• 0

    posted a message on Cave anxiety, how do you conquer it?
    See a therapist about your anxiety disorder? Seriously though, just go into the cave without any items and get killed a couple dozen times. You'll get desensitized to it and won't be as scared the next time around. Remember, it's just a game.
    Posted in: Survival Mode
  • 0

    posted a message on [IDEA]Level up!
    I don't think you should grant experience points for destroying blocks. Instead keep the focus on building by assigning a certain number of experience points to different craftables and blocks placed. This way it's less likely that players will just go around destroying everything just to get xp. Just a thought. Giving xp for blocks placed would be good. I don't expect many players would go around placing blocks randomly just to get xp :smile.gif:
    Posted in: Requests / Ideas For Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on [1.1] Piston patch - updated for 1.1
    Quote from Kimundi »
    dig/drill piston - mines all blocks


    This. I wrote a simple mod that introduces a new block that harvests any block placed in front of it, and was planning on using it with Machinecraft to create factories. However, I would much rather see a new piston block that does this, though. Pistons are way more awesome than my mod :smile.gif:
    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on [1.3_01]MachineCraft: Mover Blocks[v1.2][Entity Movement!]
    @PowerUP
    I tested the distance between super mover blocks and yes, the maximum distance is 32 spaces in between the blocks, vertically and horizontally, before the super movers stop functioning.
    I did discover one other thing that would prevent them from functioning, however. If you add a 3rd super mover block to the same axis, it must sitting either directly next to one of the existing blocks, or have no more than 1 space gap between it and the existing mover (graphical representation below). I'm sure you're aware of this but figured I'd point this out for others. Basically, stay away from having more than 2 super mover blocks on the same axis to keep things least complicated as possible.

    :DBlock: = supermover
    :DBlock: 32 air blocks :DBlock: works fine
    :DBlock: 32 air blocks :DBlock: :DBlock: works fine
    :DBlock: 32 air blocks :DBlock: [] :DBlock: works fine
    :DBlock: 32 air blocks :DBlock: [] [] :DBlock: no longer works

    On a side note, I was experimenting with how the super movers function when a block that is being moved crosses the paths of two opposing sets of super movers, setup like this on the y axis (side view)
    [] [] [] [] [] :DBlock: [] [] [] [] []
    [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] []
    [] :DBlock: [] [] [] [] [] [] [] :DBlock: []
    [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] []
    [] [] [] [] [] :DBlock: [] [] [] [] []

    If I power the left or right super mover, and power the top or bottom mover, any block that is being moved that crosses in the middle seems to always go up or down, even if the block started from left to right or vice versa.
    Just wondering, was it hard-coded this way? I'm working on making a platform that ascends vertically and then moves horizontally once it reaches the top so just want to get an understanding of the hard-coded behavior of the blocks. I haven't tested the behavior when set up on the x axis (i.e. do the blocks tend to go north&south or east&west)

    I do have a few suggestions:
    1) Make it so if both movers are powered, nothing happens (as opposed to the current setup in which blocks just "tweak out" between the movers). Not sure if anybody is planning on utilizing the current functionality but to me it just seems impractical and causes issues when redstone signals are delayed.

    2) Create a separate set of mover blocks that turn each other on/off based on whether or not the other block is powered, and have it so the blocks can't be both on or both off at once. Essentially this would make it so you don't even have to connect one of the blocks to redstone. While this will potentially limit the usage of the mover blocks for complex mechanisms, it would work very nicely for practical applications such as simple bi-directional elevators or moving platforms. It would allow the creation of an elevator in which there is no redstone circuit running between the two mover blocks. I suggested creating a separate set of mover blocks (perhaps called "Polar Super Movers" or something) so that users can still use the original functionality of the movers if they want to.

    3) Letting the user set a mover block so that it doesn't function if a block is directly next to it between it and the other mover block. This way, structures can be moved back and forth without getting flattened (like once the roof of the elevator touches the mover block, the other blocks making up the floor of the elevator don't move). Similar to the other suggestion, this one would be best implemented in a way that lets the user decide which option fits best (because in many cases it is preferably the have the mover just pull all the blocks together, like using the mover blocks to compact a certain area by removing air blocks, for example).

    Just a few ideas. I'm sure there are much better ideas out there but figured I'd share these.
    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on [1.3_01]MachineCraft: Mover Blocks[v1.2][Entity Movement!]
    Amazing mod. I'm very excited about the possibilities! One question: I was experimenting with different distances for the super mover and vertically was able to create an elevator at least 20 blocks apart (or close to). What is the exact limit in terms of distance between the mover blocks? Is it the same distance when they are used vertically as horizontally (laterally)? As I tested the distance I think I messed things up by stacking other super mover blocks on top of each other. Couldn't seem to get the same results each time...
    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on The Fed - Regulate your Minecraft Economy!
    Quote from dreamer_of_evil »
    Quote from RS14 »


    What you don't seem to be clearly explaining is why a rational player would ever accept gold in exchange for anything. "To trade with others" doesn't count, seeing as they don't want it either.




    Narcisism is correct. Its value is based only on faith, a faith that if one player accepts gold as payment for goods/services, then others will. A couple of examples:

    Example 1: A veteran SMP player wants to build a new courtyard in his castle floored entirely with tree stump blocks. It would require several stacks of wood and this veteran player is rich, having mined the hillside diligently for a while. Rather than spending several minecraft days wandering around and cutting down trees, he would rather cut out all that work and simply pay someone to do it for him. (And thus a class system is born, but more on that in another thread) So he travels down to the village where he meets a new player and says "If you bring me twenty stacks of stumps :Logs^: I will pay you ten gold bars." (This value is purely arbitrary for the purpose of the example) The newcomer agrees and later delivers 20 stacks of stumps. (to reply to an earlier post, a trading mod would be ideal) The veteran pays hims, takes his stumps and builds his courtyard. The newcomer then, ten gold richer, now goes to town a finds a player willing to sell diamonds. He buys a diamond for nine gold bars and is thus able to finally make his first diamond pickaxe. The diamond seller, in turn, takes the gold from that sale and others and then pays for other supplies. And thus the cycle continues

    Example 2: A rich but naive player of minecraft wants to build a secret locking mechanism for his house, but doesn't have the knowledge of Redstone to do it. Rather than slog through the intricacies and trial and error of experimentation, he instead calls his buddy, a Redstone expert, to come set up the system for him. The buddy agrees, but only for the price of twenty gold bars (again, arbitrary). Project completed, Redstone works, buddy gets paid. With his new gold then, the buddy decides he wants to build a new test chamber for his experimentation, but doesn't want to physically hollow out an an entire mountain, so he then pays a different player (or perhaps a team who split the profits) to do it for him. This team them pays another character to add a pool to their house and the cycle continues.

    In these examples, both goods (1) and services (2) are traded with gold as the medium of exchange. Its power therefore, lies in its ability to be effectively traded for anything be it logs, diamonds or pools. If all players acknowledge and have faith in this purchasing power, then gold will function as a useful stand-in for straight barter method. This is exactly how paper currency functions in nations all over the world.


    Absolutely correct, provided the moderators of the server strictly enforce the rule that gold must be accepted as legal tender for all debts, public and private. The moment people start to refuse to accept gold as payment and instead only accept diamond, for example, is the moment gold becomes useless; this sort of thing would happen very easily since new user's faith in bartering will certainly be higher than faith in gold-based economy. It does make more sense that a trading mod would be used where the currency cannot be mined in-game and there is a fixed amount in the economy, with the mods being in charge of "printing" more of it as needed in the growing population.
    Posted in: Survival Mode
  • 0

    posted a message on Why is it that everyone obesses over "classic" games?
    Nostalgia, mostly. For me the classic games are where many revolutionary ideas first came into the gaming world. Ideas that were brand new, never done before, and in a way they were executed perfectly. Most games that followed contain similar ideas but just aren't as great because they aren't new. I guess an analogy would be music: let's say you grew up when rock and roll first started to become it's own style. The music that evolved from it might still be very good, but you have a special place in your heart for the original stuff because you got to experience it's birth in a way.

    One of my favorite video game experiences was when I first played Super Metroid on the SNES. It was the first time I'd really seen the capabilities of the system (I didn't watch TV growing up, didn't read Nintendo power, and didn't really visit the stores all that much). Going from playing NES games and thinking they were the greatest thing ever to then seeing the SNES version of Samus run across the screen in speed-booster mode, with lava just inches from her feet, was just incredible. I just didn't think graphics could look that good.

    I've had similar awe-inspiring experiences with new games though, like the first time I played Portal for example.
    Posted in: General Gaming
  • 0

    posted a message on How to protect your chests...LIKE A BOSS
    wtf is this sh*t?
    Posted in: Survival Mode
  • 0

    posted a message on could minecraft be put on x box 360 plz
    Quote from gabelam »
    Then the team would have to port it to whatever language Xbox uses, meaning less time going into actually developing the game


    Usually companies hire external developers to port their games over to other consoles/systems so they can keep the focus on developing the lead platform. There are developers out there who pretty much only port games to other systems for the bigger developers. In the case of Mojang, I'm sure if this were to ever happen then they'd ensure that a separate team were responsible for the porting of the game.

    Quote from gabelam »
    Also, this would mean giving millions of Xbox-fags easier access to Minecraft (not a good thing)


    Can you explain exactly how this is a bad thing? I would think that opening up new markets would be financially positive for Mojang. Oh wait, this isn't logic you're employing, rather a childish opinion involving some misguided idea you have that if people you dislike play the same game as you then you feel violated in some way. By the way, you should refrain from using the word "fag" so liberally. You make yourself sound like those you are trying to criticize.
    Posted in: Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on notch plzz read
    Quote from yoman9125 »
    ok i have just got back on singlplayer and its 3/1/11 i tryed to move mouse but it kept moveing after i stoped the mouse i cheched all settings but cant find why its happening and want to stop it it is impossible to go any where i almost died with full iron :sad.gif:


    Stop playing Minecraft and instead study up on your grammar and language skills. Seriously, reading your post has given me a headache. Would it hurt to throw in just one period somewhere in there?
    Posted in: Survival Mode
  • 0

    posted a message on Unsticky this
    Not sure if someone mentioned this (I didn't read the entire thread) but did notice that this wasn't included in the list:

    It would be great to have an item regarding how to safely place lava inside of a house made of wood (like for an incinerator). Obviously this would require that you surround the lava with a non-flammable block like stone but put in some info on how lava will ignite blocks even if it's not touching them directly (i.e. it will ignite wood if it's diagonal to the lava block). I'm sure there are plenty of people who've burned down their houses due to the counter-intuitive nature of lava igniting non-adjacent blocks.

    Just a suggestion.
    Posted in: Survival Mode
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft.net is down, Notch buys Nerf gun
    Quote from Stamitos »
    No words to describe.........the hate.....i feel........for the op...........


    Funny how all the people who are legitimately upset with how Notch is managing everything spend the time to provide reasonable arguments yet all the fanboys post one liners like this. If you have no counterarguments then don't even bother posting.
    Posted in: Survival Mode
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft.net is down, Notch buys Nerf gun
    Quote from das7002 »

    Now show me a way that is easier then that you can do with an RDMS, even with MySQL I'd have to define the schema, possibly create multiple tables and index them, make sure I am using proper SQL statements everywhere...


    I guess it depends on what your software is designed to do. If your prototype is designed to actually manage relational data then you need to account for datatypes, constraints, relationships, etc. Storing the data in flatfiles the way you've described won't account for any of this unless your code handles it, which is a lot of unnecessary coding that you'd need to do in lieu if setting up a test/dev database (which doesn't take all that long if you already have the database server set up). It sounds like your prototype software just wouldn't require the amount of data to warrant setting up a db initially. My assumption was that the software would require more robust database functionality than just storing a string array in a delimited text file. For example, if you need to built a prototype that manages multiple tables, cascading operations on those tables, and reading data from multiple joined tables/partitions then flatfiles would be painful to implement.
    Posted in: Survival Mode
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft.net is down, Notch buys Nerf gun
    Quote from das7002 »

    When I make quick prototype software I rarely break out an actual database, its far quicker to just push out a sample that uses text files to store everything and if it has enough interest in actually developing more then I take the time to make it work with a database server...

    I know I can't be the only one that does that either...


    Something tells me you've never coded anything that uses a relational database if you think it's easier to design it around flat files first.
    Posted in: Survival Mode
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft.net is down, Notch buys Nerf gun
    Quote from das7002 »
    And you don't know if all the data is in a Database you really don't... for all you know Notch couldve made a terribly inefficient text file system with several billion small files everywhere


    Knowing Notch's handiwork, he probably has everything stored in 6 billion different MS Access 97 databases.
    Posted in: Survival Mode
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.