@Plagued But wouldn't it be easier to simply cap the amount of additional hunts that could be bought per lioness ? Then you wouldn't have to change the time skip fee back and no one could "grind their lions" for stats .

You have liked this post!

Option one or three but voted 3. I dont think 2 is fair >.

You have liked this post!

Griff: Oh, I see, my apologies, I misunderstood c: Yes, it wasn't from a glitch, but from what I feel is a mistake of the staff, which will have massive repercussions on the market for at least a year. I hate to sound like a broken record, but it's true, and stat breeders such as myself will end up suffering for it.

I commend the people that had the resources to take advantage of the situation, but a broken, economy-crushing system and after-effect is still such, regardless.

EDIT: To avoid sounding like a broken record, I have discussed in some detail as to why I feel caps and raised prices aren't a great solution here

You have liked this post!

@Soot I wasn't implying the skip feature would be changed; I was just saying maybe we could limit how many stats a lioness brings back for x amount of hunts before she just stops gaining stats but can still go out and bring back food if needed if that makes sense? I don't really see a problem with the additional hunts considering they're only 10 SB each, so perhaps the prices do need to be capped/raised a bit.

You have liked this post!

@Plagued There wouldn't need to be a price raise on them if there was a cap set on how many you could add per lioness each day . With your suggestion I'm unsure as to if I like it or not, I think it would depend on the number of hunts before they stopped gaining stats .

You have liked this post!

Wouldn't it be much fairer to everyone to just reset that stats on the ultrastatted lionesses [they are not particularly hard to find after all] and refund the approximate SB spent on those hunts. That way people who did nothing 'wrong' would be unaffected, and those who exploited the system will be punished [due to having lost time grinding] but not alienated by taking away their fairly spent money.
There are enough SB sinks to equal things out again much faster than if those lionesses stay.

You have liked this post!

2

You have liked this post!

Yes, Kor, I am looking at it from a larger community based perspective. I don't use the 100 sb skips, I don't often use the 10 sb added hunts. I never used the 1 gb skips. What I am thinking of is that the cost of lionesses will change drastically. The value of lions and lionesses will change drastically. The leaderboards will be stagnant and useless. There will be an even stronger force holding new people out of the top leaderboards. The people with money will continue to have the highest stat lionesses. The leaderboard people will constantly be the ones selling the highest stats cubs, low stat cubs will be even more worthless than they are now. People who are new will never be able to break into the higher market no matter how much time they spend unless they buy a bunch of gold beetles and buy a few high stat lions/lionesses.

You have liked this post!

Griff: That was what I meant, when I used to the GMO incident as an example, I'm sorry, if I didn't come around clear enough XD.

You have liked this post!

@Soot I said in my post it could depend on the levels/original stats perhaps.

Here, let me try to explain it a little better as to what I was saying.

Lets just say this as an example: a level 1 lioness can go on (example number, not necessarily "the" number) 30 hunts per day, all of those she can gain stats on. Once she is sent on the 31st hunt she will bring back food (and maybe exp) but no stats.
Using that same method, a level 15 lioness can only go on, lets say, 25 hunts that they can gain stats on.
A level 30 lioness can only go on 20, A level 45 can only go on 15, etc. This still allows newly training lionesses to be trained up while effectively capping the higher leveled lionesses if I do say so myself.

I was also suggesting that maybe according to the level it will higher/lower the chance of bringing back +1 or +2 stats per hunt. So maybe a level 1 lioness would be more likely to bring back 2 stats while a level 30 lioness would be less likely (but still able to) bring back 2 stats.

You have liked this post!

I'd like to say I wish people wouldn't keep saying that casual players are voting for option 2. Not only that but I have been on this game for at least a year, actually longer since this is my 2nd Christmas, and if I classify as a casual player then how long have non-casual players been here? Also, I do find it rather offending for it to be said (and repeated) that causal players do not know the ins, and outs of Lioden. Everyones opinion is valid, and everyone - regardless of time spent on the site - has the chance to know everything there is to know about Lioden. A new player could probably know more then the oldest if they read the entire Wiki and happened to make friends with the right people. Do not discount them! Further more, they can quite as easily see the consequences of each option as can everyone else if they gave it a chance.

Whilst I do understand those who are against option 2, it doesn't seem like many are taking into account the fees suggested are too expensive or the fact if you get rid of the skip waiting button you are penalising those who cannot get on for long periods of time each day just to be able to get those standard 10 hunts for each lioness.

What about another option?

What about each member having the option, automatically, of having 10 hunts for each lioness which for a fee you click one button and it does it all for you, all 10 hunts, and thats it. They can't hunt again since they have used their 10 slots. Then, you can have the additional hunts as well, for another fee, but have it limited - maybe 20 additional hunts? At least then those who cannot spend five hours or a whole day on the game can at least get the standard amount of hunts available. It just doesn't seem fair to 'punish', in a way, those people like me who work full time. I know this option I have explained isn't perfect nor full fleshed out, but it is an idea that could be tweaked to work. It at least, if nothing else, gives a chance for a decent amount of people to be happy.

You have liked this post!

@Plagued I understand it a bit better now but I dont like how your suggestion would effect higher leveled girls . I think that limiting the number of hunts a lioness could bring stats from would be enough .

You have liked this post!

@Soren - Unfortunately the people with money will always have the advantage. That's the way of things. And sure the boards will be stagnated for now, and possibly for a really long time. But for people bringing up the issue of lack of competition doesn't this mean that there is a high bar to strive for now? Call me optimistic or misinformed or whatever you like, totally your call and I don't really care. It just seems to me that people are getting upset because things are changing, and coming up with reasons why it won't work as opposed to ways that it could.

You have liked this post!

Thank you Bamon for your comments. I was feeling pretty put out that other players claim that casuals are not valid. Im casual, but i do spend real money. Ive seen games become a cesspool when player bases start labeling "Casual vs Elite"

Here is an idea I posted on the first page. It might be a good solution, or not, but its better than nothing:

Each rollover, when you log in, you get a message saying your lionesses have brought food, random size and number would be deposited in your hoard. This way everyone has food and extra can be sold. (hunts would be internal, and not something you have to send lions on, they just do it cuz they are good lionesses)

To stat gain lionesses, they would need to patrol, just like submales, with the same system as submales and the same cool down, but unlimited number of patrols offered. This way everyone can choose how much time and effort are put into each lion's stats.

Effectively removes the need for hunting and skipping all together.

You have liked this post!

Bamon: I think 'casual player' refers to activity on the site, rather than the point when a person originally joined ^^

As for the latter suggestion, I have no protest to it in the least, it's actually rather similar to something mentioned in my original suggestions thread, and earlier in this thread. Caps or price changes will never be fair to everyone, and it does frustrate me that those are essentially the only options we're voting for at the moment.

You have liked this post!