To me it seems silly to allow taiga trees in jungles or the nether and jungle trees in tundras or The End.
Make it so jungles need hot biomes, acacia warm, birch moderate, dark oak cool, oak cold, and spruce frozen. Or something of the sort.
It's not quite that simple, while it is true climate affects tree growth and whether or not they can be grown in a region, the fact is as long as there is sunlight, water, soil and a suitable temperature they will grow.
Also trees that grow in the tropics and subtropics will grow whether they were in a savanna or jungle biome. This is why palm trees are common in both biomes in real life.
In fact sometimes it is harder for trees to grow in a jungle because of competition that exists, and that because other trees are blocking sunlight for undergrowth, many plants below them will wither and die.
And it being too hot can be a major downside for plants, because it can start forest fires.
Usually precipitation helps prevent this happening to rainforests, but sometimes it does get too hot and dry at or near the equator.
To me it seems silly to allow taiga trees in jungles or the nether and jungle trees in tundras or The End.
Make it so jungles need hot biomes, acacia warm, birch moderate, dark oak cool, oak cold, and spruce frozen. Or something of the sort.
Partial support. The trees (and other crops, too) should still grow in non-natural biomes in regard of humidity and temperature, however, the growth in similar humidity/temperature should be faster, up to 2x speed in the most ideal climate.
It'd mean that you'd be the most time-efficient farming local sources of food, but if you really needed certain products in a certain biome (ex. skyblock) you'd still get them, just at slower rate. I'd also reward colonization of various biomes and picking crops in environments like End or Nether more wisely.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dwarf gamer found:
Buildings - square, not round
Materials - from rubble mound
Dark caves - lit 'n' cleaned out
Settlements - deep underground
Farmability - to grinder bound
Shields - made creepers but sound
Axes and crossbows - taking mobs out
Partial support. The trees (and other crops, too) should still grow in non-natural biomes in regard of humidity and temperature, however, the growth in similar humidity/temperature should be faster, up to 2x speed in the most ideal climate.
It'd mean that you'd be the most time-efficient farming local sources of food, but if you really needed certain products in a certain biome (ex. skyblock) you'd still get them, just at slower rate. I'd also reward colonization of various biomes and picking crops in environments like End or Nether more wisely.
I agree, attempting to terraform a hot desert into a deciduous forest however should not be rewarding, trees like oak and birch should dry up and burn in desert biomes if players attempt growing them there unless there is a river nearby, or if players had built any underground streams for them to absorb and remain moist, which would be a time consuming task, forcing players to make do with a small oak or birch farm in deserts or use a different biome.
it's too hot in these regions, and there isn't enough water. In fact this is why some plants like cactus have their own water reservoirs inside them. They have a bulge at the stems precisely to store surplus water, that they manage to absorb during the occasional heavy rainfall or flood.
It's hard enough for trees that exist in the tropics to keep their water unless they are close to the sea, a stream or a lake.
allyourbasesaregone does have a valid point here, trees not native to their own biome
should not be easy to maintain and it does make sense even from a gameplay aspect to change this.
I agree, attempting to terraform a hot desert into a deciduous forest however should not be rewarding, trees like oak and birch should dry up and burn in desert biomes if players attempt growing them there unless there is a river nearby, or if players had built any underground streams for them to absorb and remain moist, which would be a time consuming task, forcing players to make do with a small oak or birch farm in deserts or use a different biome.
it's too hot in these regions, and there isn't enough water. In fact this is why some plants like cactus have their own water reservoirs inside them. They have a bulge at the stems precisely to store surplus water, that they manage to absorb during the occasional heavy rainfall or flood.
It's hard enough for trees that exist in the tropics to keep their water unless they are close to the sea, a stream or a lake.
allyourbasesaregone does have a valid point here, trees not native to their own biome
should not be easy to maintain and it does make sense even from a gameplay aspect to change this.
Needing to pour water will kinda ramp up the difficulty, since the farms in convenient locations will become water-tier.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dwarf gamer found:
Buildings - square, not round
Materials - from rubble mound
Dark caves - lit 'n' cleaned out
Settlements - deep underground
Farmability - to grinder bound
Shields - made creepers but sound
Axes and crossbows - taking mobs out
Needing to pour water will kinda ramp up the difficulty, since the farms in convenient locations will become water-tier.
I mean it is strange that spruce can be grown in desert biomes when dirt is applied.
Jungle trees would probably survive if there was a river nearby, which would explain why South American jungles like the Amazon, are highly populated with trees despite being in the tropics.
But spruces are different and are more commonly found in the taiga which is just at the border of the arctic circle, this is the limits of where trees are able to grow because of the poor amount of sunlight received each year, whenever it is summer there, the sun is at a low angle and that makes it much more difficult for plants to survive. Conifers are evergreen, so don't shed their leaves, but deciduous trees like oak and maple wouldn't have better chances there, because without light there is no photosynthesis.
Ice Spikes biomes could also use a change that makes it impossible to grow trees there in my opinion,
you're not supposed to be able to grow trees in the Arctic, the border of the Arctic is where much smaller plants have a better chance of survival.
I mean it is strange that spruce can be grown in desert biomes when dirt is applied.
Jungle trees would probably survive if there was a river nearby, which would explain why South American jungles like the Amazon, are highly populated with trees despite being in the tropics.
But spruces are different and are more commonly found in the taiga which is just at the border of the arctic circle, this is the limits of where trees are able to grow because of the poor amount of sunlight received each year, whenever it is summer there, the sun is at a low angle and that makes it much more difficult for plants to survive. Conifers are evergreen, so don't shed their leaves, but deciduous trees like oak and maple wouldn't have better chances there, because without light there is no photosynthesis.
Ice Spikes biomes could also use a change that makes it impossible to grow trees there in my opinion,
you're not supposed to be able to grow trees in the Arctic, the border of the Arctic is where much smaller plants have a better chance of survival.
I'd rather still leave the players liberty of Khrushcheving and planting melons in Taiga (or in this case, growing acacia among ice spikes).
It should be slow, but feasible.
Additionally, you can plant trees underground if you dig out enough space for them, and over there it's almost always above freezing temperature - especially when it's in the same chamber as tons of red-hot, liquid rock.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dwarf gamer found:
Buildings - square, not round
Materials - from rubble mound
Dark caves - lit 'n' cleaned out
Settlements - deep underground
Farmability - to grinder bound
Shields - made creepers but sound
Axes and crossbows - taking mobs out
I'd rather still leave the players liberty of Khrushcheving and planting melons in Taiga (or in this case, growing acacia among ice spikes).
It should be slow, but feasible.
Additionally, you can plant trees underground if you dig out enough space for them, and over there it's almost always above freezing temperature - especially when it's in the same chamber as tons of red-hot, liquid rock.
Even underground there's still the absence of light. Would torches be enough for photosynthesis to work? given their varying brightness in the visible spectrum? even warm but burnt out torches in real life would emit light in the infrared spectrum, and a spectrometer would reveal that.
Lamps can be used to allow plants to grow, but they have to emit the right spectrum or the artificial light they emit will not be enough.
And the wrong spectrum can even be deadly, like UV lamps for example that are used in tanning beds. Plants in nature are exposed to UV from the sun, but plants have their limits just like everything else and the ozone protects them from the worst of UV radiation, UVC
Torches wouldn't do any of that and in a game like Minecraft it simply doesn't matter, because those mechanics for trees or any plants don't exist.
But you do have heat to worry about from lava, if a tree is too close to an exposed lava pool, it will ignite.
Even underground there's still the absence of light. Would torches be enough for photosynthesis to work? given their varying brightness in the visible spectrum? even warm but burnt out torches in real life would emit light in the infrared spectrum, and a spectrometer would reveal that.
Lamps can be used to allow plants to grow, but they have to emit the right spectrum or the artificial light they emit will not be enough.
And the wrong spectrum can even be deadly, like UV lamps for example that are used in tanning beds. Plants in nature are exposed to UV from the sun, but plants have their limits just like everything else and the ozone protects them from the worst of UV radiation, UVC
Torches wouldn't do any of that and in a game like Minecraft it simply doesn't matter, because those mechanics for trees or any plants don't exist.
But you do have heat to worry about from lava, if a tree is too close to an exposed lava pool, it will ignite.
even an unexposed lake can set things on fire, the rule is space based like noise not path based like light/mob following
even an unexposed lake can set things on fire, the rule is space based like noise not path based like light/mob following
Ouch, so I wasn't just imagining things when I had that memory of the piece of wood that caught fire in a tunnel I dug out in the mines in one of my older worlds. lol
and the wood that caught fire was next to a piece of obsidian I believe and the lava inside was completely sealed off,
I like to call those "hot blocks"
in any case this is why I use non flammable materials for the walls and ceiling of my houses.
I do use wood for the flooring, but only because once that's burned the fire will inevitably stop, it's a relatively easy mess to clean up,
just as long as the rest of the house doesn't get torched.
Compared to fixing a jungle wood farm underground in Minecraft 1.18,
yea... lol that sucks, and sometimes you're unfortunate enough to encounter a jungle
that has a lava pool in the middle of it, then you got the added hazard of a forest fire, sometimes you don't get there in time
to fix the problem, then you got to deal with the inevitability that some trees will be lost, and parrots being killed, yup, I've seen that happen.
Ouch, so I wasn't just imagining things when I had that memory of the piece of wood that caught fire in a tunnel I dug out in the mines in one of my older worlds. lol
and the wood that caught fire was next to a piece of obsidian I believe and the lava inside was completely sealed off,
I like to call those "hot blocks"
in any case this is why I use non flammable materials for the walls and ceiling of my houses.
I do use wood for the flooring, but only because once that's burned the fire will inevitably stop, it's a relatively easy mess to clean up,
just as long as the rest of the house doesn't get torched.
Compared to fixing a jungle wood farm underground in Minecraft 1.18,
yea... lol that sucks, and sometimes you're unfortunate enough to encounter a jungle
that has a lava pool in the middle of it, then you got the added hazard of a forest fire, sometimes you don't get there in time
to fix the problem, then you got to deal with the inevitability that some trees will be lost, and parrots being killed, yup, I've seen that happen.
In short: lava bad.
Since it's now renewable, I have no qualms watering down everything in sight hehehe
Since it's now renewable, I have no qualms watering down everything in sight hehehe
Yup, I remember my noob days when I accidentally burnt builds with lava, so does my friend who used to frequent the server but is now currently busy with work.
we learned the hard way that it's a good idea to use non flammable materials for permanent homes. So the interior of my main house as you saw in the photos is granite (eventually will be brick when I get enough clay), the ceilings are concrete, fireplace is made with stone bricks, and the rooftops are netherbrick.
It's also not a good idea to have a house in a forest because trees are flammable, and could easily burn down with a bit of bad luck during a lightning storm, if the rain ended at just the right moment after a lightning bolt ignited something.
Some people take the risk for aesthetic purposes, but in so doing, they're setting themselves up for frustration later on unless their house is all non flammable on the outside, or if their house has enough space away from the trees. In desert biomes I don't believe lightning strikes in bedrock edition, at least not in 1.17, 1.16 and 1.15 although on bedrock edition you're forced to play latest version only if online or on servers. But your main point was that some biomes ought to make it impossible or at least very difficult to grow trees in specific biomes, that I support, I'm just questioning how to make it work.
In desert biomes I don't believe lightning strikes in bedrock edition, at least not in 1.17, 1.16 and 1.15 although on bedrock edition you're forced to play latest version only if online or on servers. But your main point was that some biomes ought to make it impossible or at least very difficult to grow trees in specific biomes, that I support, I'm just questioning how to make it work.
If deserts don't get lightning then they definitely shouldn't get tree growth at a normal rate.
If deserts don't get lightning then they definitely shouldn't get tree growth at a normal rate.
I agree. Should make the game actually feel like survival, even if people play on lower difficulties to nerf hostile mobs, they should be given more reasons to worry about environment in the game. And honestly I don't believe most of them would mind that.
I've said it would be cool if we had more neutral mobs in the game, such as wild animals that are territorial, more birds etc.
But even without that, I do think plant growth in the game is too simplistic and could use an update.
An agriculture update could make crop fielding more fun.
I've always found it weird that oak and birch forests never had seasons in Minecraft
It would be nice if day and night length was different in the polar biomes, such as Ice Spikes, planes or tundra.
I agree. Should make the game actually feel like survival, even if people play on lower difficulties to nerf hostile mobs, they should be given more reasons to worry about environment in the game. And honestly I don't believe most of them would mind that.
I've said it would be cool if we had more neutral mobs in the game, such as wild animals that are territorial, more birds etc.
But even without that, I do think plant growth in the game is too simplistic and could use an update.
An agriculture update could make crop fielding more fun.
I've always found it weird that oak and birch forests never had seasons in Minecraft
It would be nice if day and night length was different in the polar biomes, such as Ice Spikes, planes or tundra.
I'm not asking for complexity. I just think it looks weird to have trees in the wrong biome. Just an opinion
Mineforme agrees with your statement about which saplings can grow and where being dependent on biome temperature.
You are right though. it doesn't make sense that all saplings can be grown anywhere. Desert biomes, hot or cold, should make growing oak and birch impractical, or at the very least very difficult. For example, water has to be liquid in order for plants to make any use of it, this is especially true for trees and this was also mentioned in documentaries, some trees also make their own antifreeze so they can survive extreme cold, but in Taiga forests trees still have to deal with a reduced amount of sunlight.
To me it seems silly to allow taiga trees in jungles or the nether and jungle trees in tundras or The End.
Make it so jungles need hot biomes, acacia warm, birch moderate, dark oak cool, oak cold, and spruce frozen. Or something of the sort.
It's not quite that simple, while it is true climate affects tree growth and whether or not they can be grown in a region, the fact is as long as there is sunlight, water, soil and a suitable temperature they will grow.
Also trees that grow in the tropics and subtropics will grow whether they were in a savanna or jungle biome. This is why palm trees are common in both biomes in real life.
In fact sometimes it is harder for trees to grow in a jungle because of competition that exists, and that because other trees are blocking sunlight for undergrowth, many plants below them will wither and die.
And it being too hot can be a major downside for plants, because it can start forest fires.
Usually precipitation helps prevent this happening to rainforests, but sometimes it does get too hot and dry at or near the equator.
https://thegreatsavanna.weebly.com/savanna-plants.html
Partial support.
The trees (and other crops, too) should still grow in non-natural biomes in regard of humidity and temperature, however, the growth in similar humidity/temperature should be faster, up to 2x speed in the most ideal climate.
It'd mean that you'd be the most time-efficient farming local sources of food, but if you really needed certain products in a certain biome (ex. skyblock) you'd still get them, just at slower rate. I'd also reward colonization of various biomes and picking crops in environments like End or Nether more wisely.
Dwarf gamer found:
Buildings - square, not round
Materials - from rubble mound
Dark caves - lit 'n' cleaned out
Settlements - deep underground
Farmability - to grinder bound
Shields - made creepers but sound
Axes and crossbows - taking mobs out
I agree, attempting to terraform a hot desert into a deciduous forest however should not be rewarding, trees like oak and birch should dry up and burn in desert biomes if players attempt growing them there unless there is a river nearby, or if players had built any underground streams for them to absorb and remain moist, which would be a time consuming task, forcing players to make do with a small oak or birch farm in deserts or use a different biome.
it's too hot in these regions, and there isn't enough water. In fact this is why some plants like cactus have their own water reservoirs inside them. They have a bulge at the stems precisely to store surplus water, that they manage to absorb during the occasional heavy rainfall or flood.
It's hard enough for trees that exist in the tropics to keep their water unless they are close to the sea, a stream or a lake.
allyourbasesaregone does have a valid point here, trees not native to their own biome
should not be easy to maintain and it does make sense even from a gameplay aspect to change this.
Needing to pour water will kinda ramp up the difficulty, since the farms in convenient locations will become water-tier.
Dwarf gamer found:
Buildings - square, not round
Materials - from rubble mound
Dark caves - lit 'n' cleaned out
Settlements - deep underground
Farmability - to grinder bound
Shields - made creepers but sound
Axes and crossbows - taking mobs out
I mean it is strange that spruce can be grown in desert biomes when dirt is applied.
Jungle trees would probably survive if there was a river nearby, which would explain why South American jungles like the Amazon, are highly populated with trees despite being in the tropics.
But spruces are different and are more commonly found in the taiga which is just at the border of the arctic circle, this is the limits of where trees are able to grow because of the poor amount of sunlight received each year, whenever it is summer there, the sun is at a low angle and that makes it much more difficult for plants to survive. Conifers are evergreen, so don't shed their leaves, but deciduous trees like oak and maple wouldn't have better chances there, because without light there is no photosynthesis.
Ice Spikes biomes could also use a change that makes it impossible to grow trees there in my opinion,
you're not supposed to be able to grow trees in the Arctic, the border of the Arctic is where much smaller plants have a better chance of survival.
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/taiga/
I'd rather still leave the players liberty of Khrushcheving and planting melons in Taiga (or in this case, growing acacia among ice spikes).
It should be slow, but feasible.
Additionally, you can plant trees underground if you dig out enough space for them, and over there it's almost always above freezing temperature - especially when it's in the same chamber as tons of red-hot, liquid rock.
Dwarf gamer found:
Buildings - square, not round
Materials - from rubble mound
Dark caves - lit 'n' cleaned out
Settlements - deep underground
Farmability - to grinder bound
Shields - made creepers but sound
Axes and crossbows - taking mobs out
Even underground there's still the absence of light. Would torches be enough for photosynthesis to work? given their varying brightness in the visible spectrum? even warm but burnt out torches in real life would emit light in the infrared spectrum, and a spectrometer would reveal that.
Lamps can be used to allow plants to grow, but they have to emit the right spectrum or the artificial light they emit will not be enough.
And the wrong spectrum can even be deadly, like UV lamps for example that are used in tanning beds. Plants in nature are exposed to UV from the sun, but plants have their limits just like everything else and the ozone protects them from the worst of UV radiation, UVC
Torches wouldn't do any of that and in a game like Minecraft it simply doesn't matter, because those mechanics for trees or any plants don't exist.
But you do have heat to worry about from lava, if a tree is too close to an exposed lava pool, it will ignite.
even an unexposed lake can set things on fire, the rule is space based like noise not path based like light/mob following
Ouch, so I wasn't just imagining things when I had that memory of the piece of wood that caught fire in a tunnel I dug out in the mines in one of my older worlds. lol
and the wood that caught fire was next to a piece of obsidian I believe and the lava inside was completely sealed off,
I like to call those "hot blocks"
in any case this is why I use non flammable materials for the walls and ceiling of my houses.
I do use wood for the flooring, but only because once that's burned the fire will inevitably stop, it's a relatively easy mess to clean up,
just as long as the rest of the house doesn't get torched.
Compared to fixing a jungle wood farm underground in Minecraft 1.18,
yea... lol that sucks, and sometimes you're unfortunate enough to encounter a jungle
that has a lava pool in the middle of it, then you got the added hazard of a forest fire, sometimes you don't get there in time
to fix the problem, then you got to deal with the inevitability that some trees will be lost, and parrots being killed, yup, I've seen that happen.
In short: lava bad.
Since it's now renewable, I have no qualms watering down everything in sight hehehe
Yup, I remember my noob days when I accidentally burnt builds with lava, so does my friend who used to frequent the server but is now currently busy with work.
we learned the hard way that it's a good idea to use non flammable materials for permanent homes. So the interior of my main house as you saw in the photos is granite (eventually will be brick when I get enough clay), the ceilings are concrete, fireplace is made with stone bricks, and the rooftops are netherbrick.
It's also not a good idea to have a house in a forest because trees are flammable, and could easily burn down with a bit of bad luck during a lightning storm, if the rain ended at just the right moment after a lightning bolt ignited something.
Some people take the risk for aesthetic purposes, but in so doing, they're setting themselves up for frustration later on unless their house is all non flammable on the outside, or if their house has enough space away from the trees. In desert biomes I don't believe lightning strikes in bedrock edition, at least not in 1.17, 1.16 and 1.15 although on bedrock edition you're forced to play latest version only if online or on servers. But your main point was that some biomes ought to make it impossible or at least very difficult to grow trees in specific biomes, that I support, I'm just questioning how to make it work.
If deserts don't get lightning then they definitely shouldn't get tree growth at a normal rate.
I agree. Should make the game actually feel like survival, even if people play on lower difficulties to nerf hostile mobs, they should be given more reasons to worry about environment in the game. And honestly I don't believe most of them would mind that.
I've said it would be cool if we had more neutral mobs in the game, such as wild animals that are territorial, more birds etc.
But even without that, I do think plant growth in the game is too simplistic and could use an update.
An agriculture update could make crop fielding more fun.
I've always found it weird that oak and birch forests never had seasons in Minecraft
It would be nice if day and night length was different in the polar biomes, such as Ice Spikes, planes or tundra.
I'm not asking for complexity. I just think it looks weird to have trees in the wrong biome. Just an opinion
I'm just thinking if we are using this logic, wouldn't it be a good idea to introduce seasons?
it is true that different regions are more ideal than others for a specific type of tree,
but we also need to remember that some trees are deciduous, that is some lose their leaves during autumn,
and regrow them during spring time, and some other trees are conifers, that is they are evergreen which means
they keep their trees all year round, examples of conifers include pine, spruce and palm.
Well this sounds quite complex and almost another suggestion, idk lol
I agree :))
To which part? Mind being specific?
Mineforme agrees with your statement about which saplings can grow and where being dependent on biome temperature.
You are right though. it doesn't make sense that all saplings can be grown anywhere. Desert biomes, hot or cold, should make growing oak and birch impractical, or at the very least very difficult. For example, water has to be liquid in order for plants to make any use of it, this is especially true for trees and this was also mentioned in documentaries, some trees also make their own antifreeze so they can survive extreme cold, but in Taiga forests trees still have to deal with a reduced amount of sunlight.
https://www.earthdate.org/node/139
and hot deserts main problem is they lack water, although their high temperature means
any normal tree would burn down. Acacia and palm are probably the few trees that could survive such an extreme climate,
then again Minecraft does not have palm yet.