I got an issue: while using NEI I do not see the first page (respectively the page where the locked chest should be). Here's the MultiMC log with the position when I tried to see the page with the locked chest.
That's just the part with the error because it occurred very often since I tried to get that page working.
But the only thing what perplexes me is that I sent my Minecraft instance to a friend of mine - but he is not complaining about that error...
That sounds like some of these errors might be caused by the texture for the locked chest going missing (I just double-checked my backup copy of Minecraft.jar, and I did not see any texture file for the locked chest).
I wonder if any of the mods having these issues are set up in such a way that they can handle missing textures (e.g., using a default texture for them)... it certainly doesn't look like it.
I don't know why, but the adf.ly links don't work for me at all, on this or any other mod. Any chance you could get it mirrored on another site besides adf.ly?
Edit: Nevermind, one of my add-ons was blocking the site.
Having recently done something similar, I recommend filling in what will be the open area with dirt, sand, or whatever else you can get that is readily available and fairly easy to break apart again, then just putting a layer of glass over it. Once you've got the glass done for a section, dig out the tunnel a bit (but be careful not to flood it), and repeat.
I think the best solution (in terms of appropriate spawning) would be to require a certain volume of water for them to spawn. They shouldn't be popping up in tiny puddles, one-block sources of waterfalls, and other such places; if you make it something like 50 connected water sources, then it would limit them to actual lakes and oceans, plus large bodies of water the player might make (like aquariums). As long as the limit is known, it would also be pretty easy to make pools that wouldn't get any water spawns.
T.T i havent gotten that far in science class so i have no idea what that means.
It's just a measure of pressure, based on the average air pressure at sea level. At sea level, the air pressure is right about 1 atmosphere, and about a mile and a half down in the ocean, the pressure is over 200 atmospheres (that is, 200 times the amount of pressure at sea level).
(Also, give them a look, You'll find I'm a much nicer guy when the TC isn't someone like Sol)
Sort of this. Everybody got off on the wrong foot in the otherthis thread, and it just turned into a flamefest all around. Hopefully thisthe other thread won't get so heated as the last one.
(Hadn't realized this was the original thread; I see someone bumped it.)
@ spartacuscat:
I would prefer it if food healed less, provided the healing over time (so you couldn't just down a half-dozen sides of pork in a heartbeat and be fully healed), and were able to be held in at least small stacks (perhaps 8 or 16, to continue with the current stack size trends).
If we can hold 64 cubic meters of material in a single inventory slot, I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to hold a couple of pieces of food in a slot as well, so long as it is done in such a way as to remove (or, at least, greatly reduce) the ability to abuse it.
Because your constant insults, demeaning and belittling attitude have nothing to do with the way I am behaving.
Indeed, they appear not to, as you were already belligerent and condescending well before I joined the conversation.
By the way, I don't recall having made many any insulting posts in regards to you until you had already insulted me, personally, several times. So I rather think that your comment should be reversed.
And it can be an option. So those who don't want it can turn it off.
"Common sense" is starting to become more and more of a misnomer.
If you had read the thread this was spawned off of, you would have seen Sol consistently arguing that it should not be a separate option, but just tied in with difficulty, and generally insulting anyone who said otherwise. That's part of why no-one bothered to mention it here.
To be quite frank, I don't think any honest discussion is going to happen until Sol and that massive chip on his shoulder GTFO; he just tries to turn the threads into a flamefest at every turn.
The thing with that is... i ACCIDENTALLY end up with a over abundance of food... animals are suicidal and I end up collecting so much food completely by accident. It is coming out of every orifice and I have no use for it. I still don't see the whole "oh it's so hard since you have to farm and collect food etc etc" argument, since food is so ridiculously easy to obtain.
And someone is somehow forcing you to collect all this food you find? If you think there is too much food, a rather easy solution would be to not go out of your way to collect the stuff.
this just plain doesn't seem like its worth it. it being the tool in general
Worth what, exactly? At first, you complained that it would be too much coding; now that I've pointed out that there may not even be much coding at all required, you've changed it to simply being "not worth 'it' ", without defining 'it'.
This just doesn't seam like it would be worth the extra coding, in my opion
What extra coding? It would appear that the tool stuff is already heavily present in the game, enough so that it is entirely possible that adding a tool like this would be quite easy. Obviously, I can't say for certain that it would be easy, as I haven't seen the game's code.
I love how so many people are opposed to CHALLENGE.
"Oh no it's HARDER?! NO WAY!!!"
~Sol
So, any response to my post about increasing the damage you take in higher difficulties, or Adam222's post about reducing the healing effect of foods, or are you just going to continue your streak of insulting everyone who doesn't agree with you while simultaneously avoiding all attempts at debate?
Why not if taking tools of varying remaining durability compare it...
For example, Say I have 20 picks with 20% left each, and stack them all in one stack, I get 4 picks with 100% health, and if I split the stack, use one down to 50%, and the other stack down to 75%, then recombine the stacks, the combined (2 tools each stack, one full one in each of the stacks, one @ 50% and one @ 75%, when combined, it becomes 3 @ 100% and 1 @ 25%.)
Since tools do not have any quality modifiers (a la Dwarf Fortress).
Is that "realistic"? No. Not at all. *but* it does fit the concept (being able to stack tools), without making stacking too annoying.
So, basically, just make the stack get a combined total of uses, instead of tracking just the "top" tool of the stack or tracking every tool individually? Not a bad idea.
I think I still prefer auto-swapping to stacking, though, especially if it also applies to blocks.
1
That sounds like some of these errors might be caused by the texture for the locked chest going missing (I just double-checked my backup copy of Minecraft.jar, and I did not see any texture file for the locked chest).
I wonder if any of the mods having these issues are set up in such a way that they can handle missing textures (e.g., using a default texture for them)... it certainly doesn't look like it.
0
Edit: Nevermind, one of my add-ons was blocking the site.
0
0
0
It's just a measure of pressure, based on the average air pressure at sea level. At sea level, the air pressure is right about 1 atmosphere, and about a mile and a half down in the ocean, the pressure is over 200 atmospheres (that is, 200 times the amount of pressure at sea level).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_pressure
0
Sort of this. Everybody got off on the wrong foot in
the otherthis thread, and it just turned into a flamefest all around. Hopefullythisthe other thread won't get so heated as the last one.(Hadn't realized this was the original thread; I see someone bumped it.)
@ spartacuscat:
I would prefer it if food healed less, provided the healing over time (so you couldn't just down a half-dozen sides of pork in a heartbeat and be fully healed), and were able to be held in at least small stacks (perhaps 8 or 16, to continue with the current stack size trends).
If we can hold 64 cubic meters of material in a single inventory slot, I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to hold a couple of pieces of food in a slot as well, so long as it is done in such a way as to remove (or, at least, greatly reduce) the ability to abuse it.
0
Indeed, they appear not to, as you were already belligerent and condescending well before I joined the conversation.
By the way, I don't recall having made many any insulting posts in regards to you until you had already insulted me, personally, several times. So I rather think that your comment should be reversed.
0
If you had read the thread this was spawned off of, you would have seen Sol consistently arguing that it should not be a separate option, but just tied in with difficulty, and generally insulting anyone who said otherwise. That's part of why no-one bothered to mention it here.
To be quite frank, I don't think any honest discussion is going to happen until Sol and that massive chip on his shoulder GTFO; he just tries to turn the threads into a flamefest at every turn.
0
And someone is somehow forcing you to collect all this food you find? If you think there is too much food, a rather easy solution would be to not go out of your way to collect the stuff.
0
Worth what, exactly? At first, you complained that it would be too much coding; now that I've pointed out that there may not even be much coding at all required, you've changed it to simply being "not worth 'it' ", without defining 'it'.
Do you have any actual argument against this?
0
What extra coding? It would appear that the tool stuff is already heavily present in the game, enough so that it is entirely possible that adding a tool like this would be quite easy. Obviously, I can't say for certain that it would be easy, as I haven't seen the game's code.
0
So, any response to my post about increasing the damage you take in higher difficulties, or Adam222's post about reducing the healing effect of foods, or are you just going to continue your streak of insulting everyone who doesn't agree with you while simultaneously avoiding all attempts at debate?
0
Picture for those who don't know what I'm talking about:
For the crafting recipe, I'd say something like:
[]
[]
More for consistency with other tools than for any other reason.
0
Are you sure you don't have those two backwards? I thought "survival" was going to be the highest difficulty...
0
So, basically, just make the stack get a combined total of uses, instead of tracking just the "top" tool of the stack or tracking every tool individually? Not a bad idea.
I think I still prefer auto-swapping to stacking, though, especially if it also applies to blocks.