Posts by CovertJaguar

Quote from Speiger

No Asie. Buildcraft should have simply changed their EnergyAPI a bit and everyone would have supported it still..
The main reason why people left was because the API was simply: You have to do it our way and thats it...
If you wanted to make a converter you had to constantly drain the Energy out of the custom battery in the old system to make it work.
A simply IC2 API like thing: Receiver and Sender would have been enough... Switching to RF was the same solution but you got ride of what BC was worth for. Its own uniqe power system with Explosions...

You just described the RF API. MJ was unique because it had rules. It worked a certain way. It wasn't intended to be a universal power API, it was BC's power API. The explosions were never part of its identity, they were simply a failed experiment by cpw that I eventually removed.

Quote from asiekierka

Design-wise, sort of, but it was RF or death for us - our ecosystem is far smaller than IC2's.

This is only true because SpaceToad could not be trusted to manage any API ever and was bound and determined to destroy MJ's uniqueness and make it into a worse clone of RF. I didn't feel like going along for the ride so me and Railcraft got off the train.

No more craftguide? *sadface*

The API didn't change much, don't know why you dropped it.

Railcraft does not permit modpacks to use Ad.fly, nor does it permit public packs without express permission and public permission lists. Please remove Railcraft from your pack.

Quote from BrickedKeyboard

Well, oddly enough, all of your tile entities continue to function once the frame moves them. All your machines, generators, etc. The energy nets apparently depend on the location of the cable segments or something, and the code is not refreshing the network correctly once moved by a frame. Presumably, if your e-net code occasionally checked the position of some of the pieces of wire in a particular net for a movement, it could trigger a refresh and it would all work fine.

Same with the reactor : before the code that causes the crash, stick in a location integrity check and update the pointer instead of getting those NPEs.

This doesn't seem really all that difficult to fix. The trouble is that e-net is nasty, dense code that doesn't decompile very well, or I'd take a crack at it myself.

Yes, but all of that increases the CPU load, perhaps by a great deal.

Melon Seeds don't work either.

Really like the Railcraft textures! Well done!

Pretty sure a redstone tick is 1/20th of a second.

Quote from RichardG

Flan has updated MLMP to 1.2.3, still need to wait on LexManos - he got Forge on client and partially on server (missing MLMP parts since it wasn't updated back then), we'll probably start when it's released

Just for the record, Forge is currently using SDK's ModloaderMp, not Flan's.

Quote from ultimate_omega

You mean that we have the 4096 ID's?

Not really, blocks with Id greater than 256 still dont get items auto-defined for them (game breaking) and won't render as 3D blocks without a custom renderer (minor).

I'd like to reopen this conversation now that ModLoaderMp has a proper addFuel hook that takes metadata into account, meaning this is actually possible now.

Filled Fuel Can should work in vanilla Furnaces. And by extension that would allow them to work as fuel for any mod. *cough* Railcraft *cough*

Modloader has a hook for this. As it stands, if I want Fuel Cans to work in my Tunnel Bore, I'm going to have to write some custom code for it.

As far as I know, you just need to call it before you start tessellating. The underlying function is called in WorldRenderer at the start of the render pipe for all bocks, with either a custom spritesheet (via ITextureProvider) or the vanilla spritesheet. Subsequent calls override previous calls. Item renderers can use it as well.

Quote from RichardG

Where'd you find this code?

RenderBlocks is where I probably saw it first. I've been using that function in my own custom renderers to switch spritesheets for a long time. The Railcraft Tank Cart for example uses the Buildcraft spritesheet to render the tank.

EDIT: It was not RenderBlocks, it was probably the Buildcraft source that first saw it being used to render liquids. The underlying function is called in WorldRenderer for all blocks in the game though.

I'm curious, why exactly are we not allowed to define our own spritesheet for crops? The code required is quite simple.

In the crop custom renderer code, which I assume exists:

MinecraftForgeClient.bindTexture(cropCard.getTextureFile());
// do render

I can see you not wanting to cause performance issues with spritesheet spam, but it seems highly limiting to force users to merge their spritesheets.

I was thinking to make a Creosote Bush for Railcraft, but the spritesheet issue and the complexity of the code combined with the difficulty in testing is discouraging to say the least.

Ah, didn't realize they had variable fuel values. Guess that goes on my Forge wishlist then.

I don't really understand why this isn't already implemented, but Filled Fuel Can should really work in vanilla Furnaces. And by extension that would allow them to work as fuel for any mod. *cough* Railcraft *cough*

Modloader has a hook for this. As it stands, if I want Fuel Cans to work in my Tunnel Bore, I'm going to have to write some custom code for it.

Also, I haven't checked this, but if Filled Fuel Cans don't have Empty Fuel Cans set as their container item, they should (like buckets do).

Quote from KakerMix

Woah hey now here is some hate. This isn't really fair to RichardG and his thread, but sure lets chat.

First off CovertJaguar:
We don't ask permission, we still don't. The permission has been given to us through various means, usually after people find out that we aren't assholes and that we truly and honestly love the mods and appreciate the creators. The reason we don't bother saying anything about it (usually) is because we don't want to cause drama between the modders themselves if we can help it.

Doesn't change the fact that you don't and never had permission to include Railcraft. And aren't likely to get it either, since you didn't bother to ask first.

Quote from KakerMix

I like how nobody bothers to talk, or hell, even ask us at all.

You mean like how you asked me if you could include Railcraft in the pack? Oh wait, that's right you didn't. First I heard of it was when a user pointed it out to me, and from what I can tell it had been in the pack for several versions already. Maybe the people you listed really did give you permission, but I sure as hell know I didn't.

Still waiting for the outpouring donations too. All I've gotten so far is clueless Technic users looking for support.