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

← Villagers, NPC, Humanoids
37
Follow

Potential Village Popularity Revamp

This is a modified version of u/SquidGamer15's idea which was originally posted here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/minecraftsuggestions/comments/9krdlo/villager_popularity_needs_a_revamp/

 

Instead of ranging from 10 to -30, the popularity system should range from 30 to -30 in order to make more room for the effects of popularity. Popularity would dictate how villagers and golems would react to you as well as affect the nature of the raids triggered by the bad omen status effect. The higher your popularity is, the more respect you get from the villagers, and trading discounts offered by villagers in due to you having the hero of the village status effect (an effect currently only available in Bedrock Edition) stack with those triggered by high popularity, making trades even cheaper than they would be otherwise.  The lower your popularity is, the more the villagers will treat you badly, and the stronger raids will become.

 

Effects of Popularity

30: Village Iron Golems will rush to protect you if any mob attacks you as long as you are within in their search radius

25 or over: Villagers of the diamond trade tier will offer you exclusive trades specific to their profession, some of which involve high-quality items that may otherwise be unobtainable.

20 or over: Occasionally a baby villager will give you a gift.

15 or over: Villager trades costing emeralds cost 20% less emeralds (e.g. 10 emerald trade turns into 8 emerald trade).

10 or over: Villagers are less likely to try and cheat you in trades.

5 or over: Villager trades costing emeralds cost 10% less emeralds (e.g. 10 emerald trade turns into 9 emerald trade).

4 to -4:  Standard villager behavior.

-5 or under: Villager trades costing emeralds cost 10% more emeralds (e.g. 10 emerald trade turns into 11 emerald trade); Baby villagers will run away from you.

-10 or under:  Villagers are more likely to try and cheat you in trades; Raids triggered by the Bad Omen status effect always have at least four waves due to the illagers and their associates seeing an already weakened village.

-15 or under: Villager trades costing emeralds cost 20% more emeralds (e.g. 10 emerald trade turns into 12 emerald trade); The village's iron golem is automatically hostile to you.

-20 or under: Villagers won’t make eye contact with you; Raids triggered by the Bad Omen status effect always have at least six waves.

-25 or under:  Villagers won't trade with you at all.

-30: Even adult villagers in the village run away from you; Raids triggered by the Bad Omen status effect always have at least eight waves.

 

Ways to Change Popularity

- Killing all illagers and illager associates in a raid (+5)

- Building an iron golem for the village (+5)

- Successfully curing a baby zombie villager within the village (+5)

- Advancing a villager's trade tier to diamond level (+3)

- Successfully curing a zombie villager within the village (+2)

- Giving a flower to a baby villager as a gift (+2; doesn't work if baby villagers run away from you)

- Trading with a villager for the last offer slot on their list* (+1)

- Killing a zombie within the village (+1)

- Killing a husk within the village (+1)

- Killing a drowned within the village (+1)

- Killing a zombie villager of any kind within the village (+1)

- Attacking a panda near villagers* (-1)

- Attacking a villager* (-1)

- Killing a villager* (-2)

- Attacking a baby villager* (-3)

- Attacking the village's iron golem (-3)

- Killing a baby villager* (-5)

- Killing a village's iron golem* (-5)

(*These elements are already official, or at least planned; they are listed here to give a more complete picture)

 

Thanks for your time, and thanks to u/SquidGamer15 for allowing me to post this here.

Avatar
Registered User shared this idea

5 Comments

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Date Votes
Sorted by oldest
  • 1
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    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.

  • 0
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    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.

  • 0
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    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.

  • 0
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    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)

  • 0
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    I think it may be cool if you could buy forgiveness from the priest.