Minecraft Forums

I am creating an food / XP grinder at my spawn that will spawn food animals from mob spawners, inside a restricted area. I want to limit how many of each can spawn at a time.

If I could always make the animal spawn (and not move) in the same location, then I can use/change minecrafts entity cramming to rule limit how many spawn.

Is there a plugin or is there a way to do this with command blocks?

Is there a way to get the block distribution list created by //distr to export as a text file or to output to the log files?

What I'm trying to do is find the approximate distribution of blocks in SkyGrid so I can determine and set relative block values in Essentials worth.yml

Quote from TheMasterCaver»

That has already been done; the current launcher, which was released earlier this year, is a native executable, no doubt written in C++, which is why you don't even need to install Java in order to run it (the bundled runtime is only used by the game itself):

"No longer requires Java", "interface redesign". Sure sounds like it (I have no idea what Win10 looks like).

Quote from Herb_»

indent=30px]
Textbook Microsoft,
1. Embrace: Development of software substantially compatible with a competing product, or implementing a public standard.
2. Extend: Addition and promotion of features not supported by the competing product or part of the standard, creating interoperability problems for customers who try to use the 'simple' standard.
3. Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors that do not or cannot support the new extensions.
I copy-pasted that without changing a word. I think it is obvious how bedrock, and its proprietory nature, fits this pattern.
[/indent]

Quote from TheTux99»

Message to Mojang! you all are adding too much to Minecraft! 1.13 has too many new textures! changing the crafting tables? really? I also don't like the combat update. I'm sorry, I still love Minecraft, but I'm going to stick with 1.8. those were the good old days.

I agree with a lot of what you said.

I feel Microsoft is already thinking ahead as to how to monetize the Java version the way it has with the C++ version and that has the potential to bring a lot of good things. Most good things are not free, and I'm ok with that.

I don't think they are so stupid as to kill all the Java edition servers out there, but I suspect we may see Win10 like features creep into the Java Edition. The new Crafting Table and Observer block is an example of how the console version is already having an impact.

IMHO the Microsoft effort to unify all the console versions into 1 code base and the push to add "shaders" and other features directly into that code base points to the direction they are taking at Minecraft. I think better integration into the Java Edition is inevitable, and predict that you will see the launcher replaced in the next 18 months with one that has some of the Win10 features and may even be written in C++ instead of Java.

Interesting discussion. Some of it I agree with, some, not so much. Minecraft will find a way to make more money on the Java Edition. It's a corporation, it's what they do. That doesn't have to be a bad thing. let me explain.

Java plugin and module makers are falling by the wayside. They don't really make any money and so over time, they lose interest and move on and there work goes unsupported. The ones that are able to make a few bucks, last longer. In the end only the obsessively passionate and the ones making a living will remain. Whats a player to do? Java edition player can either stay on an older version of Minecraft or give up their mods and plugins to stay current.

Enter M$. They would like to make money so how do they get DLC into the hands of the Java Edition.
1. Build content distribution into the Minecraft launcher or game (duplicating the efforts of the the C++ based group) OR
2. Find a way to make them talk to each other.

Microsoft does not have to "control" servers to make that happen. They do have to enforce vanilla gameplay when connected to a non PC based game. Vanilla servers are already built into minecraft so you can start a singleplayer world and then invite your xbox friends to play or join there game.

The C++ players will never be able to play on spigot/bukkit/sponge/bungee or any other non vanilla server, but Java players could play in "vanilla" mode hosting or connected to a console base server if the translation layer were added and the games were all running the same "underlying update".

They could then make the console content available (DLC) resource packs and maps available and make the $ they need. HardCore players are NEVER going to adopt the Win10 version, but they might be persuaded to play on the console based network.

While there wasn't much lag before, I built and migrated KiqsRocks to a new Dell rack server, capable of running multiple minecraft servers on the same machine. It's a beast. What does that mean to you? It means a better gaming experience and lets us add more playing options in the near future.

Come join a great growing community and build something amazing.

The fact that the game engines are different is not an impediment to online compatibility; Ford's and Toyota's have different engines, but both are able to use the road. The underlying communication protocols are different, so, there and would need to be a translation layer added.

Microsoft would have to have an $ incentive $ to make that happen. I would argue that the huge Java base is a large untapped market that could be opened up with such a translation layer.

MS/Mojang needs to find a way to add some of the new console content to the Java edition. A couple million people might pay $1 each for optional texture packs and pre-built maps. Content they have already created and have been selling for a few years now.

I know it would be difficult, but they have the resources to do it if they can find the right motivation.

Short Answer: NO.

Long Answer: Minecraft has been changing every few months for 8 years now. Without change, it would have faded long ago. The biggest changes to the game aren't even happening inside the PC / Java version at all.

If you haven't run the Win 10 version lately, maybe you should take a look. This is the unified "Better Together" version and there's a LOT going on here that Java Edition players may not be aware of.

The only thing keeping them from being able to connect is the will power to make it happen. So what do you think?

Quote from ItsSuperNova»

Basically the title. You can vote in the polls, and express your beliefs in the comments to much more detail. My personal opinion is that I don't like it, because PC is the original, and it should stay that way. It would be better if the PE, Console, and Win 10 Editions were rebranded to the "Better Together Edition." However, it's Mojang's decision, and we have to accept that.

I also should mention that PC is not dead/dying. The developers for Bedrock Edition and PC are different, so PC is not dying, it just won't be in the spotlight as much anymore.

Suffered a 12 hour power outage due to hurricane Irma, But were back online and working on a massive hardware upgrade.

Quote from PlanetJupiderp»

I'm not quite sure I understand this.

The purpose of an observer is to look for block updates. It is not something to shorten redstone pulses. When observing a redstone signal, they should output a pulse when it turns on and off because this allows for things like easier on/off dispensers with buckets. If you want to make redstone pulses shorter, I don't think that's what the observer is meant to do, but I agree there should be a one-bock compact way of doing this.

Since the term "observer" doesn't really match what you're aiming for here, I think there should be a separate block called, say, a "pulse block" that has the same 1-4 tick setting as a repeater, and shortens its signals to the desired number of ticks.

You are not understanding the suggestion. An observer detects a change in state. if it detects a pumpkin growing you get a pulse, if it detects the pumpkin breaking you get a pulse.

However, it you are watching any kind of redstone signal (like from a clock circuit) you get a pulse when it goes on and a pulse when it goes off. So you are detecting both the leading edge, (redstone on) and trailing edge (redstone off). This doubling of the signal limits the usefulness of the observer block. and makes you have to add additional circuitry to compensate.

Nowhere in my suggestion did I talk about the length of the pulse. It's a 1 tick pulse and that's fine. I want control over "What it's observing" I don't want to adjust the length of the pulse, or the output strength. That what repeaters do.

I want to select observing the ON/OFF state or the ON state or the OFF state. If I'm observing something like a block update from a melon growing the default way the observer block works is fine. But if I'm observing a redstone torch or dust or repeater or any other redstone device, I want to be get a single pulse when the signal goes on (leading edge) OR a single pulse when it goes off (trailing edge) OR both on/off and get 2 pulses which is the way it works now.

I don't want to change the output, I want to select the type of input. On/Off, On, or Off

We Updated to 1.12.1 on 8/10