Without checking the code myself, I have to throw in my two cents: when running debug mode (I'm assuming you are doing unit tests), then the random value is always the same, otherwise you wouldn't be able to check the code with those functions. In reality, the random value is - of course - more or less random.
If the code contains a randomizer, then it will be random within the limits provided to it.
No not unit test. I ran it through in debug mode. I went in and placed break points and then stepped through the program using a debugger which examines the code in real time as it runs. I saw that it had a seed. This will cause the randomizer to always produce the same number so long as the same seed is given to the randomizer. To even test to show it would never produce a different number I clipped the random generation out of the code placed it in a script and ran it 5000 times in which case produced the same number 100% of the time. Researching seeds, this is intentional and is working as intended.
I cant give the code snipe bc Selatos said that particular piece of code and how it functions, if people saw it, can be abused really badly
Edited By: Kendall Holm on Year 16 Day 297 6:17 ____________
Kendall a question, is there a programmed re-seed of the all galaxy deposits after a few years! When the galaxy 2.0 was done the planets got new deposits because they mostly changed position, but is there a re-seed of all galaxy deposits programmed from time to time!
I answered this in a thread a while ago but just for the record the terrain change on mine depletion is not, and from what I saw was never actually implemented. We've not decided whether we'll implement it in the future.
Good to know. Our version control only went back about 6 years so it's nice to have an example. And I agree that it was dumb, because it just picked a random terrain type. Honestly it should have been limited to rock, cave, or crater. That's what we'll probably do if we re implement it.
I was talking about mining terrain change change on depletion also. That's why the link that shows the terrain change that took place. It was within the last 6 years is why I responded to your post stating your records go back 6 years. If that is true then your records are inaccurate.
It could have been less than 6 years, I just remember it was quite a long time. I can't actually check anymore because our current setup is only a few months worth of history. It doesn't really matter.