Nerfing mending is a Right decision Because of the Fact that most of people Just Throw mending On their Tools and bam.it is now basically unbreakable.
before the enchantment get added you still needed to maintain and create new tools but now it's pointless.
what I'm saying is they should NERF mending and by nerfing I mean a major one, and make it like the old times
they could maybe add unbreaking 4 or something so that it replaces mending but still force you to replace your tools
Fun fact: Prior to 1.8 all you had to do to get infinite-lasting gear was simply rename it:
An item which has been renamed has its prior-work penalty set to 2, remaining so regardless of later work. Renaming the item back to its default name (e.g. "Iron Sword") does not revert prior-work to full cost.
As a consequence of the above, and using the same example, if you then damage that item slightly so that the next (fourth) repair cost would be 3 levels (over BV+Penalty), the renamed item will cost (5+2)+3=10 levels to repair, while if the item was not renamed before it would cost (5+6)+3=14 levels (4 more).
By taking advantage of this feature I've literally used the same pickaxe more than 4 million times (most of the uses shown have been on a single pickaxe, with several others used, including a couple which were used to breaking early on):
You may notice that I've "crafted" 658 pickaxes but most of those came from trading, same for all my other diamond items (prior to late 2015-mid 2016, depending on the item, I used mined diamonds to repair my gear, with only my pickaxe being repaired with sacrifices, otherwise individual diamonds, which is most evident for the sword, which has the equivalent uses of 102 Unbreaking III diamond swords).
The only catch is that you must pay for the amount of durability restored and the cost of all the enchantments when repairing an item, which can very quickly exceed the anvil cost limit and generally limits you to 2-3 enchantments with special ones like Fortune and Looting being more expensive; my sword, which has Sharpness V, Knockback II, Unbreaking III already does so, at 40 levels for an intact sacrifice; I get around this by using the sacrifice to kill a couple hundred chickens, which reduces the cost to 38 levels (the anvil gives a 12% bonus, which is 187 for diamond, and damaging the sacrifice by this much lowers the durability cost from 17 to 15 levels - yes, that's right - a diamond item costs up to 17 levels just for the repair, plus the costs of the enchantments - since 1.8 all items have a flat cost of just 2 levels for a sacrifice and 1 level per unit (prior to 1.8 the unit cost includes the number of enchantments; the cost to repair my sword with 2 diamonds is 35 levels).
For a more extreme example, say you want a diamond pickaxe with Efficiency V, Fortune III, Unbreaking III , which will be so expensive that the only way to repair it is with a single diamond at a time, restoring 25% durability for 37 levels; a full repair costs 5624 XP, or 0.9 XP per use, compared to 1032 XP and 0.165 XP per use for a sacrifice repair if Fortune is omitted - that's a cost increase of 5.5-fold just for adding Fortune (note that 4 repairs at 37 levels each is not the same as spending 148 levels due to the way level costs increase exponentially; 148 levels would require 56462 XP, or 10 times as much, while 5624 XP would be a bit less than 60 levels, less than twice the level cost of a single repair, thus you should look at the XP cost, not levels. The most optimal way to repair such items is as soon as you reach the required level after durability drops below 75%, which is how I sustainably used such a pickaxe while caving, relying entirely off of "natural" XP sources).
Obviously, you also need resources and anvils to repair items, so you need to continue mining in the late-game to maintain your gear, which along with the repair costs is where I think this mechanic is far more balanced then Mending, and indeed, my own version of Mending works the same way (it basically just makes it harder to obtain infinite gear by replacing a simple rename with the need to find Mending books). I even added a new material tier, amethyst (no relation to the item added in 1.17, it is more comparable to netherite), which is even more expensive and rarer than diamond, with a cost limit of 49 levels (other items are still limited to 39):
Max cost for amethyst items = 49 levels, other items = 39
Amethyst:
Efficiency V, Unbreaking III, Mending 43 levels
Efficiency V, Unbreaking III, Fortune III 47 levels
Efficiency V, Unbreaking III, Silk Touch 43 levels
Efficiency V, Smelting, Unbreaking III 43 levels
Efficiency V, Smelting, Mending 45 levels
Efficiency V, Vein Miner II, Unbreaking III 43 levels
Efficiency V, Vein Miner II, Mending 45 levels
Sharpness V, Knockback II, Unbreaking III, Mending 48 levels
Sharpness V, Looting III, Unbreaking III 47 levels
Sharpness V, Looting III, Mending 49 levels
Sharpness V, Looting III, Fire Aspect II 49 levels
Protection IV, Unbreaking III, Mending 42 levels
Protection IV, Feather Falling IV, Mending 44 levels
Protection IV, Feather Falling IV, Unbreaking III 42 levels
Diamond:
Efficiency V, Unbreaking III, Mending 36 levels
Efficiency V, Fortune III, Unbreaking III, Mending 38 levels
Efficiency V, Silk Touch, Unbreaking III, Mending 34 levels
Sharpness V, Looting III, Unbreaking III, Mending 38 levels
Other (all sacrifice):
Efficiency V, Silk Touch, Unbreaking III, Mending 29 levels (shears)
Power V, Infinity, Unbreaking III, Mending 35 levels (bow)
Luck of the Sea III, Unbreaking III, Mending 27 levels (fishing rod)
Note that some of the items listed do not have Mending or Unbreaking; this is because they would be too expensive to repair, or even try to add Mending to (the cost to add Mending is the same as the cost of a unit or sacrifice repair, whichever is cheaper; i.e. adding Mending to an amethyst pickaxe with Efficiency V and Unbreaking III costs 43 levels, while other enchantments will cost far less). However, you can use rubies, which can be found in certain biomes, to lower the prior work penalty by 6 levels per ruby, enabling you to indefinitely repair items at an increased cost (since rubies only lower the penalty you'll need to perform up to twice as many anvil operations, ideally, 33% more, or 3 repairs per ruby). You could also forgo Unbreaking to get Mending on an item (an item with Mending costs 2 more levels as Unbreaking III costs 6 and Mending costs 8; the latter is also twice the cost of Mojang's version, consistent with most single-level enchantments, e.g. Silk Touch and Infinity). And yes, I allow Mending and Infinity to be placed on a bow (just as you can rename them in vanilla 1.6.4); IMO the only reason Mojang nerfed them is to patch an exploit with Elytra and Punch bows.
Fun fact: Prior to 1.8 all you had to do to get infinite-lasting gear was simply rename it:
By taking advantage of this feature I've literally used the same pickaxe more than 4 million times (most of the uses shown have been on a single pickaxe, with several others used, including a couple which were used to breaking early on):
You may notice that I've "crafted" 658 pickaxes but most of those came from trading, same for all my other diamond items (prior to late 2015-mid 2016, depending on the item, I used mined diamonds to repair my gear, with only my pickaxe being repaired with sacrifices, otherwise individual diamonds, which is most evident for the sword, which has the equivalent uses of 102 Unbreaking III diamond swords).
The only catch is that you must pay for the amount of durability restored and the cost of all the enchantments when repairing an item, which can very quickly exceed the anvil cost limit and generally limits you to 2-3 enchantments with special ones like Fortune and Looting being more expensive; my sword, which has Sharpness V, Knockback II, Unbreaking III already does so, at 40 levels for an intact sacrifice; I get around this by using the sacrifice to kill a couple hundred chickens, which reduces the cost to 38 levels (the anvil gives a 12% bonus, which is 187 for diamond, and damaging the sacrifice by this much lowers the durability cost from 17 to 15 levels - yes, that's right - a diamond item costs up to 17 levels just for the repair, plus the costs of the enchantments - since 1.8 all items have a flat cost of just 2 levels for a sacrifice and 1 level per unit (prior to 1.8 the unit cost includes the number of enchantments; the cost to repair my sword with 2 diamonds is 35 levels).
For a more extreme example, say you want a diamond pickaxe with Efficiency V, Fortune III, Unbreaking III , which will be so expensive that the only way to repair it is with a single diamond at a time, restoring 25% durability for 37 levels; a full repair costs 5624 XP, or 0.9 XP per use, compared to 1032 XP and 0.165 XP per use for a sacrifice repair if Fortune is omitted - that's a cost increase of 5.5-fold just for adding Fortune (note that 4 repairs at 37 levels each is not the same as spending 148 levels due to the way level costs increase exponentially; 148 levels would require 56462 XP, or 10 times as much, while 5624 XP would be a bit less than 60 levels, less than twice the level cost of a single repair, thus you should look at the XP cost, not levels. The most optimal way to repair such items is as soon as you reach the required level after durability drops below 75%, which is how I sustainably used such a pickaxe while caving, relying entirely off of "natural" XP sources).
Obviously, you also need resources and anvils to repair items, so you need to continue mining in the late-game to maintain your gear, which along with the repair costs is where I think this mechanic is far more balanced then Mending, and indeed, my own version of Mending works the same way (it basically just makes it harder to obtain infinite gear by replacing a simple rename with the need to find Mending books). I even added a new material tier, amethyst (no relation to the item added in 1.17, it is more comparable to netherite), which is even more expensive and rarer than diamond, with a cost limit of 49 levels (other items are still limited to 39):
Max cost for amethyst items = 49 levels, other items = 39
Amethyst:
Efficiency V, Unbreaking III, Mending 43 levels
Efficiency V, Unbreaking III, Fortune III 47 levels
Efficiency V, Unbreaking III, Silk Touch 43 levels
Efficiency V, Smelting, Unbreaking III 43 levels
Efficiency V, Smelting, Mending 45 levels
Efficiency V, Vein Miner II, Unbreaking III 43 levels
Efficiency V, Vein Miner II, Mending 45 levels
Sharpness V, Knockback II, Unbreaking III, Mending 48 levels
Sharpness V, Looting III, Unbreaking III 47 levels
Sharpness V, Looting III, Mending 49 levels
Sharpness V, Looting III, Fire Aspect II 49 levels
Protection IV, Unbreaking III, Mending 42 levels
Protection IV, Feather Falling IV, Mending 44 levels
Protection IV, Feather Falling IV, Unbreaking III 42 levels
Diamond:
Efficiency V, Unbreaking III, Mending 36 levels
Efficiency V, Fortune III, Unbreaking III, Mending 38 levels
Efficiency V, Silk Touch, Unbreaking III, Mending 34 levels
Sharpness V, Looting III, Unbreaking III, Mending 38 levels
Other (all sacrifice):
Efficiency V, Silk Touch, Unbreaking III, Mending 29 levels (shears)
Power V, Infinity, Unbreaking III, Mending 35 levels (bow)
Luck of the Sea III, Unbreaking III, Mending 27 levels (fishing rod)
Note that some of the items listed do not have Mending or Unbreaking; this is because they would be too expensive to repair, or even try to add Mending to (the cost to add Mending is the same as the cost of a unit or sacrifice repair, whichever is cheaper; i.e. adding Mending to an amethyst pickaxe with Efficiency V and Unbreaking III costs 43 levels, while other enchantments will cost far less). However, you can use rubies, which can be found in certain biomes, to lower the prior work penalty by 6 levels per ruby, enabling you to indefinitely repair items at an increased cost (since rubies only lower the penalty you'll need to perform up to twice as many anvil operations, ideally, 33% more, or 3 repairs per ruby). You could also forgo Unbreaking to get Mending on an item (an item with Mending costs 2 more levels as Unbreaking III costs 6 and Mending costs 8; the latter is also twice the cost of Mojang's version, consistent with most single-level enchantments, e.g. Silk Touch and Infinity). And yes, I allow Mending and Infinity to be placed on a bow (just as you can rename them in vanilla 1.6.4); IMO the only reason Mojang nerfed them is to patch an exploit with Elytra and Punch bows.
My problem with this is not with the concept of your suggestion itself, but the fact that no matter what rebalancing decisions are done Mojang are never going to be satisfied with the result, nor will some members of the community. Some people would want further nerfs done to the game no matter if mending required the use of the anvil, XP and extra resources or not, and in the end it could very well lead to mending being removed, or at least not being very useful, which makes the enchantment pointless in the first place. Why add in a feature if you're just going to take it away afterwards? like Mojang had already done with gold ingot drops from Drowned Zombies in 1.17, and the Netherite Hoe from Piglin bartering in later versions of 1.16? it's stupid.
It's the entire reason why I hope Mojang implements locked older versions of Minecraft in their launcher by the time content parity is finalized in their new launcher system. We've already had account migration and a new launcher which isn't quite compatible with Windows 10 edition just yet.
Using the launcher we would have the ability to block further fiddling of the mechanics that Mojang causes, as they seem to just add in nerfs to your gear at a whim just as they did with the combat update in Java edition, forcing players to keep adapting or rethinking their strategies.
There is something very wrong with a game when a developer keeps changing their mind on how they want to design their game, just because a minority complained. Good games don't usually need this amount of tampering to get the mechanics right, once a rule has been set it's set in stone and players can either like it or lump it, their choice, as they knew what they were in for when they paid for a copy of said game.
Using the launcher we would have the ability to block further fiddling of the mechanics that Mojang causes, as they seem to just add in nerfs to your gear at a whim just as they did with the combat update in Java edition, forcing players to keep adapting or rethinking their strategies.
There is something very wrong with a game when a developer keeps changing their mind on how they want to design their game, just because a minority complained. Good games don't usually need this amount of tampering to get the mechanics right, once a rule has been set it's set in stone and players can either like it or lump it, their choice, as they knew what they were in for when they paid for a copy of said game.
The combat update was just... rough. I mean, never mind the attack cooldown (doesn't matter too much to me since I don't do PvP), but why do stone axes do more damagethan diamond swords? How does Mojang not view that as being broken? Even with a Sharpness V diamond sword, it still takes on average two critical hits to kill a spider - one of the weakest mobs. It also takes two critical hits average with a stone sword, and only three with a wooden. I get that maybe they want to give Bane of Arthropods some use but... overhauling the damage system to do so? I'd rather just have the useless enchantment that I still won't carry with me. In fact, wooden axes do the same damage as diamond swords, and you can make that within ten seconds of starting a world. That's not balanced at all.
One could argue that diamond swords remain superior because of their durability... but if you put Unbreaking III and Mending on a stone axe with Smite V to deal with zombies and skeletons, then you are getting better benefits at a far cheaper price. I don't really know how Mojang can fix that without completely altering combat again. IMO they should have left that part alone - it didn't seem broken enough to require such an overhaul especially when the old mechanics had been there since the beginning. I think part of the problem is that there are too many tiers and mobs have set health points that still require a certain number of hits, which means that the infinitesimal differences between the tiers and tools don't mean much in the wider scope of PvE combat. So the only way that I see to reduce the number of hits required to kill mobs is either to significantly reduce the damage dealt by certain weapons by half, or increase the damage benefits of enchantments.
Axes dealing more damage than swords but with the drawback of longer attack cooldown - OKAY, sure, that's fine to an extent. But everything else was a slight mess, especially with how much damage they do. (I think it's fine that a Smite V axe can kill zombies and skeletons in one hit, but prior to 1.9 you could do this to most mobs with a Sharpness V sword, which seemed appropriate given it's the highest weapon you can wield - now, there is no way to one-hit kill creepers even with Strength II).
Before they touch Mending, they need to deal with that and the combat tests.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
LP series? Not my style! Video series? Closer, but not quite. Survival journal, maybe? That's better. Now in Season 4 of the Legends of Quintropolis Journal (<< click to view)!! World download and more can be found there.
The combat update was just... rough. I mean, never mind the attack cooldown (doesn't matter too much to me since I don't do PvP), but why do stone axes do more damage than diamond swords? How does Mojang not view that as being broken? Even with a Sharpness V diamond sword, it still takes on average two critical hits to kill a spider - one of the weakest mobs. It also takes two critical hits average with a stone sword, and only three with a wooden. I get that maybe they want to give Bane of Arthropods some use but... overhauling the damage system to do so? I'd rather just have the useless enchantment that I still won't carry with me. In fact, wooden axes do the same damage as diamond swords, and you can make that within ten seconds of starting a world. That's not balanced at all.
One could argue that diamond swords remain superior because of their durability... but if you put Unbreaking III and Mending on a stone axe with Smite V to deal with zombies and skeletons, then you are getting better benefits at a far cheaper price. I don't really know how Mojang can fix that without completely altering combat again. IMO they should have left that part alone - it didn't seem broken enough to require such an overhaul especially when the old mechanics had been there since the beginning. I think part of the problem is that there are too many tiers and mobs have set health points that still require a certain number of hits, which means that the infinitesimal differences between the tiers and tools don't mean much in the wider scope of PvE combat. So the only way that I see to reduce the number of hits required to kill mobs is either to significantly reduce the damage dealt by certain weapons by half, or increase the damage benefits of enchantments.
Axes dealing more damage than swords but with the drawback of longer attack cooldown - OKAY, sure, that's fine to an extent. But everything else was a slight mess, especially with how much damage they do. (I think it's fine that a Smite V axe can kill zombies and skeletons in one hit, but prior to 1.9 you could do this to most mobs with a Sharpness V sword, which seemed appropriate given it's the highest weapon you can wield - now, there is no way to one-hit kill creepers even with Strength II).
Before they touch Mending, they need to deal with that and the combat tests.
If the combat mechanics were to be altered I believe the best way to handle it would be to have axes do more damage to shields, this way players risked their shields getting broken if they put up their shields when an axe was used.
Different swords could have been implemented as well, like the standard sword becoming the longsword, taking longer to swing, but also having the most damage output.
An introduction of a new type of sword for fast consecutive swings would be appropriate here in my opinion. The katana, it would be the fastest melee weapon, but in exchange, it would do less damage than both the longsword and the axe, as there is less weight and momentum behind the swing, which means shields would still be effective at blocking said sword and there would be minimal risk of the shield failing to protect the opponent.
That said, I do agree with you material of the weapons should matter in combat, if it doesn't then this is bad design, as it ruins the progression system and removes the incentive for players to get better materials for their gear.
It appears Mojang are appealing too much to PVP fans, and not enough to other Minecraft players who don't care about competitive gameplay and just want to fight hostile mobs at night or underground, and build or explore during the rest of their playtime. If this is the mindset they have, then the game is on a path to destruction, whether they change the mechanics of mending or not. The mechanic where mending allows players to keep their gear indefinitely so long as they are careful was clearly intentional, and removing it now would be a ridiculous move and it would almost certainly mean some people would either resort to using mods or older versions of the game through the Java launcher system, which sucks, because then it means people stuck on older versions of the game will lose out on the benefits of updates in the future of the game, like new decoration blocks and mobs.
My own implementation of a "cooldown" was to have it be a penalty for attacking a single mob too quickly or missing entirely; you can attack multiple mobs as fast as their combined damage immunities or your skill allows (1 mob = 2 attacks per second, 2 mobs = 4 attacks per second, etc). If you hit a mob while it is damage-immune (unless you dealt more damage, then the difference in damage is dealt, as it does in vanilla) or you miss entirely it increments a counter which starts to reduce damage once it exceeds a certain level, with a worst-case damage reduction of 75% (the threshold allows for the occasional missed hit; missing less than once per second has no cumulative effect, while damage-immune hits have a higher penalty).
Also, I made axes, and only axes, penetrate armor in the same way as 1.9's mechanic, except players have half the penetration effect (i.e. a zombie with an axe, which they can naturally spawn with, penetrates up to 80% of armor at the rate of one armor point every 2 damage, which requires 32 damage against a player in full amethyst; players on the other hand can only penetrate up to 60% at the rate of one armor point every 4 damage, which requires 52.8 damage against a mob in full amethyst). They are otherwise the same as in vanilla 1.6.4, dealing one less damage than their corresponding sword and lose 2 durability per hit.
Armor worn by players is also weaker; player armor reduces damage by 3.33% per armor point while mob armor reduces it by 4% (same as vanilla) and in order for a player to get full armor (20 armor points or 66.6% damage reduction) you need amethyst, whcih is much rarer and more expensive than diamond, which itself has 18 armor points/60% damage reduction and is equivalent to iron in vanilla, but with 6 times the durability (1500 for all pieces, matching the ratio between an iron chestplate and iron tools). Mob armor can also provide up to 22 armor points (20 for diamond, 22 for amethyst, both a max of 22 on a zombie, which have 2 innate armor), or 88% damage reduction, and amethyst has armor toughness against axes, which works the same as as in 1.9 (this is most noticeable on armored zombies, where diamond and amethyst both give a total of 22 armor but amethyst takes more hits to kill).
Likewise, weapons used by players deal 1 less damage than in vanilla 1.6.4, matching a change in 1.9 (in 1.6.4 a diamond sword deals 8 damage, displayed as "+7 attack damage" because it is added to your unarmed damage of 1; since 1.9 they replace your unarmed damage, as also happened before 1.6, thus 1.6 actually made weapons stronger); similar to armor amethyst is needed to deal as much damage as diamond in vanilla (a Sharpness V amethyst sword, or diamond in vanilla, deals 14.25 damage, 18.25 critical, which can one-shot spiders, but so can even stone in vanilla; of course, the repair mechanics make using stone a bad idea, even with Unbreaking).
Another interesting change I made was to make Efficiency act like Sharpness when on a tool used by a mob, adding 1.25 damage per level, which increases the damage dealt by zombies which spawn with enchanted tools (axes, pickaxes, shovels, each of which has a 25% chance with swords being the remaining 25%, they are also more likely to have armor and weapons and higher level enchantments).
Also, to partly offset the reduced effectiveness of armor I reduced the peak damage dealt by creeper explosions from 49 to 36, but the damage fall-off with distance is linear down to a minimum of 6 instead of 1, and when combined with the reduced armor effectiveness you take more damage, especially at a distance (this does not take enchantments into account, which were made non-random so the worst-case damage reduction is higher; in vanilla 1.6.4 full Protection IV reduces damage by 40-80% while I made it a fixed 60%, similar to how 1.9 fixed it at 64%):
Damage for vanilla and modded / after max armor damage reduction / ratio after armor
D V (80%) M (66.7%) Ratio
0 49 (9.8) 36 (12.0) 1.22
1 37 (7.4) 31 (10.3) 1.39
2 27 (5.4) 26 ( 8.7) 1.61
3 19 (3.8) 21 ( 7.0) 1.84
4 11 (2.2) 16 ( 5.3) 2.41
5 5 (1.0) 11 ( 3.7) 3.67
6 1 (0.2) 6 ( 2.0) 10.00
Overall, most of my changes nerf players and buff mobs, while 1.9 nerfs both (even with reduced weapon damage it still takes less hits to kill armored mobs due to general armor penetration).
Note: you should take this discussion to another thread as it is seriously off-topic and will probably end in warnings or bans; this is why I made a thread about eating habits (though as you can see this completely broke the chain of conversation in the original thread; in fact, the person I replied to never replied to the thread I made, which is why I think the strict off-topic policies are so ridiculous and are helping to kill off what is left of the forum community).
My own implementation of a "cooldown" was to have it be a penalty for attacking a single mob too quickly or missing entirely; you can attack multiple mobs as fast as their combined damage immunities or your skill allows (1 mob = 2 attacks per second, 2 mobs = 4 attacks per second, etc). If you hit a mob while it is damage-immune (unless you dealt more damage, then the difference in damage is dealt, as it does in vanilla) or you miss entirely it increments a counter which starts to reduce damage once it exceeds a certain level, with a worst-case damage reduction of 75% (the threshold allows for the occasional missed hit; missing less than once per second has no cumulative effect, while damage-immune hits have a higher penalty).
Also, I made axes, and only axes, penetrate armor in the same way as 1.9's mechanic, except players have half the penetration effect (i.e. a zombie with an axe, which they can naturally spawn with, penetrates up to 80% of armor at the rate of one armor point every 2 damage, which requires 32 damage against a player in full amethyst; players on the other hand can only penetrate up to 60% at the rate of one armor point every 4 damage, which requires 52.8 damage against a mob in full amethyst). They are otherwise the same as in vanilla 1.6.4, dealing one less damage than their corresponding sword and lose 2 durability per hit.
Armor worn by players is also weaker; player armor reduces damage by 3.33% per armor point while mob armor reduces it by 4% (same as vanilla) and in order for a player to get full armor (20 armor points or 66.6% damage reduction) you need amethyst, whcih is much rarer and more expensive than diamond, which itself has 18 armor points/60% damage reduction and is equivalent to iron in vanilla, but with 6 times the durability (1500 for all pieces, matching the ratio between an iron chestplate and iron tools). Mob armor can also provide up to 22 armor points (20 for diamond, 22 for amethyst, both a max of 22 on a zombie, which have 2 innate armor), or 88% damage reduction, and amethyst has armor toughness against axes, which works the same as as in 1.9 (this is most noticeable on armored zombies, where diamond and amethyst both give a total of 22 armor but amethyst takes more hits to kill).
Likewise, weapons used by players deal 1 less damage than in vanilla 1.6.4, matching a change in 1.9 (in 1.6.4 a diamond sword deals 8 damage, displayed as "+7 attack damage" because it is added to your unarmed damage of 1; since 1.9 they replace your unarmed damage, as also happened before 1.6, thus 1.6 actually made weapons stronger); similar to armor amethyst is needed to deal as much damage as diamond in vanilla (a Sharpness V amethyst sword, or diamond in vanilla, deals 14.25 damage, 18.25 critical, which can one-shot spiders, but so can even stone in vanilla; of course, the repair mechanics make using stone a bad idea, even with Unbreaking).
Another interesting change I made was to make Efficiency act like Sharpness when on a tool used by a mob, adding 1.25 damage per level, which increases the damage dealt by zombies which spawn with enchanted tools (axes, pickaxes, shovels, each of which has a 25% chance with swords being the remaining 25%, they are also more likely to have armor and weapons and higher level enchantments).
Also, to partly offset the reduced effectiveness of armor I reduced the peak damage dealt by creeper explosions from 49 to 36, but the damage fall-off with distance is linear down to a minimum of 6 instead of 1, and when combined with the reduced armor effectiveness you take more damage, especially at a distance (this does not take enchantments into account, which were made non-random so the worst-case damage reduction is higher; in vanilla 1.6.4 full Protection IV reduces damage by 40-80% while I made it a fixed 60%, similar to how 1.9 fixed it at 64%):
Damage for vanilla and modded / after max armor damage reduction / ratio after armor
D V (80%) M (66.7%) Ratio
0 49 (9.8) 36 (12.0) 1.22
1 37 (7.4) 31 (10.3) 1.39
2 27 (5.4) 26 ( 8.7) 1.61
3 19 (3.8) 21 ( 7.0) 1.84
4 11 (2.2) 16 ( 5.3) 2.41
5 5 (1.0) 11 ( 3.7) 3.67
6 1 (0.2) 6 ( 2.0) 10.00
Overall, most of my changes nerf players and buff mobs, while 1.9 nerfs both (even with reduced weapon damage it still takes less hits to kill armored mobs due to general armor penetration).
Note: you should take this discussion to another thread as it is seriously off-topic and will probably end in warnings or bans; this is why I made a thread about eating habits (though as you can see this completely broke the chain of conversation in the original thread; in fact, the person I replied to never replied to the thread I made, which is why I think the strict off-topic policies are so ridiculous and are helping to kill off what is left of the forum community).
That's hardly a fair balancing decision when the buffs give the hostile mobs better stats than yourself, that's like going into multiplayer PVP against people who are playing with hacks on.
It would be understandable for boss type mobs to have much greater amount of health and damage stats, but regular mob types being stronger than you is a questionable design choice especially when we're discussing a casual game that is meant for all ages above 7.
The armour worn by mobs may only be incrementally more powerful than armour worn by players, but it can still mean the difference between winning or losing. If such a mechanic is to exist in future vanilla Minecraft at all, it would only make sense to do on hard and hardcore difficulties respectively in my opinion. Not every player enjoys having a game where the element of frustration comes from non boss type hostile mobs having higher maximum defensive stats than them, and while I did advocate for having area mini bosses or hostile mobs having high grade enchanted armour in new Overworld structures, I don't believe it's appropriate to make them more powerful than players, players can already be outnumbered by hostile mobs if playing in single player which is dangerous enough. Pitting them against mobs that outgun them as well as outnumber them, just feels cheap if you ask me.
That's hardly a fair balancing decision when the buffs give the hostile mobs better stats than yourself, that's like going into multiplayer PVP against people who are playing with hacks on.
It would be understandable for boss type mobs to have much greater amount of health and damage stats, but regular mob types being stronger than you is a questionable design choice especially when we're discussing a casual game that is meant for all ages above 7.
The armour worn by mobs may only be incrementally more powerful than armour worn by players, but it can still mean the difference between winning or losing. If such a mechanic is to exist in future vanilla Minecraft at all, it would only make sense to do on hard and hardcore difficulties respectively in my opinion. Not every player enjoys having a game where the element of frustration comes from non boss type hostile mobs having higher maximum defensive stats than them, and while I did advocate for having area mini bosses or hostile mobs having high grade enchanted armour in new Overworld structures, I don't believe it's appropriate to make them more powerful than players, players can already be outnumbered by hostile mobs if playing in single player which is dangerous enough. Pitting them against mobs that outgun them as well as outnumber them, just feels cheap if you ask me.
But the player can deal far more damage per hit than nearly any mob - 14.25 damage with a Sharpness V amethyst sword, which kill most mobs, even many armored mobs, in only two hits - by contrast, a zombie deals only 3 damage and has to hit an unarmored player 7 times before they die. Also, the armor that I wear, a chestplate, leggings, boots, with Protection IV on all three pieces, reduces damage by 76.167%, increasing the number of hits to 28, and even more if you add a helmet with Protection IV - now, isn't that just absurd?! That's exactly why many people complain that armor is overpowered, plus my own statistics say all; "Time Played: 38.95 days; Deaths: 0; Mob Kills: 88714; Damage Dealt: 1693919; Damage taken: 190084" - that's an average of only 2.14 damage taken per mob killed, nearly all of which were hostile mobs encountered while caving, and that's how I can often go without eating until I'm nearly starving without much health lost (if anything, a cave spider is much more dangerous than some zombies since armor has no effect against Poison, though enchantments do reduce it).
Do note that armor in 1.9+ can be MUCH weaker against stronger attacks - 80% armor penetration means that your fancy diamond armor can offer less protection than leather in older versions (20 armor * 0.2 = 4 armor left; leather = 7 armor, which is almost twice as much!), hence why creepers can now one-shot players in full armor, which never happened before, even with unenchanted diamond armor on Hard (20% of 73 damage = 14.6, or a bit over 2.5 hearts left). 1.9 also nerfed weapon damage - a Sharpness V diamond sword now deals only 10 damage and requires three hits to kill an unarmored zombie, unless one is critical (even with armor penetration, which maxes out after 3.2 damage for 2 armor points, they still have the equivalent of 20.3 health). Note that TMCW only has armor penetration for axes, otherwise you always get the maximum protection, and amethyst armor does have armor toughness, giving players incentive to use the rarest and most expensive material (similar to netherite, except you can find amethyst in the Overworld so there is no need to go to another dimension just to repair your gear).
Also, please make a new thread - I'm done with this one and I'm surprised that the moderators haven't deleted all the recent comments yet due to being completely off-topic - what in the world does any of this even have to do with the names you use for your enchanted gear?! Not at all! I might even report them myself; maybe the moderators can move them to a separate thread.
But the player can deal far more damage per hit than nearly any mob - 14.25 damage with a Sharpness V amethyst sword, which kill most mobs, even many armored mobs, in only two hits - by contrast, a zombie deals only 3 damage and has to hit an unarmored player 7 times before they die. Also, the armor that I wear, a chestplate, leggings, boots, with Protection IV on all three pieces, reduces damage by 76.167%, increasing the number of hits to 28, and even more if you add a helmet with Protection IV - now, isn't that just absurd?! That's exactly why many people complain that armor is overpowered, plus my own statistics say all; "Time Played: 38.95 days; Deaths: 0; Mob Kills: 88714; Damage Dealt: 1693919; Damage taken: 190084" - that's an average of only 2.14 damage taken per mob killed, nearly all of which were hostile mobs encountered while caving, and that's how I can often go without eating until I'm nearly starving without much health lost (if anything, a cave spider is much more dangerous than some zombies since armor has no effect against Poison, though enchantments do reduce it).
Do note that armor in 1.9+ can be MUCH weaker against stronger attacks - 80% armor penetration means that your fancy diamond armor can offer less protection than leather in older versions (20 armor * 0.2 = 4 armor left; leather = 7 armor, which is almost twice as much!), hence why creepers can now one-shot players in full armor, which never happened before, even with unenchanted diamond armor on Hard (20% of 73 damage = 14.6, or a bit over 2.5 hearts left). 1.9 also nerfed weapon damage - a Sharpness V diamond sword now deals only 10 damage and requires three hits to kill an unarmored zombie, unless one is critical (even with armor penetration, which maxes out after 3.2 damage for 2 armor points, they still have the equivalent of 20.3 health). Note that TMCW only has armor penetration for axes, otherwise you always get the maximum protection, and amethyst armor does have armor toughness, giving players incentive to use the rarest and most expensive material (similar to netherite, except you can find amethyst in the Overworld so there is no need to go to another dimension just to repair your gear).
Also, please make a new thread - I'm done with this one and I'm surprised that the moderators haven't deleted all the recent comments yet due to being completely off-topic - what in the world does any of this even have to do with the names you use for your enchanted gear?! Not at all! I might even report them myself; maybe the moderators can move them to a separate thread.
done, I've made suggestions about enchantment nerfs, and how to address them, some I agree with you on, some not.
I do agree that being able to tank 28 hits is excessive, though, even with all the best enchantments I believe the max hits tanked should be 20, not counting environmental damage like fall damage, I don't see the problem with an 8 block fall being nullified if stacked with Feather Falling 4. With regards to mobs and even other players, this makes the health bar actually mean something, even with fully enchanted max tier armour, players would still need to be careful not to get themselves in sticky situations.
Fun fact: Prior to 1.8 all you had to do to get infinite-lasting gear was simply rename it:
By taking advantage of this feature I've literally used the same pickaxe more than 4 million times (most of the uses shown have been on a single pickaxe, with several others used, including a couple which were used to breaking early on):
You may notice that I've "crafted" 658 pickaxes but most of those came from trading, same for all my other diamond items (prior to late 2015-mid 2016, depending on the item, I used mined diamonds to repair my gear, with only my pickaxe being repaired with sacrifices, otherwise individual diamonds, which is most evident for the sword, which has the equivalent uses of 102 Unbreaking III diamond swords).
The only catch is that you must pay for the amount of durability restored and the cost of all the enchantments when repairing an item, which can very quickly exceed the anvil cost limit and generally limits you to 2-3 enchantments with special ones like Fortune and Looting being more expensive; my sword, which has Sharpness V, Knockback II, Unbreaking III already does so, at 40 levels for an intact sacrifice; I get around this by using the sacrifice to kill a couple hundred chickens, which reduces the cost to 38 levels (the anvil gives a 12% bonus, which is 187 for diamond, and damaging the sacrifice by this much lowers the durability cost from 17 to 15 levels - yes, that's right - a diamond item costs up to 17 levels just for the repair, plus the costs of the enchantments - since 1.8 all items have a flat cost of just 2 levels for a sacrifice and 1 level per unit (prior to 1.8 the unit cost includes the number of enchantments; the cost to repair my sword with 2 diamonds is 35 levels).
For a more extreme example, say you want a diamond pickaxe with Efficiency V, Fortune III, Unbreaking III , which will be so expensive that the only way to repair it is with a single diamond at a time, restoring 25% durability for 37 levels; a full repair costs 5624 XP, or 0.9 XP per use, compared to 1032 XP and 0.165 XP per use for a sacrifice repair if Fortune is omitted - that's a cost increase of 5.5-fold just for adding Fortune (note that 4 repairs at 37 levels each is not the same as spending 148 levels due to the way level costs increase exponentially; 148 levels would require 56462 XP, or 10 times as much, while 5624 XP would be a bit less than 60 levels, less than twice the level cost of a single repair, thus you should look at the XP cost, not levels. The most optimal way to repair such items is as soon as you reach the required level after durability drops below 75%, which is how I sustainably used such a pickaxe while caving, relying entirely off of "natural" XP sources).
Obviously, you also need resources and anvils to repair items, so you need to continue mining in the late-game to maintain your gear, which along with the repair costs is where I think this mechanic is far more balanced then Mending, and indeed, my own version of Mending works the same way (it basically just makes it harder to obtain infinite gear by replacing a simple rename with the need to find Mending books). I even added a new material tier, amethyst (no relation to the item added in 1.17, it is more comparable to netherite), which is even more expensive and rarer than diamond, with a cost limit of 49 levels (other items are still limited to 39):
Note that some of the items listed do not have Mending or Unbreaking; this is because they would be too expensive to repair, or even try to add Mending to (the cost to add Mending is the same as the cost of a unit or sacrifice repair, whichever is cheaper; i.e. adding Mending to an amethyst pickaxe with Efficiency V and Unbreaking III costs 43 levels, while other enchantments will cost far less). However, you can use rubies, which can be found in certain biomes, to lower the prior work penalty by 6 levels per ruby, enabling you to indefinitely repair items at an increased cost (since rubies only lower the penalty you'll need to perform up to twice as many anvil operations, ideally, 33% more, or 3 repairs per ruby). You could also forgo Unbreaking to get Mending on an item (an item with Mending costs 2 more levels as Unbreaking III costs 6 and Mending costs 8; the latter is also twice the cost of Mojang's version, consistent with most single-level enchantments, e.g. Silk Touch and Infinity). And yes, I allow Mending and Infinity to be placed on a bow (just as you can rename them in vanilla 1.6.4); IMO the only reason Mojang nerfed them is to patch an exploit with Elytra and Punch bows.
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
My problem with this is not with the concept of your suggestion itself, but the fact that no matter what rebalancing decisions are done Mojang are never going to be satisfied with the result, nor will some members of the community. Some people would want further nerfs done to the game no matter if mending required the use of the anvil, XP and extra resources or not, and in the end it could very well lead to mending being removed, or at least not being very useful, which makes the enchantment pointless in the first place. Why add in a feature if you're just going to take it away afterwards? like Mojang had already done with gold ingot drops from Drowned Zombies in 1.17, and the Netherite Hoe from Piglin bartering in later versions of 1.16? it's stupid.
It's the entire reason why I hope Mojang implements locked older versions of Minecraft in their launcher by the time content parity is finalized in their new launcher system. We've already had account migration and a new launcher which isn't quite compatible with Windows 10 edition just yet.
Using the launcher we would have the ability to block further fiddling of the mechanics that Mojang causes, as they seem to just add in nerfs to your gear at a whim just as they did with the combat update in Java edition, forcing players to keep adapting or rethinking their strategies.
There is something very wrong with a game when a developer keeps changing their mind on how they want to design their game, just because a minority complained. Good games don't usually need this amount of tampering to get the mechanics right, once a rule has been set it's set in stone and players can either like it or lump it, their choice, as they knew what they were in for when they paid for a copy of said game.
The combat update was just... rough. I mean, never mind the attack cooldown (doesn't matter too much to me since I don't do PvP), but why do stone axes do more damage than diamond swords? How does Mojang not view that as being broken? Even with a Sharpness V diamond sword, it still takes on average two critical hits to kill a spider - one of the weakest mobs. It also takes two critical hits average with a stone sword, and only three with a wooden. I get that maybe they want to give Bane of Arthropods some use but... overhauling the damage system to do so? I'd rather just have the useless enchantment that I still won't carry with me. In fact, wooden axes do the same damage as diamond swords, and you can make that within ten seconds of starting a world. That's not balanced at all.
One could argue that diamond swords remain superior because of their durability... but if you put Unbreaking III and Mending on a stone axe with Smite V to deal with zombies and skeletons, then you are getting better benefits at a far cheaper price. I don't really know how Mojang can fix that without completely altering combat again. IMO they should have left that part alone - it didn't seem broken enough to require such an overhaul especially when the old mechanics had been there since the beginning. I think part of the problem is that there are too many tiers and mobs have set health points that still require a certain number of hits, which means that the infinitesimal differences between the tiers and tools don't mean much in the wider scope of PvE combat. So the only way that I see to reduce the number of hits required to kill mobs is either to significantly reduce the damage dealt by certain weapons by half, or increase the damage benefits of enchantments.
Axes dealing more damage than swords but with the drawback of longer attack cooldown - OKAY, sure, that's fine to an extent. But everything else was a slight mess, especially with how much damage they do. (I think it's fine that a Smite V axe can kill zombies and skeletons in one hit, but prior to 1.9 you could do this to most mobs with a Sharpness V sword, which seemed appropriate given it's the highest weapon you can wield - now, there is no way to one-hit kill creepers even with Strength II).
Before they touch Mending, they need to deal with that and the combat tests.
LP series? Not my style! Video series? Closer, but not quite. Survival journal, maybe? That's better. Now in Season 4 of the Legends of Quintropolis Journal (<< click to view)!! World download and more can be found there.
If the combat mechanics were to be altered I believe the best way to handle it would be to have axes do more damage to shields, this way players risked their shields getting broken if they put up their shields when an axe was used.
Different swords could have been implemented as well, like the standard sword becoming the longsword, taking longer to swing, but also having the most damage output.
An introduction of a new type of sword for fast consecutive swings would be appropriate here in my opinion. The katana, it would be the fastest melee weapon, but in exchange, it would do less damage than both the longsword and the axe, as there is less weight and momentum behind the swing, which means shields would still be effective at blocking said sword and there would be minimal risk of the shield failing to protect the opponent.
That said, I do agree with you material of the weapons should matter in combat, if it doesn't then this is bad design, as it ruins the progression system and removes the incentive for players to get better materials for their gear.
It appears Mojang are appealing too much to PVP fans, and not enough to other Minecraft players who don't care about competitive gameplay and just want to fight hostile mobs at night or underground, and build or explore during the rest of their playtime. If this is the mindset they have, then the game is on a path to destruction, whether they change the mechanics of mending or not. The mechanic where mending allows players to keep their gear indefinitely so long as they are careful was clearly intentional, and removing it now would be a ridiculous move and it would almost certainly mean some people would either resort to using mods or older versions of the game through the Java launcher system, which sucks, because then it means people stuck on older versions of the game will lose out on the benefits of updates in the future of the game, like new decoration blocks and mobs.
My own implementation of a "cooldown" was to have it be a penalty for attacking a single mob too quickly or missing entirely; you can attack multiple mobs as fast as their combined damage immunities or your skill allows (1 mob = 2 attacks per second, 2 mobs = 4 attacks per second, etc). If you hit a mob while it is damage-immune (unless you dealt more damage, then the difference in damage is dealt, as it does in vanilla) or you miss entirely it increments a counter which starts to reduce damage once it exceeds a certain level, with a worst-case damage reduction of 75% (the threshold allows for the occasional missed hit; missing less than once per second has no cumulative effect, while damage-immune hits have a higher penalty).
Also, I made axes, and only axes, penetrate armor in the same way as 1.9's mechanic, except players have half the penetration effect (i.e. a zombie with an axe, which they can naturally spawn with, penetrates up to 80% of armor at the rate of one armor point every 2 damage, which requires 32 damage against a player in full amethyst; players on the other hand can only penetrate up to 60% at the rate of one armor point every 4 damage, which requires 52.8 damage against a mob in full amethyst). They are otherwise the same as in vanilla 1.6.4, dealing one less damage than their corresponding sword and lose 2 durability per hit.
Armor worn by players is also weaker; player armor reduces damage by 3.33% per armor point while mob armor reduces it by 4% (same as vanilla) and in order for a player to get full armor (20 armor points or 66.6% damage reduction) you need amethyst, whcih is much rarer and more expensive than diamond, which itself has 18 armor points/60% damage reduction and is equivalent to iron in vanilla, but with 6 times the durability (1500 for all pieces, matching the ratio between an iron chestplate and iron tools). Mob armor can also provide up to 22 armor points (20 for diamond, 22 for amethyst, both a max of 22 on a zombie, which have 2 innate armor), or 88% damage reduction, and amethyst has armor toughness against axes, which works the same as as in 1.9 (this is most noticeable on armored zombies, where diamond and amethyst both give a total of 22 armor but amethyst takes more hits to kill).
Likewise, weapons used by players deal 1 less damage than in vanilla 1.6.4, matching a change in 1.9 (in 1.6.4 a diamond sword deals 8 damage, displayed as "+7 attack damage" because it is added to your unarmed damage of 1; since 1.9 they replace your unarmed damage, as also happened before 1.6, thus 1.6 actually made weapons stronger); similar to armor amethyst is needed to deal as much damage as diamond in vanilla (a Sharpness V amethyst sword, or diamond in vanilla, deals 14.25 damage, 18.25 critical, which can one-shot spiders, but so can even stone in vanilla; of course, the repair mechanics make using stone a bad idea, even with Unbreaking).
Another interesting change I made was to make Efficiency act like Sharpness when on a tool used by a mob, adding 1.25 damage per level, which increases the damage dealt by zombies which spawn with enchanted tools (axes, pickaxes, shovels, each of which has a 25% chance with swords being the remaining 25%, they are also more likely to have armor and weapons and higher level enchantments).
Also, to partly offset the reduced effectiveness of armor I reduced the peak damage dealt by creeper explosions from 49 to 36, but the damage fall-off with distance is linear down to a minimum of 6 instead of 1, and when combined with the reduced armor effectiveness you take more damage, especially at a distance (this does not take enchantments into account, which were made non-random so the worst-case damage reduction is higher; in vanilla 1.6.4 full Protection IV reduces damage by 40-80% while I made it a fixed 60%, similar to how 1.9 fixed it at 64%):
Overall, most of my changes nerf players and buff mobs, while 1.9 nerfs both (even with reduced weapon damage it still takes less hits to kill armored mobs due to general armor penetration).
Note: you should take this discussion to another thread as it is seriously off-topic and will probably end in warnings or bans; this is why I made a thread about eating habits (though as you can see this completely broke the chain of conversation in the original thread; in fact, the person I replied to never replied to the thread I made, which is why I think the strict off-topic policies are so ridiculous and are helping to kill off what is left of the forum community).
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
That's hardly a fair balancing decision when the buffs give the hostile mobs better stats than yourself, that's like going into multiplayer PVP against people who are playing with hacks on.
It would be understandable for boss type mobs to have much greater amount of health and damage stats, but regular mob types being stronger than you is a questionable design choice especially when we're discussing a casual game that is meant for all ages above 7.
The armour worn by mobs may only be incrementally more powerful than armour worn by players, but it can still mean the difference between winning or losing. If such a mechanic is to exist in future vanilla Minecraft at all, it would only make sense to do on hard and hardcore difficulties respectively in my opinion. Not every player enjoys having a game where the element of frustration comes from non boss type hostile mobs having higher maximum defensive stats than them, and while I did advocate for having area mini bosses or hostile mobs having high grade enchanted armour in new Overworld structures, I don't believe it's appropriate to make them more powerful than players, players can already be outnumbered by hostile mobs if playing in single player which is dangerous enough. Pitting them against mobs that outgun them as well as outnumber them, just feels cheap if you ask me.
But the player can deal far more damage per hit than nearly any mob - 14.25 damage with a Sharpness V amethyst sword, which kill most mobs, even many armored mobs, in only two hits - by contrast, a zombie deals only 3 damage and has to hit an unarmored player 7 times before they die. Also, the armor that I wear, a chestplate, leggings, boots, with Protection IV on all three pieces, reduces damage by 76.167%, increasing the number of hits to 28, and even more if you add a helmet with Protection IV - now, isn't that just absurd?! That's exactly why many people complain that armor is overpowered, plus my own statistics say all; "Time Played: 38.95 days; Deaths: 0; Mob Kills: 88714; Damage Dealt: 1693919; Damage taken: 190084" - that's an average of only 2.14 damage taken per mob killed, nearly all of which were hostile mobs encountered while caving, and that's how I can often go without eating until I'm nearly starving without much health lost (if anything, a cave spider is much more dangerous than some zombies since armor has no effect against Poison, though enchantments do reduce it).
Do note that armor in 1.9+ can be MUCH weaker against stronger attacks - 80% armor penetration means that your fancy diamond armor can offer less protection than leather in older versions (20 armor * 0.2 = 4 armor left; leather = 7 armor, which is almost twice as much!), hence why creepers can now one-shot players in full armor, which never happened before, even with unenchanted diamond armor on Hard (20% of 73 damage = 14.6, or a bit over 2.5 hearts left). 1.9 also nerfed weapon damage - a Sharpness V diamond sword now deals only 10 damage and requires three hits to kill an unarmored zombie, unless one is critical (even with armor penetration, which maxes out after 3.2 damage for 2 armor points, they still have the equivalent of 20.3 health). Note that TMCW only has armor penetration for axes, otherwise you always get the maximum protection, and amethyst armor does have armor toughness, giving players incentive to use the rarest and most expensive material (similar to netherite, except you can find amethyst in the Overworld so there is no need to go to another dimension just to repair your gear).
Also, please make a new thread - I'm done with this one and I'm surprised that the moderators haven't deleted all the recent comments yet due to being completely off-topic - what in the world does any of this even have to do with the names you use for your enchanted gear?! Not at all! I might even report them myself; maybe the moderators can move them to a separate thread.
(hint: the aforementioned thread about eating was intended to be a reply a reply you made in a different thread, as I knew myself that it was going way off-topic and the moderators really dislike that, as seen my my warning history, nearly all for off-topic, and I have to imagine yours looks similar given how often you go off-topic, and usually as the instigator, while I'm just replying to what was started by somebody else)
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
https://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-java-edition/discussion/3128304-a-continued-minecraft-discussion-about-armour
done, I've made suggestions about enchantment nerfs, and how to address them, some I agree with you on, some not.
I do agree that being able to tank 28 hits is excessive, though, even with all the best enchantments I believe the max hits tanked should be 20, not counting environmental damage like fall damage, I don't see the problem with an 8 block fall being nullified if stacked with Feather Falling 4. With regards to mobs and even other players, this makes the health bar actually mean something, even with fully enchanted max tier armour, players would still need to be careful not to get themselves in sticky situations.
here's some of my favs
sword: . .shiny pp , Excaliber , Dragon Slayer (reference from berserk, and...well it Does slay dragon lol)
axe: . . . Bane of Lumber , Stormbreaker
pickaxe: Fortuner , Gold Digger , Silky (for silk touch pick)
shovel: . Excavator , Flat Earther , Grave Digger