Minecraft Needs to Fix This BEFORE Mending



Minecraft Viki (video wiki) ➜ https://minecraft.viki.gg

UHC Livestream → https://youtube.com/live/LfQWFn5G-Gk?feature=share

Follow my Twitter for video updates and early news! → http://twitter.com/ibxtoycat
Become a Channel Member to access exclusive videos & community posts, special emojis to use in the comments or live chat, as well as a unique badge next to your name! → https://www.youtube.com/@toycat/membership

Minecraft Bedrock is the same as Minecraft for Xbox One, Xbox Series S, Xbox Series X, PlayStation 4, PlayStation 5, Nintendo Switch, Windows 10, Windows 11, iOS/Android (Pocket Edition), and Chromebook.

This Video Was Edited By:
@HarrisonGray

If you came to read down here and you enjoyed this video, please consider subscribing, and thank you for watching! 🙂

source

49 thoughts on “Minecraft Needs to Fix This BEFORE Mending”

  1. This is such a great perspective!
    I hope the devs see this video.

    I really always thought the "too expensive" part was really stupid, even coming from a time where you actually lost 30 levels for an enchantment. This decision should be up to the player.

    I know, without mending I would never go for a netherite tool ever. Diamonds might be less durable but far easier to get and to repair. It just nerves netherite out of existence.

    Reply
  2. Maybe a rune system like in the path of exile allowing higher tier tools ti have more enchantment slots that use up XP as you use the tool (this would make the whole enchantment thing dont hurt as much but sadly wont fix the tool repairing part)

    Reply
  3. The armor enchanting chart is wrong. All 4 armor pieces have protection 4, but you can only benefit from 10 levels of protection. I am 100% against the enchanting nerf if they do not fix the broken system first. It is a choice. Nobody is forced to go through the process of obtaining the enchantment. Without mending, I usually don't waste time on diamond or Netherite gear. I would get a diamond pickaxe for the items that require it, but only equip iron gear. Just play on easy difficulty, except when I need certain drops.

    One of the things that makes Minecraft great is that there is no wrong way to play. Now they are telling their customers that they are playing the game wrong and the game needs to be radically changed to make them play it correctly. I can create a world where I can switch between creative mode and survival mode at will. If my gear breaks, I can simply manifest new gear into existence and switch right back to survival mode. So what is the point of the nerf?

    The song and dance of abducting villagers is just a time sink they are putting into the game instead of new content. It reminds me of the MMORPGs I used to play. Why make the game more challenging when you can make it more inconvenient and time-consuming? I quit playing WoW back in 2013 because I got tired of the perpetual nerfs and simplifications. The game stopped being fun to play. WoW was the most popular game in the world and nobody could conceive of another game toppling it.

    Reply
  4. How to fix the issue:

    Repairing has a flat xp cost that cannot go up that is different for each tier of item

    Remove the too expensive limit

    Make netherite repairable with diamonds but have diamonds be a lot less effective, repairing a tenth of the durability for each one.

    That's it, that's ALL they need to do
    Hell the first two is all they REALLY need to do, but mojang is lazy and never gives us anything as anymore without it being some stupid monkey's paw situation

    Reply
  5. This is a discussion that has the potential to be productive and lead to good things. I'm sure I won't agree with all that they end up doing, but I do have a wishlist of things I'd like to see coming.

    As you mentioned, the anvil could do with a change. I agree with the idea that it should never end up telling me that repairing/adding enchanted books is too expensive. Instead they should keep the current xp-cost calculations and let the player decide if he wants to use that much xp on the item. Obviously they would have to introduce a max-limit of sorts. Like 999 levels or something. Once repair-cost reaches that, it never increases but stays at that cost forever. 999 is a random number. It should probably be a bit lower, but you get my point.

    In addition, the anvil really should not break. At the very least they should have a durability attached to them, not a random chance to break every time they are used.

    As for tools not breaking. That would be unrealistic. I would much rather have it so tools break as they do today, but having (any level of) Unbreaking on them would make them work like the Elytra to become unuseable until after repaired.

    I am positive to the proposed changes to villager-trading mechanics. It makes getting the enchanted books you want (a little bit) harder. But it encourages exploration, which is a huge positive. I'd also say that nerfing villagers is a positive. Today it is not really an achievement to get Mending from a villager-trade. All you have to do is to get ONE villager and then break/replace a lectern a lot of times. Which is super easy… and super boring. A poor game-mechanic.

    Having alternative enchants to Mending is also an idea that I think I will support. We have it for the Bow already and that works very well. Having one with Infinity for exploration and resource-gathering (when you don't want a full inventory of arrows) and one at your base with Mending (for easy chorus-flower gathering) seems to be a good solution. If there were alternatives that could work for other tools as well, that could be interesting.

    Reply
  6. The phenomenon you descrive is called strategic dominance, a gamer naturally will look for the path of least resistance, and if an option is overwhelmingly good in comparation to others with no extra cost, that is bad game design

    Well you can still apply the same re work the enchanting table got, like you need a lot of levels to do high level stuff, but it only consumes one or two levels, and for netherite armor, i think it could help only needing diamonds to repair, it is still technically mostly diamond, you could say you used the diamond in it, and make it so if a netherite tool or armor breaks drops a special netherite scrap, you just fix it with diamonds and you get back the tool/armor, you can even find this kind of loot in piglin fortress, so you get better loot there, and finding a scrap is a surprise, what armor will you get? Ideas mojang

    Reply
  7. I'd say durability itself is fine, but having the tool break and vanish is the problem. Coupled with the fact that you can't just repair it manually forever means Mending is a requirement.

    Something along the lines of what TInker's does, the tool becomes unusable until repaired and you can use the resource the tool is made of to repair indefinitely is a far better system.

    Reply
  8. I like this idea:
    1. Tools don't disappear when broken.
    2. Broken tools are significantly less efficient.
    3. Repair cost never go pass a maximum.

    This would fix all the problems I think with durability. After that, I don't care if they get rid of mending (though I would like to keep it)

    Reply
  9. This obviously shouldn't be the only fix, but I find it quite hilariously annoying that the durability values of the different minerals are so wacky.

    In order from least to most, we have gold (32), wood (59), stone (131), iron (250), diamond (1561), and netherite (2031).
    Why not just make these powers of 2? Why not make these multiples of 100 or something? Why is there such a massive jump in between iron and diamond and basically no change between diamond and netherite?
    For as complex as the xp formula is, the durability is a nightmare lol. I hope this gets adjusted in some way in the future.

    Reply
  10. I personally wish enchantment and repair were two completely separate systems, where only enchanting can be done in the enchantment table, and only repair can be done in the anvil.
    I think it would be better for all enchantment handling to be done in enchantment tables, including transferring and combining enchantments, without affecting durability. I would also like for anvils to be unable to enchant, instead being made exclusively for repair, and for repairing to be much cheaper (both in terms of experience and resources required).

    Currently, you'll enchant your tool once in an enchantment table to reduce the number of books you need to add, then spend tons of experience combining books, and adding them to the tool. At the end, you end up with an amazing tool, but it becomes impossible to repair because the anvil says it is too expensive. This disincentivizes you from actually using the tool unless you have mending, making mending an absolute must have.

    I think it would go a long way to solving the durability/mending issue if regardless of enchantment level, repair cost is always one XP for the first time, with the cost increasing by one level per repair until some maximum number of repairs. Similarily, repairs should not affect enchantment cost. This would allow you to create an enchanted tool without requiring you use mending, and you'll still keep the ability of using it for a long time by repeatedly repairing it, without ruining your ability to add more enchantments down the line. This way (along with the mending changes mojang are experimenting with), mending would become the engame enchantment it was supposed to be, without disincentivizing people from using their tools.

    Reply
  11. Okay, I'm glad they've figured out a better approach. Rebalancing something that a lot of people rely on to get good gear hurts the game, but changing the problem that makes it necessary is better.

    Reply
  12. Considering that we combine ancient scrap with gold to restore it to netherite, perhaps they should make it so that the material used to repair netherite gear is actually gold. Combine that with fixing anvils, and suddenly the investment to upgrade to netherite is actually worthwhile from a repair standpoint as well.

    For the anvil fix, I wouldn't even say that they absolutely need to remove the anvil use counter mechanics either. I would appreciate it if they did, but it's not necessary if the devs decide they really don't want to. At baseline, all that's needed is just making it so that repairing an item without adding enchantments does not touch the anvil use count, neither adding to it nor receiving the penalty from it. If it's only applied to enchantments, it becomes a lot more palatable.

    Maybe get rid of anvil use count, but move the method for adding/combining enchantments over to be a secondary use of the enchantment table? So you only use the anvil for repairing, but the second slot in the enchantment table is either lapis for a new enchantment, or another item with compatible enchantments that you want to transfer over. Doing so destroys the second item, but it wouldn't have to be the same item you're moving the enchantments to. All those useless gold tools from abandoned nether portal chests would suddenly be useful, and you can still have a limiting factor like the use count in play if you want. Albeit, hopefully one that's better implemented.

    Reply
  13. if they think that mending should be somewhat harder to obtain than it is now, that's fine but should be done in a way where it feels rewarding rather than tedious.
    with the current changes, if you have a swamp nearby it's fine (but still, so far swamp trades are really bad other than mending so it doesn't feel rewarding), and if the swamp is really far away then it becomes very tedious, and that does actually take away from the fun of the game. It only being available in one biome is part of the issue, as is the way transporting villagers works now.
    They can't have it both ways, either they want to not encourage moving villagers or they require you to build new villages in a specific biome. Sure, zombie villagers exist, but they're not exactly more convenient. If they want to make biome specific villages, which i think is a fun idea if they do it for all biomes instead of just the current ones, they have to accept that moving villagers around is part of the game.

    also, i really like that kingbdogz actually considered "if Minecraft was fun without mending before, what can we do to make it fun without it again", because that is the right approach to this stuff. Not "remove it and just accept that people won't find it as fun with new changes" but "how do we change it in a way where it doesn't feel necessary and the game feels as fun after the nerf as before it". That's the thing i feel has been lacking from their recent attempts at nerfing things, the game lacked things that make up for it and make the game as fun after the change as before it.

    Reply
  14. The only thing I use the table for these days is decoration and bows because they are free to craft and if I have the table I may as well use it. But for everything else you need extreme luck or a lot of the same item which isn't possible with netherite.

    Reply
  15. Honestly the entire mass enchanting grind for endless books and villagers have been quite boring for me. I only ever use stone and iron tools and armor and friends always judge me for that. I just feel like I can't be bothered with all of that work, and then locking up the piece of equipment until a mending book is found.

    Reply
  16. Mending rework: each succesfull finished action with the tool/weapon in respective category has a 25% chance to repair your tool / (weapon + armor) by using xp from your level by (insert value, example: 1) for each item.

    This will make:
    – reparing tools harder but will allow players extend their mining/foraging sesions .
    -make armors + mending depended to weaponds ( note: Some item can have mixed function weapon & tool : AXE )
    – make mending depended to your level -> not allowing players use with 0 levels .

    Reply
  17. The biggest issue I have found isn't that mending is useful it is that replacing tools/gear is not all that interesting to do and often distracting from the task at hand. Both mending and villagers makes it a little more interesting, in that early effort helps more to avoid later tedium/annoyances/distractions.

    Reply
  18. I see the problem with postponed mending in that players now have to invest more time into the parts of the game they didn't really have to, prior to the discussion of the change. It looks for me as Mojang/Microsoft want kids (their target audience) to just spend more of their life time in their game for nothing basically. Instead of building what they want almost straight away with good tools, players now have to bother with awful transportation of the villagers or curing jungle/swamp zombies to get reliable source of unbreaking/mending or they have to invest their time in unreliable and risky dungeon crawl through ancient cities or mining resources for a new set of tools. No wonder why players don't like that change.

    Reply
  19. Maybe if tools or armor lose all of its durability, they just become very inefficient and enchants won't work.

    That way, you can still have and use the broken tool when you're stuck in a cave or in other similar situations.

    Reply
  20. For me the other problem is, moving villagers is a pain in the butt and also extremely boring. Now, if you want a reasonable Mending source (no kingbdogz, one or two per ancient city is NOT another reasonable path having to raid six or seven ancient cities just to fully enchant your gear is flipping ridiculous) you have to whether sit around in a swamp for potentially hours hoping for a zombie villager to spawn or move two villagers to said swamp from somewhere else and breed them. Then if you want that mending villager somewhere you can easily access you have to whether make your base near a swamp or move said villager all the way to your base. Not easy and not fun.
    Also, another issue with the enchanting table you don't mention is just how… bad the stuff it gives you is half the time. Like, a level 30 enchant can be anything from almost maxed out like efficiency 4, unbreaking 3, fortune 3, or efficiancy 3 and absolutely nothing else. Plus you can't even GET the max level enchants from enchanting tables for some things. If I want sharpness 5 on my sword, I have to use books for that, I can't get sharpness 5 from an enchanting table unless I use a gold sword. No one is enchanting a gold sword.

    Reply
  21. Never used mending my entire life, I just repair tools at the anvil when they're almost broken. I don't see how it's a big deal that mending is harder to get now. Villagers halls are absurdly OP, they should get removed entirely not nerfed. Just my opinion, but this is minecraft not tradecraft.

    Reply
  22. I feel that the Enchanting Table could start with a small pool of spells that you can choose from. When you get a new Enchantment in a book you can add it to the bookshelves around the table and then it is added to the list of spells you can choose from.

    Reply
  23. I feel one small band-aid on the issue of durability would be to have tools have virtual unbreaking levels for mining blocks of a lower tier.

    Like if you mine stone with an unenchanted iron pickaxe it'd work as if the pickaxe was unbreaking 1, and if you did it with an unbreaking 3 iron pick it'd be like having unbreaking 4.

    And each tier between the tool and the block would increase that by a further 1, so mining stone with an unbreaking 3 netherite pick would be like having an unbreaking 6 pickaxe

    Like I get the tool's increased durability is already supposed to simulate this to an extent, I just think it's a bit undertuned.
    Making high-end tools this much more resilient would go a long way to making them feel less like wet tissue when you're boring a tunnel at running speed in the nether.

    Reply
  24. I still think that, along with these fixes to tool durability and the anvil/enchanting table, we need an in-built, more humane way to move villagers around. I wrote out my huge idea in a different comment on a different video, but seriously, if you don't want people to set up trading halls because of how they move villagers around/breed them/box them up in little cells with a bed and workstation, maybe make it so the player can interact with villagers better, have them follow you willingly, point them at the little house you built for them specifically so they know their bed and workstation are probably in there, etc and so on.

    I mean, imagine being able to build whole cities in your world and populate them with villagers and do so without having to kidnap a single one?

    There's a lot they could do to fix the issue they're trying to fix, and also they need to treat the root of the problem rather than the symptoms.

    Also Mending was already hard to get, I made and kept three separate librarians before I got the one I made for Mending in my world, and I had to break and replace the lectern so many times!

    Reply
  25. For anyone who doesn't know, the reason the cost is different depending on which of the two same tool/equipment types you put in, is because you are transferring the enchants/durability of the first input over to the second. Meaning you technically can have infinite repairing on an anvil if you Max out on one, rearrange the inputs and transfer your current enchants over to a new piece of equipment

    Reply
  26. I completely disagree with kingbdogz. Minecraft was fun before enchanting was added but without it the game would never have made it this far. Players were already quitting in droves before they announced enchanting because it simply took too long to get things done, and that was only 18 months in?

    Enchanting did fix the speed of the game but it introduced the grind for maxed gear which started to become a problem. Grinding to max out armor and tools is fun the first few times but when you've enchanted things over ten thousand times it's not fun anymore, it's boring and tedious builds up burn out, and was one of the largest reasons players quit the game pre-1.9.

    Also, I disagree that the majority of players thinking something is a must-have is a design failure. Almost everyone agrees that Efficiency and Fortune are must-have enchantments, even more so than mending yet mending is "problematic" because so many players use it. Mending by itself is the second most useless enchantment in the game.

    Reply
  27. If they really wanna nerf mending so bad, just remove the level cap on anvils and make it to were every level of repairs costs one level each. Its been modded into the game dozens of times by now and encourages exploration for more matierials.

    Reply
  28. Making it so tools don't become unusable but increase the cost of repair, remove the limit, and have repairing from a single durability actually improve the tool so the choice is let the tool get worn down and spend resources on it to make it better or add mending and it will maintain itself without getting any better. And mending will always be a last resort because it means the tool is essentially locked.

    Reply
  29. –A few proposed enchanting changes below.

    Another thing is that when enchanting, you feel like you need to get every enchantment you can, which can lead people to grinding xp until they get multiple good ones.
    I think if enchantments are to be seen as optional improvements, we should be able to add to them more and more over time.
    Technically we can through the anvil, but once again we are blocked by the moat baffling inclusion in the game: the anvil XP limit (and the xp increase that causes it – its just a time waster)
    I want to feel less guilty about getting low level enchantments on my long term gear.

    The grindstone helped, but that only resets your enchantments.
    It's like giving someone more lottery spins rather than a steady stream of improvement.
    I still don't feel GOOD about low level enchantments, I just feel like I can easily undo it.

    _My proposed changes would be:_
    1) allow us to manipulate the output of an enchanting table. Either add a new optional slot that can change the type of enchantments you get, or maybe even allow you to use chiseled bookshelves instead of regular ones where the books stored in them can influence what you get.
    2) Allow people to reuse the enchanting table, adding extra enchantments, or upgrading the level of existing enchantments.
    It can work like the current combining system, so you can still increase your enchantment level if you get the same level enchantment a second time.
    3) remove the XP increase from the anvil entirely. No more XP cap, no more spending 50 levels combining books. Just keep at a consistent price.

    A different possible change could be to allow people to clone enchanted books, or make an enchanted book template, so that when they have finally gone through all the effort to make the perfect book, they can relatively easily make a new one for another piece of gear without having to spin the RNG wheel again

    Reply

Leave a Comment