Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jul 14, 2026. It is now read-only.
This repository was archived by the owner on Jul 14, 2026. It is now read-only.

Question - Not an issue. (Mappings) #11

Open

Description

@Cinnaminin

I do not have much knowledge in proxies, but I wanted to ask a question:
I'm currently backporting a bunch of blocks from 1.21.11 to Legacy because i want to play on me & my friends server on LCE. My current issue is the mappings. Right now im testing with the Amethyst block, but I have found out that Block IDs are no longer a thing since "The Flattening"

Basically I have my Amethyst block on legacy coded to use 174. BUT I have noticed that there is already a mapping for 174 in blockmapping.js
To my main question here:

  • Should I as the one backporting use numbers in legacy higher than 255 (last ID in java) to escape conflict?
  • For you the developer of the Proxy, is there a way you can implement another mapping system for users to add mappings such as LCE:JavaString
    Which in my case would be 257 (new amethyst block ID in legacy if needed to be changed, currently 174) and minecraft:amethyst_block (257:minecraft:amethyst_block)

Thank you for any of your time!!

Activity

  1. changed the title [-]Question - Not an issue.[/-] [+]Question - Not an issue. (Mappings)[/+] on Mar 12, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions