Posts by AshWardle

    Sorry I wasn't specific...

    under: Rising World/data/commons.jar/commons/BlockID$WorldOres.class

    I opened and viewed the code with JD Eclipse, but I haven't figured out how to edit and was hoping someone who has edited .class files with the same program could help...

    I've been trying to edit a class file with Eclipse IDE...I have looked at youtube tutorials and it has not helped. If anyone could help me on this, it would be great!

    Five questions:


    (1)First of all, is there anyway at all I can edit the Ore Detector to find coal? Not sure if this is a bug, but coal does not get detected by the ore detector!


    (2)Secondly, is there any way that I could minimize ore smelting time? (Update: I found out that I can not)


    (3)And what is the limitations of editing files? In more simple terms: what can I edit, and what can I not edit?


    (4)What are the limitations on mod making? In simple terms: what kind of modS can Mod developers make for this game and what kind of mods can’t they make. And what I mean by can’t make, would be, for example a custom item. Either a custom building block, or tool.


    (5) Is it possible to change the Amount of ore you get when when you mine a ore node? Yes, you can make larger veins Via world generation settings, but I wanna know if you can get more out of the ore when you mine it.

    I would love to see NPC villages in the new version! The challenge For the devs would be adding the NPCs, I’m sure, but I’m sure they will manage! Trading with Villager NPCs(I know what your thinking...:Minecraft. But wait, there’s more!)

    Perhaps Adding quests for the player to gather, craft and sell or trade supplies for the Villagers. This would be useful if Red51 added: (1.) More crops, (2.) More Farm animals, bakery and dairy products, (3.) Currency(I’m thinking maybe the villagers will be the players source of currency in the beginning)The list goes on, but you get what I mean.


    Also, I can see that the mining system could use a new, realistic system in the future. I’m thinking that when mining ores, you get crushed ore that needs to be sifted, and then smelted. Also adding a “Forge” for smelling, and leave the furnace for cooking and baking.


    Another thing that could make the game more realistic is adding “tool heads” in the anvil. For example, a “Pickaxe Head” will be needed to crafted in the Anvil first, in order to make a pickaxe.


    If you wanna go grind-happy, there is always more of a crafting system that would be Hardcore Crafting. For example, the system will add more steps to crafting and perhaps higher ingredient quantity demands. For example, with hard core crafting enabled, if you want to craft, say, 4 lumber, you’ll need 8 logs. I believe that players who like more of a grindy-challenge Would appreciate this feature being added! Therefore, it would be a separate game mode altogether.

    Basically multiplayer is already in the game, or more precisely, we implement everything with multiplayer in mind - this means the game is separated into a "client" and an integrated "server" (just like the old version), and every interaction with the world is synced between the "client" and "server". However, before we can release a multiplayer demo, we first have to get playermodels and proper animations ready (so you can actually see other players). There is also some additional work required to get the dedicated server or Steam P2P ready.

    Since we don't have an ETA for the demo, we can't say how much longer it takes to get the multiplayer ready...

    Ah, I see, that is understandable!

    I understand that, actually that's why we're focusing on getting the actual new version ready as soon as possible ;) But as mentioned in my previous post, if a feature isn't fleshed out or "polished" (at least to a certain degree), we cannot include it in the demo, since this could cause some confusion. If some very limited and unfinished building is in the demo, people might think this is already the "final state" and complain that building worked much better in the old version ||

    I understand now! Thanks for clearing that up!