The problem with the command block is that it can only be placed by admins. It's fine in single player, but in multiplayer it would become a huge hassle for the server admins, and also would require the players to divulge their bases' locations. Invariably, this is not a task for which the command block is optimal.
Why not just make so chunks are saved with time stamps and then when they are loaded it checks the time difference in ticks, and forces things that would have changed over time to execute that many ticks, of course imposing some limitations:
Only affects things that would be affected by the ticks. So a Log would not be affected, but Saplings would. Crops would, but only to their final stage. Once it finds that something is no longer affected by ticks, it removes it from the list
It checks if things that can be affected by ticks can grow anyways. So a Sapling that cannot grow into a tree is removed from the list.
Particle effects based on ticks such as torch smoke are not generated. Neither is fire spread.
Item decay (dropped items despawning), or item generation (chickens laying eggs) is not affected.
To optimize things, instead of just executing thousands of ticks, it checks the growth chance against the default average random update (82 seconds). So if Wheat had a 5% chance of growing every 82 seconds, it would take the total number of seconds passed, divide it by 82, and then multiply it by .05. That number (rounded to the nearest integer) is the amount of times the crop grows)
Animals growing and being able to breed would still occur, but based on minutes passed, rather than ticks. This is because babies take 20 minutes to grow, and animals can only breed every 5 minutes
If optimized properly, it could replace this idea entirely, and work everywhere, rather than just by the bed or spawn.
This would have way to many issues such as;
- Lag if used to great extent.
- People use beds just for looks sometimes which could end up making a server crash
- Grieving would probably be increased due to chunks staying loaded and it would be harder to fix
- Adventure maps would be terrible if beds are check points.
Even if it scales, it's still increasing the amount that's loaded. Just one bed doubles things. A second triples, and so on. If you have multiple bases, and a bed for each, that begins to stack up. Then there's situations where beds are used for aesthetics, and so have multiple in a relatively small area, leading to larger groups of chunks loaded. Not to mention adventure maps, where not only is having multiple beds throughout a world as checkpoints a factor, but one also has to consider that this could flat-out break maps, by causing events to trigger long before the player arrives. Further, while I typically say that griefing potential is a weak argument, this is one case where it is not. Beds are easy to make, and the potential for someone to run off for the Farlands placing them until the entire server crashes is too great not to be taken into consideration. Not only would this form of griefing be worse than normal for its potential to effect the entire server, rather than just some areas, but it would also be more difficult to detect, since it would work best when done away from other players. Actually, it wouldn't even need to be griefing. A large enough server, with players spread out, all leaving multiple beds, and the collective impact of all their beds could begin to become quite significant.
All in all, I'm sorry, but I just don't see chunk loaders having a place outside of mods. On the other hand, something like the Somnia mod, where time continues to pass while you sleep, so that you wake up and crops have grown, foods cooked, etc... That I would support.
Most of the lag comes from graphically rendering the loaded chunks. If the chunks are just merely being kept track of, that's a lot less work the computer has to do.
This would have way to many issues such as;
1- Lag if used to great extent.
2- People use beds just for looks sometimes which could end up making a server crash
3- Grieving would probably be increased due to chunks staying loaded and it would be harder to fix
4- Adventure maps would be terrible if beds are check points.
I'm proposing a small anchor area: default 3x3 chunk square as opposed to the default 21x21 chunk square loaded around the player (very small percentage). Also, though I didn't clarify this, only one bed anchor per person, as it is linked to the actual player's SPAWN, not all of their beds. Ideally, the anchors would also deactivate when their owner logs out. these points effectively should seriously reduce extraneous impact on hardware, and severely reduce griefing potential.
4: ((since you didn't clarify, I'll assume you have the same qualms as the other fellow who mentioned adventure maps))
Also, while I would argue that breaking pre-existing maps is not a good reason to avoid progress, this is also probably not an issue. Granted that the anchor is caused by the player's spawn, not beds everywhere, they still have to actually get to the bed to anchor the area around it. If something were gonna happen, it would probably happen while they were getting to the bed in the first place to set their spawn there.
Sounds wonderful. the only possible problem i can foresee is that with all the optimization in the world, you'll still end up loading 21 chunks at once, and trying to calculate all of that for all of those chunks could cause a sudden lag spike whenever you move 16m. if it's optimized sufficiently to prevent these sudden changes, i would gladly welcome this as an alternative.
However, if it does create large sudden lag spikes, it could very well become more a detriment than a boon.
Well, as long as it slowly updated each of those calculations it should only cause 2-5 FPS drop.
This would have way to many issues such as;
- Lag if used to great extent. We've covered how to avoid this.
- People use beds just for looks sometimes which could end up making a server crash. It's one extra chunk per person. That doesn't crash anything.
- Grieving would probably be increased due to chunks staying loaded and it would be harder to fix. What? Chunks load as you get near them. Griefing stays the same.
- Adventure maps would be terrible if beds are check points. They already are...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Fermat »
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof of this, which this margin is too small to contain.
[;/quote]
Well, as long as it slowly updated each of those calculations it should only cause 2-5 FPS drop.
Well in all honesty I like some adventure maps and I run a large server and if all of them had anchors and moved away from that chunk it would cause issues eventually, especially if they had more then one bed active at a time.
I just don't think it is a good idea is all.
Well in all honesty I like some adventure maps and I run a large server and if all of them had anchors and moved away from that chunk it would cause issues eventually, especially if they had more then one bed active at a time.
I just don't think it is a good idea is all.
Nope, only the bed that is the players spawn point loads. Read the text again.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Fermat »
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof of this, which this margin is too small to contain.
[;/quote]
Nope, only the bed that is the players spawn point loads. Read the text again.
Meh, missed that part the first time I guess..
Be that as it may, I still don't like the idea.
I guess it does take out the problems, just seems like an easy way out to me in general.
Meh, missed that part the first time I guess..
Be that as it may, I still don't like the idea.
I guess it does take out the problems, just seems like an easy way out to me in general.
yes. god forbid our stuff grows without us hunkering down in front of it and waiting.
Meh, missed that part the first time I guess..
Be that as it may, I still don't like the idea.
I guess it does take out the problems, just seems like an easy way out to me in general.
Exactly. But how is an easy way out? It allows you to plant food and then go explore.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Fermat »
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof of this, which this margin is too small to contain.
[;/quote]
Exactly. But how is an easy way out? It allows you to plant food and then go explore.
._ . Didn't realize having an opinion got you dogged on here..
I think it could be a good idea but it would just be sort of abused, I don't like it, not to mention if you run a large server as I do the chunks are pretty much always active where things are planted, maybe that is why I don't see the point, I suppose if I put myself in small server I would have an issue with it.
Sarcasm at it's finest I assume?
I suppose it is just preference.
._ . Didn't realize having an opinion got you dogged on here..
I think it could be a good idea but it would just be sort of abused, I don't like it, not to mention if you run a large server as I do the chunks are pretty much always active where things are planted, maybe that is why I don't see the point, I suppose if I put myself in small server I would have an issue with it.
Alright, we differ in opinions then.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Fermat »
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof of this, which this margin is too small to contain.
[;/quote]
Sarcasm at it's finest I assume?
I suppose it is just preference.
._ . Didn't realize having an opinion got you dogged on here..
I think it could be a good idea but it would just be sort of abused, I don't like it, not to mention if you run a large server as I do the chunks are pretty much always active where things are planted, maybe that is why I don't see the point, I suppose if I put myself in small server I would have an issue with it.
It was maybe a teensy bit sarcastic... anyway, in stuff like vanilla pvp servers, for example, this can become a huge issue, specifically because most people spend huge amounts of time alone, and away from their own bases.
It was maybe a teensy bit sarcastic... anyway, in stuff like vanilla pvp servers, for example, this can become a huge issue, specifically because most people spend huge amounts of time alone, and away from their own bases.
In instances like that it would be good. I don't know, I suppose it just needed convincing is all, sometimes a thread being started isn't all that is needed.
I like the idea but it has no use in some places.
default 3x3 chunk square as opposed to the default 21x21 chunk square loaded around the player (very small percentage).
A 3x3 area wouldn't even affect the cake on my makeshift table, let alone any kind of farm or redstone device that is required to be running. Anything large enough to be of any effect for most people would be too much data to store. So I have to agree with Badprenup.
Most of the lag comes from graphically rendering the loaded chunks. If the chunks are just merely being kept track of, that's a lot less work the computer has to do.
What? If they're kept track of in real time, block updates are still being performed, therefore there is still lag. I'm not a programmer, but if I'm not mistaken visuals do not cause that much lag...
A 3x3 area wouldn't even affect the cake on my makeshift table, let alone any kind of farm or redstone device that is required to be running. Anything large enough to be of any effect for most people would be too much data to store. So I have to agree with Badprenup.
What? If they're kept track of in real time, block updates are still being performed, therefore there is still lag. I'm not a programmer, but if I'm not mistaken visuals do not cause that much lag...
Really? your red stone is so huge you can't make use of a 48m by 48m by 256m prism?
And that's an example of a default. if you went to far settings it could probably be expanded.
Lol, epic reply.
As of the OP: Support, this would be very helpful.
Still, I don't like it. I would rather command blocks get a command for keeping that chunk loaded, and could be turned on and off with redstone.
Hey, look at this guy thinkin. I like the idea.
- Lag if used to great extent.
- People use beds just for looks sometimes which could end up making a server crash
- Grieving would probably be increased due to chunks staying loaded and it would be harder to fix
- Adventure maps would be terrible if beds are check points.
Most of the lag comes from graphically rendering the loaded chunks. If the chunks are just merely being kept track of, that's a lot less work the computer has to do.
Click the picture!
-Derek Shunia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1, 2, 3:
4: ((since you didn't clarify, I'll assume you have the same qualms as the other fellow who mentioned adventure maps))
Well, as long as it slowly updated each of those calculations it should only cause 2-5 FPS drop.
Well in all honesty I like some adventure maps and I run a large server and if all of them had anchors and moved away from that chunk it would cause issues eventually, especially if they had more then one bed active at a time.
I just don't think it is a good idea is all.
Nope, only the bed that is the players spawn point loads. Read the text again.
Meh, missed that part the first time I guess..
Be that as it may, I still don't like the idea.
I guess it does take out the problems, just seems like an easy way out to me in general.
yes. god forbid our stuff grows without us hunkering down in front of it and waiting.
Exactly. But how is an easy way out? It allows you to plant food and then go explore.
Sarcasm at it's finest I assume?
I suppose it is just preference.
._ . Didn't realize having an opinion got you dogged on here..
I think it could be a good idea but it would just be sort of abused, I don't like it, not to mention if you run a large server as I do the chunks are pretty much always active where things are planted, maybe that is why I don't see the point, I suppose if I put myself in small server I would have an issue with it.
Alright, we differ in opinions then.
It was maybe a teensy bit sarcastic... anyway, in stuff like vanilla pvp servers, for example, this can become a huge issue, specifically because most people spend huge amounts of time alone, and away from their own bases.
Either This, or a new block entirely that would have this effect.
In instances like that it would be good. I don't know, I suppose it just needed convincing is all, sometimes a thread being started isn't all that is needed.
I like the idea but it has no use in some places.
A 3x3 area wouldn't even affect the cake on my makeshift table, let alone any kind of farm or redstone device that is required to be running. Anything large enough to be of any effect for most people would be too much data to store. So I have to agree with Badprenup.
What? If they're kept track of in real time, block updates are still being performed, therefore there is still lag. I'm not a programmer, but if I'm not mistaken visuals do not cause that much lag...
[quote=Badgerz]You have to keep in mind that people are stupid.
[quote=Catelite]Just because you don't understand how something works, doesn't make it broken or pointless. >_<
Really? your red stone is so huge you can't make use of a 48m by 48m by 256m prism?
And that's an example of a default. if you went to far settings it could probably be expanded.