At the moment we’re re-adding the same fluid logic to the C++ build. This doesn’t mean it’s final. Rather it’s simpler to port the current solution than attempt to create something new during the porting process.
But the conversation is still open. I don’t think it’s something we’ve discussed much recently internally. So community opinions and ideas are still welcome.
The main question how can we make fluids fun and interesting without making them an awesome griefing weapon.
? Fluids can’t flow into beacons ?
? Fluids can only be placed in beacons ?
? Fluids can’t be placed but must be diverted from their source ?
This would be pity in my opinion because if i integrate a waterfall or a river in my beacon it would block it out.
If fluids are not placeable and need to be channeled to the target the griefing risk will be much lower.
As said before, if everything need to be channeled to the target and can’t be “created” this would be a good solution against crefing and a benefit for a more complex gameplay like described in my first post in this topic. Water is a worthy resource in this world (farming, fishing or as coolant for different machinery) and if water could used in a similar way this would add a lot of “creativity” to this game. It would also require a better organization of you buildings (hide pipes, don’t waste water, how to distribute water).
Oh no please not. There are a lot of reasons why one should like to have fluids flow through your beacons.
I´d interpret “Fluids can´t flow into beacons” as "If someone places fluids next to your beacon it can´t flow inside while fluids that were already there when you placed the beacon (aka. natural rivers, lakes, etc.) would stay.
Not sure this differentiation is possible. This would add a massive amount of computation to the logic (need to save if a block is natural or not and differentiation everything that is not natural).
What if i have radioactive sewage from my generators that need be discharged ?
That would still mean though that if you want a waterfall to flow from your fyilng island and down to your dessert city below you would need to cover the whole waterfall in beacons.
Don’t forget that the regen will return any changes outside of your beacon. So it would likely make beacon placement more important: 1. river already flowing through beacon or 2. source block already within your beacon.
This is correct. Every complex life-form on this planet needs water and even if there might be other life-forms on other planets that don’t rely on water (maybe some cool creatures for uninhabitable and hard worlds → stone/sand creatures) it would be cool if water would be an active resource and not only a “visual” gimmig.
Maybe this could also be a good balance for super hard worlds that it’s nearly impossible build a settlement because there is only extreme few water and if need to “stay” on this worlds you need to find that water (like the search of water on mars).
I’d rather see a waterfall that flows into a beacon than one that stops in the air and maybe even flows down on the sides of the beacon. Because nobody will use that many plots on a decent waterfall.
And why should that take a lot of plots anyway? You didn’t terraform anything. So there is nothing to be beaconed. (Assuming a waterfall from a flying island down onto earth or another island)
There really is no reason to force someone to use so many plots just to make the waterfall look realistic (and not let it stop midair).
I’m not sure on a solution to this either, however I do like the idea of only being able to divert water from the source…
With that, do you mean pipes or just digging trenches and seeing how far the water flows before it tapers off (or will it flow indefinitely until the area to fill is level?
Hmm, the flowing water mechanic raises more questions as well… if you divert water and then place a beacon over the divert so it’s effectively ‘permanent’… and that diverted water still continues to flow outside of the beacon… what happens to world regen? Would the water be in a constant state of flux and disappear and reappear all the time?
I think any solution that you opt for would need to take the prospect any future farming mechanic into consideration as well. Maybe have a bucket that can transport water, but if that water is placed directly onto the ground, it dissolves into the ground and does not create a new flowing water source. You could have it so that water can still be transferred from bucket to barrel / irrigation system though, to feed crops.
Regarding water flowing into beacons … I’m actually in favour of it, purely due to the realism factor. Although it is a potential avenue to griefing, I think the possibility of it occurring would be reduced (as others have suggested), due to limitations on water flow and the inability to place water source blocks.
Hypothetically, I think it is safe to allow water to flow from a source into a beacon (as mentioned above) provided that the source block can be somehow “taped” by the beacon owner. What I mean by this is the beacon owner must some how locate and claim the water source block or blocks that are flowing into their beacon. If this is a natural spring or river, that involves locating all source blocks that then directly flow through the beacon, selecting them, and some how tying them to the players beacon permissions. This could work similar to the beacon plotting mechanism where holding the beacon plotter also shows taped water sources, but otherwise leaves behind nothing that would be regenerated. That way, griefers can not some how divert water from rivers or pipes into another players space because those source blocks are not taped by the owner of the beacon.
I wondered what water can be used for… I see some non-decorative mechanics / logics:
a) a transportation way. I want a water “path” to my house underground, so i can put my small boat there and enter a river. like this I can park my boat save in my beaconed “garage”… b)land could become fertile for harvesting c)water as a power source (to eventually support turbines to create energy)
Do I need to transfer water for all of this? Not necessarly… a) here I can just choose a good location for my house b) I worked out an idea, where water transfer is not necessary. You need pipes and a pump. As long as the suction side is into water (not necessarly source block), the function of the special sprinkler pipes is guaranteed:
I hope, a pump will not work without energy, so it also needs an external energy source (whatever it is). c) I could use a similar construction like in b). Just with a certain logic of our real life: the generator has to be lower then the river- / lake- / sea-connection. I know, logically the water would have to run through to run the turbine, but since my concepts should exclude the necessarity of moving water, I’d skip that logically detail…
To extend my idea, i want introduce a phisically existing force the water pressure.
In our real world it is prooved that hight of water creates certain pressure in the bottom and obstacles the water has to flow through create a decreast of this pressure.
We can very easily transfer this fact to machines and pipes inside the game.
The number I call now, are just to explain the idea behind it.
If you connect a pipe to water as in c) and go down 4 blocks, you create a water pressur of 4.
You could say a turbine needs 4 units water pressure to create energy.
Sprinklers you could say decrease (consume) water pressure by 1.
With 4 units water pressure your could make 4 sprinklers work. If you add a fifth, it would not work because the sprinklers before consume all water pressure.
Same way I would say, a pump should create the same amount of water pressure, then the turbine consumes.
Because both machines can interact - I tell you later why this is important.
Second to introduce: energy consumption / creation.
A turbine creates 4 units of energy.
Let’s say a bulb consumes 1 energy unit, so you can run up to 4 bulbs with one turbine.
Same way a pump should consume 4 units of energy. (if you remember, i hope a pump needs energy source)
So 1 turbine can run 1 pump and 1 pump can run 1 turbine.
Like this people could not create a perpetuum mobile (an energy system that provides more energy then it consumes).
Means: if 1 turbine would just need 2 units of water pressure, I could run 2 turbines with 1 pump. These 2 turbines can run 2 pumps, which can ran 4 turbines. You see an endless energy cycle upwards. You can maximum balance this with recources a machine needs to be build. And with machine I mean energy creators in this case (either water pressure or electricity.
If the game runs with water and electrical force this definetly has to be considered and balanced in some way.
Simple. A griefer may place or divert water to flow into a beaconed space and flood what ever is inside of your beacon. This could drown livestock, pop torches, or interact with lava to create stone without the griefer needing to be able to even enter the beacon themselves.
Water can flow one block then it falls if I got it right. So if you fear something like that, make a step…
Since beacons (if this habit stays) prevent anyone to build something over you. It’s completely safe.
If my thoughts will be adopted and water system stays like it is, you can easily protect yourself.
On the other hand, if noone can place water somewhere, this is out of discussion anyway if you didn’t build your area next to a river / lake / sea that is higher then your plot.
Beacons don’t prevent anyone from building over (or indeed under) you … it just prevents them from placing their beacon there, effectively reserving those spaces for you.
Anything built above or below though, would eventually deteriorate with world regeneration.
Your solution should work though, but is entirely dependent upon the existing build within the beaconed area.
That’s something i already mentioned in my original post in this topic (look above). I like this idea and i hope the devs will adapt it.
Absolutely. My original post was most mostly about farming but this is indeed an other good use for water. I really like your idea.
The problem was covered in my original post in this topic. Water + Lava = Granite … and that’s - we all accept that - not good. that’s why there was a discussion about safety and anti-griefing.
