• 0

    posted a message on "4D" Biomes
    Quote from PatDay

    I think I see what you're saying. It sounds like you're suggesting a two step process for determining specific elevations. It sounds like you think the game should first generate a basic terrain that most likely (I'm assuming) has less variation and is keyed to the biomes. Then an separate elevation overlay is applied to that which creates more impressive topology.

    That's fine, but my idea is only a single step. I'm not an expert on the game's code world generation so I can't say if one way is better than the other.


    Yeah, it was the only way I could figure out how to get flat terrain, hilly terrain, and mountainous terrain both underwater and aboveground. This could be really effective at utilizing the increased map height... think huge, flat(ish) mesas towering 150m above sea level, occasionally having their own hills or even weirder, Dr. Seuss-like formations. :)
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on "4D" Biomes
    Quote from PatDay

    I termed it overlays because that's a term used in graphic design when layering multiple images to create a composite image. Think of it like a RGB color. Individually, you have Red, Green, and Blue images, but if you lay them on top of one another, you can get any color combination and shape you want.

    The idea of an undulating elevation, that's totally possible. I just didn't make my example with that level of granularity because I didn't want to go crazy :) In the real system, Mojang would probably map the elevation to a hundred or more blocks to have much more options.


    It wasn't the term "overlay" I was referring to - that makes perfect sense. ;) It was calling the variable/overlay that affects the shape of the terrain "elevation". In the context of Minecraft, "elevation" seems like it would determine the overall (or average, if you will) height of a biome. On the other hand, "terrain" could cover the undulations of the surface within each biome. :)
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on "4D" Biomes
    Quote from PrimeEchoes

    I support this. I also have another thing to add on to precipitation. What if rain and snow were determined by the clouds? Storm clouds would constantly move around the map, and theyd be easily recognizable by their massive size and dark colour. This would also require some effort put into the cloud system.


    That would be cool, seeing dark clouds on the horizon... "Red sky at night, sailor's delight; red sky in the morning, sailors take warning." ;)

    Quote from Kholdstare

    This is what I see the biome combinations would be (WARNING: Huge wall of text!) :

    *snipitty-snip*

    Yes, I ignored anything outside the realm of oceans in terms of height. Nothing would change in the biomes based on your inland-ocean scale, except for beaches spawning where you say they would. In that case, I would think that they should always spawn there except in Dry-Cold-[Anything] areas. The Flat/Hills/Mountains thing should only change ruggedness, not ground level.


    Indeed, my original idea was for "3D Biomes" (which I'm sure would have been a better title, pizza482), but then I realized that there needed to be a way to have flat areas that were at various altitudes (think mesas, the seafloor, etc), so I came up with the Base Height variable.

    Quote from X Squared

    Would it be OK if i made a getsatisfaction for this thread? I would make sure you get all the credit.


    Sure, go for it! Link it here for us and I'll probably add it to the original post. :)

    Quote from PatDay

    Whoa, seems like people have been thinking along the same lines as me. I started to putting together some stuff weeks ago, but never got around to making a fancy post about it. I think this is a good place to start though since people are already here talking about world generation. I think the OP has the right idea, but his focus isn't on the implementation. I've thought about the implementation and here's my idea: Overlays.

    Overlays are "dimensions" just like the OP talked about. I think there's only 3 overlays needed though - Elevation, Temperature and Humdity. The three overlays would be merged to create all possible combinations of climates I can think of like this:

    *snipitty-snip*

    To see how that would look in "real life" I created a simple example in excel using pseudo randomly generated values. H, M and L refer to High, Medium and Low respectively. It's simple, but the point is to show the concept, not to actually write a new world generator :) In the real game, there would be more values and randomized difference clouds would create the overlays.



    As you can see, I just created some pretty simple combinations for what makes a jungle, desert, etc. That was because it's easier to create a proof of concept that way. And, as you can see by looking at the above example, I think the results are pretty good. Jungles next to swamps or forest. Deserts next to badlands, etc. It all smooths out nicely.

    With more degrees of difference in the overlays (more "depth") it can create smoother gradients. Also, it means the the code for generating "biomes" will be more like the OPs suggestions. Meaning you have conditional statements like Jungles must have temp > 75 & humidity > 75. In that case, elevation doesn't matter so you can have hilly - even mountainous - jungles.

    Anyway, that's my rant. I've thought about this way more than I should since I know no one will ever care :)


    Very similar ideas indeed. :) The names of the overlays could be misleading, however... what is the "elevation" of a undulating seabed, or of a mesa? Also, I'm not an expert, but does humidity effectively equal precipitation with regards to how much the ground gets watered? Finally, the definitions of a few of the named biomes could use some tweaking... for example, isn't a flat jungle by definition a swamp?

    Anyway, that's nitpicking. :) Your diagrams explain things very easily for the more visually-inclined (like myself). Here's hoping something comes of all this work!

    Quote from Maduo

    I don't like this idea and here's why:

    'locked zones'

    basically this idea is suggesting that no matter where you are, your zone is going to be permanently locked in that type of scenario. thus a swamp could never be transformed into a desert, a desert could never be transformed into a forest, and so on.

    I know that zones are already locked as is, but denying blocks to grow in these locations because of a new weather system robs the player of all creative freedom when he wants to build a sand castle desert in the middle of a frozen river.

    besides, we already have somewhat of a "heat" variable with the terrain as far as block colors go. trees and grass near deserts are naturally lighter colored, whereas the same blocks near taigas are naturally deeper in color. The system isn't perfect, granted, as I've seen snowy jungles, but I would still like to be able to see snowy jungles =p


    Nobody's suggesting you would be prevented from building your sandstone house upon the ice... nor a treehouse made of ice in a jungle tree canopy. :) We're only saying that the natural generation of the Minecraft world should be determined by these kinds of variables. What man does with the world he's been given is up to him. ;)

    As for snowy jungles... :P

    Quote from Flameofice

    I did the math before someone ninja'd me, and I ended up with the conclusion that this suggestion would create...........

    108 biomes. And that's just insane.

    I'm not too sure about this......


    That's the thing though, that there wouldn't be "named" biomes anymore. Sure, one could generalize, just like with colors - this is "red", that's "blue" - but there would be numerous variations on those, and strict definitions would have to be discarded in favor of generalizations. :)
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on "4D" Biomes
    Quote from xix256

    This sounds like a great idea. If you took this and added seasons it could be even more epic. One reason i like the idea of this suggestions and seasons is because it can have a huge impact on game mechanics like when and where you can grow crops or see certain mobs. imagine having to grow enough food during the warm months to support yourself through the winter, Or even a hunting season.


    Seasons is an awesome idea. I used to live in a tropical climate, where the winters were mostly dry, but it poured every afternoon in the summers. Now I live in a Mediterranean climate, and it's the opposite: winters are wet, and summers are dry. An in-game cycle of seasons could affect both precipitation and temperature on a per-"biome" basis! I love it.

    So how long do you all think a season (~3 months IRL) should last in MC? It makes sense to me that since we have an 8-day cycle of lunar phases (which would approximate one month), seasons should last 24 days (8x3). This would make the Minecraft year 96 in-game days long, or 32 RL hours.

    That may seem rather long initially, but considering that it's supposed to represent an entire year, I think it's quite reasonable. :) It also means that those people who can only play the game at certain times of their day would get to see all the seasons on SMP servers.
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on "4D" Biomes
    Quote from Neospector

    I'm not so sure there's a variable that defines whether it rains a lot (days on end) or whether it rains a little (one or two days a Minecraft year).In other words, I've never heard of specific biomes receiving more rain than others in the current code.


    No, to the best of my knowledge, that doesn't exist currently. Precipitation as it stands in the game now is a global event, occurring (or not occurring, if it's a desert biome) everywhere simultaneously.

    Since you brought precipitation to mind, I updated the OP with some precipitation-related stuff - thanks. :wink.gif:
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on "4D" Biomes
    Quote from Neospector

    It seems complex, and hard to add so many variables. If you could simplify it with something like giving a chance for a special biome with mountains near the coast or something, I'd be fine with it.

    However, as it is, changing the base generation code by adding new variables (like precipitation and whatnot) would break older worlds, usually by turning them into other biomes. Say you have an old biome in a world. That biome is going to be assigned a variable as you suggested. Meaning that it's theoretical for old deserts to start having rain, even snow, and vice versa; for old swamps or snow biomes to start heating up like deserts and getting less rain/snow. Biomes begin to switch around; my old little "cove" that my tower overlooked used to be a plains biome, and now it's turned swampland (I'm all right with it, others aren't though). People are still complaining about this, despite it happening in 1.8 beta. See where I'm going? Adding new biomes appears to be fine, but changing previous variables seems to have the aforementioned effect.


    AFAIK there are already temperature and humidity values for each world; humidity is almost the same as precipitation - for these purposes it could be considered identical. So it's actually not as difficult an undertaking as you might imagine.

    As for the old worlds / new worlds dilemma, that's always been an issue (hence the infamous "chunk error" cliffs). Even now, Jeb's tweaking the biome generation code to add mroe hilly terrain to all biomes, add a new Jungle biome, etc... it can get annoying if you're really invested in something you've made, but you can also consider it an incentive to start afresh. :wink.gif: Worst case scenario, install WorldEdit and copy-paste whatever you don't want to lose into a new world. :tongue.gif:

    Quote from X Squared

    This is a great idea, have you considered making a get satisfaction for it?


    Hadn't thought of that; also wanted to see what kind of response I'd get here. :smile.gif: Perhaps I'll add it to GetSatisfaction tomorrow... thanks! :wink.gif:
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 47

    posted a message on "4D" Biomes
    I'd like to see the biome code rewritten to be more dynamic - none of this pre-defined "swamp"/"desert"/"forest" stuff. Here's what I had in mind; I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. :)




    Basic Terrain Generation
    It would start with 4 basic variables:
    1. Base Height
    2. Precipitation
    3. Temperature
    4. Terrain (physical contour)
    The Base Height variable would have four five possible values (sea level being at Y:64):
    1. Ocean (down to Y: ~32)
    2. Coast (Y: ~60-64)
    3. Beach (Y: ~64-70)
    4. Inland (Y: ~70-120)
    5. Plateau (Y: ~120 and up) (added 2012-08)
    Each of the other variables would have three possible values:

    Precipitation
    1. Dry
    2. Average
    3. Wet
    Temperature
    1. Hot
    2. Temperate
    3. Cold
    Terrain
    1. Flat
    2. Hills
    3. Mountains
    The game would generate 4 different "biome" maps, one for each variable, based on the world seed. The opposite value areas for the first three variables (ocean/inland, dry/wet, hot/cold) would never border each other, but would always have at least a few chunks of the respective moderate value(s) as "buffer" zones, ensuring that hot swamps never directly border snowy areas. The opposite values of the Terrain variable would not be restricted by this rule (although abrupt transitions should be kept somewhat rare), thus allowing for occasional unique features such as a mesa rising out of a flat desert, or a steep-cliffed island jutting out of a serene coastal bay.

    The four variable maps would be overlaid, and it would be their combination that would govern the actual blocks to be generated. For example:
    • [Coast/Beach]-Hot-Wet-Flat = Swamp
    • Inland-Hot-Wet-[any] = Jungle
    • Inland-Hot-Dry-[Flat/Hills] = Desert
    • Coast-[any]-[any]-Mountains = this or this
    • Beach-[any]-[any]-Flat = typical beach
    • Ocean-[any]-[any]-[any] = Varied underwater terrain (unaffected by Precipitation, although a Cold value for Temperature would result in an ice-covered ocean)
    Note that with these suggested changes, the starting height of the Terrain values (flat/hills/mountains) would be determined by the Base Height, so a 25m hill in an Ocean would only reach up to around Y:57, while the same size hill in an Inland area would reach Y:95 or so.

    Terrain Features
    With the basic terrain determined, special features would be added based on the values of any given terrain.

    Precipitation
    Precipitation would change from being a global, "all areas simultaneously" occurrence to a local one. It would occur frequently in Wet areas, and occasionally in Average areas. Dry areas could have either an extremely low chance of precipitation (1/365 or so), or simply none at all.

    The frequency of thunderstorms vs. regular rainfall/snowfall would remain much as it is now.

    In Cold areas, the precipitation would take the form of snow, and in Temperate/Hot areas, rain. In addition to the familiar thin layer of snow that exists now, if a Cold-Wet area has a thunderstorm, any blocks over a certain height (say, 96 or so) would have a full-sized snow block added on top. A limit would be placed as to how many full-sized snow blocks can pile up - something like 2-3 perhaps.

    Rivers
    Rivers would be generated to "flow" from Mountains to the nearest Hills, then on to the nearest Flat area, and from there to the nearest Ocean. In Wet areas, a river would have a chance of flooding its banks during a thunderstorm, which would mean simply duplicating the top level of water source blocks directly upwards one level, allowing them to flow outwards "naturally" (according to Minecraft water physics, at least). The additional water blocks would automatically be removed at the end of the thunderstorm.

    Flora
    Forests would have a chance to be generated in any area that was Inland and not Dry. A Wet area would have a much higher chance to generate a forest. The type of trees composing the forest would of course be affected by the Temperature value, with Cold-[Hills/Mountains] more likely to have pine trees than any other tree type, and Wet-Hot areas typically generating swamp or jungle trees.

    Mushrooms would be restricted to [Wet/Average]-[Hot/Temperate] areas, cacti would be restricted to Dry-Hot areas, and sugarcane could even have the must-be-next-to-water restriction lifted if planted in Wet-[Hot/Temperate] areas.

    Fauna
    Certain mobs could also be restricted to specific value ranges - imagine if slimes were no longer restricted to specific random chunks, but instead could only spawn in Wet-Hot areas, or if squid only spawned in Oceans rather than in just any old water block (RIP Pond Squid, Cave Squid, and Mob Grinder Squid!).



    As far as the oft-mentioned temperature variation with altitude... 64m just isn't enough of a change in altitude to affect temperatures in any significant fashion, so unless and until Mojang increase the map height limits, I'm ignoring any altitude/temperature interactions Now that map height reaches 192m above sea level, elevation affecting the temperature is not too far-fetched. Bring on the snow-capped mountains!!

    If you like this idea, consider sending @Jeb_ a link to this thread... just don't bombard the man! He doesn't need to be barraged by hundreds of near-identical tweets - anything more than half a dozen or so is just wrong. :P

    EDIT 2012-01-26: Added river overflowing and a new Precipitation section to Terrain Features.

    EDIT 2012-08-15: Adjustments to accommodate the raised map height limit (5th value for Base Height; elevation/temperature changes)
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on 1.0.0 Snow Biome Seed
    I found some neat features in the snow biome for this seed, at around 1400,1200 - a couple of lava pools, a snowy ravine, and an extreme mountain biome bordering the snow biome, ideal for epic snowy vistas from your next log cabin:



    There's also at least one stronghold deep in the snow biome.
    Posted in: Seeds
  • 0

    posted a message on Simple Changes for Natural Forest Growth
    Quote from KyoShinda

    Then again, trees need 3x3 5 tall to grow and most houses don't leave enough room for trees. I like to make dirt houses but they aren't tall enough for a tree. This might work but some still might have issues.


    Dirt houses? How come - going for the blend-with-nature look? If so, you could create a 3-wide border "path" of solid flowers & tall grass; saplings wouldn't auto-plant in an already occupied dirt block. :smile.gif:
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Simple Changes for Natural Forest Growth
    Quote from KyoShinda

    So let me get this straight, I raze a forest, start building and trees start growing again in my yard and any part of my house that has dirt? :Skeleton:


    Depends. If you completely eliminated the forest, and picked up all the saplings, then nothing could grow. If you merely cleared out a section of the forest for your house, then yes, the forest would (slowly) start to re-grow into that area.

    I can think of any number of preventative measures one could take to prevent a forest from growing in a certain direction, the simplest of which would be building a 3-wide non-dirt path as a border (saplings would only auto-plant in dirt). You could also use moats or walls.
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 1

    posted a message on Simple Changes for Natural Forest Growth
    I'd like to see forests grow.

    Imagine if trees would die after a certain number of in-game days (something like 15-30 days, where more light & rainfall/humidity = longer lifespan). The trunk & branch logs would disappear - except for the very bottom log as a stump - leaving the leaves to decay. If a sapling dropped by leaf decay isn't picked up at the end of 5 minutes, it would have a certain chance of auto-planting itself in the ground instead of vanishing.

    Those 2 simple changes would give us fully-dynamic forests, which would expand, grow old, occasionally burn down (when new trees grow near lava pools/falls), and just change over time.

    An additional enhancement could be to add the oft-requested fallen (horizontal) log blocks; when a tree dies, it would create a broken line of fallen logs in a single direction from the stump along the ground - perhaps averaging one fallen log for every 2 regular logs the tree had. When created naturally (not player-placed), these logs would decay after another 20-30 days (similar to how leaves decay), with a small chance of leaving behind mushrooms or tall grass.

    As a bonus, horizontal logs would also allow construction of proper log cabins. :wink.gif:

    Thoughts?
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on [Surv] Skyblock
    Quote from Corrupted

    Sooo...I made a long pathway leading to a large circular area covered in grass covered dirt. During the night, shittons of monsters spawn there. Like, a terrifying number. Yet for some unfathomable reason, no passive mobs, like the sheep I need to make a bed, are willing to spawn.

    Anyone willing to explain my mistake?

    No mistake; passive mob spawning changed in 1.8. They're more persistent now (they don't de-spawn much at all), and they typically only spawn when a chunk is generated (or loaded?). Since this map is so tiny, you won't be generating new chunks anytime soon.

    The simplest solution to your specific problem is to craft wool blocks from the string that spiders drop; mob grinder time! :smile.gif:
    Posted in: Maps
  • 0

    posted a message on [Surv] Skyblock
    Here's my finished map. Overboard? Perhaps. :biggrin.gif:

    Map download








    Posted in: Maps
  • 0

    posted a message on My 100% legit survival save
    Quote from reverandraptor




    Glad you found my SPILS useful! :smile.gif:
    Posted in: Screenshots
  • 0

    posted a message on Light switch help
    Quote from reverandraptor

    You can imagine how the redstone works =) My only major problem was the top piston not pulling down the lightstone. I knew redstone could fix it using some delays, but I was too tired to figure it out myself, so I went back to youtube.

    Funny enough, I found a video detailing exactly what I need-- A light system for 6x6 spawning pads. Funny how I find it after I've spent a couple hours working on figuring out a lightswitch system.



    Glad you found it helpful! :smile.gif: I tried to post it as a video response to Etho's video, but it hasn't been accepted yet. Ah well. :smile.gif:
    Posted in: Survival Mode
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.