Thorah

I like the tool belt idea. It seems very cool. I don't know how far along in the game you'd need to be but being able to pick up and drop what amounts to a hot bar sounds cool. I was thinking about doing something like that myself with pockets but this seems much more refined. As regards the discussion a moment ago about what the increase should be. I don't think we can really determine it at the moment. Once the other mechanics are solidified we'll know what would be reasonable to be portable, and what would be a reasonable increase. How much is reasonable to carry will surely be determined by what you can do with what you're carrying. Everyone with me

Oh yeah I was definitely thinking about a minor increase in strength, and our primary improvements being ingenuity based. Such as carts and such. As far as a HUD redesign. That sounds like a lot of work if it was from the ground up. However vanilla Minecraft certainly wasn't designed for TFC's system. Perhaps some modifications to facilitate the extra information TFC requires you to know. It would be nice to get away from all the raw numbers we might end up with. I'll start a new thread though so that we don't diverge too much.

@Miner239 To be honest I would prefer a harsher initial carrying limit with a sharper curve to the late game. However in principle I agree, that sounds grand. @Tony Yup agreed I'd rather not either, but I don't think that @239 was saying it had to be displayed like that. I think how we determine our weight is an interface problem. We might need a thread on interfaces at some point. @micmastadon Having subjective encumbrance that you can improve with both tools and objects, as well as the attributes system sounds good. I think the interesting part is the tools and features that increase capacity, as that's the part where we can use our ingenuity. I'd say that ingenuity is more immersive than anything else as it's a manifestation of your interaction with the world.

Sooooo no microblocks? Gotcha.

Fair idea. I understand not finding encumbrance particularly enjoyable. My ideas behind encumbrance were to maintain the internal consistency of the world, to ensure you feel as though you're in a world that could be real if you will. To that end some manifestation of the players limitations makes sense and it appears this is the best idea we have for it so far. Further to that I feel just assigning certain objects to the minecart would always produce an obvious contradiction. I would expect there to always be a lack of believability no matter how you determined the items to be assigned your suggested quality. e.g. If we say that all full block require a minecart. How come I can carry hundreds of ingots of iron in my inventory, but cannot carry a single block. That's why I was harping on so much about the player being able to discern what can and can't be carried logically. I was hoping that might move encumbrance away from a frustration as I assume you'd view it, toward a fact that grounds you in the world. A fact that makes it feel more intense when you're running from a bear debating whether or not to drop something. Or perhaps admiring your castle knowing that it's physical presence is more than just aesthetic as the blocks had to be carted there from the distant granite mine. I appreciate that idea might not solve it but that's the believability that we're going for is my impression.

@Kittty - Just read the linked thread. Oh you're kidding me. So from a modder's point of view they basically offloaded work to yourselves. That's very annoying. I suppose that it does make things more efficient. Serious query. I'm no coding genius, I am, however, familiar with coding. I absolutely love the sub block blocks. Especially those that render in 3D as the new ones are. If the community has sufficient desire is there the possibility of ourselves doing some of the legwork for you. I appreciate that the system is complicated but could you give us a template from which we work to churn out the variations of blocks to be rendered effectively. I don't fully understand that code but I can certainly see a pattern enough to make me think that I could repeat a simple task even if I cannot fully understand its application. I appreciate that you'd likely have to tidy it up but it might get the drudging boring work out of the way no? The Json file seems to be quite logically repetitive. It's just an offer as I love the mod. I feel silly saying I'd love this and that without actually offering my service. P.S. HAHA, I pasted the json code into work. 8 pages tho! XD That's insane.

That would make a lot of sense Bioxx. Maybe you could have 'sea water' block with different properties that slow swimming and sailing enough that even if someone did decide to travel by boat to another island it wouldn't be an issue on chunk generation. That would keep the reality and interest a few players. Although that would need to be built into the game. If players really just aren't supposed to try it might feel rather underwhelming. Like finding the farlands or some such. The storms and sea monsters idea is very atmospheric that's for sure. I like it for that. I suppose the danger is that it could be seen a as challenge, doing the Kepler Run as it were. Unless you'd read this topic you might conclude that they were guarding some great treasure and try to get past them.

Well if islands are the order of the day then we should discuss it. Adding (good) boats sounds rather difficult, although I do understand the feeling of loss. Would you mind explaining a bit further how you'd implement it. What ideas were you thinking of for construction and creation, and what types of control schemes were you thinking of. A simple solution might be a ship item that could be placed like a minecart, thus avoiding the difficult job of checking surroundings to ensure the correct blocks. If we implemented the 3D crafting system discussed in the Crafting 2.0 thread then perhaps natural constraints. i.e. only blocks made of wood could count towards the ship, and the ship had to be surrounded by water. We could go further by creating a 'shipyard system that had to conform to specific constraints and would create a sterilised area to work in and thus a simplified check for the computer.

That's what I'm looking for. I need to eat my words it seems so long as it's inside a block it's not so bad from a coding point of view. I'm psyched about that as yours was my favourite idea. The issue he brings up is how to ensure the player understands what they might be doing wrong, when they've missed a block. The only solution I can think of is that we either make a set of valid interpretations that will make the object, such that it's not likely that they'll work out another way to create an object that looks the same. Perhaps having the community put together all the iterations they can think of and checking to find all possibilities. That seems rather time consuming though. Rather if we could make the creation of the object as simple as possible, brainstorming for the best way to to it, thereby eliminating as much confusion as is possible. Also we need another option added to the poll.

@Tony I completely agree. I'd love that. I'm only going off Bioxx's response about it being a nightmare to code. Do you know of an easy way to do it?

Very interesting, it would certainly add a lot more depth to the system. As far as time scale is concerned, I think we'd have to key it in with the rest of the system to ensure you could get animals when they were useful, and that there were a few niches only the animals could fill. Variety I'm a massive fan of variety even if it's only aesthetic. Implementation of the colour variation would be a great aesthetic benefit it's as easy as that but I'm not sure that Minecraft can handle creating a new texture form two previous ones. Awesome if it can. Perhaps a workaround could be simply having the community create a large variety of coats for the various animals and then have the computer somehow infer a set of coats logically similar and randomly pick from that. Intelligence Intelligence seems to be the most difficult to implement. Perhaps we could simplify it by having a system that allows for a set of specific but useful behaviours they could have.s Effectively creating a subset of each animal. Then a pig could have any of traits 'flee', 'truffle hunt', 'fight', 'advanced pathing', 'extra sight range', etc. That could also include the personality aspect if implementable. Production I like the idea of having a variance in production. That would add an interesting element. Balance I think that a genetic system such as this would need balancing in a simple manner to ensure that it wasn't merely an inconvenience until you'd perfected the breed, or excessively drawn out. That could done by balancing for length of time to breed relative to other milestoness. Alternatively perhaps having certain axes on two ends of a scale would ensure you could only breed stupid animals with high production, or small animals with great intelligence. Thereby ensuring the system can't be exploited excessively. Interface Do you have any idea to incorporate a manner of observing this. Were you thinking it could all be done intuitively by observation, or that it needs to be explicitly detailed by means of an item or GUI. A smooth manner that we could use would be to tie it to the generation of the skin. Aggressive boars having darker skin, and higher production sheep having less flecks of other colours in their wool. Overall yeah I like it. Would be very cool to see in the game.

Oh, excellent idea. that sounds like a reasonable trade-off and shouldn't be too difficult to implement either. I think it would be nice to see variety but that could well manifest from a purely graphical perspective. We could also if we wanted assign a specific tool which only served that purpose as well. Thus adding value to specific tools. As much as I'd love to see a 3D crafting system I think I'll have to a) learn to code and code it myself. Maybe someday I suppose.

Well yes I was just throwing out a few ideas to oil the gears. Although I don't think we should discount the benefit of more subtle alerts. I#d enjoy the game from an immersion level much more.

Very cool ideas for progression. I think I'm personally a fan of the idea of efficiency by automation. That way you circumvent the attempt to improve value of higer tier tool materials by having a flat benefit of being able to 'drop in' a bunch of logs and watch them pop out the other side. This could be balanced quite well by having to lay down the logs and saw them out of a GUI menu. Although this would certainly be an upgrade to arranging logs and a saw in the crafting grid. I'd certainly consider it. I suppose we'll have to wait next until the ideas of power are explained as to how to balance these.

We shall have to get some ideas brewing for the other trades. Aw the whole block-scanning system would be the Shangri La that's for sure. It might break the code with the awesome. I understand that B. We need to be gentle with java here. If we're thinking additional tools to make different things incorperated into the crafting grid, could we have clicking on the crafting table with the item in question quickslots that tool. That makes it a bit more intuitive. That is of course if we have a slot system rather than an automatic check affording you extra options. Could we alternatively have multiple outputs according to the tool. i.e. three output slots with a tool next to each.

Yup I agree about having weight and bulk as two independant axes for measuring an item. Personally not a fan of having an excessively abstracted system. I can't really envision carrying more than 3 vessels IRL. However I get that that's a bit hardcore. Perhaps some sort of a variable we can adjust. One issue also highlighted by your quote Miner239 is that we need a good indication system. Don't get me wrong I know we can just throw some numbers on the screen but for me personally I find that more immersion breaking than having an illogical carrying capacity. Not to mention that anyone vaguely dyscalculaic, or simply doesn't enjoy handling lots of different numbers won't enjoy it. Although please don't misinterpret that as disinterest in this idea. I'd just like to facilitate it. However this may need another thread on interface systems as it bleeds into how we display environmental factors, and so on. One way might be to have some sort of effect on the camera. A small shaking when things are getting heavy, or a bob that mimics slow ponderous footsteps, at the same time as a slowed speed. Another might be to have a small symbol integrated to the hotbar as that's what we most identify as representing out inventory. Third we could Have a simple gauge. edit: Another Idea. I don't think we should rule out audible cues either. They're so passive that I forget about them but they are very effective that's for sure. Moreover their passivity adds to the benefit by not obscuring the players senses unintuitively. Learning from the Skyrim mod Frostfall it seems that one important factor is simplifying the screen by having the indicators visibility directly tied to its imminence a the time. i.e. when you're not at all encumbered you can't see anything and have to access the inventory for example to see what your level is. Also learned from that mod is that you can use more than one indicators for a smoother experience.

I like the idea of almost subdueing the volcano by using it as an energy source. That feels thematically very cool. I like the experience that would confer to playing the game. As far as underground volcano caves go. I thought I'd drop some inspiration on ya' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2305745/Is-magical-cave-world-The-chambers-carved-Kamchatkas-glaciers-volcano-fed-hot-springs.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lava_cave#/media/File:Classic_lava_tube_passage.jpg http://tuoitrenews.vn/lifestyle/25487/a-closeup-of-southeast-asia-s-longest-volcanic-cave https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lava_tube The one in Vietnam adds some really interesting general geographical features. Although that's another discussion.

You make a really good point 239 but I have to agree with Bioxx. IT seems that it wouldn't add an enourmous amount to the game considering the effort required. As regards encumberance I love that idea but couldn't we model it based on items as they're currently manifested with much the same effect. i.e. one block of stone being x weight, and a log being y weight. Personally I'm all for the idea of a fully realized intuitive system that doesn't have an arbitrary concept of 'items' determining how much you can carry. I'd much rather have a system that logically takes into account what I could carry in a manner that factors in the physics of the world. However I can't see a coding solution myself from what either Bioxx or Kitty say. If it is possible, you seem to know a bit about coding, could you demo it at all? I 'm not just trying to shoot you down I do really like the idea. edit: Grammar

I did not know that Bioxx. May I ask if it's worth discussing volcanoes at this point or are you still toying with how to make it work at all. I presume you mean how to make them appear dynamically right? Or is it hard work trying to get them to appear at all as large mountains with lava somewhere in the mix?

Very intriguing. I love the idea. I think the idea of required tools and perhaps resources brings up the point about how we differentiate between two recipes which use the same components except for the tool. The idea of having a taggle button to use or not use the tool is good but I can't help but feel from a design standpoint it might be frustrating having to click several buttons to get what you want. An issue accentuated if we were to have several tools. That said I know I'm not offering any sort of solution. I'll try to make a suggestion if I work one out.

Well if that's the only issue we could instead have a block of stone split into 64 which would solve the problem right? I wouldn't say we'd need any smaller divisions than 1/64th of a block of stone.

Volcanoes sound like an interesting idea. My perference would be similar to the prevaling opinion. First: That they should be infrequent to make them a little unique. Second: They should be observable so one's base isn't unexpectedly destroyed. Third: Their destructive capabiilities and danger should be proportional to some sort of a reward. Gorgeous as they would look, it would be a large chunk of coding for a relatively small aspect of the scenery. If they had a specific and interesting function such as a unique ore, or a bounty of a valuble ore they'd have a good purpose and one that changed according to the circumstances of the player.

The weighted system does seem like a good idea, but I appreciate the dificulty of implementation. I've been thinking of a system to split blocks into logical components. It would effectively add more granularity allowing for a more intuitive 'weight' system without actually having 'weight'. We could have divisible substances and materials such as stone broken down into pixels (for example). So many pixels of stone would be requried each crafting recipe. Let us propose that a pixel is a 3D version of what we see in minecraft currently. Making each block be composed of 16x16x16 pixels. i.e. 256 pixels. (Pixels is just a placeholder for the smaller quantity.) To complete the idea a few recipes could be added to fascilitate communication between blocks and their smaller components such as if a recipe needs 128pixles and so returns 128p from a block's usage when crafted. Similarly you could use 128p to create the same thing. or 192p with the recipe returning 64p. This could then be integrated with a weight system by valuing a pixel of stone as a specific weight and telling the computer therefore how much weight so many pixels' worth might be. At this point it bleeds into encumberance discussion but I think the topic lends itself to that. I hope I'm not digressing too much. I appreciate that this is only applicable to substances like flux and stone, but I don't think Miner239 was trying to overhaul foodstuffs as much as more naturally divisible substances. Anyway how does that sound as a workaround?

That was at you. I have no idea how it ended up like that. Oh yeah absolutely. Thanks for defining the idea. I was going for a cost benefit balance. That you could either carry x or y, which should make the system more customisable and the experiience more unique. Not to mention that having more customisation gives the player more tools to intelligently react to situations.

Interesting. I must say the sky-fridge would probably be an easier solution. That said, if in fact building changes slightly and building so high isn't so effective perhaps. Or there are other functional uses for cooling like more advanced tech. No I don't mean modern tech I mean things like some sort of wierd metal working. It is an interesting suggestion though. Are there any non-food uses you were thinking of?