Hm, that's not really a tool I've seen much use of it gardening. It's not a small hand tool though, as you admit yourself, whereas a trowel is an actual small hand tool that is used in gardening.
*facepalms* lets try again, and this time follow BOTH of the links (specifically the one in bold)
Oh, that's actually a very good point. I think I would have made three ingots make one slab, but that still doesn't fully solve it (6 ingots for a full block compared to 9). And even your recipe doesn't fully solve it, since it takes 8 ingots to make a full block instead of 9. Still, that's pretty close. The only other option I can think of is six ingots making one slab, which seems a bit too expensive. I guess your recipe is the best choice in this one.
Thank you.
Sarcastic? I'm not sure why you would think that. There are games where wizards are incapable of wearing plate armour. If you try to put plate armour on them, you'll get a message saying they can't do that. This is illogical, and it annoys me. It's perfectly fine by me to heavily penalize that wizard for daring to put on plate armour, but simply disallowing it altogether does not make any sense.
It has to do with where the power stems from. In a way, it's almost a form of clerical magic at that point, where you have to follow a certain set of standards to be allowed access to that power, so yeah, it makes sense for you to not be able to put on plate armor. However this particular point is WAAAAY off topic, so lets end that there. Personally though, I do agree that magic should at most only be disabled while you're wearing the armor, and perhaps even come with physical skill penalties if you're not trained for using that heavy of an armor, but it should still let you at least put it on.
The simplest way to handle that would be to simply not allow stacked satchels to be opened.
No, because there is no differentiation between the same item when there's just one and when its stacked. Putting it down automatically takes it out of the stack, so THAT is the simplest method.
I agree that hatchets would not be terribly useful if logs can be mined by hand, though they could at least increase the speed at which they are mined.
It barely makes a difference as is. certainly not enough to justify them having different material amounts.
How so?
Every other material that you can make tools from needs a tool (generally a pickaxe) to mine. This makes wood, which you can also make tools from also require a tool to mine. (though you still have the more tedious option to make it from saplings)
Axes are valuable for increasing the speed of woodchopping. They may not be precisely equal in value to pickaxes, but they are valuable enough not to just neglect altogether.
Not really. That only brings the axe up to the same value as a Shovel, and that only uses one material, nowhere near the 3 that an axe uses.
...and you call this a good thing? :tongue.gif:
In fact not only do I, but I did. I don't know why you didn't include that when you took that quote.
Flexibility isn't a bad thing, sure, but you're also taking options away, which I don't like. Also, you seem to be pushing for realism, which to me is not a good sign; I don't want my game to be realistic, I want it to be fun. Besides, if you take this mod and apply it to Minecraft, but leave out the hatchet and the requirement of having an axe to break wood, you already have immediate flexibility; you can "break log, make workbench, etc etc", or you can "break log, make hand pick, etc etc".
You do have a point, but I personally see this as an option that Notch, if he had considered the possibility from the start, he would have already implemented himself. I don't see it as making something more difficult than it should be, but rather AS difficult as it should be. After all, you have to carry around a pick axe to be able to mine stone, do you consider that unreasonable? Why is it any more unreasonable to require an axe to mine logs? Heck I'm not even saying it should be needed for wood planks or chests.
I think it's obvious that we cannot agree on this subject.
I also doubt we'll come to a full agreement, but as long as we keep track of what is personal opinion and what is objective assessments the debate can be quite enjoyable and thought provoking for both sides.
*facepalms* lets try again, and this time follow BOTH of the links (specifically the one in bold)
I did follow both links, but I admit I didn't really look closely especially at the first one. Still, in my experience the trowel is more used than the pick for gardening.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
It has to do with where the power stems from. In a way, it's almost a form of clerical magic at that point, where you have to follow a certain set of standards to be allowed access to that power, so yeah, it makes sense for you to not be able to put on plate armor.
Nope, this explanation still doesn't fly. There's no magic in armour.
Quote from "GreyAcumen" »
it should still let you at least put it on.
Yeah.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
No, because there is no differentiation between the same item when there's just one and when its stacked.
Um, actually there is. There's this field in ItemStack called "count" (at least, that's what Bukkit calls it) which can be checked to see if the satchel is stacked before opening the inventory window.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
Every other material that you can make tools from needs a tool (generally a pickaxe) to mine.
If every material used to make tools required a tool to mine, it would be impossible to make tools. I imagine that's probably why Notch made wood mineable by hand. Now, it's true your idea solves that in another way (giving an alternate way to obtain one of those materials other than by mining), but I still prefer the simplicity of punching a tree to death.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
Not really. That only brings the axe up to the same value as a Shovel, and that only uses one material, nowhere near the 3 that an axe uses.
Fair enough, I guess.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
...and you call this a good thing? :tongue.gif:
In fact not only do I, but I did. I don't know why you didn't include that when you took that quote.
That was my way of saying that I don't think it is a good thing.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
an option that Notch, if he had considered the possibility from the start, he would have already implemented himself.
I suspect you'd be wrong, but neither of us can speak for Notch without first asking him, so I won't comment further on this.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
I don't see it as making something more difficult than it should be, but rather AS difficult as it should be.
Which runs into my "too realistic" barrier.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
After all, you have to carry around a pick axe to be able to mine stone, do you consider that unreasonable?
Not really, but stone is a lot harder than wood.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
Why is it any more unreasonable to require an axe to mine logs?
Mostly just because it's a change to the current mechanic, also because logs are not as hard as stone.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
I also doubt we'll come to a full agreement, but as long as we keep track of what is personal opinion and what is objective assessments the debate can be quite enjoyable and thought provoking for both sides.
True, true, and I'll try my best to avoid stating opinion as fact. That said, if we start just arguing in circles, there's probably nothing left to cover.
I did follow both links, but I admit I didn't really look closely especially at the first one. Still, in my experience the trowel is more used than the pick for gardening.
just because it's more commonly used doesn't mean its more effective at the specific task of TILLING.
Nope, this explanation still doesn't fly. There's no magic in armour.
There doesn't need to be magic. All you need is for the power that the wizard draws on to be from something with its own awareness, and it can easily say "well, if you wear that shitty platemale stuff, you aren't gonna be tapping into MY power"
Quote from GreyAcumen »
No, because there is no differentiation between the same item when there's just one and when its stacked.
Um, actually there is. There's this field in ItemStack called "count" (at least, that's what Bukkit calls it) which can be checked to see if the satchel is stacked before opening the inventory window.
Oh, okay, I hadn't see that in bukkit, and I've observed no examples of this in vanilla minecraft. Either way, because there are no examples of this already in vanilla minecraft, I would tend to stay away from using that methodology.
Which runs into my "too realistic" barrier.
Look, it's not like I'm proposing that you take damage as you carry lava in a bucket, but on the other end of that spectrum, would you be okay with lava not injuring the player at all, even if they swam through it?
Mostly just because it's a change to the current mechanic, also because logs are not as hard as stone.
Yet still harder than your fists. (otherwise you'd be able to mine stone by hand, wouldn't you?)
True, true, and I'll try my best to avoid stating opinion as fact. That said, if we start just arguing in circles, there's probably nothing left to cover.
i suppose. That's part of why I've trimmed out so much of what you've posted, i generally left out the ones that are purely a difference of opinion.
Nope, this explanation still doesn't fly. There's no magic in armour.
There doesn't need to be magic. All you need is for the power that the wizard draws on to be from something with its own awareness, and it can easily say "well, if you wear that shitty platemale stuff, you aren't gonna be tapping into MY power"
Well sure. However, that only means they can't use magic while wearing it, not that they can't wear it at all. It's the difference between forbidding and penalizing.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
No, because there is no differentiation between the same item when there's just one and when its stacked.
Um, actually there is. There's this field in ItemStack called "count" (at least, that's what Bukkit calls it) which can be checked to see if the satchel is stacked before opening the inventory window.[/quote]Oh, okay, I hadn't see that in bukkit, and I've observed no examples of this in vanilla minecraft. Either way, because there are no examples of this already in vanilla minecraft, I would tend to stay away from using that methodology.[/quote]Uh, it is in vanilla Minecraft. I just checked, and MCP calls it stackSize. How else would the game know how many of each item you have, anyway?
Quote from GreyAcumen »
Look, it's not like I'm proposing that you take damage as you carry lava in a bucket, but on the other end of that spectrum, would you be okay with lava not injuring the player at all, even if they swam through it?
Actually, I would be okay with that. :tongue.gif: It's not something I would push for, though.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
Yet still harder than your fists. (otherwise you'd be able to mine stone by hand, wouldn't you?)
Well, real people don't generally dig up massive quantities of dirt and sand with their bare hands either. Realism is not the answer here in my opinion.
Well sure. However, that only means they can't use magic while wearing it, not that they can't wear it at all. It's the difference between forbidding and penalizing.
You forget how petty sentient energy sources can be.
Uh, it is in vanilla Minecraft. I just checked, and MCP calls it stackSize. How else would the game know how many of each item you have, anyway?
I'm not talking about the function, I'm talking about USING that function to give a stack of items a different effect when used than what a single item by itself does. That is something that vanilla minecraft doesn't do, at least not so far.
Actually, I would be okay with that. :tongue.gif: It's not something I would push for, though.
you're okay with lava in a bucket damaging the player, but not with trees needing axes to cut down. Yup, this defintiely is a personal preference issue.
Well sure. However, that only means they can't use magic while wearing it, not that they can't wear it at all. It's the difference between forbidding and penalizing.
You forget how petty sentient energy sources can be.
Okay, it might be possible to justify it. I've never seen a game that even attempts to, though. Granted, I haven't played that many games that do it in the first place.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
I'm not talking about the function, I'm talking about USING that function to give a stack of items a different effect when used than what a single item by itself does. That is something that vanilla minecraft doesn't do, at least not so far.
I'm certain it would be possible, but I don't know that much about how Item and its subclasses work, so if you're merely extending Item (or one of its subclasses) to make your satchel I suppose it might not be as simple to check the stack size as if you were writing a Bukkit plugin. Still... I noticed at least some of the Item subclasses decrementing the stack size, so at least some of them have access to it.
Quote from GreyAcumen »
you're okay with lava in a bucket damaging the player, but not with trees needing axes to cut down. Yup, this defintiely is a personal preference issue.
Sorry, I meant that I'd be okay with swimming in lava not damaging you. It's logical that it does, however, so I wouldn't push for it to happen.
Am I the only one who wants almost everything in this post to be in the game? Awesome, game changing ideas you have here. Although the hatchet seems way underpowered, and I don't like the satch or whatever it is called.
Am I the only one who wants almost everything in this post to be in the game?
I really wish you were. :tongue.gif: As far as I'm concerned it's a haphazard mix of really good ideas and really bad ideas.
But no. There are quite a few people who like the idea as a whole so much that they want it to be in the game, at least if the poll at the top is any indication.
Nice mod / ideas but it would really ruin the point of making a workbench. Im not saying the mod is bad but in 1.5 there will be achivments and one of them is makeing workbenchs.
Nice mod / ideas but it would really ruin the point of making a workbench. Im not saying the mod is bad but in 1.5 there will be achivments and one of them is makeing workbenchs.
So wouldn't it be MORE of an achievement if you didn't absolutely NEED to make it?
I like the idea of crafting sticks from saplings, but not enough to completely remove punching wood. Otherwise, I like the entire post.
You can still punch wood, you just can't get logs from doing it. I liked punching stone blocks back in classic, but notch took that out with the pre-alpha release, you don't see anyone bitching about that, or at least not being taken seriously when they do ***** about it.
put 4 daggers together in your crafting box (inventory) will give you "Throwing Knives" (Wood-Diamond) which stack to 64 and do the damage of a arrow and the damage lowers as the knife travels though the air.
If you use daggers that stack, it will be an over powered melee weapon if it stacks and would be an under powered (based on the damage) if it doesn't
As cool as this idea sounds, the argument is that you can use it until you have a workbench in place, but the problem is that you can not only craft a workbench from the equivalent of a single Wood block, which is probably the first thing you will get your hands on after starting a new game, but you can also take it with you.
Granted, some of the concepts are cool, and might work out better under the premise that you're out in the field and unable to access your workbench, but I don't think I've ever been in a situation where I would actually really need tiny disposable items like this...
As cool as this idea sounds, the argument is that you can use it until you have a workbench in place, but the problem is that you can not only craft a workbench from the equivalent of a single Wood block, which is probably the first thing you will get your hands on after starting a new game, but you can also take it with you.
Granted, some of the concepts are cool, and might work out better under the premise that you're out in the field and unable to access your workbench, but I don't think I've ever been in a situation where I would actually really need tiny disposable items like this...
On second thought, some of those ideas that aren't just mini versions of existing items are actually pretty neat, like the directional arrows and changing the properties of arrows. I guess the idea is still good, but marketing it as a placeholder until you get a crafting table wasn't such a good idea; regardless of required crafting space size, some of these ideas are actually really cool.
Being able to punch logs off Minecraft trees sort of makes sense, actually...
You see, when a real-life tree grows, it forms layer upon layer of hard membranes as it slowly grows. This causes it to be very tough and nearly impossible to punch down. But Minecraft trees do not have time to leisurely armor themselves over a long time. In fact, they grow so quickly and explosively (literally in a blink of the eye) that air bubbles form within the tree, causing it to be extremely porous. Moreover, the membranes have no time to connect in the organized manner assumed by real life trees, causing the wood to be very easily broken.
The result is trees that are very player friendly.
-They are easily punched down
-Once down, the player is able to strip the spongy wood into planks, and those planks into rods (sticks) with their bare hands.
-The trees float in the air, otherwise the #1 noob death would be trees that fell on players when they took the bottom log out first.
-Saplings take much less time to grow into trees because fewer resources are necessary to grow if it is mostly air.
With the one consequence being that the logs burn extremely quickly with all the air bubbles, they will burn out in a matter of seconds rather than the many hours that a cubic meter of wood would provide in real life.
Summary-Stop thinking Minecraft trees should act like regular trees. All the evidence points to the fact that they are not.
Thank you.
It has to do with where the power stems from. In a way, it's almost a form of clerical magic at that point, where you have to follow a certain set of standards to be allowed access to that power, so yeah, it makes sense for you to not be able to put on plate armor. However this particular point is WAAAAY off topic, so lets end that there. Personally though, I do agree that magic should at most only be disabled while you're wearing the armor, and perhaps even come with physical skill penalties if you're not trained for using that heavy of an armor, but it should still let you at least put it on.
No, because there is no differentiation between the same item when there's just one and when its stacked. Putting it down automatically takes it out of the stack, so THAT is the simplest method.
It barely makes a difference as is. certainly not enough to justify them having different material amounts.
Every other material that you can make tools from needs a tool (generally a pickaxe) to mine. This makes wood, which you can also make tools from also require a tool to mine. (though you still have the more tedious option to make it from saplings)
Not really. That only brings the axe up to the same value as a Shovel, and that only uses one material, nowhere near the 3 that an axe uses.
In fact not only do I, but I did. I don't know why you didn't include that when you took that quote.
You do have a point, but I personally see this as an option that Notch, if he had considered the possibility from the start, he would have already implemented himself. I don't see it as making something more difficult than it should be, but rather AS difficult as it should be. After all, you have to carry around a pick axe to be able to mine stone, do you consider that unreasonable? Why is it any more unreasonable to require an axe to mine logs? Heck I'm not even saying it should be needed for wood planks or chests.
I also doubt we'll come to a full agreement, but as long as we keep track of what is personal opinion and what is objective assessments the debate can be quite enjoyable and thought provoking for both sides.
PLEASE ALSO SUPPORT:
Sabata & Grey Acumen's "New Nether"
Grey Acumen's Minecraft 2.0 Suggestion Series
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumNope, this explanation still doesn't fly. There's no magic in armour.Yeah.
Um, actually there is. There's this field in ItemStack called "count" (at least, that's what Bukkit calls it) which can be checked to see if the satchel is stacked before opening the inventory window.
If every material used to make tools required a tool to mine, it would be impossible to make tools. I imagine that's probably why Notch made wood mineable by hand. Now, it's true your idea solves that in another way (giving an alternate way to obtain one of those materials other than by mining), but I still prefer the simplicity of punching a tree to death.
Fair enough, I guess.
That was my way of saying that I don't think it is a good thing.
I suspect you'd be wrong, but neither of us can speak for Notch without first asking him, so I won't comment further on this.
Which runs into my "too realistic" barrier.
Not really, but stone is a lot harder than wood.
Mostly just because it's a change to the current mechanic, also because logs are not as hard as stone.
True, true, and I'll try my best to avoid stating opinion as fact. That said, if we start just arguing in circles, there's probably nothing left to cover.
There doesn't need to be magic. All you need is for the power that the wizard draws on to be from something with its own awareness, and it can easily say "well, if you wear that shitty platemale stuff, you aren't gonna be tapping into MY power"
Oh, okay, I hadn't see that in bukkit, and I've observed no examples of this in vanilla minecraft. Either way, because there are no examples of this already in vanilla minecraft, I would tend to stay away from using that methodology.
Look, it's not like I'm proposing that you take damage as you carry lava in a bucket, but on the other end of that spectrum, would you be okay with lava not injuring the player at all, even if they swam through it?
Yet still harder than your fists. (otherwise you'd be able to mine stone by hand, wouldn't you?)
i suppose. That's part of why I've trimmed out so much of what you've posted, i generally left out the ones that are purely a difference of opinion.
PLEASE ALSO SUPPORT:
Sabata & Grey Acumen's "New Nether"
Grey Acumen's Minecraft 2.0 Suggestion Series
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumUm, actually there is. There's this field in ItemStack called "count" (at least, that's what Bukkit calls it) which can be checked to see if the satchel is stacked before opening the inventory window.[/quote]Oh, okay, I hadn't see that in bukkit, and I've observed no examples of this in vanilla minecraft. Either way, because there are no examples of this already in vanilla minecraft, I would tend to stay away from using that methodology.[/quote]Uh, it is in vanilla Minecraft. I just checked, and MCP calls it stackSize. How else would the game know how many of each item you have, anyway?
Actually, I would be okay with that. :tongue.gif: It's not something I would push for, though.
Well, real people don't generally dig up massive quantities of dirt and sand with their bare hands either. Realism is not the answer here in my opinion.
I'm not talking about the function, I'm talking about USING that function to give a stack of items a different effect when used than what a single item by itself does. That is something that vanilla minecraft doesn't do, at least not so far.
you're okay with lava in a bucket damaging the player, but not with trees needing axes to cut down. Yup, this defintiely is a personal preference issue.
PLEASE ALSO SUPPORT:
Sabata & Grey Acumen's "New Nether"
Grey Acumen's Minecraft 2.0 Suggestion Series
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumI'm certain it would be possible, but I don't know that much about how Item and its subclasses work, so if you're merely extending Item (or one of its subclasses) to make your satchel I suppose it might not be as simple to check the stack size as if you were writing a Bukkit plugin. Still... I noticed at least some of the Item subclasses decrementing the stack size, so at least some of them have access to it.
Sorry, I meant that I'd be okay with swimming in lava not damaging you. It's logical that it does, however, so I wouldn't push for it to happen.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumI really wish you were. :tongue.gif: As far as I'm concerned it's a haphazard mix of really good ideas and really bad ideas.
But no. There are quite a few people who like the idea as a whole so much that they want it to be in the game, at least if the poll at the top is any indication.
So wouldn't it be MORE of an achievement if you didn't absolutely NEED to make it?
PLEASE ALSO SUPPORT:
Sabata & Grey Acumen's "New Nether"
Grey Acumen's Minecraft 2.0 Suggestion Series
I like the idea of crafting sticks from saplings, but not enough to completely remove punching wood. Otherwise, I like the entire post.
http://interstellarmarines.com
Thanks qwertyz for linking me to this vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhk-2Wb_IyQ&feature=player_embedded
You can still punch wood, you just can't get logs from doing it. I liked punching stone blocks back in classic, but notch took that out with the pre-alpha release, you don't see anyone bitching about that, or at least not being taken seriously when they do ***** about it.
PLEASE ALSO SUPPORT:
Sabata & Grey Acumen's "New Nether"
Grey Acumen's Minecraft 2.0 Suggestion Series
Instead...
put 4 daggers together in your crafting box (inventory) will give you "Throwing Knives" (Wood-Diamond) which stack to 64 and do the damage of a arrow and the damage lowers as the knife travels though the air.
If you use daggers that stack, it will be an over powered melee weapon if it stacks and would be an under powered (based on the damage) if it doesn't
Other than that, its a great idea!
Granted, some of the concepts are cool, and might work out better under the premise that you're out in the field and unable to access your workbench, but I don't think I've ever been in a situation where I would actually really need tiny disposable items like this...
On second thought, some of those ideas that aren't just mini versions of existing items are actually pretty neat, like the directional arrows and changing the properties of arrows. I guess the idea is still good, but marketing it as a placeholder until you get a crafting table wasn't such a good idea; regardless of required crafting space size, some of these ideas are actually really cool.
You see, when a real-life tree grows, it forms layer upon layer of hard membranes as it slowly grows. This causes it to be very tough and nearly impossible to punch down. But Minecraft trees do not have time to leisurely armor themselves over a long time. In fact, they grow so quickly and explosively (literally in a blink of the eye) that air bubbles form within the tree, causing it to be extremely porous. Moreover, the membranes have no time to connect in the organized manner assumed by real life trees, causing the wood to be very easily broken.
The result is trees that are very player friendly.
-They are easily punched down
-Once down, the player is able to strip the spongy wood into planks, and those planks into rods (sticks) with their bare hands.
-The trees float in the air, otherwise the #1 noob death would be trees that fell on players when they took the bottom log out first.
-Saplings take much less time to grow into trees because fewer resources are necessary to grow if it is mostly air.
With the one consequence being that the logs burn extremely quickly with all the air bubbles, they will burn out in a matter of seconds rather than the many hours that a cubic meter of wood would provide in real life.
Summary-Stop thinking Minecraft trees should act like regular trees. All the evidence points to the fact that they are not.
Pipes
Sorry, your "air bubbles" theory did not sway me.
PLEASE ALSO SUPPORT:
Sabata & Grey Acumen's "New Nether"
Grey Acumen's Minecraft 2.0 Suggestion Series