At the same time, it means you HAVE to be involved in their multiplication. Some people might not like that sort of micromanagement.
No it doesn't. There can be some % chance for the eggs to hatch automatically, if the local populaiton is below #. We need some kind of counter to the activity of wild wolves.
This is a game that has creatures that commit explosive suicide whenever they see the player and you can carry >1000 cubic meters of rock without any help, does it have to make that much sense.
I still think your idea has merit though. I don't really care what kind of animals there are, but there should be something. We could replace cows with seals/walruses.
That's the reason I like the eggs breeding idea. A person can just go collect some cow eggs and bring them back to the tropical island in the middle of a giant ocean.
Wheat is still requires as both a tool for domestication and for overall sustenance.
...
I would personally stick with the traditional spawning method unless the animal was "domesticated" with wheat (at which point it becomes persistent).
...
I loathe the idea of being forced to grow wheat in order to raise livestock. This model forces feedlots and negates ranching.
I'd actually prefer eggs to simply having baby animals.
Why? I can transport an egg in inventory, instead of trying to herd a baby animal across countless block distance to a pen I built to contain it.
I agree with that. One additional thing that people seem to be ignoring with the proposed alternative, is that if you want to raise animals you would be forced to raise wheat first to replenish your animals. If I'm being forced to raise wheat, why would I bother with the animals after that. I could just turn the wheat into bread, and have less **** to put up with.
Tending animals should not rely on tending crops. That's a feedlot, not ranching. At least with eggs I wouldn't be forced to build and maintain fields of wheat too.
There are a couple things wrong with snow right now. Only one biome type has it on the ground, and even if it falls with weather effects it doesn't make new snowcover.
I know Notch acknowledged that new snow wasn't forming. I haven't seen any comments on the diversity of where it falls.
I wouldn't mind ocean biomes if it weren't for the fact you can't explore the bottom of the ocean. It would be kind of cool to make an ancient looking diver gear to explore it.
I hope in the near future, now that have oceans, they will recieve some development lovin. Flora and fauna really need to be added to oceans to liven them up and make them worth exploring. Kelp forests, coral reefs, schools of tuna or sharks, and scuttling crabs would all be nice basic additions.
Not that I doubt you, I was just wondering if that is actually confirmed somwhere that animals do not spawn in ocean biomes, even if you were to grow grass all the way to wherever you decided to build a patch of land.
I ask merely out of interest since I were going to build a base out in the ocean to focus hostile mob spawn.
I've seen a lot of ocean islands (avg ~5 per ocean, 100+ observed), less than half have a tree, and not a single one has had wildlife. And no, they aren't desert colored, they have the generic color pallete - they just happen to be rather sandy most of the time like old beaches.
And for the OP, yes, Ocean is one of the biome types. There is a moderate chance that this biome will be found in clusters with itself (making large oceans that extend beyonf view), though I have observed many small 'lakes' made up of one patch of Ocean as well.
So I couldn't care less between live birth or eggs. I don't see why so many are hell bent on keeping some kind of perceived normality in a fantasy game.
Eggs solve two problems with one stone. The breeding, and transportation.
I just hope some of the eggs dropped will hatch automatically to keep wild populations up.
This is the main problem, for now... the taller mountains are amazing, but other than to explore them, there is no real reward for climbing... only digging. The good ores are still below base level.
From a "this is a game" perspective I can understand why certain precious resources were restricted to certain Y ranges, but honestly, I'd prefer to see that restriction removed. There are plenty of gold veins in mountains, and diamonds found just below the surface of flatlands in reality.
Minecraftians have developed plenty of ways to make mining efficient. Most of the precious ores might as well be generated anywhere stone can be found. It would be more "adventuresome" if precious minerals were more predominant lining the walls of caves, regardless of elevation.
I agree, the swamps are ugly, but that is okay if they were not just about everywhere. I have a world that is about 50% swamp. I have a few things I think should happen:
1. There should not be hills in swamps. They should be mostly flat.
Why not? A swamp is just a poorly drained region in which water collects to create a wetland. That can happen amidst hills. I'll guarantee you it does in reality. You'll probably find small streams leading into and or out of most of them, but in an area with good evaporation you'll find some endorheic lakes and swamps too.
2. Swamps should not be next to large bodies of water. I don't think that this happens in real life, not 100% sure though.
Florida Evergaldes? Practically any large river delta (Mississippi, Amazon etc.) is a swamp abbuting a sea or ocean. The ones that aren't are only that way now because humans wanted to live there, so we modified them by building a city on it.
3. They should be surrounded by forests, not next to deserts.
How about the Nile river delta, or the Tigris and Euphrates that Saddam went out of his way to drain. They're swamps / wetlands surrounded by desert. Just because there's some water pooled there, doesn't mean it fell as rain.
4. They shouldn't be as large as they currently are and shouldn't be as frequent.
Why not? They're not all enormous. In 100+ seeds I've seen small and big, wide and narrow swamps. If the one or two you saw weren't to your liking, find a different seed, or walk away from it and find another one.
5. Ravines should not happen in swamps.
From a logical point of view I'll give you this one. Swamps normally exist because they're areas of poor drainage, and a big fissure in the ground seems like a pretty good way to drain water. However, from an "this is interesting" point of view, let it happen. These ravines aren't terribly common. If you don't like the look of a swamp with one in it, then go somewhere else, I'll guarantee you that most swamps won't have one.
0
Pretty sure you can still find intestine based condoms. It's one of those natural alternatives, and for people who have latex allergies.
0
Eggs are funnier, and easier to transport. Go eggs!
0
Chuck Norris parables
jokesteach us all about real life. I'm pretty sure there are some about him punching down cords of lumber.0
Mushroom biomes definitely need badgers.
0
No it doesn't. There can be some % chance for the eggs to hatch automatically, if the local populaiton is below #. We need some kind of counter to the activity of wild wolves.
0
That's the reason I like the eggs breeding idea. A person can just go collect some cow eggs and bring them back to the tropical island in the middle of a giant ocean.
0
I loathe the idea of being forced to grow wheat in order to raise livestock. This model forces feedlots and negates ranching.
Let there be grazing to refill their gonads.
0
That's because they hopped/walked there, they didn't spawn there. Only squid spawn in Ocean.
0
I agree with that. One additional thing that people seem to be ignoring with the proposed alternative, is that if you want to raise animals you would be forced to raise wheat first to replenish your animals. If I'm being forced to raise wheat, why would I bother with the animals after that. I could just turn the wheat into bread, and have less **** to put up with.
Tending animals should not rely on tending crops. That's a feedlot, not ranching. At least with eggs I wouldn't be forced to build and maintain fields of wheat too.
0
I know Notch acknowledged that new snow wasn't forming. I haven't seen any comments on the diversity of where it falls.
0
I hope in the near future, now that have oceans, they will recieve some development lovin. Flora and fauna really need to be added to oceans to liven them up and make them worth exploring. Kelp forests, coral reefs, schools of tuna or sharks, and scuttling crabs would all be nice basic additions.
0
I've seen a lot of ocean islands (avg ~5 per ocean, 100+ observed), less than half have a tree, and not a single one has had wildlife. And no, they aren't desert colored, they have the generic color pallete - they just happen to be rather sandy most of the time like old beaches.
And for the OP, yes, Ocean is one of the biome types. There is a moderate chance that this biome will be found in clusters with itself (making large oceans that extend beyonf view), though I have observed many small 'lakes' made up of one patch of Ocean as well.
0
Eggs solve two problems with one stone. The breeding, and transportation.
I just hope some of the eggs dropped will hatch automatically to keep wild populations up.
0
From a "this is a game" perspective I can understand why certain precious resources were restricted to certain Y ranges, but honestly, I'd prefer to see that restriction removed. There are plenty of gold veins in mountains, and diamonds found just below the surface of flatlands in reality.
Minecraftians have developed plenty of ways to make mining efficient. Most of the precious ores might as well be generated anywhere stone can be found. It would be more "adventuresome" if precious minerals were more predominant lining the walls of caves, regardless of elevation.
0
Why not? A swamp is just a poorly drained region in which water collects to create a wetland. That can happen amidst hills. I'll guarantee you it does in reality. You'll probably find small streams leading into and or out of most of them, but in an area with good evaporation you'll find some endorheic lakes and swamps too.
Florida Evergaldes? Practically any large river delta (Mississippi, Amazon etc.) is a swamp abbuting a sea or ocean. The ones that aren't are only that way now because humans wanted to live there, so we modified them by building a city on it.
How about the Nile river delta, or the Tigris and Euphrates that Saddam went out of his way to drain. They're swamps / wetlands surrounded by desert. Just because there's some water pooled there, doesn't mean it fell as rain.
Why not? They're not all enormous. In 100+ seeds I've seen small and big, wide and narrow swamps. If the one or two you saw weren't to your liking, find a different seed, or walk away from it and find another one.
From a logical point of view I'll give you this one. Swamps normally exist because they're areas of poor drainage, and a big fissure in the ground seems like a pretty good way to drain water. However, from an "this is interesting" point of view, let it happen. These ravines aren't terribly common. If you don't like the look of a swamp with one in it, then go somewhere else, I'll guarantee you that most swamps won't have one.