Quote from SuperCreeperGirl
EDIT: just thought of something!
Look at this Q&A. I've underlined the part I'm talking about.
Can I charge access to a specific part of my server, such as a minigame or world?
No, you cannot charge for any part of a server other than the initial access. Once on a server, all players must have the same gameplay privileges. You may make a different server for the user to connect to which features “premium” areas, and charge for access to that server instead, but the benefits cannot carry over to your other servers.
In other words, if you wanted to have a perk (such as a minigame) that can only be used by people who pay hard currency, you could just make a new server with the premium perks, and then give people the IP (via a plugin or something) whenever they donate the required amount of money. All you would have to do is make sure that the perks on the premium server don't cross into the main server.
No idea if this is allowed, but it would work. (I don't own a server myself, so I really don't know if this would be executable, though I think it would be. Just saying)
Woah. This is probably the most useful contribution on the whole thread. Basically you can have a "trial server", and then if you like it enough, you can donate to move to the one with more features?
In general, I don't think the "good" (large) servers will die. I think they will innovate. If they can't, they didn't deserve to exist (at least that's what Mojang is saying).
The donators having powers to give everyone something is a really neat idea, as well.
0
You're right on the simple algebra. I think, though, that he means that 6 dollar bills would cost 1$. His math is off, though - I don't know why he ignored the 25% linen that he said the bill was.
0
5
I mean, cool mod and all, but I'd feel better using it if I knew that he didn't mind spin-offs.
Edit: If you're going to talk about "innovation", your mod doesn't have much. You don't improve on the interface, the textures, the idea, you just add a higher tier barrel. At the very least ask neptunepink first, so that he knows you're using his stuff.
Btw, don't give me all the "intellectual property patent/copyright shouldn't exist" crap. It doesn't matter: you copied him directly without even asking.
0
I do like the change to make progression more gradual - however, I do like the current concept that brewing can only be done after going and fighting some blazes. So, I'm not sure overall on this idea.
0
0
Seriously though, I have no way to tell if this guy is credible at all.
0
The fight's too complicated. How in the world would I remember to do all the cat-killing etc? I don't know if I would bother. It seems like something for a mod. Would be good if it was simpler, though.
Difficulty seems good without the flying away part (we already have 2 flying bosses).
The broom is overpowered. No getting around it, even with magical fuel. Again, it feels like something from a mod - as much as it would be awesome, I don't know if it fits. Maybe Mojang could find a way to make it feel more like vanilla? Possibly giving some effect akin to jump boost? I don't know.
I don't support it in its current form, but I agree the witches should be changed (or removed).
0
He didn't say he donated, just that the rank existed.
OT: Kind of stupid. Not many people will have that kind of money laying around.
0
I actually wasn't going to support a "peaceful" method of getting gunpowder, but this seems pretty interesting, fairly balanced, and would add some flavour. But definitely not as a common overworld ore.
0
So? Your arguments against more possibilities don't make a lot of sense.
Yes, if I were to release a map to the community, I would make it look good. Especially because I don't have to spend all my time doing redstone.
AFAIK, they are not "gone". Instead of all the work being duplicated across all the clients, it gets done on the server once... which are mostly beast machines anyway. I haven't seen drops in very large servers because of this.
Huh? NEI works with servers just fine.
Yes, you sound like a conspiracy theorist. I see nothing to say that they are outlawing offline mode. Sorry.
Overall, I'm not sure you understand singleplayer-multiplayer "merge". A locally hosted server is a very common way of not having to create, essentially, two games and codebases. There is nothing stopping you from not playing with anyone else! You can still play "multiplayer" (localhost singleplayer) in offline mode. As for making "multiplayer more like singleplayer", that would be bugfixes due to the codebase merge. Nothing gameplay wise; in fact, the opposite.
0
However, I think the reason that paintings drop is because they are entities... and cocoa beans aren't. So might take more effort than necessary, given the usefulness.
(However, given the effort expended on fireworks...)
0
If this is to make the tools more balanced, I don't see the need - they're already slow.
If this is to have more of a "use" for the wood step, I don't see the point: I seriously doubt anyone would use them any more, except as an "on-the-fly" tool. Which brings me to the next issue:
Why make it take longer for the player to dig things? There is no way I would use a 60-use wood tool instead of just cooking stone. All this has done, then, has made my life more annoying.
Yes, I do agree it opens some interesting resource-limiting possibilities. But so does the current setup; and overall, I don't see the benefit that would come from such a fundamental change.
By the way, if you're going to say that it won't affect much, simple recipe change etc - it does. That's the point, right? It changes a fundamental tech path of the game. And I don't understand the overarching benefit.
0
Two things:
-Maybe bubbles etc. where it's located, so as to make it visible to attentive players
-How would the bottom look? Say, if in multiplayer, someone swam down to the base of the arm.
Sounds pretty cool though, and kind of fitting. Maybe a little on the creepy side, but ghasts are pretty creepy, so...
0
The rendering engine, afaik, cannot support upside-down players/viewpoints etc. Of course, it could be re-written, but that seems like a LOT of work for one addition. We could then however have nice falling animations, but for now seems to be not worth it.
0
Here is my mod class, item class, and entity class:
Ignore the first item modification part in load, that doesn't have any problems.
And here is my render file. Most of this is copied from the snowball's, 'cause I don't understand too well how it works.
Can anyone help? What have I not registered? It seems a lot of people have throwing item problems, but none the same as this.
Edit: Whoops, did the spoilers wrong.