I mean glass is supposed to be fragile, it would make more sense if glass could break from something other than your hands/tool. Arrows make sense, and although they will fly completely through shattering the glass, they lose some of their momentum. Also, nearby glass should shatter too, similar to real life.
It's a small somewhat cosmetic addition I would like.
I just wish you could collect arrows shot AT you. How many times I've gotten into a 3 on 1 fight with skeletons and when I finally vanquish the last one I can't even collect the dozens of arrows sticking in the ground around me.
I just wish you could collect arrows shot AT you. How many times I've gotten into a 3 on 1 fight with skeletons and when I finally vanquish the last one I can't even collect the dozens of arrows sticking in the ground around me.
It's a 1mx1mx1m cube of glass. No flimsy arrows made or sticks and flint are gonna get through it, even with smurfkittens shooting at it. I'm at Eh. And I know Minecraft doesn't need to be realistic, but this means one less perk for arrows breaking glass.
I think they should and shouldnt break though glass.. Because griefers and all that gud stuff.. But the reason of they should, is then you cant just hide behind a wall of glass with skeletons shooting at you :I
It's a 1mx1mx1m cube of glass. No flimsy arrows made or sticks and flint are gonna get through it, even with smurfkittens shooting at it. I'm at Eh. And I know Minecraft doesn't need to be realistic, but this means one less perk for arrows breaking glass.
Doesn't change the fact that glass is still brittle and a well-placed shot can crack even a 1^3m cube.
Especially if you consider that four arrows are supposed to have the mass of a (1^3)/9 cube of pure iron and (1^3)/4 of wood. Let's just assume that an individual arrow would be a whopping 250kg launched at 5 m/sec. To calculate the kinetic energy, we simply do 250*5^2/2 and end up with 3125 joules worth of kinetic energy. (For the record; all arrows I still have are from the old crafting recipe and I cba to find out the density of flint :tongue.gif: )
<EDIT>
Ohh, just found the density for common flint (I guess it's made of silica? Beats me, I'm a software engineer, not a geologist..) so here goes. One 1^3m of gravel mystically becomes flint, so I'll assume the mass of 1^3m/4 (four arrow per batch) for the flint, yielding a weight of 350kg. Let's simply replace the values of the prior calculations (350*5^2/2) and we end up with 4375 joules worth of kinetic buggery.
</EDIT>
If we dig up some comparisons on that amount of energy, we can conclude that shooting an arrow at a block of glass is roughly equivalent to firing one of these using one of these, if we use the old iron recipe. Using flint, however, it boils down to a set of weapons like these, used for hunting big game, apparently...
It's a 1mx1mx1m cube of glass. No flimsy arrows made or sticks and flint are gonna get through it, even with smurfkittens shooting at it. I'm at Eh. And I know Minecraft doesn't need to be realistic, but this means one less perk for arrows breaking glass.
Doesn't change the fact that glass is still brittle and a well-placed shot can crack even a 1^3m cube.
Especially if you consider that four arrows are supposed to have the mass of a (1^3)/9 cube of pure iron and (1^3)/4 of wood. Let's just assume that an individual arrow would be a whopping 250kg launched at 5 m/sec. To calculate the kinetic energy, we simply do 250*5^2/2 and end up with 3125 joules worth of kinetic energy. (For the record; all arrows I still have are from the old crafting recipe and I cba to find out the density of flint :tongue.gif: )
If we dig up some comparisons on that amount of energy, we can conclude that shooting an arrow at a block of glass is roughly equivalent to firing one of these using one of these.
Yea for science and i agree with this idea to an extent
It's a 1mx1mx1m cube of glass. No flimsy arrows made or sticks and flint are gonna get through it, even with smurfkittens shooting at it. I'm at Eh. And I know Minecraft doesn't need to be realistic, but this means one less perk for arrows breaking glass.
Doesn't change the fact that glass is still brittle and a well-placed shot can crack even a 1^3m cube.
Especially if you consider that four arrows are supposed to have the mass of a (1^3)/9 cube of pure iron and (1^3)/4 of wood. Let's just assume that an individual arrow would be a whopping 250kg launched at 5 m/sec. To calculate the kinetic energy, we simply do 250*5^2/2 and end up with 3125 joules worth of kinetic energy. (For the record; all arrows I still have are from the old crafting recipe and I cba to find out the density of flint :tongue.gif: )
If we dig up some comparisons on that amount of energy, we can conclude that shooting an arrow at a block of glass is roughly equivalent to firing one of these using one of these.
Pure iron? Since when have arrows required iron? The OLD recipes are just that: Old. The NEW crafting design is as followed, and is the ONLY correct way to make arrows currently...
You'll also do well to notice that the flint is not exactly one meter cubed. It's much closer to 1/3 to 1/5 of that size. Furthermore, to use RAW flint as an arrow head wouldn't work. You'd need to work it to fit a rather specific set of requirements (very thin, properly tailored kill edge, notches for retention of head to shaft, etc). Also, you cannot use raw sticks for this, so those, TOO, would need to be trimmed down. And I'm sure it's obvious that the feather would need modification in a similar regard.
As it stands, I'm FAIRLY sure a cubic meter block of glass would protect against such small projectiles. And, besides, what use is glass if you're worried about it getting broken all of the time? Maybe we should have a crafting formula for "strengthened glass" that cost a bit more to make, but would be indestructible in regards to the foolishness of griefers and skeletons, whereas we use the current recipe to make normal glass which would break after a few shots with arrows, or if you stood on it if all surrounding blocks are glass, or whatnot.
And, again: MineCraft isn't about realism. If you want realism, I suggest you find a game that doesn't have exploding green creatures and the like. Good luck either way, mate.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Fire And Ice
Some say the world will end in fire
Some say in ice
From what I've tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire
But if it had to perish twice
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice
And, besides, what use is glass if you're worried about it getting broken all of the time?
That is the trade-off, isn't it? The ability to see at the cost of a little security. It's the same reason we have windows IRL. We could easily make them out of a more durable material like wood, but we decide the occasional broken window is worth having sunlight come into your home.
And it's not about realism, it's about gameplay. If we really wanted true realism, we'd be asking for a game with a real-life physics engine that calculates the movements of atoms or smaller. The point of the matter is; what is the trade-off for using one brick over another? If a block of glass holds up as well as a block of stone, why bother making a wall out of one or the other. It's all aesthetics at this point. Making glass break when struck by one or several arrows is a balancing maneuver. You can make your huge plate=window, just remember; it won't keep you safe when the skeletons come a knockin'.
It's a 1mx1mx1m cube of glass. No flimsy arrows made or sticks and flint are gonna get through it, even with smurfkittens shooting at it. I'm at Eh. And I know Minecraft doesn't need to be realistic, but this means one less perk for arrows breaking glass.
if you place glass on a block you droped the block you droped stays inside proveing it's hollow then it's only 2 small planes of glass
That is the trade-off, isn't it? The ability to see at the cost of a little security. It's the same reason we have windows IRL. We could easily make them out of a more durable material like wood, but we decide the occasional broken window is worth having sunlight come into your home.
Actually, the windows on my house are made out of re-enforced glass. While an arrow could nick it, you'd need a whole bunch of arrows to do anything more than just annoy me when I wake up. But I don't use my windows for sunlight. I use it to allow me to see outside without letting the outside atmosphere in. I also use it to allow the outside atmosphere in when I want to.
In a defense situation, I would use peep holes (which I did at first before I figured out that coal was so easy to come by that it's silly to not use it when you want to) for observing the outside world while avoiding risk to myself.
But again, this is a situation that would just end up being bothersome. You use glass in minecraft to let in outside light, or to observe things without being attacked. This would nullify the second usage and would just result in peep holes being used. It's the reason that I normally make sure my door, which is an open hole to the outside world for skeletons, outside of my general observation area so I don't end up getting poked in the back by a boney beast.
Quote from Sneferu »
And it's not about realism, it's about gameplay.
Exactly! I don't care about the realism that a meter cubed chunk of glass is highly illogically, and in a more-realistic size glass would be easily destroyed by an arrow. I care about the gameplay that glass, which is not very costly, gives me a slight advantage over having solid walls for looking out or torches for light.
Quote from Sneferu »
If we really wanted true realism, we'd be asking for a game with a real-life physics engine that calculates the movements of atoms or smaller.
Nah. You could easily simulate the realistic systems that we live in at a much more macro level because we have a really good understanding of the systems involved. But, again, I don't want realism. I want a fun game that doesn't have me fearful of losing my glass wall to watch skeletons flail around in the burning sun.
Quote from Sneferu »
The point of the matter is; what is the trade-off for using one brick over another? If a block of glass holds up as well as a block of stone, why bother making a wall out of one or the other. It's all aesthetics at this point.
Exactly. Again, we aren't aiming for realism. We're trying to make for a fun game, and that means, in a sand box game, having lots of choices that won't affect the general outcome of the survival aspect.
That aside, glass is more costly than cobblestone, although the same cost as smooth stone (roughly, I'd consider glass more-costly by a slight bit as I don't normally mine sand while making my mines). I don't build entire places out of glass normally, though, because of that. Glass is usually reserved for windows, observation areas, and skylights.
Quote from Sneferu »
Making glass break when struck by one or several arrows is a balancing maneuver. You can make your huge plate=window, just remember; it won't keep you safe when the skeletons come a knockin'.
Then people wouldn't make massive windows. Instead, they'd make three to five layer thick glass walls (which work exactly the same as a single glass-thick wall, thankfully) and would take care of any damage in the morning. At that thickness it should be able to survive even a bad night of skeletons (long enough that you can retreat to avoid any further damage to your window), so it just makes windows cost a bit more without really increasing the cost of ownership in a dangerous way.
That aside, I understand where you are coming from. I replied to a thread "AGGRO!!! READ THIS" and I think this would fit in really well with a defense mode. If your main goal was to defend yourself against waves of enemies, then it might make sense that enemies would aim for your windows to try and kill you. In survival mode, though, we're dealing with enemies that are truly moronic, and as such, aren't very likely to be able to really understand the concept of trying to find you by searching through glass for you, or that glass can even be looked through properly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Fire And Ice
Some say the world will end in fire
Some say in ice
From what I've tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire
But if it had to perish twice
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice
It's a small somewhat cosmetic addition I would like.
It would be much too easy to farm arrows then.
Hue
I think they should and shouldnt break though glass.. Because griefers and all that gud stuff.. But the reason of they should, is then you cant just hide behind a wall of glass with skeletons shooting at you :I
Doesn't change the fact that glass is still brittle and a well-placed shot can crack even a 1^3m cube.
Especially if you consider that four arrows are supposed to have the mass of a (1^3)/9 cube of pure iron and (1^3)/4 of wood. Let's just assume that an individual arrow would be a whopping 250kg launched at 5 m/sec. To calculate the kinetic energy, we simply do 250*5^2/2 and end up with 3125 joules worth of kinetic energy. (For the record; all arrows I still have are from the old crafting recipe and I cba to find out the density of flint :tongue.gif: )
<EDIT>
Ohh, just found the density for common flint (I guess it's made of silica? Beats me, I'm a software engineer, not a geologist..) so here goes. One 1^3m of gravel mystically becomes flint, so I'll assume the mass of 1^3m/4 (four arrow per batch) for the flint, yielding a weight of 350kg. Let's simply replace the values of the prior calculations (350*5^2/2) and we end up with 4375 joules worth of kinetic buggery.
</EDIT>
If we dig up some comparisons on that amount of energy, we can conclude that shooting an arrow at a block of glass is roughly equivalent to firing one of these using one of these, if we use the old iron recipe. Using flint, however, it boils down to a set of weapons like these, used for hunting big game, apparently...
Yea for science and i agree with this idea to an extent
If your looking for a good minecraft towny server visit play.hydrahub.net
Pure iron? Since when have arrows required iron? The OLD recipes are just that: Old. The NEW crafting design is as followed, and is the ONLY correct way to make arrows currently...
You'll also do well to notice that the flint is not exactly one meter cubed. It's much closer to 1/3 to 1/5 of that size. Furthermore, to use RAW flint as an arrow head wouldn't work. You'd need to work it to fit a rather specific set of requirements (very thin, properly tailored kill edge, notches for retention of head to shaft, etc). Also, you cannot use raw sticks for this, so those, TOO, would need to be trimmed down. And I'm sure it's obvious that the feather would need modification in a similar regard.
As it stands, I'm FAIRLY sure a cubic meter block of glass would protect against such small projectiles. And, besides, what use is glass if you're worried about it getting broken all of the time? Maybe we should have a crafting formula for "strengthened glass" that cost a bit more to make, but would be indestructible in regards to the foolishness of griefers and skeletons, whereas we use the current recipe to make normal glass which would break after a few shots with arrows, or if you stood on it if all surrounding blocks are glass, or whatnot.
And, again: MineCraft isn't about realism. If you want realism, I suggest you find a game that doesn't have exploding green creatures and the like. Good luck either way, mate.
Some say the world will end in fire
Some say in ice
From what I've tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire
But if it had to perish twice
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice
That is the trade-off, isn't it? The ability to see at the cost of a little security. It's the same reason we have windows IRL. We could easily make them out of a more durable material like wood, but we decide the occasional broken window is worth having sunlight come into your home.
And it's not about realism, it's about gameplay. If we really wanted true realism, we'd be asking for a game with a real-life physics engine that calculates the movements of atoms or smaller. The point of the matter is; what is the trade-off for using one brick over another? If a block of glass holds up as well as a block of stone, why bother making a wall out of one or the other. It's all aesthetics at this point. Making glass break when struck by one or several arrows is a balancing maneuver. You can make your huge plate=window, just remember; it won't keep you safe when the skeletons come a knockin'.
If your looking for a good minecraft towny server visit play.hydrahub.net
if you place glass on a block you droped the block you droped stays inside proveing it's hollow then it's only 2 small planes of glass
Actually, the windows on my house are made out of re-enforced glass. While an arrow could nick it, you'd need a whole bunch of arrows to do anything more than just annoy me when I wake up. But I don't use my windows for sunlight. I use it to allow me to see outside without letting the outside atmosphere in. I also use it to allow the outside atmosphere in when I want to.
In a defense situation, I would use peep holes (which I did at first before I figured out that coal was so easy to come by that it's silly to not use it when you want to) for observing the outside world while avoiding risk to myself.
But again, this is a situation that would just end up being bothersome. You use glass in minecraft to let in outside light, or to observe things without being attacked. This would nullify the second usage and would just result in peep holes being used. It's the reason that I normally make sure my door, which is an open hole to the outside world for skeletons, outside of my general observation area so I don't end up getting poked in the back by a boney beast.
Exactly! I don't care about the realism that a meter cubed chunk of glass is highly illogically, and in a more-realistic size glass would be easily destroyed by an arrow. I care about the gameplay that glass, which is not very costly, gives me a slight advantage over having solid walls for looking out or torches for light.
Nah. You could easily simulate the realistic systems that we live in at a much more macro level because we have a really good understanding of the systems involved. But, again, I don't want realism. I want a fun game that doesn't have me fearful of losing my glass wall to watch skeletons flail around in the burning sun.
Exactly. Again, we aren't aiming for realism. We're trying to make for a fun game, and that means, in a sand box game, having lots of choices that won't affect the general outcome of the survival aspect.
That aside, glass is more costly than cobblestone, although the same cost as smooth stone (roughly, I'd consider glass more-costly by a slight bit as I don't normally mine sand while making my mines). I don't build entire places out of glass normally, though, because of that. Glass is usually reserved for windows, observation areas, and skylights.
Then people wouldn't make massive windows. Instead, they'd make three to five layer thick glass walls (which work exactly the same as a single glass-thick wall, thankfully) and would take care of any damage in the morning. At that thickness it should be able to survive even a bad night of skeletons (long enough that you can retreat to avoid any further damage to your window), so it just makes windows cost a bit more without really increasing the cost of ownership in a dangerous way.
That aside, I understand where you are coming from. I replied to a thread "AGGRO!!! READ THIS" and I think this would fit in really well with a defense mode. If your main goal was to defend yourself against waves of enemies, then it might make sense that enemies would aim for your windows to try and kill you. In survival mode, though, we're dealing with enemies that are truly moronic, and as such, aren't very likely to be able to really understand the concept of trying to find you by searching through glass for you, or that glass can even be looked through properly.
Some say the world will end in fire
Some say in ice
From what I've tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire
But if it had to perish twice
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice