Content: Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Background: Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Pattern: Blank Waves Notes Sharp Wood Rockface Leather Honey Vertical Triangles
Welcome to TerraFirmaCraft Forums

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements

    • Dries007

      ATTENTION Forum Database Breach   03/04/2019

      There has been a breach of our database. Please make sure you change your password (use a password manager, like Lastpass).
      If you used this password anywhere else, change that too! The passwords themselves are stored hashed, but may old accounts still had old, insecure (by today's standards) hashes from back when they where created. This means they can be "cracked" more easily. Other leaked information includes: email, IP, account name.
      I'm trying my best to find out more and keep everyone up to date. Discord (http://invite.gg/TerraFirmaCraft) is the best option for up to date news and questions. I'm sorry for this, but the damage has been done. All I can do is try to make sure it doesn't happen again.
    • Claycorp

      This forum is now READ ONLY!   01/20/2020

      As of this post and forever into the future this forum has been put into READ ONLY MODE. There will be no new posts! A replacement is coming SoonTM . If you wish to stay up-to-date on whats going on or post your content. Please use the Discord or Sub-Reddit until the new forums are running.

      Any questions or comments can be directed to Claycorp on either platform.
GobHoblin

A slight modification to logpile block physics

26 posts in this topic

Hi everyone I'm new here and as tradition dictates, whenever a minecraft mod updates I should immediately tell the people, who just put forth their ideas and effort, how they should actually make their game.In all seriousness though I actually do have one request of logpile block physics. I think that if logpiles were to leak logs downwards into logpiles below them it would fit in nicely with the rest of their physics as well. Logpiles already cant be placed on one another if the one that you're placing it on isn't completely filled or if there isn't a block below it, which gives it a feel of psuedo-gravity. And correct me if I'm wrong but logpiles leak logs into campfires below them. If log piles were to do that to other logpiles I think that it would fit in nicely with the preexisting nature of logpiles as well as making it slightly more convenient for the player.post-14509-0-97647500-1412674484_thumb.p

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I now have the approval of Jeremy Clarkson and a resident of Oz. Soon the creator will realize how necessary and dire this modification is to their ongoing list of problems.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually already looked into doing this when I altered the ingot pile code to behave this way.

 

The biggest issue that I came across when trying to implement this is that log piles can mix and match logs. As it currently stands, in order to place another log pile on top, the bottom one must be completely full in that there are 4 logs in each and every slot.

 

The logic that I used for ingot piles is that the bottom pile must be completely full (64 ingots) and that if you place another ingot pile on top of the same type of ingot, removing an ingot from the bottom essentially grabs the ingot from the top of the pile. If you place an ingot pile of a different metal on top, and then you try to remove one of the original 64 ingots, it's like a really touchy game of jenga, and the entire top pile breaks and drops all of its ingots on the ground because it is no longer supported by a full, 64 ingot, pile.

 

Things also get a bit more messy because the log pile is a GUI, and there really isn't an intuitive "these 4 logs are above the other logs inside" order.

 

Let's say I have a log pile with 8 oak logs in it, and 8 ash logs in it. Because there is a total of 16 logs inside, I am able to place another log pile above. Now let's say that I put 4 willow logs inside of the top log pile. What happens when I remove a single oak log from the bottom pile. In essence, the bottom log pile no longer has 16 logs inside of it, and therefore by definition cannot support another pile above it, but it is unable to grab a log from the pile above it to refill to 16, because all of the slots are occupied by a log that is not willow. Do we then implement the jenga system for the log piles, in that by removing the single oak log, the top log pile simply breaks and drops all of its willow logs on the ground? In my opinion, this would make log storage almost too complicated and annoying of a system, because it would almost have to be some sort of puzzle in order to fit all of the logs within a defined space, or you would be forced to take up a larger area of space and simply do a single log type per stack of piles.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an alternate suggestion, the log piles could be changed so the inventory couldn't be accessed if a solid block is placed on top of it.

 

Seriously, who collects thier firewood from the bottom of the log pile rather than the top? (I'm talking real life with that statement)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually already looked into doing this when I altered the ingot pile code to behave this way.

 

The biggest issue that I came across when trying to implement this is that log piles can mix and match logs. As it currently stands, in order to place another log pile on top, the bottom one must be completely full in that there are 4 logs in each and every slot.

 

The logic that I used for ingot piles is that the bottom pile must be completely full (64 ingots) and that if you place another ingot pile on top of the same type of ingot, removing an ingot from the bottom essentially grabs the ingot from the top of the pile. If you place an ingot pile of a different metal on top, and then you try to remove one of the original 64 ingots, it's like a really touchy game of jenga, and the entire top pile breaks and drops all of its ingots on the ground because it is no longer supported by a full, 64 ingot, pile.

 

Things also get a bit more messy because the log pile is a GUI, and there really isn't an intuitive "these 4 logs are above the other logs inside" order.

 

Let's say I have a log pile with 8 oak logs in it, and 8 ash logs in it. Because there is a total of 16 logs inside, I am able to place another log pile above. Now let's say that I put 4 willow logs inside of the top log pile. What happens when I remove a single oak log from the bottom pile. In essence, the bottom log pile no longer has 16 logs inside of it, and therefore by definition cannot support another pile above it, but it is unable to grab a log from the pile above it to refill to 16, because all of the slots are occupied by a log that is not willow. Do we then implement the jenga system for the log piles, in that by removing the single oak log, the top log pile simply breaks and drops all of its willow logs on the ground? In my opinion, this would make log storage almost too complicated and annoying of a system, because it would almost have to be some sort of puzzle in order to fit all of the logs within a defined space, or you would be forced to take up a larger area of space and simply do a single log type per stack of piles.

 

Well you could make it so that the willows would trickle down if you free up a slot, so it wouldn't have any effect if it can't fit. 

Eh, what i m trying to say is that at any point a case like you described happens nothing would happen, just like it is now, would that be a problem?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you could make it so that the willows would trickle down if you free up a slot, so it wouldn't have any effect if it can't fit. 

Eh, what i m trying to say is that at any point a case like you described happens nothing would happen, just like it is now, would that be a problem?

 

The problem with doing it that way is that it creates an inconsistency in the rules, which in general tends to lead to extra confusion. In order to implement it, the change either needs to be made so that the top block would break, or we need to change the rules on log pile placement so that a "full" log pile is one that has at least one log in each of its slot, rather than one that has 4 in each slot.

 

If the behavior isn't consistent for both methods, players easily get confused and have a hard time keeping track of what is correct behavior for whichever action.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly when it comes to multiple wood types, the log pile interface could alway be expanded to a 4x4 grid of one log per slot. It would also make more realistic sense. You grab the big heavy logs one at a time, not 4 logs at once.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno. I think having to drag out ever individual log, though realistic as it might be, could be really bothersome.

 

I mean, ever tried to take stuff out of a chest when there was only one item per slot? Annoying as hell. And if I had to drag my mouse over each and every similar-looking log to find the one I want.... pretty darn annoying I'll say.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a solution :)

post-14223-0-32491300-1412868391_thumb.p

4 stack * 4 = 8 stack * 1

No problem to merge.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the best solution we could ever have. I made a post a long time ago with a similar picture

Think I'm going to second this. Shift click logic -does- work for log piles right? Besides, we already have to right click them into piles without the GUI (Which I still think makes very little sense, but I'm not going to be picky here.)Just make the gui logic have trickle down mechanics like the forge, and then this makes perfect sense. Might be a little complicated and tedious to fill up a log pile by the gui, but if there's trickle mechanics in place, just place the logs in the top left slot, even one at a time, and they'll simply fall in place. Not as complicated as it looks.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the 16 slot gui if not for any other reason then be able to use more than 4 different wood logs.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the 16 slot gui if not for any other reason then be able to use more than 4 different wood logs.

Gotta agree, would be nice to not have to make 3 irrelevent stacks of logs due to limited space within the gui. it's only 16 spaces, but it does give a lot of potential.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be much more likely that we would just make it GUI-less than it would be to make 16 single-item slots. So similar to how the logs in the pit kiln work, but would be like ingot piles in that they change color depending on what log is in them, and it would only be 1 type per pile.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be much more likely that we would just make it GUI-less than it would be to make 16 single-item slots. So similar to how the logs in the pit kiln work, but would be like ingot piles in that they change color depending on what log is in them, and it would only be 1 type per pile.

I suppose that could work, make the piles a bit more organized in that case, it'd just be more space consuming.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of being able to visually distinguish which logs are in which pile.  Usually I have access to a couple different types of wood and prefer to use some for building and some for cooking, but its hard to remember where each type is.  You also can't see at a glance how many logs you have with the current system.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be much more likely that we would just make it GUI-less than it would be to make 16 single-item slots. So similar to how the logs in the pit kiln work, but would be like ingot piles in that they change color depending on what log is in them, and it would only be 1 type per pile.

I like that equally as much as my suggestion. There's a sense of accomplishment I get when looking at a stack of ingots, I bet a stack of logs would be similar. Also it wouldn't put in more rules to confuse players, in fact it would cut down on some, which is nice.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waste of time in my opinion.

 

Here's an exercise in real life. Take 16 different wooden logs and try to make a nice stack out of them. It's not as easy as you might think, hell, even two different types of wood can be hard.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waste of time in my opinion.

 

Here's an exercise in real life. Take 16 different wooden logs and try to make a nice stack out of them. It's not as easy as you might think, hell, even two different types of wood can be hard.

That's why making gui-less versions where only one type of wood can be stacked together is a good replacement on the matter, since it still serves the purpose of letting people stack logs and grab from the bottom if needed.Yay~ we can make wood silos now and stuff.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If logpiles are going to be GUI-less then I feel like it should come with a way of placing stacks of logs at once. Otherwise I feel it would become tedious really quick. Other that I think it would be great to have.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If logpiles are going to be GUI-less then I feel like it should come with a way of placing stacks of logs at once. Otherwise I feel it would become tedious really quick. Other that I think it would be great to have.

think it should have the "toss it in" system, toss a whole stack into a log pile, it'll fill up and add another pile on top if possible.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites