[1.5.1/1.5.2] Modular Forcefield System v2 Classic 2.3.0.1.15

  • It's quite simple. All versions that are not coming from Thunderdark are derivative versions of the mod. That's true for Cal's UE version of MFFS and for our classic version of the mod. Now I'd prefer to stop discussing this topic and focus on the next steps in bringing you a stable release of MFFS classic.


    This is not true. My version, (if you even call it a version since it is independent) is not a derivative and is independent from the GPL license legally. It does not use any code or textures from the old MFFS and was coded from the ground up. It's a completely different mod, both in code and in terms of theme and style. The only thing similar are the ideas of the mod. Ideas cannot be called "derivative". I had a lawyer look through my code in comparison to the original as well as the development and this is pretty much confirmed. Debate if you want, but this is a fact. Anyway, this is the end of discussion. :)

  • The end of discussion is that thunderdark was the original developer of the "forcefield" idea and immibis, calclavia and minalien/searge just continued it, doesn't matter how they did.

  • I had a lawyer look through my code in comparison to the original as well as the development and this is pretty much confirmed. Debate if you want, but this is a fact. Anyway, this is the end of discussion.


    This is hilarious and yes, I agree, end of discussion. I recommend you to just stay away from this thread, as your mod is completely independent, there is no reason at all to discuss anything related to it in this thread.

  • I had a lawyer look through my code


    Talk about taking things too seriously... :rolleyes:

    Would anyone like to try a Slowpoke Tail?! Only 1 Million Yen!


    Quote

    this isn't about arrogance or ego, I have a block that I put a lot of freaking work into


    Every Mod Author, in existence. And yet, you STILL say otherwise.

  • How much would you bet Redpower has had the same happen to it?

    145 Mods isn't too many. 9 types of copper and 8 types of tin aren't too many. 3 types of coffee though?

    I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realise that what you read was not what I meant.


    ---- Minecraft Crash Report ----
    // I just don't know what went wrong :(


    I see this too much.

  • I haven't seen this reported yet, but using the most recent version in the OP with IC2 .304 causes an IC2 API crash. I've deleted every single instance of the IC2 API I could find that wasn't in IC2 itself so I think this is an actual API change failure. I could be wrong; if so, could someone please tell me how they get it working?


    EDIT: Removing MFFS allows the game to work normally, deleting the IC2 API folder inside MFFS does not.

  • Talk about naive as all hell.


    You take me WAY too seriously. There's a such thing called 4th wall, you know.

    Would anyone like to try a Slowpoke Tail?! Only 1 Million Yen!


    Quote

    this isn't about arrogance or ego, I have a block that I put a lot of freaking work into


    Every Mod Author, in existence. And yet, you STILL say otherwise.

  • I'm still trying to decide if I want to use this version of MFFS. I mean, there are three versions now. Cal's with it's super fancy graphics(but I think it can generate the fields without any weird resources), this one(true to the v2 by thunderdark, thus will need weird ores but doesn't have insanely fancy graphics), or Immibis's version(no ores needed but doesn't have some of the v2 features).


    Truth be told, I'm still kind of pissed that Cal decided to remove the in game manual from the multitool. Not a really big deal, it's just that AFAIK he hasn't added a different way to look up how things work in game.
    But that's all kind of moot because I'm quick enough to catch on usually.


    Long story short I wish one didn't need to mine that stuff to generate fields.

    Apprentice Redstoner, Professional Slacker

  • I've updated the beta to 2.3.0.0.5 to fix compatibility with IC2 304. Note that MFFS 2.3.0.0.5 now currently requires 304 or later. Nothing else has changed at the moment - the only difference between 2.3.0.0.4 and 2.3.0.0.5 is the IC2 API update.


    I've also restructured the attachments so that there will be fewer mistakes with people grabbing the wrong version.

  • I'm still trying to decide if I want to use this version of MFFS. I mean, there are three versions now. Cal's with it's super fancy graphics(but I think it can generate the fields without any weird resources), this one(true to the v2 by thunderdark, thus will need weird ores but doesn't have insanely fancy graphics), or Immibis's version(no ores needed but doesn't have some of the v2 features).


    Truth be told, I'm still kind of pissed that Cal decided to remove the in game manual from the multitool. Not a really big deal, it's just that AFAIK he hasn't added a different way to look up how things work in game.
    But that's all kind of moot because I'm quick enough to catch on usually.


    Long story short I wish one didn't need to mine that stuff to generate fields.

    I hear you, forcium is a bit of a pain to get. personally, to get around the problem, I use this version and immibis's, you get the best of both worlds :)

    145 Mods isn't too many. 9 types of copper and 8 types of tin aren't too many. 3 types of coffee though?

    I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realise that what you read was not what I meant.


    ---- Minecraft Crash Report ----
    // I just don't know what went wrong :(


    I see this too much.

  • The question is, what is the main problem with Forcicium? I personally like the idea that a resource is required to keep the force fields running, not just energy. But I would agree if you complain about Forcicium spamming storage and chests unnecessary. I'll check if there are more effective ways of storing Monazit and Forcicium.


    Forcicium requirement and Monazit worldgen could be an option in the config file, but we'll discuss it internally first before a decision can be made about adding this kind of option.


    So what are your opinions, would it be better to create more effective ways to store large amounts of Forcicium/Monazit or should the requirement be optional (a config file setting)? Keep in mind that we try to keep it as compatible with Thunderdarks version as possible.

  • The question is, what is the main problem with Forcicium? I personally like the idea that a resource is required to keep the force fields running, not just energy. But I would agree if you complain about Forcicium spamming storage and chests unnecessary. I'll check if there are more effective ways of storing Monazit and Forcicium.


    Forcicium requirement and Monazit worldgen could be an option in the config file, but we'll discuss it internally first before a decision can be made about adding this kind of option.


    So what are your opinions, would it be better to create more effective ways to store large amounts of Forcicium/Monazit or should the requirement be optional (a config file setting)? Keep in mind that we try to keep it as compatible with Thunderdarks version as possible.

    I really don't mind having to mine Monazit to keep my force fields running, but it can't be a storage hog when you don't use it. I think there should be something like forcicium blocks or refined forcicium, that would make it use less inventory space.


    Also, making it optional would be the best of both worlds.

  • The Forcicium Requirement should be a numeric Config, to allow diffrent amounts of it, to be required. Also the Energy Requirement (if not already configurable) should be a numeric Config to increase the Energy needed for Force Fields if that helps with balance on PvP-Servers for example.

  • The Forcicium Requirement should be a numeric Config, to allow diffrent amounts of it, to be required. Also the Energy Requirement (if not already configurable) should be a numeric Config to increase the Energy needed for Force Fields if that helps with balance on PvP-Servers for example.


    The Force Energy cost is already configurable per-field-block (along with multipliers for the initial creation cost and certain addons), and we've got customizations for how much EU equates to how much Force Energy (for the MFFS Converter), so this wouldn't be difficult.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Minalien ().

  • Cool. We need forcium blocks. Big green things with nice Sphax textures which function as a building material too.

    145 Mods isn't too many. 9 types of copper and 8 types of tin aren't too many. 3 types of coffee though?

    I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realise that what you read was not what I meant.


    ---- Minecraft Crash Report ----
    // I just don't know what went wrong :(


    I see this too much.

  • I suppose I just miss the old way of doing it. Well, how I always thought it worked anyway. You could run massive fields... with a massive infrastructure. A CASUC reactor could in theory generate enough power to run the system which protects your base from monsters back then(in my head canon).
    I wouldn't mind using Forcium except it's kind of hard large amounts of it some times.


    I would love a way to simply jam more energy into a device and have it run on nothing but energy... But alas, I use GregTech so using the Matter Fabricator means I'm almost always not going to have a surplus of UUM. I suppose a way to generate forcium in a fusion reactor wouldn't hurt for us who use GregTech. Well, I'm getting off topic because I have currently got Cal's version installed so I can see if it can run without green rocks.

    Apprentice Redstoner, Professional Slacker