Emerald generation is based on chunk because it's biome specific. No other ore has this specification.
Its not proven that biome specifics are the only reason its generation is based on per chunk. the world loads per chunk, so ores are generated per chunk
Its not proven that biome specifics are the only reason its generation is based on per chunk. the world loads per chunk, so ores are generated per chunk
I haven't seen any proof for the later either.
EDIT: Well, technically it's true, but ore PLACEMENT isn't determined by chunk.
"ores are generated per chunk" doesn't really mean anything at all in proving your new mining idea. Pretty much everything is generated per chunk, but the placement of ores has no upper or limit per chunk AFAIK which is what you need to be proving.
Technically, everything is generated by Seed, then it is loaded by chunk. The Seed does not take chunks into consideration at all, only biomes, which is why you see ore veins passing that are in two chunks at once (as you saw in your gif).
When generating the world, first it looks at the Seed, finds out where everything is supposed to be, then it breaks the terrain into 16x16x256 chunks for easier loading. When generating Biome-specific Ore like Emeralds it doesn't ask if it is in a chunk that is in an Extreme Hills biome. It just asks if it is in an Extreme Hills Biome because the game decides where everything generates first, then divides it into chunks. Technically, you could look at seed data directly without having chunks made at all and it could tell you exactly where things generate.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
I do also want to add that this heavy hate and slander makes no sense, im taking an existing method and applying a new strategy. my method cant be worse than the method, potentially better. Im justifying it though odds. Sure I can roll a 6 100 times in a row on a six-sided die, rolling 1 on a 1200 sided dice 100 times in a row is much harder. so my way im believing is better and at the very least only .1% more efficient, not a lot but still undeniably better (if it is a true .1% better, its still better regardless)
I do also want to add that this heavy hate and slander makes no sense, im taking an existing method and applying a new strategy. my method cant be worse than the method, potentially better. Im justifying it though odds. Sure I can roll a 6 100 times in a row on a six-sided die, rolling 1 on a 1200 sided dice 100 times in a row is much harder. so my way im believing is better and at the very least only .1% more efficient, not a lot but still undeniably better (if it is a true .1% better, its still better regardless)
Nobody is giving you hate. We are giving you reasons why we disagree which are perfectly valid and up for debate. As IronMagus said, the reason level 12 is given is because it might have a lower Diamond spawn rate, but you avoid the generation of Lava Pools so it is much safer and easier to traverse. You may be correct that mining lower will get you more, but that was never contested in the first place. Level 12 was always merely a safer level to mine at.
As for the other things, those are just our knowledge of how the game works, as well as some bits and pieces of psychology like the Gambler's Fallacy.
you might be right in some parts, you might be wrong. All we are doing is giving our own beliefs and evidence supporting it. That isn't "hating", that is called having a logical discussion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
When generating Biome-specific Ore like Emeralds it doesn't ask if it is in a chunk that is in an Extreme Hills biome. It just asks if it is in an Extreme Hills Biome
Are you sure about this part? I thought I had heard that emeralds could actually generate anywhere in a chunk if that chunk has even one space of extreme hills biome in it. I haven't seen this for myself so I don't know if it's true, but if it is then that would indicate that the chunks at least have something to do with generation...
Are you sure about this part? I thought I had heard that emeralds could actually generate anywhere in a chunk if that chunk has even one space of extreme hills biome in it. I haven't seen this for myself so I don't know if it's true, but if it is then that would indicate that the chunks at least have something to do with generation...
Well I suppose it would technically be possible. The game might distribute biomes based on 16x16 blocks then average the borders or something like that. Or I could just be wrong in that regard, and the game will throw region specific ore anywhere in a chunk that is at least partially the correct biome. Either way that isn't relevant to the OP, it was just added information for the argument that ore can generate across multiple chunks because it is based on the seed, rather than individual chunk information.
Now that I think about it, the game could choose a single block to designate where a vein will go, then generate the vein based off that single location, which would explain both.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
Nobody is giving you hate. We are giving you reasons why we disagree which are perfectly valid and up for debate. As IronMagus said, the reason level 12 is given is because it might have a lower Diamond spawn rate, but you avoid the generation of Lava Pools so it is much safer and easier to traverse. You may be correct that mining lower will get you more, but that was never contested in the first place. Level 12 was always merely a safer level to mine at.
As for the other things, those are just our knowledge of how the game works, as well as some bits and pieces of psychology like the Gambler's Fallacy.
you might be right in some parts, you might be wrong. All we are doing is giving our own beliefs and evidence supporting it. That isn't "hating", that is called having a logical discussion.
I will say it is tame and logical here, on my video and other posts people are going as far to call me mentally challenged. its hard to take some posts seriously when they immediately discredit me and say the same support because it sounds nice. Im not seeing much of a breakdown as to why Im wrong but that i'm wrong and not taking any counter argument to light and that I'm wrong to the point my method is invalid when at its WORSE its the same as a similar method. Its hard to not feel attacked when im getting over critical reviews to the point of making stuff up
Are you sure about this part? I thought I had heard that emeralds could actually generate anywhere in a chunk if that chunk has even one space of extreme hills biome in it. I haven't seen this for myself so I don't know if it's true, but if it is then that would indicate that the chunks at least have something to do with generation...
Ok So Statement #1 - Mine Layer 12
People do this since Layer 12 has proven to hold the most diamonds, however; this is misguided. You Expose layers 11-14 in the process, 14 has a terrible diamond distribution compared to the other layers.
My Method: Layer 11
Exposes layers 10-13. Technically layer 10 would be the best to mine on but lava complicates the mechanics to that, I feel.
Statement #2 - Branch Mine
Branch Mining Works. Mine a line, move over 3 blocks on the other dimensional plane and repeat. The suggested method is ~20 blocks. this is completely inefficient and when precision is taken into account, you can gain incredible amounts of efficiency. heres how
My Method: Chunk Mining
With this, I found enlightenment
There is an average of 3.097 diamond ore per chunk.
This is why I believe in chunk mining. If you find diamonds in a chunk, it is extremely likely you wont find more in the chunk. This means if you find a vein of diamonds early in a chunk, there is no point to mining that chunk more, therefore you save time. There is a small chance you might miss a diamond, but the odds are better to just try a new chunk.
Pretty much you want to branch mine chunks (16x16 spaces) until you hit diamonds and then move to the next xhunk immediately since you have statistically drained the current chunk of all its diamonds. Saves time overall and gets you to the next vein faster
*Snip*
You sir are a fellow genius. I've mined like that my entire Crafting Career (never mine in same place twice, layer 11.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My avatar-Madison Gotha. She knows various weapons, she's a mage/sage, and is somewhat immortal. Madison has the capability of taming and communicating monsters, a genetic trait passed down by her father. 26 physically, 1400-something mentally, and a Lofty Peakian/Zenithian mix. Doesn't really like being called an elf and hates being called human..
I might be Moderator, but don't bother treating me too special. And don't make tons of Ban Hammer jokes, please. Also, I'm an Off-Topic only Mod. Don't ask me to lock a thread or something if it's not in the off-topic
Are you sure about this part? I thought I had heard that emeralds could actually generate anywhere in a chunk if that chunk has even one space of extreme hills biome in it. I haven't seen this for myself so I don't know if it's true, but if it is then that would indicate that the chunks at least have something to do with generation...
AFAIK, the seed dedicates the biome placement and layout. Based on what I've tinkered with the seed code, I've found that the seed generates biomes of x chunks. (I'm not counting transitory chunks). Then, the chunks are populated with blocks, based on the SEED and BIOME. Something like:
However, ONLY EMERALDS are affected by biome; nothing else is. The code is currently structured on a block-by-block basis. This can be clearly seen without any coding knowledge in MCEDit, when you do an ore search for ANY ORE OTHER THAN EMERALD.
The OP's math is flawed; this would work in the number of diamonds was DEPENDENT on the chunk, but they're not. The number of diamonds has nothing to do with the chunk or ores next to it. (Disregarding veins). It has to do with the seed. You could prove this by taking the world gen code and having it output X Y and Z values for diamonds, and then checking the game, but I don't have the time to write that.
I have been doing this for a very long time. however the only difference is I don't branch mine. as far as I can see you have the same probability of striking diamonds if you mine a straight line without turning at level 11, then as you do branch mining. at the very least I find that digging straight at least finds diamonds at a similar or even faster rate. of course there is the issue of walking back home afterwards...
however the only difference is I don't branch mine. as far as I can see you have the same probability of striking diamonds if you mine a straight line without turning at level 11, then as you do branch mining. at the very least I find that digging straight at least finds diamonds at a similar or even faster rate. of course there is the issue of walking back home afterwards...
That's still what I'd consider "branch" mining. The important bit isn't that you "branch off" your main tunnel, the important bit is that you dig 1x2 tunnels at level 11/12.6. Technically, digging a single straight, unending tunnel would be the absolute most efficient, but like you said, that makes for a long walk back.
I have been doing this for a very long time. however the only difference is I don't branch mine. as far as I can see you have the same probability of striking diamonds if you mine a straight line without turning at level 11, then as you do branch mining. at the very least I find that digging straight at least finds diamonds at a similar or even faster rate. of course there is the issue of walking back home afterwards...
Well if the server you are on has TP plugins, that remedies it a bit. Also with that being the most efficient method I have dont a modification of that with mine. I snake through the chunks. Ill go in a straight until I hit Diamonds then find the closest direction to the next chunk and straight line until diamonds again
I've done just about all the above methods at one time or another.
Probably not the most efficient way. However the one I end up using most of the time (because I'm not only looking for Diamonds) is just to make a giant hole starting at level 14, and dig down to bedrock. I hit lava all the time. I have my ways of dealing with it.
Coarse I'm not right in the head (self proclaiming here) because I'll use the giant hole I make for something as well so I'll clear out the lava with Water (to make obsidian) and gravel (to get rid of the stuff).
Like I said, most likely not the most effiecnet, and not the brightest but I have lots of diamonds.
Now the weirdest thing I've noticed is this.
On my world I have dug a lot of tunnels for mine carts. 4 blocks wide and 4 tall, and quite literally Kelometers long. When I began digging them I decided to do it at bedrock because being down that low meant that I was a lot less likely to run into something else I might build.
I'll be dammed if I don't run across a crap ton of Diamonds by accident that way. Normally enough diamonds to keep my pickaxe going and not have to get more diamonds by mining.
I guess that is like the ultimate branch mine?
Also just went spelunking on a snapshot of 1.7. This method sucks, or I'm just very unlucky.
Also just went spelunking on a snapshot of 1.7. This method sucks, or I'm just very unlucky.
Yeah, spelunking ("caving") isn't much good for finding diamonds, redstone, or lapis, because it's hard to find a cave that goes just deep enough to reach those layers without also being so deep that it's filled with lava.
I know branch mining is a waste of time and just makes your tools degrade quickly.
Branch mining is the most efficient method in terms of blocks exposed versus blocks mined (aside from spelunking, which as I've just covered above, doesn't work out that well for diamonds), which translates into it being the one that finds the most diamonds over time, and the best method overall.
Its not proven that biome specifics are the only reason its generation is based on per chunk. the world loads per chunk, so ores are generated per chunk
EDIT: Well, technically it's true, but ore PLACEMENT isn't determined by chunk.
Technically, everything is generated by Seed, then it is loaded by chunk. The Seed does not take chunks into consideration at all, only biomes, which is why you see ore veins passing that are in two chunks at once (as you saw in your gif).
When generating the world, first it looks at the Seed, finds out where everything is supposed to be, then it breaks the terrain into 16x16x256 chunks for easier loading. When generating Biome-specific Ore like Emeralds it doesn't ask if it is in a chunk that is in an Extreme Hills biome. It just asks if it is in an Extreme Hills Biome because the game decides where everything generates first, then divides it into chunks. Technically, you could look at seed data directly without having chunks made at all and it could tell you exactly where things generate.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum
Nobody is giving you hate. We are giving you reasons why we disagree which are perfectly valid and up for debate. As IronMagus said, the reason level 12 is given is because it might have a lower Diamond spawn rate, but you avoid the generation of Lava Pools so it is much safer and easier to traverse. You may be correct that mining lower will get you more, but that was never contested in the first place. Level 12 was always merely a safer level to mine at.
As for the other things, those are just our knowledge of how the game works, as well as some bits and pieces of psychology like the Gambler's Fallacy.
you might be right in some parts, you might be wrong. All we are doing is giving our own beliefs and evidence supporting it. That isn't "hating", that is called having a logical discussion.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum
Are you sure about this part? I thought I had heard that emeralds could actually generate anywhere in a chunk if that chunk has even one space of extreme hills biome in it. I haven't seen this for myself so I don't know if it's true, but if it is then that would indicate that the chunks at least have something to do with generation...
Village Mechanics: A not-so-brief guide - Update 2017! Now with 1.8 breeding mechanics! Long-overdue trading info, coming soon!
You think magic isn't real? Consider this: for every person, there is a sentence -- a series of words -- which has the power to destroy them.
Well I suppose it would technically be possible. The game might distribute biomes based on 16x16 blocks then average the borders or something like that. Or I could just be wrong in that regard, and the game will throw region specific ore anywhere in a chunk that is at least partially the correct biome. Either way that isn't relevant to the OP, it was just added information for the argument that ore can generate across multiple chunks because it is based on the seed, rather than individual chunk information.
Now that I think about it, the game could choose a single block to designate where a vein will go, then generate the vein based off that single location, which would explain both.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum
I will say it is tame and logical here, on my video and other posts people are going as far to call me mentally challenged. its hard to take some posts seriously when they immediately discredit me and say the same support because it sounds nice. Im not seeing much of a breakdown as to why Im wrong but that i'm wrong and not taking any counter argument to light and that I'm wrong to the point my method is invalid when at its WORSE its the same as a similar method. Its hard to not feel attacked when im getting over critical reviews to the point of making stuff up
that would make things very interesting
You sir are a fellow genius. I've mined like that my entire Crafting Career (never mine in same place twice, layer 11.)
If people are calling you names or insulting you here, the most effective response is to report their posts and the mods will get right on it.
The golden age: it's not the game, it's you ⋆ Why Minecraft should not be harder ⋆ Spelling hints
AFAIK, the seed dedicates the biome placement and layout. Based on what I've tinkered with the seed code, I've found that the seed generates biomes of x chunks. (I'm not counting transitory chunks). Then, the chunks are populated with blocks, based on the SEED and BIOME. Something like:
However, ONLY EMERALDS are affected by biome; nothing else is. The code is currently structured on a block-by-block basis. This can be clearly seen without any coding knowledge in MCEDit, when you do an ore search for ANY ORE OTHER THAN EMERALD.
The OP's math is flawed; this would work in the number of diamonds was DEPENDENT on the chunk, but they're not. The number of diamonds has nothing to do with the chunk or ores next to it. (Disregarding veins). It has to do with the seed. You could prove this by taking the world gen code and having it output X Y and Z values for diamonds, and then checking the game, but I don't have the time to write that.
Epic!
Will do!
That's still what I'd consider "branch" mining. The important bit isn't that you "branch off" your main tunnel, the important bit is that you dig 1x2 tunnels at level 11/12.6. Technically, digging a single straight, unending tunnel would be the absolute most efficient, but like you said, that makes for a long walk back.
Village Mechanics: A not-so-brief guide - Update 2017! Now with 1.8 breeding mechanics! Long-overdue trading info, coming soon!
You think magic isn't real? Consider this: for every person, there is a sentence -- a series of words -- which has the power to destroy them.
Well if the server you are on has TP plugins, that remedies it a bit. Also with that being the most efficient method I have dont a modification of that with mine. I snake through the chunks. Ill go in a straight until I hit Diamonds then find the closest direction to the next chunk and straight line until diamonds again
Probably not the most efficient way. However the one I end up using most of the time (because I'm not only looking for Diamonds) is just to make a giant hole starting at level 14, and dig down to bedrock. I hit lava all the time. I have my ways of dealing with it.
Coarse I'm not right in the head (self proclaiming here) because I'll use the giant hole I make for something as well so I'll clear out the lava with Water (to make obsidian) and gravel (to get rid of the stuff).
Like I said, most likely not the most effiecnet, and not the brightest but I have lots of diamonds.
Now the weirdest thing I've noticed is this.
On my world I have dug a lot of tunnels for mine carts. 4 blocks wide and 4 tall, and quite literally Kelometers long. When I began digging them I decided to do it at bedrock because being down that low meant that I was a lot less likely to run into something else I might build.
I'll be dammed if I don't run across a crap ton of Diamonds by accident that way. Normally enough diamonds to keep my pickaxe going and not have to get more diamonds by mining.
I guess that is like the ultimate branch mine?
Also just went spelunking on a snapshot of 1.7. This method sucks, or I'm just very unlucky.
Yeah, spelunking ("caving") isn't much good for finding diamonds, redstone, or lapis, because it's hard to find a cave that goes just deep enough to reach those layers without also being so deep that it's filled with lava.
Branch mining is the most efficient method in terms of blocks exposed versus blocks mined (aside from spelunking, which as I've just covered above, doesn't work out that well for diamonds), which translates into it being the one that finds the most diamonds over time, and the best method overall.
Village Mechanics: A not-so-brief guide - Update 2017! Now with 1.8 breeding mechanics! Long-overdue trading info, coming soon!
You think magic isn't real? Consider this: for every person, there is a sentence -- a series of words -- which has the power to destroy them.