Futurecraft Forums

A forum dedicated to communication and innovation!
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in
Welcome, one and all, to the Futurecraft Forums!

Share | 
 

 Danice123's Dev. Log

Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
AuthorMessage
Danice123
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 607
Join date : 2012-01-06
Age : 24
Location : The Dankins

PostSubject: Danice123's Dev. Log   Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:48 pm

Hey guys, I'm Danice123. I'm gonna be working on the power/electronics systems at the moment, but that may change depending on where I'm needed.

>-------------------------------
-1/8/12

-Wireless Redstone Project
-Force Field Project

Basically messing with redstone for now, until we decide on a power system to use. Should be able to port the code from redstone to any other system pretty easy tho.

Wireless redstone is just a server block and a client block which send a redstone signal from the server to up to 10 clients. To pair them you use the remote item on the client and then on the server block. Pretty simple. The blocks do not stay paired on restarting minecraft at the moment though.
The force field is a block that when powered create a force field block up to 10 blocks on top of it. Force field is unbreakable. The redstone input on blocks is a little buggy too, I'm gonna fix it later.

Test it out and give me some input (Is this even worth continuing work on?)
dl.drop box.com/u/39506207/Wireless.zip
recipies:
dirt - client
stone - server
brick - force field
sand - remote
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://wbcentral.com
The Schmetterling
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 3123
Join date : 2011-08-31
Location : I'm a butterfly.

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Mon Jan 09, 2012 2:40 am

Danice123 wrote:
Hey guys, I'm Danice123. I'm gonna be working on the power/electronics systems at the moment, but that may change depending on where I'm needed.

>-------------------------------
-1/8/12

-Wireless Redstone Project
-Force Field Project

Basically messing with redstone for now, until we decide on a power system to use. Should be able to port the code from redstone to any other system pretty easy tho.

Wireless redstone is just a server block and a client block which send a redstone signal from the server to up to 10 clients. To pair them you use the remote item on the client and then on the server block. Pretty simple. The blocks do not stay paired on restarting minecraft at the moment though.
The force field is a block that when powered create a force field block up to 10 blocks on top of it. Force field is unbreakable. The redstone input on blocks is a little buggy too, I'm gonna fix it later.

Test it out and give me some input (Is this even worth continuing work on?)
dl.drop box.com/u/39506207/Wireless.zip
recipies:
dirt - client
stone - server
brick - force field
sand - remote

Okay. You have read all of the Futurecraft information available, haven't you?

It's fine to experiment for now, you never know what might be useful in the future, but please try and stick to the plan.

When it comes to power, I have the way I think it should be done, but I will need your, Fr0stbyte's and Ectrimble's recommendation on whether it is possible, or weather my ideas need revising.

Have you read my section on power, or should I post it here, so you can read it?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Apokalypse
Newbie
Newbie


Posts : 33
Join date : 2011-12-21

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Mon Jan 09, 2012 3:21 am

for the wireless redstone see the wireless redstone mod that already exists. but for the power system id suggest something loosely based on ic's power system. if possible a fusion core that needs multiple blocks placed for it to work. for the forcefeild id suggest something along the lines of the having the size increase or decrease depending on the amount of power per second fed to it something like .4 blocks per eu/t that way if you feed it 256 eu/t youd wind up with a 64x64x64 forcefeild and it wont be too cheap. another thing SOLARS. i cant stress that enough. you could make the panels themselves behave like rail tracks so that they give the ship a nice streamlined look. that way theyd accept power from two directions rather then just up. the ship would have the solars for emergency power storage. and the fusion core powering the engines and main powers system. another thing to look into. solar satellites its actually planed for the future that wed have satellites collecting solar energy and transfering it down via microwave. you could build a large Satellite dish planetside and then launch a satellite to collect the energy and beam it down.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Danice123
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 607
Join date : 2012-01-06
Age : 24
Location : The Dankins

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Mon Jan 09, 2012 1:30 pm

Well what I'm thinking is that redstone and the power system need to be seperate systems that then work together. Machines could be POWERED by wires and energy from generators and then triggered by redstone. So machines in the sense of most of IC's machines would only need a energy hookup because they are on all the time. But a machine like a force field or turret on something would use both, an energy to power it (because redstone isn't powerful enough) and a redstone logic input to trigger it.

Also are we using IC's power system or building our own? Your ideas seem to basically be the IC's power system with a few modifications. There's no reason to build an identical system to IC's if we can use theirs (you have permission right?)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://wbcentral.com
ectrimble20
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 441
Join date : 2011-11-07

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Mon Jan 09, 2012 4:37 pm

Per Doc's compendium, it stated that we had permission from IC or was it BC? I think it was IC, not sure I'll verify this, but we had permission to use one of those engergy systems.

My thoughts on the subject:

Basically I'm thinking the concept of computers and maybe making a computer hook up to a device to control it. Like something that you attach to an engine or engines and the user is able to pull up a simple gui to control engine power, set a % or something of that nature. That would make the logic a little easier to build for the user since trying to manage a controlled output through red stone would be nearly impossible. Also, simple computer switches could be added, something like the current levelers in vanilla, where they are simply an on/off switch, then add a logic computer into the equation to create things like alarms or activate systems, open doors, bake cookies, what have you.

As for power, I personally would like to see a separate system, however, I think cloning the IC system and adapting it to our needs would work just as well.

Thats my thoughts anyway, I'm not really concerned how we accomplish it, it just needs to be something we can implement on ships and on the surface, the same energy scale and system at least, this will reduce complexity in getting it to work with devices if the system is the same all around.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Buggy1997123
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 394
Join date : 2011-10-18
Location : Somewhere, somewhen.

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Mon Jan 09, 2012 4:53 pm

Dr. Mackeroth wrote:
Danice123 wrote:
Hey guys, I'm Danice123. I'm gonna be working on the power/electronics systems at the moment, but that may change depending on where I'm needed.

>-------------------------------
-1/8/12

-Wireless Redstone Project
-Force Field Project

Basically messing with redstone for now, until we decide on a power system to use. Should be able to port the code from redstone to any other system pretty easy tho.

Wireless redstone is just a server block and a client block which send a redstone signal from the server to up to 10 clients. To pair them you use the remote item on the client and then on the server block. Pretty simple. The blocks do not stay paired on restarting minecraft at the moment though.
The force field is a block that when powered create a force field block up to 10 blocks on top of it. Force field is unbreakable. The redstone input on blocks is a little buggy too, I'm gonna fix it later.

Test it out and give me some input (Is this even worth continuing work on?)
dl.drop box.com/u/39506207/Wireless.zip
recipies:
dirt - client
stone - server
brick - force field
sand - remote

Okay. You have read all of the Futurecraft information available, haven't you?

It's fine to experiment for now, you never know what might be useful in the future, but please try and stick to the plan.

When it comes to power, I have the way I think it should be done, but I will need your, Fr0stbyte's and Ectrimble's recommendation on whether it is possible, or weather my ideas need revising.

Have you read my section on power, or should I post it here, so you can read it?
I think you should post it here.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Schmetterling
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 3123
Join date : 2011-08-31
Location : I'm a butterfly.

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Mon Jan 09, 2012 5:15 pm

ectrimble20 wrote:
Per Doc's compendium, it stated that we had permission from IC or was it BC? I think it was IC, not sure I'll verify this, but we had permission to use one of those engergy systems.

My thoughts on the subject:

Basically I'm thinking the concept of computers and maybe making a computer hook up to a device to control it. Like something that you attach to an engine or engines and the user is able to pull up a simple gui to control engine power, set a % or something of that nature. That would make the logic a little easier to build for the user since trying to manage a controlled output through red stone would be nearly impossible. Also, simple computer switches could be added, something like the current levelers in vanilla, where they are simply an on/off switch, then add a logic computer into the equation to create things like alarms or activate systems, open doors, bake cookies, what have you.

As for power, I personally would like to see a separate system, however, I think cloning the IC system and adapting it to our needs would work just as well.

Thats my thoughts anyway, I'm not really concerned how we accomplish it, it just needs to be something we can implement on ships and on the surface, the same energy scale and system at least, this will reduce complexity in getting it to work with devices if the system is the same all around.


Yes, we HAD permission to use the IC's energy component.
However, it is quite likely that they have completely forgotten, and I don't
particularly want an angry mod coming after us because we used their mod without
their permission. So, Danice can either start working on a new system, or I can
try and go ask permission again. If we build the system ourselves, we won't
have any legal issues, we will know completely how it works, and we an modify
it easily to add in new features in the future, but in turn, it will take
longer than if we use IC's system.

That's how I see it.

Ectrimble, what you wrote about computers is almost exactly what I said in the
Compendium. Because Buggy asked me to, I will post the section on energy, and
computers. But what Danice said about devices being powered but still requiring
Redstone input to activate is similar to how computers would work, but replaces
slow, space consuming, and primitive Redstone with high speed, wireless, and space
saving computers (with wireless transmitters).




The sections on computers and power:
Spoiler:
 

If you have any questions, or you are in the least bit unsure about something, speak up, I like to know what you guys think.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Apokalypse
Newbie
Newbie


Posts : 33
Join date : 2011-12-21

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Mon Jan 09, 2012 5:56 pm

i like the chair holgran gui itd be awesome if you could use some of the map code for the screen. as for the development of the power system i think it should go
Actual power system (eu/t calculations and whatnot)---------> ways of generating power(solars generators etc)--------------> Stuff to use the new power(machines computers engines)
i like the idea of having one main computer to house the functions of a ship or a factory. or maybe limit it to something like 10 functions per computer and then that computer would need to call another computer thus consuming more resources the more stuff you have on a ship.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Danice123
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 607
Join date : 2012-01-06
Age : 24
Location : The Dankins

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Mon Jan 09, 2012 11:46 pm

Ok well the plan now is to develop a wire that carries two values, a power level and a function value, which would allow a computer to send commands through the wire to a machine. Unless we would dump the idea of wires all together and run everything wirelessly...
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://wbcentral.com
ectrimble20
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 441
Join date : 2011-11-07

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:07 am

I liked the idea in Doc's compendium about the "wire the ship" idea, however I don't know how practical that is.

I feel that we need some form of wiring, simply because there's not challange in simply putting a wireless power system in the middle of your ship and that's that. I think it needs to be somewhat unintrusive, kinda like how redpower is done, where you can run wires behind panels and what not, that way the player can build something that actually is more than skin deep. Then perhaps for the computer wiring, use wireless so you can issue commands without having to run more wires, plus it wouldn't have to run the same checks as the wiring programming would for power, think it'd be easier that way.

Just my opinion on the subject.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Schmetterling
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 3123
Join date : 2011-08-31
Location : I'm a butterfly.

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:08 am

ectrimble20 wrote:
I liked the idea in Doc's compendium about the "wire the ship" idea, however I don't know how practical that is.

I feel that we need some form of wiring, simply because there's not challange in simply putting a wireless power system in the middle of your ship and that's that. I think it needs to be somewhat unintrusive, kinda like how redpower is done, where you can run wires behind panels and what not, that way the player can build something that actually is more than skin deep. Then perhaps for the computer wiring, use wireless so you can issue commands without having to run more wires, plus it wouldn't have to run the same checks as the wiring programming would for power, think it'd be easier that way.

Just my opinion on the subject.

I think something similar should be done:

Power is transmitted through wires and wires only.
Commands can be sent only via Redstone or a wireless link, not through wires.

I think this cycle of improving the ideas is going well.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
fr0stbyte124
Super Developrator
Super Developrator
avatar

Posts : 1835
Join date : 2011-10-13

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:24 am

It would be hard to do sophisticated commands via redstone. I think we should have one wire for power and one for data.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Schmetterling
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 3123
Join date : 2011-08-31
Location : I'm a butterfly.

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:43 am

fr0stbyte124 wrote:
It would be hard to do sophisticated commands via redstone. I think we should have one wire for power and one for data.

The only reason I mentioned redstone was because commands are currently sent using it (in vanilla). With my way, Redstone would act as link between drives, just like your data wire would. The only difference is: if we used redstone, we would have one less texture and block to worry about, and people don't have to use separate methods of data transfer between, say, a lever and door, and a computer and laser turret.
And besides, however we end up doing it, most people will use wireless data transfer, meaning that we don't really need to worry about wired data transfer so much as power transfer. In an advanced ship or facility, the only data wire needed would be to connect several devices in close proximity to a single wireless uplink, which would then be connected to a control chair or computer with its own witless uplink.

I think I might of rambled on a bit. Sorry.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Apokalypse
Newbie
Newbie


Posts : 33
Join date : 2011-12-21

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:45 am

That could work itself into the tier system. the initial tier (redstone) would be simply that on and off. the second tier (computers) would have a more sophisticated gui, maybe on off and power consumption. the third tier (command chair) would have all the systems their power consumption and their hit points.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
ectrimble20
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 441
Join date : 2011-11-07

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:36 am

Dr. Mackeroth wrote:
fr0stbyte124 wrote:
It would be hard to do sophisticated commands via redstone. I think we should have one wire for power and one for data.

The only reason I mentioned redstone was because commands are currently sent using it (in vanilla). With my way, Redstone would act as link between drives, just like your data wire would. The only difference is: if we used redstone, we would have one less texture and block to worry about, and people don't have to use separate methods of data transfer between, say, a lever and door, and a computer and laser turret.
And besides, however we end up doing it, most people will use wireless data transfer, meaning that we don't really need to worry about wired data transfer so much as power transfer. In an advanced ship or facility, the only data wire needed would be to connect several devices in close proximity to a single wireless uplink, which would then be connected to a control chair or computer with its own witless uplink.

I think I might of rambled on a bit. Sorry.

A tad bit of ramble going on, but never the less, it was a good ramble.

I think the main problem with red stone, is that is only good for stuff that needs a "1" or a "0", try to add in an if 1 = x and redstone is useless, well, unless you want to build one of those 8 gagillion block redstone 16 bit computers people get off on.

Anyway, I'm with Frost on this one. I think if we're going to do a power specific wire, we might as well do an actual data specific wire. It wont be too hard to develop once a power wire is developed and besides, red stone looks, well, like crap. It looks like I took some red glitter and threw it on the ground.

Now I'm also thinking there should be plus's and minus's to using wireless that might make a wired system more appealing, such as the ability to hack into an opponents wireless communications and shut down systems. Again, this is just a though, and at this stage of the game I don't think we need to worry too much about over complicating what we haven't even begun working on.

hows that for a ramble? Very Happy
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Schmetterling
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 3123
Join date : 2011-08-31
Location : I'm a butterfly.

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:57 am

ectrimble20 wrote:
Dr. Mackeroth wrote:
fr0stbyte124 wrote:
It would be hard to do sophisticated commands via redstone. I think we should have one wire for power and one for data.

The only reason I mentioned redstone was because commands are currently sent using it (in vanilla). With my way, Redstone would act as link between drives, just like your data wire would. The only difference is: if we used redstone, we would have one less texture and block to worry about, and people don't have to use separate methods of data transfer between, say, a lever and door, and a computer and laser turret.
And besides, however we end up doing it, most people will use wireless data transfer, meaning that we don't really need to worry about wired data transfer so much as power transfer. In an advanced ship or facility, the only data wire needed would be to connect several devices in close proximity to a single wireless uplink, which would then be connected to a control chair or computer with its own witless uplink.

I think I might of rambled on a bit. Sorry.

A tad bit of ramble going on, but never the less, it was a good ramble.

I think the main problem with red stone, is that is only good for stuff that needs a "1" or a "0", try to add in an if 1 = x and redstone is useless, well, unless you want to build one of those 8 gagillion block redstone 16 bit computers people get off on.

Anyway, I'm with Frost on this one. I think if we're going to do a power specific wire, we might as well do an actual data specific wire. It wont be too hard to develop once a power wire is developed and besides, red stone looks, well, like crap. It looks like I took some red glitter and threw it on the ground.

Now I'm also thinking there should be plus's and minus's to using wireless that might make a wired system more appealing, such as the ability to hack into an opponents wireless communications and shut down systems. Again, this is just a though, and at this stage of the game I don't think we need to worry too much about over complicating what we haven't even begun working on.

hows that for a ramble? Very Happy

Nice ramble. I suppose that you're right then. We may as well just create another wire for data. Still, seeing as nobody seemed to understand what I meant with Redstone I should explain. We would alter Redstone, so that it could not only work as a method of fliping a switch, but also be a method of data transfer. If you put Redstone from a computer to a door, you could close the door from the computer's GUI, and if you put Redstone from a computer to an engine, you could turn the engine on or of from the computer, but also be able to control engine output, direction of thrust, etc.

Actually, I think I should ask this now: do you think it would be wise to make engine blocks "clump", as in, you control them as a whole? Also, this is less open to discussion (unless anyone has major objections), but for the anti-gravity engine (the kind I will be using on my ships, which looks similar to Glowstone [actually, it is refined Glowstone which has anti-gravity properties naturally]), as it has no actually "thrust", it should be able to be placed within a ship, and not on the outside.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
ectrimble20
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 441
Join date : 2011-11-07

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:06 am

Quote :
Actually, I think I should ask this now: do you think it would be wise to make engine blocks "clump", as in, you control them as a whole? Also, this is less open to discussion (unless anyone has major objections), but for the anti-gravity engine (the kind I will be using on my ships, which looks similar to Glowstone [actually, it is refined Glowstone which has anti-gravity properties naturally]), as it has no actually "thrust", it should be able to be placed within a ship, and not on the outside.

Regarding powered engines, no, I think they should be a component that we should discourage people from clumping, since if one fails or is knocked out, it would take out the whole power system. Redundancy! Also I think it would be a bit more dynamic if the player had the ability to link systems together with fail-safes (space between them basically) separating them from one another but linked together via control and power wires, so if one is disabled, the others can continue to function.

I don't know really. I suppose we'll have to see how the power system goes before we can say "yes that makes sense" or "no wtf are you talking about?"

As for the anti-gravity blocks, that's an interesting thought. I like the concept of the glowstone having anti-grav properties, however, I thought we were replacing the neither with space? or did I miss something? I'm not 100% on how we're doing a single server's dimensions.

Either way, whatever we decide should be they "hey I float lol gravity, u mad?" block, using them in a terrestrial vehicle should require X number of blocks to levitate Y number of non-anti-grav blocks. Again, something we can tune once we get these pieces in place.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Schmetterling
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 3123
Join date : 2011-08-31
Location : I'm a butterfly.

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:27 am

ectrimble20 wrote:
Quote :
Actually, I think I should ask this now: do you think it would be wise to make engine blocks "clump", as in, you control them as a whole? Also, this is less open to discussion (unless anyone has major objections), but for the anti-gravity engine (the kind I will be using on my ships, which looks similar to Glowstone [actually, it is refined Glowstone which has anti-gravity properties naturally]), as it has no actually "thrust", it should be able to be placed within a ship, and not on the outside.

Regarding powered engines, no, I think they should be a component that we should discourage people from clumping, since if one fails or is knocked out, it would take out the whole power system. Redundancy! Also I think it would be a bit more dynamic if the player had the ability to link systems together with fail-safes (space between them basically) separating them from one another but linked together via control and power wires, so if one is disabled, the others can continue to function.

I don't know really. I suppose we'll have to see how the power system goes before we can say "yes that makes sense" or "no wtf are you talking about?"

As for the anti-gravity blocks, that's an interesting thought. I like the concept of the glowstone having anti-grav properties, however, I thought we were replacing the neither with space? or did I miss something? I'm not 100% on how we're doing a single server's dimensions.

Either way, whatever we decide should be they "hey I float lol gravity, u mad?" block, using them in a terrestrial vehicle should require X number of blocks to levitate Y number of non-anti-grav blocks. Again, something we can tune once we get these pieces in place.

Exactly what I was thinking. Regarding the anti-gravity, that is. The only reason I want engines to work together as a single engine, rather than as individual blocks, is because my battle cruiser's main engine is 200+ blocks in size, which would make it very inefficient if I had to control each block individually.
I thought that Space was just another dimension, like The Nether or The End, and that nothing would need to be removed.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Apokalypse
Newbie
Newbie


Posts : 33
Join date : 2011-12-21

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:36 am

can we actually get a post as to how ships work because now im totally confused. at first i assumed that theyd be powered by one set of everything but now it seems like you could just build a giant rectangle and stuff it with things and have super amounts of power
Back to top Go down
View user profile
fr0stbyte124
Super Developrator
Super Developrator
avatar

Posts : 1835
Join date : 2011-10-13

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 6:01 am

Apokalypse wrote:
can we actually get a post as to how ships work because now im totally confused. at first i assumed that theyd be powered by one set of everything but now it seems like you could just build a giant rectangle and stuff it with things and have super amounts of power
We're getting it worked out, right now before your very eyes. Tada.

It was my intention from the beginning that engines would be complicated things you would construct out of various pieces on-site, though unlike most of the game elements I have not yet made any detailed plans for how to pull it off. But now's as good a time as any.

As I see it, there are a number of challenges to making this work. First and foremost is maintaining an acceptable variety of components. Engines will come in all shapes and sizes (especially sizes) and will be constructed with a variety of components. We need a way to supply all of this without blowing all our block id's. I think we can do by making each block in the engine a tile entity, associated with a specific engine. Only one of the tile entities handles the entirety of the graphical model of that engine and its collision. The rest are just there as placeholders for logic. There's no rule stating that a tile entity has to be relegated to a single cube. Actually, we should probably do the same for every FutureCraft device.

Second is making the assembly interesting. I like to think of engines as a microcosm of the modular ship theory. You start with a base, which determines the overall size and shape, and you add assorted components to various mounting slots determined by the engine base. Each component gives the engine certain characteristics and you can exchange components of the same type and class to get different effects. That's for when we get to the customization stage of the mod. For the first stage it will probably just be a generic set of stats for a certain class and the engine itself is just treated as blocks within a designated area. Hmm, we'll need some good 3D artists to make tons of parts, but that can wait.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Schmetterling
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 3123
Join date : 2011-08-31
Location : I'm a butterfly.

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:29 pm

fr0stbyte124 wrote:
Apokalypse wrote:
can we actually get a post as to how ships work because now im totally confused. at first i assumed that theyd be powered by one set of everything but now it seems like you could just build a giant rectangle and stuff it with things and have super amounts of power
We're getting it worked out, right now before your very eyes. Tada.

It was my intention from the beginning that engines would be complicated things you would construct out of various pieces on-site, though unlike most of the game elements I have not yet made any detailed plans for how to pull it off. But now's as good a time as any.

As I see it, there are a number of challenges to making this work. First and foremost is maintaining an acceptable variety of components. Engines will come in all shapes and sizes (especially sizes) and will be constructed with a variety of components. We need a way to supply all of this without blowing all our block id's. I think we can do by making each block in the engine a tile entity, associated with a specific engine. Only one of the tile entities handles the entirety of the graphical model of that engine and its collision. The rest are just there as placeholders for logic. There's no rule stating that a tile entity has to be relegated to a single cube. Actually, we should probably do the same for every FutureCraft device.

Second is making the assembly interesting. I like to think of engines as a microcosm of the modular ship theory. You start with a base, which determines the overall size and shape, and you add assorted components to various mounting slots determined by the engine base. Each component gives the engine certain characteristics and you can exchange components of the same type and class to get different effects. That's for when we get to the customization stage of the mod. For the first stage it will probably just be a generic set of stats for a certain class and the engine itself is just treated as blocks within a designated area. Hmm, we'll need some good 3D artists to make tons of parts, but that can wait.



Okay, Fr0stbyte, I really don't think building modular ships
is a good idea. I mean, space stations today are modular, but could you imagine
what would happen if you built your ships out of segments? They would end
looking like one of these space stations.

For engines, are you essentially saying the same thing I was, that ship engines
should be constructed out of blocks, that act as one single engine, to make
engines easier to manage (in game)? From the way you suggested adding in tile
entities to the engines, it seems as if you only want to have one texture for
the engine block, but have the type determined purely by its associated tile
entity. But I do agree with you, many Futurecraft devices will need tile
entities to determine how they work.




I may be confused, please could you explain what you mean in simple terms.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Schmetterling
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 3123
Join date : 2011-08-31
Location : I'm a butterfly.

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:47 pm

Just in case anyone is interested, I'll create the textures
for the power wire. I think it should be able to be run in 3-dimensonal space,
like a normal block, but when placed on another block, it will appear
flat like Redstone. This means that you can have power cables running all
through the corridors and rooms in your ship without them taking up space, but
could still have over head power lines (if you wanted to).



And in other news, I am actually working on the texture
pack. My main issue with most of the man-made blocks is wether to make them
seem futuristic, despite what they should look like given their construction
materials, or make them look like what you would expect from the materials, but
abandon the futuristic feel to those blocks. Things like chests, crafting
benches, pistons, etc, are what I'm worried about. Things like iron doors,
rails, and Redstone devices, not so much. What do you guys think?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Apokalypse
Newbie
Newbie


Posts : 33
Join date : 2011-12-21

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:59 pm

from my own experience i think flat cables would look kinda nasty. on another note which blocks are you making the textures for? i thougt nothing was made yet?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
tonyri
Newbie
Newbie
avatar

Posts : 126
Join date : 2011-09-04
Age : 23
Location : Wisconsin, USA

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 5:06 pm

So simply put, if I take like 12 engine blocks and clump them all together, they would act as a group to be one big engine. It would only need one fuel input and one control wire leading from a computer. (or more than one fuel pipe for larger capacity engines.) If I don't connect them together, they should act individually. I think it would be cool for them to change texture each time you added a block so that you only see the corresponding outside face, in case you wanted an engine that wasn't perfectly rectangular.

Also, in addition to power wire and redstone wire, we will need computer wire to send commands from a computer to devices. It could also work as wireless, but the wireless would feed into a wire, not a device, plus, the wireless transmitters and receivers would need a very small amount of power to work, plus would have a small delay.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Schmetterling
DEV
DEV
avatar

Posts : 3123
Join date : 2011-08-31
Location : I'm a butterfly.

PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   Tue Jan 10, 2012 5:15 pm

tonyri wrote:
So simply put, if I take like 12 engine blocks and clump them all together, they would act as a group to be one big engine. It would only need one fuel input and one control wire leading from a computer. (or more than one fuel pipe for larger capacity engines.) If I don't connect them together, they should act individually. I think it would be cool for them to change texture each time you added a block so that you only see the corresponding outside face, in case you wanted an engine that wasn't perfectly rectangular.

Also, in addition to power wire and redstone wire, we will need computer wire to send commands from a computer to devices. It could also work as wireless, but the wireless would feed into a wire, not a device, plus, the wireless transmitters and receivers would need a very small amount of power to work, plus would have a small delay.



Yes Tonyri, everything you said there is exactly what I was
planning. It just seems that not everyone agrees. Well, everything I’m planning
except for the second half of the first paragraph, with the textures and such.
That part makes no sense. When you stick two engine blocks together, they still
look like individual blocks, but are controlled as one. Also, I have decided that it would be best to add data wires, as Redstone, I can see now, would be silly in those situations.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Danice123's Dev. Log   

Back to top Go down
 
Danice123's Dev. Log
Back to top 
Page 1 of 10Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Futurecraft Forums :: Development :: Development Logs-
Jump to: