Hi everyone, I did a test too comparing the generation of diamond ores both in 1.16.5 and in 1.17 Java.
The seed that I used is: -7297006097225229061
I did my test between initial coordinates
0 15 0
and final coordinates
0 15 750
In the 1.17 version I found a total of 344 diamond ores (deepslate included).
In the 1.16.5 version I found a total of 355 diamond ores.
Which correlates with a reduction of 3.19% in the 1.17 version.
Furthermore, it seems that the Y-level in which they are more common is lower than the 1.16.5 version.
I used the following command:
/fill ~-15 0 ~-15 ~15 ~ ~50 air replace #minecraft:diamond_ores
Even if the sample size is not as big as the one portrayed by the staff member above, I still suspect that at least for some users (including myself) diamonds are rarer and most importantly their distribution is skewed towards lower Y-values.
If some other users can provide the data that the youtuber Xisuma exposed in one of his recent videos I think it would be beneficial.
I am eventually at disposal for more tests. Let me know. Thank you.
Johnny_9610
Hi everyone, I did a test too comparing the generation of diamond ores both in 1.16.5 and in 1.17 Java.
The seed that I used is: -7297006097225229061
I did my test between initial coordinates
and final coordinates
In the 1.17 version I found a total of 344 diamond ores (deepslate included).
In the 1.16.5 version I found a total of 355 diamond ores.
Which correlates with a reduction of 3.19% in the 1.17 version.
Furthermore, it seems that the Y-level in which they are more common is lower than the 1.16.5 version.
I used the following command:
Even if the sample size is not as big as the one portrayed by the staff member above, I still suspect that at least for some users (including myself) diamonds are rarer and most importantly their distribution is skewed towards lower Y-values.
If some other users can provide the data that the youtuber Xisuma exposed in one of his recent videos I think it would be beneficial.
I am eventually at disposal for more tests. Let me know. Thank you.