Xechon

If you are not familiar, I recommend checking it out! It isn't actually updated to 1.12.2 unfortunately, but while you are correct, it mechanically doesn't add anything, I love the way it looks and feel that I would have a better time progressing through the ages in a more realistic and much more interesting environment. I may be a bit strange but I actually prefer world generation mods that don't add a ton of new stuff, it ends up feeling like useless clutter to me. Regardless, that would be a lot of work to integrate, and it is beside the point. I'm just hoping at least for functional world gen to be allowed to spawn, so we don't have to desperately wait and watch for compatibility addons.

Man, its been a while. I'd just like to throw in my vote here: I very much agree with the OP, and would love to see a more vertical overworld with a "mining dimension" when you reach world floor. However, something I haven't seen mentioned yet about world gen is mod compatibility. Sure, I'd love to use Realistic World Generation with TFC, but I would ignore that limitation if I didn't need a compatibility addon to use TFC alongside any other mod that adds worldgen. That said, I'm thrilled this is making a comeback! Thanks to the devs for putting your time on the line for this, I hope it turns out better than ever!

I completely overlooked the patterns being possible. This would limit the options too significantly to be useful, and the only way I can think to fix that is to make control more fine, which would just make smithing a lot easier on its own. The randomization per world is working fine, and I swear I'm not red-green colorblind, can't believe I mixed them up. You're right, I should've checked the date on that post. The values could be calculated from the necessary information instead of preset, but it wouldn't be worth it and the options would be limited. Should have kept the second question to one option in hindsight. I was just trying to keep that out of the multiple choice. I'll change it, although I don't know what it will do to the existing vote, and the point of the poll is moot now.

Have you read, understood, and followed all of the rules listed in large text at the top of the suggestions forum?(Yes/No): Answering "no" to the above question will result in your post being deleted. Yes I've seen a lot of argument about numbers being revealed for anvil crafting in TFC. It seems that the developer's intention is to keep the numbers secret, which I personally agree with. However, there are a few options I see for reducing the potential for a leak to take the fun out of smithing for some new players, or limiting the ability for people to figure out the numbers. Please vote for options you would like to see, or post your own in the comments. Randomizing the position of the green arrow slightly per item would not eliminate the numbers, but would make them less meaningful than getting a feel for each button, as the person counting numbers would have to re-calculate for every item, and as a side-affect would make the crafting of every item slightly different. Randomizing the hit numbers per world would disallow for people to simply learn the values and use them to make perfect tools in every world. They would at least need to figure it out again every world, and people can't spoil the fun for others. Randomizing minimally per hit would make smithing a perfect tool more difficult, unless an acceptable range was implemented, but would make smithing a much more experimental process every time, and would make knowing the numbers almost moot. This may end up more frustrating than beneficial, however. A combination is also possible, which is why I opened the poll up to multiple options per person. I personally prefer the first option, but would like to see what you all think. Option one could be handled by generating a random modifier to add to the crafting value when it is stored in nbt, two may require redirecting access to some values to the Anvil Tile Entity if the seed isn't public static, and the third could be handled by adding a random modifier to each hit. I can provide code if requested. I very much hope this is distinct enough from this.

The return type on that method is ItemStack. Try returning the itemstack you get in the parameters.

I don't know if it will let you use reflection to access the private constructor. If not, then you will have to use bytecode manipulation to flip a private, bytecode injection to add your armors to that class, or submit a pull request to change it. Here is a paste of the reflection code I used when trying to do this, and it seems to work, but I ran into another issue so I don't know for sure.

No real way to do it with the API, since you have to change both ItemChisel.onUsed() and PlayerInfo.switchChiselMode(), and the api for onUsed is inherited, not composed. Unless I'm forgetting something stupid.

The weird names are probably because you didn't include a localization. Add gui.plans.codeitemname=In Game Name to the appropriate lang file (en_US.lang for US English, for example) if you haven't already.

Did you rename the ModClientProxy in the template he gave you? If so, you have to make sure to update all references to use the new name. I don't use eclipse, but usually an IDE will have an option to rename the class and automatically update all references to it.

To make an addon, you simply have to add the TFC deobf jar as a module dependency of your project. You get the deobf jar by downloading the zip and running gradlew.bat build from command line, and then grab it from *buildlibs. Adding modules and dependencies differs by development environment. You will also have to grab the src from the same place as the deobf and add it as a library depenancy if you want to view TFC source in an IDE.

I am not 3TUSK, but I have attempted to contact him and linked him to this post. If I get a response I will communicate all of this.

Anvil code is a little messy right now. "int value" does indicate the location of the red arrow, and it is not randomized. Also keep in mind that these recipes assume that the item will not inherit damage from the process and making them only increases general smithing ability. It also doesn't seem that one can actually create their own plans with this. I am curious if it has been tested if adding anvil recipes actually works due to this. You may be able to override another plan for your item, though. Barrels are complicated, but it seems that specific fluid/item output amounts cannot be set, and are simply relative to the amount of output and weather or not remove fluid is true. Quern code on the modtweaker2 side is a bit sloppy, and the error is probably due to concurrency handling. I will see if I can contact 3TUSK to figure it out. For kilns, I see no dependency of the kiln recipe on inheriting ItemPotteryBase. Spindles aren't. Finally, a TFC Deobf jar is included in the libs folder. Is this okay? I have been searching for a way to make everything work without it for my own addon, with no luck.

You're right, a separate section is probably the best solution right now. I didn't even think about the work that would put on you. Didn't you guys used to have someone that works on the site? If they are still around and willing, making it required to add at least some tags to a post might help you out a bit.

That's a very valid point. Perhaps a required tag for spoilers or game-changers would be best? I still feel that a separate section for things deemed "cheaty" could possibly alienate some mods or users.

I voted to let them stay. Now, I am not in favor of addons that are essentially cheats, that give you all of the information. I honestly wish for more abstraction in the game, but that would almost require redundancy to be done well. I had a lot of trouble locating ores when I started playing, and it started to become dismaying. However, when watching one of Dunkleosteus' streams, he mentioned that (quite obviously, but I'm a little slow with math) that if you find the end of a vein, you can count blocks and find the ore quickly almost every time. I was overjoyed, and had a lot more fun and progress for a week or so. After that, I grew tired of how accurate the method was. There was no more challenge in locating the vein, but still the tedious search for traces in the beginning (ores were really hard to come by back then, especially garnerite). I also do not think that it would have been much better if I were to have figured this out myself (I knew the range of the propick, it is listed in many places). I never got tired of smithing though, because I never learned any tricks, just kept getting a better idea of how far each button moved the arrow, and writing down the best ways I found for each item for each metal in a book by my forge. I could always try to get even better results, and even if I found the best I got the feel good of a perfect result and stacks of loot to break the tedium.Also, TFC is open source. I can look through the code really easily and pick out the info I need, grab the world seed and my username and run the calculations. Java is very readable, and especially so the TFC code. (good job on that devs, btw ) I think that people who want them will be upset if they are denied. I think that people who don't want them don't have to use them. I think that the experience of getting a feel for it is better than having your hand held or even figuring it out on your own, because that is a longer and more lasting progression that doesn't have anything to do with tiers. I think mods should be able to experiment with those features however they want, without creating a dichotomy of "true-players" and "cheaters", and without fear of restricting their audience to only one of those categories. I think I'm very bad at explaining myself. I hope this was all understandable