Of course just cause the numbers look good doesn’t necessarily mean it is. Gotta take into account the terrain. You might have great hotspots filled with lava for the diamond.
its more accurate than just total numbers as it kinda takes the worlds size out of the equation. The higher the average number per each chunk on the world means the higher amount to farm in the same area, on average.
But with that being said, the averages also get skewed by chunks with none… so in the end, its best to throw a resource in to a completed altas and take a look. For resources, you may have a high average number per chunk but it may be thinly spread out over the entire planet… which means there is “alot” there, but it may take longer to gather it
You can have a world with say, diamonds… that has a low number per chunk, but then when you get on the planet almost all of it is in one giant hotspot which would make it amazing for mining compared to a planet with more total diamonds spread out over the entire world.
correct … total amount of resources divided by number of chunks from what I understand. Still more accurate than the % of total resources though, especially when comparing to other planets… but it is not a guarantee that the world is good or bad for harvesting the resource itself… unless you are just wanting the highest number possible without regards for how easy it is to get to it and gather it.
Just as an example. My T6 is like number 12 on the numbers per chunk list for sapphire so if just looking at pure numbers you may not think it rolled well. But taking a look at the atlas, it has 2 or 3 amazing hotspots that I will take any day over big numbers spread out across the whole planet evenly.