Honestly, it's not a terrible idea, but it's the type of idea that will never be implemented, because it isn't worth the effort of doing it. If you want to have food mean something, play on easy. The monsters don't do anything on easy anyway
http://www.minecraft...Both of these things are explicitly stated as things "not to do" in a sticky. Should probably read it before you get reported more.
This is nothing but spam and does nothing but dampen the creative spirit of this forum.
You already have access to essentially infinite chests, since trees are infinitely renewable, all this suggestion does is abstract out the tediousness of having 500 chests.
I meant the first, but the second is a viable option. Would it really cause that much lag? There is a lot of speculation on the matter, but no actual data. They could optionally develop a different manner of the object persisting in this way that would NOT cause lag (they were all blocks originally and that did not cause lag, exact same concept but on a smaller scale... literally)
Ok, so I know I'm DEFINITELY not the only one who gets tired of having 3+ large chests of dirt. Excessive amounts of chests for one block type are tedious to maintain and obnoxious to use. That is why I came up with this idea. It's a simple idea, and while vast quantities of dirt did spur the idea, the usage of this is definitely open to some assuredly ingenius contraptions.
Ok, so the creation of the block would be something like this:
With = a chest and = planks.
What does it look like? What the the dimensions?
I see this block as being the same dimensions of a small chest, and connection two would do the same thing as a large chest. It would look like a chest without a lid, probably with a different texture. Nothing insanely fancy.
Ok, neat. But what does it DO?
The concept of the item is as simple as the rest of it.
It would be a place where blocks on the ground do no vanish after 5 minutes, they would stay indefinitely.
When you look at it the "drop" functionality would be overwritten to "pick up" and that would be the only way to grab things from it. This would prevent the issue of straying to close and accidentally flooding your inventory with your spam blocks.
To "add" things to it, you would do the same thing you normally would do. Drag and drop them out of your inv, or spam q while looking straight ahead.
Edit: This is even better now that blocks will auto-stack when dropped in 1.3
Do you really transport single chicken across biomes, or so crazy conditions wheat does not suffice?
It's better than crossing biomes and spending multiple minecraft days hunting for enough eggs that the trip will be worth the 30 minute time expenditure. So... yes?
It's definitely the biggest thing that would make it difficult to implement. I'm pretty sure that dynamically checking stuff like that takes quite a bit of number crunching, and with multiplayer games, less is more.
I'm not sure if it is possible to differentiate between the two bodies of water in a scenario like this.
I think it would be easy. Just limit the increase to be between 1-2 blocks in the ocean biome, and larger elsewhere. If they wanted to get more technical, there are surely some fast algorithms to recursively check the adjacency of blocks. Doing that with a counter is a quick and dirty way of judging the approximate surface area of a body of water. I'm sure Mojang has a more elegant solution than that, however.
I will say that I do like the idea of the water rising up, but how will it be able to come down to normal level?
The same way it does IRL (not 100% true, don't knock me on technicality and get into the details of rivers, streams, runoffs, watersheds, etc). Generally, in a localized environment rainstorms do increase the waterlevels, but they fall off because they are not sustainable in that environment (runoff, evaporation, etc). That's why I suggested the ~1 minecraft day to emulate the local environment doing it' thing to return itself to a state of balance.
0
0
2
0
Agreed. It shouldn't have any different effect than other water (knock out torches, redstone, etc) but no block destruction
0
http://www.minecraft...Both of these things are explicitly stated as things "not to do" in a sticky. Should probably read it before you get reported more.
This is nothing but spam and does nothing but dampen the creative spirit of this forum.
0
Signed.
0
0
Nothing personal, I think all "new dimension" ideas are dumb.
0
2
Ok, so the creation of the block would be something like this:
With = a chest and = planks.
What does it look like? What the the dimensions?
I see this block as being the same dimensions of a small chest, and connection two would do the same thing as a large chest. It would look like a chest without a lid, probably with a different texture. Nothing insanely fancy.
Ok, neat. But what does it DO?
The concept of the item is as simple as the rest of it.
0
It's better than crossing biomes and spending multiple minecraft days hunting for enough eggs that the trip will be worth the 30 minute time expenditure. So... yes?
0
0
Slimes
0
I think it would be easy. Just limit the increase to be between 1-2 blocks in the ocean biome, and larger elsewhere. If they wanted to get more technical, there are surely some fast algorithms to recursively check the adjacency of blocks. Doing that with a counter is a quick and dirty way of judging the approximate surface area of a body of water. I'm sure Mojang has a more elegant solution than that, however.
0
The same way it does IRL (not 100% true, don't knock me on technicality and get into the details of rivers, streams, runoffs, watersheds, etc). Generally, in a localized environment rainstorms do increase the waterlevels, but they fall off because they are not sustainable in that environment (runoff, evaporation, etc). That's why I suggested the ~1 minecraft day to emulate the local environment doing it' thing to return itself to a state of balance.