Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

EMI compat centers "strict" crafting recipes #2513

Open
2 tasks done
Xefyr0 opened this issue Dec 7, 2024 · 0 comments
Open
2 tasks done

EMI compat centers "strict" crafting recipes #2513

Xefyr0 opened this issue Dec 7, 2024 · 0 comments
Labels
type: bug Something isn't working

Comments

@Xefyr0
Copy link

Xefyr0 commented Dec 7, 2024

Checked for existing issues

  • I have checked for existing issues, and have found none.

Tested latest version

  • I have checked that this occurs on the latest version.

GregTech CEu Version

1.5.4

Minecraft Version

1.20.1

Recipe Viewer Installed

EMI

Environment

Singleplayer

Cross-Mod Interaction

Yes

Other Installed Mods

EMI 1.1.18
Architectury 9.2.14
KubeJS 2001.6.5-build.16
Rhino 2001.2.3-build.6

Expected Behavior

EMI should correctly report dust unpacking recipes as being in the first two slots of the crafting grid:
emi_true_asga_1
emi_true_asga_2

Actual Behavior

EMI displays the recipe as requiring the dust in the very center of the table:
emi_asga

However, there are no such recipes:
emi_false_asga

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Make instance with the mod(loader) versions described above (KubeJS, Rhino, Architectury should be optional)
  2. Open EMI recipe for Gallium Arsenide Small/Tiny dust
  3. See that it suggests the recipe have a regular Gallium Arsenide dust be put in the center of the grid, instead of the actual recipe

Additional Information

May be an issue on EMI's end, if not an issue with GTm's EMI compat.
Cross-reported to EMI: emilyploszaj/emi#798

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type: bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant