Posted by Inbreeding mechanics

Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)

Resurgent
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 04:03:52
Yes. Inbreeding. That thing that many players go "Why do you avoid it it does nothing anyways" about. But please read it all before hitting the "NO support" button; I'd love to hear your thoughts, but please hear me out first.

Inbreeding Mechanics



In real life, inbreeding will often cause malformations, mutations and a general detriment of the offspring's health if done to the extreme, and is used to conserve certain desirable traits in animals. We already have the second part easy enough - many breeding projects use the tactic of breeding the son that has the desired trait/s to his mother, or the contrary with a father and his daughters, to produce more lions with those same traits -, but I think it would be interesting to add a bit more complexity to Lioden. What if there was a set system that added a higher chance of miscarriage for each shared relative, with an added, smaller chance of producing a lethal cub, and generally producing offspring with lower stats than they would have normally, or even the possibility of spontaneous infertile cubs? It would certainly add another limit to the breeding system.

Why would that be useful?



The breeding system has currently a global limit, the fertile lifespan of a lion - from 2 years old to 16 years old for males, females from 2 years to 14, varying due to their own heat cycles and the use of Instant Cub Delivery, two limits to male breedings, and one for females: the males are limited by their own energy when mating with their own females, and the double of the usual energy and studding slots when mating with the lionesses of another player, while the females are limited by a cooldown after giving birth to a litter.

And yet, there are easy ways to bypass these limits: the use of Energy Roots to breed within our own lionesses, that and Cape Bulrush for the stud requests, the Black Stallion that ensures the female it's used on will get pregnant the next try, and for females there is the use of Yohimbe Bark to shorten their cooldown - granted, this last item is only available during one Event and it requires a lot of them to make a big difference.

Now, Energy Roots and Cape Bulrush are available all year around in the Oasis, and while the Cape Bulrush replenishes 3 stud slots per and costs 3GB - making those 3 additional studdings cost 1GB each at least -, it's rather easy to just buy Energy Roots and offer for people to send their females in heat to your account, along with the payment and other items that they wish for your male to use - at their own risk, that is. This means that the original 15 studdings limit - which would add a max of 60 new cubs to the game each week - is bypassed completely, and the amount of lionesses for them to breed now depends on the level of trust this player is given balanced with how much people want to stud to their male. A player could breed thousands of cubs, instead of the potential max of 24 cubs per lioness - the biggest litter is 4 and a lioness has a heat every 2 years until she's 14 years old, which means she can have around 6 natural heats - he could have in his own pride, plus the max amount of 2520 cubs if this male spent all of his weekly stud slots every week starting from 2 years old until he was forced to retire at 16, without using any of the items listed above. Even if we cut those numbers by half - because 1 and 2 cub litters are the most common - that amount of cubs produced by a single male is insane.

How many of those cubs end up clogging the Trade Center, not quite meeting the requirements of their breeders, and yet having cost too much to be used as fodder and disappear from the database? How many of those cubs in the Tree, where they get their stats lowered to NCL amounts from before the overhaul of the system, and thus losing potential owners? With the implementation of an inbreeding system the mass breeding would slow down, either because the stillbirth regulates the amount of cubs produced or more players take their time to plan for a breeding searching for a partner with whom they share goals, if they don't want to risk it with the inbreeding penalty, letting the market breath and rejuvenate itself - and before you protest, yes, I know studdings to highly sought out lions take weeks and even months, and a lot of resources. This is meant for more studs to be sought for the players, instead of the same group all the time, which would even the market by adding more competitors, and thus lowering the prices, even.

What would it consist of?



To keep it well balanced, the lethal mutations would have to be a lower chance than using a CRB - whatever that chance is - but it'd be an added thing to roll when the cubs are conceived. And we already have miscarriages when a lioness isn't nested or isn't well fed, only that this would be a cumulative chance of a set percentage per shared relative, around 1%, even when that lioness is sated and nested. To avoid having everyone suffering from the penalties suddenly, this could be introduced gradually over a couple or real time months, when players have the chance of starting to reach out for lions unrelated to their own and the coders can go over everything a bit more calmly.

The penalties could work in two diferent ways, but it's always calculated with the amount of repeated ancestors a lion has in his/her full heritage: first, by substracting the corresponding percentage of the inherited stats from a parent. Both parents would suffer this independently, before the resulting stats combined to be the ones of their offspring. If we take up to the Great-Great Grand-Parents of the parents, which would be up to a 30% of penalty per parent in the worts of cases; second, by adding a chance of the cubs of the litter being stillborn, rolling individually for each cub, and being the result of the sum of both the parents' penalties, divided by 2, which would result in a 15% of a cub being stillborn in the worst of cases.

There's a lot of controversy regarding the possibility of a slightly higher chance of lethal mutations, so there's the option of creating a unique mutation for the system - a runt lion of sorts - that would be infertile and wouldn't be able to hunt, breed, patrol or be a king, maybe have a shorter lifespan, or having no additional mutation chance at all. Along with this, there'd be a chance - the same as the penalty - to produce spontaneus infertile lions.

Summarized, inbreeding could entail:


  • Lower stats than what would be expected

  • A set percentage of an added chance of miscarriage|The chance would roll for each cub of the litter individually, not for the litter as a whole|With the lowest of chances and with a lion being and ancestor 15 times, it would mean a chance of 14 - 15% of a cub being stillborn - depending if we take it from the third time a lion is related to introduce the penalty or not

  • A whole new item to ensure that at least one cub survives

  • Spontaneous infertility

  • A higher chance of producing a lethaly mutated cub, but still lower than a CRB - it only affects the chance of having a lethally mutated cub, not the chance of having a mutated cub overall|Or|An exclusive non-lethal mutation, consisting on weak looking, infertile lions that are unable to hunt,
    patrol or be kings, an keep the other lethal mutations' odds as they are currently

  • Possible ways for the inbreeding to take place:


    • The effects above - minus the lethal mutation - would have a cumulative increased chance per shared ancestor

    • A three strike system could be added, too, and start from the 3rd ancestor shared and not the 1st for the effects to take place

    • There could be a limit to the amount of times a common ancestor can influence the cumulative system

    • The cumulative could stop working from a particular ancestor once it reaches the status of Great-Great Grand Parents or Grand Parents only

    • The inbreeding could only be considered such if the parents are directly related within five generations only




Frequent comments:




  • This would harm new players, because smaller prides means more inbreeding: A little bit of inbreeding won't be a problem, so they are safe in this regard until they get the grasp of it, like everything else in the game, and the pride size doesn't matter when it comes to inbreeding.


  • This would ruin the game for stat breeders: When this was first suggested, there was no limiting feature for stats, but the amount of time, effort and allies a player has, which means the market is controlled by a handful of people. This isn't meant to take away all their effort, but to make it so that they need to reach out for others to keep on with their breeding, and thus even the field. Now we have limited consumption of certain food items, or usage of other items that grant stats in one way or another, but this could be another way to do so.


  • This would mean I have to get rid of my offspring because I cannot safely breed them to their father: Yes and no. You could risk it and breed them anyway - a 2, 4, 6, or 10% of penalty would require you to have really bad luck to have a stillborn -, or you could seek out a stud to breed them until you reach a level of inbreeding you feel safe again or until you get another main male.


  • Lethals are supposed to be rare/This would make people stop buying CRB: For those who are worried that this would harm the mutie market making the lethal mutations more common, another possibility was added, that of an exclusive mutation that would be virtually useless. We already have the chance of claiming a CRB lioness in explore and people still buy Cotton Root Bark, so I don't see how increasing the chance of a mutant born of an inbred lioness would change it. Yet, the option of the unique mutation remains. Or not adding a mutation effect at all.


  • This would make the rare markings/bases breeders project even harder: I agree, but I don't know how this could be avoided short of increasing the drop chance of those traits to make up for the penalty that results from inbreeding the lions that got the particular trait, or the introduction of an item and ensured the base pased - but those suggestions have a controversy of their own.


  • This would be a problem for the players that have long, inbreed lineages already: Other than introducing the system slowly, with warning notices so these players could branch out their lions and avoid the worst, or plainly wiping the heritage of every lion currently on Lioden - as some of you suggested - there's no other thing I can think of currently to avoid the issue.


  • I like "insert inbreeding feature nº1 here" but not "insert inbreeding feature nº2 here", can't it be just that instead?: Now, when this idea was born - brainstorming with a group of players, with eveyrone adding their own thoughts - it was as a way to add another layer of limits to the game inspired by real life inbreeding consequences. In my opinion, there shouldn't be a feature added without the rest, because they are meant to balance each other out.


  • What if I don't want to play like this? Can't this have a toggle?: I don't think it is feasible to introduce such a change as something you can just toogle on and off, like the Events. Perhaps I'm wrong, but even if I'm not, this was thought with the intention of mending the market. If everyone could just hop off, it would be moot point.




*Note: Given the amount of feedback this has received, I will no longer reply to every single one; the OP is very clear on both the basis of the suggestion as well as the issues it was inspired of, and you are free to agree or disagree; just please don't take it on me as player. If you have doubts after reading it, feel free to PM and I'll try my best to explain myself better when I have the time. Nothing would please me more than to find a middle ground for the reasonable issues mentioned over the replies to be resolved, or even have another, better suggestion be born from this one.



This suggestion has 505 supports and 563 NO supports.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Edited on 20/02/18 @ 07:03:58 by Berenos (#84593)

xXDruidXx (#74535)

Nice Guy
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 05:29:48
Queen, I think maybe there'd have to be a free stud selection if there was inbreeding effects? Otherwise it would be unfair on poorer players!



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

🔲Shitlord
Mauaji🔳 (Knees (#33232)

Deathlord of the Jungle
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 05:32:21
I think there should be a separate switch for people who prefer not to inbreed that activates a little pop up on a lions page telling you if any of your lions is related to that certain one.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

🌈Rainbow (#66036)


View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 05:32:57
It's not in the suggestion to im guess that the stud prices are up to the player of that king to decide. Atleast this is what I'm getting from it.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Dunnart [On Hiatus] (#29090)

King of the Jungle
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 05:33:17
This would give every player who likes to breed for anything specific serious problems. The new genetics have already made it practically impossible to breed the rarest bases (sepias, lilacs etc). I'm pretty sure this system would ruin things for them entirely. Mutation breeders would have a lot of trouble as would rosette breeders. So would people like me who like to create a specific design and breed it.

Lioden is a multi-faceted game, and most people choose to focus their attention and resources on the aspects of it that appeal to them most. At this point, people who don't like to inbreed don't have to do so, but if this idea was implemented, many people who enjoy a different facet of breeding or some of the other aspects of the game would have a lot more trouble. It might be true that this suggestion would help with the economy, I don't know. But even if it did, it wouldn't be worth it in my opinion.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

xXDruidXx (#74535)

Nice Guy
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 05:33:21
Maybe instead of negative and positive effects, there should just be a notification, like Lord Mauaji said, I think I've seen that suggested before?



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)

Resurgent
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 05:34:54
@Finnegan

There is an hypothetical first player who, for their breeding project, is breeding continuously half siblings and/or father and daughters, and who'd get the hypothetical 30% penalty, yes? Then there is another, who has an inbred, hypothetical lion that, due to the amount of ancestors repeated, would, too, get the 30%. In this case, regarding the inbreding mechanic, the first player would be putting cero effort in it, while the other one could be starting out from a lion whose looks or stats they want to introduce into their pride. That's what I was trying to point across. In the same scenario, if instead of getting the point of view of inbreeding, we took the point of view of a looks breeder, the first player would be putting all their efforts to achieve their goal.

I get it that if this was implemented everyone would be affected, no matter if they cared for it or not. The thing is that, when I started thinking about it, it seemed a fun dinamic to introduce to the game. Everything it uses - minus a possible unique mutation - is already in game, from the ancestry of the lions, to the heritance of the stats, to the stillbirth. How many people have complained about forgetting to nest a lioness and loosing an entire litter? I've yet to hear anyone talk about forgetting to nest a lioness and having the cubs live anyway, but perhaps they don't notice because they don't read the notification, or they don't need to vent their frustrations in chat because, in the end, the worst didn't happen. I really thought this out so that, if you want to achieve something, you have to risk something. And that applies to everyone, yes. Myself included.

I'll try to explain the penalty more detailed. If we take a look at the Full Heritage of a lion, there's up to 30 ancestors. This would mean that, with how the breeding system is right now, a lion with 30 repeated ancestors would have a 30% of penalty, which means that any stats that lion passes to its offspring would be a 30% less of stats than what it would get normally. Perhaps, for the miscarriage thing, each parent would add their penalization and have that be divided by two? That way you end up with the maximun of 30% of stillbirth per cub, which is, again, less by almost a half of what you already have if you forget to nest a lioness.

No matter if this suggestion ever makes it or not, the market problem is there.

I'm fine with you countering, that's the best part! But I'd like to get a minimum of respect, the same way I demand myself to offer respect to others. And I never even implied that those who don't care about inbreeding are playing it easy. I personally find the stat breeding to be the hardest and most time consuming, to be honest.

Again, the willy-nilly thing was for the example I started this reply with, it was said once, and for this particular example, so please, don't make a mountain from a grain of sand. I'm sorry you took it the wrong way, it wasn't, by far, my intention.




Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

🔲Shitlord
Mauaji🔳 (Knees (#33232)

Deathlord of the Jungle
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 05:34:54
Let everyone play as however they want, be it inbreeding or not. The lil message pop up will make non inbreeders aware of lions they want to avoid breeding to certain other lions, and we'll all be happy. Or so i hope.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Maiq the Hoarder (#92244)

Sensual
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 05:49:45
I'm pretty certain that the chance of cubs surviving without a nest is 0%. I have *never* had a cub survive when I forgot to nest the lioness.

As far as the market problem- they are working on the Gorilla Enclave which will help with the excess cubs as I understand it.

And if you happen to think stats are a problem (I don't) then the changes with egg yolks and clan rotting are going to make a huge impact.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Myr (#188)


View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 05:51:10
Dunnart (see a few posts above) already said a lot of what I was about to.

I just don't see any reason to add inbreeding mechanics that reduce people's choices of how they personally want to play. I personally breed 99% of my lions to my own kings, and I always have done. It saves time, and I can more easily predict the outcomes for my cubs. I have no desire to waste what time I have to play LD going around searching for individual unrelated studs for each lioness I breed, simply to avoid things like increased chances of still births that have been suggested here. This is a game where people have limited time to play and should be able to make their own choices about gameplay without constant risks and penalties for inbreeding; it's not real life.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

xXDruidXx (#74535)

Nice Guy
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 05:52:00
I find it annoying that there is no/ such a little chance that I haven't noticed for the cubs surviving without a nest. I mean I've forgotten once before and lost all 6 litters all with mottled mothers :/



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Five (#34182)

Eros
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 06:06:58
For one, I'm not terribly happy about the stat penalty especially since I'm trying to breed high-stat cubs now. I do not need an added hindrance to my projects that I spend a good amount of money on. I usually keep my breeding within the confines of my main and side account studs to save money and have quick response on my requests. I understand that the stat penalty would be gradual but it is incredibly easy to keep inbreeding and inbreeding without stopping to think that /maybe/ one should breed to another player's lion. Secondly, I'm not agreeing with the chance of a miscarriage even if you do nest a lioness. If I breed a valuable lioness with an expensive stud and use items then I want absolutely 0% chance that there will be a miscarriage if I nest the lioness.

Yes Lioden can be realistic in some general sense of the term, but in my opinion, it is not that realistic. Look at it in the broader sense: prides are HUGE. Prides of this size would not exist out in the wild. There are mutations that have never been documented in wild lions being introduced to LD lions. There are events where anything from demons to snow plague the African landscape, obviously that wouldn't happen in real life. Inbreeding does happen in real life but all in all, I believe it does not need to be a feature due to how it would complicate the game further and the fact that most of the community wants to play on their own terms.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Laila 💰
(Gryffindor!) (#96222)

Heavenly
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 06:16:52
I am not supporting because there is way too much inbreeding to change it. It would be very hard to find lions that haven't been inbred or anything. Also, since there is a lot of inbreeding, it would just make mutations too much easier to get.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)

Resurgent
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 06:24:41
Seeing as I'm repeating myself over and over, I'll refrain for replying to things that I've already done.

I appreciate you've put to point out the flaws, the same I appreciate it when you point out the positive outcomes this could have. Thank you.

For the repeated issue of rare markings/bases breeding, I'd love to suggest that they'd be exempt of the stillbirth penalty, but that wouldn't be fair to the rest. I really thought that balancing out your goals with the negative effects could be fun for people, and that this could help the market by forcing those who want to avoid the negative effects of inbreeding to search for cubs and lions unrelated to their prides. I still do. And there are over 90 people that agree, same as there are over 90 people who disagree.

I'll try to edit the Head Post to describe the suggestion better and more detailed.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Waabin (#36543)

Heavenly
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 06:25:39
No support.

While some of the points are good I have too many points to argue it.

1.) The idea that Lioden is supposed to be mostly realistic, and therefore adding this is a good idea as it is realistic, falls apart. Lioden has ice lions, blazing lions, crimson eyes, ect. It's a fantasy game with elements of lion prides - but is far from real lions. If you like playing realistically - only with natural lions and stuff - that's fine, but you would never enforce that on others who want to play with fantasy. This mechanism forces your way of playing on others.

2.) If you want this for realism purposes, this line "A higher chance of producing a lethally mutated cub, but still lower than a CRB" is false. Yes, in real life, lions inbreed and it causes problems - shorter lives, often weaker lions, more miscarriages, maybe a blind lion or a lion with a minor spinal deformity. But, over all, lethal mutations die in the womb. You don't often see increases of two headed lions, or multi-tailed lions because of inbreeding. Animals all over inbreed TONS. It happens. It exists. And, for the most part, those prides (and packs, as wolves also do this) exist just fine in the while. You wouldn't get more lethal realistically that are born - you'd get more miscarriages, more infertility, and maybe more minor mutations (blind, bobbed tail, over grown claws and manes) but that's it. Sorry.

3.) Your mechanism of "five generations back" is also unrealistic, and since this suggestion is based in adding more realism, I feel like I should point it out. Most inbreeding effects basically disappear after a degree of three - even for humans, though socially we don't often marry distant cousins anymore because of society. So honestly the two parents could share the same great-great-grandparents and everything would be fine. Five generations implies great(x4) grandparents.

4.) For those concerned about how this could help the economy - yes and no. Maybe it would give some oompf to stud prices and stuff, since people would have to use studding way more often, and it woudl reduce the number of cubs available. However, as it stands now, it would trash the market for mutations as this suggestion implies they woudl be way more common - be it because of inbreeding or because of the influx of miscarriages or because of the increased amount of infertility. So, no, actually, it's not an economy fix. It actually has the potential to ruin part of it.

5.) For people suggesting this would make people put more time and effort into breeding: false. There are loads of ways to make people care about breeding - loads of people do. People pay attention to generations of markings just for rosettes, for example. But not everyone does. People pay attention to generations to reduce inbreeding, but not everyone does. That's the glory of the game - players pick how they play and what they want to focus on and how. There doesn't need to be a special mechanism that exists to force players to play one way or another.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Heda Vampiric (#56702)

Prophet
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-03 06:28:33

Wow. A lot has happened since I was away. I fully agree with many of the statements made while I was gone, including where it is refuted that we might be trying to play on easy mode. I've tried to explain several times that it truly is a pain in the ass to breed for some things, even when you inbreed. For most of my time on this game, I've only bred within my pride. I only stopped when I decided to breed for stats instead of markings and bases (Specifically because of how hard it was. My king is on his...4th generation I think... as a Blush Rose and he has only given me personally about 1 Blush Rose cub).

I'm aware this suggestion is heavy on it being a "Force everyone" feature, but I still find this very unfair. Let people play how they want. I could very much agree with a mere "warning" so that those who wish to play without inbreeding could do so. I also still agree that there is to be no increase to lethality chance when inbreeding. It's simply not fair and will probably ruin the market farther. It would also encourage inbreeding if anything (Who doesn't wanna be the first person to breed a inbreed mutation and sell it for a big buck trophy to a rich player?). With a warning system everyone can still play the way they want and neither side will be affected by the other. Look at it this way:
-- If inbreeding is aloud without penalty everyone can continue to play how they want. Inbreeders breeding what they must for their projects (Weather easy, hard, expensive, cheap), and people who wish to avoid inbreeding can just do that. Breed outside their pride.

-- If inbreeding is given a penalty, inbreeders are forced to change their playing style to something that is going to cost them even more and be hella frustrating. Like many people have mentioned, some markings are given to the community on a single lioness. The best investment to spread the mark is to breed the lady until you get some kings and queens and then breed all of them together. Especially on markings that have an extremely low pass rate, because having 2 of the marking will make it easier.


Sorry if I didn't address anything else, a lot happened in my absence; however, I also noticed that you seemed to have pulled very biased arguments to post on the top thread? I humble request that you include arguments and concerns from both sides as one would in a proper argument or debate paper. They do not have to nor need to be defended or given offensives in the main post, I just think it would be more fair if both sides of the arguments were given a chance to be seen. (I think I see a single anti-suggestion quote posted up there; however, I may have missed some.) I think this is a rather valid request, especially considering when you look at your approve to disapprove rating, the votes are very close (which means the community is probably hella torn over this).


I also want to point out, because I don't think anyone else did (or I missed it, in that case sorry), but I saw that you don't understand a 15 stat loss to an already 1k stat cub. For a lot it's selling them and making something from it.
If you stud to a 5Gb stud, you need 2 cubs at 3Gb or 3 cubs at 2Gb to make that back with small profit. To get that Gb worth it needs to have at LEAST 1k stats (900-999 seem to sell for shit for some reason). If you breed less than a 1015 stat cub and there is a 15 stat penalty you are now below the 1,000 mark and the cub can only sell for mere SB (Talking like maybe 900Sb if you're lucky). 1-999 stat cubs are far less valued than 1-1.5k cubs. And 2k cubs? All the more rare.




Personally I agree with what someone said about if this was implemented there would be little reason to run my breeding projects anymore. It is at that point that I am no longer willing to put forth such effort because it's just too difficult at that time. I would probably just do whatever it took to try and earn all my currency back and just buy art from the threads.

Another person pointed out that this is not a breeding game, and is in fact a ruling game I 100% agree. The lioden description is;
"Lioden is a revolutionary twist on the SIM game experience - be the king of your very own pride of lionesses, breed the best cubs, defend your territory and battle other lions for supremacy."
It is a lion sim game, not a breeding game. You play as a king of your own pride, which gives you the right to breed your lions however you want, not how people who do not fully understand the complexity of your projects thinks you should.



Side note, before posting I checked Waabin's post. I 100% agree.




Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?







Memory Used: 675.63 KB - Queries: 2 - Query Time: 0.00046 - Total Time: 0.00636s