I don't think there are less caves at all, actually. I'm pretty certain they've just gotten the terrain generation to stop generating large caves with openings on the surface. All of the surface openings my girlfriend and myself have found have been to small little cave "pockets," so to speak.
I've still found a few ravines on the surface, but the only way we've found larger caves is by digging, which I hate to do and she happens to love, so it works out where I find small pockets with enough resources to get us by and she finds huge complexes where we find diamonds and whatnot.
They actually have changed cave generation in the snapshots; I used JAD to decompile 13w39b and found the MapGenCaves class; the first two lines of the recursiveGenerate function (these are the deobfuscated names that Forge uses) are as follows:
int i = this.b.nextInt(this.b.nextInt(this.b.nextInt(15) + 1) + 1);
if (this.b.nextInt(7) != 0) i = 0;
In 1.6.2, these lines read as:
int i1 = this.rand.nextInt(this.rand.nextInt(this.rand.nextInt(40) + 1) + 1);
if (this.rand.nextInt(15) != 0) i1 = 0;
From modding the game myself (basically, making more and more varied caves, as well as ravines), the first line sets the size of individual cave systems and the second is the chance to spawn a cave system per chunk (actually less because the nested random calls produce a output that is biased low to make caves more clustered). The changes are definitely noticable; I noticed almost immediately when playing the new snapshots, using the seed I used in my first (unmodded) main world, which I assume should otherwise be the same underground (I found ravines in the same locations).
Also, why not make it so we can configure how common/dense caves are, like how we can change mineshafts in superflat (those as well, using generatorOptions in level.dat to save the settings)?. So if you entered 100 and 1, you'd get rare but massive cave systems, or 1 and 100 for small caves scattered all over the place, like this (using 0 for either completely disables cave generation, 14 and 14 would be similar to the 13w39b generator and could be the default):
int i1 = this.rand.nextInt(this.rand.nextInt(this.rand.nextInt(caveSize + 1) + 1) + 1);
if (this.rand.nextInt(100) + 1 <= caveFrequency) i1 = 0;
Using MCEdit I compared the density of caves in 1.6.4 and the 13w39a snapshot.
1.6.4
13w39a
Caves do seem to be less common. They also don't seem to have decreased in length, just in quantity. I think this is a good thing, because caves still take a decent amount of time to "conquer", but they don't branch off into dozens of other, equally long cave systems. Which is just absurd.
I noticed that too. If they'd made them more rare, I'd appreciate the change, but I wouldn't like it if they completely removed the abandoned mines. I only played the current snapshot to see the new biomes, so I haven't been underground yet.
No need to worry about that. I've found three abandoned mineshafts so far, one I saw due to non-optimal chunk loading, the other two I found while caving.
As for caves themselves, it definitely feels like they're slightly less common, and that cave systems don't seem to be as large as they were before. Of course, it's hard to tell just from experience, but I've found myself several times going over a cave twice, simply because I couldn't believe I'd fully explored it. Usually, it takes a several expeditions for me to fully explore a cave, not a couple of them.
I'd also like to add that like the surface terrain, the underground terrain also looks nicer. I've had quite a few "moments of wow," while "moments of fail" have been non-existent so far. Of course, the sample size is rather small at the moment.
I'm just having the hardest time finding dungeons and mineshafts in my 13w36a-started world, though I like to explore thoroughly so I tend to stick to the same general area until I can't find more dark tunnels to check out.
Funny to compare this situation to my previous 1.4.6-started world. The other day I went back to that world to do some 1.6.4 witch hut / nether fortress mapping to get things ready for 1.7 and sure enough, I heard some noises from underground when I was near my swamp base and decided to check it out. I found the culprit in a new cave area after a bit of digging that shortly after led me to a zombie dungeon and like 3 minutes later I found a mineshaft, probably the 7th one I have found in that world and it's not even that large, just slightly crosses 1000 blocks in one direction so far.
Using MCEdit I compared the density of caves in 1.6.4 and the 13w39a snapshot.
1.6.4
13w39a
Caves do seem to be less common. They also don't seem to have decreased in length, just in quantity. I think this is a good thing, because caves still take a decent amount of time to "conquer", but they don't branch off into dozens of other, equally long cave systems. Which is just absurd.
Unfortunately, you can't conclude that from your pictures.
Unless you are looking in the same direction, at the same coordinates, in worlds with the same seed created in the two different versions, your pictures are not an "apples-to-apples" comparison. As you can see from the pictures in Princess_Garnet's earlier post, cave generation occurs in "clumps". Your 1.6.4 picture was simply taken in an area with more caves.
All fair analyses have indicated that there has been no change to cave generation.
Another thing I'm noticing, is they seemed to tone down the amount of resources. I've been playing my world for 9+ hours, and have less than a stack of iron in the reserves, and still haven't found diamonds.
Which is perfectly fine with me. What's the point of playing if you can accomplish everything within a single play session?
You mentioned earlier that you built your home on top of a mountain. Are you in an Extreme Hills biome? Many aren't aware, but emeralds will spawn in place of diamonds in Extreme Hills. You can still find diamonds, it's just a lot more rare. Leave the Extreme Hills and you'll find diamonds.
I don't get why people want less caves. Why do you have to feel like you have to "conquer it"? Just stop exploring and go home if you get sick of looking around in a cave.
Every update there is a thread that says the caves have been changed...
It's for real this time, as I said earlier; I looked at the code* and it has been changed.
*I used JAD to decompile the jar for 13w39b then searched through the files for 3.14 since pi is used in the cave generator** (a few other files too but Windows grep made short work of finding the file, since it was only slightly modified and I knew what it looks like from the MCP 1.6.2 source). This is also one reason why I signed up, so as to suggest that an option to change cave size/frequency be added, just as we can do with other generated structures in superflat, without having to mod the game.
**amv.class in 13w39b (MapGenCaves in MCP Forge 1.6.2)
I don't get why people want less caves. Why do you have to feel like you have to "conquer it"? Just stop exploring and go home if you get sick of looking around in a cave.
It's not about hating caves, it's about balance (you know, that thing Minecraft has seemed to lack since Mid-Beta). I love cave exploration, and hate the grind of mining my own tunnels, but you know there's something wrong, if you can get significant amounts of iron ore (Supposed to be Mid-Tier) on the first night, because Caves have a high chance of exposing ore. I'd rather have to work for my stuff, than have all enchanted diamond stuff practically given to me within the span of 3 in-game days. If I wanted to build without resource constraint, I'd play creative.
You mentioned earlier that you built your home on top of a mountain. Are you in an Extreme Hills biome? Many aren't aware, but emeralds will spawn in place of diamonds in Extreme Hills. You can still find diamonds, it's just a lot more rare. Leave the Extreme Hills and you'll find diamonds.
Are you sure about this? I thought emeralds were an addition to diamonds in Extreme Hills, not a replacement for them. Emeralds usually only occur in ones, maybe twos and they occur up to level 32. Diamonds can only be found up to about level 16.
For those interested, I decided to do a comparison. Draw from them what you will.
The older world I used for comparison had chunks generated in release 1.2.5 (I used the area around the original spawn point in both worlds), but I believe it's probably comparable for most of the more recent release versions. This is a 700 x 700 block area.
For those of you who are questioning this, this actually slightly proves Altaire's theory, if you look at the top MC 1.2.5 You see alot of balls of tangled caves, which I assume is swiss cheese caves, then on the new snapshot, the bottom photo you see that, there is alot less balls of cheese and more stretched out stringy bits.
I love exploring caves, but I hate how they're just ongoing.. When I think "This might finally be the end.." I find another tunnel leading to more tunnels, it's really annoying. Me personally wants to fully explore a cave when I delve into one, I think a lot of people have that same feeling. Because when you leave the cave, you might miss out on valuables, but if you keep on exploring it's just going to take a lot of time.
It would be awesome if it is changed so that caves are large, but just more rare, so they don't branch into other cave systems. It would still be a challenge to fully explore a cave system, but when you're done you can leave it forever and not worry about it anymore.
I can see that being a problem for some people, but for people like me where exploring caves is a big part of the game a single cave system goes by all too fast; this is what my first main world, approx 4000x2000 blocks, looks like underground:
(10% of original size; made with MCMap, which searches for torches and only shows areas within some small radius, around 15 blocks, with unexplored mineshafts edited out; I have since modded the game to remove naturally generated torches)
Yes, all of those are interconnected; I only came to the surface to get more supplies and unload what I mined; also, while I have since modded cave generation to make more caves overall, I made cave systems bigger but further apart so they are more distinct, with a sparse network of caves modified to be very long to make them interconnected (plus the occasional very rare supermassive cave system, all made with three separate cave generators). Rei's minimap also has a cave mapping option that makes it easier to stay in one cave system until it is explored, as well as placing waypoints at areas that appear to go into another system.
But anyway, it would be better if we could change the size/density and frequency/spacing of cave systems when a world is created.
* TheMasterCaver: You may need to start your own thread for there to be any chance of people actually seeing this info, seriously. Title it something like this: "Cave Generation changed in Source Code. Here is proof.". Then tactfully show the proof like you did before. btw: Thanks for digging out that info!
They actually have changed cave generation in the snapshots; I used JAD to decompile 13w39b and found the MapGenCaves class; the first two lines of the recursiveGenerate function (these are the deobfuscated names that Forge uses) are as follows:
int i = this.b.nextInt(this.b.nextInt(this.b.nextInt(15) + 1) + 1);
if (this.b.nextInt(7) != 0) i = 0;
In 1.6.2, these lines read as:
int i1 = this.rand.nextInt(this.rand.nextInt(this.rand.nextInt(40) + 1) + 1);
if (this.rand.nextInt(15) != 0) i1 = 0;
From modding the game myself (basically, making more and more varied caves, as well as ravines), the first line sets the size of individual cave systems and the second is the chance to spawn a cave system per chunk (actually less because the nested random calls produce a output that is biased low to make caves more clustered). The changes are definitely noticable; I noticed almost immediately when playing the new snapshots, using the seed I used in my first (unmodded) main world, which I assume should otherwise be the same underground (I found ravines in the same locations).
Also, why not make it so we can configure how common/dense caves are, like how we can change mineshafts in superflat (those as well, using generatorOptions in level.dat to save the settings)?. So if you entered 100 and 1, you'd get rare but massive cave systems, or 1 and 100 for small caves scattered all over the place, like this (using 0 for either completely disables cave generation, 14 and 14 would be similar to the 13w39b generator and could be the default):
int i1 = this.rand.nextInt(this.rand.nextInt(this.rand.nextInt(caveSize + 1) + 1) + 1);
if (this.rand.nextInt(100) + 1 <= caveFrequency) i1 = 0;
It's for real this time, as I said earlier; I looked at the code* and it has been changed.
*I used JAD to decompile the jar for 13w39b then searched through the files for 3.14 since pi is used in the cave generator** (a few other files too but Windows grep made short work of finding the file, since it was only slightly modified and I knew what it looks like from the MCP 1.6.2 source). This is also one reason why I signed up, so as to suggest that an option to change cave size/frequency be added, just as we can do with other generated structures in superflat, without having to mod the game.
**amv.class in 13w39b (MapGenCaves in MCP Forge 1.6.2)
For those of you who are questioning this, this actually slightly proves Altaire's theory, if you look at the top MC 1.2.5 You see alot of balls of tangled caves, which I assume is swiss cheese caves, then on the new snapshot, the bottom photo you see that, there is alot less balls of cheese and more stretched out stringy bits.
When I first posted those images, I wasn't too sure if things really did or didn't change.
I did notice, however, that although it appears to be roughly a similar-ish amount of cave to non-cave area offhand, that is only a 2D (top down) view. The clusters in the 1.2.5 version seem to have more caves to them, as you said. With the mention of discovered changes to the coding regarding caves, it all does to point that way.
I also thought I noticed something others have said, that surface openings for caves seem at least a little less common as well, but I wasn't sure if that was just placebo.
Are you sure about this? I thought emeralds were an addition to diamonds in Extreme Hills, not a replacement for them. Emeralds usually only occur in ones, maybe twos and they occur up to level 32. Diamonds can only be found up to about level 16.
You are correct, emeralds do occur higher than 16 so I wasn't completely clear when I said that emeralds replace out diamonds in Extreme Hills. I guess I don't know quite how to explain it, but I have noticed it since emeralds were introduced. For whatever reason, in Extreme Hills diamonds are much more rare. I feel I can say this with confidence because I have completely cleared out the lower 16 in Extreme Hills zones and was lucky to find 1-2 diamonds in a 128x128 area. As soon as I ventured out of the Extreme Hills, they occurred at their normal rates as listed by the Wiki. Maybe it doesn't happen to everyone, but it does happen to me every time.
Looking at the code, I wouldn't expect a *decrease* in cave frequency in 1.7 The second line looks like the frequency of caves spawning is *increased* from 1 in 16 to 1 in 8. The *size* of cave systems decreases from 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 of 40, (i.e. 5) to 1/2 of 1/2 of 15 (i.e 3.75). So if the size of caves is linearly related to the "cave size" parameter there should actually be an increase in caves expected per chunk, albeit with a decrease in typical cave size (so less swiss cheese).
The pictures look like a decrease in cave system size without a big change in frequency, so the opposite of my simple interpretation of the code. Is the cave system size non-linearly related to the size parameter?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Geographicraft (formerly Climate Control) - Control climate, ocean, and land sizes; stop chunk walls; put modded biomes into Default worlds, and more!
RTG plus - All the beautiful terrain of RTG, plus varied and beautiful trees and forests.
Better Forests Varied and beautiful trees and forests, in modern Minecraft.
Looking at the code, I wouldn't expect a *decrease* in cave frequency in 1.7 The second line looks like the frequency of caves spawning is *increased* from 1 in 16 to 1 in 8. The *size* of cave systems decreases from 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 of 40, (i.e. 5) to 1/2 of 1/2 of 15 (i.e 3.75). So if the size of caves is linearly related to the "cave size" parameter there should actually be an increase in caves expected per chunk, albeit with a decrease in typical cave size (so less swiss cheese).
The pictures look like a decrease in cave system size without a big change in frequency, so the opposite of my simple interpretation of the code. Is the cave system size non-linearly related to the size parameter?
The average for the new code is actually 1.875; you forgot about the third random function (they nest three so that higher numbers are much less common, giving the clustering effect; it is possible to get a number as high as n-1 but very unlikely, with just one random function you have a 1/n chance of any number). Also, the code that generates a cave can call itself, presumably generating additional caves and so on (set so there isn't infinite recursion); many larger cave systems are also actually several smaller systems generated near each other due to random placement.
Also, I looked at some older versions and it appears that at least as early as the first beta release the code is the same (the Minecraft Wiki states that the last time caves were changed was in Infdev; described as "Caves are now so clustered that a cave could be described as "Swiss cheese"), meaning that a beta world could be loaded in 1.6.4 and caves would be generated the same (if the way the seed is handled wasn't changed).
* TheMasterCaver: You may need to start your own thread for there to be any chance of people actually seeing this info, seriously. Title it something like this: "Cave Generation changed in Source Code. Here is proof.". Then tactfully show the proof like you did before. btw: Thanks for digging out that info!
I did do something of that sort, with a post in suggestions on adding an option to change the way caves generate, with a link back to this thread regarding the changes.
I've still found a few ravines on the surface, but the only way we've found larger caves is by digging, which I hate to do and she happens to love, so it works out where I find small pockets with enough resources to get us by and she finds huge complexes where we find diamonds and whatnot.
In 1.6.2, these lines read as:
From modding the game myself (basically, making more and more varied caves, as well as ravines), the first line sets the size of individual cave systems and the second is the chance to spawn a cave system per chunk (actually less because the nested random calls produce a output that is biased low to make caves more clustered). The changes are definitely noticable; I noticed almost immediately when playing the new snapshots, using the seed I used in my first (unmodded) main world, which I assume should otherwise be the same underground (I found ravines in the same locations).
Also, why not make it so we can configure how common/dense caves are, like how we can change mineshafts in superflat (those as well, using generatorOptions in level.dat to save the settings)?. So if you entered 100 and 1, you'd get rare but massive cave systems, or 1 and 100 for small caves scattered all over the place, like this (using 0 for either completely disables cave generation, 14 and 14 would be similar to the 13w39b generator and could be the default):
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
1.6.4
13w39a
Caves do seem to be less common. They also don't seem to have decreased in length, just in quantity. I think this is a good thing, because caves still take a decent amount of time to "conquer", but they don't branch off into dozens of other, equally long cave systems. Which is just absurd.
https://soundcloud.com/slimy-4
No need to worry about that. I've found three abandoned mineshafts so far, one I saw due to non-optimal chunk loading, the other two I found while caving.
As for caves themselves, it definitely feels like they're slightly less common, and that cave systems don't seem to be as large as they were before. Of course, it's hard to tell just from experience, but I've found myself several times going over a cave twice, simply because I couldn't believe I'd fully explored it. Usually, it takes a several expeditions for me to fully explore a cave, not a couple of them.
I'd also like to add that like the surface terrain, the underground terrain also looks nicer. I've had quite a few "moments of wow," while "moments of fail" have been non-existent so far. Of course, the sample size is rather small at the moment.
Funny to compare this situation to my previous 1.4.6-started world. The other day I went back to that world to do some 1.6.4 witch hut / nether fortress mapping to get things ready for 1.7 and sure enough, I heard some noises from underground when I was near my swamp base and decided to check it out. I found the culprit in a new cave area after a bit of digging that shortly after led me to a zombie dungeon and like 3 minutes later I found a mineshaft, probably the 7th one I have found in that world and it's not even that large, just slightly crosses 1000 blocks in one direction so far.
y u do dis random number generator
Unfortunately, you can't conclude that from your pictures.
Unless you are looking in the same direction, at the same coordinates, in worlds with the same seed created in the two different versions, your pictures are not an "apples-to-apples" comparison. As you can see from the pictures in Princess_Garnet's earlier post, cave generation occurs in "clumps". Your 1.6.4 picture was simply taken in an area with more caves.
All fair analyses have indicated that there has been no change to cave generation.
You mentioned earlier that you built your home on top of a mountain. Are you in an Extreme Hills biome? Many aren't aware, but emeralds will spawn in place of diamonds in Extreme Hills. You can still find diamonds, it's just a lot more rare. Leave the Extreme Hills and you'll find diamonds.
It's for real this time, as I said earlier; I looked at the code* and it has been changed.
*I used JAD to decompile the jar for 13w39b then searched through the files for 3.14 since pi is used in the cave generator** (a few other files too but Windows grep made short work of finding the file, since it was only slightly modified and I knew what it looks like from the MCP 1.6.2 source). This is also one reason why I signed up, so as to suggest that an option to change cave size/frequency be added, just as we can do with other generated structures in superflat, without having to mod the game.
**amv.class in 13w39b (MapGenCaves in MCP Forge 1.6.2)
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
Because caves get in the way of my building projects.
It's not about hating caves, it's about balance (you know, that thing Minecraft has seemed to lack since Mid-Beta). I love cave exploration, and hate the grind of mining my own tunnels, but you know there's something wrong, if you can get significant amounts of iron ore (Supposed to be Mid-Tier) on the first night, because Caves have a high chance of exposing ore. I'd rather have to work for my stuff, than have all enchanted diamond stuff practically given to me within the span of 3 in-game days. If I wanted to build without resource constraint, I'd play creative.
Star Trek DS9 and Doctor Who FTW.
Are you sure about this? I thought emeralds were an addition to diamonds in Extreme Hills, not a replacement for them. Emeralds usually only occur in ones, maybe twos and they occur up to level 32. Diamonds can only be found up to about level 16.
Join me on World Community Grid and help find a cure for COVID-19!
For those of you who are questioning this, this actually slightly proves Altaire's theory, if you look at the top MC 1.2.5 You see alot of balls of tangled caves, which I assume is swiss cheese caves, then on the new snapshot, the bottom photo you see that, there is alot less balls of cheese and more stretched out stringy bits.
I can see that being a problem for some people, but for people like me where exploring caves is a big part of the game a single cave system goes by all too fast; this is what my first main world, approx 4000x2000 blocks, looks like underground:
(10% of original size; made with MCMap, which searches for torches and only shows areas within some small radius, around 15 blocks, with unexplored mineshafts edited out; I have since modded the game to remove naturally generated torches)
Yes, all of those are interconnected; I only came to the surface to get more supplies and unload what I mined; also, while I have since modded cave generation to make more caves overall, I made cave systems bigger but further apart so they are more distinct, with a sparse network of caves modified to be very long to make them interconnected (plus the occasional very rare supermassive cave system, all made with three separate cave generators). Rei's minimap also has a cave mapping option that makes it easier to stay in one cave system until it is explored, as well as placing waypoints at areas that appear to go into another system.
But anyway, it would be better if we could change the size/density and frequency/spacing of cave systems when a world is created.
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
.
Here is the proof below everyone.
* TheMasterCaver: You may need to start your own thread for there to be any chance of people actually seeing this info, seriously. Title it something like this: "Cave Generation changed in Source Code. Here is proof.". Then tactfully show the proof like you did before. btw: Thanks for digging out that info!
- The Cubic Chunks Mod is back! Be a part of it's rebirth and Development.
-- Robinton's Mods: [ Mirror ] for some of his Mods incl Cubic Chunks Mod, due to DropBox broken links.
- Dungeon Generator for the Open Cubic Chunks Mod
- QuickSAVE-QuickLOAD for the Open Cubic Chunks Mod
When I first posted those images, I wasn't too sure if things really did or didn't change.
I did notice, however, that although it appears to be roughly a similar-ish amount of cave to non-cave area offhand, that is only a 2D (top down) view. The clusters in the 1.2.5 version seem to have more caves to them, as you said. With the mention of discovered changes to the coding regarding caves, it all does to point that way.
I also thought I noticed something others have said, that surface openings for caves seem at least a little less common as well, but I wasn't sure if that was just placebo.
You are correct, emeralds do occur higher than 16 so I wasn't completely clear when I said that emeralds replace out diamonds in Extreme Hills. I guess I don't know quite how to explain it, but I have noticed it since emeralds were introduced. For whatever reason, in Extreme Hills diamonds are much more rare. I feel I can say this with confidence because I have completely cleared out the lower 16 in Extreme Hills zones and was lucky to find 1-2 diamonds in a 128x128 area. As soon as I ventured out of the Extreme Hills, they occurred at their normal rates as listed by the Wiki. Maybe it doesn't happen to everyone, but it does happen to me every time.
The pictures look like a decrease in cave system size without a big change in frequency, so the opposite of my simple interpretation of the code. Is the cave system size non-linearly related to the size parameter?
Geographicraft (formerly Climate Control) - Control climate, ocean, and land sizes; stop chunk walls; put modded biomes into Default worlds, and more!
RTG plus - All the beautiful terrain of RTG, plus varied and beautiful trees and forests.
Better Forests Varied and beautiful trees and forests, in modern Minecraft.
The average for the new code is actually 1.875; you forgot about the third random function (they nest three so that higher numbers are much less common, giving the clustering effect; it is possible to get a number as high as n-1 but very unlikely, with just one random function you have a 1/n chance of any number). Also, the code that generates a cave can call itself, presumably generating additional caves and so on (set so there isn't infinite recursion); many larger cave systems are also actually several smaller systems generated near each other due to random placement.
Also, I looked at some older versions and it appears that at least as early as the first beta release the code is the same (the Minecraft Wiki states that the last time caves were changed was in Infdev; described as "Caves are now so clustered that a cave could be described as "Swiss cheese"), meaning that a beta world could be loaded in 1.6.4 and caves would be generated the same (if the way the seed is handled wasn't changed).
I did do something of that sort, with a post in suggestions on adding an option to change the way caves generate, with a link back to this thread regarding the changes.
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?