it's pulled at Calclavia's advice. THe mod link is dead and we lost 40 potential users due to modpacks failing to install.
Resonance Unleashed - [Closed - merged into Resonant Rise]
- Thread starter Velotican
- 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
- Status
it's pulled at Calclavia's advice. THe mod link is dead and we lost 40 potential users due to modpacks failing to install.
Are you talking about Electric Expansion? Cause Calcalvia said that Electric Expansion is dead.
I see that RedLogic is listed in the supported mods, however there doesn't appear to be a config for it in the pack. Was just wondering if I'm missing something or if something was overlooked. Thank you for all your hard work, by the way. This is quite remarkable!
I have a lot of plates to juggle at the mo so it's very likely I've overlooked a few things. There's a config for Redstone in Motion in the pack for example although the mod itself seems to have been removed from RR at some point.
As for RedLogic, I believe it's an Immibis mod and Immibis keeps most of his config data stored in one file.
I only became aware of its existence today, so there are no existing plans to support this. I may have a look and see if it's worth the bother, because I have a feeling it's too specific to be suitable. I'd love to be wrong though!
As for RedLogic, I believe it's an Immibis mod and Immibis keeps most of his config data stored in one file.
I only became aware of its existence today, so there are no existing plans to support this. I may have a look and see if it's worth the bother, because I have a feeling it's too specific to be suitable. I'd love to be wrong though!
It only has about 30 mods, most of which are already covered. I believe the only unique mods are Armor Status HUD, Barrels, Better Dungeons, BskprsCore (not sure what that does), Chest Transporter, Gravestone, iChunUtil, Lava Monsters, More Furnaces, Prayers, Special Mobs, and Tconstruct Recovery. Some seem to be client side only while others are mob mods, so integration shouldn't be too hard. If nothing else though getting a normalized config for Gravestone might be useful since I've been seeing more people adding it to packs.
Ah, another config problem. The propellant vial and the 16 paint cans from Gas craft are shifted by 256, making them conflict with some of BiblioCraftForestry's recipes. This makes the propellant look like and have the recipe of what seems to be the potion rack and makes all the paint cans require it, as well as creates issues with some tables and shelving.
Edit: Also, it should be noted that those seem to be the only conflicting items from those mods going by the warning that popped up.
Edit: Also, it should be noted that those seem to be the only conflicting items from those mods going by the warning that popped up.
May I say these conflicts not getting reported in the console logs is really annoying. A fix is forthcoming.
E: Just realised that the lack of a conflict report is because RR has the config for Emasher's GasCraft but it's not actually part of the pack. Some stuff's been left in there because I was more interested in getting things to work than getting things to work cleanly.
You'll also notice that I don't include GasCraft on the list of supported mods.
Still, this report is useful because it's pointing out what I've left in the configs that isn't actually formally supported. Can't support what I can't test.
What I'll do is make a decision about whether I want to strictly support only the mods contained in the supported modpacks and nothing else or whether I'm OK with being more flexible than that at the risk of breaking things later.
E: Just realised that the lack of a conflict report is because RR has the config for Emasher's GasCraft but it's not actually part of the pack. Some stuff's been left in there because I was more interested in getting things to work than getting things to work cleanly.
You'll also notice that I don't include GasCraft on the list of supported mods.
Still, this report is useful because it's pointing out what I've left in the configs that isn't actually formally supported. Can't support what I can't test.
What I'll do is make a decision about whether I want to strictly support only the mods contained in the supported modpacks and nothing else or whether I'm OK with being more flexible than that at the risk of breaking things later.
Yea, I had noticed it wasn't supported, but thought it might have been an oversight since the config file was with the downloads. Either way, as you have said it's a good thing to point out since the configs were included even if they weren't supported.
The other reason I'm loathe to remove extra configs is that it could also break support for something that's actually working fine in theory.
Resonant Rise has pulled Electric Expansion for example due to it being totally rewritten for Modjam, the latest old version being super-broken and the last working version having its download pulled. If I now go ahead and say "I'm only supporting mods in the modpacks" then EE's config will also be pulled as it's no longer supported by RR.
This all said, I have a GitHub now for a reason: if you want a mod supported that I'm not supporting, you can get it working and drop me a pull request for it.
Resonant Rise has pulled Electric Expansion for example due to it being totally rewritten for Modjam, the latest old version being super-broken and the last working version having its download pulled. If I now go ahead and say "I'm only supporting mods in the modpacks" then EE's config will also be pulled as it's no longer supported by RR.
This all said, I have a GitHub now for a reason: if you want a mod supported that I'm not supporting, you can get it working and drop me a pull request for it.
May I say these conflicts not getting reported in the console logs is really annoying.A fix is forthcoming.
E: Just realised that the lack of a conflict report is because RR has the config for Emasher's GasCraft but it's not actually part of the pack. Some stuff's been left in there because I was more interested in getting things to work than getting things to work cleanly.
You'll also notice that I don't include GasCraft on the list of supported mods.
Still, this report is useful because it's pointing out what I've left in the configs that isn't actually formally supported. Can't support what I can't test.
What I'll do is make a decision about whether I want to strictly support only the mods contained in the supported modpacks and nothing else or whether I'm OK with being more flexible than that at the risk of breaking things later.
Sorry about this. I've been using this during dev cycles to hold block IDs.
See my signature and youtube channel for more info. It's a modpack made by several FTBers but unfortunately FTB doesn't give us any way to publish it (without compromises that would really hurt our mission as a modpack). I wish it were not so, but it is. Still, FTB is great and we don't really see ourselves as "competing."
I have to say based on my experience with the three most commonly used launchers (Vanilla, Technic Launcher, FTB Launcher) and ATLauncher, ATLauncher effortlessly trumps the rest in terms of features, flexibility and performance. Very nice for modpack developers too and I might actually make some use of it myself depending on what I consider appropriate for this config pack.
I agree completely. It requires perhaps a bit more technological know-how in the XML coding required for mod pack authors, however the flexibility, features, and performance it provides pays off massive dividends.
Furthermore, it also dramatically reduces the effort on the ATLauncher team as well. Because all of the effort is placed on the shoulders of the mod pack creator, the only thing the ATLauncher really needs to do is provide the mod pack creator with an account for the dev side with permissions only for -his- mod pack, and a little bit of hosting space for those mods which have GPL/GNU type licenses.
In fact, if they wanted to, they could even bypass the hosting space, and you can set to download those mods from the mod author's source without needing user input (barring ad.fly or other such things).
This means the only thing the team really needs to do at that point, other than tech support, is police to make sure everyone is following mod author requests
Lucky for you, you're not a moderator. You'd lose your status and probably be kicked from the forums if you abused mod power that way.
lol you know what? I'm kinda fed up with greg fanboi's too
Luckily for both of us I'm not a mod.. god I'd hate that job.. poor mods.I'm not really a fanboylol you know what? I'm kinda fed up with greg fanboi's too
I'm helping out with an open source replacement of IC2 and GT... But yeah, poor moderators.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Eh, he dredged up a two-week old post just to respond... in the manner in which he did.lol you know what? I'm kinda fed up with greg fanboi's too
DFTT, let the REAL moderators handle him.
I'm not really a fanboylol you know what? I'm kinda fed up with greg fanboi's too
I'm helping out with an open source replacement of IC2 and GT... But yeah, poor moderators.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
For a moment there I had no idea what was being talked about, and then I saw the "show ignored content" button at the bottom of my page and all became clear. At least now I'm sure you weren't talking to yourselves~
- Status