihalcon) only in Myrror, but perhaps other differences as well. For example Arcanus having more money, Myrror more crystals. Arcanus could have more coal and Myrror more adamantium/mithril (better versus more units). Arcanus might also have more game to compensate for more ore on Myrror. (All of this with the caveat of what the algorithm can pull, of course)