My kingdom for a single block that allows a frame to move omnidirectionally, without having to make an inchworm drive for every direction!
Or heck, even an one-axis inchworm drive in one block. A recipe with 4 motors and *other stuff* to give a block that can move an attached frame in two directions. Interface it with bundled cables from Immibis (http://www.minecraft...ontrollighting/) and a GUI to select what color moves in each direction. Less laggy, smaller, and simpler to use than inchworm drive spam?
- Registered Member
Member for 9 years, 7 months, and 28 days
Last active Mon, Jan, 11 2016 21:32:58
- 0 Followers
- 349 Total Posts
- 0 Thanks
Jul 22, 2010Posted in: SuggestionsQuote from Bearodactyl »you....>=[ are suggesting that my food spoils?
No. screw that. I'll backtrace you to hell and back.
having food that spoils is like having fatigue. It just punishes you for playing the game right.
CONSEQUENCES WILL NEVER BE THE SAME
Jul 7, 2010Posted in: SuggestionsQuote from werty894 »I only understood 50% of that but it sounds great!
I'm not totally convinced the OP actually does either. Bittorrent is for static files. Once you start changing chunks, I'm not sure if error-checking will still work anymore. At least all the buzzwords seem to be in the right locations.
As far as distributing files when servers are offline? Sure. Lock the size at something manageable (for broadband), like half a gig of data.
And distributed servers wouldn't be impossible either. Just not "Bittorrent" like it's a magic word that makes things work.. It would be... fairly easy (?) to simply keep a local copy on each client, changing stuff as needed. The problem is, each player needs to download all the changes since they left, each time they reconnect. This means players will be stuck not-playing for protracted periods of time, as they download static (yet changed) chunks, and update those with dynamically changed chunks. Instead of "block X, Y, Z on chunk 2134 is now type 37" they'll need to do a LOT more.
Instead of a server keeping track, each player will need to send a copy of all their block changes to each co-client- shouldn't be too bandwidth intensive though, I suppose.
For LAN games, this might be workable. Use the torrent to distribute a single saved world to each client. Have each client use the relatively unlimited LAN bandwidth.
Pros: Lots more monsters. Each PC might keep track of a set of monsters, and simply update their positions.
- [*:cizqgh70]New players "connecting" to a changing world could be very hard. Look at any FPS match-style game right now, each player loads a local copy of the map, and then the positions of all the players, names, dropped items, etc. Now add in a changing world map of large size.
[*:cizqgh70]Downloading a lot of changes for a large map every join would be... interesting. Chunks would need "last updated" values, so clients don't get old data, then have to toss it and get NEW data.
[*:cizqgh70]Cheater vulnerability- Imagine if someone figures out how to join, and re-update every chunk...[*:cizqgh70]Bandwidth issues can be run into, impacting gameplay.[*:cizqgh70]Who's going to be the tracker? DHT protocol? More bandwidth.[*:cizqgh70]Some people (well, their ISPs) have issues with Bittorrent stuff. A lot of Blizzards (for example) users cannot download their stuff via torrents. This has been an issue since beta, in fact. (I was there!)
Jul 6, 2010Servers don't spend CPU on maintaining areas that nobody is near, or on monsters that have no chance of running into players.Posted in: Suggestions
So you could POSSIBLY tie a equipped-zombie spawn to a player "tombstone" entity. But it wouldn't wander unless a player was near enough, and if the player leaves, it would probably despawn. Also, we don't want a field full of tombstones that kills anyone who enters.
How about this: boss zombies that collect equipment. They're tied to a dungeon spawn, and they take your gear and throw it in a chest if they kill you.
Jun 27, 2010Mostly identical to the current lava. Magma pretty much MEANS "Lava, but hotter and deeper"- I'm suggesting another fluid type, so it needs a new name too. So. Magma.Posted in: Suggestions
Lava. But hotter.
Spawns far lower in the map. Magma > Water > Lava.
Magma would evaporate water, instead of the water turning it to stone. Visually, could be a different color pattern, or color. Perhaps make lava duller, and magma stays at current brightness.
IMO, it would be nice to have lava caverns that could not be defeated by dumping water on it. It would be low on the map, because it's a bit more of a hazard... maybe have it spread more readily than lava?
(If you want to get really technical, it SHOULD expand ignoring air whenever a mine hits it... but that would just be crazy hazardous for deep mining, and not help the gameplay.)
Jun 27, 2010Posted in: SuggestionsQuote from Swingerzetta »Quote from ibeatyou9 »its muscovite and its really thin, but yeah i think this would fall under weight or time falling/disappearing blocks
maybe thats what obsidian could be used for? or maby this: because it has no use now
I find it odd that you suggested the two hardest materials in the game in a thread about easily broken rock :tongue.gif: The whole point of bedrock is that it's unbreakable. Serves as a barier on the bottom of the world, is how I interpreted it.
I would prefer sand/wet sand to behave like this than have a whole new type of rock themed block. I am all for new materials, but there are so many that could add crafting depth or world beauty, breakable muskovite isn't really one of them.
He's talking about REAL obsidian. Not op-block.
And how it works (if you don't already know) is the top layer of lava in a volcano shaft cools and hardens, then the lava underneath recedes. As long as the volcano remains inactive, that plug remains. The plug can be of any thickness, anything from thin enough to shatter under its own weight, to any given thickness that fits inside the shaft.
It would be quite cool if the game spawns volcanoes. Don't tell me you wouldn't build a volcano base, everyone would do THAT. :tongue.gif:
(Given another forum, I might assume most people know basic geology, but... this is Minecraft suggestions forum...)
Jun 21, 2010Posted in: SuggestionsQuote from Swingerzetta »I agree with you o springs (although decorating the landscape with rivers is pretty cool)
But why shouldn't players be able to dig a trench and have water follow it?
Simple answer: because players can't be trusted to not flood the world. (Either on purpose, or even accidentally. Heck, even the map generator might try, if it were possible.) Having a long-range aqueduct require a certain construction makes it just slightly harder to pipe water to places. But requiring that man-made construction limits it to certain block types, which HOPEFULLY would make the water calculations quicker enough to allow it to flow long distances.
I'm not the one who decided water only flowed 6 blocks, Notch made it that way so that water could be localized.
Quote from Lordofq »Acequia's work wonders and require absolutely no stone. I don't see why dirt cannot be used. It would be a shame to
olimit flowing to only work with half blocks.
Again, water behaves in the current fashion as a shortcut. Water does NOT flow realistically. Water stops flowing to prevent flooding and overuse of CPU.
Adding in aqueduct-stuff water would simply IMO be a better solution of getting water from a pump-point. Since holding endless water in a bucket seems kind of silly to me. :?
Jun 20, 2010The point is to be able to create aqueducts that are totally useless for actually flooding anything.Posted in: Suggestions
IMO, we shouldn't be able to create springs anyway- leave the "springs" action to pump-type stuff (or liquid portals). Then, people could pump water UP, and channel it through aqueducts for farm irrigation. (A properly cascaded structure could probably still split it decently).
Using half blocks has another purpose: it requires effort and stone. Players won't be able to just dig a trench, they'll have to actually MAKE a decent amount of half-blocks to make an aqueduct of size.
TBH, an aqueduct should probably require stone on the sides, too. That might be a bit much though.
Jun 20, 2010Infdev water is neat. Doesn't quite fill properly, IMO, but it's a necessary evil, i guess.Posted in: Suggestions
One thing though that's hard to make is channels of water- the water evaporates/soaks in/disappears within what, 6 squares? Tolerable for small-scale irrigation, but not a whole lot else.
So I was playing around on infdev, putting spring blocks on top of various things, and using half-blocks for bridges of water channels. Got to thinking that half-blocks could have one more use- lining water channels.
Here's how it could work: Water introduced to a half-block flows almost like normal, without losing height as long as it's flowing onto exactly one adjacent half-block. If the water flows onto 2-3 blocks, it loses one level of height (and keep in mind, it has to be above 50% to start, anyway.) The water flowing OFF of a half-block is only half normal flow-height. Ideally, you place a spring directly next to a line of half-blocks, probably for irrigation.
What this offers, is a way to make channels of water of any length, as long as it's over a string of half-blocks. Once it flows off, it behaves normally. And if it's split more than.. twice? It stops flowing, so no long strings of half-blocks could be used to flood a long cliff- as the blocks are removed, the water starts halving, until there's no more height left, drying up the rest of the blocks.
Jun 18, 2010Posted in: SuggestionsQuote from Ditherliss »Quote from Swingerzetta »haha. I like that beds drop pillows. Although I'd say you only have to have four cloth, none on the corners.
as for concerns about ditches and stuff, well, claim flags would help that :tongue.gif: other than that, this is a concern no matter how spawning works, as long as there's a set respawn point. A potential greifer just has to pay a bit of attention to see where you pop up after dying.
They would dig AROUND the flag. You can't claim everywhere. Flags wouldn't work.
Dude. Is your brain broken?
Even if a spawn flag only claims 50x50 blocks, digging down to lava would require removing, what, roughly 100 blocks per column?
So, for a trench down to lava (100 deep?) of 3 width around a 50x50 claim, that would require more than 15000 blocks per side (50x3x100 deep). So 4 sides (not counting corners, even) is 60,000 blocks.
Now, say that each block takes 1/2 a second to remove- that's 30,000 seconds, 500 minutes, 8+1/3 hours.
And once the person inside respawns, they have a 50x50 area to get ONE SINGLE BLOCK TO PLACE TO JUMP ACROSS 8 HOURS OF WORK.
Jun 16, 2010Posted in: SuggestionsQuote from nebb »Also when its on the last wave all wooden blocks will set on fire. including chests and crafting tables.
nebb, you're still a twit. This isn't a discrete game type- there are no "waves." Nothing should just "happen" for no reason. Perhaps embers might fall from the sky and light unprotected combustibles.
Jun 14, 2010How about an emitter of some sort that throws a beam of light?Posted in: Suggestions
Combine that with mirrors at 45 degree angles, and you have a reliable method of lighting a mine without requiring torches. If the mirrors don't require wood, you wouldn't even need wood.
Just 4 blocks, 2 iron ingots, and a stone block, and sand=nothing.
And if you could create a prism out of glass to split beams, you could light up multiple paths!
Jun 14, 2010Posted in: SuggestionsQuote from Asdflvr »Nope.
Sounds neato though
I would really love this
It..its sort of reminds me of Nazi zombies :3
:? Nazi zombies?
There should definitely be some way to dodge the cycles though. Perhaps players could rush to construct airships in the safe times, and then be in the air and mostly safe during the apocalypse times, and either fly to a safe area, or just wait it out. Though for the servers with longer cycles, waiting it out would be kinda boring.
That, or teleports- a standard cheap teleport that simply acts as a respawn, dropping off a player in a safe area, where they can repeat the process, or do something else. Or let people teleport to other bases (with built teleports), which would be a good method of fleeing a breached base. Because if the gametype is challenging enough, things should go tits-up fairly often.
One thing that I thing would be interesting is having bases with a gadget that projects a beam of light straight up, visible from long ranges. This would allow players to gather and pool resources at say, a fortified mountain, when they're bailing from their own bases.
Quote from nebb »Whenthey get rain itll rain FIRE!!!!! :twisted:
*patpat* Now you be a good little moron, and don't eat too much paste, ok?
Not a terribly bad idea for an ambient visual effect during apocalypse periods though. nebb, you might almost be starting to lose your edge. :roll:
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.