Logo

Strictly for humanoid and humanoid type mobs feedback and suggestions. Bugs, duplicate ideas and support issues will be deleted.

Please sign in to leave a comment.

  • Avatar
    Magnus Anderson commented

    I really love your new popularity boosters. Right now, it feels like popularity stagnates or goes down. It would be cool to see an indication of village popularity changing, too. However, there are three criticisms I have of this.
    Firstly, checking if you can take crops is basically impossible. A system that did so would feel hacky or clunky, I think. It would be better to change those tiers, possibly to adding and destroying houses in a village giving/taking popularity.
    Secondly, the -10 penalty is harsh because the player has a very hard time going up from there. I would make it so it is linked to -25 or even -30 popularity. I think the pillager strength upgrades could also be lowered down to the -10 slot.

    Thirdly, rather than causing a maximum strength raid, it should cause stronger raids. At -10, it could begin at level 2. At -20, it should start at level 4. At -30, it should start at level 7.
    Firstly, because rng is a bad game mechanic. Secondly, because starting at max skips over the entirety of the "progress system" of a raid which I think shouldn't happen. Third, because starting a raid at maximum difficulty could actually be seen as a good thing, eg by totem farmers. I guess that's not a very good criticism but it should be kept in mind. Fourth, because it allows you to actually see how -20 is worse than -10 and -30 is worse still, and react, rather than it being randomly determined behind the scenes.

  • Avatar
    Mc Rat commented


    This really needs to be added in the Village and Pillage  update, or at least some sort of new stuff to make the Popularity levels more relevant

  • Avatar
    DaffodilAura218 commented

    Okay, @Magnus Anderson, I'll have to reply to this comment in chunks...

    >Firstly, checking if you can take crops is basically impossible. A system that did so would feel hacky or clunky, I think.

    I added this because I heard that older versions of minecraft had a system where taking the villagers' crops provoked the iron golem...  If that was incorrect, then sorry...

    > It would be better to change those tiers, possibly to adding and destroying houses in a village giving/taking popularity.

    Somehow, that doesn't quite seem right either...

    >Secondly, the -10 penalty is harsh because the player has a very hard time going up from there.

    Sorry, it was the only thing I could think of at the time...  Still, since villagers wander in the streets, and since there's always the possibility of killing zombies and whatnot to raise popularity...

    >I would make it so it is linked to -25 or even -30 popularity.

    I see...

    >I think the pillager strength upgrades could also be lowered down to the -10 slot.

    One variant could, but not all of them...

    >Thirdly, rather than causing a maximum strength raid, it should cause stronger raids. At -10, it could begin at level 2. At -20, it should start at level 4. At -30, it should start at level 7. 
    Firstly, because rng is a bad game mechanic. Secondly, because starting at max skips over the entirety of the "progress system" of a raid which I think shouldn't happen. Third, because starting a raid at maximum difficulty could actually be seen as a good thing, eg by totem farmers. I guess that's not a very good criticism but it should be kept in mind. Fourth, because it allows you to actually see how -20 is worse than -10 and -30 is worse still, and react, rather than it being randomly determined behind the scenes.

    I certainly see merit in your points here, but I worry about the feasibility of your proposed change on account of the fact that you have to take the Bad Omen effect itself having different levels into consideration.  Furthermore, I would have it so that at -30, it would start at level 8, assuming you have only the lowest level of the Bad Omen status effect.

  • Avatar
    Magnus Anderson commented

    I'm replying to each comment you made about my blocked comments in turn. On mobile so sorry if unclear...
    > farming anger
    I don't think something like that was in the game. I may be wrong, so don't quote me.
    > houses add popularity?
    Yeah it was a random idea spawned from the dev's initial vision that players would find villages and expand them with more houses, etc to grow them. It may not work either.
    > Iron golems hate your guts
    That's true, it just seems rude to the player and a harsher barrier to progress than any other, to require them for a relatively slight infraction (accidentally killing a villager and hitting a golem that first night brings you already there, and villagers tend to wander right in front of swords) to be under attack by the village as they try to fix their relationship with the village.
    > one variant could
    If I am understanding, this was my intent. Oops
    > the rest
    Hmm. I don't think the bad omen by itself would be hard to deal with because there is no randomness so the popularity can be checked and the appropriate amount of danger added to the current bad omen.
    Still, you have your own preferences, and they are valid too. I of course was offering my opinion but its your post, and an argument could be made to keep it how you first envisioned it. Either way, I really like the idea and think it would fit well into the vanilla game.

  • Avatar
    DaffodilAura218 commented

    It's good to clear some of this stuff up @Magnus Anderson,

    >I don't think something like that was in the game. I may be wrong, so don't quote me.

    Well, I guess we should just leave that to the devs...

    >Yeah it was a random idea spawned from the dev's initial vision that players would find villages and expand them with more houses, etc to grow them. It may not work either.

    I see... so, that ought to be something we leave for the devs to work out...

    >That's true, it just seems rude to the player and a harsher barrier to progress than any other, to require them for a relatively slight infraction (accidentally killing a villager and hitting a golem that first night brings you already there, and villagers tend to wander right in front of swords) to be under attack by the village as they try to fix their relationship with the village.

    Hm...  Good points...  Let's try and come up with a better penalty for -10... you know, besides the raids getting stronger...

    > If I am understanding, this was my intent. Oops

    That's okay.

    >Hmm. I don't think the bad omen by itself would be hard to deal with because there is no randomness so the popularity can be checked and the appropriate amount of danger added to the current bad omen. 
    Still, you have your own preferences, and they are valid too. I of course was offering my opinion but its your post, and an argument could be made to keep it how you first envisioned it. Either way, I really like the idea and think it would fit well into the vanilla game.

    Well, Perhaps we should only keep the randomness factor for max-strength raids at -30 popularity, if we keep it at all (in light of some of the problems you pointed out).  So, for general cases, perhaps it should be the following:

    -10: Raids triggered by the Bad Omen status effect always have four waves at minimum

    -20: Raids triggered by the Bad Omen status effect always have six waves at minimum

    -30: Raids triggered by the Bad Omen Status effect always have eight waves at minimum; possibly a rare chance for a maximum strength raid (optional)

Powered by Zendesk