2 small chest next to each other form a large chest, but you can't place another chest block down immediately next to them, as it is right now, you have to skip a space before you can add another chest block.
Small suggestion in allowing users to pack large chests a little closer together.
con: small chest binding to form large chest would have to be worked out and kept track of a left to right or right to left architecture could be used for simplicity sake, or a holds as originally crafted strategy could be employed (preferred).
Application Suggestion: * if a small chest is placed between 2 other small chests, it would bind with the first available small chest that the pointer was closest to at the time the chest was set down in that spot.
I think I would rather have this trap/locked chest that the pc has. Which can be used to trigger redstone signal when opened. using this chest and the regular one you could alternate that way. So I think for me I just would rather have another chest type to mix with the original.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My First World, always getting back to is a pleasure I enjoy with each new update that brings in more things to add in.
2 small chest next to each other form a large chest, but you can't place another chest block down immediately next to them, as it is right now, you have to skip a space before you can add another chest block.
Small suggestion in allowing users to pack large chests a little closer together.
con: small chest binding to form large chest would have to be worked out and kept track of a left to right or right to left architecture could be used for simplicity sake, or a holds as originally crafted strategy could be employed (preferred).
Application Suggestion: * if a small chest is placed between 2 other small chests, it would bind with the first available small chest that the pointer was closest to at the time the chest was set down in that spot.
Oh I would definitely love this
I think it might have to do with just the programming. Cause there isn't just a two block item. Perhaps.. they could fix that by just having the small chest, and the large chest be two separate items?? Maybe that would work.
I think I would rather have this trap/locked chest that the pc has. Which can be used to trigger redstone signal when opened. using this chest and the regular one you could alternate that way. So I think for me I just would rather have another chest type to mix with the original.
So... it's better to be lazy and have it open with a pressure plate then just LT? Lol.
So... it's better to be lazy and have it open with a pressure plate then just LT? Lol.
Or am I misunderstanding you?
I think (from my understanding) the point is that with the trapped/locked chest is that it opens like a normal chest (but sends off a redstone signal out when activated). Although you don't NEED to have this connected to any redstone circuitry, the point is that this chest has a different block ID that the regular chest, which makes it necessarily disjoint from a normal chest.
I think (from my understanding) the point is that with the trapped/locked chest is that it opens like a normal chest (but sends off a redstone signal out when activated). Although you don't NEED to have this connected to any redstone circuitry, the point is that this chest has a different block ID that the regular chest, which makes it necessarily disjoint from a normal chest.
Ohhhh I see. Yeah that makes sense then. If that's the case then I'd be for it too.
Small suggestion in allowing users to pack large chests a little closer together.
con: small chest binding to form large chest would have to be worked out and kept track of a left to right or right to left architecture could be used for simplicity sake, or a holds as originally crafted strategy could be employed (preferred).
Application Suggestion: * if a small chest is placed between 2 other small chests, it would bind with the first available small chest that the pointer was closest to at the time the chest was set down in that spot.
Oh I would definitely love this
I think it might have to do with just the programming. Cause there isn't just a two block item. Perhaps.. they could fix that by just having the small chest, and the large chest be two separate items?? Maybe that would work.
So... it's better to be lazy and have it open with a pressure plate then just LT? Lol.
Or am I misunderstanding you?
I think (from my understanding) the point is that with the trapped/locked chest is that it opens like a normal chest (but sends off a redstone signal out when activated). Although you don't NEED to have this connected to any redstone circuitry, the point is that this chest has a different block ID that the regular chest, which makes it necessarily disjoint from a normal chest.
Ohhhh I see. Yeah that makes sense then. If that's the case then I'd be for it too.