Yes indeed. If you add an air "slab" to the types, the permutations increase to 12^2 = 144. Eliminating the silly air-air combo (which is just air!) leaves 143. Thing is, air mixed with a slab in both positions is already in the works, like the 11 same-slab combos. So I didn't even consider it in the math for new block types. Technically, though, you are correct.
Technically he is not correct, though. There is no "air slab", not in any real sense. Do stairs then have a one-quarter air "half-slab", (vernacular mis-labling aside) a block type that doesn't exist in the game?
It has to do with the collision mask of the block: the part of the block that interacts with the player and mobs.
Like you said, it doesnt factor into the combination permutations, but its incorrect to think that there are actually "air slabs".
Sorry, I'm not trying to degrade anyone here, but I think inaccurate data muddles-up the conversation and leads to inaccurate conclusions, such as having 144 permutations when the actual number is 121. Again, sorry.
Technically he is not correct, though. There is no "air slab", not in any real sense. Do stairs then have a one-quarter air "half-slab", (vernacular mis-labling aside) a block type that doesn't exist in the game?
It has to do with the collision mask of the block: the part of the block that interacts with the player and mobs.
Like you said, it doesnt factor into the combination permutations, but its incorrect to think that there are actually "air slabs".
Sorry, I'm not trying to degrade anyone here, but I think inaccurate data muddles-up the conversation and leads to inaccurate conclusions, such as having 144 permutations when the actual number is 121. Again, sorry.
So, here's where it gets tricky. IF a slab and air can be handled with 1 block ID and just an orientation placing the slab in either half of the nothing that is air and stairs much the same; why can't combos of two slabs have only 1 block ID and just an orientation placing them either rightside up or upside down? This would cut the needed block IDs down essentially by half, wouldn't it?
So, here's where it gets tricky. IF a slab and air can be handled with 1 block ID and just an orientation placing the slab in either half of the nothing that is air and stairs much the same; why can't combos of two slabs have only 1 block ID and just an orientation placing them either rightside up or upside down? This would cut the needed block IDs down essentially by half, wouldn't it?
Yes, it would.
But its contingent on how many Block IDs are used just for the slabs.
Here's the situation:
- A slab of any type is its own Block ID. That means there are 11 IDs attributed to slabs (jungle slabs included).
- If upside down slabs have their own ID, that adds 11 more, for a total of 22 IDs just for the slabs themself.
- A double-slab, (slab on top of slab) is a seperate Block ID. This means that there are 11 block IDs attributed to double slabs, which are completely different from the the Block IDs for regular full blocks. Now keep in mind that it doesn't matter if bottom-half slabs and top-half slabs have seperate IDs in this case, since it would be impossible to place a bottom slab onto another bottom slab and a top slab onto another top slab.
- Mixed double slabs would likewise each need their own Block ID. Here is where your question comes into effect.
If bottom slabs and top slabs have their own Ids, then the 121 possible combinations will each require a seperate Block ID of their own.
But if slabs have only one ID and the game "flips" a slab based on orientation, then we can assume the game can "flip" combo IDs as well.
i.e. A Birch/Cobble double slab has only one ID and the game "flips" the block depending on which was placed first. This reduces the required Block Ids from 121 to 66.
But that still doesn't make the coding any less difficult.
Wait.
I just counted the slabs and I only counted ten. Correct me if I missed anything here.
1. Oak 2. Birch 3. Spruce 4. Jungle 5. Stone 6. Cobblestone
7. Stone Brick 8. red Brick 9. Nether Brick 10. Sandstone
This means there is 100 different combinations, not 121.
EDIT - The 11th slab is the old wooden slab (the one that was fireproof and broke faster with a pickaxe than a regular axe).
However, if you want to include Quartz slabs, the total goes back to 11.
Okay, instead of fumbling through the dark like a cat without whiskers, I decided to educate myself on what the hell is going on with slabs. Here's what I discovered:
Stone, brick, cobble, stone brick, nether brick, sandstone, quartz, and the old wooden slabs all share the same Block ID, but have different meta-date values based on damage.
The four wooden slabs have a seperate Block ID, again distinguished by meta-data values based on damage.
Moving along - all upside down slabs have a different meta-data value within the same Block ID
(so its kinda what I was saying above except its the "meta-data" thats different, not the entire Block data value - big difference though.)
Double slabs are treated the same way, with all "stone" double slabs having the same ID with different meta-data, and all Wooden double slabs having a seperate Id, etc.
Anyway, I don't know enough about coding to know if this would make it more difficult or not. It stills mean coding for 121 new blocks. (Edit - sorry, 110 new blocks. 11 double slabs already exist).
Technically he is not correct, though. There is no "air slab", not in any real sense. Do stairs then have a one-quarter air "half-slab", (vernacular mis-labling aside) a block type that doesn't exist in the game?
It has to do with the collision mask of the block: the part of the block that interacts with the player and mobs.
Like you said, it doesnt factor into the combination permutations, but its incorrect to think that there are actually "air slabs".
Sorry, I'm not trying to degrade anyone here, but I think inaccurate data muddles-up the conversation and leads to inaccurate conclusions, such as having 144 permutations when the actual number is 121. Again, sorry.
So, here's where it gets tricky. IF a slab and air can be handled with 1 block ID and just an orientation placing the slab in either half of the nothing that is air and stairs much the same; why can't combos of two slabs have only 1 block ID and just an orientation placing them either rightside up or upside down? This would cut the needed block IDs down essentially by half, wouldn't it?
Yes, it would.
But its contingent on how many Block IDs are used just for the slabs.
Here's the situation:
- A slab of any type is its own Block ID. That means there are 11 IDs attributed to slabs (jungle slabs included).
- If upside down slabs have their own ID, that adds 11 more, for a total of 22 IDs just for the slabs themself.
- A double-slab, (slab on top of slab) is a seperate Block ID. This means that there are 11 block IDs attributed to double slabs, which are completely different from the the Block IDs for regular full blocks. Now keep in mind that it doesn't matter if bottom-half slabs and top-half slabs have seperate IDs in this case, since it would be impossible to place a bottom slab onto another bottom slab and a top slab onto another top slab.
- Mixed double slabs would likewise each need their own Block ID. Here is where your question comes into effect.
If bottom slabs and top slabs have their own Ids, then the 121 possible combinations will each require a seperate Block ID of their own.
But if slabs have only one ID and the game "flips" a slab based on orientation, then we can assume the game can "flip" combo IDs as well.
i.e. A Birch/Cobble double slab has only one ID and the game "flips" the block depending on which was placed first. This reduces the required Block Ids from 121 to 66.
But that still doesn't make the coding any less difficult.
I just counted the slabs and I only counted ten. Correct me if I missed anything here.
1. Oak 2. Birch 3. Spruce 4. Jungle 5. Stone 6. Cobblestone
7. Stone Brick 8. red Brick 9. Nether Brick 10. Sandstone
This means there is 100 different combinations, not 121.
EDIT - The 11th slab is the old wooden slab (the one that was fireproof and broke faster with a pickaxe than a regular axe).
However, if you want to include Quartz slabs, the total goes back to 11.
Yeah I know. Maybe when MCXBLA branches off in its own direction they can include it.
Stone, brick, cobble, stone brick, nether brick, sandstone, quartz, and the old wooden slabs all share the same Block ID, but have different meta-date values based on damage.
The four wooden slabs have a seperate Block ID, again distinguished by meta-data values based on damage.
Moving along - all upside down slabs have a different meta-data value within the same Block ID
(so its kinda what I was saying above except its the "meta-data" thats different, not the entire Block data value - big difference though.)
Double slabs are treated the same way, with all "stone" double slabs having the same ID with different meta-data, and all Wooden double slabs having a seperate Id, etc.
Anyway, I don't know enough about coding to know if this would make it more difficult or not. It stills mean coding for 121 new blocks. (Edit - sorry, 110 new blocks. 11 double slabs already exist).