Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[1.16.5] missing many blocks from ConquestReforged #63

Open
Tiavor opened this issue Feb 8, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

[1.16.5] missing many blocks from ConquestReforged #63

Tiavor opened this issue Feb 8, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@Tiavor
Copy link

Tiavor commented Feb 8, 2022

a lot of full and some partial blocks from Conquest are not covered by the block scan. I can't really seem to find a pattern which are covered and which aren't. it's even the case that some slabs of the same full block are visible while the full block is missing and vice versa.

@Devlin556
Copy link

+1 on Conquest Reforged

@mikeprimm
Copy link
Member

mikeprimm commented Mar 2, 2022

If blocks are fully missing, it usually is for mods that do custom/funky mappings of the identity of the block state files relative to the block name. Mods that do this use client-side code that a) I cannot get to from the server, and b) even if I could I cannot use. The net effect of this is that I cannot find the right block state file and thus cannot find the state mapping and model files - and there isn't anything I can do about it. Not sure if that is the case here, but that is an important part of framing any 'mod XYZ doesn't work perfectly or even well' discussion. Blocks with custom renderers will never work, for example, unless they're just reskinning a standard special renderer like the water/fluid renderer.

The point of DynmapBlockScan is to attempt to handle mods automatically, not to create a boatload of unsupportable custom/mod specific code - sorry, you guys are on your own if the mod doesn't follow normal vanilla resource mappings. I'm not doing per-mod hacks that will break the next time the mod dev has another clever idea on how to tinker with their mod resources. Last I saw, CR claimed 12000 custom blocks - so good luck with that...

All that said, if you can identify some specific blocks that are not right, I'll give it a look and see if it is a case of a blockstate+models scenario that should work versus one that will not work.

@mikeprimm
Copy link
Member

One current limitation is that Dynmap doesn't support rendering of blocks that exceed a standard cube (which is why banners don't render properly), and I do see some mapping complaints due to the translation of the block models resulting in a bigger model. These aren't going to be fixed anytime soon, as altering the Dynmap renderer to handle models that extend outside their home block is 'a big deal' (complex, huge performance hit if not done right, etc...).

@mikeprimm mikeprimm reopened this Mar 2, 2022
@Tiavor
Copy link
Author

Tiavor commented Mar 7, 2022

some examples: these full blocks are not rendered
conquest:oxidized_copper_roof
conquest:large_limestone_block
conquest:mixed_clay_tiles
conquest:dark_slate_roof_tiles

this full block is just black: (maybe no server side texture?)
conquest:sandstone_oven

full blocks that are rendered:
conquest:bundled_firewood
conquest:light_clay_tiles
conquest:tudor_diagonal_frame_1
conquest:tudor_diagonal_frame_2

and then is a lot of inconsistency with not full blocks too
while conquest:mixed_clay_tiles_vertical_slab is rendered (as full block),
conquest:blue_shipping_container_vertical_slab and
conquest:mixed_clay_tiles_vertical_slab is not rendered at all.
conquest:tudor_diagonal_upwards_frame_vertical_corner is rendered as full block while
conquest_todor_cross_frame_vertical_corner is not rendered at all (same orientation and state)

A big part is probably that Conquest is using Optifine features to the fullest.
the complete asset folder is 268MB (raw) and over 100k files

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants