How to Fix Mob Farms on Servers | Minecraft 1.18 Suggestion

[@sylesh1088]

Everybody can hope that this video is viewed by minecraft devs and they consider this an important change to bring to the game and have fun in multiplayer servers.

[@skywz]

Pretty sure several devs watch logic

[@papermario3982]

@@skywz SlicedLime is the tech lead for Java, and he and Logic do a lot of stuff together on Legacy SMP!

[@skywz]

@@papermario3982 yes, that was who I was talking about. I think there’s something with Ulraf (I think that’s the name) too.

[@dustin1481]

Im supporting personal mobcaps

[@yankees88888g]

Do u know if a mod has this?

[@dillanagarwalla6100]

Everybody should beware , most servers that people play on are not “vanilla”. They are often bukkit, spigot, paper, forge, etc. These non-vanilla server jars do not fully preserve vanilla behavior. They sacrifice vanilla behavior for more performance which is necessary for large servers. The server jar called Paper has an option for a Per Person Mob Cap, which many server have enabled, but paper, and many other non-vanilla jars can also lower to mob cap to save server resources. They often also lower the mob spawn sphere from 128 blocks to 96 blocks, So keep that in mind when building mob farms. If you want to vanilla experience with good performance, you should use fabric with lithium and phosphor, which improves performance without breaking vanilla behavior

[@howardbaxter2514]

I’ve noticed that as well. I need to talk with my server owner to see if he did reduce despawn radius, cause I have a sneaking suspicion that he did.

[@emmdeekaysays173]

Paper breaks everything fun

[@grampyrick4356]

Are lithium and phosphor 'server-only' plug-in's, or are they useful for SP as well?

[@jimez86]

@@grampyrick4356 If you are having significant performance issues in single player caused by a CPU bottle neck, then they can help with that. Generally though Single Player doesn't need it as badly.

[@PatrickHemmes]

@@emmdeekaysays173 true

[@LanderPlasschaert]

As a general idea it seems like a rather simple and straight forward way to improve gameplay for most players. Mojang should definitely implement something like this!

[@rjamsbury1]

I think this makes a lot of sense. It's not just more fair it's more intuitive to the average player, which is an important part of ux.

[@turtilee5989]

I like how he can explain things in such understandable terms.

[@tyrsia]

This is actually how I thought mob caps worked when I first heard about them. It makes logical sense.

[@swegatron2859]

This feels like a pretty big oversight on the original developers I mean certain players getting triple or quadruple the hostile mobs of all other players are flying seems pretty unbalanced

[@sphereron]

Yeah, kinda baffled how they missed this for years

[@zedquincey]

4:30 man build Terraria in Minecraft to explain Minecraft mob spawning mechanism. Respect.

[@arafpv9530]

Great video! I totally agree! One more reason why farms struggle on larger SMPs is there are hidden data packs that change the 128 spawning sphere. My current server is a 38 block despawn sphere, thus I have to design my own farms using minihud. If people don’t realize that huge game change is there, farms won’t work At all

[@trashcaster]

It's not a datapack... People run Paper/Spigot servers which have configuration files to tweak performance related attributes/variables.

[@jitseschreurs5224]

I had this problem 3 days ago after spending 6 hours on multiple farms. And the only solution I found was that only the person that wanted to farm could be online for an effective and working farm. Thank you for making this video!

[@crsoccerfreak19]

One player in each dimension. So one person could be in the overworld, one in the nether, and one in the end. Not all THAT helpful but thought I'd share.

[@kaimoffat6910]

This video is very informative and explains everything well. We have a similar issue on realms where no matter how you setup farms the rates are always less even when your the only one online and would love more youtubers to come up with ways to beat/resolve this.

[@rafid_zx]

There is a function in Paper version of Servers called " per-player-mob-spawns " which kinda does the same mobcap per player thing you are talking about

[@vaibhav3852]

can i get some more info on how to do it?

[@anuzsubedi]

@@vaibhav3852The per-player-mob-spawns option is inside the papyer.yml file.

[@rafe99e83]

Finally! A reason that paper is good!

[@howardbaxter2514]

Good to know. I’ll have to talk with the owner of this one server I play on. I need to check with him on mob despawn limit and mob spawns, cause the witch farm I made barely works.

[@tefazDK]

But then sand, gravel & concrete duplicating won't be possible.

[@trashcaster]

I think the last issue about "increased mob caps" being used to fuel a single farm could be prevented by just counting mobs per player in their own radius. There doesn't need to be a raised global cap on anything. Just keep track per player exclusively, and when a mob is spawned, the game can keep track of which player it spawned for, even if other players are also in its radius. This means that multiple people could afk inside a single area and get increased spawns (the same effect as players raising the cap by spreading out in "dead zones")

[@telendar_]

This is how it always should have been since multiplayer was added

[@ghostturbo]

Yes! Thanks for proposing this, I hope it gets traction. This really shouldn't be that difficult to re-code either.

[@jonotis1922]

I would love to see this implemented as a game rule in vanilla. Fantastic idea! Hope something comes of this, Logic!

[@ZerofeverOfficial]

Make it togglable, doPerPlayerMobcap true or something like that. I like it.

[@evanyoung9714]

This is THE correct way to implement the feature. Have it on by default, but if some players want to use mobcap boosting on their tech servers, they should be able to.

[@rayhanbrown5716]

@@evanyoung9714 wouldn’t mobcap boosting still be possible?

[@rylandrc]

It's somewhat of a meme on minecraft suggestion boards, but also kinda true when someone suggests making something a toggleable gamerule; It can lead to a slippery slope where if everything becomes a gamerule, we can lose clarity on what vanilla is and overcomplicate things. So the "make it a gamerule" solution should be considered carefully imo to see if it is actually important to gameplay for most players.

[@superslimanoniem4712]

If they do that, might as well make total mobcap number a gamerule too

[@jazzling]

@@rylandrc so is the comment a joke

[@micl249]

Not only highly technical servers use the enlarging mobcaps feature. On my SMP I pretty often spawn bots in on special locations to largen the mobcap. I also sometimes do this as a prank, if someone says they are going to cave I also do it, a bit sadistic but it's fun. But like you said, it's for the greater good.

[@G-DCD]

At 9:30, regarding Technical Servers farms, they could make individual MobCaps as you suggested and cumulative. So instead of several AFKs spot, they would all be in the same spot and adding to the MobCap, each player +70. In that scenario, you put 10 players on one AFK spot, you get 700 MobCap at that one farm. However, Mojang should do the minimum logic thing and always give the option to the player (or server) to configure what is best for them: [MOBCAP] 0--10--20--30--40--50--60--70--80--90--100 (from "Peaceful" to "Inferno") [MOBCAP STACKABLE] ON--OFF ("on" as it is now or "off" as you suggested)

[@JustinVConroy]

This is exactly what I came to say but you made it first! Totally agree with this to solve that issue. Let the player choose their gameRule.

[@CreativelyJake]

experimental 3 seems to have done something along these lines!

[@dmitrysurname1961]

Each time when checking your vid, I notice with satisfaction that your number of subs increases at higher rates. Congrats!

[@josephwilson3180]

You can also clog up a mob farm so mobs will not die but still count towards the cap. If you leave an alt nearby so they don’t despawn, you can use it as a hostile mob switch and even troll other people with it.

[@silver-pearl]

Okayy this was so important and such a clear explanation! Thankyou so much! Hope minecraft does this! Been wanting it for so long

[@TammonOG]

I assume if there is any lag it would be in determining which mob is associated to which player, and since mobs despawn instantaneously if there are more than 128 blocks away, this value could be modified quite frequently in non optimized areas of the world. Would definitely be curious to see how Mojang would tackle this in a way that it would laggy, or memory intensive for more than 20+ players at a time. To tackle the problem that technical players would not be able to abuse the mob cap system in this layout is simply by reverting to the old 1.12 spawning criteria where overlapping chunks surrounding each player are counted more than once when deciding how many mobs to spawn. Personally, I liked this behaviour over the what we have now

[@ThomasToSpace]

Awesome video that shows the pros/cons well! I really hope this will arrive eventually.

[@zachyrish2682]

As players are continuously moving and redefining spawn areas, mobs might need to despawn. As player X moves away from player Y, mobs around player X would start spawning near him until 70 and mobs around player Y should diminish until 70. Preferably, the mobs that despawn are the ones furthest from player Y

[@ericdculver]

I think this may be part of why the dev made it how they did to begin with. These kinds of technical details were too hard to program and balance.

[@raymondstheawesome]

so you are saying that somebody else's local mobs should be take away because somebody else is moving away?

[@zachyrish2682]

@@raymondstheawesome Right, I mean in order to balance the 70cap per player, if one player's radius holds more than 70 mobs, some of them should de-spawn in order to not generate more than 70mobs per player, otherwise it would lag more

[@zachyrish2682]

i.e. Player X and Y share the same radius, so each one spawns 70 mobs = 140. But then player X goes away, player Y would be holding those 140 mobs and player X would start generating another 70. So, in order not to lag more and keep mobs spawning around every player, those players who have more than 70 should de-spawn some mobs. Note that I'm not saying this is bad, it may flow weird to have a mob de-spawn in front of you, so de-spawning the mobs furthest from the player should fix it.

[@SirUmnei]

A gamerule "doIndividualMobCap" would be a good way to implement this, off by default. It would work for technical servers and servers where there are a lot of farms on. Technically it shouldn't be that hard to implement as some servers that run on custom jars like paper or bukkit already have such options. It's really up to the MC devs to actually take their time to make it

[@madman2572]

I've always thought the game should work like this. For non-technical players, Logic touches on the fact that if someone is not taking up any of the mobcap, and someone else goes caving they could be inundated with mobs. I think this is just as good of a reason, if not better than making mob farms work (since Mojang probably doesn't care as much if your mob farm doesn't work) Chunk loaded/spawn chunk mob switches would be rendered completely useless since we are only counting mobs around each player. As for the crazy tech servers and multiple accounts, they can just build multiple smaller farms if they really need that many drops. Just breaks an old game mechanic but ads a new one.

[@jophmac]

Mob switches would work the same, because there still is a global mob cap. Of course, spawners, zombie reinforcements, and other mob spawning methods could still fill up both the personal and global mob cap.

[@madman2572]

@@jophmac hmm. I thought the idea was that there would no longer be a global mob cap? Otherwise if one player was using a farm that can exceed the mobcap (spawner, reinforcement, or portal based) the other player would not be seeing any spawns. I didn't think about having a global mobcap as well. That would certainly solve the mob switch issue.

[@primeplatypus1799]

@@madman2572 if there was both global and per player mobcaps maybe only the non player loaded chunks could make mobs count towards the mobcap. The only ways you could get non player loaded chunks in recent versions is via spawnchunks and portal loaders so it would have to be pretty intentional and probably wouldn’t ruin anything

[@primeplatypus1799]

@PrimePlatypus I’m actually really liking this, if they change it to be per player hopefully they’ll do it like this

[@madman2572]

@@primeplatypus1799 what if they had a global mobcap, but mobs would only spawn around a player if there were less than 70 in their 128 sphere. So someone using a farm that exceeds thier 70 mobs would affect another players mobcap but most farms other than a reinforcement driven zombie farm (which is almost the definition of a mob switch) would not affect other players. Maybe that's exactly what you're saying....

[@drench1580]

They could just make it a gamerule to avoid the potential issues on technical servers

[@dillanagarwalla6100]

But then we wouldn’t be vanilla anymore which makes projects feel less legit

[@chiirp]

Recommended - This man is facts. Thank you for the research you put in & for explaining this so thoroughly Logic!

[@wisnoskij]

For that last implementation issue. Better to just do away with overlapping spawn areas altogether. Each player gets 70 mobs. If they join up, then they can face bigger hordes. Laterally a feature. This also solves the technical MC issue.

[@Megabooy1]

As a long time minecraft enjoyer I think it would be nice if this got implemented. I really cannot see the "downsides" really being downsides so I would 100% support this if it got introduced into the game

[@daveguy_]

amazing video, i cant wait to see if mojang adresses this issue. thank you logic

[@colewoerner8383]

Here’s a way to solve the technical player’s concerns while still achieving the same affect for most players: instead of distributing mobs by having a per player mobcap, distribute the spawn attempts amongst the players in a way that tends to create an even number of mobs around each player. Player-centric spawn attempts might be good from an optimization perspective too, since the mob spawning algorithm currently wastes time spawning mobs in all player-loaded chunks, then immediately despawns them if they’re more than 128 blocks from any players.

[@fullerz6147]

YOU LEGEND THEY LISTENED TO YOU AND NOW WE HAVE INDIVIDUAL MOB CAPS

[@fullerz6147]

(for the 1.18exp3 update)

[@cookiezooka9988]

@@fullerz6147 LETS GOOO

[@lucaslarsson1268]

I feel like this is how non-technical players think hostile mob spawns work

[@user-vv1do1wg1j]

damn bro thats crazy but who asked?

[@lucaslarsson1268]

@@user-vv1do1wg1j u seem to be havin a bad time, everything alr??

[@rubixtheslime]

I'm surprised nobody's mentioning bedrock's cap system. It does this and much more. Though it's a bit complicated: There's 3 types of caps: general, population control, and density. Additionally, each of those is split into surface and cave. Cave is simply defined as "there's a solid block above it." General does total mobs similarly to java (though I'm not certain if it scales). Then you have population control. What this means is when making a spawn attempt, it counts the number of mobs of that type (eg hostile, passive, pillager, etc) in a 9x9 chunk area around it. If that exceeds a certain number, the attempt fails. The number is different depending on the mob family. Lastly, the density cap. It's almost identical to population control but on a per-mob basis, and doesn't apply to most mobs. The main ones are 2 for cave ghasts (also 0 for surface ghasts even though there's no surface in the biomes they spawn in), and 5 for surface creepers. In the end, it allows the game to efficiently limit any certain area to a decent number of mobs. Unless you're in a soul sand valley on sim distance 4 (the default for realms). What's extra nice about this is it lets you create a mob switch that only prevents surface creepers around your base, using only 5 creepers. Same with a ghast-only mob switch that only applies to a certain area, using just two ghasts. Though I do kinda wish we had some sort of density cap for cave creepers as well so we could prevent creepers all together for a given area. And the surface-cave split is extremely nice because it basically means that throughout the entire day, surface mobs will _only_ spawn in farms, assuming you darkened it with water/ice/etc. instead of solid blocks. It also makes it easier for mobs to start spawning at night immediately instead of needing to wait for cave mobs to despawn. I'm guessing the main reason there's all these rules is because bedrock was designed to run more optimally, and this way there's roughly the same number of mobs that a player will encounter, while being able to have a relatively tiny general cap. Though I don't mean to say that bedrock's mob control system is perfect in any way. Like how until 1.16 they thought it was a good idea for mobs to not despawn if they're in the dark. And the aforementioned soul sand valley on sim distance 4.

[@infra8466]

A good way to be able to still raise the mob cap for mob farms would be to remove the distances needed to increase it so all players could afk at the same spot

[@robertzhang5687]

i was gonna say that this would break multicap farms but then this popped up. great solution idea!

[@Vt0702]

How would 2 players not in the same chunk themselves but loading common chunks affect the mob cap?

[@infra8466]

Mob cap would be directly proportional to the number of players so 70 in each sphere, 140 in total

[@TheCelloPanda]

My thoughts on how it should work when multiple players are nearby is still give a total mob cap of 70 per person, but count the mobs that are shared multiple times if there are multiple people nearby. This would, in effect, mimic the current mechanics of reduced mob cap when near other players. So with two players partially near each other, total mob cap of 140. However, say 40 mobs are within both spawning spheres and get counted twice, so only 100 mobs spawn, but are counted as 140, thereby filling the mob cap.

[@MiahooJunk]

they can add it as a rule, so servers that don't this 'limit' can turn it off.

[@mambodog5322]

The final idea can actually be used quite decently if I'm not mistaken. For example, you can have players spaced out in spawn-proofed areas to raise the mob cap, and then have many players at the main farm so that they can use the high mob cap, since the combined pool of that many players would get a large portion of the mob cap to be in the farm. It's not as good as before, but it wouldn't totally destroy large farms. Alternatively, they could construct many small farms instead of a single massive one.

[@riverbed9073]

So basically u just need to build small farms?

[@Dwars-ls6tc]

The technical players are probably smart enough to make a datapack or plug-in that changes it back to how it used to be

[@simons.1736]

Wouldnt be surprised if gnembon added this as a carpet rule

[@soul_0o0]

In paper servers, there is a setting known as "per-player mob spawns". It allows for there to be say, 70 mobs within each player's despawn sphere, and doesn't stack with other players (so 2 players within the same despawn sphere will still only produce the set amount of mobs (70 for instance) in the despawn sphere instead of 140, so players wouldn't get overrun with mobs either). If paper can code this, I'd think Vanilla Minecraft should be able to code this into a togglable multiplayer feature as well....

[@skydragonfire93]

So, along these lines I know there was talk about the spawning mechanics being changed so that the game would check the number of mobs in each players spawning sphere and try to do the spawn in the sphere with the least mobs first.

[@PeaceInExile]

Mojang could add a local mobcap gamerule. If ticked on, it would set the max mobspawn per player to 70 within range of the player. If not ticked on, the game would remain as is.

[@calvissuperman]

This is just a small detail, but in the end it's not necessarily the spawning spaces that "steal" mobs from one player to another. It's the way mob farms work. They quickly move and/or kill the mobs in them to allow other mobs to spawn, thus giving you fast drop rates. When someone is online, all the mobs that spawn around them normally aren't being killed or moved immediately, thus they hang around in the mob cap, and eventually there's %100 of them in that space since the mob farm is dispatching theirs every second. That's why it is so ineffective, because every second you are at the farm and someone else is online, another 10 mobs die/leave your farm, and 0-10 spawn near your friend, removing the ability for them to spawn back in your farm. So just a clarification to those who don't fully understand. A farm works so well because it dispatches the mobs VERY quickly, and effortlessly. Faster you remove the mob that spawns, the faster another one can take its place. Add a player not in the farm, and all the mobs stop being removed. They just hang around, and your farm essentially is turned off.

[@alphalumoss]

For the issue of techical farms being impacted with afk spots around the world, just implement a system where 2 players in the same 128 block sphere still doubles the mob cap to 140 yet within the same spot, so for techical farms you have 2 players afk in the same spot, the mob cap will be at 140 and concentrated soley in the farm if the players afk in the same place instead of in different places.

[@earthyface8920]

This video was a success

[@scottthomson6037]

Make it so your personal mobcap doesn't reduce when close to others that fixes the technical issue because they can all afk at the farm they need the resource from and boost the productivity And it solves the shared issue Then the casual player has the downside that if they are working together there may be 2 times the mobs around them which is still ok

[@Zendien]

It's an interesting idea, and tbh I think it would be really fun to see everyone have a personal permanent mob cap :D .... so if 2 players run a farm, they get 140 mobs instead of a shared 70, lol. That might make adventuring way too dangerous tho, lol. 5 players in the same spot would have to fight off 350 mobs! Edit: Loved that 2d sphere! ... a regular work of art :D

[@butterhalfgaming2303]

In consideration of lag, the biggest concern I can think of is live tracking the number of mobs in each player's spawning sphere. I'm not sure what the impact would be for adding a check for that during each spawn attempt. If that number is already tracked and can just be called, I could see it not being a big issue, but if this would adding a new system for live tracking that each players local mob count, that could definitely add up on larger servers. Interestingly, wouldn't the overlap issue just cover the already present feature of the spawn cap growing steadily as you move away, from 70 to 140? Like, in that consideration, having a local rather than global spawn cap could actually fix the issue, with overlap in local spawn caps causing the global spawn cap to shrink, with the minimum being when both players are together and sharing the same number of mobs in their spawing sphere, being 70. Definitely a neat topic.

[@MarvinSweat]

I think even with the divided mob cap, on technical servers, a limited number of players could strategically place themselves above, below and around a farm to still increase farm spawns within the farm.

[@tejassingh4745]

Saved my life, spent 6 hours on a mob farm to get 4 items per hour, now I understand I need to wait to be alone

[@saptarshimondal7021]

Really good suggestion 👌🏻

[@ognjenbrborovic7154]

3:34 so this mean, if im in mob farm and my friend is in sky in afk platform all 140 mobs will spawn near me, soo that mean mob farm will work beter???

[@psyclops5757]

Thanks my dude! Great video, from a great Lad.

[@rhueoflandorin]

The problem is "spawning attempts" succeed far more frequently near players who are not near a purpose-built farm with spawn-proofed area around them. This fills up the server-wide mob cap leaving only few mob spawn attempts remaining for the person near a mob farm (which generally have fewer spawnable places in comparison. like 1/1000th in many cases. The solution is individualized mob caps, rather than server-wide mob caps. Meaning each player has a mob cap of 70, regardless of their location. This means STACKING afk accounts near a farm will GREATLY increase the efficiency of the farm, it can also reduce server load if a player is in an area where mobs can't spawn period (such as a large perimeter with their mob farm disabled or a biome where hostiles don't spawn (mushroom biome), etc.

[@TheStone190]

I guess there would be some dirt ways to patch the code to work that way, but implementing it properly would probably require reworking the very basic spawning algorithm. And from what I know parts of the spawning algorytm are used all over the place like for spawners that use part of the code. So it might be tricky to change without affecting other mechanics

[@wildmanviper]

I think your video worked, if I read the changes correctly, mobs will be divided by the people on the server now...at least in Experimental Snapshot 3 version 1.18

[@Yorick257]

That's a really good idea! Also, wasn't mobcap implemented differently in the past? Something along the lines of "total mobcap = number of players * 70"? Maybe it could return back!

[@ToperRS]

That's how it works now already. There's just the extra modifier of how close players are together. Your suggested change wouldn't actually fix the problem.

[@G33v3s]

As for the technical server issue. I would imagine the sorts of people who came up with these hyper efficient complex farms will probably find a way to make the most of any set of rules, so whilst they might have valid concerns, I wouldn't imagine they would be blockers to something like this.

[@AndreUrzua1]

Some ideas to solve the issues: 1. Mob switch: Keep two different mob caps, one server cap that would be 70*online players and the other cap 70 per player, that way mob switchs will still work without affecting the gameplay of regular players at all 2. Technical players increasing spawn rates with multiple players in multiple afk spots: Two solutions A) Implement a gamerule to enable or disable per player spawns B) Just make the technical players take the hit and make them afk all in the same place to boost the spawns, the purists that don't want to change the gamerule will definitely end up doing this But I still find an issue, 10 players in the same place will get 700 mobs spawning around them, which is a little bit dangerous, yes, 10 players can fight them off, but what if one of them decides to go caving alone but close to the others? and also, at night it would feel like an invasion

[@Loutenant87]

If the personal mob cap is 70, then when 2 players move closer together, their mob caps merge (as you've shown in your video). The mob cap per player will still be 70, but the total mob cap will decrease, as mobs spawned in overlapping area's will count towards both caps. So 2 players next to eachother have a personal mob cap op 70, and the world has a total mob cap of 70. No problem there, I think.

[@Mike-qt4fr]

I personally think a random approach to mob spawns would make sense, like each player would be randomly selected, then the spawnable area would be selected. Assuming the random function isn't biased to any one user that is. This would reduce the intersection cases of possible duplicate mob spawns in shared chunks, by taking all spawnable blocks and players into perspective would look like (pseudocode): fun getNextSpawnSpace() : Block { val spawnAround = players.rand(playerFunction) val spawnableArea = spawnAround.getSpawnableArea() return spawnableArea.rand(blockFunction) }

[@bobdagranny7431]

Very interesting idea logic! Maybe to solve the tech server issue, the game could check once every ___gameticks whether the player has ANY spawning spots within their entire spawn sphere. If the check reports a fail, then the personal mobcap is added to the next player, and if that player doesnt have any then the NEXT player, and you get the point. If the check reports a success (there is one/more spawning spots within their sphere), then the personal mobcap will stay with that player.

[@madman2572]

I'm an intro level tech player (but have never felt the need to use this specific mechanic). I don't think this is something that should be considered a reason to not switch to individual spheres though and I would guess Mojang would not try to cater to the .01% of Minecrafters that will ever need more than a full mobcap in a single farm. Depending on how overlapping spawn areas were implemented though, multiple players could AFK in the same spot to get a higher mob cap. Mob switches on the other hand are a bigger concern for me. If we are only counting mobs around a player as thier personal cap, I don't see how mobs in the spawn chunks/chunk loaded would contribute to a players mob cap. I do think the benefits outweigh the drawbacks though for general gameplay. I would be upset to see my mob switch go but not having to schedule afk sessions on my server would be very nice as well.

[@bobdagranny7431]

​@@madman2572 The tech community is a LITTLE higher than 0.1%. (that's sarcasm its actually MUCH more) and this would be a really easy fix. Just add a line of code as soon as someone joins the game running this short command. Also I'm not saying that we shouldn't do this, read my msg carefully (its kinda confusing ngl). Also HOW ON EARTH have you not used mobcap mechanics they are the basis of all mobfarms (not just general mobfarms they are the basis of almost all the farms where you farm specific mobs too)!! And if you're an intro tech player, that means that you don't fully understand the tech community and why this decision is an important one. I feel that my solution is the best one because there are no drawbacks for any community of minecraft.

[@madman2572]

@@bobdagranny7431 Haha. No. I use mob cap mechanics. And the tech community is way bigger than 0.01%. I was referring to the specific practice of placing alt accounts or other players 256+ blocks away from each other with no spawning spaces to boost the mobcap for the player loading the farm. I am familiar with the mechanic, but have just never needed to use it on my 6 player server. I would guess there aren't that many servers out there even in the tech world large enough to need to run farms at more than one mob cap but I could be wrong. I just don't think the alt account grid mob farm being altered would really be even be on Mojang's radar when deciding for or against the issue. If there's a clean way to fix it then sure. Just saying I'd be more worried about my mob switch being broken and that's something I believe Mojang might be more inclined to take into account as many more players use a mob switch than an efficient farm large enough to run at multiple mobcaps.

[@MarceloPetrucelliBR]

I wouldn't say that the last point is an issue. All the game has to do, arithmetically is to make something like this: If I have 3 players, all of them in places where their spheres don't intersect, each will get 1x the perPlayerMobcap (default 70) If I have 3 players and all of them are in the same block, the arith makes it so that the spawn per player is actually 2/3x the perPlayerMobcap. In the second example they could find any interesting rate based on the number of players or their distance and actually check per player. I used 2/3, since having 3 players in the same spot would literally make them still get 0.75x the spawn, since they are actually collaborating and playing together. That way, having three players in the same spot would spawn 158 (157.5) mobs, instead of the 210. This means that players can help each other idling together, which is the same as asking for them to idle by themselves. If not, only disconnecting would make it function as a single player farm. Play together, more risk and better farms, normal distant farms work as single player if done alone, and also you can ask friends to help you farm stuff, the same way u ask them to idle somewhere in any case. Another option is to create a priority system for spawn. Mobs usually de-spawn after sometime without pathing or getting the sight of a player. When a slot comes to be filled, check the player priority list, based on how many slots the other players have allocated. In this way, you could always round-robin the spawn for all players and spaces they have to spawn. But the cap would never change. In your example, by the moment you got apart with your other friend, de-spawns would happen and you would be put in a higher priority than him, until your loaded chunks reached almost 70 mobs, as his would become by de-spawning. Anyway. Great video, explanation and quite elegant solutions, I'd say.

[@ruyotramp]

This seems logical

[@lamdo7897]

Very fitting

[@SreenikethanI]

Ba dum tss

[@ladyp8043]

Ever since i followed you here on Yt @LogicalGeekBoy, i have always loved your video´s - Yours was the first villagerbreeder i ever build by my self in my world and still play with my son. Thank you for all of your work (video´s, streams and LegacySMP) and Thank you, is just not a big enough word.

[@ClebyHerris]

I think that when the spheres merge they kinda become one instead of staying separate. When someone else waltzes into your sphere they are bringing their sphere into yours

[@Skirakzalus]

Not sure if the light level spawning change is even supposed to address this issue, if it's implemented I see it more for decoration, to finally make the amount of light sources required more reasonable and allow for dimly lit save areas. Your change seems like a fix the game needed for a long time, also great way of presenting everything clearly. What even makes the current spawning worse beside a farm aready having a lot fewer spawning spaces is that it's supposed to cycle (so spawn, death, new spawn) them really fast while other areas will keep them around for a bit. Even if it was a coin flip each time a mob dies, the farms would see the numbers lowered over time as mobs spawning in the other area(s) won't be freeing up that mob cap anywhere near as quickly.

[@carsonpowers514]

I don't think the last overlap point is that big of an issue. The proposed per-player mobcap is a good idea, but have it to where it is not a hard cap. It spawns until it fills each players cap in normal circumstances, but in the proposed scenario where only 90 mobs are spawned out of a possible 100 then just continue to spawn in mobs up to the overall cap, randomizing the player they go to.

[@earthyface8920]

Players using spawner based farms could fill up the mobcap for other players since spawners will continue to spawn mobs regardless off the mobcap

[@rafe99e83]

Mobs from spawners don’t count towards the mobcap

[@TheRealWormbo]

@@rafe99e83 Yes they do. Spawners don't track the mobs they create, they just care about how many are in their 9x9x9 area, and if the mobs leave that area, the spawner can keep working, potentially exceeding the mobcap.

[@yellowintherealm9596]

They already do so

[@Flupperz]

Could they have a toggleable function for servers where you can enable what this new system would be or have the legacy system?

[@Frithgar]

Didn't it kind of work like this in 1.12? Ilmango did a zombie pigman farm where he had 20 players all standing above the farm, and I'm fairly certain that was a vanilla mechanic and not a carpet mod feature.

[@yuvalorp]

if that was the case in this verision what ilomango did wouldn't make any diffrent because in the vidio he said that every mob counts for all the players which are close enough

[@Frithgar]

@@yuvalorp He was saying in this video that the mob cap should be for each individual player, therefore it could also work that each player standing beside a large farm would increase the mob cap at that farm.

[@user-vy5hc9ud6l]

Its some what of a "bug" in 1.12

[@vergeofapathy]

I'm certainly no expert in the codebase, but the way I see it, with the way mob-spawning works in Minecraft, a change like this is not going to be quite as trivial to implement as one might imagine at first, and the performance impact of the additional checks it would require is not gonna be negligible as soon as you have more than a handful of people on a server. Not saying it's a bad suggestion, just that it might require a fundamental change to how Minecraft fills the mob-cap in the first place in order to be a reasonable option, and then you get significant changes to game-feel, possibly "break" farms and change some of their basic concepts, probably face people that complain about it, etc. I'd argue that this is more in the territory of being 'a' or even 'the' major change in a full update, and not something to "just throw in there".

[@DavidLatham-productiondave]

Those spheres you've made up in the sky look like the glasses on your skin. 😀 And yes, a personal mob spawning sphere sounds interesting. Compelling even. I guess one way to implement it is to tag mobs against the player. Then spawn rules would check the player tag on the mobs to determine if the mob should (de)spawn. For every tick the game will have to calculate the player sphere for each mob it tries to (de)spawn for each logged in player. Because as you move the game has to spawn new mobs into your new sphere and remove them from the old ones. I suppose that's not much different from what happens now. It's just a new tag on all the mobs that has to be checked in the rules engine. The only game play downside I can think of (assuming we manage to do all the maths in time without lag) is if I walk into your sphere and log out, you will see all of my mobs disappear which would be weird from your perspective.

[@Silplay-nq5yt]

Even when i am the only one online on my aternos server creepers still wont spawn in my creeper farm even tho it works perfectly in my singleplayer farm

[@kheori]

Never in the history of someone saying, "It should be pretty simple and straightforward" has it ever been simple OR straightforward.

[@laartje24]

I like this idea way more than having them only spawn in light level 0. Feels like having them only spawn in light level 0 would ruin the survival experience for survival focused players (like me) especially if someone else is afking at their farm while I am caving.

[@danielduncan6806]

You are an idiot. This comment you just made is like putting a tattoo on your forehead that says "I am stupid". Seriously, if you place light sources down in the world you do so with the intention of stopping mob spawns. That was the case before and it will still be the case going forward. Nothing changes on that front. The mobs spawning only in light level 0 does absolutely nothing to harm the survival experience. There are plenty of arguments to be made about how the mob cap works. But there is no argument against the light level change. Even if they were to change how the mob cap works, they should still go forward with the light level change, because even if it was not their intention, it is purely a quality of life change, perhaps that best one Minecraft has ever seen since its release 10 years ago.

[@IanSlothieRolfe]

The only real problem with two or more adjacent players combining mob cap is that if several players are near to each other they could experience huge numbers of mobs which would be problematic particularly on the early days of a server when players are close to world spawn and largely unprotected! But since the spawning algorithm on multiplayer has to take into account the distance from players, then I can't see why it wouldn't be possible to work something out. The ideal outcome, of course, is for players to experience roughly equal "mob density" wherever they are, without resorting to a per-chunk cap that would stop most farms from working effectively. This has been a problem for so long however, I wonder if there isn't some architectural reason that this can't be fixed.

[@3mp7y1995]

would it really hurt to have more mobs where more players are at tho? im just thinking if you are playing together you should be able to stand up against a harder fight?

[@theflatsixth]

It wouldn't really be more mobs, it would just be balanced so each player has an equal amount of mobs

[@yuvalorp]

most of the time even if the players are close enough they arent relly together and you relly dont want to fight double the amount of mobs then what is spawaning courently in a night on the sarface

[@Lyazee]

laggy

[@jhrymer]

may be worth talking to gnembon and see if you can work to implement it as a carpet feature that players can toggle should they want to?

[@deltashit]

Do you know if we as viewers could also contact him?

[@jhrymer]

@@deltashit scicraft discord carpet mod chat

[@superslimanoniem4712]

@@deltashit seems a bit spammy if everyone starts messaging him.

[@deltashit]

@@superslimanoniem4712 Yeah, right. Still I think it could maybe be worth ...

[@spoon3953]

would getting everyone in the server to afk with you work?

[@simpson6700]

this seems like a no-brainer. assigning one extra value to every mob shouldn't be that much of a problem and the benefits are huge.

[@thefactor7854]

Did anyone notice logic was wearing dia armor while poppy iron. Logic made him OP in everything

[@FarmandSMC]

So… build an AFK platform 128 blocks above an ocean and a good mob farm somewhere else. If you are alone in the farm you get 70 spawns and 70 extra spawns for each AFK account at the ocean platform.

[@eagle-from-aut]

Loved the video. As a member of one of the highly servers you mentioned, i actually dislike "multicap" farms because they are a bit of a cheap shot. They take the focus away from the major challenge of mobfarm design, namely lifetime optimization. This is, while obviously not representative of the entire community, a sentiment i heard quite a lot. Farms which need much more than a double mob cap are heavily frowned upon. Also on an unrelated note, the example of a mobswitch you showed is very outdated on a few counts and doesn't even function in newer versions, because entities in carts don't count towards the mobcap. Easy permaloaders in new versions also mean almost no one uses the spawnchunks anymore. Edit: hopefully fixed ambiguity

[@0x2A_]

You can use zombie villagers for a mob switch though in 1.16/17, might not work in 1.18. I would even say it is too easy to do lol.

[@eagle-from-aut]

@@0x2A_ what i mean is the specific example he showed is broken. Mobswitches still work just great.

[@0x2A_]

@@eagle-from-aut The way I read your comment was as if you meant they did not work at all now. Honestly don't even know how reading it back, it's been a tiring day lol.

[@JustinTimeCuber]

I'm not a super technical player, but couldn't you make a mob switch by pushing shulkers into the spawn chunks with pistons? I feel like that'd be better than minecarts anyway bc it's half as many entities

[@eagle-from-aut]

@@0x2A_ the reason its not confusing now is that i edited it. I actually wrote a note on the bottom that i did. You were absolutely right pointing it out though. Thanks.

[@primeplatypus1799]

Mobswitches would be affected because you’re proposing a per player mobcap and the entire purpose of a per player mobcap is to prevent mobs in the same dimension but not within Steves’s loaded chunks from filling up the cap so mobs don’t spawn near him

[@dunkno]

No they won’t because you could build it in the spawn chunks. He even mentions this in the video

[@jdancemedia6182]

Yeah this has been a really bad issue so far, I have been a victim of this thing for a good few weeks when I was playing on a survival server. I feel as if the main issue here is that all the mobs go to me instead of someone else, I could count at least 30 zombies in a horde I gathered coming up to me.

[@parsampsh]

Another challange about this thing: Size of the platforms. If there are 1000 spawnable blocks in someone's mobcap and only 25 spawnable blocks at someone else's mobcap, is that good to minecraft spawn 70 mobs in only 5*5 platform? What's your solution for it?

[@erin.anderson]

And yet the overly vocal "technical community" is how we get buggy behavior accepted as "this is ok because we like the result of the bug"; my guess is the "greater good" will not start to make any more of a difference now than it ever has in the past. I like this idea, and think it's a good one. I also think the instant Mojang would try to make this suggestion, those same mega-technical farm players would raise yet another big stink and it will never happen. I applaud you for making this video and this effort, but... let's just say I'm not holding my breath.

[@GompMC]

Just curious if you talked to Sliced about this and what his thoughts are? I'm all for it, as long as it doesn't lag the game.

[@nissesunnerstedt7340]

A solution for those who want to keep it like it is you could also make it a game rule, something like /gamerule idnividualmobcap true. And then those who want to boost farms with more players can still to that

[@v0gue53]

Hey there, I’m just wondering if the gold farm is going to work after 1.18 because as far as I know, magma blocks emit light level of 3

[@theflatsixth]

I think they will still work because pigmen can spawn in decently high light levels. they still need to spawn by lava lakes

[@v0gue53]

@@theflatsixth I hope they do because I was just about to build one

[@indrajith2460]

Cubfan did some testing of that in his stream and found that nether mobs are generally unaffected by the light level change. Since you need a high light level to stop nether mob spawns

[@v0gue53]

@@indrajith2460 damn thanks a lot bro🙏

[@madman2572]

@@v0gue53 yes. Anything that could only spawn at a level of 7 or below can now only spawn at zero. Anything that ignores light levels (slime/magma cubes/ghasts) or anything else (zom piglins/blazes) spawns at previous caps.

[@moofurg]

Thanks for this :)

[@simons.1736]

How would wither mob switches get affected? Since they are not built in the spawn chunks rather loaded by a chunk loader, far away from any players' despawn sphere. what players' mobcap would the withers count to?

[@CleverCrumbish]

LGB described spawn chunk based mob switches as avoiding the problem entirely by filling up the global mobcap instantly, ensuring no spawn attempts are made in any player's spawning sphere. Mob switches loaded by chunk loaders ought to function the same way.

[@DeceasedONE]

I sure do like this idea!

[@yuvalorp]

the problem that you mentioned in the end of the vidio that happen when players share their spawnable speres happen if I understand correctly (from the page in the minewiki ) because in the current mob spawning algoritem the mob cup is porputional to the number of loding chancks and not the amount of online players to prevent overspwaning in places with more then one player so in your suggestion you can gast remove that part(and fix the personal mob cup to one number) and it will fix it

[@Iv_john_vI]

The last part of the video, where you show the intersected circles... In that area, the spawning should be random. I mean in the example you gave, one mob belonged to one player and the other which was missing a mob, should get it but anywhere in the sphere around him. Why? Because that area might lack surfaces with enough light and then the game would make an additional effort to search for spawn spots there and eventually will have to go to the rest of the sphere anyway. Also the intersections change all the time and can be more players and the dynamic of this should not be considered just to favor some potential mob farms. It consumes CPU and the complexity of the algorithm can be a source of strange bugs too.

[@genericname3685]

Yup just till today I realized that the amount of players affect the mob spawn rate no wonder my 8 layers farm works absolutely so disappointing.