Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Become a Premium Member! Help
Latest News Article

Full blocks on bottom slabs.

half blocksslabs

  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1

Insurrection

Posted 07 February 2013 - 06:39 PM

This would open up a TON of room for creativity if you could place a fully sized block on top of a half block. It'd be pretty basic, but it's one of those mechanical additions that would help make the game that much more smooth.

It's a simple suggestion. If someone could make a mockup of what it'd look like, that'd be helpful.

Register or log in to remove.

#2

DoubleDongle
  • Minecraft: DoubleDongle

Posted 07 February 2013 - 06:42 PM

This would require changing the basics of what a block IS.  Not a simple suggestion.

And Mojang has said that if they wanted to make that level of detail possible, they would have made the blocks smaller.  So I don't think this is going to happen.
Notch loves you.  Notch labors for your fun.  Believe in Notch, and let his Game relieve your boredom.
How to not die in a cave

#3

Insurrection

Posted 07 February 2013 - 06:50 PM

Not really- it would be immensely simple, actually. Just place the block boundries half a block lower than where it would usually be. This already happens with top slabs- that's why it lags for a split second before adjusting to the correct position.

The shape would also be the exact same as a block with a half slab on top of it. It's just the reverse.

#4

PanJouda
    PanJouda

    Redstone Miner

  • Members
  • 602 posts
  • Location: MT-Network Public (93.91.240.160:37258)

Posted 07 February 2013 - 06:56 PM

Placing block between two block spaces is currently impossible. It would require totally block mechanism rebuild. No support.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#5

Roadsguy
    Roadsguy

    Lapis Lazuli Collector

  • Members
  • 1152 posts
  • Location: Near I-86ESSSSEEEEEEEESESSESENENW
  • Minecraft: Roadsguy

Posted 07 February 2013 - 06:59 PM

You mean have a block sit right on a right-side-up slab instead of hover a half-block over it? No support. It would require so much extra coding work...
Insert clever signature here.

#6

Insurrection

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:05 PM

View PostPanJouda, on 07 February 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

Placing block between two block spaces is currently impossible. It would require totally block mechanism rebuild. No support.
Again, it wouldn't. It'd be the same thing as the current "top slab" coding- shift its coordinates after placement to match what it should be.

View PostRoadsguy, on 07 February 2013 - 06:59 PM, said:

You mean have a block sit right on a right-side-up slab instead of hover a half-block over it? No support. It would require so much extra coding work...
Hardly. They do stuff like this all the time. Corner stairs, top slabs, etc. It's a small thing, but it would help diversify the game a little bit. It could also allow for things such as dirt/grass half slabs as once planned, so you can still have tall grass growing on it and whatnot.

#7

Badprenup
    Badprenup

    Retired Staff

  • Retired Staff
  • 10971 posts
  • Minecraft: Badprenup

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:08 PM

View PostInsurrection, on 07 February 2013 - 06:50 PM, said:

Not really- it would be immensely simple, actually. Just place the block boundries half a block lower than where it would usually be. This already happens with top slabs- that's why it lags for a split second before adjusting to the correct position.

The shape would also be the exact same as a block with a half slab on top of it. It's just the reverse.
It's actually not like that at all. How slabs work is it has the same placement collision box (a voxel) as any other block (16x16x16 pixels). However, it's model is 16x16x8 in pixels, and it's entity collision box is the same. That's why if you place a water block on top of a slab, there is a gap of air in the water. The game still treats it like a full block as far as placement. The lag you see is the game rendering the default block ID (for example, a Stone Slab is 44x0) and then the game positioning it properly by adjusting the metadata bit 0x8. On a faster computer you don't see that little lag at all.

So no, it actually is completely different from how you think it works. It would be possible, but it would indeed require changing how the game handles blocks.

Sources:
http://www.minecraft...nd_Double_Slabs
http://www.minecraft...i/Slab#Behavior
Looks like my free time is going to be divided equally between Minecraft suggestions and Starbound suggestions from now on.

#8

Roadsguy
    Roadsguy

    Lapis Lazuli Collector

  • Members
  • 1152 posts
  • Location: Near I-86ESSSSEEEEEEEESESSESENENW
  • Minecraft: Roadsguy

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:10 PM

I thought slabs worked by auto-changing to a new damage value on placement to make the model upside-down.

EDIT: Ninja'd. Maybe add my link to your sources, though, as Dinner-proof. ;)
Insert clever signature here.

#9

Some_Free_Cake
  • Location: The Depths Of Your Innermost Soul
  • Minecraft: Willvanzero
  • Xbox:Some Free Cake

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:12 PM

I agree it would be nice, along with being able to place different types of slab on top of each other, but each double slab has a unique block ID, so even THAT would be some serious coding.
Posted Image
Click to support!

#10

Insurrection

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:16 PM

View PostBadprenup, on 07 February 2013 - 07:08 PM, said:

It's actually not like that at all. How slabs work is it has the same placement collision box (a voxel) as any other block (16x16x16 pixels). However, it's model is 16x16x8 in pixels, and it's entity collision box is the same. That's why if you place a water block on top of a slab, there is a gap of air in the water. The game still treats it like a full block as far as placement. The lag you see is the game rendering the default block ID (for example, a Stone Slab is 44x0) and then the game positioning it properly by adjusting the metadata bit 0x8. On a faster computer you don't see that little lag at all.
Oh wow, that's strange. Other blocks with metadata don't have that little lag bit.

As for entity collision box, though, it's not like this affects anything other than placement. Players and etc can still walk on it as though it has a different bounding box.

If they need to re-code some stuff, so be it- it'd be a nice addition.

View PostSome_Free_Cake, on 07 February 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

I agree it would be nice, along with being able to place different types of slab on top of each other, but each double slab has a unique block ID, so even THAT would be some serious coding.
Double slabs probably wouldn't even be needed if you could properly combine them.

#11

Badprenup
    Badprenup

    Retired Staff

  • Retired Staff
  • 10971 posts
  • Minecraft: Badprenup

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:22 PM

View PostInsurrection, on 07 February 2013 - 07:16 PM, said:

Oh wow, that's strange. Other blocks with metadata don't have that little lag bit.

As for entity collision box, though, it's not like this affects anything other than placement. Players and etc can still walk on it as though it has a different bounding box.
Entity collision is the one that determines mining how players walk on it. You're thinking of it's Voxel collision, which is the place in the 3d grid where it is placed.

I do agree that it would be kind of cool, but I really don't find it a necessary change to make. It would really only change aesthetics of the game. After all, a full block placed on a bottom slab would be the exact same thing as a bottom slab placed on a block, it just has some minor texture limitations.
Looks like my free time is going to be divided equally between Minecraft suggestions and Starbound suggestions from now on.

#12

Insurrection

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:28 PM

View PostBadprenup, on 07 February 2013 - 07:22 PM, said:

Entity collision is the one that determines mining how players walk on it. You're thinking of it's Voxel collision, which is the place in the 3d grid where it is placed.
Yeah, I'm saying that the "voxel collision" is only used for placement and not much else- the looks, entity collision, and etc don't use this. Surely, there can be a nice little workaround to combine the two.

View PostBadprenup, on 07 February 2013 - 07:22 PM, said:

I do agree that it would be kind of cool, but I really don't find it a necessary change to make. It would really only change aesthetics of the game. After all, a full block placed on a bottom slab would be the exact same thing as a bottom slab placed on a block, it just has some minor texture limitations.
I actually had thought about it because I was thinking of placing dirt/grass slabs into the world for more proper hills in the terrain- but tall grass would either hover above the slabs or not be placed on it at all, and I realized it's always been rather silly to have slabs still behave in the same manner they have since before alpha.

And let's face it, aesthetics matter to Minecraft's userbase- top slabs, corner stairs, etc were all made with this in mind.

#13

MrSnowBunni
  • Minecraft: MrSnowbunni

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:50 PM

View PostInsurrection, on 07 February 2013 - 07:05 PM, said:

Again, it wouldn't. It'd be the same thing as the current "top slab" coding- shift its coordinates after placement to match what it should be.


Hardly. They do stuff like this all the time. Corner stairs, top slabs, etc. It's a small thing, but it would help diversify the game a little bit. It could also allow for things such as dirt/grass half slabs as once planned, so you can still have tall grass growing on it and whatnot.

Corner stairs and top slabs are still within the normal block boundaries, you're talking about turning every block into half slabs then binding them together by default, that is redoing the entire block mechanism of the entire game.

Posted Image

Check out my Lets Play! It would be much appreciated! :3


#14

Insurrection

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:57 PM

View PostMrSnowBunni, on 07 February 2013 - 07:50 PM, said:

you're talking about turning every block into half slabs then binding them together by default, that is redoing the entire block mechanism of the entire game.
And? At some point, they have to redo virtually every system in place anyway. Why not make sure slabs can function more appropriately? I imagine if they can fix this, it would lead to other "block-in-block" scenarios, so we could have proper water flowing through doorways and what have you.

Technical fixes like these are never a bad thing.

#15

firesbh
    firesbh

    Out of the Water

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 07 February 2013 - 08:53 PM

View PostMrSnowBunni, on 07 February 2013 - 07:50 PM, said:

Corner stairs and top slabs are still within the normal block boundaries, you're talking about turning every block into half slabs then binding them together by default, that is redoing the entire block mechanism of the entire game.

And how does this affect you? As far as I can tell this would only annoy modders who actually deal with the code for minecraft(which isn't a big suprise, as mojang changes a lot of the code or cleans it up with each patch).

This would be pretty simple to implement from a coding perspective and could easily be done with either some form of "stacking" logic changing the positioning of the block OR properly coding all slabs and other things similar to slabs as a type of half-block with the same length and witdth of a normal boxes collision box, but half of its height.

#16

RedstoneOperator

Posted 07 February 2013 - 10:27 PM

So you're asking for tons of new IDs? Oh, and did I remind you that it would need to introduce slabs of every full block in the game? That would be even more IDs
Posted Image

#17

colers5
    colers5

    Diamond Miner

  • Members
  • 767 posts

Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:03 PM

View PostInsurrection, on 07 February 2013 - 06:50 PM, said:

Not really- it would be immensely simple, actually. Just place the block boundries half a block lower than where it would usually be. This already happens with top slabs- that's why it lags for a split second before adjusting to the correct position.

The shape would also be the exact same as a block with a half slab on top of it. It's just the reverse.

it would a: break the fysics of minecraft (due to halfslabs actually being a full block)

b: would require the entire block grid to be overhauled so every block is actually a half slab

c: would require block combinations of every block with every slab, which will possibly even go over the current 4096 possible blocks


and i saw a near- similiar thread not so long ago

#18

InfiniteTurbine
  • Location: A place with things.
  • Minecraft: InfiniteTurbine

Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:42 PM

View Postcolers5, on 07 February 2013 - 11:03 PM, said:

it would a: break the fysics of minecraft (due to halfslabs actually being a full block)
b: would require the entire block grid to be overhauled so every block is actually a half slab
c: would require block combinations of every block with every slab, which will possibly even go over the current 4096 possible blocks
I don't know much about Block IDs or anything, but why are there only a certain number available? And can this number not be adjusted to be larger in the future?

Also, back on topic, this is something ALOT of people have thought of that they want in the game. It's something that would be a simple change gameplay wise, but a good one to help allow more customizing with blocks.

Sadly, similar to many of these suggestions threads, these great ideas that appear simple apparently are over complicated to code, according to others. It sucks badly, so many good ideas that people automatically trash because they'd be 'too hard to code'. :/

#19

colers5
    colers5

    Diamond Miner

  • Members
  • 767 posts

Posted 08 February 2013 - 12:02 AM

View PostInfiniteTurbine, on 07 February 2013 - 11:42 PM, said:

I don't know much about Block IDs or anything, but why are there only a certain number available?

i have no idea why it is limited. see update 12a07, there it says about the update in block ids.

but i believe it has something to do with the map format. for anvil (the map-format, not the block) changed the id limit (i do not think it is java-based)

#20

InfiniteTurbine
  • Location: A place with things.
  • Minecraft: InfiniteTurbine

Posted 08 February 2013 - 12:52 AM

View Postcolers5, on 08 February 2013 - 12:02 AM, said:

i have no idea why it is limited. see update 12a07, there it says about the update in block ids.

but i believe it has something to do with the map format. for anvil (the map-format, not the block) changed the id limit (i do not think it is java-based)
Odd... Even with that limitation, take a gander at things like the FTB modpack. Look how many blocks they were able to stuff into there, including all those microblocks...

View PostRedstoneOperator, on 07 February 2013 - 10:27 PM, said:

So you're asking for tons of new IDs? Oh, and did I remind you that it would need to introduce slabs of every full block in the game? That would be even more IDs
Considering all the block additions and microblocks in FTB that they were able to stuff, I'm not so sure if your argument with IDs is really something to be concerned over...