[Agema]

Firstly, many thanks for the analysis, it's very interesting.

It could be developed further. The sums for each number offer the percentage usefulness of searching a particular terrain type with a certain magic type; this could be further adapted with the basic terrain modifier. Admittedly, this could be putting into numbers what an experienced player may already roughly know by experience to an extent, but still worth knowing.

However, is it accurate to say you get far more gems from forests? I'm guessing the totals you have added up in the main body represent *sites*, not available gems, as the magic path subtotals don't add up to the gem totals at the end. On this assumption, caves have fewer possible different site types, but not necessarily fewer sites or gems. Continuing my subtotals = sites assumption, If you divide gems by the sites, all terrain types are between 1.85 and 1.90, which would mean your income per site is effectively the same in any terrain: the big modifier will be the likelihood of a site being in a province.

Finally, it might be nice to see the number of gems of each type per site path. For instance, 20 nature sites in forests might provide 18N, 2F, 6A, etc. That's a lot of database searching and number crunching so I certainly don't mean to put any onus on anyone. But it could be a useful step to optimising where you search for certain types of gems, assuming limited means.