Minecraft Forums

I have to disagree with the OP. I've been using it since it was first introduced and I find it superior to the old system in every way. To discuss each of the OP's points in order:

1. Making Lapis required is bad because it could be used for other things.

First of all, that reasoning can be applied to literally any item used to make any other item. Making Torches require Coal could be seen as bad because the Coal could be used for something else. Heck, you could even say that using XP for enchanting is bad because it could be used for brewing. That is a non argument, because any item can be used for anything. The only difference is the rarity of the material and the power of the crafted item.

The other argument is that it should be used for things like armor, rings, or upgrades. Why armor? The ore is slightly rarer than Diamond, but the amount you get per drop makes it more common than Diamond, but less common than Iron. So the only tier that would make sense is once between Iron and Diamond, which is not needed. Especially when you consider the fact that if you are at levels you can get Lapis, you are at or near Diamond levels. Then you say rings, which you don't give a use for them. If I have to choose between a vague ring concept that could do nothing or could cause an in-game apocalypse, or for enchanting, I'm going to go with enchanting because I know exactly how it affects enchanting and why it does. Then you say it should be used for upgrades. Enchanting is a form of upgrading so that would already be true.

Finally, you just say to get on rings and upgrades. Both vague and meaningless without saying exactly how they should work. And as an added kicker you say that it makes Hunger games harder and enchanting harder because you need Lapis. As for Hunger Games, that argument does not matter. Mojang in not obligated to only change parts of the game that will not affect your server or mod of choice. They make the base game, and mods and servers adapt to the game Mojang makes. That is how it works and the only way it CAN work. As for making normal enchanting harder, that was the point. But even then it doesn't really make it harder, because as I already pointed out, Lapis Ore is slightly more rare than Diamond Ore, but the higher drop rate makes it more common. You break 1 Lapis Ore and you have enough for at least one top level enchantment. On average you get 6 Lapis which gives you two top level enchantments. Since you need Obsidian to enchant, and you need Diamonds for Obsidian and to enchant, you will almost always come across Lapis while getting the 3 Diamonds to mine Obsidian, the 2 Diamonds for the Enchanting Table, or the 4 Obsidian for the Enchanting Table

2. It takes the randomness out of enchantments, and binds you to certain enchantments until you enchant something.

Finally, the awful randomness is partially gone, and in a good balance too. Spending 30 levels on a Diamond Pickaxe to only get Efficiency 1 was just plain awful. I would rather get a peek at what I will get. Especially with enchantments only changing after you enchant something.

Side Note: You are partially wrong on that point too, you say you can't get new enchantments on that tool type until you enchant that tool type. I just loaded up the latest snapshot, went into Creative, and set up an enchanting table. I took two Diamond Swords and a Leather Helmet. I put the first Diamond Sword in and it showed Knockback 1, Sharpness 2, and Unbreaking 3 for each slot, respectively. I put in the other Diamond Sword and sure enough it showed me the same enchantments. By how you described it, the Diamond Sword enchantment should not change unless I enchant a Diamond Sword. I instead enchanted the Leather Helmet (different item type and different tier), and then put a Diamond Sword back in the slot. This time it showed BoA 1, Unbreaking 2, and Smite 4, respectively. Therefore you can enchant any item and it causes the enchantments for EVERY item to change.

Using that information, plus your earlier argument that removing the randomness is a bad thing it invalidates most of your argument. If you want Fortune 3 on a Pickaxe, the only time you KNOW that it will not give you Fortune 3 is if it says Silk Touch or Fortune 1-2 (as you cannot get Silk Touch and Fortune and you can't get multiple levels of Fortune on one tool). Any other time you take a chance with the same randomness as before. So unless the enchantment that it shows guarantees you won't get the enchantment you want, you still have a chance for the one you want. If you don't want to take the chance, you can put a Torch in front of a Bookshelf to slightly modify the levels which changes the enchantments until you enchant something or remove the Torch, or you can find another item to enchant and then wait for 3 levels. So you may not get Fortune 3 guaranteed on your pickaxe right away, but you can always enchant a Sword or Shovel or piece of Armor and then try again in 3 levels. It isn't like you need to grind all 30 levels again like before.

3. Not using all 30 levels is... bad somehow.

I don't even really know the argument you are trying to make here. Your argument is that using all your levels was good, because then there was no experience risk when you die. But lets look at the possible outcomes of each situation:

Pre 1.8 - You spend 30 levels on a Diamond Sword, then you...

• Die: You can retrieve the Sword, but because you already used all your XP, you don't have any to lose (or pick up at your body)
• Live: You still have no XP because you spent it all on one enchantment

1.8 - You spend 3 levels on a Diamond Sword, then you...

• Die: You go to your body and get the Sword. You also get about 5 levels of XP back because you drop some XP based on your level when you die.
• Live: You still have 27 levels of XP.

Now lets compare the net difference in XP for each situation

• Die: Dying in 1.8 gives you 5 levels of XP because you had XP when you died, Dying before 1.8 gives you no XP because you already spend it all. 1.8 has the advantage of 5 levels versus 0 levels
• Live: Living in 1.8 leaves you with 27 levels of XP because you only spent 3. Living before 1.8 leaves you with no XP because you already spent it all. 1.8 has the advantage of 27 levels versus 0 levels

So in both situations, keeping some of your XP is better than spending it all. I just supplied irrefutable mathematical evidence of that fact. But for fun, lets say you use all your XP until you get back to level 0 in 1.8 and compare the amount of enchanted gear you get in 1.8 to before 1.8:

Before 1.8, you spend 30 levels and get one enchanted item.

In 1.8 you spend 3 levels and get 1 enchanted item, and have 27 levels left. You then spend 3 more levels, get another enchanted item, and have 24 levels. You spend another 3, get another enchanted item, and have 21. After a long amount of enchanting, you spend 30 levels. You also have 10 enchanted items. I've already explained that Lapis is more common than Diamonds, and getting 30 is fairly easy. This is just my personal opinion, but if I am spending 30 levels, I would rather have 1 item at max enchanting strength and 9 other enchanted items than just 1 item at max enchanting strength. 1+9 is more than 1. But the kicker is you don't NEED to spend all 27 levels. You can pop back into your mine and get 3 more levels in 3-5 minutes. You can go kill mobs and get 3 levels in 3-5 minutes. Then you get another max strength enchantment.

The belief that you need to spend all 30 levels only exists when an enchantment costs that much. If that cost isn't there, that belief is no longer reasonable. Those are my responses to your reasons.

As for TheMasterCaver's issue with Anvils being less useful, I understand it but I do not agree. Having basically unlimited tools was kind of unbalanced, at least to me. You only needed a single lucky enchantment, and you were set with that item for life, or until you accidentally drop it in lava. Heck, you were set for life even if you got 2 bad enchantments that are good when combined, provided you name your tool. With this system (assuming players are playing smart and using Diamond gear for their enchanting) sure it won't last forever. But not including Unbreaking, isn't being able to enchant your awesome Diamond Pickaxe 5-6 times enough? Even without Unbreaking, we're talking at least 7000 uses. If you have Unbreaking 3, approximately 31000 uses. I'm fairly sure you will get enough materials and XP in those uses to make a new tool or... 5, especially if you get Unbreaking, which is godly for getting the most experience out of a tool's lifespan.

Quote from cephalo2

--snipped--

Yeah, I did a little peeking on the wiki and on Youtube when I first started. I still use the wiki every time I play. Keep in mind that this was a couple years ago, so I didn't have to worry about things like Hunger. But here is the thing. Go to the wiki and find where it talks about custom world generation. It took me a few minutes of specifically searching for it before I came across a hit for it. There are only 3-4 pages that mention it besides it's main page, and the main page is titled "Customized". How many people do you REALLY think are going to say "Hmm, I need to find Diamonds. I'll go to the wiki and search for..." and then search for the words "customized" or "world type" or any of the other vague things that reference this obscure feature? I'd have to give the same number you pulled out of your butt and guess ten percent. And even then I'm really being generous with my estimation.

No, they are going to search for the item they are looking for. They want Diamonds, they search "Diamond", which leads them to click on Diamond Ore. That page does not reference custom generation. Maybe they want to know about Slimes. They search, and the page does not reference custom generation. They want to know about biomes, they search, not a single link to custom generation. The only places that reference it (from what I found), are the pages on 1.8 changes or planned features (the latter will be removed when 1.8 comes out), the "World type" page, and the actual page for it. It isn't even on the front page of the wiki. They aren't going to just stumble across it.

Finally, you SEVERELY underestimate new players. Not everybody instantly tries to make the game as absolutely easy as possible. I never start a new game on the easiest setting. I typically start on normal difficulty, or whatever is close to that. Lots of people do. Will there be some of those people? Sure. But those are also the people who will abuse cheats (which is easier to find in game and on the wiki and is way easier to understand unless you know how the generation works), use mods (simple with mod loaders and will be easier with the API), or use 3rd party programs, which they can find easily on here. But it isn't going to be some sweeping, game ending plague where people uncontrollably make the game as easy as possible and then quit. In fact, I'll tell you exactly what will happen:

1. Some people (likely less than 10% of new players, as players don't typically wander through every option when feeling the adrenaline of a new game to play) will discover how the custom world generation works.
2. Of those less than 10%, some of them will make ore generation super common. They will play like that and:
Realize that they made the game super easy and adjust the world generation (most people).

3. Brag to others about how much loot they have, which people on here will either not care or say they probably used a command, mod, or custom world type (and the OP will either admit it or deny it and within minutes the thread is ignored or locked).
4. Continue to play and enjoy the product they bought in the way they want to (which makes it not your business or your problem).
5. Think the game is too easy and complain, and people will figure out that they used custom world generation and tell them to stop using it to make the ore less common.
6. Think the game is too easy and stop playing (once again, not your business or your problem)
7. The world keeps spinning, birds continue to make noises in the trees, and we all slowly age until we die, which can be long or short, pleasant or torturous. And after we die the world continues onward for billions of years until the Sun dies.
In short, this changes nothing and you are being ridiculously over dramatic. Finally, I'll leave you with this parting message:

At least a dozen things have been heralded as "the end of Minecraft". The Adventure Update, when Jeb took over as lead developer, the hiring of Dinnerbone, the Horse Update, the Redstone Update, Survival Mode, reintegrating Creative Mode Adventure Mode, Realms, the revised EULA, the official release, the new world generation, removal of the Far Lands, adding The End. That list goes on and on and on. The thing they all have in common is that none of these killed Minecraft. This is just another insanely convoluted end of days theory to throw on that pile.