All users will need to merge their Minecraft Forum account with a new or existing Twitch account starting October 23rd. You can merge your accounts by clicking here. Have questions? Learn more here.
  • 1

    posted a message on New 1.11 Cartographer Question?

    Farmers, fletchers and shepherds all have the same cloak (brown with no apron), so I imagine cartographers will share librarian traits and also have a white tunic. But I don't think they're just going to drop into the towns of your Realms world that you've already explored, they'll only appear in new villages in unexplored areas (or they may appear when you breed villagers). Same for the Woodland Mansions, they'll most likely appear in wooded areas that you haven't yet explored.

    I guess the 20-dollar question is this: Will cartographer maps point to areas in pre-1.11 worlds where a Woodland Mansion would have spawned if that area hadn't already been explored? It would be a rip-off to get a treasure map that points to your old cow barn, lol.

    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • 1

    posted a message on Looting and Fire Aspect, a Bad Thing?

    I think some of the people who don't like a sword with both looting and fire aspect are those who like to harvest meat to sell to a butcher villager... They don't buy cooked meat. But if you're harvesting meat to keep for yourself, then looting and fire aspect are great.

    And, it took me almost ten minutes to write this reply because of the stupid ads and banners that this site chooses to display... I ended up having to write my reply in Notepad and then copy/paste it to the forum. Freakin' annoying.

    Posted in: Survival Mode
  • 1

    posted a message on Is it okay too block vilagers into their houses?

    This may be a little cheaty, but if you have cheats enabled then you can stand in the middle of your village and execute this command:

    /entitydata @e[type=Villager] {Invulnerable:1b}

    I use this command in my version 1.9 world whenever I find a village, because I don't like to babysit the villagers. It makes all the villagers in a village invincible, and zombies won't be able to kill them anymore (and it's funny watching zombies chase invincible villagers around the village). You don't need to be in 'creative' mode to execute this command, just type it in and it'll work. Be careful though, because if you're in 'creative' mode then you can kill invincible villagers. Also, if you're breeding villagers, new baby villagers created after the /entitydata command is executed will Not be invincible. You'll need to execute that command again every time a baby villager is born to make sure the new villagers are also invincible.

    Posted in: Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on ELSE and NOT (command blocks)

    Pretty much what the title suggests, a NOT and ELSE option for Command Blocks. Here's how they work...

    This is a new command block condition. Right now you have 'conditional' and 'unconditional', and the new third condition will be a 'NOT'. The NOT condition is 'conditional' for chained command blocks, in that it will not execute if the command in the previous command block is true. Let's say I have a /testfor to see if a player is holding an item, but I want to execute the next chained command block if the statement is False. Maybe I'm testing to see if a player has a Special Sword, and if he does Not have one then give him one. If there's a 'not' condition, then simply perform the /testfor in one command block to see if the player has the 'Special Sword' item. In the next chained command block, set it to the 'NOT' condition and put in the /give command. That's it, two command blocks and no redstone will give a player a Special Sword if he or she doesn't already have one.

    Command -> Execute if Not True -> Next command -> Next command...

    This isn't really a command that is entered into the command block, it's a command block path that's followed when the command is not true. Let's say I have a /testfor to see if the player is holding an item. If the player's holding the item, continue execution to the next 'conditional' command block like expected. But if the player is Not holding the item, execution is passed to a 'conditional' command block that's on either side of the command block.

    Command -> Execute if True -> Next command -> Next command...
    Execute if False
    Next command
    Next command...

    That's about it... To summarize, use the NOT condition in a chained command block to execute a command if the previous condition is False, and any chained unconditional blocks following your NOT command will execute like expected. Use the ELSE option to branch execution when a condition isn't true, and you can wrap around a command block chain from the ELSE path back to the main command block chain by simply setting your 'else' path blocks in a loop and then point the last 'else' path block to an unconditional chain block in the main command block path.

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 1

    posted a message on Delay option for command blocks

    Probably a few more suggestions... If CommandDelay (the command, not the NBT tag) is set for a 'chain' command block, have it only affect the next chained command block if it's set to 'conditional'. Everything else along the chain should be unaffected by the chained command block with the delay in it. That would keep this command more in line with how command blocks currently work.

    But, like your original idea states, if CommandDelay (the command, not the NBT tag) is set on a 'repeater' command block, then it triggers the entire chain in time with what's set in the repeater's CommandDelay.

    If any command block's 'NBT tag' has a CommandDelay in it, then that command block won't execute its own command until the CommandDelay NBT tag is met. It's different from the CommandDelay 'command' in that the NBT tag's condition won't affect blocks chained to it, only the command that's typed into the command block will do that. This is so the command that's in the command block with the CommandDelay NBT tag properly triggers the following conditional chained block properly... Hopefully that makes sense.

    Maybe use 'CommandDelay' for the NBT tag, and 'TriggerDelay' for the command block command? It might be a little less confusing.

    Anyway, I like the idea of a 'delay' in Command Blocks. Support!

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 1

    posted a message on OptiFine HD C6 (FPS Boost, Dynamic Lights, Shaders and much more)

    Alright, I played OptiFine 1.9.0 HD U A1 for about 30 minutes (gotta go to work) on vanilla 1.9 with no shaders on smp...

    - FPS boost (awesome)
    - All mob models sometimes flicker (disappear and reappear)
    - Sometimes a mob will spawn invisible.

    All I can say is 'So far, so good!' I'll test more later after work, my system is a Win10 laptop with nVidia 540m and 6 gigs of RAM, and Minecraft is running on Java x64 1.8.0_25. To all the doubters: Getting something to appear on the screen is the easy part. Debugging and optimizing code is the hard and tedious part. sp614x will release a finished build when everything works, so please be patient because it'll be worth the wait. To sp614x, keep up the good work, you rock!

    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 2

    posted a message on 'Invert' switch for Command Blocks

    When you right-click a command block, you can set its properties by clicking buttons: Repeat/Impulse/Chain, Unconditional/Conditional, Needs Redstone/Always Active. I think it would be cool to have an extra button: Invert Output/Normal Output.

    What the 'Invert Output' does is makes the command block's SuccessCount equal 1 if the condition within the command block is False. For example, let's say you set 'Invert Output' on a command block containing this command:

    testfor @p {Inventory:[{id:minecraft:bow}]}

    The command block will trigger the adjacent chain command block if the player has NO bow.

    How is this useful? Let's say you're making a minigame that requires the player to have a bow. Since bows don't stack, you wouldn't want to just give the player another bow if he already has one or he'd end up with an inventory full of bows. You can use the command 'testfor @p {Inventory:[{id:minecraft:bow}]}' to see if he has a bow, which is True if the player has a bow. But then you'd have to do some fancy redstoning to invert the output to check and see if the player Doesn't have a bow, and then give him one if he needs it... If you had an 'Invert Output' option on that command block, you wouldn't need the fancy redstone inversion circuit because the output of the command block would now be True if the player didn't have a bow.

    I know, I know... You can probably just /clear the player's inventory of all bows and then give him one single bow... But there are other times where you might want to see if a player Doesn't have an item, and this would make that task much easier.

    What do you think?

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 6

    posted a message on Squids defend themselves with their Ink

    I've seen this suggested in other threads but my idea is a little different. It's a simplified 'squid ink' idea using features already coded in the Minecraft game! The simplified idea means it uses less code to implement, and fewer code changes means fewer bugs.


    You're swimming underwater and come across a squid, and you want to whack it with your sword. Or a stick. Or maybe a pork chop. So you whack it, and you hear a wet 'swishing' sound followed by blindness! The blindness lasts for five seconds, then all is once again normal. After blindness wears off, you continue to beat the squid until it finally dies.

    How it works:

    • To get inked, you have to be fully submerged in water (far enough underwater where the 'air meter' appears). You won't get inked if you're wading in waist-deep water, and you won't get inked if you're swimming on the surface with your head out of the water.
    • You'll only get inked if you harm the squid. You won't get inked if you can kill it in one blow.
    • Squids only ink you 25 percent of the time. You have a relatively decent chance to whack a squid and not get inked.
    • If you get inked, it lasts about five seconds no matter what. For example, if you are inked and then swim to the surface, you'll still have to wait for the 'ink' effect to wear off before you can see again.


    Squid got damaged

    -> Is the damage caused by a player and that player's completely underwater?

    - Yes, go to Ink Routine.

    - No, go to Damage Routine.

    Ink Routine

    -> Is the damage caused by the player greater than the Squid's current health?

    - Yes, go to Squid Death

    - No, is (rnd*100) < 25?

    --Yes, play an 'ink squirt' sound at Squid's coordinates and cast Blindness on attacker for 5 seconds.

    --No, continue

    Damage Routine

    health = health - damage...

    -> Is 'health' <= 0?

    - Yes, go to Squid Death

    - No, exit 'Squid Got Damaged' routine

    Squid Death

    -> Is death caused by a player?

    - Yes, drop some ink sacs based on 'Looting' value of weapon and also drop some experience orbs

    - No, drop some ink sacs and continue

    Do the death animation for the squid entity

    That's about it, pretty much the only thing added to the Minecraft code is the simple test to see if a player gets inked, then play a sound and cast 'Blindness' for five seconds. I think it would be pretty fun if squids could 'ink' an attacking player, it would definitely make attacking a squid more interesting. Maybe for more of a challenge, if a squid inks a player then it's less likely that it would drop an ink sac. Or maybe, the 'Ink Routine' in my flowchart could test for other underwater players close to the attacked squid, and the ink effect could affect them too... Lots of possibilities! What do you think?

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 1

    posted a message on Noobiest thing you've ever done in Minecraft?

    Built a nice house after I bought Minecraft in winter of 2010 (Minecraft beta), it was a 2-story house that was fairly detailed and I was pretty proud of it. I decided to add a fireplace, and the second story caught fire while I was in the first story. When I saw a couple of blocks burn away, I looked up and the entire upstairs was on fire. I tried to put it out, but that was back when fire spreading was very fast and I couldn't get it put out in time... The entire house burned down except for the stone details and fireplace, and the large forest where I built the house completely burned away.

    I almost wished 'fire spreading' was like it used to be... Burning down entire forests with one click of the flint and steel was fun!

    Posted in: Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Can Someone please give me some advice?

    Little kid's game, lol... 'Childish' is so subjective.

    I'm 44 and have played Minecraft for longer than my join date to this forum. It's fun to play a game with goals I can either tackle or ignore, and when I 'defeat' the game I can continue to play the game beyond the 'ending'. Also, it's a game that I can play without really thinking about it, which makes it therapeutic when I've had a hard day at work or if I need a break from brainstorming a problem or issue. Sometimes it even helps me to come up with a solution to problems, because I'd zone out while playing Minecraft and then think of my problem in a different way than if I sat in a chair and studied the schematic, code, or circuit board for the 200th time. Whether someone considers this game to be childish, I still like playing this game.

    My son is 8, and he still sleeps with his favorite blanket and plush animals. Some people might think it's 'childish' and time for him to move away from the blanket and teddy bears, but I think it fosters creativity and helps him to deal with social situations in his own way. It's fun to listen in on the adventures he and his plush Minecraft pig have together! It also gives me a chance to help him if he's dealing with a tough time, because he'll tell his plush buddies things he won't tell me. For example, he sometimes reenacts 'bully' situations, or times when he or other kids get in trouble in school, then I can intervene and help him to find a positive resolution through those situations (If Enderman is bullying Piggy, then maybe Piggy can ignore Enderman? If that doesn't work then maybe Piggy can tell his teacher or his parents about it. But Piggy should not bully Enderman in return, because that might make Enderman bully Piggy even more or can get Piggy in trouble with his teacher. Put down the baseball bat, Piggy!). I don't discourage his playtime with his stuffed critters because he has a great personality and is very creative, and I certainly don't tell him that it's childish to play with them, because then he will quit and I'd be cheating him out of an important part of his childhood. That's how I quantify my standing on the term 'childish' as being subjective.

    My son gets excellent grades in school, and I let him play Minecraft when his daily duties and school work is done. He is a kid though, and I sometimes have to moderate his Minecraft playtime so he learns how to keep his priorities straight. For example, if Minecraft or his other electronic devices get in the way of his school work or chores, then I will 'unplug' him until he gets caught up with his work. I tell him why he's getting pulled away from the PC, and most of the time understands and is OK with it. I won't tell him that he is being childish for playing Minecraft, but I will tell him he's being childish if he has a fit and cries about not being able to play it.

    It's hard to understand why your dad chose to tell you that 'Minecraft is a childish game'. Maybe that is indeed how he feels. Maybe he's trying to discourage you from playing it because he feels you spend too much time in front of the computer/tablet/game system. Or maybe he is frustrated and is trying to get you to do something else he thinks you should be doing that is more important than Minecraft, and he's not sure how to tell you about it. Whatever the reason, what's important for you to know is that your dad has your best interests in mind. He wants you to grow up to be a well-rounded individual, someone who knows how to set priorities and goals and then follow through with them, before you grow up and leave home and take on life by yourself. He wants you to succeed. With that in mind, you should have a talk with your dad and get on the same playing field. Maybe he'll tell you why he thinks Minecraft is childish, or maybe he'll apologize and tell you why he was discouraging you from playing the game ('It's not good for you to play the game ALL day', or 'I want you to get your homework done first', or 'Bring up your grades and you can have more time to play Minecraft', or 'First go outside and play with your friends'). Then you can tell your dad why Minecraft is important to you ('I like to play online with my friends at school, and it gives us something fun to talk about when I'm there', or 'It helps me to unwind', or 'It keeps me disinterested in games that contain objectionable material', or 'I just think it's fun'). He might make a schedule or set a time limit for you to play Minecraft, and things will be OK if you respect him for it. You might earn more time to play Minecraft if you do well in your other duties. When you two get on the same page, you'll most likely have a day with plenty of Minecraft time as well as time to get your schoolwork and chores completed, and you'll also have a happy father.

    I do tend to ramble, sorry... But that's just me, speaking as a dad and a Minecraft player. I hope all goes well for you, and that you and your father can come up with a resolution that works for both of you.

    Posted in: Discussion
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.