Thamus' Texture Treasure Trove

Emoticone11

The Dark Lord Sauron
Staff member
One thing I'd love to see is the top face of the sandstone blocks actually being some interesting texture, rather than just a flat square. That would improve the look of so many floors in Dorne and the Westerlands.
 

Thamus_Knoward

Shadowbinder
As per @Elduwin's request, this is a prototype for Canabis sativa. Could you give me some feedback Eld? Bear in mind that the texture is a rough draft so all I need to know from you right now is if the proportions, size and shape are OK. In general, is it immediately recognizable what it is supposed to be?

fa3177758a.png


39e3790b6e.png


My inspiration was this pic of a hemp plantation in France:
1280px-La_Roche_Jagu_chanvre_2.JPG
 

Thamus_Knoward

Shadowbinder
I just had an idea, why don't we retexture all the unused wheat, turnip, carrot and pea metadata to crops that we try to show with stand-in blocks (or crops that we cannot show with stand-in blocks).

We don't really use all the metadata, from the wheat block I've only seen people use 7, and 6. and for turnips and peas etc people also just use the standard blocks. If we then retexture the fieldblock a little and give it a full-height model, we can have some much nicer fields imo!
 

Emoticone11

The Dark Lord Sauron
Staff member
I don’t think it’s very good practice to have entirely different crops sharing meta of the same ID. I thought we ditched that kind of thing a while ago. Also, the crops require tilled soil underneath, so it’d be unstable.
 

Thamus_Knoward

Shadowbinder
I don’t think it’s very good practice to have entirely different crops sharing meta of the same ID. I thought we ditched that kind of thing a while ago. Also, the crops require tilled soil underneath, so it’d be unstable.
I see wasted potential as we're running out of block IDs and thus are doing something far worse: Overloading other blocks in meaning, which is really what I thought we seek to eradicate.

As for different crops sharing meta of the same ID. We're doing exactly that with any other block, and as long as they are thematically the same it's fine. Wool is block ID 35 and each colour is a different metadata for instance.

These new crops are not more or less unstable than the crops that cover hectares of land on our server already.

There is a high demand for new blocks, and a primary argument against adding them is the fixed block ID limit. Yet, there are unused IDs at our disposal.

I will explore those in the ThamPack, and you guys can take time to make up your minds about them.
 
Last edited:

Emoticone11

The Dark Lord Sauron
Staff member
As for different crops sharing meta of the same ID. We're doing exactly that with any other block, and as long as they are thematically the same it's fine.

The difference, to me, is that those other blocks don’t already have some ‘internal logic’ tying together their block states, in this case level of growth. I’m generally wary of relying on vanilla blocks for things at all, since Mojang could so easily push an update which breaks something if we’ve been using a vanilla block in a way which is incongruent to how Mojang uses the block. It’s low risk for inert blocks like cobble, but for crop blocks, what if Mojang decides to do a crop revamp that changes their growth dynamics?

These new crops are not more or less unstable than the crops that cover hectares of land on our server already.

I don’t think you understood what I meant by that. If you replace e.g. flowers in mustard fields with a metadata of the vanilla crop block, it’d make them liable to breaking upon block updates (like when someone uses the wrong ID for water layers) since they don’t use tilled soil. AFAIK that’s not the case for any current fields, since people do use tilled soil for carrots/turnips/wheat.

There is a high demand for new blocks, and a primary argument against adding them is the fixed block ID limit.

I don’t think we’re so near that limit as to avoid adding a couple widely-useable new blocks like that; we’re just close enough to the limit to make me worry about adding a number of trivial or highly specific blocks, like house banners, unless they’re important for the canon of a server build. It’d be good to know just how close to the limit we are so we could figure out how to ration future additions better... or see it as impetus to figure out how to solve the limitation.

The main reason I’ve held out on crop additions (as opposed to ‘nature blocks’, although it seems like there’s been spillover between the two anyways) is because I think there should be an organized team dedicated to retrofitting existing builds with the new crops once that happens, and there didn’t seem to be very high energy for that whenever new crops were proposed in the past.

I will explore those in the ThamPack, and you guys can take time to make up your minds about them.

As long as people don’t use them in the production world beyond a temporary test.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SseriousBusiness

Margaery_Tyrell

The Dark Lord Sauron
I think we could probably retexture the beetroot into 4 unique and new crops since as a block its not located anywhere, I'd probably recommend adding:
  • Capsicum Peppers
  • Onions
  • Beets
  • Broccoli
By re texturing each growth cycle of the beetroot into the crops above, im not too concerned either about Mojang revamping crop growth cycles since the game is currently about to release 1.16 and haven't changed a thing in 5 update cycles and I'm fairly confident it'll stay that way.

On the point of unstable crops, we already place crops that require farmland on non-farmland blocks such as at Stoney Sept and Wyl to produce different soil mediums based on the climate (muddy farmland in Stoney Sept and dry farmland in Wyl). Its not as unstable as you would think since it operates on the same principle that we use to place lit candles on top of chain blocks to make candlestands.

I think it could be done very well, and would be a welcome addition to the server without having to add a new block.
 

Thamus_Knoward

Shadowbinder
My research on the other suggestions is shaky, but instead of Broccoli, I'd go for Wild Cabbage which is the medieval predecessor of from which the Broccoli cultivar was created.

Capsicum Peppers, Onions and Beets sound like great first suggestions :) I'd add Garlic too! I'd also want to cover as much from this list as possible:
 

CashBanks

A Knight at the Opera
Staff member
By re texturing each growth cycle of the beetroot into the crops above, im not too concerned either about Mojang revamping crop growth cycles since the game is currently about to release 1.16 and haven't changed a thing in 5 update cycles and I'm fairly confident it'll stay that way.

Yeah if they’re at 1.16, any changes to beetroot crops would be in 1.16.1 - they don’t apply changes to versions retrospectively. I figure if we eventually do upgrade to 1.13 and beyond we’ll have to adjust WesterosBlocks to match the new block ID system anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SseriousBusiness

Emoticone11

The Dark Lord Sauron
Staff member
On the point of unstable crops, we already place crops that require farmland on non-farmland blocks such as at Stoney Sept and Wyl to produce different soil mediums based on the climate (muddy farmland in Stoney Sept and dry farmland in Wyl). Its not as unstable as you would think since it operates on the same principle that we use to place lit candles on top of chain blocks to make candlestands.

Really? I don't remember seeing that. Do the blocks break if you place a block adjacent to them?

I think it could be done very well, and would be a welcome addition to the server without having to add a new block.

I'd still like to see a plan for a team to systematically update old builds with any new crop blocks, in the climates where they would be appropriate, before officially adding any.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SseriousBusiness