- Darkfyre99
- Registered Member
-
Member for 12 years, 7 months, and 9 days
Last active Sat, Oct, 3 2015 10:24:19
- 0 Followers
- 517 Total Posts
- 136 Thanks
-
Nov 1, 2012Darkfyre99 posted a message on DON'T PANIC -- Regarding "Warning - visiting this web site may harm your computer!"Good luck resolving this issue. A webcomic I follow had gotten onto the "malicious site" list thanks to similar ad. She was never able to get off the list, and ended up having to register a new domain and changing hosts. Here's hoping you're big enough to not be ignored by the "powers that be."Posted in: News
-
Jul 23, 2012Darkfyre99 posted a message on Lawsuit Filed Against Mojang - This Time, For Obscure Patent*finishes marathon reading session*Posted in: News
From what I've read, I get the feeling that what's really happening is that the makers of the Android smartphones licenced authentication software for their product from Uniloc (which is what this company does when not making predatory lawsuits) which makes up part of the Android's OS, which individual apps are able to use. I find it significant that in the lawsuit, Uniloc specifies Android apps, as opposed to those other smartphones like the iPhone, which also runs a version of the Minecraft Pocket Edition app. I suspect that Uniloc is suing those companies that either don't require authentication to use the app, or may have included their own authentication software, and thus don't feel the need to pay Uniloc royalties for something they don't use in the first place, on the assumption that Uniloc's authentication software is being used without permission.
Never mind. The Android OS is open source, so Uniloc is nothing but a lawsuit happy patent troll. Crush them, Mojang! Crush them so hard that their great grandchildren will be afraid to crawl out from under whatever rock spawned them. -
Nov 4, 2011Darkfyre99 posted a message on A New Way of Learning With MinecraftThis is going to be interesting.Posted in: News
I can easily see using redstone to teach logic gates, and I've had someone point out to me the parallels between human development and a player's development in the game.
For those of you don't see the parallels, think of what you do in the game: first you start out with wooden tools and hunting for your food (prehistoric hunter gatherers). Then you graduate to stone tools and begin plainting farms taming animals (Stone Age/Agricultural revolution). Then you progress to iron tools (Classical/Iron Age). Finally you start developing into redstone technology to automate some things for you. (Rennaisance/Industrial Age) - To post a comment, please login.
0
2
Nope, a lot of people disagree with your opinion, because quite frankly we find the new enchantment system worlds better than the old one, fairly easy to use to get the enchantments you want, and a lot cheaper XP wise. It really doesn't need to get any easier than it already is. Getting the enchantments you want should take at least some effort and strategy.
Seriously, a well designed enchanting room and a little patience can give you your choice of about 15-20 enchantments. The key is to check multiple items at multiple levels. For example, a Diamond Pickaxe might give you your choice of Fortune II at level 16, Efficiency III at level 20, Silk Touch at level 24, or Unbreaking III at 30.
So when enchanting, and wanting that coveted Silk Touch diamond pickaxe, I'd also be checking a diamond sword, a book, a bow, and maybe an armor piece or two. I might not get the Silk Touch, but the bow will get infinity at level 26, so I'll enchant that instead. Check again, and I can get Fortune III as early as level 28, so no need to go all the way to 30 this round. No Silk Touch again, but the sword can get fire aspect II at level 30, or I can get Feather Fall III at level 26 on my boots. Oooh, look! I can get Unbreaking II on the book for one level this time around!
So far, in the games I've started in the 1.8 snapshots, I've gotten Silk Touch on my pickaxe long before I've come even close to fully kitting myself out, and I think I've gotten a grand total of two enchantments (on books IIRC) that I've considered a complete waste.
Yes, higher levels cost more XP, but lower levels (where you'll be doing the bulk of your repairing) cost less XP, and at worst an enchantment only costs you 3 levels. I think it's a good trade off: much easier and cheaper custom enchanting, in exchange for not being able to repair an item forever.
1
The fun part of this new progression is that the first ten levels are actually cheaper than the old one. After level 11, the cost starts going up, but then you don't have to spend all your levels for a single level 30 enchant.
edit: crap.... need to format it. *starts editing again*
edit2: that's better
edit3: gol dang it!
edit4: better than nothing
0
The new level progression is this:
XP for level 1 = 7,
XP for level 2-16 = XP for previous Level + 2
XP for levels 17+31 = XP for previous level + 5
XP for levels 32+ = XP for previous level + 9
I haven't tested it past level 50, primarily because I doubt I'd ever have that many levels at any time.
0
What people do in their single player games is their own business. Use exploits, use the /give command, switch to creative for all I care. Your single player game doesn't affect me in the slightest.
But once you start playing with other people, then it stops being your game. And what you do, directly or indirectly, affects other people. When a small group of players starts using exploits to get ahead, it tends to ruins the fun for everyone else... namely the majority who are playing by the rules of the game. They find themselves unable to compete in PvP, unable to compete economically, and sometimes unable to play at all, because they even get dominated in PvE.
Which is why game developers are constantly fixing exploits and tweaking game balance.
And I don't go to those kind of parties, either.
I also don't go to parties where everyone is so competitive that they bring loaded dice and marked cards so they can "win." Because what makes games fun is not the winning, but the spirit of competition between players. When one player decides to win at all costs, it comes at the cost of everyone else in the game.
It is not unreasonable to join a golf league, and expect those playing it not to kick the golf ball from under a tree so they don't have to take a penalty stroke. It is not being unreasonable to participate in a marathon, and expect those running not to inject themselves with their own red blood cells to boost their endurance. And it is not being unreasonable to expect players in an online game not to take advantage of exploits to get ahead of everyone else, nor is it being unreasonable to expect game developers to fix those exploits when they come to their attention.
I know you feel otherwise, but.if there's a rule that says, "You're not allowed to trip the runner ahead of you," then it exists because someone actually did that, and then piously claimed, "But it's not against the rules. Stop ruining my fun!"
4
No. Its that enderman farm that's overpowered, not the new enchanting system. The old enchanting system was overpowered if you had an enderman farm. Any enchantment system is overpowered, if you have a source of large amounts of easy XP.
The new enchanting system removes the most frustrating aspects of the old system: the extreme randomness, and the high penalties of having bad luck. The old enchanting system worked best for basic enchantments, but if you wanted the special enchantments like silk touch, fortune, looting, among others, then it was an exercise in extreme frustration combined with a lot of grinding for diamonds and XP... especially if you don't use XP farms.
0
Why? Does bringing loaded dice or marked cards make parties more fun?
Does rules lawyering and min-maxing make people popular in RPG groups?
Do you really have to cheat to have fun?
Please explain this to me.
1
Good point, one I've never considered before. I'm probably showing my age when I say I've never understood the popularity of modding myself. It seems too much like cheating, IMO, in more ways in one.
Probably why I soured on fanfiction as well.
I'm pretty sure you were being sarcastic, but I've never raided villages for food. First because it was stealing, even if they are mere NPCs, second because it made the game far too easy. Survival Minecraft is easy enough as it is. No need to make things easier by taking advantage of exploits.
0
But I have a lunch hour to kill at work, so I'll reply anyway.
The primary source of the issue is that there are six separate games, using the same engine: creative, survival, adventure, both single-player and multi-player versions.
What works in creative doesn't work in survival; what works in single-player doesn't work in multiplayer; and what's needed for adventure definitely doesn't work for survival.
The secondary source of the issue are some poor decisions by Mojang when they added villages and villagers to the game. The biggest was an overly simplistic house detection: a house could be defined with a door and a single block, whereas a proper house has not only a door, but walls, a floor, and a roof. It is the recognition of non-house like houses that permitted ultra-dense "villages" to exist. Confining village detection to a narrow band of Y-coordinates and a small spawning area for golems didn't help any.
The tertiary source of the issue is that different people emphasize different aspects of the game. For me, the whole "monsters come out of the dark to kill you" is far more important than "building wonderous things." Yes I build wonderous things, but I do so while giving monsters a fighting chance to kill me, and once I'm done with the wonderous thing, I start a new game. No mods, no cheats enabled, and no exploiting bad AI and poor game design. Pure vanilla survival minecraft, usually with natural regeneration turned off and maybe in hardcore mode to give the monsters an edge.
If this was only a single-player game, this wouldn't be an issue. But this has a multi-player mode, and once two people share the same world, it no longer becomes MY game and YOUR game. It becomes OUR game and what one player does will affect the other.
Yes, I very much understand why some people like utilizing exploits to get ahead in survival. It takes time to gather resources, and the old enchantment system was excessively random, and needlessly punitive of bad luck. But there is a game mode that gives unlimited resources: creative. And a great deal of the punitive nature of of the old enchanting system was due to players simply not using the system to its fullest.
That's all I have time for unfortunately.
2
Yes, I was. And I was also here when Jeb said he considered mob farms item dupes.
And while I appreciate Notch as the creator, its fairly obvious that he didn't always fully think out the ideas he had. Jeb has been fixing a lot of Notch's mistakes, and turning Minecraft into a much better game. Of course, Jeb has made his fair share of mistakes, primarily because ideas that will work great in single player don't work in multi-player, as many, many online game developers have discovered, to their dismay and frustration.
Case in point: village detection.
0
0
I'm even more excited about comparators reading the orientation of item frames. They make great dials.
1
My major complaint with iron farms and infinite breeders is that they obviously exploit flaws in the village system. Especially that iron trench monstrosity that, while I respect the amount of effort to figure out how to exploit those flaws to that degree, required hack... er, making a mod to do so. Seeing one of those things on a survival server just screams, "look at me! I'm exploiting Mojang's mistakes!"
If, for example, house detection required something that looked like a house, what you get isn't something that is screaming its unnaturalness at the top of its lungs. Instead, what you get is a village with a dark secret. And imagine what would happen if you accidentally fell into one of the traps in that village.
2
You're right. I am oversimplying things.
There's also the fact that iron golem spawning is so predictable that it's easy to capture them and move them out of the range of the "village." Having them spawn anywhere within the village would've increased the investment cost to an iron farm.
And the fact that a house can be defined by a door and a single block. House detection being more robust, so that it needed a door, four walls, a floor plan of at least 3x3, and a roof would've increased the investment cost to an iron farm.
And the fact that villages can be layered one on top of the other. Having village boundries range from y=0 to y=255, rather than on a narrow plane, would've increased the investment cost to an iron farm.
And last but not least, the fact that iron golems drop iron in the first place. If Mojang hadn't done that, there'd be no iron farm controversy in the first place.
0
And so an item duplication exploit will remain in the game, because too many people liked it...
One more reason not to play multi-player, I guess.