1) I would say... for the very first part... village generation. Instead of completely negating villages being built on the sides of hills and if water is in the foundation and such... separate Villages into 2 classes... Cities, and Villages. Villages follow the current generation rules as they CURRENTLY are, with a few minor tweaks to make them not generate buildings completely under ground where the door is hidden, or being built 50 storys tall on the side of a sheer cliff with the front door off the side of said cliff, etc. Sounds okay.
Cities however, will be just big to massive and generate in large open terrain and do all that stuff about flattening terrain and such you suggested. Eh... I really am unsure whether or not cities (in the proper sense of massive villages) would work, because people have mentioned before that they would be absolute resource fests and basically secure you permanently, as such an establishment wouldn't even have a threat of being attacked by monsters without its oversized garrison wiping them out. With a normal village you have to at least make some form of preparation for things like zombie sieges, be that creating guardsmen, building walls, crafting golems, etc.- you can't just leave them on autopilot, because the village militia will only really work for basic night to night defense, and if they DO survive a zombie siege then they might contend with Illager sieges later, which are far deadlier. However, a proper city might come with some nice, unique threats. I think that "criminals" of some kind would be one, and far greater sieges. I will put up a poll for this.
This keeps the little trading outposts and ALSO gives a new dynamic type of village that conforms the landscape to the city, instead of the city to the landscape... to a certain degree. In an Amplified map for example, a city may conform to the terrain somewhat, like even building UPSIDE DOWN STRUCTURES under cliff overhangs for example. ...What? No. Literally nobody in their right mind will build a village on the side of a steep mountain or in the middle of a river.
2) For the BUILDER Villager... I would say make them ALSO REBUILD and REPAIR buildings. Okay, that sounds quite reasonable. I think I'll include this. If a building is damaged by a player and hat building is not acted upon by any player within 1 day, the Builder Villager will attempt to rebuild the building using a randomly generated blueprint that will fit within the space the building is still standing in, as long as there is a 2 air gap space between the outside of the new building and any adjacent solid blocks, glass, water, or other structures. Builder will call the miner and the lumberjack to remove anything that the builder is not equipped to remove or destroy. The three will work together to build the new building. This wouldn't work if there wasn't a Miner and Lumberjack. I don't see why the Builder couldn't just take out a hammer and break the offending blocks himself. Also calls on the engineer to "oversee" the building and the Engineer villager will grunt and whine and moan at the builder, miner, and lumberjack as if they are not doing what he is telling them quickly enough. His grunts and whines will be high pitched and squeaky, like a mixture between a villager squeak and a wolf whine. High and nasally sounding. Can be heard whining and nagging from up to 16 blocks away. The Engineer is not a foreman of builders, he's a Leonardo da Vinci type that does things like fiddle with redstone and gears, and study the surface of the Moon with his telescope from his house's roof at night. He wouldn't know the first thing about building a house, because that's not his field of expertise.
3) NO GUNS. Why not? Matchlock arquebuses were present after 1450-1475, and armor plates in various forms didn't fully vanish until the early 1700s. At a gameplay perspective, they offer a unique offensive weapon for Guardsmen and Brigands that allows them to be a threat to players wearing armor, disincentivising you from just rushing in and killing everybody unless you have a good plan. The extra damage and range also lets them defeat Skeletons.
4) Guardsman Villager: Will have a full suit of iron armor and a sword and shield (if they are from a village they will have no cape, if they are from a CITY they will have a cape with a coat of arms randomly selected for that city by the procedural generation system), or a helmet and breastplate of leather armor and carry a bow and arrows (again, village no cape, city with cape). Both will work together with the Iron Golem to defend the village and will patrol a dirt and grass beaten down path around a Village, or a fenced and walled in road around a City. I'm not having knight/heavy man-at-arms type Villagers whatsoever. The entire point of Iron Golems is to both take it and dish it out, letting Guardsmen fire without pressure being placed on them by Skeletons and Zombies. You throw in armored and melee-armed Villagers, you both clash with the sort of cowardly, non-action guy feel they have, and also defeat the purpose of Iron Golems. I get that Armorer villagers produce various melee weapons and armor, but I could consider doing something like giving the Guardsman an iron chestplate to reflect that (after all, iron cuirasses were used by arquebusiers in the 1490s to the 1600s). As for the beaten path, I don't see why it's necessary when they already patrol the village in a manner similar to Iron Golems. That lets them catch monsters inside without constantly skirmishing with mobs that were just wandering around and inevitably getting themselves killed with prolonged battle.
5) Alchemist Villager: Some will be in Purple robes that shimmer as if enchanted at all times and will be civilian Alchemists. These will work in shops and can be hired as free lance mercenaries if they do not have a shop of their own or are wandering about the village or city. Alchemists can already be hired. No hired Villager is a "mercenary" (in the sense of a soldier who fights for money) with, perhaps, the exception of Guardsmen. They're coming with you because you paid them, yes, but they're mostly civilians.
-- A second variant will be the Cleric Guardsman - This Alchemist Villager variant will have robes made of white leather armor with a red cross on their chest plate (and on their cape if they are from a city, cape will be plain if they are from a village, but they will ALWAYS have a cape), and they stand behind and work to heal their fellow guardsman as well as cast potions of harming and poison at enemy mobs. If you fight with them against a mob, they will also heal you by throwing splash potions on you as well. These CANNOT be hired as they are City and Village Guardsmen loyal to their people. That would clash with the ability to hire any Villager. Besides, Alchemists already throw potions of healing and harming (though they don't really fight as part of the militia, only if they are cornered or hired).
6) Captain of the Guard: Will always have a big bushy mustache... and never wears a helmet. Villagers wearing helmets look dumb anyways, hence why Guardsmen just have those cloth caps which are part of their texture. Has fully enchanted Diamond armor (minus thorns so he does not damage everything that comes in touch range of him) and a cape that shimmers as if it is enchanted... and carries a fully enchanted Diamond Longsword (Longsword soon to be implemented in a recent snapshot apparently???) and shield. REEEEEEEEE NO KNIGHTSVillagers shouldn't have diamond anything except for diamonds themselves, and only then as currency that Financiers are wealthy enough to have. Their military weapons are iron- from arquebuses to swords. Neither are they enchanted. Diamond, enchanted weapons are the hallmark of the player and the player only (with the exception of super-rare Zombie generations), and I like it that way.Font of chestplate, cape, and shield will ALL have the City coat of arms (mentioned above and chosen by the Procedural generation system of MineCraft), and can ONLY be spawned in a City. Stands back and directs his guardsmen where and what to attack and can be heard bellowing loudly during combat. Always grunts in a low baratone voice... a mixture between the pig grunt sound and a villager grunt sound. Never makes any other sound... but during combat that grunt gets LOUD and VERY forceful sounding. Can be heard clearly from up to 32 blocks away. Has 2 tamed wolves that follow him everywhere. This just sounds absolutely unnecessary. Not only do you technically fulfill the role of "Captain of the Guard", but having some random guy with full diamond armor, a cape, an enchanted sword, and two wolves following him around sounds less like a Minecraft mob and more like the sort of OC a 13 year old would make on DeviantART. I just can't see this guy in any serious light whatsoever.
-- DEPENDENT ON CITY SIZE, when the city is spawned: The Captain may ride different things. If the city is Massive, he will ride a very slow and nearly hobbled horse with shimmering (as if it is enchanted) diamond armor. If the city is just huge, his steed will be a donkey. If the city is only big, he will ride a llama. If said "city" is small enough to only be little bigger than a hilltop village... he will ride a saddled pig and direct it with a carrot on a stick,and have to dismount when he gets to the combat area. :-P ...That's an image that's never getting out of my brain. Besides, "mounted" Villagers shouldn't be. The existing guard mobs already draw some controversy, having a full Renaissance-era armed force with a captain, infantry, cavalry (though not artillery) would turn quite a few people away I believe.
7) City size will depend on building count. Players can convert a village into a city... but such a process MUST be done THROUGH THE VILLAGERS THEMSELVES. The PLAYER building buildings does not a city from a village make. ONLY the villagers can upgrade and convert their village into a city by building more buildings. The player can HELP build buildings, but this will automatically convert that building into a player built building and the villagers will not work to construct it unless they are hired specifically to do so as a work crew. "Cities" can already be made by villages slowly expanding themselves. Player buildings will count for size, but will only be repaired after village buildings, and only to the exact form in which they were originally made.
-- Work crew for a building must have at least one Engineer, one Lumberjack, One Builder, and One Miner Villager. Player built structures do NOT count towards city building count and will simply be built around as if they are a lump of bedrock. Which means you have to constantly breed villagers until you get all three. I'd prefer if the Builder could just do his job himself, like all the other Villagers.
8) VILLAGE building foundations are made from dirt and hardened and colored clay ONLY. CITY Foundations are built from Sandstone, Stone, Cobble, Granite, Andesite, Diorite, Hardened and Colored Clay, and Concrete... depending on where the City is located in relation to what biomes. If it crosses between 2 biomes... the City on one side of a biome is one type of materials, the city half on the other side of the transition be twen biomes is another type of materials. Building style does the same thing as well. Foundations are made of whatever the ground is made of, to keep things consistent. Foundations are only really just flattened or raised areas to keep the village from looking like a weird Dr. Seuss township, anyways.
9) Village Chief: ONLY spawns in Villages. Wears a black robe and makes the same sounds as the Engineer. High nasally whining. Does nothing but walk around all day and walk in and out of his Chieftain lodge. No villager walks within 7 blocks of him as they wish to avoid his whining. People don't like the idea of a "leader" Villager very much- I think it's better to just be able to decide who runs the place yourself. I originally wanted a Governor/Lord with red robes, who could hand out random generated "quests", but that seems like mod territory, and Villages aren't part of nations anyways, just their own sort of "city states" that might have trade agreements or defensive alliances at the very most. Might not be realistic, but Minecraft was never a realistic game.
10) City Mayor: ONLY SPAWNS IN CITIES - Same as the Village Chief except he wears a cape with the City Coat of Arms on it and goes in and out of the City Council building all day. All city dwellers avoid him by no less than 10 blocks. When bumped into, stops walking, starts to whine and grunt and complain for 5-15 seconds while spinning around in circles. Can be bribed for lower cost with trades for up to 1 in-game day. May be followed by a Financier in Massive Cities only. For the same reasons as the Village Chief, I'm gonna have to reject this one. The idea of him being a useless screechy twit who can only be really used as bribery fodder would also make quite a few people intolerant of him.
-- City Council Person: ONLY SPAWNS IN HUGE AND MASSIVE CITIES - Same as the City Mayor, only with Charcoal Grey colored robes instead... constantly walks within 1 block of and is constantly bumping into the City Mayor. Every time they bump into the City Mayor said Mayor grunts, moans, or whines. Can always be heard grunting, moaning, or whining at all times... never shuts up. Every time they bump into the Mayor they bow (crouch) 3-5 times while whining loudly. Causes all City Villagers to avoid the Mayor by 1 extra block per council person. Will never spawn with less than 2. Huge Cities spawn up to 5. Massive cities spawn up to 10. Never more than 3 blocks away from the mayor. Never stops walking. Can be bribed for lower cost with trades for up to 1-in game day. Totally unnecessary except for realism, so I don't see why I'd include these.
Responses in bold.
You have some solid ideas- such as cities and Builder repairs- but other stuff, I'm sorry to say, treads mod territory or is incompatible with the concept of the mod. I will try and see if I can include the two aforementioned items in v4.0, but I can't say that Villager knights, diamond-armored Captains of the Guards, and bows/swords instead of arquebuses would work well with the Update Civilis.
Nice idea! It seems unlikely that Mojang will add this to the game, but a modder can make this into a mod!
Thanks!
Mojang is unlikely to see anything on this forum, it being unofficial, but there's always the chance. And if a modder sees a suggestion and figures it's cool enough to make into a mod, it's basically the same result (in that you can play it instead of writing about it).
Rather than Villager cities, there should be specialized villages, such as villages built on large ore veins that have lots of mines, strongholds filled with Guardsmen, etc... They would have more of specific types of villager, to the detriment of other villager types, and would even have items only found there, either by having unique variations on events. This is a solid concept and I will most certainly add this to v4.0.
Additionally, there should be a "village grouping" that is made up of several villages spawned close enough to each other that they could be treated as "cities", but with each village being somewhat independent from each other, with them having unique offers to show that, along with a few structures between the villages, such as inns and small outposts. This sounds difficult to accomplish from a processing perspective, and since they'd be so close it would basically be a city itself. I don't want cities to be just giant Villages, I want them to have unique features and mobs. I was thinking something like a city wall that would generate first on open terrain, then a grid of gravel streets, then randomly generated buildings inside, with a castle of sorts at the center of the village. These cities would be the only Villages with proper leaders, I think they would be "princes" or "governors" since I don't want to imply that Villagers have huge nations (which "lord" or "king" would imply), but at the same time "mayor" seems too 'advanced' if that makes sense.
The chance of Arquebuses misfiring in rain should be removed, as that is more of an annoyance than anything, specially as such an issue can be avoided with a few blocks over the Player. This sounds good from a gameplay perspective- I'll do that. Funny note- the Japanese in real life figured out how to stop their arquebuses from misfiring in rain, by attaching lacquer boxes over the matchcord and lock mechanism. I'll just consolidate that with the Arquebus without changing its look or description, because it should be kept simple anyways.
Responses in bold. Thanks for the feedback- some of this is certainly making it into v4.0.
I like this idea, but there are a few parts I don't like.
I like the idea of hiring villagers and illagers, but some of the powers are over powered.
I think that a illager village is just not a good idea. There are already zombie villages, and the woodland mansions for them to spawn in.
I like the idea of the rusty golem, however, the stainless golem seems too powerful. Maybe if it decayed with time, or had to be maintained, it would be better, but if they are permanently that powerful, it is overpowered.
Finally the the technology just doesn't fit. The gun just doesn't fit with minecraft. This is a game of survival, where you craft weapons and tools to survive. The crossbow is a good idea, but the gun, even if it is just a primitive flintlock, just doesn't work. If it was harder to get, maybe. The gears, while providing vertical redstone, don't really work, but with some tweaking, it might work very well. The airship is just a cut price elytra. If it was uncraftable, and only obtainable by killing an Ace illager, (or them letting you borrow it by hiring them) it would be much better.
Overall
I give this 85% support.
With tweaking, it could be great, but does need a little bit of work.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
PM this account if you are interested in trading on DragCave
I like this idea, but there are a few parts I don't like.
I like the idea of hiring villagers and illagers, but some of the powers are over powered. Can you elaborate on this?
I think that a illager village is just not a good idea. There are already zombie villages, and the woodland mansions for them to spawn in. It's more diversity at the least. I am also feeling iffy about this, so I might modify them significantly in v4.0.
I like the idea of the rusty golem, however, the stainless golem seems too powerful. Maybe if it decayed with time, or had to be maintained, it would be better, but if they are permanently that powerful, it is overpowered. Makes up for it by being so rare. Stainless golems aren't Player-made golems; that image is just included as a general image of how it would resemble. Player golems still have the standard 100 HP and power.
Finally the the technology just doesn't fit. The gun just doesn't fit with minecraft.This is a game of survival, where you craft weapons and tools to survive. Right, but you can also craft light sensors, complex machinery, bundles of TNT, etc.- the Player is basically a god of creation as long as they have the right materials. And given that gunpowder occurs naturally in this world, if you have the iron and wood to do it, I don't see why you couldn't craft an arquebus at the very least. The crossbow is a good idea, but the gun, even if it is just a primitive flintmatchlock, just doesn't work. If it was harder to get, maybe. The gears, while providing vertical redstone, don't really work, but with some tweaking, it might work very well. ...How so? They're meant to represent more "primitive" Villager tech that's only just starting to dabble with redstone (hence they have more mechanical stuff), and it's also both a useful crafting ingredient and aThe airship is just a cut price elytra. Wrong- it has a height limit, it's slow, it requires fuel, it's a large target, but it CAN hover. I think that I will make it fall to the ground and blow up on destruction to make it more risky though. If it was uncraftable, and only obtainable by killing an Ace illager, (or them letting you borrow it by hiring them) it would be much better. I'll say something I've said before: guns pierce armor. That lets your unarmored, melee-averse Guardsman still be a threat to some guy rolling up in full iron armor with a sword saying "i'd rather torch this village and get those sweet Illager hires than these Villager ones". To be "evil" you have to properly plan- rushing in will just get you blasted. A bow or crossbow just can't do that- and if I want an armor-piercing weapon, I'd much rather have a unique musket than a Bow turned sideways and strapped to a plank.
Overall
I give this 85% support.
With tweaking, it could be great, but does need a little bit of work.
Thanks for the responses. My responses are in bold.
As to the recent controversy surrounding the Arquebus, I'd like to offer some reasons as to why I chose it and not my initial plan (bows for Medieval-style guards):
It's really unique compared to the Bow. You can tell right away that it's gonna be slow shooting, hard hitting, and your armor won't be as good against it, because that's the "public consciousness" view of a musket of any kind. A bow or crossbow is much harder to think of in that frame right away, and some people even immediately think "fast shooting" when they see a crossbow. The Arquebus itself will have an effect added to indicate pierced armor in v4.0; likely a burst of sparks and a loud "CLANG" noise, perhaps even with a quick indicator showing a ball smashing through an iron plate or something similar.
It's long-ranged. Guardsmen have only 10 hearts and no armor, and I will not give them armor of any kind (I don't want Villager knights, if they're getting into the action it's strictly at range) apart from perhaps chainmail chestplates or something similar. The ability to shoot a Skeleton starting from 24 blocks instead of 16 is critical if you don't want every Guardsman-Skeleton skirmish to end with the Skeleton dead and the Guardsman at 1/2 a heart of health. Now mind you, Guardsmen aren't supposed to be unkillable gods of war or master snipers, but at the very least the average Golem-less village militia should have the power to hold off random wandering Zombies and Skeletons.
It fits in perfectly with Minecraft's usage of plate armor and swords. No, really. The full set of iron plate we associate with stereotypicalc knights (and Minecraft's Iron Armor) only came into being in the 1530s, 5-10 years after the Conquistadors had taken over the Aztecs and the French cavalry were routed at Pavia by German pike and shot. Before the proper "gunpowder age" started in 1450 or so, chain mail and leather padding was the order of the day. Plate armor itself is the source of the "bullet proof" term; because armorsmiths would fire a pistol at the chestplate to see if it could deflect a bullet. Now, mind you, a long gun like the Arquebus is just gonna punch through, but at long range it could bounce; I've simplified that to it just halving the "power" of the armor it hits when it's calculating its shot damage (and that only; if you hit them with a sword right after their armor would still resist it normally).
It's much more expensive than a Crossbow. Being made of iron, with Flint and Steel and wood, it's more than just a Bow, a plank, and an iron ingot. That only gets worse with its ammo, which requires iron, paper, and gunpowder to support, and which doesn't craft as many units as a time as arrows. This is one of its counterbalances; the arquebus will not be your first weapon, but rather come into your hands only after you have used the Bow well (unless you rush for it, which then requires you go out of your way to fight Creepers to keep yourself supplied with powder, all without Iron Armor), and likely after you've seen it for the first time in the hands of a Guardsman.
That, hopefully, should clear some stuff up regarding why I chose that item instead of a crossbow or bow. I intend on sticking to my guns (hue) with this part of the suggestion, because I feel like it's a very integral part of making an effective and challenging village defense without resorting to weird, theme-breaking options such as Villager knights.
Ok, thanks for informing me about the golems, I was confused. Redstone, fair enough. I get that the Airship would be slow, and fuel hungry, but it still makes flight too easy. Perhaps if something like the chorus fruit was required in its creation. Thinking about it, a armor piercing weapon would be a good idea, so long as it does not render diamond armor redundant. If someone has the matchlock, armor would be useless. Any noob could beat a pro. Thank you for the information on the villagers. In that light, it is a good idea.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
PM this account if you are interested in trading on DragCave
There should be a few items that can only be obtained by trading with Villagers or Illagers, such as a new bread variant that could be bought from Bakers (Which could be eaten more quickly than most foods), blocks that are only sold by Builders, or kits to upgrade items (Such as, say, blacksmiths selling an item that "overrepairs" iron tools to the point of having doubled durability, or Engineers an item that adds superimposed charges to Arquebuses, letting them fire a 4-round burst, at the cost of less accuracy, higher reload time, and still using an ammo item per shot).
That's an interesting concept. I'm particularly interested in the Engineer's upgrades; perhaps you could have a "tinkering" mechanic where you could toss Emeralds and a weapon/tool to him, and he would apply a random upgrade with his mad science engineering skill (e.g. extra barrels to your Arquebus allowing repeating shots, a hoe with a hopper attached that could automatically plant crops on blocks that it plows, etc.). What do you think of that?
There should be a few items that can only be obtained by trading with Villagers or Illagers, such as a new bread variant that could be bought from Bakers (Which could be eaten more quickly than most foods), blocks that are only sold by Builders, or kits to upgrade items (Such as, say, blacksmiths selling an item that "overrepairs" iron tools to the point of having doubled durability, or Engineers an item that adds superimposed charges to Arquebuses, letting them fire a 4-round burst, at the cost of less accuracy, higher reload time, and still using an ammo item per shot).
That's an interesting concept. I'm particularly interested in the Engineer's upgrades; perhaps you could have a "tinkering" mechanic where you could toss Emeralds and a weapon/tool to him, and he would apply a random upgrade with his mad science engineering skill (e.g. extra barrels to your Arquebus allowing repeating shots, a hoe with a hopper attached that could automatically plant crops on blocks that it plows, etc.). What do you think of that?
I've already explained why I went with this unusual design decision before, but I'll reiterate:
I don't want Villager knights or golem hordes.
"Now wait," you ask, "that's not what I said. I don't want to see Villagers with muskets." Well, therein lies the problem. You have to either choose between...
A pathetically weak village defense force (lone Iron Golems, sword or bow wielding militiamen with no armor) that cannot stand up to a rampaging Iron Armor covered player or repeated incursions by wandering hostile mobs in the night. This is what's in present Minecraft (requiring you brick Villagers into their houses) and what would be in a gunless Update Civilis.
A strong defense force that can hold off daily attacks, dissuade a player from attacking unless they have a good plan on how they'll do it, and at least make a half decent attempt at stopping a zombie siege. This would require strong mobs such as the aforementioned Villager knights.
The latter, using Minecraft's current tech, demands either a ridiculous amount of defensive mobs, or a proportional pool of very strong ones. Villagers are supposed to be moderately passive, from what Mojang's given them; they don't have big nations, they don't have vast alliances, they just have their independent towns, which I'd imagine would have trade routes or defensive alliances but no more than that (and I don't plan on including either of those, because they start treading full-scale RPG territory). I don't want them being stupid hardcore melee guys who can take down thirty zombies on their own, which knights would have.
You could say that the Golems would cover all aspects of village defending, but they're quite expensive and it would look stupid if even the tiniest hamlets had two or three Iron Golems patrolling around. (I don't want stone or wooden Golems either, since that's starting to look more Stone Age if anything.) The thing with Golems too is that they're slow and melee based, and that's honestly a terrible idea for villages if it's not just a few "tank" units like Golems are currently, since zombies and skellies can easily enter in far too many areas at once for them to handle things. To sum it up, villages need a force that can react to things rapidly and appear to be less expensive, and Golems can't do either of those.
Hence, that brings us to three concepts a village defensive mob needs:
To be dangerous to an armored player enough that they can't just rush in and massacre them all
To be able to hold off daily attacks from monsters wandering into the village, and to possibly hold off a zombie siege
To not be a new Golem or heavily armored Villager
Let's examine the Guardsman now that we know these criteria.
He's unarmored. A few good strikes from a higher level sword will ruin his day easily. This compensates for his ranged ability and relative abundance.
He's got no melee weapon. He can hit monsters with his arquebus, but that'll just knock them back and deal a pittance of damage. He is not a close up melee dude, that's the Iron Golems' role.
He's got an arquebus.
This gives him a 24 block range, so he can skirmish with Skeletons without losing 3/4 of his health in an arrow duel.
This gives him 4 damage per shot; he can defeat a Zombie in 3 shots instead of the 4-6 that mob arrows would take.
This forces him to take 3 seconds to reload, moving at sneaking speed, after each shot. A smart player can use this time to attack, rewarding combat intelligence and planning if you want to destroy villages to get in the Illagers' good graces.
Most importantly, this lets him ignore 50% of the enemy's armor. This here is why he has a gun.Suddenly, 3 Guardsmen go from being sword fodder to being a credible threat to an iron-armored player, enough to make you think "Okay, how am I going to go about this battle" instead of charging down the road. Not only that, but Zombies- who can have armor- and Illagers- who often have more health than the player- won't just steamroll them now in sieges or raids.
The decision to give the Guardsman an arquebus was not one taken lightly. I myself detest suggestions that want guns from after 1530 or so without a very good reason for its existence. But archers just don't cut it, and armored knights are a total antithesis for the cautious, passive, defensive villagers. That, and player-style helmets on Villagers are the stupidest things I've ever seen in my entire life. Seriously, look it up and try not to laugh.
This, specifically, is what I'm shooting for (hue hue) when I portray the Arquebus; nowhere near an 18-19th century "refined" flintlock that might be seen in an American Revolution movie, but early matchlock firearms of the sort carried by conquistadors, explorers, and soldiers in the early 1500s; which coexisted with knightly armor and splendor until modern armies and recruiting put an end to the feudal system, rather than battlefield weapons.
Hopefully, that clears up the discussion on guns; I put them in for a specific reason and I figure that I've balanced them well enough to be interesting and unique instead of just "bow+". I'm very open to suggestions regarding this still, but they won't be removed in the foreseeable future.
As for some actual news, I think I have given the polls enough time to cook; I will be updating the suggestion to v4.0 by tonight. Stay tuned!
I am not trying to plug my thread or report you for copying or anything like that. Here is my thread from alchemists (If you like it, then you can get some ideas from it) Alchemists!
Also, since many are complaning about the guns, I have a solution.
The crossbow would be an instant fire weapon with a cool down. The tip of the arrow could be made out of metal to indicate that it is strong. They can also target from very far away and what would be cool is if they could climb ladders and shoot from towers
I am not trying to plug my thread or report you for copying or anything like that. Here is my thread from alchemists (If you like it, then you can get some ideas from it) Alchemists!
Also, since many are complaining about the guns, I have a solution.
The crossbow would be an instant fire weapon with a cool down. The tip of the arrow could be made out of metal to indicate that it is strong. They can also target from very far away and what would be cool is if they could climb ladders and shoot from towers
Nice work with your thread- I like it!
I do not think I will change the Guardsmen's weapons in the future. The fact remains that the best weapon to make them threatening to even armored players, and mobs at range, without resorting to enchantments or heavy armor, is the arquebus; a crossbow can't penetrate armor (and if it did, it'd beg the question of "why can't bows"- plus, it's way too similar to the Bow appearance wise).
Since villagers can already utilize ladders in this suggestion, I like the idea of Guardsmen trying to get to higher ground to shoot. I think I will add this come the next update cycle.
This is easily the best set of suggestions I've ever read regarding Minecraft. Although stating that they'd require a complete 1.1x Update is an extreme understatement. It would require (At Least) several major updates for complete implementation This update in its entirety would probably constitute as the largest single content expansion Minecraft has ever received, and if every single aspect of the game ever received anywhere near this amount of complexity it could actually be labeled as Minecraft 2.0. My mouth waters at the very thought.
I guess I could try to mod it in somehow, but I've never modded anything near this scale, so don't expect much from me.
To say an understatement... that's quite a lot of changes. I'm lagging right now as I type this text because of the sheer amount of text I just quoted.
This would definitely need at least one major update to implement. However, that's only if it will be implemented, and I have some issues with that.
I'll try to address some of my disagreements 1-by-1 using bolded and underlined text. If I don't mention something, it's because I either support it or don't feel it noteworthy enough to respond to. Really, I find it strange that some people are giving Full Support, because I highly doubt that out of these suggestions they don't have a single disagreement with any of them. Anyways. Gentlemen? Let's begin.
Villages now “flatten” the terrain around them slightly instead of exactly conforming to terrain for generation.
Villages will not generate on the sides of mountains or other inhospitable places. A village will be more likely to spawn on flat land, ideally with water nearby.
Buildings no longer spawn if they have water under a part of their foundation.
The first suggestion is steam66's! He's... suggested villages conforming to terrain.
Enough Expiration Date references.
This isn't a game-breaking idea, but I think that while villages in mountains could be improved (we'll get to that later), villages in strange places are more diverse and uniquely entertaining. Every single village spawning on flat land in similar biomes will honestly be quite boring.
Villages now have random names (Tarnhill, Redport, etc.) that are automatically generated upon first encountering them, and which pop up when you enter or leave a village. This both flavors things and helps you know exactly where a village starts and ends when creating ones.
Well, Tarnhill better be on a hill, and Redport better be near the sea.
I don't agree with the popping up part. Villages don't exactly have clearly defined boundaries, as far as I know, and there's nothing wrong with that. The unique names does sound like a neat idea, but I don't think this is the best way to add it.
Villages now have a distinct "flag". This is a red banner with a stylized Testificate head on it in gold.
Does every village have the same flag? If so, that's still kinda boring. If not, where are you gonna find that many unique flag designs?
You can edit the name of a village with the command /editvillagename [Name of village] [New name], which is not considered a cheat.
Can still be considered a cheat because it provides gameplay advantages (keep track of which village has which trade). Not noteworthy enough to add a completely new command for.
However, this might already be implemented. I checked online, and apparently, sneak-clicking a village with a name tag will rename the villager. If that's true, we don't need a new way to rename villagers.
Villagers are divided into “low” and “high” class depending on their profession (e.g. a farmer will be low class, but a librarian will be high class). This doesn’t really mean anything but what kind of hats they can wear and how embellished their robes are.
Like you said, it doesn't really mean anything and thus isn't very useful. Villager appearance is already defined by their class.
Low-class villagers can have leather hoods, simple caps, or be bare-headed. High-class villagers tend to wear hats more often, and can have more elaborate hats, including feathered caps.
Hats on villagers would seem weird in a block game. Right now, the only hats in Minecraft are helmets, and I'm personally fine with that.
High-class villagers can sometimes read a book, opening and holding it in their arms for a while. Cartographers can sometimes read maps.
Sounds good, but additionally, they should look up and put the book or map away if a player comes within a certain distance of them.
Villagers can barricade doors now. They will quickly run up and make a hammering noise, then a few boards will appear over the door texture. A barricaded door takes twice as long for a zombie to break, but a villager can only barricade the door once. They will only do this when they are cornered (i.e. have no second door or ladder with which they can escape).
Villagers are getting a little too smart. Have you ever considered that villagers may be intentionally designed to look and sound, well, 'stupid'? They have long noses and folded arms. They make weird noises, run off cliffs, stare at each other, stare at the player, run in circles, you name it. It's part of what makes them unique and unlike other human-like NPCs in other games.
Arquebus
You've been playing TF2 again, haven't you?
Airship
Mate.
I didn't respond to the others because I realized what might be the intention behind the villager's design. You have some very good, diverse ideas in here, but realistically speaking, is Mj/MS really willing to risk making the Minecraft villager into basically an RPG game's NPC?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote me if you're replying to my comment please.
Check out my maps! Vampire and Hunter PVP - multiplayer PvP map:
Since the quoting system is a little weird, I'll respond to each of these through a conventional post. Responses are in italics now, since you've already bolded yours.
Villages now “flatten” the terrain around them slightly instead of exactly conforming to terrain for generation.
Villages will not generate on the sides of mountains or other inhospitable places. A village will be more likely to spawn on flat land, ideally with water nearby.
Buildings no longer spawn if they have water under a part of their foundation.
The first suggestion is steam66's! He's... suggested villages conforming to terrain.
What? I'm not sure what you mean here. Villages aren't supposed to exactly conform to terrain anymore, instead they sort of "regularize" the land around them (not perfectly, mind you) to make the place look more natural and less like a bunch of houses randomly slapped onto the side of a mountain.
Enough Expiration Date references.
Didn't intend any.
This isn't a game-breaking idea, but I think that while villages in mountains could be improved (we'll get to that later), villages in strange places are more diverse and uniquely entertaining. Every single village spawning on flat land in similar biomes will honestly be quite boring. Mountain villages still exist- just that villages tend to flatten land somewhat around them.
Villages now have random names (Tarnhill, Redport, etc.) that are automatically generated upon first encountering them, and which pop up when you enter or leave a village. This both flavors things and helps you know exactly where a village starts and ends when creating ones.
Well, Tarnhill better be on a hill, and Redport better be near the sea.
I figure that a village spawning on a beach biome could always end in "-port", but otherwise it's randomly generated.
I don't agree with the popping up part. Villages don't exactly have clearly defined boundaries, as far as I know, and there's nothing wrong with that. The unique names does sound like a neat idea, but I don't think this is the best way to add it. They do. This is used to determine things like whether or not villagers stay in a village or randomly wander (i.e. if they fit in the boundaries). The name thing is both to flavor things up and to provide an exact determination of whether or not you are in the boundaries, which is highly useful for players who like planning out their towns.
Villages now have a distinct "flag". This is a red banner with a stylized Testificate head on it in gold.
Does every village have the same flag? If so, that's still kinda boring. If not, where are you gonna find that many unique flag designs? You're right. I should change this to a randomly generated banner.
You can edit the name of a village with the command /editvillagename [Name of village] [New name], which is not considered a cheat.
Can still be considered a cheat because it provides gameplay advantages (keep track of which village has which trade). Not noteworthy enough to add a completely new command for.
You're thinking of villagers. This command is related to VILLAGES. Doing it would let you rename, say, Tarnhill to "Pootis Land" or whatever the heck you want if you don't like the village's name.
However, this might already be implemented. I checked online, and apparently, sneak-clicking a village with a name tag will rename the villager. If that's true, we don't need a new way to rename villagers.
Villagers are divided into “low” and “high” class depending on their profession (e.g. a farmer will be low class, but a librarian will be high class). This doesn’t really mean anything but what kind of hats they can wear and how embellished their robes are.
Like you said, it doesn't really mean anything and thus isn't very useful. Villager appearance is already defined by their class. It controls things like the order of response for Guardsmen (forgive me if I forgot to write that down) and what hats are worn. It doesn't appear in any named form in-game, but is an internal form of differentiation.
Low-class villagers can have leather hoods, simple caps, or be bare-headed. High-class villagers tend to wear hats more often, and can have more elaborate hats, including feathered caps.
Hats on villagers would seem weird in a block game. Right now, the only hats in Minecraft are helmets, and I'm personally fine with that. Basic cloth caps look fine, and the other more complex hats can use the second layer on heads, such as how some player skins do it. It really isn't impossible in any way.
High-class villagers can sometimes read a book, opening and holding it in their arms for a while. Cartographers can sometimes read maps.
Sounds good, but additionally, they should look up and put the book or map away if a player comes within a certain distance of them. Good idea. I'll add this.
Villagers can barricade doors now. They will quickly run up and make a hammering noise, then a few boards will appear over the door texture. A barricaded door takes twice as long for a zombie to break, but a villager can only barricade the door once. They will only do this when they are cornered (i.e. have no second door or ladder with which they can escape).
Villagers are getting a little too smart. Have you ever considered that villagers may be intentionally designed to look and sound, well, 'stupid'? They have long noses and folded arms. They make weird noises, run off cliffs, stare at each other, stare at the player, run in circles, you name it. It's part of what makes them unique and unlike other human-like NPCs in other games. Dude. They're smart enough to set up these villages and manage daily life. The fact that their current AI is nightmarishly dumb is a fault, not a feature. Furthermore, literally nobody whatsoever likes dumb villagers in practice; they get themselves killed so easily it's not even funny, to the point where you have to brick them into their houses to keep them safe. That's not a preferable alternative to having them be smart enough to not die like flies.
Arquebus
You've been playing TF2 again, haven't you? What's wrong with that? And besides, TF2 lacks any kind of musket type weapon, so I don't get what you're trying to say here.
Airship
Mate.
This is nowhere near sufficient for me to know what you find wrong with this.
Responses in bold.
You have some solid ideas- such as cities and Builder repairs- but other stuff, I'm sorry to say, treads mod territory or is incompatible with the concept of the mod. I will try and see if I can include the two aforementioned items in v4.0, but I can't say that Villager knights, diamond-armored Captains of the Guards, and bows/swords instead of arquebuses would work well with the Update Civilis.
We're doing a mod project, check it out:
I have gone ahead and added two polls (on Villager leaders and cities). I will delay v4.0 by 3-5 days to get responses on this.
If you have other suggestions, content you made, or just your own two cents on anything- as always- feel free to post them.
EDIT: Recreated poll #2 after it was accidentally closed before anyone voted. Derp.
We're doing a mod project, check it out:
Nice idea! It seems unlikely that Mojang will add this to the game, but a modder can make this into a mod!
I support Phantom Additions:
https://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-java-edition/suggestions/2895432-the-phantom-additions
Thanks!
Mojang is unlikely to see anything on this forum, it being unofficial, but there's always the chance. And if a modder sees a suggestion and figures it's cool enough to make into a mod, it's basically the same result (in that you can play it instead of writing about it).
We're doing a mod project, check it out:
Responses in bold. Thanks for the feedback- some of this is certainly making it into v4.0.
We're doing a mod project, check it out:
I like this idea, but there are a few parts I don't like.
Overall
I give this 85% support.
With tweaking, it could be great, but does need a little bit of work.
PM this account if you are interested in trading on DragCave
Thanks for the responses. My responses are in bold.
As to the recent controversy surrounding the Arquebus, I'd like to offer some reasons as to why I chose it and not my initial plan (bows for Medieval-style guards):
That, hopefully, should clear some stuff up regarding why I chose that item instead of a crossbow or bow. I intend on sticking to my guns (hue) with this part of the suggestion, because I feel like it's a very integral part of making an effective and challenging village defense without resorting to weird, theme-breaking options such as Villager knights.
We're doing a mod project, check it out:
Ok, thanks for informing me about the golems, I was confused. Redstone, fair enough. I get that the Airship would be slow, and fuel hungry, but it still makes flight too easy. Perhaps if something like the chorus fruit was required in its creation. Thinking about it, a armor piercing weapon would be a good idea, so long as it does not render diamond armor redundant. If someone has the matchlock, armor would be useless. Any noob could beat a pro. Thank you for the information on the villagers. In that light, it is a good idea.
PM this account if you are interested in trading on DragCave
That's an interesting concept. I'm particularly interested in the Engineer's upgrades; perhaps you could have a "tinkering" mechanic where you could toss Emeralds and a weapon/tool to him, and he would apply a random upgrade with his
mad scienceengineering skill (e.g. extra barrels to your Arquebus allowing repeating shots, a hoe with a hopper attached that could automatically plant crops on blocks that it plows, etc.). What do you think of that?We're doing a mod project, check it out:
That's an interesting concept. I'm particularly interested in the Engineer's upgrades; perhaps you could have a "tinkering" mechanic where you could toss Emeralds and a weapon/tool to him, and he would apply a random upgrade with his
mad scienceengineering skill (e.g. extra barrels to your Arquebus allowing repeating shots, a hoe with a hopper attached that could automatically plant crops on blocks that it plows, etc.). What do you think of that?We're doing a mod project, check it out:
No guns.
How do you download this?
I've already explained why I went with this unusual design decision before, but I'll reiterate:
I don't want Villager knights or golem hordes.
"Now wait," you ask, "that's not what I said. I don't want to see Villagers with muskets." Well, therein lies the problem. You have to either choose between...
The latter, using Minecraft's current tech, demands either a ridiculous amount of defensive mobs, or a proportional pool of very strong ones. Villagers are supposed to be moderately passive, from what Mojang's given them; they don't have big nations, they don't have vast alliances, they just have their independent towns, which I'd imagine would have trade routes or defensive alliances but no more than that (and I don't plan on including either of those, because they start treading full-scale RPG territory). I don't want them being stupid hardcore melee guys who can take down thirty zombies on their own, which knights would have.
You could say that the Golems would cover all aspects of village defending, but they're quite expensive and it would look stupid if even the tiniest hamlets had two or three Iron Golems patrolling around. (I don't want stone or wooden Golems either, since that's starting to look more Stone Age if anything.) The thing with Golems too is that they're slow and melee based, and that's honestly a terrible idea for villages if it's not just a few "tank" units like Golems are currently, since zombies and skellies can easily enter in far too many areas at once for them to handle things. To sum it up, villages need a force that can react to things rapidly and appear to be less expensive, and Golems can't do either of those.
Hence, that brings us to three concepts a village defensive mob needs:
Let's examine the Guardsman now that we know these criteria.
The decision to give the Guardsman an arquebus was not one taken lightly. I myself detest suggestions that want guns from after 1530 or so without a very good reason for its existence. But archers just don't cut it, and armored knights are a total antithesis for the cautious, passive, defensive villagers. That, and player-style helmets on Villagers are the stupidest things I've ever seen in my entire life. Seriously, look it up and try not to laugh.
This, specifically, is what I'm shooting for (hue hue) when I portray the Arquebus; nowhere near an 18-19th century "refined" flintlock that might be seen in an American Revolution movie, but early matchlock firearms of the sort carried by conquistadors, explorers, and soldiers in the early 1500s; which coexisted with knightly armor and splendor until modern armies and recruiting put an end to the feudal system, rather than battlefield weapons.
Hopefully, that clears up the discussion on guns; I put them in for a specific reason and I figure that I've balanced them well enough to be interesting and unique instead of just "bow+". I'm very open to suggestions regarding this still, but they won't be removed in the foreseeable future.
As for some actual news, I think I have given the polls enough time to cook; I will be updating the suggestion to v4.0 by tonight. Stay tuned!
We're doing a mod project, check it out:
I like this idea. It would make the minecraft world more interesting to explore and trade more open-ended.
Full support
I am not trying to plug my thread or report you for copying or anything like that. Here is my thread from alchemists (If you like it, then you can get some ideas from it) Alchemists!
Also, since many are complaning about the guns, I have a solution.
The crossbow would be an instant fire weapon with a cool down. The tip of the arrow could be made out of metal to indicate that it is strong. They can also target from very far away and what would be cool is if they could climb ladders and shoot from towers
Nice work with your thread- I like it!
I do not think I will change the Guardsmen's weapons in the future. The fact remains that the best weapon to make them threatening to even armored players, and mobs at range, without resorting to enchantments or heavy armor, is the arquebus; a crossbow can't penetrate armor (and if it did, it'd beg the question of "why can't bows"- plus, it's way too similar to the Bow appearance wise).
Since villagers can already utilize ladders in this suggestion, I like the idea of Guardsmen trying to get to higher ground to shoot. I think I will add this come the next update cycle.
We're doing a mod project, check it out:
Thank you very much for taking my ideas into consideration. After reading your muskets thread I can totally understand the weapon of choice. Nice work
This is easily the best set of suggestions I've ever read regarding Minecraft. Although stating that they'd require a complete 1.1x Update is an extreme understatement. It would require (At Least) several major updates for complete implementation This update in its entirety would probably constitute as the largest single content expansion Minecraft has ever received, and if every single aspect of the game ever received anywhere near this amount of complexity it could actually be labeled as Minecraft 2.0. My mouth waters at the very thought.
I guess I could try to mod it in somehow, but I've never modded anything near this scale, so don't expect much from me.
Otherwise, complete support!
To say an understatement... that's quite a lot of changes. I'm lagging right now as I type this text because of the sheer amount of text I just quoted.
This would definitely need at least one major update to implement. However, that's only if it will be implemented, and I have some issues with that.
I'll try to address some of my disagreements 1-by-1 using bolded and underlined text. If I don't mention something, it's because I either support it or don't feel it noteworthy enough to respond to. Really, I find it strange that some people are giving Full Support, because I highly doubt that out of these suggestions they don't have a single disagreement with any of them. Anyways. Gentlemen? Let's begin.
I didn't respond to the others because I realized what might be the intention behind the villager's design. You have some very good, diverse ideas in here, but realistically speaking, is Mj/MS really willing to risk making the Minecraft villager into basically an RPG game's NPC?
Quote me if you're replying to my comment please.
Check out my maps!
Vampire and Hunter PVP - multiplayer PvP map:
Custom vanilla mobs showcase map:
Collection of two WIP maps (Quad SB and Advanced Village) [MinecraftForum thread]
Since the quoting system is a little weird, I'll respond to each of these through a conventional post. Responses are in italics now, since you've already bolded yours.
Villages now “flatten” the terrain around them slightly instead of exactly conforming to terrain for generation.
Villages will not generate on the sides of mountains or other inhospitable places. A village will be more likely to spawn on flat land, ideally with water nearby.
Buildings no longer spawn if they have water under a part of their foundation.
The first suggestion is steam66's! He's... suggested villages conforming to terrain.
What? I'm not sure what you mean here. Villages aren't supposed to exactly conform to terrain anymore, instead they sort of "regularize" the land around them (not perfectly, mind you) to make the place look more natural and less like a bunch of houses randomly slapped onto the side of a mountain.
Enough Expiration Date references.
Didn't intend any.
This isn't a game-breaking idea, but I think that while villages in mountains could be improved (we'll get to that later), villages in strange places are more diverse and uniquely entertaining. Every single village spawning on flat land in similar biomes will honestly be quite boring.
Mountain villages still exist- just that villages tend to flatten land somewhat around them.
Villages now have random names (Tarnhill, Redport, etc.) that are automatically generated upon first encountering them, and which pop up when you enter or leave a village. This both flavors things and helps you know exactly where a village starts and ends when creating ones.
Well, Tarnhill better be on a hill, and Redport better be near the sea.
I figure that a village spawning on a beach biome could always end in "-port", but otherwise it's randomly generated.
I don't agree with the popping up part. Villages don't exactly have clearly defined boundaries, as far as I know, and there's nothing wrong with that. The unique names does sound like a neat idea, but I don't think this is the best way to add it.
They do. This is used to determine things like whether or not villagers stay in a village or randomly wander (i.e. if they fit in the boundaries). The name thing is both to flavor things up and to provide an exact determination of whether or not you are in the boundaries, which is highly useful for players who like planning out their towns.
Villages now have a distinct "flag". This is a red banner with a stylized Testificate head on it in gold.
Does every village have the same flag? If so, that's still kinda boring. If not, where are you gonna find that many unique flag designs?
You're right. I should change this to a randomly generated banner.
You can edit the name of a village with the command /editvillagename [Name of village] [New name], which is not considered a cheat.
Can still be considered a cheat because it provides gameplay advantages (keep track of which village has which trade). Not noteworthy enough to add a completely new command for.
You're thinking of villagers. This command is related to VILLAGES. Doing it would let you rename, say, Tarnhill to "Pootis Land" or whatever the heck you want if you don't like the village's name.
However, this might already be implemented. I checked online, and apparently, sneak-clicking a village with a name tag will rename the villager. If that's true, we don't need a new way to rename villagers.
Villagers are divided into “low” and “high” class depending on their profession (e.g. a farmer will be low class, but a librarian will be high class). This doesn’t really mean anything but what kind of hats they can wear and how embellished their robes are.
Like you said, it doesn't really mean anything and thus isn't very useful. Villager appearance is already defined by their class.
It controls things like the order of response for Guardsmen (forgive me if I forgot to write that down) and what hats are worn. It doesn't appear in any named form in-game, but is an internal form of differentiation.
Low-class villagers can have leather hoods, simple caps, or be bare-headed. High-class villagers tend to wear hats more often, and can have more elaborate hats, including feathered caps.
Hats on villagers would seem weird in a block game. Right now, the only hats in Minecraft are helmets, and I'm personally fine with that.
Basic cloth caps look fine, and the other more complex hats can use the second layer on heads, such as how some player skins do it. It really isn't impossible in any way.
High-class villagers can sometimes read a book, opening and holding it in their arms for a while. Cartographers can sometimes read maps.
Sounds good, but additionally, they should look up and put the book or map away if a player comes within a certain distance of them.
Good idea. I'll add this.
Villagers can barricade doors now. They will quickly run up and make a hammering noise, then a few boards will appear over the door texture. A barricaded door takes twice as long for a zombie to break, but a villager can only barricade the door once. They will only do this when they are cornered (i.e. have no second door or ladder with which they can escape).
Villagers are getting a little too smart. Have you ever considered that villagers may be intentionally designed to look and sound, well, 'stupid'? They have long noses and folded arms. They make weird noises, run off cliffs, stare at each other, stare at the player, run in circles, you name it. It's part of what makes them unique and unlike other human-like NPCs in other games.
Dude. They're smart enough to set up these villages and manage daily life. The fact that their current AI is nightmarishly dumb is a fault, not a feature. Furthermore, literally nobody whatsoever likes dumb villagers in practice; they get themselves killed so easily it's not even funny, to the point where you have to brick them into their houses to keep them safe. That's not a preferable alternative to having them be smart enough to not die like flies.
Arquebus
You've been playing TF2 again, haven't you?
What's wrong with that? And besides, TF2 lacks any kind of musket type weapon, so I don't get what you're trying to say here.
Airship
Mate.
This is nowhere near sufficient for me to know what you find wrong with this.
We're doing a mod project, check it out: