Terrain effect on new map industry generation

[CrownVic95]

Those of you who read my comments awhile back about the lack of logging camp generation on most of the Australia - 1850 WA map know of my frustration in trying to understand that phenomenon and to somehow overcome it in the editor.

I fiddled with it for a good while, but finally gave up after making zero (apparent) progress in achieving an understanding. Seems clear that there is more going on behind the scenes in the program than the editor gives us access to.

Continuing to fiddle now and then in the editor, I stumbled upon another interesting head-scratcher this morning. I was revamping the Australia - 1850 WA map and one of the things I wanted to try was game-play without mountains, in that mountainous terrain is/was a real headache in those early years of locomotives. So I bulldozed all terrain in operational areas to sea-level.

Started a new scenario with my flattened map and what popped out at me immediately was that there was no coal generation. None whatsoever in the flattened areas, where it had always appeared before. Restarted several times with the same result, proving that it wasn't just random probability on the first map. Where hills began again, there was a line of coal mines that "knew" not to dare step over the line bordering the flats. Why? How? Where/what in the programming tells coal mines that they must have altitude? And clearly, from game experience , it doesn't take much altitude at all. And why does it affect coal mines and not iron mines? Iron mines were plentiful on the flats.

My gut feeling tells me that this phenomenon is related somehow to the aforementioned lack of logging camps, with no tangible reason for it in the editor. If we ever unravel one mystery, I think we'll understand the other.