It took me less than 3 minutes to get around Greg's limitation, and the current release of OmniTools should work fine, unless he has gone back and changed it again.
1.6.2 equivalent mod of OmniTools?
- Thread starter Vaygrim
- Start date
-
The FTB Forum is now read-only, and is here as an archive. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord
It took me less than 3 minutes to get around Greg's limitation, and the current release of OmniTools should work fine, unless he has gone back and changed it again.
as someone who has no coding knowledge at all I am just throwing this out, but could it be possible for forge to add some kind of wrench api to their mod? if that would be possible, then modders might use this api for their wrench and machines or blocks. wouldn't it then be possible for the wrench from one mod to work on the other?
again, I have no coding knowledge at all, I am just doing some dumb thinking here.
I know it'd create more work for the forge team, and it shouldn't be so easy to have an api that would work on all mods, or for modders to change their code to adapt to the api...
again, I have no coding knowledge at all, I am just doing some dumb thinking here.
I know it'd create more work for the forge team, and it shouldn't be so easy to have an api that would work on all mods, or for modders to change their code to adapt to the api...
That is what we were talking about with our earlier discussion over the concept of an "Item Dictionary": have Forge provide definitions for tool functionality that all mods could key into, making life easier for their players. Unfortunately this concept was shot down by the Forge 'powers that be' because they thought that Minecraft 1.7 might have a similar feature in it. (shrug)
aah, sorry for not having read the whole topic to have noticed this. it would really be nice if forge would add this to their mod, as you can't really depend on things mojang promises to do, unless it's already in a snapshot. then again, we can't force a decision onto them, so if they believe it's better to wait and see what mohang does.... then so be it.
Well as it has already been pointed out... if we waited to implement features purely based upon the fact that the next few revisions of Minecraft 'might have that feature', we would never have Forge ModLoader to begin with much less any of the other mods that are out there. Mojang was talking about releasing a Mod API since way back in the early days of Minecraft and that still has not happened. Now they want to hold on the item dictionary concept purely because MC1.7 might have something "similar" ?
(rolls eyes) Sure guys. Okay.
It'd be very easy to add tool functionality into Forge, and it would also be ignored by basically every mod out there.
Why? You aren't going to make an interface that everyone is happy with. Look at wrenches and crowbars. Look at how Greg thinks wrenches should work. Look at TE's dismantle mechanic. So, which do you base it off of? BuildCraft's wrench? Alright, well IC2 will never go for that.
It's quite difficult to unify disparate APIs and work within or around limitations set by a mod, that's why the OmniWrench is on hold right now.
Forge does some things extremely well, mostly bugfixes and access changes. Aside from FML, the .obj file support, Events, the OreDictionary, and now the Liquid/Fluid System, Forge doesn't really add stuff in the way of content. That isn't the point.
The item dictionary as it was proposed was a bit silly - it makes a horrible assumption that two things with the same basic name (or registration tag) will behave in the same way. That isn't the case whatsoever. One modder could write a copper ore block that doesn't drop itself, but rather drops a chunk of ore. That mod might be the only thing that handles said chunks, which ends up screwing up everything else if it is determined that said version of copper ore is the canonical one.
When Forge puts a content change in, it's largely optional, and modders can choose to use it or not - and the nature of that means that something like this is never as simple or elegant as it sounds.
I do see what you mean in regards to different mods having different design intentions behind them when it came to tools, KingLemming. Change proposals are never quite as simple as they sound when tossed around on the forum, sure.
That being said however, I really do think that it is a tell-tale sign of what people 'want' when it comes to forge features when so many people miss OmniTools. (shrug) If a "Tool Dictionary" feature isn't needed in Forge... then why was OmniTools needed at all?
That being said however, I really do think that it is a tell-tale sign of what people 'want' when it comes to forge features when so many people miss OmniTools. (shrug) If a "Tool Dictionary" feature isn't needed in Forge... then why was OmniTools needed at all?
Because, if I'm not completely mistaken, what it's doing is basically simulating the functions of each wrench. What a 'Tool Dictionary' should be, is a common listing of all the coding hooks used by the various wrenches. That way when someone builds a wrench, they just link to those functions. Of course that's like herding squirrels.
Then what is the feasibility of a "Tool API"? An independent API that modders could use.. or not? (shrug)
This is where you have a point of confusion, the Forge API by the very virtue of being an API is catered to the modders, not the players. As KingL stated, if forge was to add a tool/item dictionary the modders would have to want to use it for it to be worth it. It sounds kind of an odd thing to say but modders don't mod to please us (well some of them probably do). Of course they like pleasing us (I assume) but it's not their main directive, sometimes it's a pleasant side effect.
OmniTools is only "needed" by the players, modders *might* have their own ideas. They might want you to have a toolbar full of tools to force you to choose, which TBH only generates bad karma but that might still be what they want.
Hmmm... Are you sure you wanna do that? Ask Mdiyo how circumventing GregTech's "balance" went for them. I wasn't doubting whether you'd could circumvent Greg's changes, I was contemplating whether it was worth it.
Ars Magicka has the "Spellbook", which lets you select a spell with a mousewheel. But you still only hold the spellbook, right? So perhaps the tool/toolbox can work like that? It is possible to take other peoples tools and basically place what is a selectable wrapper around them?
BuildCraft and Thermal Expansion and Forestry and Railcraft and RedLogic and Applied Energistics would, which is the point I think.
That already happens with the ore dictionary - you can get an equivalent item in a different way with a vastly different cost (e.g. bronze, steel) and there's no way to turn that off.
That's also why the item dictionary had a feature where you could specify in a config file which version of the item gets used.
That sounds horrible. That would force people to use IC2. That's just horrible
Hmm I should not have made my post so brief. I'm just reminding them that there is/was a mod that acted as a sort of swiss army knife. I could have also mentioned MPS's Powertool which is possibly more robust then the GraviTool, Heck as at ver 1.5 there's even an omniwrench module you can add to the power tool. Making it possibly the tool of choice for anyone.
Then again I guess it still has the problem of new mod not immediately being compatible with it, which a universal tool API (if used) would remedy.
Also, IC2 isn't THAT bad.
I hate to keep bringing this up but the GraviSuite tool is NOT an 'OmniTool'.. not even close.
And yes.. I love the concept of a 'Swiss Army Knife' (or a 'Pocket Multi-Tool' ?) for Minecraft mod tools. I think that really would be epic useful.