Leaving the villager cap where it is, currently taking the lead....... kinda sucks. I thought there would be more people wanting at least 100.
Oh well, the people have spoken! And are still speaking. Maybe it will change.
Leaving the villager cap where it is, currently taking the lead....... kinda sucks. I thought there would be more people wanting at least 100.
Oh well, the people have spoken! And are still speaking. Maybe it will change.
I think perhaps you're looking at this the wrong way..
Currently as I'm writing this, 24 people have voted. 8 of them voted that somehow, someway things are just fine.(Strange I know..) 16 other people have voted that the cap needs to be raised in some way. That's about 77% of the vote.
Either way, I've said it before, everyone plays the game differently.. I'm guessing that some people aren't as interested in ways to use villagers as an additional resource, for trades, iron, or just plain scenery. Through inexperience, or apathy. Although if that's the case, why vote? I haven't seen an intelligent argument for keeping the cap.. Sorry.. but all I've read is that, "Xbox can't handle it.." Which has been shot down by people who have experienced otherwise several times. Sure there's discussion about the villager AI, which I think is a separate issue from population.
I would roughly estimate the average desire is to raise the caps to around 150, but it really isn't a fair plot as no one was given the option to pick 0, and infinity is kind of vague for actual limitations for anyone that clearly wants more than 200. But if we assume an estimated game capacity of about 300 for infinity over the 25 people who have currently voted, I estimated an average desire of a 148 villager cap. But again, that is a very loose estimate based on sparse and sketchy data.
I think it is safe to say that the majority want the cap raised. Whether that can be infinite or not probably doesn't matter, they just want it raised.
I'd wager that many of those who said to leave it as is are just those who don't play the game with villagers as a factor, which is completely fine. But the majority do prefer villagers as part of the game so the cap should be raised. Especially since we already know the xbox can handle a greater number, why not do it?
The bugs relating to breeding and clumping, etc. are a seperate issue, but they too should be fixed.
The xbox can definately handle more I have around 240 villagers on my xbox map right now and it works just fine I think they should cap it at atleast 300 so you can kill and rebreed villagers for different trades.
I'm guessing that some people aren't as interested in ways to use villagers as an additional resource, for trades, iron, or just plain scenery. Through inexperience, or apathy.
Just because we vote differently to you doesn't make us inexperienced or apathetic. We exercised our right to have an opinion in a democratic vote. Just saying
its about priorities. Sure xbox can handle 240 villagers but then what happens when you have that, and 240 chickens, or cows, or some gigantic redstone contraption? You guys clearly know nothing about consoles. The more entities you have the more lag it will create, period. Its about resource management, they are not going to push the limits because then it would likely be unstable or laggy or both.
I honestly can't see a valid argument for increasing the limit. 50 isn't enough really?!?!
I'd post the spock face palm, but its not worth my time.
I would tend to agree with Shiggs. I don't know what the limits of the console are for sure, but the game already lags in multiplayer. I don't tend to have much of a problem in single player but then I don't really go in for complex redstone setups but I am aware of lag issues on other peoples servers so I can't imagine adding more villagers will help. And to be honest, do we really need them? Iron farms don't seem that useful to me. The time and resources required to make them hardly seems worth it when you can just go dig a hole and find iron.
I just don't get why people use villagers for 'company', they are annoying, loud, and personally I'd rather stick a sword in their gut rather then be around them. Villagers are for resources, currently they can supply you with lots of iron, but soon tools and other goodies once trading comes into play.
What really burns me is that many are saying oh, 50 is fine, until they actually start 'wanting' to use them, at which point your '50' just don't cut it, If you have even 2 cells setup to produce iron, it leaves you with only a handful to be able to setup a good merchant hall. The goal for many in the next version will be to get 'perfect' villager trades, and to do this your going to burn through villagers like their is no tomorrow. Maybe when you have to wait 20 minutes between each merchant that you don't need/want you'll change your mind. You have to remember that 90% of villager trades are going to be garbage. And only 1% are perfect trades.
So lets say your after that pig spawner that one of the villagers will offer, your going to kill off at min 100 villagers to get the trade, assuming its offered as his first trade (more then likely not). So you kill off 2 of your villagers that have crappy trades, they breed and produce 2 new babys, you wait 20 minutes for them to grow up, and repeat 50x. If on the 100th villager you get the trade, it will have taken you roughly 17 hours to complete get the spawner. Now this is best case scenario, more often then not your going to have to burn through about 500 or so villagers to get something your after. Thus you need to multiple that 17 hours by 5.
Having more villagers means that you can setup merchant halls, in which if you don't like trades you can automatically get rid of that villager, and a new one will soon take its place which is already grown up and given to us from a infinite breeding cell that we setup deep below.
I understand that some may not wish to exploit the villager trading system, and that's all fine and dandy, you just don't setup a merchant hall and or infinite breeding cell. You can easily control the amount of villagers by providing the amount of doors to support the village population that you want. Point is don't ruin it for other people who do wish to use them and band together, vote for that increase, ya never know....down the road you may wish to use them and will be glad you voted for that increase.
What is this pig spawner stuff? This is the second time I've heard of a villager offering a pig spawner......
A Pig spawner is just that, its like a monster spawner that you find throughout the world but instead of having a skeleton or zombie or spider spinning in the center it will be a pig, and it spawns pigs. GREAT for farms, but offered very very very rarely, in fact of all my trading on the PC i've only ever had it offered to me twice.
A Pig spawner is just that, its like a monster spawner that you find throughout the world but instead of having a skeleton or zombie or spider spinning in the center it will be a pig, and it spawns pigs. GREAT for farms, but offered very very very rarely, in fact of all my trading on the PC i've only ever had it offered to me twice.
That's what it sounds like but I've never seen that before! And in my perfect villager hunt I went through some villagers. That's not even mentioned in the wiki! (As you can tell I use the wiki like a Bible) The only place I've seen a pig spawner is via the give command on PC. So you're saying that you can actually get a pig spawner via trading?........ that's just too crazy.
I would tend to agree with Shiggs. I don't know what the limits of the console are for sure, but the game already lags in multiplayer. I don't tend to have much of a problem in single player but then I don't really go in for complex redstone setups but I am aware of lag issues on other peoples servers so I can't imagine adding more villagers will help. And to be honest, do we really need them? Iron farms don't seem that useful to me. The time and resources required to make them hardly seems worth it when you can just go dig a hole and find iron.
So are you blaming the lags in multiplayer on the number of villagers? That seems like a big conclusion without knowing how the coding works. I mean that all villagers use the same code. You aren't adding a new code for each villager. It is the same code whether you have 1 or 100 villagers.
I think most people who play on miltos teen can see that the lag occurs when events such as chests or crafting UI are opened, or someone traveling fast via minecart so that chunks are being loaded quickly. You don't see a lag when there are 50 villagers around you. Annoying maybe, but not the cause of the lag.
We have 6 natural villages in our seed. That doesn't leave much room for developing the towns when you have hit the cap. If people only want one town then maybe 50 is enough, but for those of us who want to create a world with destinations, a higher cap would be nice.
That's what it sounds like but I've never seen that before! And in my perfect villager hunt I went through some villagers. That's not even mentioned in the wiki! (As you can tell I use the wiki like a Bible) The only place I've seen a pig spawner is via the give command on PC. So you're saying that you can actually get a pig spawner via trading?........ that's just too crazy.
Yes you can get them from trading, but as I said extremely rare cases, and I believe its a one time offer that occurs, and that when and if it shows up you best get it as the next trade will make that one disappear. Once the spawner is placed it can't be moved as well. Also keep in mind that the wiki is written by a collection of dedicated users so prone to missing some things and sometimes misinformation.
Also its the only legit way to get bottles of enchanting, or whatever its called, its basically bottled xp.
its about priorities. Sure xbox can handle 240 villagers but then what happens when you have that, and 240 chickens, or cows, or some gigantic redstone contraption? You guys clearly know nothing about consoles. The more entities you have the more lag it will create, period. Its about resource management, they are not going to push the limits because then it would likely be unstable or laggy or both.
I honestly can't see a valid argument for increasing the limit. 50 isn't enough really?!?!
I'd post the spock face palm, but its not worth my time.
Just because I voted to raise the Villager cap, doesn't mean that I don't know a thing or two about resource management....
I just had a lengthy conversation with kaboPC and he says that the pig spawner was only available in a few version of MC and that these were not full versions by rather snapshots. I don't recall as it was along time ago when i acquired mine. So I may have shoved my foot in my mouth here, really sorry.
Depends on how useful I'll find Trading w/ Villagers to be. Also, I do enjoy making civilizations. They usually feel empty since it's 8 players per world max. It'd be nice to give them a sense of activity.
Just because we vote differently to you doesn't make us inexperienced or apathetic. We exercised our right to have an opinion in a democratic vote. Just saying
Honestly being inexperienced in certain aspects of the game isn't a bad thing. We've all been there and because someone is still learning parts of the game doesn't make them a bad player. Although, I do feel that a couple posters have have been ignoring that fact that everyone plays the game differently.(Maybe in my post it sounds like I may have been doing that, but that wasn't my intention.) Some people use villagers, and consider it a fun part of the game. Some do not, and that's ok too.
Posts following mine have proved my point even more. Saying, and declaring that players that are ignorant of managing system resources.. I think it's important to note that everyone's experience ingame is different and that's an awesome thing.
I've seen several valid arguments for increasing the cap. Looking over the posts I notice a variety of playstyles, and a few of the posters, including myself are really looking forward to trading. I'm trying to keep my current world, and have a space set for a trading hall. I'm building huge farms, and I have a iron golem farm. Looking at the current cap, it's limiting... and looking for perfect trades is going to be more time consuming that it needs to be.
One thing to note... This world was generated in TU12, and has about 70-100 villagers. I'm doing just fine. I'm aware of what can cause lag.. and I do spread things out now and then. More often I don't... There's an old style mob farm behind the base, etho's design, that I've been meaning to take down. During the day there might be quite a few mobs sloshing about in there. Maybe 50 or so..
Honestly the times I've experienced lag have mainly been when starting a new map the game is generating new chunks and multiplayer. I don't think either can be helped. Since I rarely play multiplayer,( not that I don't want to, just like to play with trustworthy players) and I play mainly single player, multiplayer lag isn't something I usually experience.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Oh well, the people have spoken! And are still speaking. Maybe it will change.
I think perhaps you're looking at this the wrong way..
Currently as I'm writing this, 24 people have voted. 8 of them voted that somehow, someway things are just fine.(Strange I know..) 16 other people have voted that the cap needs to be raised in some way. That's about 77% of the vote.
Either way, I've said it before, everyone plays the game differently.. I'm guessing that some people aren't as interested in ways to use villagers as an additional resource, for trades, iron, or just plain scenery. Through inexperience, or apathy. Although if that's the case, why vote? I haven't seen an intelligent argument for keeping the cap.. Sorry.. but all I've read is that, "Xbox can't handle it.." Which has been shot down by people who have experienced otherwise several times. Sure there's discussion about the villager AI, which I think is a separate issue from population.
I'd wager that many of those who said to leave it as is are just those who don't play the game with villagers as a factor, which is completely fine. But the majority do prefer villagers as part of the game so the cap should be raised. Especially since we already know the xbox can handle a greater number, why not do it?
The bugs relating to breeding and clumping, etc. are a seperate issue, but they too should be fixed.
Just because we vote differently to you doesn't make us inexperienced or apathetic. We exercised our right to have an opinion in a democratic vote. Just saying
I honestly can't see a valid argument for increasing the limit. 50 isn't enough really?!?!
I'd post the spock face palm, but its not worth my time.
What really burns me is that many are saying oh, 50 is fine, until they actually start 'wanting' to use them, at which point your '50' just don't cut it, If you have even 2 cells setup to produce iron, it leaves you with only a handful to be able to setup a good merchant hall. The goal for many in the next version will be to get 'perfect' villager trades, and to do this your going to burn through villagers like their is no tomorrow. Maybe when you have to wait 20 minutes between each merchant that you don't need/want you'll change your mind. You have to remember that 90% of villager trades are going to be garbage. And only 1% are perfect trades.
So lets say your after that pig spawner that one of the villagers will offer, your going to kill off at min 100 villagers to get the trade, assuming its offered as his first trade (more then likely not). So you kill off 2 of your villagers that have crappy trades, they breed and produce 2 new babys, you wait 20 minutes for them to grow up, and repeat 50x. If on the 100th villager you get the trade, it will have taken you roughly 17 hours to complete get the spawner. Now this is best case scenario, more often then not your going to have to burn through about 500 or so villagers to get something your after. Thus you need to multiple that 17 hours by 5.
Having more villagers means that you can setup merchant halls, in which if you don't like trades you can automatically get rid of that villager, and a new one will soon take its place which is already grown up and given to us from a infinite breeding cell that we setup deep below.
I understand that some may not wish to exploit the villager trading system, and that's all fine and dandy, you just don't setup a merchant hall and or infinite breeding cell. You can easily control the amount of villagers by providing the amount of doors to support the village population that you want. Point is don't ruin it for other people who do wish to use them and band together, vote for that increase, ya never know....down the road you may wish to use them and will be glad you voted for that increase.
A Pig spawner is just that, its like a monster spawner that you find throughout the world but instead of having a skeleton or zombie or spider spinning in the center it will be a pig, and it spawns pigs. GREAT for farms, but offered very very very rarely, in fact of all my trading on the PC i've only ever had it offered to me twice.
That's what it sounds like but I've never seen that before! And in my perfect villager hunt I went through some villagers. That's not even mentioned in the wiki! (As you can tell I use the wiki like a Bible) The only place I've seen a pig spawner is via the give command on PC. So you're saying that you can actually get a pig spawner via trading?........ that's just too crazy.
So are you blaming the lags in multiplayer on the number of villagers? That seems like a big conclusion without knowing how the coding works. I mean that all villagers use the same code. You aren't adding a new code for each villager. It is the same code whether you have 1 or 100 villagers.
I think most people who play on miltos teen can see that the lag occurs when events such as chests or crafting UI are opened, or someone traveling fast via minecart so that chunks are being loaded quickly. You don't see a lag when there are 50 villagers around you. Annoying maybe, but not the cause of the lag.
We have 6 natural villages in our seed. That doesn't leave much room for developing the towns when you have hit the cap. If people only want one town then maybe 50 is enough, but for those of us who want to create a world with destinations, a higher cap would be nice.
Yes you can get them from trading, but as I said extremely rare cases, and I believe its a one time offer that occurs, and that when and if it shows up you best get it as the next trade will make that one disappear. Once the spawner is placed it can't be moved as well. Also keep in mind that the wiki is written by a collection of dedicated users so prone to missing some things and sometimes misinformation.
Also its the only legit way to get bottles of enchanting, or whatever its called, its basically bottled xp.
Just because I voted to raise the Villager cap, doesn't mean that I don't know a thing or two about resource management....
Honestly being inexperienced in certain aspects of the game isn't a bad thing. We've all been there and because someone is still learning parts of the game doesn't make them a bad player. Although, I do feel that a couple posters have have been ignoring that fact that everyone plays the game differently.(Maybe in my post it sounds like I may have been doing that, but that wasn't my intention.) Some people use villagers, and consider it a fun part of the game. Some do not, and that's ok too.
Posts following mine have proved my point even more. Saying, and declaring that players that are ignorant of managing system resources.. I think it's important to note that everyone's experience ingame is different and that's an awesome thing.
I've seen several valid arguments for increasing the cap. Looking over the posts I notice a variety of playstyles, and a few of the posters, including myself are really looking forward to trading. I'm trying to keep my current world, and have a space set for a trading hall. I'm building huge farms, and I have a iron golem farm. Looking at the current cap, it's limiting... and looking for perfect trades is going to be more time consuming that it needs to be.
One thing to note... This world was generated in TU12, and has about 70-100 villagers. I'm doing just fine. I'm aware of what can cause lag.. and I do spread things out now and then. More often I don't... There's an old style mob farm behind the base, etho's design, that I've been meaning to take down. During the day there might be quite a few mobs sloshing about in there. Maybe 50 or so..
Honestly the times I've experienced lag have mainly been when starting a new map the game is generating new chunks and multiplayer. I don't think either can be helped. Since I rarely play multiplayer,( not that I don't want to, just like to play with trustworthy players) and I play mainly single player, multiplayer lag isn't something I usually experience.