I've been playing Minecraft for a couple of months now. I'm a new account and havent posted a suggestion before, but I have a lot of programming experience and some personal video game development experience as well. I'll try to be a "good poster" per the read this first thread.
I had an idea that I thought would improve the way tools worked in the game. Basically, it seems weird that your diamond pickaxe can break as many obsidian blocks as something like Nethrrack. Likewise, you can use a shovel to break stone or wood, and it would go through as many blocks of stone or wood as it would sand. Not that you would ever do that intentionally, but it seems like that should wear it down more.
I think it would be a gameplay improvement if the amount of durability lost were more dependent on the hardness of the block being broken, or the time it took to break. Not something extreme. It could be balanced so the difference between breaking something weak and breaking something strong didn't make a huge durability difference, just a noticeable difference. I have a couple of ideas on how this could work and stay balanced. Using the square root of the hardness value would make the durability loss not linear, for example. In general though, I just think this would make sense.
Things like shovels would last a little bit longer all around the board, but they would wear out faster from digging clay or grass than sand or snow. Axes wouldn't go down so quickly from chopping up mushrooms or pumpkins. Picks wouldn't run out as quickly in the Nether unless you were breaking Nether Brick or Quartz. Mining ores themselves though would wear down picks a little bit quicker. Mining obsidian would wear them down slightly more even, which is fine, because you don't really mine that much obsidian, and this could actually be balanced by reducing obsidian's hardness somewhat. The difficulty of mining obsidian would then be split between it taking longer to mine (though not as long as it is currently) and it using more of your precious diamond picks, which could be nice because then obsidian wouldn't need to be as obscenely time consuming to gather.
Beyond just making sense, this is one of the times I feel like added realism would actually make the game more fun. Generally, harder blocks is are more valuable. Ores, obsidian, iron structures. Wood is generally more desireable than sand. Cobble more valuable on average than dirt. It means you can use your tools for longer on "bulk jobs" like landscaping or mining stone and gravel, and you have to be aware and make more of a value judgement when you go to move that iron door or row of furnaces and hoppers. Also, it just means that tools would last a more consistent amount of time.
There are other ways to accomplish this than using the hardness value. You could just have separate "durability loss" values for each type of block. This might actually be better, because then you could making mining diamond wear a pick down more than mining coal. I'm sure there are other approaches as well. But all of this would be very transparent when you are playing the game, and if the way it was done was reasonable enough, then you wouldn't have to really remember anything. It makes sense that something made of iron would wear down your tool more than sand. It makes sense that if you used the wrong tool, it would wear it down faster.
I don't know what other people would think about this, but I would appreciate any input. I'm honestly not sure if something like this has been suggested before either, though I didn't see anythign when I searched around. Minecraft is a great and wonderfully innovative game, and it would be pretty amazing if this idea ever actually influenced a change. Hopefully the way I explained this makes sense.
I Might agree with this , but this will cause them to actually INCREASE the dirability a LITTLE bit ...
I Might agree with this , but this will cause them to actually INCREASE the durability a LITTLE bit ...
Being a nerd is nothing to be ashamed of. Nerds rule the world! Who invented the internet? Nerds. Who created personal computers and smart phones? Nerds. Who made every video game you've ever played and ever will? Still nerds. Who sent probes to distant planets? Nerds, nerds and more nerds! I'm a nerd and I'm proud.
"A shovel cant break the same amount of stone/wood as sand. A shovel takes two durability points from breaking something which its supposed to. Yet, i like and support your idea."
Ah, okay. I hadn't noticed since I really would never try that out. I did know that swords broke some things faster at the cost of extra durability though, like leaves, which I think is a good idea as well.
Well, just to point it out, but a diamond pixaxe can break 1562 blocks. That's 1562 blocks of stone (making cobble) or 1562 blocks of obsidian. Almost a full large chest. I can go through that much cobble if I tried, but that's a lot of obsidian. Enough for 111 Nether portals, all from just 3 diamonds, and that isn't counting unbreaking enchantments. I can see that (maybe) negatively affecting people that like to farm it en masse, but I think a lot of people would appreciate being able to just break obsidian a bit faster and would rather take a durability hit to do so. Honestly, it might actually help farming because of that, kind of like how iron pickaxes are more effecient than stone for mining because you mine faster and find more than enough iron to replace what you use up in a quicker amount of time.
I find plenty of diamonds myself. I don't know that I've ever had the need to use 1562 blocks of obsidian in the first place, but I would think the time saved by it breaking a little bit faster would be more than enough time to find 3 more diamonds. Maybe I'm wrong though.
Swords wouldn't be affected with fighting though. This would just affect block breaking.
It has potential. I'd stick with just subtracting the harness value from durability for each block mined. Also it might be interesting to do double wear on non-purpose blocks, pick mining wood for example.
I've noticed this as a strangeness too, thanks for posting.
Well, just to point it out, but a diamond pixaxe can break 1562 blocks. That's 1562 blocks of stone (making cobble) or 1562 blocks of obsidian. Almost a full large chest. I can go through that much cobble if I tried, but that's a lot of obsidian. Enough for 111 Nether portals, all from just 3 diamonds, and that isn't counting unbreaking enchantments. I can see that (maybe) negatively affecting people that like to farm it en masse, but I think a lot of people would appreciate being able to just break obsidian a bit faster and would rather take a durability hit to do so. Honestly, it might actually help farming because of that, kind of like how iron pickaxes are more effecient than stone for mining because you mine faster and find more than enough iron to replace what you use up in a quicker amount of time.
I find plenty of diamonds myself. I don't know that I've ever had the need to use 1562 blocks of obsidian in the first place, but I would think the time saved by it breaking a little bit faster would be more than enough time to find 3 more diamonds. Maybe I'm wrong though.
Swords wouldn't be affected with fighting though. This would just affect block breaking.
1,562 blocks isn't that much:
That's in just 3-4 hours; granted, Unbreaking III quadriuples the uses you get but I still repair my pickaxe almost every day - and in 1.8 you can only repair items 6 times at the most (less if you upgrade/add enchantments; I have to use an Efficiency V, Unbreaking III pickaxe), plus the last repair is very expensive due to the changes in XP require per level.
No support; I'd just mod it out of the game anyway, like I will for the 1.8 repair mechanics whenever I use 1.8, or the nerfed cave generation in 1.7 (or rather, I'm just adding in some new features I like to 1.6.4).
My Avatar is a Dalek, therefor your argument is... EXTERMINATED!!!
You know who can tell me something I already know? Me. All the time. I'm really good at telling me stuff I already know. I don't need help in that department. I don't know about others, but I can't imagine I'm alone here.
Glad to see some people like the idea! I know it wouldn't be for everyone. Clearly it wouldn't play 100% nice with people that do races to mine vast quantities of ore for points, but I personally like that it would add some challenge but also allow some uses of tools to make them last longer. Rather than just giving a durability buff to everything...
Of course, if the durability loss was a separate variable that was different for each block, it could always not cost extra durability for ores, but still cost extra for obsidian or fixtures or other heavy duty objects. Like it could cost more durability to break polished granite or stone bricks than regular granite or regular stone, even though they have the same hardness and take the same time to mine. And likewise, it could be set so that ores don't cost extra durability, but take longer to mine as they currently do.
I find myself looking for extra challenge in the game as is. I'm currently playing hardcore in a customized world with very rough, dangerous terrain with lots of overhangs and floating islands and caves that are much more windy and confusing.
This post really goes in depth with your suggestion and I like both the suggestion and the post itself. I'd like to have this as well, it seems a bit weird to have everything cost the same amount of durability and this adds a little bit of realism that'll make the game better for quite a few people.
It doesn't. Tools only use double durability when you attack mobs with them. Breaking blocks not meant to be broken by the tool doesn't use double durability.
I think it should generally be related to the time mining, completely ignoring the number of mined blocks. Because I don't think it's realistic that punching bedrock for 53091932 hours without the tool breaking. Also the durability of weapons could be related to the damage dealt. It would also fit to the 1.9 cooldown, because if you don't hit with full force, it also doesn't damage the weapon as much. If that in any way makes diamond weapons or tools less durable, it could just be balanced. If the system of durability changes I don't expect the numbers to stay the same anyway.
Since this post is pretty old, but still has only 6 likes, I think it might be because of the lenght of it. Maybe change the title to "Tools loose durability based on block hardness" or something like that. This way people who don't like to read so much can still understand your point.
Yes, it is, but the point of Minecraft isn't to be realistic in every way possible. This is something only a specific audience would like. It sounds interesting, but I think you should stick with making it into a mod.
I wonder how this would effect mods? The best part about this, is the interaction with netherrack. At the point of the game where I want to travel far distances, mining miles of netherrack destroys tier 1 picks.
A personal suggestion with posts is to add pictures and keep it as brief as possible. Walls of text usually don't do as well. (This tip and more in the stickies)
Yeah, that guy in the avatar is me. I'm *that* strange. It happens. Sometimes people act like that. Just go with it. I can offer help with suggestions even before you post them - NOT make your suggestions - but help you with them.
I've been playing Minecraft for a couple of months now. I'm a new account and havent posted a suggestion before, but I have a lot of programming experience and some personal video game development experience as well. I'll try to be a "good poster" per the read this first thread.
I had an idea that I thought would improve the way tools worked in the game. Basically, it seems weird that your diamond pickaxe can break as many obsidian blocks as something like Nethrrack. Likewise, you can use a shovel to break stone or wood, and it would go through as many blocks of stone or wood as it would sand. Not that you would ever do that intentionally, but it seems like that should wear it down more.
I think it would be a gameplay improvement if the amount of durability lost were more dependent on the hardness of the block being broken, or the time it took to break. Not something extreme. It could be balanced so the difference between breaking something weak and breaking something strong didn't make a huge durability difference, just a noticeable difference. I have a couple of ideas on how this could work and stay balanced. Using the square root of the hardness value would make the durability loss not linear, for example. In general though, I just think this would make sense.
Things like shovels would last a little bit longer all around the board, but they would wear out faster from digging clay or grass than sand or snow. Axes wouldn't go down so quickly from chopping up mushrooms or pumpkins. Picks wouldn't run out as quickly in the Nether unless you were breaking Nether Brick or Quartz. Mining ores themselves though would wear down picks a little bit quicker. Mining obsidian would wear them down slightly more even, which is fine, because you don't really mine that much obsidian, and this could actually be balanced by reducing obsidian's hardness somewhat. The difficulty of mining obsidian would then be split between it taking longer to mine (though not as long as it is currently) and it using more of your precious diamond picks, which could be nice because then obsidian wouldn't need to be as obscenely time consuming to gather.
Beyond just making sense, this is one of the times I feel like added realism would actually make the game more fun. Generally, harder blocks is are more valuable. Ores, obsidian, iron structures. Wood is generally more desireable than sand. Cobble more valuable on average than dirt. It means you can use your tools for longer on "bulk jobs" like landscaping or mining stone and gravel, and you have to be aware and make more of a value judgement when you go to move that iron door or row of furnaces and hoppers. Also, it just means that tools would last a more consistent amount of time.
There are other ways to accomplish this than using the hardness value. You could just have separate "durability loss" values for each type of block. This might actually be better, because then you could making mining diamond wear a pick down more than mining coal. I'm sure there are other approaches as well. But all of this would be very transparent when you are playing the game, and if the way it was done was reasonable enough, then you wouldn't have to really remember anything. It makes sense that something made of iron would wear down your tool more than sand. It makes sense that if you used the wrong tool, it would wear it down faster.
I don't know what other people would think about this, but I would appreciate any input. I'm honestly not sure if something like this has been suggested before either, though I didn't see anythign when I searched around. Minecraft is a great and wonderfully innovative game, and it would be pretty amazing if this idea ever actually influenced a change. Hopefully the way I explained this makes sense.
I Might agree with this , but this will cause them to actually INCREASE the durability a LITTLE bit ...
Ah, okay. I hadn't noticed since I really would never try that out. I did know that swords broke some things faster at the cost of extra durability though, like leaves, which I think is a good idea as well.
I find plenty of diamonds myself. I don't know that I've ever had the need to use 1562 blocks of obsidian in the first place, but I would think the time saved by it breaking a little bit faster would be more than enough time to find 3 more diamonds. Maybe I'm wrong though.
Swords wouldn't be affected with fighting though. This would just affect block breaking.
I've noticed this as a strangeness too, thanks for posting.
Support.
1,562 blocks isn't that much:
That's in just 3-4 hours; granted, Unbreaking III quadriuples the uses you get but I still repair my pickaxe almost every day - and in 1.8 you can only repair items 6 times at the most (less if you upgrade/add enchantments; I have to use an Efficiency V, Unbreaking III pickaxe), plus the last repair is very expensive due to the changes in XP require per level.
No support; I'd just mod it out of the game anyway, like I will for the 1.8 repair mechanics whenever I use 1.8, or the nerfed cave generation in 1.7 (or rather, I'm just adding in some new features I like to 1.6.4).
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
Support
~yoshi9048
My best suggestion:
Mobs actually being varied???
Of course, if the durability loss was a separate variable that was different for each block, it could always not cost extra durability for ores, but still cost extra for obsidian or fixtures or other heavy duty objects. Like it could cost more durability to break polished granite or stone bricks than regular granite or regular stone, even though they have the same hardness and take the same time to mine. And likewise, it could be set so that ores don't cost extra durability, but take longer to mine as they currently do.
I find myself looking for extra challenge in the game as is. I'm currently playing hardcore in a customized world with very rough, dangerous terrain with lots of overhangs and floating islands and caves that are much more windy and confusing.
Support!
By the way: Support the idea.
'Tavi be beautiful...
But I'm gonna cut it short.
/SUPPORT
I think it should generally be related to the time mining, completely ignoring the number of mined blocks. Because I don't think it's realistic that punching bedrock for 53091932 hours without the tool breaking. Also the durability of weapons could be related to the damage dealt. It would also fit to the 1.9 cooldown, because if you don't hit with full force, it also doesn't damage the weapon as much. If that in any way makes diamond weapons or tools less durable, it could just be balanced. If the system of durability changes I don't expect the numbers to stay the same anyway.
Since this post is pretty old, but still has only 6 likes, I think it might be because of the lenght of it. Maybe change the title to "Tools loose durability based on block hardness" or something like that. This way people who don't like to read so much can still understand your point.
Yes, it is, but the point of Minecraft isn't to be realistic in every way possible. This is something only a specific audience would like. It sounds interesting, but I think you should stick with making it into a mod.
I wonder how this would effect mods? The best part about this, is the interaction with netherrack. At the point of the game where I want to travel far distances, mining miles of netherrack destroys tier 1 picks.
A personal suggestion with posts is to add pictures and keep it as brief as possible. Walls of text usually don't do as well. (This tip and more in the stickies)
- CR Builds - Better Banners - Better Alchemy - Pirate - Accessories -
"Where there is no vision, there is no hope."
I'm on Twitch! CYPHphilos (I build cool things, come check it out!.)
100% MEGA support. I have always wanted this in the game, and thought it was weird how all tools lasted the same no matter what.
Good necro man!
Yeah, that guy in the avatar is me. I'm *that* strange. It happens. Sometimes people act like that. Just go with it. I can offer help with suggestions even before you post them - NOT make your suggestions - but help you with them.
Unofficial Suggestions Guide (2.0) - by Theriasis
Unofficial Critics Guide - by yoshi9048