The red thing above red wool block in the topic's image seems does NOT seem to be a red mushroom.
In fact, it looks like... a ladybug!
Sweet!
EDIT: Danggit, it's just the Grum boss mob!
- Ouatcheur
- Registered Member
-
Member for 11 years, 10 months, and 9 days
Last active Sat, Feb, 5 2022 19:07:22
- 52 Followers
- 3,168 Total Posts
- 734 Thanks
-
May 2, 2013Ouatcheur posted a message on Snapshot 13w18a Ready For Testing; 1.5.2 Now LivePosted in: NewsQuote from LynnNexus
Um...
There are skins for the two undead horses included in the snapshot but unused and they follow the same pattern as the released horses. It is not unreasonable to hope that not only the undead horses will be included from this information but that they may have horse related drops.
Or that since they imported a lot of the framework directly from Mo's Creatutre author, there was saome amount of coding magic cut n paste involved. Why take the time to remove an entire part with the risk of making the entire compiling of the coded module fall to it's knees, when you could just leave it like that and use a simple switch to avoid generating that part? This is just like in our real life bodies we have old genetic code in our DNA which has no usage anymore whatsoever, it's just there. *maybe* it will serve again one day. But it probably won't.
I think the undead horses "skins only" are exactly like that. They thought about adding the, chose otherwise, but did the logical thing: not waste programming time on fully removing it, after all ,who knows if it could serve one day, right? So they simply turned it off. Having worked as a coder, this is a very common coding practice. -
May 2, 2013Ouatcheur posted a message on Snapshot 13w18a Ready For Testing; 1.5.2 Now LivePosted in: NewsQuote from TNT24X
Why can’t t Horses fight mobs.
Real Horses attack and bite things they don’t like and I happen to know that mules are used as guards for livestock, sheep farms use that to stop cougars and wild dogs.
I think it was Mojang chose deliberately, not something they forgot.
Horse stuff is by definition rarer: harder to find than normal animals, and uncraftable saddle & armor.
They are designed to be mounts, not guards.
Yes in real-life mules can serve as guard animals. BUT
1) That is usually not the case of horses.
2) since when does realism dictates what goes in Minecraft? Minecraft has definitely some realism (for example, the fact that you must eat some foodstuff to take care of your hunger, not eat pink bricks or something just as weird), but it also hads lots of unique and definitely non-realistic elements: eternal torche, infinite water, solid blocks that float without any kind of support, etc.
While realism can be a source of ideas, it definitely shoud not be THE source of ideas, and it is game design that should always take priority here, NOT realism. which leads me to:
3) Horses and donkeys are already more than powerful enough as they are without ALSO providing combat bonuses.
Anyway, if they fought while you were riding them, dang, you'd lose control over the horse and couldn't manage to do your own attacks yourself? That would be pretty bad. When you are on a horse, you're the one that should do all the fighting, not the horse.
And as guard animals, wolves being smaller are way more manoeuvrable and since animals don't need to eat unless it's for breeding (once per animal) or healing, it's not a big deal. In fact, a bigger pack means the hostile mob will probably die all much faster, meaning actually LESS healing to do afterwards (for those caring about that). With sufficiently big pack, you just forget about healing and just breed some more wolves every once in a while.
"But wolves avoid creepers..."
Yeah so would the horse too, or any other friendly mob designed to fight, except if it's a golem (stupid and single purpose minded by definition, and either a bit fragile and useless on it's own like a snow golem, or with enough hit points to withstand an explosion like an iron golem).
It's not what would be "realistic" that is important, it's what would be "logical'" and what is 'important", and making horses fight definitely wouldn'r be a logical thing to implement in Minecraft, and lots more things are way more important.Quote from LynnNexus
I really hope now that the saddles and armors aren't craftable that they will be a rare drop from the undead horses.
Note:
Mo's Creatures have Undead Horses.
While the new Minecraft horses come from Mo's Creatures collaborative work, they don't include undead horses.
There was already a Lapis Lazuli block been in the game for a long time. Unless you're trying to ask something else? -
May 2, 2013Ouatcheur posted a message on Snapshot 13w18a Ready For Testing; 1.5.2 Now LivePosted in: NewsQuote from shiney_ninja
I thought 1.6 was going to be the "mob update" I've seen more blocks then mobs introduced
1.6 isn't finished yet. And yeah, if the only mob they add is horses, then their promise of "new mobs" will turn out to to be "new mob". Even of there are 10 kinds of horses, it's still only 1 type of mob. We need more variety! -
May 2, 2013Ouatcheur posted a message on Snapshot 13w18a Ready For Testing; 1.5.2 Now LivePosted in: News
I guess the slimeball serves to kind of "hold" the lead's knot.
I'm fine with that recipe. -
Mar 20, 2013Ouatcheur posted a message on Minecraft Realms: What Is It?Features that Minecraft Realms will need to become massively popular:Posted in: News
1- Capability for the host (i.e. the person paying for the service) to upload and download the world.
2- Mods support.
Without these, using WorldEdit (for example) or a mapper becomes impossible, and you're stuck with Vanilla.
3- Multiworlds support
Wether it is to connect your own worlds together, or connect your world to all others, having support for this through a standardized rules/access granting room interface would help a lot.
I'd find it crazy if for each world you pay the same. Some worlds are tiny, some huge, and having 2 connected worlds doesn't means you'll have twice as much players.
But I bet Realms will be popular even without these features. -
Jan 18, 2013Ouatcheur posted a message on 13w03a Ready for TestingPosted in: NewsQuote from toatanu
Agreed. Nobody here (I hope) has a thing against caves, but most people with some sense have problems with the infinite spaghetti cave system (note the singular form) found in all Minecraft worlds, and the frequency of gigantic systems.
Hear, hear! I agree with you 200% -
Jan 18, 2013Ouatcheur posted a message on 13w03a Ready for TestingPosted in: NewsQuote from RoboMat
"Creating a infinite water source no longer needs a block underneath, but has to have a water source block."
I personnally do not understand the actual meaning of that sentence!
Basically, in the sentence structure
"Doing A no longer needs B, but has to have C"
It should always be possible to split the sentence into 2 simpler ones.
Like in the following example:
"Bob is no longer a cop, but has children"
can be split into:
"Bob is no longer a cop"
and
"Bob has children",
which both make sense.
But when
"Creating an infinite water source no longer needs a block underneath, but has to have a water source block."
is split into
"Creating an infinite water source no longer needs a block underneath."
and
"Creating an infinite water source has to have a water source block."
The second sentence doesn't make any sense at all! It's bad syntax, plain and simple.
Just what thing exactly in the "Creating an infinite water source" thing, does the "has to have a water source block"?
Just what exactly "has to have" a water source block?
And how does it work exactly? And which water source block has to be had?
Does it mean that you have to provide a block of water source using a bucket? Or what?
Please explain a little bit better! -
Jan 11, 2013Ouatcheur posted a message on Change Your Minecraft Name? Possibly In The Future>>> "Just ban the IP"Posted in: News
>>> Griefers would just change username and grief again!
Wow, brilliant ideas! I'm sarcastic here. All those who posted such should be banned from the forums forever lol. That'd raise the average IQ in here by a coupla points I guess lol.
If they'd taken the time to actually read more than the first page of posts, or just use Google or common sense, they'd of course have seen that:
The Ban IP idea for is stupid for so many reasons: a) Griefers can just use IP spoofers; Or just cross the street from the Mcdonald to the public library or other public free wi-fi access; c) Innocent players could potentially get their account banned because of the actions of somebody else on the same LAN as them; d) Some countries use dynamic IP. Etc. In short, the idea that "1 user = 1 IP, always the same IP" is just plain stupid.
Griefers would just swap names: Gee, like somebody else said: Surely that is exactly what happens all the time in *ALL* those *_other_* games where players can change their user names! Of course not!
Thank god *most* posters provide real and valuable ideas and insights!
****** This is how I think changing the in game name could potentially be done :
Not by allowing X changes per month or interval, but by forcing a waiting period instead!
Procedure: Into his account, the player can make (or cancel) a request to change his "in game name" (ign). His profile will now show the remaining number of days before the requested new ign activates automatically (well, not while he's playing, or logged out, only at the moment that he actually logs into the game itself, AFTER the waiting period is over of course.
It doesn't have to be more complicated than that!
When the player connects to a multiplayer server, the server will get the list of names for his profile:
- unique uncheangeable account profile name identifier (always)
- current in game name (always), does not need to be unique.
- requested future name, if any
- last X recently used names, if any.
Each name in that short list has a "timestamp" for when it was used the first time.
Using that information, each server can make up its own rules as to how to let players login or not, how to ban, etc., and what kind of info is available to other players. - To post a comment, please login.
0
You could simply have made a new Underworld portal a little bit away (less than 128 blocks!), and then destroy the old portal, no?
Unless Avernite changed it, a portal exiting coordinates looks for another already existing portal up to 128 blocks away and makes player exit at that already existing one, instead of generating a brand new exit portal.
Of course, if you go into another dimension without carrying everything to build and activate a different exit, that's like I dunno, asking for trouble?
0
lol so it's basically a "do as I say, not as I do" thing, right?
Usually, when you get a warning, the specific post for which you were reported is included in the moderator's warning. If not, ask the moderator to provide the "offending" text, saying you have a right to know for what you have been accused. If they don,t provide it, don't push further, If they do, thank profusely and say you're sorry for breaking the rules (even tough you don't feel like you did anything wrong). Your history stays with you FOREVER so it pays to try to "make up" and be nice. By the way, they know what you did last summer! (cue in omninous music).
I've been warned enough to know that moderating rules here are a bit like in most religions: only 0.01% of the population will can go to heaven, the rest goes straight to hell lol. Moderators prefer to err on the side of extra-careful, anything remotely looking bad gets a warning. Even if they end up being the ones burning some posters a little bit lol. Can't really fault them for that, for I've seen the alternative elsewhere, and it's .. well .. hellish! you need an iron fist to prevent rampant chaos in any popular forum.
As long as one follows the forum rules, one can be a superb jacka$s, the sky's the limit. then when somebody else tries to put the jacka$s in it's place even a LITTLe bit, WHAM the hammer of god falls on him. Just get used to it.
- Life Lesson You Learned: Life Ain't Fair.
- For that Life Lesson You Actually Paid : 0$
I call that a bargain!
0
> Everything you don't like can be disabled if you don't like it or want a performance boost
I don't think saying "there is an option to turn it (or parts of it) off!" counts as the kind of argument that supports an idea. If anything, to me, that kind of argument actually works against an idea. Options Flags should only be for really, really, major stuff, like say "Enable Cheats", not for every single feature, or feature parts, that some people might like or not like. If you need to rely on a "it can be turned off!" argument as a kind of "lifeboat flotation device" in order to justify (save) an idea, it just means that the idea is, simply put, not really totally able to float all by itself.
I agree that the Video settings need to be more "finer grained", for calibrating performance reason. Still, just how would you propose to "turn off" this lighting system? You'd have BOTH the current lighting system *and* this new lighting system coexisting one alongside the other in the game?!? That would be really weird, as they are clearly incompatible and fundamentally different and lead to a very different gameplay experience. The core functionality of this new light system just couldn't be turned off, at all. Video settings would be needed only for the most CPU/GPU hungry aspects, but almost by definition there would not be (and should not be) any Video setting for the central parts of a new lighting system.
Some parts of this idea are very interesting. But I feel that this suggestion tries to address too many things all at once, while skipping on the most central and vital part, which is my main beef with the idea here:
You say you'll talk about the impact on mob spawning and crops growth elsewhere. But mob spawning is a very central core gameplay feature, here. You go in great details on lots of things, but skip completely the one and only thing that makes this suggestion ruin a very important current gameplay aspect. So yeah, sorry, but I just can't support this.
I recommend you make the whole thing a bit more "focused", and not rely on multiple posts/suggestions to work. If another suggestion by somebody else covers well some aspect of it, just point to that and skip straight to the most vital parts. The more long and complicated something is, the more it is prone to fail. It's not a matter of "they'll like at least half of it". Think of a suggestion working a bit more like a high-rise building: if only one floor fails, the entire tower comes crumbling down. So yeah, building smaller is safer. So So focus on the most central and important parts. I should know, I too tend to write way too long posts lol. But not addressing clearly the core impact on the actual gameplay is your suggestion's real killer here.
- - -
As a sidenote, if only rendered blocks cast shadows, then "just out of reach" blocks will suddenly "jump-cast" shadows when moving a bit nearer.
(or the opposite, shadows will suddenly jump-disappear when moving a bit away - however that is much less of a problem as usually when a player is moving away that typically means that he is also looking in the opposite direction. Also, there is some "hysteresis" when moving away before the chunks really become unloaded, so that kind of event would typically happen only at bigger distances).
Maybe the shadows should be "progressive" i.e. at max render distance, the shadows thrown by loaded blocks are "barely visible", and become more and more strongly contrasting as the shadow-projecting blocks get nearer. That would avoid that kind of "shadow-jumping-straight-into-view, with sunny sky one moment, and big darkness the next moment, just because the player moved only a few blocks.
1
Total agreement with you Liam_Morris.
But there is also another even more important aspect to consider:
There is a huge difference between an "open" environment (PC), and a "closed" one (console).
Limiting the choices to predefined skins, of which Microsoft own all the rights, means automatically avoiding
big groups of potential problems that could come from suing/litigation:
- Offensive skins (nude skins for example). Average player age is much lower on console than on PC so that counts.
- Other types of "offsensive" skins that could cause arguments, or that parents would prefer not having to explain away.
(Klu Klux Klan, Hitler, religious icons, etc.)
- Characters trademarked by other companies. Gee whiz, Mario Bro skin on a Microsoft console. Wham, royalties!
So limiting skins is basically more "secure" against all kinds of potential lawsuits. Expecting for this to ever change is a bit of an irrational pink-cloud-lined wish, nothing more.
0
Woah, gold ore and that other ore at the far top right in the distance below, what is that?
How many type of ores exist with a Netherrack "texture background" ? All of them?
0
NoooooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOoooooooooooOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooo!
Me an my nephew we JUST reached Anvil (around Day 140).
Seems like we'll stop updating at R170, then. Sigh.
0
Avernite, my nephew made you a Fruit salad icon in Photoshop. Enjoy!
0
If we have a R170 Experimental Branch world, can we upgrade it to R172, or is it basically "Old Experimental branch is over, compatibility broken, start all over again with New Experimental branch?"
0
I deleted the entire content of folder, and it worked. Dunno what you did to fix it, or what was the exact problem, but thanks Avernite!
0
Weird bug in Multiplayer screen server list:
Since yesterday, whenever we start the game, me and my nephew get this on the Multiplayer screen:
(see attached image).
There are exactly 9 such "bad" servers listed, then the normal "added by hand" server list (those with an Edit instead of an Info button).
Setup: MITE R165 with all our Minecraft game and minecraft files in the normal respective C: paths for them.
I dug around a bit and found that something weird is happening in the /MITE/public_servers/ folder.
No matter if the public_servers.txt file exists, or whatever is in it, even if empty, the public_servers.txt file always get auto-created and auto-overwritten to this content:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN">
<html><head>
<title>302 Found</title>
</head><body>
<h1>Found</h1>
<p>The document has moved <a href="https://minecraft-is-too-easy.com/public_servers/public_servers.txt">here</a>.</p>
<hr>
<address>Apache Server at minecraft-is-too-easy.com Port 80</address>
</body></html>
For example, we had this instead for our private server:
server_address=***.***.***.***:25565|world_name=Alecazonia|start_date=Juin 2017|description=Ceci est notre serveur expérimental!/Des plaines et de la verdure qui/s'étendent à tout bout de champ et peuplées de morons/qui sont avec ou sans bottes couleur rouge jaunes oranges roses,/pis des cavernes à poulets qui se prennent pour des troglodytes viandeux pas à peu près!|website=Aucun, rien pantoute !|image_url=http://minecraft-is-too-easy.com/public_servers/Alecazonia.png|theme_color=F0E68C|backdrop_opacity=0.4
(in the above the IP values are actual numbers not ***)
Also tried putting image_url field directly to my local mage file, no behavior changed.
and also the 2nd attached image (which for some reason didn't get displayed as background image at all, but for some reason I hadn't got around to fix that properly yet).
I wonder what is doing that?
0
I agree. What happened to Avernite's R105's hope? Lol!
Putting out violin, starting funeral song?
0
Wait, wait, wait...
Is this the SAME experimental branch, or a NEW one? We have 3 versions now???
Confused.
0
Is there a way to make tool benches and furnaces have durability similar to anvils? it only makes sense to have them crumble and break eventually 👹
Why limit that logic only for those 2 types of block?
Logic, realism, and just making sense, dictate to go all the way with the idea!
Every furniture block!
- Beds, Brewing Stands, Enchant Tables, Chests, etc!
Every blocks that really it only makes sense that they'll wear out eventually!
- Pistons, Buttons, Levers, Doors, Ladders, Rails, Dispensers, Redstone Repeaters, etc!
Let's put those frakking super ugly "durability damage" anvil cracks on everything!
(clearly I am not a big fan of the idea lol)
Evil, Arma, you're EEEVVVIIILLL! lol! I'm putting worms inside your food chest! :-)
0
Phoenix, this specific exact way to die happened to me TOO MANY TIMES ALREADY.
That was spot on! Genius! Lol!
0
R170 Hidden Easter Eggs Super Experimental Branch:
- New block: Tumbleweeds. Randomly appear in NPC villages and randomly pushed along the wind (westward, same as the clouds).
- Players "hit" by Tumbleweed take 1 damage and some Knockback.
- Tumbleweed hit by lightning become Charged Tumbleweed.
- Players hit by Charged Tumbleweed are Knockbacked all the way back to Spawn and then take falling damage equal to the release number.
- To enable Easter Eggs Super Experimental branch features, just hit Up-Down-Left-Right-A-B-C-Start-Select on your joypad.
:-)