Items stackable by 100 ?

What stack_max would you prefer ?

99 (current)
8
18%
100 (for easier calculation)
31
69%
< 99
3
7%
> 100
3
7%
 
Total votes : 45

User avatar
Gael de Sailly
Member
 
Posts: 741
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 17:01
Location: Lyon, France
GitHub: Gael-de-Sailly
IRC: Gael-de-Sailly
In-game: Gael-de-Sailly Ginkgoo

Items stackable by 100 ?

by Gael de Sailly » Thu Mar 12, 2015 19:22

The default max stack for items is 99. But mods can exceed this value.
Why do not turn it to 100 ? It changes nearly nothing in gameplay, but so items are easier to count.

Since mods can exceed 99, I guess it's not a 2-digit limitation.

489 leaves in the 2 lines !
Image

Yes, it's a low-priority change, but, why not ?
Last edited by Gael de Sailly on Fri Jul 08, 2016 20:36, edited 1 time in total.
Just realize how bored we would be if the world was perfect.
 

User avatar
firefox
Member
 
Posts: 1542
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 07:34
Location: Xanadu
In-game: Red_Fox
 

User avatar
rubenwardy
Moderator
 
Posts: 6012
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 18:11
Location: United Kingdom
GitHub: rubenwardy
IRC: rubenwardy
In-game: rubenwardy
 

User avatar
Calinou
Moderator
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 14:26
Location: Troyes, France
GitHub: Calinou
IRC: Calinou
In-game: Calinou

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by Calinou » Thu Mar 12, 2015 20:21

I agree, it should be 100 by default.
 

User avatar
bdjnk
Member
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 21:03
Location: New York
GitHub: bdjnk

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by bdjnk » Thu Mar 12, 2015 22:17

Maybe it should be a highly composite number instead. I mean, I like 100 as much as the next fellow whose native base is 10, but it's divisibility is only slightly better than 99.
 

User avatar
Don
Member
 
Posts: 1643
Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 18:40
GitHub: DonBatman
IRC: Batman
In-game: Batman

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by Don » Thu Mar 12, 2015 22:48

I like the 100 idea
Many of my mods are now a part of Minetest-mods. A place where you know they are maintained!

A list of my mods can be found here
 

User avatar
12Me21
Member
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 00:36
Location: (Ignore all of my posts before 2018)
GitHub: 12Me21

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by 12Me21 » Thu Mar 12, 2015 23:48

should be 96.

96 is evenly divisible by 12 numbers:
1,2,3,4,6,8,12,16,24,32,48,96

99 is only divisible by 6:
1,3,9,11,33,99

and 100 is divisible by 9 numbers:
1,2,4,5,10,20,25,50,100


Another option would be 120, with 16 factors. HOWEVER, none of these numbers (except 99) are divisible by 9 (iron, mese, and other metal and crystal blocks, are crafted from 9 of the item.) If you're OK with having much larger item stacks, 360 is probably the best, since it is divisible by:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 ,12, 15, 18, 20, 24, 30, 36, 40, 45, 60, 72, 60, 120, and 180.

But yes, I do agree that stacks of 100 are SO much easier to count. but maybe it would be better if you could fit an unlimited amount of items in a stack, or, at least, an absurdly high number, like 65535 or 99999 or something.
Last edited by 12Me21 on Fri Mar 13, 2015 00:11, edited 1 time in total.
 

User avatar
12Me21
Member
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 00:36
Location: (Ignore all of my posts before 2018)
GitHub: 12Me21

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by 12Me21 » Fri Mar 13, 2015 00:06

bdjnk wrote:Maybe it should be a highly composite number instead. I mean, I like 100 as much as the next fellow whose native base is 10, but it's divisibility is only slightly better than 99.


wow, I actually was looking at that page before I saw your post
 

User avatar
Casimir
Member
 
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 16:59
GitHub: CasimirKaPazi

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by Casimir » Fri Mar 13, 2015 12:29

1, 2, 6, 12, 60, 420, 2520 . . .
Those numbers are divisible by all whole numbers without gap. e.g. 60 is divisible by 1,2,3,4,5,6. But that might not be the best for Minetest. If you want it to go up to 9 - because of the nine fields in the craft grid - you would need a stack of 2520.
 

User avatar
12Me21
Member
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 00:36
Location: (Ignore all of my posts before 2018)
GitHub: 12Me21

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by 12Me21 » Fri Mar 13, 2015 12:38

Casimir wrote:1, 2, 6, 12, 60, 420, 2520 . . .
Those numbers are divisible by all whole numbers without gap. e.g. 60 is divisible by 1,2,3,4,5,6. But that might not be the best for Minetest. If you want it to go up to 9 - because of the nine fields in the craft grid - you would need a stack of 2520.


You don't need it to be divisible by ALL numbers, the important ones are:
2
3
4
6 (2 rows of crafting grid)
8 (all spaces except middle)
and 9 (all spaces filled)

Also, there are more important things than having lots of divisors.
For example:
64 can be divided by 2 six times, before it gets to 1:
64
32
16
8
4
2
1

but 2520 can only be split in half 3 times.
2520
1260
630
315
and then... 157.5

The best numbers are powers of 2, and highly composite numbers.
 

User avatar
Gael de Sailly
Member
 
Posts: 741
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 17:01
Location: Lyon, France
GitHub: Gael-de-Sailly
IRC: Gael-de-Sailly
In-game: Gael-de-Sailly Ginkgoo

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by Gael de Sailly » Fri Mar 13, 2015 17:12

For me, divisibility isn't the question : I fully agree that 100 is not the best about divisibility.

12Me21 wrote:You don't need it to be divisible by ALL numbers, the important ones are:
2
3
4
6 (2 rows of crafting grid)
8 (all spaces except middle)
and 9 (all spaces filled)

72 is the simpler number that matches these conditions.
Or why not 144 ?

That's why the base should be 6 or 12 (12×12=144), but base 10 is so established in our society that it would be impossible to change (Duodecimal system).
Casimir wrote:(…) stack of 2520

Stay reasonable ! It's a good idea to make it divisible by 1~10 but think about gameplay ! It's completely foolish to stack 2520 items in your pocket ! And after someone will enev say : "It's not divisible by 11 ???".
Don't go too far !

Really I think that the best is 100. Count the items in the first and in the second line of the picture in the first post. Which one is the more handy ?
bdjnk wrote:it's divisibility is only slightly better than 99.

I don't expect a major gameplay change. I only want to simplify items counting.
Just realize how bored we would be if the world was perfect.
 

User avatar
philipbenr
Member
 
Posts: 1688
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 01:56
Location: United States
GitHub: philipbenr
IRC: philipbenr
In-game: robinspi

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by philipbenr » Sat Mar 14, 2015 16:54

+2 to 100
+1 to 144
-1 to 64

I think that the larger numbers are better. I always get annoyed whenever I fill up my inventory while playing survival, and it would be even worse with 64. I think that 100 sounds like the best even number, and 144 for divisibility.
 

User avatar
12Me21
Member
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 00:36
Location: (Ignore all of my posts before 2018)
GitHub: 12Me21

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by 12Me21 » Sat Mar 14, 2015 17:03

Now that I think about it, 100 is the best. When are you going to have EXACTLY one stack of an item? that's the only time divisibility matters. Plus, it's so hard to craft a lot of an item, since you can't hold shift and right click to spread them evenly.
 

User avatar
Casimir
Member
 
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 16:59
GitHub: CasimirKaPazi

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by Casimir » Sat Mar 14, 2015 17:58

With 2520 I just was joking. For Voxelgarden I decided on a stack of 90, which is divisible by 2 (right click), 10 (middle click) and 9 (craft grid), also it is not to small and not to big. You can very easily split up the stack of 90 into ten items each for the crafting slots.
 

User avatar
Krock
Developer
 
Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 07:48
Location: Switzerland
GitHub: SmallJoker

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by Krock » Sat Mar 14, 2015 18:16

90 is acceptable.
I know, realism it not a theme in Minetest but still, stacks with > 100 items just decrease the use of chests.
IMO, players should plan space for their stuff.
Look, I programmed a bug for you. >> Mod Search Engine << - Mods by Krock - DuckDuckGo mod search bang: !mtmod <keyword here>
 

User avatar
Brane praefect
New member
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 01:23

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by Brane praefect » Sun Mar 15, 2015 00:53

--this post was irrelevant to the subject... edited
Last edited by Brane praefect on Sun Mar 15, 2015 19:55, edited 1 time in total.
 

User avatar
12Me21
Member
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 00:36
Location: (Ignore all of my posts before 2018)
GitHub: 12Me21

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by 12Me21 » Sun Mar 15, 2015 01:12

Krock wrote:I know, realism it not a theme in Minetest but still, stacks with > 100 items just decrease the use of chests.

if you have > 41 types of items, you can't fit them in your inventory no matter how large the stack size is. for example, on a mining trip, you might have:
a pick and shovel -2
some ores: iron, copper, diamond, mese, coal -6
torches - 8
wood - 9
food - 10
cobble - 13

That's fine, but what about on servers like moontest, where you have to have a spacesuit, and usually carry a UFO?
And if there are mobs on your server, and you need a sword? There goes another slot...
What about birthstones! That's at lease 11 more spaces filled up! (opal ore doesn't generate)
Now you're using 27, which only leaves 14 spaces left.
Then maybe you carry a travelnet box, and elevator, and a bunch of other crap*! Sooner of later, you're gonna find yourself having to use the crafting grid!
[color=#FFFFBFd]mesecons

even with INFINITE stacks, the inventory fills up quite quickly. I'm not against having a practically infinite stack size, that way you can both count items easily, and store lots of stuff, too.
I think, Minetest is more about building and exploring than surviving; that's why you don't lose items when you die, and there's no hunger system.
 

User avatar
Gael de Sailly
Member
 
Posts: 741
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 17:01
Location: Lyon, France
GitHub: Gael-de-Sailly
IRC: Gael-de-Sailly
In-game: Gael-de-Sailly Ginkgoo

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by Gael de Sailly » Sun Mar 15, 2015 14:34

12Me21 wrote:the inventory fills up quite quickly

I fully agree but it takes part to the survival mode. We must put away numerous things. And, as you say, the problem is not the stack size. My aim is not to extend max stack, else it would be ridiculous to turn 99 to 100. Simply it's simpler to count.

For stacks of 99 :
14 stacks + 62... yes it's around 1462, but if you want want the precise number, it's 1400 + 62 - 14, which is... 1448, after severals seconds, or even minutes (we aren't all living calculators).

For stacks of 100 :
14 stacks + 62 ---> 1462. Pretty simple, isn't it ?
Just realize how bored we would be if the world was perfect.
 

User avatar
12Me21
Member
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 00:36
Location: (Ignore all of my posts before 2018)
GitHub: 12Me21

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by 12Me21 » Sun Mar 15, 2015 16:24

Gael de Sailly wrote:
12Me21 wrote:the inventory fills up quite quickly

I fully agree but it takes part to the survival mode. We must put away numerous things. And, as you say, the problem is not the stack size. My aim is not to extend max stack, else it would be ridiculous to turn 99 to 100. Simply it's simpler to count.

For stacks of 99 :
14 stacks + 62... yes it's around 1462, but if you want want the precise number, it's 1400 + 62 - 14, which is... 1448, after severals seconds, or even minutes (we aren't all living calculators).

For stacks of 100 :
14 stacks + 62 ---> 1462. Pretty simple, isn't it ?


I agree, 100 is probably the best. However, I would like to see some new types of chests that can hold more items, since we don't have double chests like in Minecraft. I'm not saying we should add double chests, though. (that's a bad idea, since then you can't place more than 2 normal chests next to each other)
 

User avatar
Don
Member
 
Posts: 1643
Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 18:40
GitHub: DonBatman
IRC: Batman
In-game: Batman

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by Don » Sun Mar 15, 2015 18:06

12Me21 wrote:
Gael de Sailly wrote:
12Me21 wrote:the inventory fills up quite quickly

I fully agree but it takes part to the survival mode. We must put away numerous things. And, as you say, the problem is not the stack size. My aim is not to extend max stack, else it would be ridiculous to turn 99 to 100. Simply it's simpler to count.

For stacks of 99 :
14 stacks + 62... yes it's around 1462, but if you want want the precise number, it's 1400 + 62 - 14, which is... 1448, after severals seconds, or even minutes (we aren't all living calculators).

For stacks of 100 :
14 stacks + 62 ---> 1462. Pretty simple, isn't it ?


I agree, 100 is probably the best. However, I would like to see some new types of chests that can hold more items, since we don't have double chests like in Minecraft. I'm not saying we should add double chests, though. (that's a bad idea, since then you can't place more than 2 normal chests next to each other)

There are a few mod that give bigger chests. More chests is one.
Many of my mods are now a part of Minetest-mods. A place where you know they are maintained!

A list of my mods can be found here
 

ABJ
Member
 
Posts: 3015
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 13:02
Location: In Earth orbit, with a perigee of 1048 km and an apogee of 1337 km and an inclination of 69 degrees.
GitHub: ABJ-MV
In-game: ABJ

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by ABJ » Sat Apr 04, 2015 12:52

Thats a good idea. 99 is a nice number but it makes the stack seem so "incomplete". And the obvious reason that 100 is easier to count.
 

prestidigitator
Member
 
Posts: 640
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 23:54

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by prestidigitator » Sat Apr 04, 2015 18:27

Hmm. I guess my vote would be for 128, because binary. :-P
 

User avatar
Linuxdirk
Member
 
Posts: 2423
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:21
Location: Germany
In-game: Linuxdirk

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by Linuxdirk » Sat Apr 04, 2015 19:19

Why was it 99 and not 100 in the first place? Accidentally used … < 100 instead of … <= 100 and decided to leave it that way?
 

User avatar
12Me21
Member
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 00:36
Location: (Ignore all of my posts before 2018)
GitHub: 12Me21

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by 12Me21 » Mon Apr 06, 2015 12:40

Linuxdirk wrote:Why was it 99 and not 100 in the first place? Accidentally used … < 100 instead of … <= 100 and decided to leave it that way?


Most likely, there was little thought put into it, and it was just used because it was the highest 2 digit number in decimal.
 

ABJ
Member
 
Posts: 3015
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 13:02
Location: In Earth orbit, with a perigee of 1048 km and an apogee of 1337 km and an inclination of 69 degrees.
GitHub: ABJ-MV
In-game: ABJ

Re: Items stackable by 100 ?

by ABJ » Tue Apr 07, 2015 13:02

That said, on some servers, the maximum amount of players that servers can accomodate is displayed as "99+"
Maybe it's because 99 is a multiple of the number of which the 55 in Celeron55 is the fifth multiple of :D
No offence intended
 

Next

Return to Feature Discussion



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests