Hyena Grin

Heh. Make redstone torches give off UV light and allow farming underground.

Honestly I would just like to be able to adjust the increments on chiselling. Instead of only having the option to chisel one 'unit' at a time, it'd be nice if you could cycle through one, two, three, four, and five unit increments. That way you could rapidly create blocks of certain sizes without having to tap it a bunch of times, but you would still need to shape each stone individually. Just with less or more fine control.

I agree that it's easier with wood, which is why I agreed that some waste would make sense. I actually suggested a loss ratio of 8/12 (one third loss) with saws and 3/12 (three quarters loss) with axes, which I think is plenty restrictive. The key to the change is that you could convert one log into one tile's worth of flooring or wall using an axe. I think that's critical. You shouldn't need to use half a tree to build one tile of wall. However the current waste ratio is pretty abysmal, you are throwing away the vast majority of the log. I also agree that survival mode could be harder, but I don't think this is the way to make it harder. Once you reach saws, wooden structures really should not be especially time consuming. It should be far easier than using stone, because, y'know.. that is why the vast majority of structures are and have been made out of wood ever since the advent of metal tools. With the new stone axe you are already wasting 10% of your logs, and if one log = 3 planks, and you need 8 planks minimum to build a single, basic floor or wall tile, then there is basically no reason to use wood to build with in the early game, which is silly. You would be wasting wood hand over fist just to build a tiny wall. You would need to chop down half a forest just to construct a simple hut. I am all for making the game more challenging, but I think there are better ways to do that then to make building with wood undesirably costly. Especially given that we need so much wood already for charcoal - given the choice between extremely expensive wooden structures at the expense of charcoal, or using ridiculously efficient stone, I can't see why anyone would use wood for anything other than purely aesthetic reasons. I'd rather if stone was the more difficult to process material. Wood is an incredibly efficient building material in real life, it's the first building material anyone would use if they were going to start building in the wilderness. Also you have to consider that in Minecraft everything is scaled; a day is much, much shorter than in real life, time to chop trees/wood is scaled down, for plants/trees to grow is scaled down, etc. Which also means the resources gained need to be scaled up to compensate. A day's worth of wood harvesting is already not especially productive unless you are lucky and have piles of willows. It is very time consuming to create charcoal and by the time you're done you'll have cleared a rather large chunk of forest, and must wait for it to regrow. Just make plank floors/walls less desirable by making them more vulnerable to creeper explosions. Make them weak and unsalvagable. But don't make them scarce, otherwise they won't get used in a sensible way.

Conservation of mass is important, I think. Obviously converting logs to planks will include waste, and currently you get 8 planks out of a log (with a saw), so I think it's reasonable to assume that 12 planks will create a full block. Just make a block 3 planks wide and 4 planks thick. This will also mean that even a stone axe can convert a single log into one block's worth of thin floor/wall. While a saw could create two blocks-worth, plus change. Anyway I love the idea, but my hope was that building with planks would make it more efficient to build wooden structures, and right now it doesn't feel that way. I still feel tempted to use old wood recipes to craft half-blocks. 4 planks to make a block, multiplied by 3, so 12 planks to make 6 wooden floor tiles. That seems much more efficient than the current 8 planks per tile. Of course you might very well get rid of plank blocks altogether, I have no idea. But either way, it could use a balance pass. It should be easy to use wood to build basic structures once you have a saw, like really easy. Right now you just need to pick a few rocks up off the ground to build a wall, while wood, a much more common and versatile building material, is extremely inefficient.

I am not sure what that has to do with anything. A lot of people play with strangers. So the kind of people you're playing with is frequently unknown. That's true. However, just because you can find pictures of penises on bathroom stalls today doesn't mean I necessarily want a mechanic in a game where people can draw them all over the place. This is neither ancient Rome nor a bathroom stall, and we are not ancient Romans. Just seems like a lot of work to allow people to grief eachother with crude pictures.

Aside from the technical improbability of this (any kind of vector or raster dynamic texture overlay system would undoubtedly require major engine overhauls), I can say that this would be used (in SMP at least) primarily for graffiti. I am not offended by obscenities and the like, but I don't know if I want to see obscenities, racial and sexual slurs, and untold numbers of phalluses littering the settlements. ;P

I'm not in your shoes, and so I can't imagine what impact it would have if there were a bunch of newbies who got it into their heads that NPCs might be a thing. However, generally speaking, if a lot of people are going 'Oh wow, wouldn't NPC's be awesome?! Here's what we could do with them...!' Doesn't, y'know, actually have an effect on development. Maybe you consider it a hassle, but reality is reality. People wanting something doesn't make your job harder unless you feel compelled to give in to those demands. Hey, I don't have an issue with a dev making a quick 'Sorry guys, we decided against this' on a forum post. But calling people dicks for even daring to start a poll is excessive. I was actually part of a mod community where the developers had a specific subforum for rejected suggestions (as well as rejected bug reports) where they would move threads that fit the criteria. It seemed to work well for them. People could continue to talk about it, but there were no illusions about the likelihood of that suggestion being implemented. It also saved the devs time arguing with people in threads. It's a lot easier to move a thread than to respond repeatedly with the same 'sorry guys but no' script.

Well, this place is more hostile than I expected. If you want to make it clear that NPCs will never, ever, ever be a part of this mod, there are better ways to do so rather than editing polls and getting defensive over someone's harmless poll. If there is a demand for NPCs that this mod will never address, then that might be a reason for someone to find ways to combine this mod with one that does what they would like. I really like this mod a lot, but it doesn't exist in a vacuum. Pretending otherwise isn't a great way to encourage a community. If vanilla minecraft forum devs got defensive every time someone made a thread about stuff they had no intention of implementing, mods like this wouldn't exist. I have a suggestion actually: Why don't you create a subforum specifically for threads of this nature. Call it 'Rejected Suggestions' or something that you can move threads like this to. And then you can peacefully ignore it while the community can continue to discuss whatever they want and by the nature of the subforum it would leave no room for doubt about your position.

This thread was linked in the sticky post, so hopefully I'm not doing any overt thread necromancy here. I have thought a lot about lighting and how it seems to be off in its own little world; while the mod makes just about everything else in-depth and interesting, lighting remains overly simplistic and not something that needs to be managed. I think the best way to handle this would be to create several tiers of lighting; Torches: Burn out after 24 hours, otherwise are identical. Can be relit with the firestarter so that you don't have to keep making batches of torches. Brazier: An object made from raw stone or metal that you can fill with sticks or logs, ignite, and it will burn like a campfire, providing light. You could balance it out so that a full stack of sticks (64) or a full stack of logs (16) would burn for a very long time perhaps 24 hours per log(16 days max), and 6 hours per stick (16 days max). This would give you a semi-permanent light source that I think everyone could agree would be manageable. They would light a larger area and have a larger protection effect than torches do. Like a campfire, if it goes out, more fuel and a fire-starter would relight it. The specific amounts of times could be adjusted to make things last longer. Lantern: The final light source would require fashioning a metal lantern (out of a single ingot - any metal will do) and combining it with a pane of glass and a piece of charcoal. These lights would be permanent and behave the same as torches do now. That would give you a clear progression and stages of semi-permanent lighting, without the irritation of a huge technology gap between unreliable torches and permanent lighting.

It'd be rather nice if you could maintain guards and shop keeper NPCs that would function while you were AFK, it would help maintain the economy in a world where people can just take whatever they want when you're not around. Just use some system where you pay NPCs wages (in the form of currency) and they will work for you for a set amount of time. A guard will attack intruders while a shopkeeper will act like a vanilla villager, trading goods with people. I wouldn't expect anything terribly advanced, here. Just enough to allow people to have a presence in the world, in the form of 'employees' with minimalistic combat/trade AI, to guard and run shops/homes that are supplied/owned by the player. Edit: Eh, 'no a long time ago' doesn't mean 'never.' =) No harm in talking about it. But it's good to know where the devs stand on it.

Bloomers already use a weight capacity rather than a slot-based capacity. It might be possible to simply give chests a large amount of slots and then tack on a size/weight capacity. As a sidenote, I'd really like to see craftable backpacks and stuff to manage carrying capacity, on top of a slow mechanic. Backpack to give you more slots to carry things (how much you can carry is as much limited by how many hands/pockets/space-in-backpack you have, as much as it is physical weight. It's not so hard to carry a 20 pound stone, but twenty pounds worth of small nuggets would be hard to manage without something to put them in), and then a maximum weight that applies different slow effects as you get close and surpass it.

Maybe I don't know everything about minecraft or TFC, but can you explain to me how you can actually find a thief's bed? Considering it could be literally anywhere in an enormous 3D space? And considering beds don't exactly tell you who is set to respawn there? Short of actually physically finding the thief near that bed, I don't see how you can just go out and know which bed of the 30 nearby is theirs, or whether their bed is even included in the ones that you find. More likely you'd waste your time destroying the beds of totally innocent people. Which seems silly, especially when the search could take untold amounts of time - time that you are spending away from your home, which means the thief (or a different thief) could easily be ransacking it while you are on a wild goose chase.

After home stones are implemented it would be relatively easy to white-list people so that if they die in that area then they respawn normally, while anyone else in that area who died is treated as an intruder. It'd be nice if you could 'flag' people as thieves or vandals based on actions they take inside a home area. If they break a block or take an object out of a chest, and aren't white-listed, then they could be flagged as a criminal and if they are killed before they leave the area they become a prisoner. But I dunno if that's even possible. Edit: I want to add that attempting to create a 'realistic' and cooperative world in any minecraft server is hampered by the facts that; i) Unlike real life, you are not in the world 24/7. In real life you spend most of your time around your home or at your place of work. If we were in-game 24/7 either at our homes or in the mines/forests gathering, then thievery would be more difficult because there would be more people around any given location. But if I want to log in for a couple of hours a night, that is 22 hours that I cannot catch thieves and vandals. That's a problem. There are solutions for this (such as 'owned' areas, but that's a discussion for another thread) ii) Even in the instances where a thief is caught, there isn't an adequate way to punish them. A thief who is thinking ahead won't go into a risky situation with an inventory full of valuables. They will have a chest near a bed somewhere and if they die while stealing some goods, all they've really lost is whatever they failed to steal from you. So it's sort of a situation where they can't lose. Like others I feel like banning people for stealing removes a layer of competition from the game. I'd rather a way to punish them in the context of the world so that 'thief' can be a viable path, but not as easy and consequence-free as it is now. If it could be done, prisons could be a great solution to that problem. An hour or even a day trapped in a room with no inventory and no visible means of escape might be enough to make people think twice. Of course it could also be abused: build a prison in an area that cannot be escaped (by building a wall in front of the exit) would trap people indefinitely.