Misc Changes 2/22/14

Discussion in 'Empire Updates' started by Aikar, Feb 22, 2014.

  1. well this definitely explains why i couldn't get an updated pic of my "empire" state building as i could not get a full view of it. :( oh well at least i still have the old pic.
  2. Although inconvenient, you could still use the World Download mod to download the area and take screenshots of larger creations with that (as SP allows much further viewing distance)
    cadgamer101 likes this.
  3. I really really wish we could keep view-distance higher, but for every level is an even bigger amount of lag it adds, and I'm sure everyone prefers lag free to laggy-but-i-can-see-farther.
    sonicol1, 607 and queendiva1 like this.
  4. i completely agree aikar, i most definitely would prefer less lag over a few screenshots. :)
  5. You mean the maximum render distance?
  6. yes.
    Each level added to view distance exponentially increases the number of chunks loaded per client... so you can see in town that can hurt a lot with entities.
    chickeneer likes this.
  7. Sadly yes I have also noticed this, I am sure in time though, that Aikar will update the servers to cope better with features such as this, but we all know this takes real $ and as he wants this to be the best server I think we can trust that he will invest the $ when he can.
    /slapEyeKaraoke.
  8. This sadly isn't something that can easily be solved with money either.

    It's just a pitfall of how Minecraft is designed. 1.8 has HOPES of multithreading MC better by world, so we may be able to increase it then.... as the load will be split up between cores then, but I think 5 would probably be the highest even then, a distance of 7 in town would destroy us even with 1.8 intended changes.

    All of those other super large servers usually run with 3-4 view-distance and no entities.... EMC is super entity oriented.
  9. This sounds like a great idea. Plus should be relatively easy to implement. I'll talk to Aikar and see if I can just take care of it ;)
    cadgamer101 likes this.
  10. It's doable, but a few political concerns we have to take care of - but I can def let you take that one but you'll need to wait as youll be needing to use code im working on tonight that may end up changing in API.

    The way ive seen it done in essentials is nice, right click, chest opens, but its virtual, so when chest closes, it just disappears!

    But, there needs to be a confirmation in chat explaining this so that malicious users dont trick users into opening this chest and end up losing items, and I have a perfect idea for that.
    607 and cadgamer101 like this.
  11. What I have seen, is a simple [Delete] sign that opens a chest interface when right clicked, and the items are only destroyed when you close out of the "chest", could prevent people from accidentally deleting things.
    PandasEatRamen and cadgamer101 like this.
  12. Well I can live with a little distance reduction as I have seen and played on servers with little or no entities spawning. Lets hope 1.8 brings some improvements then.
  13. Right, I just want to add a confirmation step to opening the chest, so they can read in chat that anything put in there will be deleted.

    Also mainly because our sign system (and id really prefer to not go around the system and end up duplicating code or special casing signs) can be triggered by more than right click, so i wouldn't want someone to walk on a pressure plate, chest opens *confused* puts items in and loses them.
    cadgamer101 likes this.
  14. Nice.
    A /delete command that pulls up a vault type of interface would be sweet.
    With clear confirmation of course.
    Thank you for considering this for the future.
  15. a command sounds much better. :D less worry about the potential abusive aspect of these chests.
    607 and cadgamer101 like this.
  16. Yeah command would be most idea and no sign based usage.

    Pirate, i'll write you a track issue!
    cadgamer101 likes this.