/locate command doesn't locate nearest structure

I'll add, it would be nice if there were a /locate option that listed all structures within some fixed radius, like 500 blocks radius.

I believe what you are trying to say is that the /locate command isn't directly on the structure because I have tested for this and the structure is there, however it is noticeably a little bit off from the actual structure.

No, I'm trying to say that /locate doesn't locate the nearest structure, and the error is way off, far more than you would expect if the location were "a little bit off." In the example in my description, /locate identified a stronghold 950 blocks away as nearest, when the actual nearest stronghold is a completely different one 740 blocks away in a different direction. If I plot the end portal for each stronghold on a map, it's clear and obvious which one is nearer.

I'm speculating that this error may be due to the way distance is calculated, knowing that taxicab distance will always result in longer distances than direct-bearing distance, especially for intercardinal bearings.

In the example I gave, the stronghold identified by /locate is almost directly south, while the actual nearest one is southeast (-45 degrees bearing).  An object at 45 degrees bearing will measure 1.4 times farther away than its true distance, if taxicab distance measuring is used.

It seems you are right. I guess it just happens to be by chance it was close by. By attempting more times, there have been more occasions where structures have been located more than 135 blocks from the given location. I'll look into the code from the game to try to pinpoint this error.

Euwill, I apologize for any confusion. I'm not saying that the location identified is incorrect, I'm saying that there are cases when /locate identifies one structure as nearest while completely missing another structure that is nearer.

I went back and checked the coordinates in my description. Given a search position at the spawn coordinates 960,4:

• The stronghold identified by /locate at 578,882 is the correct location. It corresponds to the location of the village well above it, and is accessible by digging down from that well. The end portal is actually nearby in that stronghold, but not at that location (I had thought strongholds were located by the end portal, but apparently it's the top of the spiral staircase).

• The other, nearer stronghold I found at 1460,546 is closer. I've updated the coordinates in the description. Digging straight down the well doesn't get you there; the top of the spiral staircase is actually 7 blocks east of the well.

Now, here's the new weird thing: This nearer stronghold isn't found by /locate at all, even when I'm right over it!

Update: I have verified by experimenting with two locatable strongholds (at 578,882 and -286, -702) that /locate is actually calculating distances correctly, using Euclidean distance instead of taxicab distance. The bug reported here, then, is that /locate simply cannot find one nearby stronghold even when you're right on top of it. I don't know whether this is an isolated anomaly or a systemic problem with /locate.

Updated description with a second example of /locate failing to find two nearer ocean monuments.

Confirmed in 1.11.4 using Windows 10. The steps to reproduce given in the description are correct.

MCPE-34355 reported a similar bug, but was retracted by the reporter who said that the command worked correctly when you were not above the ocean monument. That is not true for this report; moving some distance away, it still locates the farther target.

That is correct. It doesn't matter if you're directly over the structure. If /locate doesn't find it, then /locate never finds it, no matter where you are.

Resolving issues that were marked as fixed in the 1.15 and 1.16 Betas, now that 1.16.0 is being released.

As the reporter, I have verified that the steps outlined in the description no longer reproduce the issue. This ticket can be closed.