Talk:Calculators

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Block distribution calculator is gone?[edit source]

It's now a red link. Is it a mistake or was it removed on purpose?121.8.98.42 00:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The block distribution graphs exist on individual pages, such as diamond ore. There just isn't a Calculator/Block distribution page yet, because that would require adding additional functionality to the calculator (like a drop down menu to select a block). - Harristic / Talk 21:14, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, just wanna say, that the devs of this wiki should add that. Jackthecool291 (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Block gradient tool[edit source]

Would it be possible to integrate this block gradient calculator tool to the wiki?

demo - https://html-preview.github.io/?url=https://github.com/malachyfernandez/MinecraftGradient/blob/main/index.html

repo - https://github.com/malachyfernandez/MinecraftGradient -BrianGLHF (talk) 17:40, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This seems a little outside of the Wiki's scope. Other tools in the list of calculators are based on objective game data, whereas this gradient tool, while it's likely useful, is less grounded in actual game mechanics. The wiki is designed to document information, and these tools make it easier to calculate mechanical information when a tool for that is more convenient than listing all the values in the page. I wouldn't be upset if other tools like this were included, but that doesn't seem like the wiki's priority SprouSprou (talk) 04:44, 25 October 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I’m not aware of the scope you refer to. The calculator project page states "This project aims to explore how interactive tools and calculators might benefit reader experience." The wiki about page states "This wiki is a publicly accessible and editable website for gathering useful information related to the Minecraft franchise." Building is a mechanic of the game and gradient design is super popular with builders. A gradient calculator could drive visitors to the wiki. Plus, it’s really not that different to the useful visual calculators we already have for dyeable items, banners and beacons. -BrianGLHF (talk) 03:43, 26 October 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It doesn't align with the other calculators that are 100% grounded in objective game mechanics, although in retrospect the wiki does include some tutorials for builds and some pages on other notable user generated content, such as specific minigames
If it were to be added, however, I think it belongs under a new category to separate it from the more information based calculators. Perhaps a "building tools" category? SprouSprou (talk) 05:25, 27 October 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Armor Trims calculator[edit source]

Adding an armor trim calculator would definitely be a great addition to the wiki.

This could be similar to https://armortrims.com/ however this doesn't show if the armor is enchanted or not. Ayaan 16:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redstone simulator[edit source]

Probably the most ambitious idea, a redstone simulator could be useful to demonstrate working circuits on dedicated wiki articles, among other things. Some of the existing online solutions, such as Mordritch’s, are rather limited. We already have the block structure renderer, the next step would be doing a simulation engine. Would WebAssembly be of any benefit here? BabylonAS 18:51, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I like this idea. Not sure about performance though... -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  00:56, 1 March 2025 (UTC)Reply[reply]

a stack calculator[edit source]

sometimes i (and most likely others aswell) have sometimes trouble when a tutorial or some sort says u need like for example 7436 redstone dust and doesnt list out how many it is in stacks TheluckyguyNL (talk) 12:11, 31 March 2025 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shouldn't this be in MCW namespace?[edit source]

Title. Mainspace content is supposed to be for Minecraft-related things. Outrowed (talk) 07:30, 1 April 2025 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Already discussed and rejected. BabylonAS 07:33, 1 April 2025 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh okay. Thanks for pointing it out. It is a bit odd at first, but I don't think it is too problematic. Outrowed (talk) 07:36, 1 April 2025 (UTC)Reply[reply]