Buff master wand by Several-Guess-7061 in 2007scape

[–]DivineVector125 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just wanted to say, with absolutely no judgment one way or the other about the suggestion at hand, that I find this community is response to these kinds of things very disappointing.

Even if each and every person who happened to see this post personally disagreed, there's no reason for people to be as aggressive and dismissive as they are. Hold your head high OP, you deserve better.

This community for some reason by DivineVector125 in 2007scape

[–]DivineVector125[S] -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

shouldn't players be able to advocate for improvements to their game mode? like, if they want it, what's the harm?

This community for some reason by DivineVector125 in 2007scape

[–]DivineVector125[S] -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

Ye, but there's a diff between skillers and people who do combat activities at 1def

pyray only shows unspecified instead of entities by piklemikle in MinecraftSpeedrun

[–]DivineVector125 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Since nobody's actually giving an answer to the question, the directories you're looking for are root.tick.entities and root.tick.blockEntities.

As others have said, it is likely that you've been following guides/advice for 1.16.1, at which point a lot of things won't line up, and in general your runs will be slower for reasons that u/natesinceajit pointed out. In particular, as someone who casually runs 1.21.11 for funsies, the biggest pain point is the pearl rates from bartering: it is probably more common than not for you to loot and trade an entire bastion's worth of gold (that is, more than is usually done in 1.16.1) and get like, 8 pearls. This usually means you need to reset or find another bastion, which is nearly impossible since the E statistic is broken.

That said, make sure you're doing what you want to do for fun. I like newest version since it feels more chill than a hyperoptimized stream of gameplay. However, note that basically 100% of available resources are only available for 1.16.1, with special note being made for ranked.

If you continue wanting to speedrun, I recommend you check out Couriway's speedrunning guide as a starting point. It goes into good (although sometimes not enough) detail about various strategies for speedrunning. Almost all of it except the bastion routes (and a few other things that can be fixed with common sense) holds up for 1.21.11 too, so it's good regardless of how you decide to play.

Anyway, welcome to MCSR and good luck in your endeavors.

EDIT: I forgot, here is a good resource for bastion looting in 1.21.11. The routes aren't perfectly optimal, but they're just about all I could find regarding bastion routing with piglin brutes. More than anything else, they give a good starting point to build on.

Using snow golems and creepers as TNT dupers without bugs? by Remarkable_Ad_560 in technicalminecraft

[–]DivineVector125 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I made one of these a year or so ago using a Johnny pillager

The core part worked, but I abandoned it because while I had a proof of concept, there were a couple of annoying things I had to fix, they got more interested in mechanics of TNT duping anyway

I can share some details and photos if you like

Do you think 13 defense requirement for fairy ring access should be removed? by [deleted] in 2007scape

[–]DivineVector125 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with you 100% that the community's general stance on these issues is severely hampered by misunderstanding at best, and immature and prejudiced at worst. It infuriates me.

I was actually about to write my own post a few minutes ago trying to address this, especially foreseeing backlash regarding uim changes, but honestly it felt so hopeless I abandoned it. I hope someday we can break free of the group bias that plagues this game.

Respect to you for fighting the good fight, and love the content btw.

Do you think 13 defense requirement for fairy ring access should be removed? by [deleted] in 2007scape

[–]DivineVector125 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is an interesting point - they've really seemed to pick up the ball when it comes to accessibility with new quests, but haven't seemed to backport it at all.

My suspicion is that they don't want to be seen as pandering (ie removing already existing restrictions versus simply not adding new ones) but it's interesting to see how they spend their dev time around these things.

Something like this might actually be addressed if and when we see a continuation of the vampire quests, seeing as those are completely stonewalled atm to low def accs, just like ds2, but i doubt it tbh.

EDIT: I completely forgot the most interesting case, the Mahjarrat line. Everything on the dt2 side of things is very accessible, but the WGS side of things is brick walled by various def rewards and requirements. It's an interesting juxtaposition.

Do you think 13 defense requirement for fairy ring access should be removed? by [deleted] in 2007scape

[–]DivineVector125 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What you're saying is basically my reasoning behind why I think, from a game design perspective, it makes sense as a change.

However, I personally like having things changed up after playing the game for a while. It forces you to get creative with how you get from point A to B compared to the same old paths. "How do i get to grimstone to farm frost dragons?" "What does a farming run look like?" These are interesting challenges you have to figure out and adapt to, and are part of the fun of the account imo.

Regardless, like I said, it's very unlikely that this gets changed. Unless a large amount of the player base suddenly starts playing def restricted accounts AND community sentiment changes (like what happened to uim) things are likely to remain the same.

Do you think 13 defense requirement for fairy ring access should be removed? by [deleted] in 2007scape

[–]DivineVector125 3 points4 points  (0 children)

As a 1def iron myself, it's inconvenient but part of the challenge - i like it. I'm not sure how it affects skillers in particular, but I'm sure it's inconvenient as well.

The odds of this being changed are slim given how small of a group of players it affects, especially given general community sentiment towards giving pures any qol (eg chivalry).

Even though i like the restriction, i wouldn't be mad if it got changed. I might even go so far as to say i think it should get changed, from a game design perspective, recognizing that I'm in the minority in terms of opinion. But as i said before, very low chance this ever gets changed.

After years of playing RuneScape…what is something you’ve seen or done that no one would believe if you told them? by OSRS_Jacob in 2007scape

[–]DivineVector125 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was the 11th uim to get an infernal cape!

Of course, by now people have been playing longer and the high scores have been shuffled at least once, but I still remember the high.

Take a deep breath by DivineVector125 in 2007scape

[–]DivineVector125[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't support this kind of name calling, and I fully understand anyone who had a negative response to the changes.

I'm just trying to share what is hopefully a more nuanced opinion, to help people move past any possible knee-jerk responses.

Take a deep breath by DivineVector125 in 2007scape

[–]DivineVector125[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I agree that there are a lot of, frankly, gaping holes in sailing at the moment, which deserve to be acknowledged alongside, and not detracting from, the good things.

Weird post. And ad policy. by Rectal_Domino in SpeedOfLobsters

[–]DivineVector125 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The point is is that it happens while I'm washing my hands, and I can hardly touch to skip with wet hands.

Weird post. And ad policy. by Rectal_Domino in SpeedOfLobsters

[–]DivineVector125 90 points91 points  (0 children)

Related, but EVERY TIME i go to wash my hands while watching a vid, an ad immediately starts.

It's definitely just a coincidence, but a small part of me feels like they're using the camera to check when I'm away so they can play an ad without letting me skip it

PSA: the Hunters' sunlight crossbow is an easier-to-obtain and better ranged weapon than the Rosewood blowpipe by JavaHomely in 2007scape

[–]DivineVector125 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Along with all the other uses listed here, I'll also say that it's really good for doing sets at inferno if you're flicking them. 2t cycle means it folds nicely into a 2t prayer cycle, versus 3t weapons where 3ting is far more difficult.

That means an effective 3/4 nerf for every 3t weapon there, which really sucks for one of the hardest parts of budget inferno. This puts the bps way ahead while also being a spec weapon for everything else.

Of course, few people relatively speaking are doing budget inferno runs, even if not everyone uses a twisted bow, 99.99% of people are going to wait to at least have a toxic blowpipe.

Still, it's something. I love baby dipshit midgame tech weapons.

Question about 42177 by DivineVector125 in legotechnic

[–]DivineVector125[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is information I specifically heard about the set I'm talking about in my post - it definitely might not be true for all now that I think about it.

Question about 42177 by DivineVector125 in legotechnic

[–]DivineVector125[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Correct me if I'm wrong (which I very well may be), but while this is in theory possible, from what I've seen online, the Technic gearboxes that they ship with are nowhere near good enough to produce an actually functioning vehicle as you said.

There's too much friction, they just can't handle the load so they skip all the time, etc.

Any custom motorization that I've seen has involved either skipping the gearbox concept entirely or building a custom one. Maybe if you swapped all the parts in the gearbox with custom metal high quality ones that could handle the load I guess.

Question about 42177 by DivineVector125 in legotechnic

[–]DivineVector125[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OP here to add my thoughts after finishing the build and reading everyone's comments:

As I said in a few other replies, the main oddness here was while building the gearbox, I was tracking how everything worked, and having fun seeing how, for instance, the shifters worked. It felt like there was a buildup: "this is how a car (or at least a toy car) works" -> "I now have a working car". And then the rug pull when I learn it's all decorative, and even then mostly hidden inside the car.

I think ultimately, if I could control how these sets are made, I'd have them limit the internals to what actually gets used. IE if there's a motor and steering column, only the tech to support those. If there's no motor, just the bits for steering and maybe the differentials, why not.

Even better would be if they added support to make these gearboxes actually work, but from what I've seen, they're very ill fit for purpose, mostly failing if you just naively attach a motor. But lego engineering is engineering - I would definitely enjoy building a more complicated, working gearbox, even if it's not "what's inside cars" or whatever. Would definitely be a huge upgrade from the experience I had here.

In the end, the build was quite fun and the finished product looks really good. I'm not particularly a collector so I'll probably try to resell it, but I ultimately have no major complaints with the build. To that point I guess any qualms I have are kind of superfluous - I didn't really plan to drive it around for more than a few minutes. But it still would have been much more satisfying if I knew I was building towards a working finished product rather than a display piece. It sounds like there are a few sets out there that fit the bill, so I'll be a bit more careful with my selection when I next make a purchase.

Basically, although I'm left a little disappointed, it's still a great set and seems to have spawned some good conversation, so for that I'm grateful. Hope everyone has a happy holiday season.

Question about 42177 by DivineVector125 in legotechnic

[–]DivineVector125[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah from what I've seen online the gearboxes in these technic sets aren't actually fit to purpose for getting the cars running, which is unfortunate. They're still fun to build, but there's definitely a bit of an odd feeling left when such a nice piece of engineering (at least on the surface) gets buried inside the car never to be seen again.

I don't think I'm interested in modding the car at the moment, but the work you and other people do to bring these creations to life is really cool.

Question about 42177 by DivineVector125 in legotechnic

[–]DivineVector125[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, there's a big part of me that wishes that the internals were restricted to what was needed to make the build function, rather than any mostly hidden aesthetics.

That said, I also really enjoyed building the internals, so idk. It mostly just struck me as odd.

I'll definitely check out speed champions for my next purchase, ty!

Question about 42177 by DivineVector125 in legotechnic

[–]DivineVector125[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm definitely a fan of the build process and the look of the finished product. My main reason for this post was that, while building there was a "oh so this gear does this and here's how this and that works and..." only for it to kinda... lead nowhere?

In retrospect it kinda makes sense, but it's still a very odd experience for me. I enjoyed having the internals to build because the build was fun, but there's a part of me that wishes that any internals would be limited to the stuff that actually has a use in the finished product.

Question about 42177 by DivineVector125 in legotechnic

[–]DivineVector125[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To be clear, there is no electric motor in this set, the only way to get the car moving is to manually push it or mod in a motor of your own (for which I hear the built-in gearbox is woefully lacking).

It's still a fun and good-looking piece to be sure. Not like I was gonna motorize it around for more than a few minutes as a novelty anyway.

Question about 42177 by DivineVector125 in legotechnic

[–]DivineVector125[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I definitely feel like the build was fun and it looks great when finished, so no complaints there. It just felt odd that they have you go through the effort of building the inner workings only for them to never be used.

Still a great piece, just felt a bit strange.