• 0

    posted a message on A Basic Guide to Optifine Entity Modelling
    Quote from ProCookieOP»

    how do i make for example a sheep huge? What would i need to do?


    Alter the scale, and possibly adjust the limb speeds depending on how it looks with the entity's movement speed.

    Posted in: Resource Pack Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on [DEAD] [Download the models and use them if you want] RealisticLivestock Mod

    Just jumping in here with an outside opinion. I'm not really invested in whichever direction this mod takes.


    The biggest problem I see with staying on 1.7.10 as time goes on is that more and more mods are making the leap to at least 1.10.2 to take advantage of the new rendering and other advancements. Even if they keep a 1.7.10 version, the vast majority do not keep maintaining that version past its current form. All updates are focused on the newer versions. I think that will lead to a majority of players moving on for the cool new features coming out in their favorite mods. Of course there will always be mods that don't make the jump at all, but they usually cease to be relevant to the game. Everybody remember all those cool mods for 1.2.5? Yeah, me either. The only thing propping 1.7.10 up at this point are the large industry mods that won't make the jump or are just taking forever because of the complexity of the update. So while 1.7.10 is still viable, and probably will remain that way for a while, it is not the future. If you're just developing for yourself, then knock yourself out - code for the version you play. But if you're not a coder and need to attract one, and/or you want your mod to become popular with a large player base, then staying with 1.7.10 is foolish, and becomes more-so with every new version.


    EDIT: And, if all you have at this point is a mod idea and some resources, and you've barely even coded any AI, then staying with 1.7.10 is even sillier (assuming the above goals; that you want your mod to be popular and/or you need coders or other contributors to want to work on your mod) because you don't have a legacy investment of a complex codebase, or knowledge of developing for one version, that have to be completely changed to work with the new versions. You still essentially have a clean slate, and it's as easy to develop for one as it is for the other. (Except that most developers I've seen talk about the switch say that there's a lot more exciting possibilities with the new systems, and things are generally easier to accomplish - so that would make newer versions easier to develop for.)

    Posted in: WIP Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on Is Et futurum illegal

    I suppose it's possible, but in that case Forge is HIGHLY illegal.


    Though I suppose I should say that it used to be. Now, using byte-code changes I guess they don't have to use any Mojang code at all. Although to do anything at all, they first have to reverse engineer the obfuscation, which I think is technically illegal as well.

    Posted in: Mods Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Just Another Spawner (JAS) v0.14

    I'll add another vote for a 1.10.2 version. I've already moved on from 1.7.10 and chose EnderZoo as the best option available, but I haven't even bothered to attempt configuring it yet. JAS I know will work if/when it's released, and as MohawkyMagoo noted, most problems have already been solved by users.


    Note that later versions of MoCreatures have split BigCats/Bears/Fish etc. into individual types, making biome configuration much easier. Dunno if any of those changes have made it back to 1.10.2 though.

    EDIT: Just checked, and yes, MoCreatures hasn't gone beyond 1.10.2 yet, so the animals have been split in that version.

    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on GeographiCraft - Stop chunk walls, control size and frequencies of climate zones, oceans, land, and biomes, and more

    Yeah, it is a massive amount of work, even if it becomes possible. I think perhaps the biggest problem with terrain in general is scale. Mountains IRL look great because they're 3 miles across. When you try to cram the same effect into 300m of space it's going to look forced. So I agree about it being a learned skill. What is mathematically correct and what is visually pleasing are sometimes curiously at odds with each other, unless you have the time and computing power to do everything. Good visual shortcuts are often quite unintuitive.


    No, I have no problem with your terrains. Truth be told, I haven't even run RTG yet. My only experience with it is through pictures. I was referring to normal BOP generation. Perhaps the problem is just the small variety of terrains and not really anything inherently wrong with BOP at all.


    I might be interested in writing an outside mod that adds to RTG. I'll have to look into it and play around some more, but realistically I'll probably never get around to doing it the hard way. I have too many features I'd like to include in a personal modpack already that will almost certainly never see the light of day. :-) I've already spent too many years trying to track down a combination of mods that will tweak the game the way I'd like it, and I end up tweaking and testing and configuring so much that I never get around to actually playing. I'm trying to cut back my expectations a bit so I might actually enjoy the game, and anyway my main focus is building right now, rather than survival. I'll probably just go with whatever seems good enough, but without TC being affected by Geographicraft it's most likely I'll end up using RTG. Though it would be nice to be able to include your 1.10.2 port of Highlands and not just BOP.

    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 1

    posted a message on GeographiCraft - Stop chunk walls, control size and frequencies of climate zones, oceans, land, and biomes, and more

    Yes, I'm sure that any attempt to make general-case script-run world generation would run into performance issues pretty quickly. You can't make any assumptions about shortcuts, and so are forced into a brute-force or worst-case approach too often.


    See, I think about it completely backwards from your point of view. I would gladly give up TC and BB generation. I'm not trying to achieve block-for-block fidelity. I just want to capture the essence of the terrain character. In my view what would be needed is for RTG to make their terrains externally available so that a biome config could specify generator=rolling_hills or generator=snowy_mountain or whatever names you use internally. Then the surface/filler/mix blocks and decoration objects create the variety over that basic terrain shape. Essentially, instead of team-RTG choosing the realisitc biome, the config would tell RTG which generic realistic terrain algorithm to use for a given biome. How do-able that is depends a lot also on how much has to be hard-coded for a given terrain algorithm to work with smoothing, transitions, beaches, etc. It's certainly a lot of work either way, and I don't know if that sounds like where you guys want to take RTG. I think it fits within the scope, but may not be the right direction. Certainly performance would suffer, and might make it all unworkable regardless.


    Really I started investigating BiomeBundle looking for an alternative to BOP biomes, which I have begun to find tiresome over the course of their development. It seems like the unique ones were dropped or their generation parameters were changed to the point that they feel interchangeable rather than distinct. Dunno. Maybe it's just color choices. I can't really put my finger on it. They do seem a little preoccupied with dead stuff.


    Anyway, I'd much prefer to use RTG terrains than TC if I could somehow get TC's biomes into RTG. But I'd need realistic versions of the biomes somehow, and I don't even know if TC puts them into the vanilla biome array at all. I'm not clear on how it handles biomes <256, but not vanilla. Obviously it has to convert biomes >256 to something <256 for saving to the files, but it's not clear if something like 125 is accessible to a mod like Geographicraft if TC isn't generating the terrain. The number is valid, of course, but a TC terrain doesn't really have any generation parameters outside of TC worlds, so I'm not sure how vanilla would generate 125 if it existed in the normal biome array. Maybe it just adds it to the biome array, but not the generation groups, so it would never be generated in the world except by TC.


    So, after all that, just want to say that i LOVE Geographicraft and Underground BIomes. They are an indispensable addition to any sort of worldgen. Maybe somebody will find a way to make my dream happen. It could even be me. :-)

    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on GeographiCraft - Stop chunk walls, control size and frequencies of climate zones, oceans, land, and biomes, and more

    Yes, I understand that about the climates. What I meant was that in TC/biomebundle they are literally border biomes, but for my purposes they are biomes that could appropriately be grouped with either the WARM or the HOT biomes because they are a transition between the two. For example, a biome that transitions between desert, which is HOT, and jungle, which is WARM, would look appropriate in either group but could only be seen in one or the other with the current tags.


    Yes, it had occurred to me that RTG would be a problem unless there was some way to write compatibility for the biomebundle biomes. Which probably isn't an appropriate thing to do to anything but a private version, since they aren't really biomes at all outside of TC worlds.


    I guess really what I'm trying to achieve is a way to insert custom biomes without having to program my own biome-adding mod. That's basically what TC provides, and biomebundle takes advantage of, and I'm trying to hack together a way to backdoor that into RTG generation instead of TC. Probably futile, but the powerful combination of BT+CC/GC+RTG makes it seem like it's just out of reach, needing only that one final step to be taken.


    I guess in my dream version of things you would create biomes with vanilla parameters in BiomeTweaker and have Geographicraft pick those up and provide the climate framework (ideally with humidity also), and then have config options in RTG where you could say, "generate this with the xx algorithm, and decorate with these (RTG or non-RTG) objects and this ore/resource spawn." Then it's all controlled by scripting without having to program BiomeGenBase's and all that hassle. Decoration could even be split between RTG and RecurrentComplex if necessary and/or possible.

    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on GeographiCraft - Stop chunk walls, control size and frequencies of climate zones, oceans, land, and biomes, and more

    Well, I've been pursuing a different tack on this. I have a couple of questions, and depending on the answers maybe a feature request.


    My idea was to "fake" the biomebundle biomes by adding them as vanilla/BOP/etc (supported mod) biomes by choosing one that was similar terrain-wise, using BiomeTweaker to add any with no counterpart. Would GC properly climate-sort those biomes if I pulled them in with external_biomes? And then could I generate them with RTG successfully? Then I could use Recurrent Complex to populate the decoration structures and at least have a version of the biomes even if the terrain is not equivalent.


    If that process would work, then I would request a couple of climate tags be added to GC if that's not too big a deal; one that equates to WARM,HOT, and one that equates to SNOWY,COOL. There are several edge-type biomes that would actually span climate zones in that way, and for them to be able to generate against either source biome in, say, a latitudinal world, they need to belong to both groups.

    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on GeographiCraft - Stop chunk walls, control size and frequencies of climate zones, oceans, land, and biomes, and more

    Yeah, I was afraid that they wouldn't be compatible. I think maybe they could be, with a fair amount of work and very careful planning. TC can be made to use some or all of the vanilla system, but I'm not familiar enough with it to know how or where it hooks into it. I'd love to use GC to arrange the vanilla system with TC biomes included in it (by making TC substitute down into a custom subset of biomes from 0-255) and then have TC customize within that placement framework, but I honestly can't tell whether GC or TC would take precedence, since they're sort of trying to do the same thing a lot of the times. If TC won't respect GC's decisions then the whole system falls apart.


    I'm looking into it to see what might be possible by altering the Biome Bundle and running GC 0.8.6. I was able to generate a world without it crashing, though I only explored over a couple of biomes, so it is possible at some level. Remains to be seen whether that level is too limited to be worth the effort of combining the systems.

    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 1

    posted a message on GeographiCraft - Stop chunk walls, control size and frequencies of climate zones, oceans, land, and biomes, and more

    I think MJo's request represents a naive or incomplete understanding of how Geographicraft and/or the Biome Bundle work. As you pointed out, TC uses its own biome layout system - with 1024 biomes. TC saves the biomes in the map files as one of the 0-255 biomes after generation as its method of integrating with the vanilla system. So, either your Geographicraft config has external biomes with the correct id's, up to 1023 - can it even handle that? - or you'll have 38 external biomes with the same id as vanilla Jungle, for example. Once again, can it even handle that?


    It would be great if it did handle it somehow, but it looks to me like the odds of Geographicraft interpreting the Biome Bundle biomes correctly are pretty low. Unless it's pretty easy to make it handle 1024 biomes for TC worlds - and GC can get access to the actual TC biome id (I don't know if id's above 255 are ever exposed external to TC code) - then you'll have to rely on TC's translated-to-vanilla id's. That would work fine and still give you decently fine control for general TC worlds, but notice that most of the biomes of the Biome Bundle specifically would have to be rewritten. Only 14 of the 430 biomes were chosen in the 0-255 vanilla range.


    Also, the Biome Bundle itself packages the latest Forge version of TC, rather than the Spigot version.


    Did you just hard-code operation in TC worlds in the 0.8.6 version? I don't see any additional config options related to that.

    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on Do It Yourself Decorative Blocks 1.12.2-7.0.0 (09/11/2017)

    Looks great! The only glaring omissions I can see are true directional blocks like logs and hay, in addition to the facing blocks like crafting tables, furnaces, and jack-o-lanterns that you have now; and possibly carpet blocks.

    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 1

    posted a message on LittleTiles v1.3.0 #BuildItYourself - Finally Updated to 1.11.2 and 1.10.2
    Quote from CreativeMD»

    I have been thinking of something like this, but not implemented yet, because i was not sure if somebody will ever us it. 16x16x16 is more than enough for most cases, changing it to 32x32x32 makes things a lot more difficult (but it does not hurt the performance at all). Performance is only affected by the number of tiles not by the size or the resolution of the grid.
    I had an idea of changing the grid to 32x32x32, but still make the player think it's 16x16x16 and allow him to build in 32x32x32 if he wants to (maybe via a special key). That way I could offer more possibilities and still keep it simple, but I'm not really sure if something like this is needed.


    Absolutely!!!!! I've wished for this for a long while, but didn't know if it was possible, performance-wise. Mostly this is good for higher-resolution texture packs. At that point though you have to wonder how much is enough. I prefer 32x as the sweet spot between realism and abstraction for Minecraft, though 64x is better for some isolated tiles (glass leading, plants, etc.). So I would support up to a 64x grid if you wanted to go that high, but I DEFINITELY vote absolutely yes for 32x!


    Providing it as an option with the special key is probably best, because, as you said, 16x is enough for most cases.

    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 1

    posted a message on In-Game NBTEdit! Edit Mob Spawners & Attributes in game! FINALLY UPDATED!

    No. Check here for a 1.7.10-compiled version.

    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on XtraBlocks Extreme Edition *Updated 19 March 2016
    Quote from CraftyTurtle

    Now if only I could get Kaevator's slopes and frames back....... :P

    Grim has them for 1.7 here.

    Edit: Ok. Since Curse has managed to completely screw up links in the post editor, Grim actually has them Here:
    http://grim3212.wikispaces.com/Kaevator's Mods
    Oh, and as an added bonus, since Curse has COMPLETELY completely screwed up links, you can't click on it. You'll have to copy/paste the text into your browser's address field.

    Sadly, he seems to have skipped all the in-between versions since the original, so 1.6.4, which I assume you're using, is not available.
    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 0

    posted a message on Climate Control - change climate zones sizes, ocean sizes, and more
    Quote from MohawkyMagoo

    This is just great. I hate the 1.7.2 world gen in Minecraft. While you are at it, can you correct Mojangs limited view distance problem? Its driving me nuts.


    Optifine is the best way I know of to fix that, but for some reason a lot of people hate to run it. It boosts my framerates so significantly that I can't run without it, using the mods and texture packs I prefer. I've never experienced major problems with it even though I run a similar number of mods to yourself, but I do know that some specific mods have more trouble with it than others.
    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.