jakj

You just repeated yourself without even addressing my counterpoints, so you contributed nothing.

If I do something that depends on the exact mod and config files in a specific version of ssp, can I count on rec. build version a.b.c being set, or can it change midrun?

Re: Is there a version of the technic launcher that..... I have way too many control issues to ever allow a substance to affect my mind.

Re: Is there a version of the technic launcher that..... 32 years old and never drank. :P

But that ignores the interstitial coordination factor and the international date line.

It's ridiculously easy to pirate the expansions for things like Morrowind and Fallout: New Vegas, and plenty of people (including me) still buy them, because 1) they're easier to get that way than pirate copies, 2) they're easy to install and manage than pirate copies, 3) they're less likely to be on some virus-ridden website than pirate copies (d'yarr, scurvy, eat yer oranges kiddos), and 4) good content deserves compensation. Oh yeah, and 5) not everyone even knows how to pirate content. So, yeah, there's plenty of reason to release paid DLC.

Actually, I think it's rather an amazing mod, and the changes he made even to the newest beta version are superb, to the bees especially. It's certainly not as large or complex as something like IC2, but it's quite an effort and I dearly want to use Forestry in the future. But I won't.

My idea is to create a series of interesting chains of macerator/compressor/extractor recipes with a couple new machines (blender and separator) to do transmuation using EU/MJ. I also have an idea for using solar panels not to produce energy but as consumable fuel in a machine that regenerates chunks so they can be re-mined. (Basically, I believe Minecraft is most fun when you never get something out of nothing, so passive solar panels and energy collectors just need to be made not passive anymore. Also, the biggest problem with transmutation is its quickness and ease, because making diamonds out of coal with IC2 doesn't feel like cheating, so it just needs to be a longer and more complex process and it will be cool again.)

Which would have been useful...how, exactly?

+1 awesome point for using a word I've never heard or seen. I trade you back "verisimilitude".

One of the best things IC2 ever did for Minecraft was make the mining of obsidian obsolete.

Yes, that's accurate. It's why I'm great with spatial relations, reading from any angle, and OO. I have excessive difficulty with anything I cannot visualize.

EE endgame is creative. I like to restrict myself to charging klein stars for tool fuel.

Re: [MC 1.1/SSP 6.0.7] JAKJ's "Fair Trade" 0.1.0.0 (Apr. 8, 2012) Remember to edit the config. Default they still destroy blocks.

Re: [MC 1.1/SSP 6.0.7] JAKJ's "Fair Trade" 0.1.0.0 (Apr. 8, 2012) Well Technic recommends 7 anyway; There are links to it on the front page. Let me know if you have further issues.

Re: [MC 1.1/SSP 6.0.7] JAKJ's "Fair Trade" 0.1.0.0 (Apr. 8, 2012) Unsupported class version...interesting. Are you using Java 7?

Re: [MC 1.1/SSP 6.0.7] JAKJ's "Fair Trade" 0.1.0.0 (Apr. 8, 2012) Put the launcher log in a pastebin and post a link here.

Re: About actually downloading the technic from the laucher??? The developer of the biomes mod is already working on a version that you can turn on and off, so don't worry about it.

Re: Is there a version of the technic launcher that..... Newsflash: A single paragraph of code can make a mod that will read and transmit your lastlogin file, which thanks to Notch's wisdom, isn't even hashed. Playing anything but vanilla Minecraft -is- trust.

Re: Is there a version of the technic launcher that..... And finally, you're not giving Technic your information. All Technic does is pass it through to Minecraft, which you have to give your information anyway.

He's asking because, in order to edit base classes to add/change/remove features, he needs to know which version to edit the base classes in, so he doesn't have to do it all over again when Tekkit does update.

Don't start the debate back up again. If you think Forestry is trustworthy, just use it. If you don't, then find something else. Either way, you're installing a separate mod into Technic, so it's the same thing.

1) You can install Forestry into Technic anyway, and all you should have to do is change block IDs in the config file. 2) The chance of it coming back into the Pack is 0.0000001856344444% (repeating, of course). Keeping in mind: You have to decide if you trust this guy to not hide any code in there in the future, since he's already done it once. And this time, the code -could- actually do something to your system.

Re: [MC 1.1/SSP 6.0.7] JAKJ's "Fair Trade" 0.1.0.0 (Apr. 8, 2012) The "src" folder is the source code. That's just if you want to look at how I did it; If you don't care, you can ignore it. You need to post your crash log (see the bug-board stickies for how to do that, but post it in this thread, not the bug board) for me to tell what's going on. But first, make sure you're using the recommended (6.0.7) build of Technic using Minecraft 1.1, not one of the dev builds.

And those are still not reasons why it should be removed. The only thing that might possibly be considered the start of a reason out of you, is that nooby server admins don't realize how OP it is and leave it on, and then...continue to not realize how OP it is over the course of a couple days and start thinking about turning it off? Are you just trying to save new server owners a few days of discovery? Do you actually think people need to be "protected" from EE somehow, like they can't be trusted to handle it properly?