@Alrewolf I do rather admire your creativity as I myself would have never thought of this however I feel if this was implemented things would rely a wee bit too much on birth stats .

You have liked this post!

@Alrewolf - haha, I suggested something similar earlier and over on Maulise's thread.
I think with the right adjustments it might help.
Interesting idea, with the luck level~

You have liked this post!

My opinion is with Option 1 or 3. They seem the best way to let everyone continue at their own play style. People who want to skip can do so, others can have their extra hunts. And 3 allows for both SB and GB. All around, the best, most balanced option of the 4 offered. While I love option 4, I don't see it doing anything to stop the complaining and arguing going on.

My vote, 3. And perhaps, rather then trying to force the topic into 'other options', pick the best of those offered, like a multiple choice question on a test. You don't get to tell your teacher 'I don't like any of your answers because they don't seem right, so I wrote my own.' The sooner this is sorted, the sooner people can get back to enjoying the game and the sooner the bad blood and hurt feelings can go away.

I am sorry. I am tired of hearing about this.

You have liked this post!

Soot, I know :( But there has to be something!


(Please note these are totally exemplary numbers to make it simpler for myself since math is not my strong suit xP)
I mean, let's say you got a wonderful lioness who has 10 base stats, but only luck level 1 (again, we can't see it, so we won't know until she's leveled up a few times what luck level she's at).

You also have an NCL with 1 base stats, but a luck level of 4.

The first level up for both of them, they gain 4 base stats. Now, if luck level 1 was 1-5, level 4 might be, say, 1-10. They could both be luck level 4, so we have to continue leveling to see.

NCL is now at 8, Lioness is now at 14.

Next level up, NCL gains 10, whereas Lioness only gains 3. NCL is now 18, and Lioness is 17.



With this example, an NCL was able to overcome a bred lioness even though she had higher base stats. Yes, I realize that NCLs and bred lionesses of good stock would never be so close, but since stats are inheritable, it's conceivable that new players could get lucky with a good NCL lioness, breed better birth stat lions, and then catch up a little.

On the same coin, a person with a high-stat lioness may have a cub with good birth stats, but luck level 1. They may only ever gain a handful of extra experience throughout their lives.

It may also encourage people to keep more stock, to see if they can figure out the lioness' luck levels, keep stock for longer, breed less, eventually letting the market become less clogged and seeing rares go back up in price (since I'm seeing that's becoming a problem).


Again, I'm not saying this specific suggestion is the solution, but people need to think more outside the box. Maybe the problem with the system is that stats shouldn't rely on hunting. Maybe the problem is that lions shouldn't gain stats when leveling up, but exploring, or something. There are a million tweaks that might work out there!

You have liked this post!

There was no issues when the Skip was GB instead of SB. Honestly, I think that's the best of all four options. Though I did vote 4, because it lets people use SB, but also acts as a SB sink that people say the site needs.

Honestly, I don't see how any of the options will be completely fair. The richer players will always have a sort of lead because they'd be able to buy the more expensive high stat cubs regardless of limiting factors. Making the prices raise between each tier of use, or even limiting to only 10 hunts per lioness.

If it stays the way it is right now, we'll adapt and move on. It'll be very hard for people to catch up to the people with higher stated lions, but it gives something to work at. If there isn't a challenge of some sort, than there isn't a reason to try or play in some cases.

You have liked this post!

Silverfish, I am so sorry! I didn't even see that - great minds think alike, hm? :) I wasn't trying to steal or copy, but it's kind of a common sense "might work" solution. Again, I apologize for not seeing that. :(

You have liked this post!

Pf, don't apologize. I'm glad someone else thinks it might be a viable idea! It takes more than one brain to work out a good solution - that's why the LD staff put the poll up in the first place.

You have liked this post!

//casually decides I'm gonna run like the wind with this idea

I would also like if this was implemented for users to have a dynamic luck level that changes with each day. The luck level would be, say, for my other example up there, 1-5. All stats would be determined by this.

So, for example.
A user has a lioness who can level up. The lioness' luck level is static, and level 4. This means she can gain anywhere from 1-10 stats on a level up.

The user who owns her has a luck level of 1 today. Lioness can level up. The system takes the luck level of the user and multiplies it by 2. So, 1*2 = 2. The lioness gains 2 stats on level up.

Now, why is the lioness' luck level important?

Let's say user is at luck level 5 today, but their lioness is only at luck level 1, which caps off at 5. User's luck level says their lionesses gain +10 today (5*2), however because the lioness' cap is only 5, she can only gain +5.



Again, just little ideas that mean we could eliminate this hunting nonsense altogether and use hunting just for food.

You have liked this post!

Option 2

You have liked this post!

Option twooooooooo!!!!!!!

You have liked this post!

But why did you pick option 2

You have liked this post!

I'm not going to vote on this just yet and only voice my opinion...

While I agree it's "bad" to give GB a fixed value as 1000SB, that's only because it's not implemented anywhere else. Some people have heard my arguments when it comes to paying for something like art. GB has too many values to it and only one of them being a fixed rate. And that fixed rate (50 cents) is still debated and argued because of time/effort factors. I personally always preferred 1kSB per 1GB. For the average person, that's about a week's worth of playing with regular features, which is fair to me. And if others get it quicker with lion sales and art, good for them. But it needs to be based on how ALL players can earn SB just by playing the game for what it offers directly. Since the staff still haven't come up with a true fixed rate for SB-GB conversions and prohibiting more or less, we can't really use that. Which sucks because..

If that were the case, I'd then choose option 3 easily. But what's also holding me back about option 3 is the high tier cost. I think the original system was fine. I'm no longer nearly as active as I used to be with this game (nor nearly as interested), but I almost never got up to the 10 full hunts and never needed to skip the time. I didn't care about "grinding stats" and I made a personal choice to keep a small pride, so I only hunted enough to feed my pride and did extra just as a pass time. But I never needed or used more than 10 hunts or the skip feature. And despite not using it or needing it, I'd still rather have it there for others to use if they needed to. Or if I ever decided to use it.

I did consider option 2 at first. Only because of the words "Everyone has the same playing field, and it's effectively capped." To me, without considering other complaints people have about this new system (since I admittedly don't care to know as nothing negative has affected me), it is worded as a fair system. And I want fair. No exploits, no advantage to those who have the money to pay for steroid stats, and no high fees for those options.

However. As agreed with many, these options do all kind of suck. For various reasons of them all having wonky pros and cons to them. But also, as others have said, why does option 2 seem like the fair option and seem to be preferable, but yet there's a poll for a chance to change it with all the complaints. Obviously there's something wrong with the current system/option 2 if there's a poll to change it and clearly isn't as fair as it seems. But again, pretty much none of these will affect me as I never bothered to skip the time nor go over the 10 alloted hunts.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So with that all being said, if the price for the tiers went down to say pure SB options of like 800SB, 900SB, and then 1000SB, I'd think that's fine for skipping. Now even if it went down to something like that, I'd still be iffy and not vote for it. The reason being, is the extra hunts. I think hunts should be unlimited and the time skip is what Should be limited. Only 3 time skips and unlimited hunts. BUT, how about this? What if only the 10 original hunts are what help gain stats (be it with experience points to level up and then gain a number for example:
Each hunt is a fixed rate of 10 experience points. 10 hunts x 10 exp =100%
The 100% means the bar is full and can be redeemed to gain stat points
How many points a lion will get will have to be determined more in depth, but I think hunts X exp is a very fair and fixed rate. It not only applies to every player evenly for their time/effort spent, but helps restrain super steroid stat gains

OR either way, if we keep the current gaining of stats or something else, only those 10 hunts will get you the stats and anything additional will get you food ONLY.)

So to make this easier to understand...

Summary:
- Option 2 isn't as fair as it seems if we're having a poll to change that current system.
- Therefor, I'd vote option 3. But I won't officially do that because of the high tier prices, the unnoficially implemented SB-GB conversion that won't be applied/official anywhere else, and I don't think additional hunts should have a fee based on my preferred suggestion of...
- Unlimited hunts but limited skips. Skips would only happen 3 times a day and at an SB rate of say 800SB, then 900SB, then 1000SB with NO relevance to GB.
- The 10 original hunts will remain as they are. Free to everyone but the restriction is that it's ONLY those 10 hunts that will get you a stat gain of sorts. Any additional hunts will be for food ONLY.
- Stat gains can either remain how they are per hunt or perhaps we can implement something fixed and fair with 10 experience points per hunt. So the full use of the 10 hunts will get you a 100% filled bar to redeem for stat points. Unsure of how that willl be determined, but can also be fair upon level of the lioness.


I'm thinking of making that an actual suggestion to support if people like that. Please PM me (both staff and players) if you'd like me to make that as a suggestion to support :) It'll be hard to keep up with this thread.

You have liked this post!

I think Xylax's already assuming we all want option two based on the first few answers proves most of the dissenters points. SOME OF US HAVE REAL LIVES. I go to work, come back and it's all done and over and decided before even getting a chance to respond.

When you get to a point that EVERYONE has a say, not just those who stay at home or happen to be online at a certain time, then you might show us you care about the whole game and not those who are so busy trying to be first to post that they don't even read and REALLY respond.

For me I'm of the opinion that the guy who suggested making hunts more like the sub patrols works better. AND I think that lionesses who reach the age of 14 should take cubs under their wings to train them, giving them some of their stat bonuses. It gives a purpose to the old dears who can't be bred. That way we don't chase them, we let them live their lives out constructively and it's a way to improve cub stats from 0-5 months.

And BTW, if I have to chose, then Option 4.

You have liked this post!

I am a casual player simply because at the moment I cannot afford to donate to the site as yet. That is NOT to say that I do not care about the site or what happens to it. I am new on here and already I care a great deal about this site and enjoy playing the game. I have spent a great deal of my SB to buy a few lionesses that are pretty and have good stats to widen my breeding pool. I have spent SB to increase my territory and the other things I can do. I see so many posts in response to the poll that make it seem like casual players like me, who do care about the site, who simply cannot afford to donate, don't care at all about the game. I find that offensive and it bothers me. I may be just starting out and I may be a casual player so that automatically means I don't care??? Why is that believed to be the truth? I personally vote for #3. But I'm AM just a casual player after all.

You have liked this post!

Rayvn, I think the point people are trying to make is that a large majority of people do NOT donate, do NOT really spend time working on their prides and such that a lot of the dedicated players have. A "casual" player is much more likely to drift between games, to leave the game, to vote for "fairer" playing fields even if they aren't fair because they feel like they deserve to get just as much reward for their 5 minutes logging in as someone who truly dedicates a lot of time and effort, and not to mention money, to the game.

I don't think it's fair to pit the casual players against the dedicated players. Casual generally refers to those who come in for 5 minutes each day, maybe post one thing or explore/hunt once and then leave. I don't think it has anything to do with GB - but those who do donate GB SHOULD be listened to. Because without them even "casual" players won't have anything to play.

Casual players are more likely to stay even with big/little tweaks - because it doesn't affect them. They may gripe and groan about it, but they soon realize it doesn't affect them, shrug it off, and continue logging on for 5 minutes a day.

For those dedicated players, a little tweak means a world of difference. Especially if it's something to do with a system that is the ONLY way to improve your pride quality.

You have liked this post!