[Addon 1.42] Iron Chests V0.9.5

  • Just a quick update, I've recently been trying out Minecraft 1.0.0 and haven't progressed much.
    I'm hoping to clear out some time by the end of this week to do some more coding to solve some of the issues I'm getting with SMP, mainly sending the password to identify.

  • lishid, sorry for the long time I took to reply, but the chests aren't in fact explosion-proof - I just asked you to make them explosion-proof :whistling:


    Note how he hasn't done an update since you requested this as well...
    two fails here:
    1: Patience
    2: Observation/Reading

  • lishid, sorry for the long time I took to reply, but the chests aren't in fact explosion-proof - I just asked you to make them explosion-proof :whistling:


    Yeah, I agreed to make it explosion proof in the future versions.

  • Question: I haven't taken the time to read the whole discussion, but when will you be able to open iron/gold/diamond chests with blocks on top of them?
    I am a modder, and its sounds simple to change; just remove the bit of code that checks if there is a block above before opening.
    If it is coming in the next update, please say so.
    EDIT: BTW I use your mod on my server, its awesome! :) I'd just like to be able to stack chests on top of one another.

  • Question: I haven't taken the time to read the whole discussion, but when will you be able to open iron/gold/diamond chests with blocks on top of them?
    I am a modder, and its sounds simple to change; just remove the bit of code that checks if there is a block above before opening.
    If it is coming in the next update, please say so.
    EDIT: BTW I use your mod on my server, its awesome! :) I'd just like to be able to stack chests on top of one another.


    Yes, coming in the next update.

  • On SMP:


    Code
    1. Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Slot 251 is already occupied by ic2.common.BlockScaffold@75d252d when adding ic2.mod.ironchest.BlockVeryLargeChest@7433b121
    2. at qf.<init>(Block.java:51)
    3. at nx.<init>(BlockContainer.java:16)
    4. at ic2.mod.ironchest.BlockVeryLargeChest.<init>(BlockVeryLargeChest.java:13)
    5. at mod_IronChest.<clinit>(mod_IronChest.java:72)
    6. ... 13 more


    Even when the config is changed (taken from the above post, since your config does not generate if a block ID conflict occurs on first run... you should fix that too):


  • That looks interesting, but It's non-SMP which is basically where I am at right now.


    What's the point of a password in Single Player? :?:

    "A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand." - Bertrand Russell


  • That looks interesting, but It's non-SMP which is basically where I am at right now.

    I figured I might point that out as I have decompiled both SSP and SMP, and minus the network communication code, the two are somewhat similar. I have been poking around inside the code to find a way to use MLMP and Forge to send the "combination" packets from client to server and back. Also, I thought it might give some inspiration.


    If I hit something, I'll let you know.

  • I figured I might point that out as I have decompiled both SSP and SMP, and minus the network communication code, the two are somewhat similar. I have been poking around inside the code to find a way to use MLMP and Forge to send the "combination" packets from client to server and back. Also, I thought it might give some inspiration.


    If I hit something, I'll let you know.


    Well What I think now is to use Modloader's packet to send the password to set/authenticate every time it's asked. Although I have been busy recently with some Bukkit plugins...

  • Yeah, using Packet230s would be the best way to go.


    Be sure to use server side authentication - if you send the password in the P230, people could easily hack their clients to get the password.

  • Yeah, using Packet230s would be the best way to go.


    Be sure to use server side authentication - if you send the password in the P230, people could easily hack their clients to get the password.


    No need for auth. Client sends attempt pass to server, unless your network is being watched, nobody should catch your packet.