Org Minecraft Server

[newO_ajniN]

Yes - sounds good

Can we get a yes or no vote on this land regeneration thing? The proposal is to delete the areas outside these orange

[Sigurd]

The org must have eaten my earlier reply. I am sure I replied. Yes to the question, but I would support a rather closer cropping of the orange line. I wouldn't mind to have the line go just north of the flag behind my castle. Much boring unused terrain around where I live. Remove the jungle on the east side of my castle for example.

I don't know if this is easy with the tool you are using to regenerate...
suggestion:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Papewaio]

That might crop out my village (with populated horse stables), and my treehouse.

It definitely crops out my (small) underwater lair which is ok.

[Tamur]

Just in case anyone missed it...

http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/inno...p-britain.html

[Csargo]

I'm good with the regeneration. The structure to the south is mine, and you can move it wherever you like.

[TinCow]

The org must have eaten my earlier reply. I am sure I replied. Yes to the question, but I would support a rather closer cropping of the orange line. I wouldn't mind to have the line go just north of the flag behind my castle. Much boring unused terrain around where I live. Remove the jungle on the east side of my castle for example.

I don't know if this is easy with the tool you are using to regenerate...
suggestion:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I'll take these suggestions into account, though I make no promises about the final result. I'd like to keep the cropped areas to existing water boundaries as much as possible, to make the mismatching less noticeable.

[TinCow]

That might crop out my village (with populated horse stables), and my treehouse.

It definitely crops out my (small) underwater lair which is ok.

You will definitely not lose your village or treehouse. I was planning on transporting your underwater lair (and the nearby jungle island), if you have any preferences about where it should go.

I'm good with the regeneration. The structure to the south is mine, and you can move it wherever you like.

Sounds good. I'm going to move your entire island. Do you want any of the other nearby islands transported with you?

[Csargo]

Sounds good. I'm going to move your entire island. Do you want any of the other nearby islands transported with you?

I had intended to build on all four of those small islands. If it'd be easier on you just move the island with structures on it. That's the only one I've actually worked on.

[TinCow]

I had intended to build on all four of those small islands. If it'd be easier on you just move the island with structures on it. That's the only one I've actually worked on.

Moving all four is perfectly fine. Islands are the easiest things to relocate as they'll look natural in any ocean spot I plunk them in.

[Sigurd]

I'll take these suggestions into account, though I make no promises about the final result. I'd like to keep the cropped areas to existing water boundaries as much as possible, to make the mismatching less noticeable.

Ok... so following the rivers inland would be possible? I have no idea how easy/difficult this might be.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Nigel]

Another thought:

If you want to get rid fo the snow area West of your castle and the desert area SouthEast, perhaps it is easier to leave the land as it is and just change the biome type to whatever you want it to be.

[TinCow]

Ok... so following the rivers inland would be possible? I have no idea how easy/difficult this might be.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I was thinking more about oceans, not rivers. Editing to follow river boundaries would require a lot more work. It might be feasible, but I'm not sure. The area north of your castle does have some largish lakes though, and I think I could probably edit that area according to your desires. No promises about the desert though.

Another thought:

If you want to get rid fo the snow area West of your castle and the desert area SouthEast, perhaps it is easier to leave the land as it is and just change the biome type to whatever you want it to be.

I wish it were that simple. Changing the biome only changes the weather present in that area, it doesn't alter the nature of the existing terrain or otherwise impact any block. Even the snow on the ground would remain and have to be removed by hand (hence the remaining snow in the desert around Vlad's old bridge and artificial town).

[Papewaio]

If it makes you feel any better the driest desert in the world is in Antartica.

[BSmith]

Do we have an idea on the expected timing of the conversion to 1.7? I assume we'd do the world updates and the change to the new version all at once? Or would we upgrade to 1.7 then do the world later when TC has the time?

[TinCow]

Do we have an idea on the expected timing of the conversion to 1.7? I assume we'd do the world updates and the change to the new version all at once? Or would we upgrade to 1.7 then do the world later when TC has the time?

It will happen as soon as I have time after the 1.7 version of bukkit has been released. As of yet, 1.7 bukkit is not out and I don't see any info on its ETA. If it came out today or tomorrow, I would probably do the upgrade over the weekend. If it didnt come out until, for example, next Tuesday, I might have to wait for the following weekend to do the work. Regardless, everything will be done at the same time. The server will continue running 1.6.4 until everything is set for the upgrade, at which point I will upgrade the server and do all of the map editing work at once.

Speaking of which, now is a good time to remove any resources you want to save from Mineworld.

[Nigel]

If you do the update, TinCow, and deleting of the unused areas of our world, will you auto-generate the new areas?

I was wondering if we can have them as black spots for us to explore and discover again. Could be a lot of fun for explorers.

Of course, I understand that the auto-generation was done to avoid ugly chunck errors (Cliffs of Mohang) which happen, when the game version gets updated. So with that we should have the auto-generation of the entire world prior to the update that comes after 1.7. But at least in the mean time we could go exploring. What do you and other people think? Good idea? Bad idea? Is it even possible at all?


(on a little sidenote: the structure I mentioned earlier is at -2850 -980, pretty snow castle, no idea who build it, but may be worth saving)

[BSmith]

I am a fan of more exploration, if possible.

[TinCow]

If you do the update, TinCow, and deleting of the unused areas of our world, will you auto-generate the new areas?

I was wondering if we can have them as black spots for us to explore and discover again. Could be a lot of fun for explorers.

Of course, I understand that the auto-generation was done to avoid ugly chunck errors (Cliffs of Mohang) which happen, when the game version gets updated. So with that we should have the auto-generation of the entire world prior to the update that comes after 1.7. But at least in the mean time we could go exploring. What do you and other people think? Good idea? Bad idea? Is it even possible at all?

(on a little sidenote: the structure I mentioned earlier is at -2850 -980, pretty snow castle, no idea who build it, but may be worth saving)

This is definitely possible, but there are some problems with it. First, if I do not auto-generate the new areas I cannot smooth over the chunk errors that will be created between the existing terrain and the new 1.7 terrain. So, exploration of the unknown would mean more Cliffs of Mojang at the borders of the new areas. Second, generating new terrain is a CPU-intensive process. If the terrain is generated on-the-fly while people are playing, the server will lag a bit. You can sometimes notice this already if you're exploring out into new terrain in the Nether, as the Nether has never been pre-generated.

If everyone is fine with those issues, I can certainly leave the new land uncreated. In fact, it would be a lot less work for me since all I'd have to do would be move some structures and then delete the terrain we don't want. Not having to pre-generate the new terrain and smooth over the borders between the old and new would save a lot of time. If the lag issues turns out to be too problematic, I can always fill in the terrain later. However, the Cliffs of Mojang issue is a permanent one. In order to smooth those over I have to do it immediately when generating the new terrain, or not at all.

[BSmith]

...so conflicted...

EDIT: after a little thought, I think I would prefer a smooth world over exploration. The world will be permanent, exploration is not.

[Nigel]

Well, I would agree with BSmith on that.

In order to smooth those over I have to do it immediately when generating the new terrain, or not at all.

But, TinCow, perhaps you can explain a bit more about how that process works.
Do you have a program to do it? Or would you do it manually in one big session?

As I think about is, my biggest concern is, that we get a lot of cliffs by getting old-ocean / new-land borders.
I imaginge, as long as we get old-ocean / new-ocean borders, we should be ok, but as soon as the newly generated border tarrain is not an ocean, a cliff would probably be happening.

[TinCow]

Well, I would agree with BSmith on that.


But, TinCow, perhaps you can explain a bit more about how that process works.
Do you have a program to do it? Or would you do it manually in one big session?

As I think about is, my biggest concern is, that we get a lot of cliffs by getting old-ocean / new-land borders.
I imaginge, as long as we get old-ocean / new-ocean borders, we should be ok, but as soon as the newly generated border tarrain is not an ocean, a cliff would probably be happening.

First of all, there is no way for me to force old ocean/new ocean borders. The only way I could possibly even attempt such a thing would be to generate an identically sized world in 1.7.2 with our seed, then overlay it on the existing map, find exactly where water boundaries intersect, then write down all the coordinates for those boundaries and crop the existing world to match that kind of outline. That would take me an extremely long time and even then it wouldn't help most boundaries. So, we have to live with a situation where the new terrain is going to generate on its own and there's nothing we can practically do about making certain stuff appear in locations where it looks good. The best we can do is make sure that as many boundaries as possible are old ocean/new land, rather than old land/new land. The land/land mismatches are usually the worst, so it's best to focus on avoiding those.

The process I use to blend old land and new is a bit complex. First, I have to take the server offline and download the entire world to my local PC. Then I have to find all the structures that need to be moved to save them and manually relocate them to new areas using MCEdit . When that's done then I delete the old land using MCEdit. Deletion has to be done on a chunk-by-chunk basis, which means that I cannot make nice curves or perfectly follow contours of existing rivers. Chunks are squares that are 16x16 in size, so all borders are going to be straight lines that can turn, at most, every 16 blocks. Then I run mcmerge to trace the outline of the remaining world. Then I get the server running on my local machine and use a console command from the WorldBorder plugin to regenerate all of the deleted area in the new version. Then I take the world offline again and run mcmerge a second time to smooth the boundaries (described below). Then I re-upload the world files to the server. Then I put the server back online and run a new dynmap render to get it updated. I would be surprised if this process took less than 48 hours, as some of the steps can take a lot of time to complete due to the size of the world being manipulated.

What mcmerge does is blend the matching areas by making rivers between the old areas and new, and blending any land on both sides down to the river so it looks more natural. Since it's just a river, when ocean meets ocean you don't even notice. When land meets ocean, it just looks like coastline. When land meets land, it looks like a new river. Here are examples from our server:

First, these are the old Cliffs of Mojang we are trying to avoid. These were created years ago in one of the very early version updates:

Here is mcmerge at work on a land/ocean boundary. In this case, this is where Sigurd's castle is located. The ocean was the old terrain and the land where he built his castle was the new terrain. The coastline between them was the result of mcmerge:

Finally, here is mcmerge at work on a land/land boundary. The straightish/angular river diving the tundra biome from the desert and jungle biomes is the work of mcmerge:

Taking a screenshot of ocean/ocean with mcmerge is pointless as it just looks like ocean and you'd never know otherwise.

[spankythehippo]

My faith has been restored. I will work on this after the 21st of November.



EDIT: One major requirement, this must be built in the spawn chunks. If it is, then it will continue to produce iron even when no one is logged on.

I don't know how to resolve this issue, only the mighty TinCow can pass such judgment. I could build this right in the middle of the spawn chunk, but it would need to be elevated really high. The only downside with that is aesthetics. It would look really odd to have this floating contraption. I could beautify it, however.

[BSmith]

If it's not it would produce iron only when players are near? What is the production rate? May not be that much of a problem if the rate is high for it to be off by itself.

[Ishmael]

If it's not it would produce iron only when players are near? What is the production rate? May not be that much of a problem if the rate is high for it to be off by itself.

I glanced at the video, and it has to be in the spawn chunk in order for the villages to not merge, due to the way chunks are loaded when players are in the nether and the like.

There seems to be a lot of spare space underneath the farm, so it could always be enclosed, beautified slightly, and turned into the city's industrial sector (for other automatic farms). Just a thought.

[spankythehippo]

I glanced at the video, and it has to be in the spawn chunk in order for the villages to not merge, due to the way chunks are loaded when players are in the nether and the like.

There seems to be a lot of spare space underneath the farm, so it could always be enclosed, beautified slightly, and turned into the city's industrial sector (for other automatic farms). Just a thought.

Also, it would need to be floating, so that doors on ground level don't interfere with the village chaining mechanic. I was thinking about making it as high as possible.

I am thinking of making a sugar cane factory of massive proportions. It would probably be underground, but in the spawn chunks.

If it's not it would produce iron only when players are near? What is the production rate? May not be that much of a problem if the rate is high for it to be off by itself.

It would produce iron constantly. At a rate of 1700 iron/hour. That's 26 stacks in an hour. That's 624 stacks in a day. About 11 double chests. So yeah, it would produce A LOT of iron.

[TinCow]

Also, it would need to be floating, so that doors on ground level don't interfere with the village chaining mechanic. I was thinking about making it as high as possible.

I am thinking of making a sugar cane factory of massive proportions. It would probably be underground, but in the spawn chunks.



It would produce iron constantly. At a rate of 1700 iron/hour. That's 26 stacks in an hour. That's 624 stacks in a day. About 11 double chests. So yeah, it would produce A LOT of iron.

That's a lot of villagers and a lot of golems producing a lot of iron, presumably without an off switch. Is that going to lag the server?

[Nigel]

I have to admit that I am not too keen on having an above-ground industrial estate in the middle of our city centre.

On the other hand: 11 double chests per day !!!
That is a huge amount.

At that rate, it may even be worth while to build it and leave it for a couple of days only.
If we leave it for only a week or two, we will probably have enough iron on this server to last us for the next 3 years.

[Beskar]

I have to admit, I liked that aspect of Tekkit. You could advance with industry to pump out different resources and the like. It made it very hard to return to the server, admittedly. I hit that point where I was an industrial giant so the lack of ease in resources was something I couldn't readjust to.

[spankythehippo]

That's a lot of villagers and a lot of golems producing a lot of iron, presumably without an off switch. Is that going to lag the server?

I don't think it should. The villagers are all stationary, and there can only be a maximum of 4 golems at any time.

Essentially, what this is a revamp of the Iron Trench. Except, this version doesn't have a ton of redstone to rebuild the village chaining process. That means I would need to manually chain the villages, but I would only need to do it once. That's why it needs to be in the spawn chunks. The Iron Trench consisted of 32 adjacent villages. This Iron Foundry consists of 44. It's only 400 more iron per hour, which is negligible in terms of lag. The lag you would get from the Iron Trench is not that high, anyway.

I have to admit that I am not too keen on having an above-ground industrial estate in the middle of our city centre.

On the other hand: 11 double chests per day !!!
That is a huge amount.

At that rate, it may even be worth while to build it and leave it for a couple of days only.
If we leave it for only a week or two, we will probably have enough iron on this server to last us for the next 3 years.

If this does work, I'll be using iron blocks for a lot of my building. I'm also not a fan of a giant floating contraption in the middle of the city. Maybe I can turn it into a towering office building?

I was thinking about transforming that spawn building into an office building, where they would spawn in the foyer. As soon as newbies log in, they can help themselves to limitless iron.

I have to admit, I liked that aspect of Tekkit. You could advance with industry to pump out different resources and the like. It made it very hard to return to the server, admittedly. I hit that point where I was an industrial giant so the lack of ease in resources was something I couldn't readjust to.

I was overwhelmed by the complexity of it. FTB still appeals to me, but it requires time to learn, time which I don't have. I still enjoy vanilla Minecraft. Something very satisfying about completing redstone circuitry.

[Sigurd]

That Iron farm (max size) takes 45x45 according to the video.

If you build it directly over the spawn it would roughtly look like this:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

(from spawn 0,65,0 -> right top corner: 22,65,-23 -> right bottom corner: 22,65,22 -> left bottom: -23,65,22 -> left top -23,65,-23)

Maybe current spawn location doesn't cut it. Would it help to move the spawn? or does it have to sit atop the 0,65,0 coordinate? It says spawn chunck no spawn point. Is there a difference?
edit: Ok, read up on it. Apparently the spawn chunk are 12 by 12 chunks around the spawn point (192x192 blocks) and can't be moved.