The only change I might suggest is to try to remove entity types with a higher number first.

Just that way you won't log in and see 100% of your chickens are gone, 100% of your pigs, 100% of your cows, 100% of your horses, 100% of your villagers, but you have 20 sheep sitting around.

Also, I'm not sure if it takes name tags into account, but it'd be nice to wipe those last. At least then you could name two of each animal and not have to worry about traipsing around the world trying to find two cows to lure back to the middle of the ocean again.

I feel with you... my sheep farm is slightly bigger and it has been activated (aka ate CPU time) only when I use it and I use it only when less than 20 players are online. I have been doing this on purpose because we had such radical changes before and I didn't want to lose my sheeps again.

However, some time ago (perhaps 1-2 years) Intelli already posted a thread that the number of mobs will be reduced, I let my brother kill most of my sheeps and then the limit was not reduced. Well, you know how it feels if Fluffy is gone. Took me weeks to come back to a point where I was and since then I expected that some day it would happen.

Let's see it as part of the game play, as one of the challenges given by nature we have to face, like a disease or a climate change. It's like in real world, things will change and we have to live with it, even if grinders etc. lost partly their function. In the long run, I hope that the overall experience does not suffer from this unforeseen force of nature.

A.

Regarding this, I have a simple, yet very important question:

Why rush the implementation of these changes without giving your player-base a chance to take the necessary precautions to secure any important villagers/friendly mobs they might have?

In effect pcgamer asked the same question in his post. He also asked other equally important questions.

So,

the questions has been asked.

Answers?

Best regards,

XsyntaXerrorX

Hm... there seems to be a lot of frustration around. Would it perhaps be possible to use a backup and put all non-aggressive mobs back where they are and then give the players a week to downsize the number of mobs? I guess, it's similar to the quartz batch Intelli wrote and should give the players enough time to rescue their most valuable villagers.

Best Regards,
A.

It would have been nice to have some warning about this drastic change before it was implemented, seeing as lots of people's effort has gone to waste. I haven't noticed much change in the tps, and even before this I seldom saw it drop below 18 (I do only check it with the serverhealth though, so I may be lacking important info here). Maybe allowing 50 peaceful mobs per realm, (since going from 100 to 20 is a huge change, as others have said) would have been a better choice.

How will this affect the suggestion to protect animals on private land which was accepted a while back? I don't see much point in protecting the animals of there are almost none there.

Also, does this affect the nether as well? I checked earlier with some lava cubes, but it would be good to have a proper answer.

Awww thank you. I really loved reading your response. We should be friends <3

Ikr?

Or... maybe we are just ment to suck it up? Wko knows...

Hi,

Just found the article* in which all players were informed about " de-spawning a large number of animals over the upcoming weeks". Good, it's 77 weeks ago... but we knew it. Nobody should complain. And we should be happy that the limit was not reduced to two/plot. Or zero. Or 1000...creepers...per plot...all day... in Hardcore+ mode...

Best,
A.

*http://minerealm.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=12425

Are you serious? That's not given notice...
It also says over the comming weeks not a year and a half later.
Stop trying to justify it.

77 weeks? We should be happy? Why add insult to injury with these useless counter comments?