|
|
---|---|
Posted by | [++] Add Very High fertility; TC sugestion(620+sup |
Isabella Lena (#49545) Deathlord of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2015-10-21 21:23:01 |
This is just a idea. I do not care how it is done. I just want the large 50% VLF gap gone. Right now we have: Goddess = 100% High = 90%-99% Good = 80%-89% Average = 70%-79% Low = 51-69% Very Low = 1%-50% Infertile = 0% My idea is to add Very high fertility, than it would look like: Goddess = 100% Very High = 90%-99% High = 80%-89% Good = 70%-79% Average = 51-69% Low = 26%-50% Very Low = 1%- 25% Infertile = 0% This way the large 49% gap of very low would be gone. And that is easier, because if you buy a very low lioness now, you have sutch a large range her fertility could be. This way you have a little bit more change you get the fert on your lady you want. My example: I was looking for a 700+stat lady with nice marks and VLF fert (under 20%)... So I bought one with all those things, and reveald her fert.. She got 39%..... *buggle*..... what do you think? And if you click non support, why do you think it's a bad idea? |
Trinket (#71704)
King of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2015-11-15 17:50:02 |
GalacticRing (#68231)
Harbinger View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-02-01 03:03:27 |
.:forest:. (#81778)
King of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-02-05 05:04:25 |
Lia-Lin (Sunset|4xCimm|G2) (#36246) Divine View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-02-05 05:06:05 |
I only support because I think the fact that Very Low Fertility can actually be quite high is annoying. 0 players like this post! Like? Edited on 05/02/16 @ 12:06:25 by Lia-Lin - {I.R.I.S - T.A.O.L} (#36246) |
🐝 Detective (#19805)
Protector View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-04-11 18:58:10 |
Yeah, I 100% agree that the fert levels need to be adjusted. Very Low going up to 50% makes no sense to me :3 I don't know about adding a "very high" option, I think they should keep the level-names they have now just change what % falls under them. (VL being 1-25%, etc) 0 players like this post! Like? |
Isabella Lena (#49545)
Deathlord of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-04-11 19:01:29 |
Detective@ If we do not add very high, than the fert levels woudl stille be big ranched. So High would be possinly 80 to 99%.. Insted of 90 to 99%. It is possible. But I think if we add very high fert, it would make it easier. Also for the coders. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Nera (#92686)
Recognizable View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-06-26 00:09:59 |
Isabella Lena (#49545)
Deathlord of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-06-26 00:22:29 |
Nera@ It is just a name for a %. So and somethign has to happen for the big 50% gap, this is a easy way. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Nera (#92686)
Recognizable View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-06-26 05:52:07 |
Uh I'm pretty sure average would make up a good number of lionesses, which would mean that the overall fertility of lionesses on the game goes down. That's the definition of the word. The average lion will now have a bracket lower percentage-wise in fertility, making it harder to breed overall. Unless I'm wrong about that being the case cuz they've stated somewhere that it's entirely random or something, in which case just tell me. 0 players like this post! Like? Edited on 26/06/16 @ 12:53:29 by Nera (#92686) |
Acorn in Sparkling Armor (#40486) Usual View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-07-25 05:53:54 |
IMHO Good and high work just fine. It would actually make the chart imbalanced, because we would have THREE sections for upper feet and TWO sections for lower fert, not counting goddess and infertile.... I don't think we should mess with it anymore than it already is. Average is a mediator, it doesn't really count as good or bad, the scale would make my OCD hay wire. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Heda Vampiric (#56702)
Prophet View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-07-26 01:30:27 |
@#Acorn There is another suggestion post that has all these + adds "Extremely low" to the list. That would even it out for you <3 0 players like this post! Like? |
Acorn in Sparkling Armor (#40486) Usual View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-07-26 01:34:30 |
I don't see a point in changing any of it, that would only lead people to want an extremely high. I don't see a point in changing it at all. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Heda Vampiric (#56702)
Prophet View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-07-26 01:41:40 |
The point I think is how big the gap is. Most people who breed VLF (Me included) are looking for like 10% and below. And when you can get a VLF (This is especially true if you use a VukaVuka) that has a 50% fertility it's kind of annoying. Also as it stabds, average isn't very average since its not in the half way point. It helps High and good fill up the top 50% so they don't have such a stretched range. VLF itself takes up the bottom 50% alone. Which makes it not very low at all. 0 players like this post! Like? |
JediMiçanguei ro (#82466) Divine View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-07-31 00:19:36 |
Support. The VLF being up to 50% does not make sense, if better ideas appear I will also support, and I believe the staff would look into all options once noticed the resquest supported from so many players. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Chazza (#63497)
King of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2016-08-07 18:25:07 |
100% support...I'm not sure why very low is up to 50... To me 50% is average, low is 25-50% and very low would be 1-25%. There is no way a 50% chance of a breeding resulting in pregnancy is very low...it doesn't make sense the way it is. 0 players like this post! Like? |