New growlamps needed

[paramat]

Non-cubic mese growlamps have been requested so that meselamp doesn't have to be used when growing stuff underground. I'm thinking a simple ground-only mese torch or narrow lamp (a simple nodebox). The recipe can be generous to compensate for now needing mese lights to grow saplings underground. I'm happy to work on this and keen to partially address the complaints about not being able to grow saplings in darkness, i would like to make mese growlamps easier to acquire.

[rubenwardy]

I suggest giving meselamps a node box to make them look nicer

I also suggest renaming them to sun lamps to make their use more obvious

[C1ffisme]

Rather than another mese-related lamp, I would prefer something more original. Save mese torches for mesecons.

Although, I don't want it to be an early game item, as I pointed out in #1476. Making it mid-to-late game means that vertical transportation or mobile inventories have more value in the game.

[Desour]

maybe make the lamp slowly consume mese as fuel to make it the use of it more temporary or mese and normal fuel to keep the mese molten

or make a magnifier but this would be hard i think...

[paramat]

Rubenwardy, we need a full-cube lamp to build with, and it is being used as a full cube already, so we can't change it, but we can add something new. Renaming causes disruption and needs aliases.

C1ffisme, apart from torches, fire and lava, which should not be able to grow plants, there is nothing else to use as a bright light source, mese is ideal.

[paramat]

Just saw that meselamps require 3 mese crystals, that's 3 mese ore nodes, too much, will change to 1 mese crystal per lamp.

[sofar]

How about a lantern that's made with e.g. sticks/wood, a torch, maybe a metal bar, some glass panes? The model should be a bit more complex so the textures don't look too dumb (can you specify multiple tiles for nodebox nodes?).

That should be a nice luxury node that looks good, needs a bit more material and crafting.

- s -
p t p
- w -

s - steel ingot p - glass pane t - torch w - wood plank

I'd make a nice .obj file for something like this:

----------------
----------------
-------BB-------
-BBBBBBBBBBBBBB-
--p.....ss...p--
--p....ss....p--
--p...XXXX...p--
--p...XXXX...p--
--BBBBBBBBBBBB--
------SSSS------
------SSSS------
------SSSS------
------SSSS------
------SSSS------
------SSSS------

anyway, just throwing out an idea. Maybe this is too complex for mtg.

[paramat]

I was thinking of something similar, but simpler, and mese powered for this issue. Mese because this is specifically a light for growing plants (level 14), so cannot be torch-based. Yes i'm fairly sure a nodebox node can accept differing textures for top, side, base etc.

[Fixer-007]

I suggest giving meselamps a node box to make them look nicer

or crappier underwater ;)

[Desour]

such a lantern would spray the light in every direction, so even through the top and the floor of the lantern where is inside the light source:

so i would suggest a lamp which has a dome out of glass:

[C1ffisme]

@DS-Minetest So, like, a lightbulb? Makes sense to make it out of mese, I guess.

[Zeno-]

There would have to be a migration script (or code) that converts all existing torches to these torches if this is a suggested solution to growing and farming underground.

Hopefully if this is done, that the torch can look at least somewhat organic.

Also, is mese really common enough for a miner to quickly make 99 of these torches every 10-30 minutes?

[NathanSalapat]

Why would a miner need to make that many of these torches, they can still use the normal torches for lighting their caves.

[Zeno-]

Why would a miner need to make that many of these torches, they can still use the normal torches for lighting their caves.

When you're -10000 deep in a mine and have no way to get to the surface and back down (e.g. on a server without teleport) you need to grow forests so that you have a wood supply for more torches, ladders, more saplings, etc. It's not uncommon to need to grow a large forest at regular intervals in the deep world mines

[NathanSalapat]

99 torches that often seems like an awful lot of forests to be growing underground, but I guess everybody has their own playing styles.

[Zeno-]

Yeah it is a lot for one person. But in a team of say 6 on a server it's not that many

[paramat]

There would have to be a migration script (or code) that converts all existing torches

That's not possible, we can't replace normal torches, and those are still needed for a low-cost method of lighting made from ores accessible at the surface..

Even with 1 mese crystal per lamp, the change the PR makes, meselamps and mese lights will be more difficult to acquire than torches, but i feel it should be that way as growing something in darkness needs to come at a higher price than a single torch.

Also, is mese really common enough for a miner to quickly make 99 of these torches every 10-30 minutes?

That would be unacceptably easy.

Those who are complaining are used to the ridiculous situation of growing saplings in darkness, and just have to get used to putting a little more work in. Plus, saplings requiring meselamps happened over a year ago so many players are already getting used to the new situation. My PR will make meselights at least 3 times easier to craft, so i am actually making underground farming easier.

Once a sapling grows a mese light can then be moved to the next sapling and replaced by a torch, so we don't need 1 mese light per tree.

[Zeno-]

That's not possible, we can't replace normal torches, and those are still needed for a low-cost method of lighting made from ores accessible at the surface..

Of course it's possible. I think you missed the word "existing". I.e. replace all the existing torches (those currently in the database) with the mese lamps so that everything doesn't break. Then after that people can use normal torches as per normal.

Have you ever played a game where you mine very deep? Growing trees one at a time is not a viable option in my opinion.

Breaking all existing worlds is not an option (but I see you may have already done that with a previous commit).

[Zeno-]

Plus, saplings requiring meselamps happened over a year ago so many players are already getting used to the new situation.

That should not have been merged. I think that because most devs are prohibited from contributing to minetest_game that it got merged due to oversight. If the PR that did that was more widely reviewed it would have been met with strong opposition. It might be the reason why no current servers seem to be boycotting the _game updates (but that's just conjecture on my part, I don't know the real reason).

Every single server I have visited in the last 2 days has underground forests or farms with normal torches. It is (was?) a big, big part of the game.

[paramat]

Changing all existing torches to meselights will cause a revolution, it will extremely unpopular, we wouldn't dare try it. Growing trees underground will not be as hard as you think, especially once i make meselamps 3 times easier to craft.

Breaking all existing worlds is not an option.

No worlds are broken, as i have said many times torches were never bright enough to grow plants, sapling requiring meselamps happened a year ago.

I think that because most devs are prohibited from contributing to minetest_game that it got merged due to oversight

See https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/4873#issuecomment-269340876 i even opened an issue asking if it was reasonable. Eventually 3 weeks later 2 people complained so we made the 'can grow' function global, a simple mod can override it for those who want the old behaviour. Now see IRC logs, even hmmmm realised there was little opposition and the change had support, so he said "if it was popular then so be it".

It might be the reason why [no] current servers seem to be boycotting the _game updates

I assume you mean they are boycotting everything in MTGame since Oct 2015? I doubt they are, they can simply override the function.

I accept it was unpopular with some, but it was a bug that people got used to, and totally unreasonable to grow saplings in darkness when all other plants have always required something brighter than torchlight. Those who want the old behaviour can use a mod to override the function, or can add level 14 torches.

[Zeno-]

No worlds are broken, as i have said many times torches were never bright enough to grow plants, sapling requiring meselamps happened a year ago.

That is NOT true. If they were never able to grow plants how come everybody was able to do it with... torches?

[paramat]

Check the code yourself. They must have been using mod torches.

[Zeno-]

oops, sorry paramat. I edited your comment by mistake. The reply is mine. Your text is unmodified. Change it back if you like and I will respond properly

[paramat]

Before Oct 2015 saplings grew in darkness, yes, but all other crops, flowers, and grass needed 13 at the node (so a neighbouring light of 14) to grow, and have always done.

[paramat]

So back then, if saplings needed light to grow, they would have been given the same requirement as other plants, 13 (light source 14).

[Desour]

torches were able to grow default:dirt to default:dirt_with_grass

[paramat]

In which version? could you link the code? Growing grass on dirt isn't very critical though.

[paramat]

Note that a lack of a lighting check is different, it is not a positive action that chooses a necessary light level, a few things (saplings, cactus, papyrus) lacked light checks simply through neglect, laziness or just not thinking about it yet, grass may have been the same.

[Desour]

i dont remember in which versions it was but im sure it took light to grow, a torch gave enough

[paramat]

More generous meselamp recipe #1481

[Zeno-]

Note that a lack of a lighting check is different, it is not a positive action that chooses a necessary light level, a few things (saplings, cactus, papyrus) lacked light checks simply through neglect, laziness or just not thinking about it yet, grass may have been the same.

And 13 for can_grow was chosen because.... ?? There doesn't appear to be a reason.

[Desour]

@Zeno- 13 was chosen because the plants should need sunlight, but the sunlight doesn't differ from other light. Sunlight is 14 and in a node next to a node with 14 is light level 13.

[Zeno-]

@DS-Minetest Ok I guess what I meant is, who decided that saplings need that much light to grow? I mean minetest has been out for, what, over 6 years(?) and all throughout that time until the patch a year ago plants were able to grow without that much light. I think that something that has been part of the game for so long needs a bit more attention than someone just deciding that they need 13 light to grow.

Edit: Fortunately sofar has suggested a much, much, much better solution

[paramat]

I mean minetest has been out for, what, over 6 years(?) and all throughout that time until the patch a year ago plants were able to grow without that much light. I think that something that has been part of the game for so long [...]

Not true. I've explained this to you multiple times already:

Throughout Minetest history plants have either required more light than a torch, or, have been missing lighting checks (saplings, cactus, papyrus) very probably due to MTGame neglect rather than a decision to allow plant growth in darkness. The fact that some plants required more than a torch suggests this was the general intention for all plants.

Growing plants with a torch is the unusual and uncharacteristic behaviour, you are stating completely the opposite.

[Zeno-]

paramat, I recall you once insisting that you would not fix floating blocks of land in the mapgen because they added to the charm and character of minetest. Other than being silly and floating they served no useful purpose. And yet here you are twisting words and saying that saplings have never been able to grow underground. Underground forests and farms add significantly to the "charm and character" of minetest and they have a useful function. And yet you insist on basically destroying them and adding a hack to make them possible again. You're an eco-terrorist I think :p

[sofar]

I'm still in favor for a compromise: use longer nodetimers to grow any crop in low light conditions. Set the minimum at ~ 10, and scale the timer length so that at 14, it's 1.0x, at 13 it's 1.5x, at 12 it's 2.0x, at 11 it's 2.5x and at 10, it's 3.0x.

These numbers are just an idea. 3x slower farming wouldn't be so bad for saplings (6 days for most trees to grow) at all, considering you need little resources and only create a large space for them).

This will unlock new and interesting underground uses while still encouraging players to farm in sunlight for efficiency.

[Desour]

at 14, it's 1.0x

It would never reach 14 as long as it isn't a light source.

I would prefer an exponential increase of time per light level. Yes, linear would come in mind since the light level brightness is linear now, too. But we could say that plants grow with exponential speed depending on light.

[sofar]

The numbers are just an idea. Exponential is possible as well, but 6 days for a sapling is already really really long IMHO, and with an exponential curve it would likely be much more.

[paramat]

And yet here you are twisting words and saying that saplings have never been able to grow underground

I have never said that. I'll say it for the 5-6th time: saplings could be grown in darkness because they had no light check.

Underground forests and farms add significantly to the "charm and character" of minetest and they have a useful function. And yet you insist on basically destroying them

Again, for the 5-6th time i'll say it: saplings requiring meselamps was done over a year ago. Nothing i am doing currently makes underground farming impossible. This issue is about making underground farming less ugly in response to requests and complaints and i have just made meselamp recipes more generous. I am making underground farming easier.

If you don't believe me check the code and commits yourself.

Zeno you are a talented and intelligent person, so why are you consistently misunderstanding or ignoring my multiple explanations? It's out of character and somewhat concerning. You are also giving the impression of having an obsessive and irrational problem with me, the last 2 weeks have been non-stop attacks.

[Zeno-]

@paramat This is your comment, and there are similar ones in other places:

[...] torches were never bright enough to grow plants

Whether or not that was because of an omission in the code or whatever, it's NOT true. You are twisting words and history to your advantage. The ability to grow plants underground was possible. And many people relied on this "feature" (I don't care if the feature was due to a bug or an omission of a check... it became a feature)

In one breath you're saying it was never possible and in the other you're saying it became impossible 1 year ago because you made a change. Now, which is correct and who is misunderstanding things?

[rubenwardy]

It seems by "plants" he means farming and flowers, not trees

[paramat]

torches were never bright enough to grow plants

This can be misunderstood i admit, and i'm sorry for the sloppy language, i did mean saplings too here.

What i mean here is 'there was never a plant lighting check that was satisfied by torches'. The lack of a lighting check does not mean 'torches were bright enough for saplings' because there wasn't a positive choice of torches being bright enough, it was just neglect. Had saplings, cactus and papyrus had lighting checks they would have been given the same requirement as other plants, 13.

[paramat]

sofar i feel that's complex and not what is asked for. Those like zeno, hmmmm and others want to be able to grow plants by torchlight and have them grow just as fast. It would also make plants growable in torchlight which has never been allowed in MTG before for good reason. So i suggest we add a setting to MTG 'required plant growth light level' set to 13 by default.

[sfan5]

So i suggest we add a setting to MTG 'required plant growth light level' set to 13 by default.

No :-1: Putting quite important game elements into some settings is just lazy engineering and doesn't solve the problem at all.

[rubenwardy]

It's possible for mods to change it: https://github.com/rubenwardy/torches_grow_saplings

[paramat]

Yeah the can grow function is overridable, we did that on request in response to the few people who complained. Players can also define a brighter torch if they want.

Sfan5 that's fine by me, i don't think we need a setting. A small number of people are making a big fuss over this but it's not a big issue and doesn't need a complex compromise as sofar suggests.

[Desour]

Needing for every plant one lamp could be really annoying. => Using @sofar's suggestion (to let it grow more slowly with less light) not fully but only for 2 or 3 different light levels (13-12) could be useful so that you don't need so many lamps for the plants, especially for many small plants like farming stuff (one lamp per one big tree would be ok).

[paramat]

Needing for every plant one lamp could be really annoying.

That's the way it's always been, apart from the plants with missing light checks.

[paramat]

sofar i don't feel we need a compromise as default, since this goes against how MTG has always been in requiring more than a torch. The compromise is better done as a setting, which is also much simpler. Surely you find growing with a crude cheap torch too easy and very unrealistic?

This is mostly a lot of fuss made by one person who has consistently misunderstood. There are a few others too but it's not a lot of people. Remember a year ago when the change was made only 2 people complained 3 weeks after the commit. VanessaE and hmmmm have too but like Zeno they are not MTGame devs so they count as players.

[Zeno-]

@paramat Stop insisting that minetest has always required more than a torch. You're still twisting words. Hmmmm found proof in the source code last night that the design, before you changed it, was intentional.

18:58   hmmmm   https://github.com/minetest/minetest/bl​ob/stable-0.3/src/environment.cpp#L1095
18:58       there's 0.3
18:59       dunno how much farther back you want to go but
18:59       sorry paramat, you're just wrong here, it's not a bug

[tenplus1]

@paramat - It may be true that most players are not game devs, but they do have valid opinions and points to be made about the gameplay.