setAverageBiomeSize() causing weirdness about biometweaker HOT 5 CLOSED

Update: I stand corrected, somewhat. I had said it doesn't matter what the integer is, that's not quite accurate. I used the wiki example of 200 (without specifying the worldgen type of default, large, etc) and low and behold, I had more biomes. I started fiddling with it a bit more and discovered that while 100 does not work (generates only one biome), 128 does work. I then decided to try 126, which still generated only one biome. So, something happens when going over 128 (127 may or may not work, honestly, I'm not that motivated right this second :P) ... maybe a typing issue or something?

I have not gone so far as to actually see whether there is a difference in the 'average biome size' in terms of block or chunk count, I imagine that I would actually have to wind up flying across terrain with a chunk border indicator turned on and counting ... and I'm really not up for that, especially when we're talking about biomes that could be upwards of 256 chunks across.

from biometweaker.

I guess 200 was a pretty poor example to use...

The number you pass is actually a byte. That means it's maximum value is 127. If you input anything over that, it gets truncated to 0. (I've fixed the wiki. Not sure where I got 255.)

I can't run your script, since I don't have the mods you do. However, I ran some tests in a world with just BT and saw the following:

Biome size 2:

Biome size 4:

Biome size 8:

Anything over 10 and you're starting to get really large biomes, and it may seem to just be one biome. I'm not saying it isn't actually one biome, but it's a strong possibility that with numbers that high, you just haven't actually left that biome because it's so massive. Or perhaps the size algorithm gets wonky when it's that large. I can't say. The early generation code is a giant clusterfuck of obfuscated variables.

You'll want to keep your sizes under around 10, unless you want insane biomes. Let me know if it still appears to be one biome.

from biometweaker.

Fair enough, I will point out though that your documentation says "radius in chunks", a 10 chunk radius would be a 20 chunk diameter, only 320 blocks. What it sounds like, based on what you're saying and the screen shots, is that that number is actually closer to what's used by the biome size thing in vanilla where the "default" is 4 and "large biomes" is 6.

I will give this a whirl using that logic and see what happens. Thanks.

from biometweaker.

I'm not certain that it's actually the radius. That's just a guess based on observed behavior. If you are still having issues, you can continue to comment here, but I'm going to consider this issue resolved for now.

from biometweaker.

It does seem to line up with the "usual" biome sizing where 4 is standard
and 6 is Vanilla's large biomes. Confirmed non-issue, though.
On Oct 29, 2015 8:36 PM, "Chris" [email protected] wrote:

I'm not certain that it's actually the radius. That's just a guess based
on observed behavior. If you are still having issues, you can continue to
comment here, but I'm going to consider this issue resolved for now.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#46 (comment)
.

from biometweaker.