Talk:Tutorials/TNT cannons/Archive 1

This is an English Wiki So pls let it AMMUNITION not MUNITION

-Munition - Materials used in war, especially weapons and ammunition.

-Ammunition - A supply or quantity of bullets and shells.

-Those are two completely separate words and should not be interchanged.

?Maximum Delay Increases Distance?

When using TNT as the projectile, I've noticed it consistently travels further when the projectile TNT was activated the moment the booster detonates. Specifically a delay of 10 repeaters set to 4. Kmwillia 12:52, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

00:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC)00:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC)~

Yes, R4.10 is the maximum delay, And achieves the maximum Range for a cannon without changing anything else.

This article is obsolete
As of the latest updates it is not possible to make TNT Cannons (at least not like this). So should this article mark as obsolete? --The mr Zalli from Finland 22:16, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree, this page is rather outdated. It needs a rewrite. I don't agree, however, that cannons can't be made "like this" anymore (a variety of methods are covered here; most aren't my first choice, but whatevs), as they can indeed. [|Cactus Master] 02:50, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Wrong! each of these cannons work, i tried it myself!

76.27.210.111 21:57, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * That is very wrong. Many of these things are true, especially the part about mounting blocks and condensation. The example cannon is outdated as of 1.1, but still functions as a short range anti-infantry cannon. Edit: I do see your point though in terms of rewrite. Edit 2: Working on it!

ArkEneru 01:27, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

42.2.22.32 06:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The thing is that I've tried to make TNT cannons, and since a recent update, the TNT blocks seems to randomly shift left or right when primed each time, resulting in a very erratic firing range and location. Condensing the charge does help to improve the situation a bit, but the TNT cannon is too unreliable to work as anti-infantry. The cannon works all right, but it isn't as good as before. --

While this problem can be easily fixed by adding a guide block(s). You are right, TNT does shift a little, but not in a problematic way if you add guide blocks. If you add a guide, it can work as anti-infantry, or better.

ArkEneru 18:23, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

"I find no problem with current TNT tech, Just add guide blocks as explained. This can, may, and will interfere with some redstone, but i have always found workarounds. All this info is useful. I have made extremely effective anti-infantry cannons in my time, all recently. Granted, the TNT randomness is slightly annoying, but it can be useful to aid spread in wide-impact area cannons." -Creeper&#39;s Nemisis 20:30, 30 June 2012 (UTC)CreepersNemisis

Correct. In fact, TNT cannons today can do more damage than ever before. The workarounds that Creepers Nemisis mentioned are almost always easy to find. With just a minor tweak, the cannons under question can be firing accurately again. ArkEneru 15:31, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Cannon Range Equation
Ok, so before I give you the numbers, let me first explain how I went about this. I used my Ramses Cannon to test this (link provided so you can see the details of the platform). I tested range at elevations of .5 blocks, 1 block, and 1.5 blocks, as I considered these the practical range of elevations. I used charges from 1-7 tnt for each elevation. I recorded the distance for each shot from each pairing of elevation and charge size. I then took that data and using magic created the following equation. Do remember that it isn't perfect, as it assumes that your target is on the same plane as your cannon. I'm working on altering the equation to account for changes in this.

EQUATION f(x, w) = 13.0539 + cos(0.35123932 - x)/(32.091557 - 15.533575/cos(18.448326*w - x) - 47.684593*x) + 11.635796*w*cos(0.35123932 - x) - 3.8064015*x*cos(18.448326*w - x) - 12.089317*cos(18.448326*w - x) - 11.635796*x

STATISTICS:

r^2: 0.997904

Maximum error: 3.374008

Minimum error: 3.8147^-6

Reply: You have not indicated the repeater lengths, which is another varible. As someone has said up there, the delay length matters very much. ArkEneru 20:27, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

This is more for testing purposes than actual use in combat (my server's battles are too fast for such nonsense), as unless you've got an application built to do so (I made a quick C++ for it), plugging in the numbers is a bit tedious. I feel like a better equation could potentially be derived if more data is used, but I'm pressed for time. If someone would want to help me make a better equation, I suggest using the Ramses in a no-lag environment and measuring elevations of 0, 2, 2.5, and 3 with 1-7 tnt charges. I do, however, not see the point in ever actually equipping a cannon with elevations at the extremes; they are useful in only a handful of situations in battle (and can be accomplished by specialized equipment much easier). Please tell me what you think. My goal for the equation is to be included on the actual page after validation and such by all necessary parties. Thanks for reading.

How the acceleration of gravity (7.5M/S/S) is calculated??
The article referred that "TNT falls at a constant acceleration of 7.5 m/s/s, an important number for predicting the range and drop of the shot"

I have some questions about this. First, how the Measure of "meter" in this blocky game is defined? Dose the author means "blocks"?? Second, what is more important, I’ve developed a experiment to measure the acceleration of gravity in the game(which means I do not use any tools that out side the game) and I've got some statistics which indicate that the sand will get into a constant speed of 2blocks/tic when falls about 10 blocks away. But unfortunately, the experiment is not accurate enough to calculate the actual number of this acceleration.

I'm here to ask if anyone has a method to get the accurate number of the acceleration of gravit? If so, please contact me at peterdengjr@gmail.com –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Woshizhu99 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 13:43, 30 April 2012‎. Please sign your posts with


 * Your measurement is close; the actual acceleration and maximum speed are at Entity (pulled from decompiled source code). Looks like the 7.5 m/s/s figure was added by an anonymous user - I'll remove it, as it's quite wrong. -- Orthotope 04:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Names
I like ArkEneru's TNT page, it has some very useful information, but I need some help. I do not completely understand the naming process. It is very confusing. Can somebody please expand on ArkEneru's explanation for to me. That would be very helpful.

An example of two cannon names are ArkEneru's 119.3R4.10M6 Ares and 112.0MM3 Ironwall Anti-Infantry cannon.

CommanderLOL 20:22, 13 June 2012 (UTC)CommanderLOL

00:14, 14 June 2012 (UTC)ArkEneru Hey! Saw your comment, maybe this can help:

Charge= TNT used to fire a projectile Shot= said projectile, usually TNT Vertical row of TNT= Well, harder to explain. Say, in the example cannon, it has 1. If it had another row of TNT above that row, it would be 2, etc

119.3R4.10M6 Ares

119.3 = 1 row of vertical TNT (the same as the one button medium range cannon), 1 shot, 9 charge, 3 condensation charge. R4.10 = 10 repeaters each with the full setting of delay. M6 = The mounting block code is 6, which means fence post and pressure plate. Ares = Nickname

112.0MM3 Anti-Infantry Ironwall

112.0 = 1 vertical row of TNT, 1 shot, 2 charge, no condensation charge M = manual, no repeaters or other form of delay ( such as minecarts, dispensers (heh)) M3 = Mounting block code for Half block. Anti-Infantry = Descripition of use, not mandatory. Ironwall = Nickname

Hopes that helps! If it dosent, maybe you could post a Descripition of your cannon, and I could show you how to name it.

--Ark ArkEneru 20:27, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Ark

CommanderLOL 02:50, 14 June 2012 (UTC)CommanderLOL

Your welcome. So it helped? Glad to know. Just ask if you have any more questions.

ArkEneru 03:04, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

''"Um, just saying, this naming system is really confusing. I would propose a system much clearer, at least clearly separating the bits of data. For example, I would suggest instead a common name with info common folks want to know, like [# of TNT in shot][range estimate(s/m/l/x)][arc type(h/m/l/n)] [nickname], so a typical single shot 7 TNT cannon with a half-slab shotblock would be 1mm Basic. So you could say 'This cannon shoots 1 tnt medium range with a medium arc' Then there would be a technical name for those guys like us, which would be like [# charge tnt]:[# charge layers]:[# shot tnt]:[shot distance]:[spread(n/a/m/w/r)]:[arc type(h/m/l/f/f&p)] [nickname] [condensation system? (Focused)] or something, so that same cannon would be 7:1:1:104:n:m Basic. THis gets around the problem i find with the presented system: the numbers run together and confuse themselves. for example 234 could mean 23,4 or 2,34. I would explain a lot more but i have limited time at the moment. I plan on further reaserching and explaining a perhaps diferent system from the one i presented, that was off the top of my head. Input would help me =D"'' -Creeper&#39;s Nemisis 20:25, 30 June 2012 (UTC)CreepersNemisis

(Please read this all I'm not critizing you just explains a little. I've had problems with people not doing that in the past. Thanks!)

Thanks for the feedback, I was right about to get around to changing the system when you mentioned this. But the system you offered would not work. Some faults in it are:


 * The arc of a cannon is explained by the MB, and if it has an special component it will have a Mortar label right before the nickname.
 * The shot distance is explained by MB, charge/charge layers, and conden charge.
 * In Minecraft, there are two people (right now) that you can define in cannons: People who don't like cannons and people who like them enough to use the full name. So if there ever is a common folk, I think they would just call a cannon by it's nickname.
 * One minor thing, when building the cannon, the condensation charge is not something you can just decide to stick on as an after though. In your system, the conden charge is said right after the nickname, and it is just focused/not focused. The conden charge is a large part of a cannon and if say you were building one and forgot that there was a condensation charge, you would probably have to start over.

I have been working in a better naming system for a long time because of the probllems that you explained. Many times, it would be hard to tell where the numbers are separated. Such as in my longer range cannons, they have in the triple digits of charge, it gets very confusing. I am thinking of something more just moved around, such as

Instead of a 116.0R4.7MB3

Bum ba pa!!!! Preeeeesenting my suggestedddddddd naming system!

1R4.7M3-1/6.0

1 shot, 7 full repeaters, 3rd mounting block, 1 vertical layer of TNT, 6 charge, no conden charge. It separates each bit of info more, and it separates the shot info on one side and charge info on another.

This is just an example to you guys. I you do not like it, tell me. This is where the cannon experts decide the naming future for cannons. This one will probably become the standard in the next few days. If you do not like the first example and have something different to offer, I am open to suggestions. ArkEneru 16:16, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

''"I did say I was working on it =P The problem with that is that you have to memorize mounting block numbers. I completely disagree about the shot distance being explained by the Mounting Block. Delay, amount and distance of TNT, and ceiling blocks placed to shorten the shot range can help determine that. I put some more thought into it, and I realize that even the die-hard TNT engineers have limits, and long complex strings of numbers and letters don't help memorizing a cannon name. I came up with a simpler system:

''TNT Naming System

''A simple, clear naming system.

Damage Value: How effective it is. This is tricky, as there are always situations where some cannons are more effective than usual, E.G. a cannon might be good defense but terrible offense. However a few basics I have noticed are valuable for most cannons, and since this value is for most cannons, it is practically useless for rating specialized cannons One is range. Cannons are meant in general to hit a target with as much TNT as possible from the farthest distance possible. This can mean different things, as there are always trade-offs between these three things, which I will call 'accuracy','power', and 'speed'. They are important in that order. You can fire 1524522 TNT 155248852 blocks, but without accuracy it will do no damage. Or if you carefully aim a 52289 block long shot but have no power you do nothing. And if you shoot 100 TNT just right 0 blocks... So I have concluded the damage value should be an average between a 1-100 range value between these three values. Accuracy can be measured by ten minus the distance of each shot from the block the shot should hit times ten. Power can be measured by ten times the number of TNT in the shot. Speed is the number of blocks the farthest TNT blocks traveled divided by ten. So a Basic (single-shot,7 TNT charge, half-slab SB)cannon that shoots ~104 blocks would have a Damage Value of about 60+10+10/3=27 out of 100. Notice values over 100 are possible and denote awesome cannons.''

Ergonomic Value: How much it takes to build the cannon. This is also hard to figure out. This involves the amount of materials and complexity of the mechanism. This would be hard to get exact measures on and is therefore inaccurate a bit. So for the first measure 1000 - the estimated number of blocks divided by ten. And for second 10 minus an estimate from 1 to 10, times 100. Those two measures are then averaged, so for example the Basic cannon would have a score of 97+80/2=89.''

Number of TNT: How much TNT it takes to fire the cannon witout manual reloading. A Basic cannon takes 8 TNT.''

Range: How far it shoots. A Basic cannon shoots about 104 blocks.

Nickname: The nickname of the cannon.

'' '27.89:8.104 Basic TNT Cannon'

''The details of each cannon are too many to be contained within a simple name. They can be posted in other ways. Common technical parameters include: ''Number of Charges ''Number of Layers ''Number of TNT per Layer per Charge ''Charge Delay ''Compression Charges ''TNT per Compression Charge ''Compression Charge Delay ''Number of Shots ''Shot Range ''Shot Spread ''Shot Block ''Shot Delay ''Timing Type Automatic/Semi-Automatic/Single-Shot

''Also note that the values presented in calculating the DV and EV are not perfected. "'' -Creeper&#39;s Nemisis 03:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

1. Thanks for pointing out my mistake there the delay does matter. What I meant is that the range is explained by the other things mentioned in the name. But with that added to what I said, it does become explained e.g. You can tell that 1R4.10M3-1/9.0 shoots quite about farther than 1R4.5M2-1/6.0 tl;dr Thanks I made a mistake however I am still correct that it is explained by the other, less specific components.

2. If the a whole bunch of numbers could not be applicable to some cannons, then that part of the system cannot be used. Each number must apply to all cannons. I mean, if there is one quirky cannon that is mean to screw itself up or something, it's okay. But if that bunch of numbers would have a totally Diffrent meaning in a specialty cannon, which is a pretty large category are growing larger fast, it just would not work. tl;dr Damage value section only applies to certain things, therefore too specific to be used.

3. If a cannon is built not accurate enough to function, why would it be named? It is under assumption that a cannon is accurate enough to function properly If it is to be built for military purposes. Power, if it is how you described it, is mentioned when it says how many blocks of TNT in the shot, because you described power as that. Speed is described by mounting block, charge and conden charge. tl;dr Damage value section is pointless.

4. The Egronomic value is out of place. If you have enough materials to reasonably have a Cannon in mind, then I don't think you need to worry about the mount of blocks. I don't know really how to word that well, but it does not make sense to say that.

5. When writing a name in so that a reader of the name can make the cannon and have the desired effect, you need to list all the components. If you do not know amount of delay or charge or whatnot, YOU CANNONT EFFECTIVELY BUILD THE CANNON. tl;dr You cannot build a cannon from a name if the name does not tell you how to build the cannon.

THE SECTION THAT ACTUALLY IS IMPORTANT To wrap this up, I don't think that you quite understand the concept of naming a cannon. It is not really naming it per se, just announcing the important specifications that would be nesscary to build it. I do not know how to explain this, but the system is made for building the cannon based on the name. The way to read the range and accuracy and whatnot from the name is to interpret it by processing said specifications.

Thank you for reading me ramble on, and not raging when I foolishly repeat myself many times and execute countless grammar mistake.

ArkEneru 05:05, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

''I based my system on the fact that: ''1. Putting the complete technical specifications of a cannon is too much, ''2. No reasonable name can tell how to build a cannon, ''3. The person reading the name is interested in building it and would like to know if it is feasible for him/her to build such a cannon, and if they want to, based on how much damage it does.

''I used extreme examples on accuracy, I know nobody would make a cannon that absolutely has no chance of hitting, unless it's a mortar. But a hit 6 blocks away from the target can have a huge difference in effect then a shot that hits just perfectly. If you want to make a specefication system, it is good, but not appropriate as a naming system. Names are meant to designate a thing/person by, and good names are short and easy to remember. What you want is a short notation of how to build/see specs, not a name. The name does not tell you how to build the cannon, the instructions do. No set of tehnical details like all that stuff you have can tell you how to build a cannon, only the specifications it has to meet to be classified as one of those cannons. All the things in my system I know all cannons have.'' ''TL;DR Read it this time. -Creeper&#39;s Nemisis 20:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Guess what: I did actually read what you wrote! I read every last bit of it, because I have had it happen to me when people do not read my entire suggestion. cough cough. Anyways. In my talk, user CommanderLol actually did build the Ares cannon to the desired effect, if not looking like mine, based on the name. I helped with a few things, but he got down the components needed to get the desired effect, and the cannon shot the desired distance. It actually does not matter what the body of the cannon looks like, as long as long as it has the technical specifications.

Other words:

1. No, its not. Anyways, we don't put the ENTIRE specifications, 2. Yes, it can, if you mean to the desired effect of the person trying to build it. 3. The naming system is designed so that a general can tell two builders to set up a cannon that will shoot a certain distance and will take the shel on a certain trajectory. 3a. If you are a survival cannon engineer, the things that will turn you away from a cannon will be the amount of TNT and delay. However, if you are the general of an army wanting to build a cannon, it does not really matter if you use a bit of TNT, you will probably have a crap ton of it. 3b. Like I said, cannons are assumed to be accurate. If it is not, it would not be used.

Final You name a cannon based on the specifications of building it. Other things can be assumed and some don't actually matter. The point of when you name a cannon is that the person on the receiving end can look at the specifications in the name and create those specifications, which will make the cannon work, regardless of the shape of the body or technique of the condensation system. If you decide to build a TNT cannon in the first place, the ergonomic value does not matter, as wet TNT cannons can be made out of dirt and the delay out of redstone torches. The only thing that really would matter would be the TNT, but that is listed in my system. Damage value is assumed to be well enough to function. I don't know how that did not get through, its that simple.

If this doesn't help you understand, just trust me on it. I am not not admitting you do not have good points, but that is not what would fit into this system not because the system is named "names" but because this system is meant to tell people how to build the cannon's important specifications.

Edit for sig

ArkEneru 20:41, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, let me explain this the way I see it in the clearest terms I can think of.

A good naming system clearly and simply describes to any reader basic information about a cannon without excessive hassle to the reader.

A good technical description system describes specifications of a cannon, even possibly suggesting how to build a cannon to meet those specs.

''I made a naming system, you made a technical description system, and call it a naming system. Technical descriptionscannot be a naming system because of the simple fact that it is too complex and causes excessive hassle(for a naming system) to remember all the places meanings etc. ''

''My system is good for naming because it is simple(4 bits of info), and provides basic information condensed to an easy-to-understand form. ''

''As for accuracy, I understand nobody would name a wildly inaccurate cannon, unless it was a mortar-type cannon. However, most cannons have some small degree of inaccuracy that can alter performance. I also know nobody would name a cannon that doesn't do damage, but Damage Values are about how much damage a cannon does at a glance. I, for one, would like to know if the cannon I see the name of only does as much damage as a 27.89:8.104 Basic cannon or blasts a 100 block radius crater. ''

''Your system is a good technical description system, because, as you said, people can construct similar cannons from the specifications. ''

''If necessary, you could call my system the 'simple' name and yours the 'complex' name, or 'common' and 'technical' names, or the like. BTW, I real all of each of your posts, too; Ivput the TL;DR for the peops skimming through this discussion. =)'' &#60;&#60;&#61;CreepersNemisis&#61;&#62;&#62; 02:44, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Semi-Automatic versus Automatic delay
Maybe this is not common knowledge, but just because a cannon has one button to activate all the redstone does not make it semi-automatic. The term for that is called automatic delay. Ive made a few semi automatic and automatic designs, and those are called automatic because they actually reload the TNT immediately after each shot. In terms of firing/reloading, the tiers go like this:

Hope that helps you guys understand!
 * Manual: Must activate charge and shot sepreatly and manually, eg no delay, must reload TNT after every shot manually.
 * Automatic delay: Charge and shot are activated automatically, eg delay of some sort, must reload TNT after every shot manually.
 * Semi-Automatic: Charge and shot are activated automatically, TNT is reloaded after every shot, must press button to fire shot after every shot (ooooh so much work!)
 * Fully automatic: Charge and shot are activated automatically, TNT is reloaded after every shot, once you press the button, it keeps firing until you press the button again.

--Ark ArkEneru 00:48, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification! &#60;&#60;&#61;CreepersNemisis&#61;&#62;&#62; 20:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I cannot tell of that is sarcastic or not. If it is, oh well. if it is not, you are welcome.

ArkEneru 20:44, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Rewite
As of right now (as I wright this post) The article has been mostly re-written by yours truly to be updated with the current Minecraft version and the current level of cannon science. There are still a few things that haven't been re-written, such as the mounting block descriptions, but it's happening. I will update this post according to how close it is to being finished. Also, if you have any questions, post them as replies here. I'll try to get back to you ASAP.

--Ark

ArkEneru 01:34, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Some of the content breaks the Wiki rules. The videos aren't necessary and therefore should be removed. If you still want them included, link them. All of your signatures could constitute as spam and advertising, and you are not part of Mojang, so those have to go too.Frogjg2003 02:09, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I didn't post the vids. About sig, I thought it said that I was supposed to, but.. Okay. ArkEneru 02:46, 14 June 2012

For the talk pages, you are supposed to use signatures. I was referring to the fact that your name appears 7 times in the article itself. The last time doesn't even indicate your work; its function would be better served with an "In use" template. http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Template:In_use frogjg2003 03:41, 14 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The reason we don't put signatures in articles is that claiming ownership of text discourages others from editing it. Edits that improve an article often reorganize text and combine separate things, meaning adding signatures to each individual part would be a lot of noise that makes it hard to read the text. I see you proposed leaving them until major changes are made — but think about how you would feel to people making “minor” changes to the text with your name on it! Or, someone might not edit at all because they were worried about either leaving your name on or taking it out inappropriately. So, we sidestep all of this by keeping credit in the article's history, not in the article. A wiki is a place for everyone to make one good document, not for everyone's individual contributions to be recognized (though good work is noted by people who read Recent Changes and occasionally commended, and your name is forever in the page history).


 * As to the in use template, you use it by writing, with curly brackets, at the top of the page. I just tested that out in preview and it seems to be working fine.


 * —kpreid 19:09, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for explaining. It does make sense, but it did not the way that other guy was explaining it. I'm only trying to help here; I don't need that other guy to come and say its breaking the rules. An enlightened ArkEneru 20:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Okay, everything us up to date with the innovations of now, except the mounting block descriptions, which I am debating wether or not to rewrite some of them. Of course, there are many more things to come in cannon science, so this page of far from finished! ArkEneru 03:57, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Naming scheme
The current naming scheme attempts to convey some information awkwardly for superlarge cannons; I have a superlarge cannon that has 16 vertical rows of 8 TNT (minus 1, for the water source) that would be displayed as 161127 (and the 114 example listed only has 3 charges, not 4). The delay on the cannon is also more complex than anticipated (to get those 16 rows). I suggest a scheme more similar to:

16.127.2|1A!5:F Rows.Charges.[Condensers|P]|Shots[A|M]!MountType:Direction


 * Rows Vertical rows of TNT.
 * Charges Total number of charge shots.
 * [Condensers|P] Number of condensing charges, or P for piston
 * Shots Number of shots fire per volley. (usually 1 or 2)
 * [A|M] A for automatic lighting of shot(s), M for manual.
 * MountType The type of mounting block used: 0 no block (shot is level with charge), 1 full block (shot is a full block above the charge), 2 half block (shot is half a block above the charge), 3 trap door (shot is on a (normally closed) trap door), 4 ladder/pane (shot is on a ladder or pane of glass/iron), 5 fence post (shot is on a fence post: 1.5 blocks above the charge), 6 piston (shot is located on a piston)
 * Direction The direction the shot is fired. F for forward, D for diagonal, S for spread

This seems clearer than smashing numbers together. Skyboy 08:44, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, we are working on the naming system. That is a very good idea for one, but some things should not be there. I have quite a few super large cannons the really screw the current system, the system as of right now really only works if they have in the ones digits of TNT/rows of TNT. My candidate for the new system still has the same number, but with more separation. Lots of the other suggested systems do not works because of too much/too little specifications. Thanks for your help. ArkEneru 23:05, 7 July 2012 (UTC)