Minecraft Forums

The Minecraft Wiki has a small section on this: http://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Explosion#Interaction_with_entities

So the way you're describing it, it SHOULD work. Clearly it doesn't, so you've made a mistake somewhere. The most likely scenario is that the world spawn isn't where you think it is. Try standing in the centre of your chunk with the command blocks and running the command "/setworldspawn ~ ~ ~". Possibility 2 is that the armor_stand isn't where you think it is. Hop into gamemode 3 and make sure it follows you around even when not in the spawn chunks.

No. You can only test for the existence of tags, not their absence. To test for an item that has not been renamed/has the default name, you would have to test for the absence of the display:{Name} tag, so it is not possible.

Yes this is really annoying. It's giving me a lot of trouble in relation to arrows. My best suggestion is to try and find a way to rename the item before the player gets ahold of it in the first place.

First of all, the second number, which you have as 0, is the maximum number of items to clear. If you want to clear at most 0 items, it won't ever clear anything. The first number is the item's metadata, which should be -1 unless you only want to clear shears that have been used a particular number of times.

If you have not renamed the item or given it other display related data, then the display:{} tag will not exist. If you only want to clear shears that have been renamed to that, your command will work. If you only want to clear shears that have not been renamed, that is, unfortunately, not possible.

Also note that names are cases sensitive, so you probably mean:

/clear @p minecraft:shears -1 1 {display:{Name:"Shears"}}

There is no trivial way to do this. The "/scoreboard players operation" command does not support simple boolean (True/false) comparisons, and the /testfor command cannot compare a score to another score, only to a constant. But there is a way to do it (This is in fact the way computers compare values at the most basic level).

First create a third score, called something like "Compare" of type dummy. Then set use "/scoreboard players operation @e[name=playerCounter] Compare = @e[name=playerCounter] playerAmount". This sets playerCounter's Compare score to its own playerAmount score. Then use "/scoreboard players operation @e[name=playerCounter] Compare -= @e[name=playerCountReady] playerReady". This subtracts playerCountReady's playerReady score from playerCounter's Compare score. Then you can just do "/testfor @e[name=playerCounter,score_Compare_min=0,score_Compare=0]" to test if playerCounter's Compare score is 0. If it is, that means that the subtraction resulted in 0 and the amounts are equal. You could also use this for other comparisons:

playerAmount = playerReady: "/testfor @e[name=playerCounter,score_Compare_min=0,score_Compare=0]"

playerAmount < playerReady: "/testfor @e[name=playerCounter,score_Compare=-1]"

playerAmount > playerReady: "/testfor @e[name=playerCounter,score_Compare_min=1]"

playerAmount <= playerReady: "/testfor @e[name=playerCounter,score_Compare=0]"

playerAmount >= playerReady: "/testfor @e[name=playerCounter,score_Compare_min=0]"

The hardest operation to do is not equals, which is best done by first checking equals, and then using "/testforblock x y z BlockID -1 {SuccessCount:0b}", where x y z are the coordinates of the command block that did the /testfor and BlockID is of course the ID of that block.

It's not every z amount of times. As long as you don't call it every tick or multiple times a tick, the result will be based on the time that has passed since you started the clock. This is unpredictable in most cases, so it is random for all intents and purposes, or pseudo-random.

If you need to call it multiple times a tick or every single tick, please say so (And which it is) so we can provide you with an alternative algorithm that will function in that circumstance.

On top of what MegaDerf said, nothing in computing is actually random, it only appears random, which is called being pseudo-random. ChocoParrot's algorithm will produce a pseudo random result, and so will work just fine. Unless you need an overly complicated pseudo-random algorithm to avoid some particular odd case, that algorithm won't be functionally much different from using random number generators built into your computer.

Note that one of those particular odd cases is if you're checking <= 71 every tick or multiple times a tick. That will produce data that doesn't look completely random.

The Ultimate CTM Community Thread: http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/mapping-and-modding/maps/maps-discussion/1564860-ctm-the-ultimate-ctm-community-thread

I'm still working my way throughout this, got yellow and green levers so far. I've figured out how to navigate the whole maze... But I can't figure out red and blue. It's very well done! A great puzzle.

Only suggestion would be for you to set the gamerule logAdminCommands to false, because it can cause some serious lag with command blocks, particularly without teleporters. I had to turn it off manually when the map became unplayable due to rubber banding, but it works fine now.

The Haste effect currently does affect attack speed. Though I agree the effect should be moved to a new and different status effect.

Erm, can't you do "/gamerule sendCommandFeedback false"?

Well you did try and summon it in 4 spacial dimensions so... Try changing direction:[0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0] to direction:[0.0,0.0,0.0]

I'm trying to make the jack o lantern invisible for the purposes of creating an invisible harmless light source (So not End portal). I used Gimp to create a transparent 16x16 texture, but blocks in game don't render transparency it seems, because the actual block was still opaque, and only the item in my hand showed as transparent. If I overwrite the texture, the block looks the same, and if I create a new texture it just appears black. So how do I make it transparent?

Portal needs to be surrounded by bedrock, as you're not supposed to be able to get around/under it, but other than I agree.

Basically because you have to load into memory 16x16x256x((RenderDistancex2)^2) blocks, all of which have varied models and textures, then you have to process and chain block updates 20 times a second, while rendering entities that have even more complex models and that all have their own AI and require regular updates. Throw on top of that animated textures, saving game state (Which is really big) and a whole load of other things, and it's really slow.

The thing with Minecraft compared to other games is that Minecraft is so dynamic it's difficult to cut down on processing. For example, in most games the levels are laid out ahead of time, so if an enemy is sitting 10 feet away from you behind a wall, the game doesn't have to render it because it knows you can't observe that enemy and there's no way for you to observe that enemy, except by continuing along the level until you hit a trigger that loads that enemy. You can't do that in Minecraft, because there's nothing to stop the player punching a hole through the wall.

TL;DR Minecraft is much more complex and dynamic than many games out there.