Minecraft Forums

Same here.

Very disappointing. Had the urge to start fresh.

However... if I go to my son's Windows login and try it from there, it works fine...

Edit:

Compared my .minecraft directory to my son's and found I had a lot of excess stuff. Can't recall when I put them there, but had all manner of resource files, etc. Clearing them out got me going again.

This idea came up in response to another topic strictly about filtering what goes into chests, but since it kind of has a broader scope as well, I figured I'd give it its own topic, too.

My suggestion would be to create a "router" block.

You would attach this (like a hopper) to any kind of container. This will be its input.
It will automatically attach to any other surrounding containers, which would serve as outputs.
You'd then open it up and, in the GUI, place whatever items you want it to route.
Then, whenever a defined item is found in the input container, it's taken and sent, round-robin, into the outputs.

If it has a redstone charge it works opposite; it'll grab any items from the input container that AREN'T among those defined in the GUI.

Unlike hoppers, filters would NOT be considered a container. This would prevent filters from connecting to other filters directly, thereby avoiding any logic mess.

That being said, this would be an expensive item to create. My suggestion would be:

Stone - Hopper - Stone
Dropper - Comparator - Dropper
Stone - Dropper - Stone

Alternatively it could require Dispensers instead of Droppers, to increase its cost even more. (+3 bows)

I think that would adequately represent the 1-input, multi-output nature of it, as well as the logical complexity involved.

Let me know what you think. I have yet to find any quality filtering technique that works...

A bit of a thread resurrection but, eh... if the owners didn't want it they shouldn't let search engines crawl their forums.

My suggestion would be to create a "router" block.

You would attach this (like a hopper) to any kind of container. This will be its input.
It will automatically attach to any other surrounding containers, which would serve as outputs.
You'd then open it up and, in the GUI, place whatever items you want it to route.
Then, whenever a defined item is found in the input container, it's taken and sent, round-robin, through the outputs.

If it has a redstone charge it works opposite; it'll grab any items from the input container that AREN'T among those defined in the GUI.

Unlike hoppers, filters would NOT be considered a container. This would prevent filters from connecting to other filters directly, thereby avoiding any logic mess.

That being said, this would be an expensive item to create. My suggestion would be:

Stone - Hopper - Stone
Dropper - Comparator - Dropper
Stone - Dropper - Stone

Alternatively it could require Dispensers instead of Droppers, to increase its cost even more. (+3 bows)

I think that would adequately represent the 1-input, multi-output nature of it, as well as the logical complexity involved.

Quote from IronMagus

Sure there is. Just use a block that isn't dirt, or a tree that isn't oak. Oak trees are the only tree that can grow through things other than their own leaves, and the only things they can grow through are leaves of any kind, oak wood, and dirt.

I think that's right, anyway. Been a while since I checked. I do know that glass blocks, 8 blocks off the ground, will make perfect, uniform, 5-tall birch trees, every time.

You should add this to the wiki. From what the other guy said above it sounds like it could even grow through bedrock. But that aside, this would be good to have in the wiki for those who ran into this problem like me.

But it's a non-issue for me now. I've gone back to Beta 1.7.

Quote from Tyounr

This is very normal, it's used alot for apple farms.

So there's no way to force-limit the height of trees like in the old farms? Used to be you'd just give them 6 blocks worth of growth room and you could more easily farm.

Quote from EnderCreeper168

Well... stick with an older version!
The Minecraft launcher is able to download a lot of different versions of Minecraft. If you want to play an older version, just create a new profile in teh launcher and select yourpreferred version.

Ah, sweet. Didn't realize that ability was added.
I'll probably go all the way back to Beta 1.6, before they screwed passive mob farming. The best part was building traps for them!

Just too bad I'll lose all the more recent blocks and building mechanics. Would be nice if they separated such things into addons so you could pick and choose. I always enjoyed combining form and function; huge mansions built around even larger mob traps. Just can't get the best of all worlds, I guess.

Quote from P3num6ra

Trees do this all the time. In the update we are playing right now, you can use Dark Oak Saplings to destroy bedrock:

So a bug, then? I can't imagine they intentionally wanted to destroy bedrock...

I really wish they'd freeze development of this game someplace and give people a cleaner choice to stick with old versions. Ever since pre-release 1.6 it feels like updates just keep moving farther and farther away from the game I liked and bought. I've lost count of the number of worlds that have broken, huge mob traps that have been made obsolete, and now even my tree farm is breaking...

So coming back to Minecraft after a few months (since an update completely broke a world I'd done a lot of work in...) and I've built a rudimentary tree farm in preparation of major building.

Only I've got an anomaly I haven't seen before:



I have layered rows, one directly atop the others, with a 6-block vertical gap to limit growth to small trees.

If not obvious from the picture, the tree below is growing through the dirt block 7 blocks above it. I read in the wiki that branches and leaves sometimes grow through non-solids, but this is the trunk growing through as a solid. Is this normal? A bug? The wiki doesn't seem to point out this behavior at all.

P.S. Oh, and the funny part is that the torches that were on the side of the dirt block are now on the side of the wood. The dirt block is literally just replaced by wood.

Based on peoples' comments it sounds like the problem is that in the past games--ME2 especially--your actions could affect a lot of different things at, or towards, the end. The Human Reaper would be killed and the Collectors stopped, but everything surrounding that primary story conclusion could be altered.

Your actions could lead to some, all, or none of the Normandy's crew dying.
Your actions could lead to the ship being improved, or main characters dying as the battle goes.
Your actions could lead to main characters dying on the last mission depending on if you completed their personal missions.
Your actions determined if the Migrant Fleet was united or not at the end.
Your actions determined the fate of the Collector's base

The primary objective of the story was completed per the writer's wishes, but there were extensive details around that ending that you could control.

But based on what I've read there are few details surrounding the end of ME3 that you can control. Sure, you determine the "big outcome" between three choice, but none of those are satisfying if you can't define the details. It's like being able to pick a venue for a celebration, but not being able to decorate it.

Shepard should be able to survive.
You should be able to save the Mass Effect Relays or at least find information about how to build new ones.
And I imagine a great many other things--good or bad--should be based on your decisions.

Mind you, this is just based on what I've read. Honestly I have very little interest playing ME3, myself, after everything I've read about the ending. Which is sad. I had 8 characters I played through ME1 and 2 and made sure to play out a large variety of different options, hoping they'd have a big impact on ME3. Seems like they're pretty irrelevant now.

I'm against anything important only being obtainable in rare, random locations.

Even diamond, the rarest of resources, isn't actually required for anything important, except perhaps mining obsidian--but then it's not hard to find only 3. Everything else can be done with lesser, more common metals.

The reasons are simple:

1. Some people have **** poor luck and just don't find these things

2. In SMP, a single person dedicated to adventuring could find a great many of them, leaving none within a reasonable distance from spawn for new players or those who don't explore often.

3. Anything that isn't renewable has a risk of becoming increasingly rare on SMP servers.

Quote from Dorfan

"I am tired of all of this variety in my game, I want him to reuse pigmen for the villages. Someone please make my game less fun and interesting, I hate these snowmen that notch has forced me to make." -A rant by Trenix shortened down

now enough jokes, I am fine with how the villagers look, but they need to do something other than just wander around. Act like a real village. Collect that wheat, have a chest with bread or something, maybe a book for the village head and some resources for the guy with the forge. It can't be hard.

The irony is... many actually do feel the way you "jokingly" made him sound. Minecraft's original appeal was its simplicity--simplicity that won it many awards and millions of buyers. Overwhelming the game with more mechanics--even optional ones--makes it lose that simplistic, appealing feeling.

Wait... magic? Tell me they're not adding magic.

Potions I could deal with, though I would have preferred alchemy as a means to make a new generation of items.

But magic... even enchanting?

I started saying a week ago that Notch is taking the game more and more in the direction of an RPG, but even I didn't think he'd go this far. Especially this quickly. And enchanting makes me think of World of Warcraft way too much...

Quote from volcano_fl

Installing mods means MOVING FILES! You can't tell me that there are people who managed to get Minecraft but are not able to move files. -.-

Well, in defense of those not computer savvy, even I've never had any real cause to venture into the Users directory of my C: drive before. I still use the shortcut button in Minecraft options to get there quickly. It's an unusual place for a game to install itself.

And a bit annoying since I prefer all my games to reside on my E: drive...

Quote from Bondo

Besides how is it easier than the way it was before? I never used to have any issues with animal scarcity in the past. Now, if I don't create something to corral them in, plant some wheat, and herd a few animals together in order to create a sustainable supply, I quickly find that I have a serious problem with animal scarcity.

Never mind that passive mob killing is a whole new way to grief a server.

Quote from SmurfChisholm

you dont have to buy/play the game...you arent even required to update so why bother bitching about something you did not create...if it bothers you so much then create your own damn game then release it to the public and add things how you see fit so i can ***** about how YOU didnt make YOUR game the way I wanted you to.

The issue is more the fact that, for many people, Minecraft was the game they wanted, and now Notch is changing it away from that. That's even worse than a game not being what you hoped when you first get it. These people got it long ago and have been happy with it until now.

Quote from themodernkillcam

yes, i know. I just thought i would get more views that way.

What are you getting money per view or something?
Stop lying to people.

I'm not sure what's worse. That you did it or that you explained why you did it without seeming to realize how wrong it is...