Talk:Explosion

Ray separation for large explosions
This video is an unremarkable roundup of "cool commands", but the segment at 1:00 shows some odd behavior for very large explosions: It looks to me like for sufficiently large explosions, the crater edge breaks up into the individual rays of the explosion processing. --MentalMouse42 (talk) 13:44, 7 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I recall seeing something similar a while ago, setting off a very large explosion in a superflat world made of glass blocks to more easily see the path of the rays. -- Orthotopetalk 19:56, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Explosion bias
Southeast bias in explosions has been fixed. 108.216.22.33 00:59, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Interactions with entities - gained velocity
I don't understand section about interactions with entities. Last point in results is: "The maximum velocity gain that an entity can obtain from a TNT explosion is 1...", but above is no word about velocity.

Second thing - point 4: "The entity's eyes are propelled along the ray from the explosion center by the new exposure" What means entity's eyes? What is "new exposure"? I assume it's reduced exposure from point 3 but what is connection between exposure and velocity (and velocity before explosion)? Wrimpl (talk) 15:27, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Shulker bullets, PE potions
There was a suggestion in the editor notes that we look into the explosion power of shulker bullets, and that of mixing potions in PE. What I've found: – Sealbudsman talk/contr 01:14, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Shulker bullets make an explosion-looking particle, and maybe deal knockback, but no explosion.
 * Potions make an explosion sound, but no explosion.

Archive nav
, I tried to copy your technique; could you walk me through why it's including that archive note, when this page title doesn't include the fragment 'Archive/' ? It's doing it also on Talk:Crafting. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 02:15, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Cause I was dumb and forgot the "#" in "#pos:". It was calling it as "Template:pos: ..." instead. – KnightMiner  t/c 19:22, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hah. Insidious syntax error.  Thanks!  – Sealbudsman talk/contr 19:25, 5 April 2016 (UTC)