|
|
---|---|
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 MechanicsIn 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:
Frequent comments:
*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. |
Axel (#6627)
Pervert View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-04 02:08:49 |
To be frank, almost all lions on Lioden are inbred. A lot. There is also a playstyle that doesnt rely on studding. There are many who dont stud their girls, so they breed them to their own male, who is... well... very much related to them. How the game is set up atm, it would be unwise to bring such negative effects. Negative effects would be okay, just not too drastic. I do like the higher chance for lethal mutations and possible infertile lionesses. But that is all. Everything else would stop one playstyle from existing. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Thalath {Offline} (#41669)
Wanderer View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-04 02:11:42 |
"There is a line between having a realistic game and having a fun game." exactly I completely agree with Heda. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Waabin (#36543)
Heavenly View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-04 02:14:10 |
"This would make the rare markings/bases breeders project even harder: I agree, and 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 controversy on their own." This is pushing a way of playing on others. Right now on Lioden I would say there are three or four main types of ways people play: Realistic to the max (no inbreeding, natural lions, ect) Special breeding projects (Markings, mutes, ect) Stat breeding projects Casually with no real goals except to have fun and have pretty lions. This suggestion: Would make marking projects even harder than they already are (and loads of markings are very hard on their own). You can't just shrug your shoulders at this idea. Would make mutant breeding easier, which defeats their purpose. Would make stat breeding harder (and while there are not checks on that right now, you need to introduce a check that wouldn't dictate the rest of the game) The only people this benefits are the people who play realistically. Which is forcing a way of game play on others. I'm with Heda on the fact you don't seem to see this concept. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)
Resurgent View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-04 02:16:16 |
@Hekata I wasn't talking about pair patrolling/hunting specifically, no. I'm not really sure what's stopping other people from doing it - lack of people they trust, misconceptions about it regarding the ToS, lack of free time? - I haven't experienced it myself, I only know about it from third parties. And I know the highest stat studs' owners put a lot of effort, and I don't get the stat breeding myself, and I get that nobody is forcing anyone to pay for those studs. But I thought this could help those who try and try and don't quite get there, without harming too much those who are on top, to act as a balance of sorts to shorten the space between the extremes of those who are on LB and the rest - but I'm told even a 1% stat reduction is a lot for a high stat breeder, so... Actually, would you mind clearing something for me? Is it true that, once you get past the 2k stat umbral, the effect stats have in gameplay it's the same, be them 2k or 10k? I'm curious. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Hekata (SFD) (#84603)
Usual View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-04 02:33:39 |
i can't really speak from first hand experience on that, my kings stats are currently only 700 stats but I do know that Meli can't win a battle to save his life and takes Tilted Scene a long time to level him because of that. im not sure if people think that people who are into stats are mean evil people that they can't reach out to for advice if they are having trouble over coming a hurtle. I have never received any messages asking for advice or help or even how it's possible. I dnt have much free time on my hands either, I dnt constantly explore and stuff, I set my timers, come on, take 5 seconds ( well with out lag that is) to do what I have to and then go back to what I have to do in rl. I know what it feels climbing up the stat market, I did it slowly and cost effectively, I made mistakes that I learned once I reached out to someone else with high staters, who didn't have an issue talking to me at all and was more then willing to help me. I do have a partner now, but I hadn't talked to them a ton before we started working together. Trust was built over time, same as in real life. It could have gone horribly wrong, but how would I have even formed a friendship without taking the plunge. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Raina Chiaki (#54236)
King of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-05 12:12:41 |
While I'll give credit, it's an interesting idea, I'd have to agree with Waabin and others. As a casual player who virtually never studs (mainly because I don't really feel the need, I only crown kings with marks that I really like and keep only lionesses that I think look nice with the current male) this would almost certainly have a huge impact on my gameplay, and force my hand in moving to another method that I don't particularly want. Just my opinion, though, and perhaps something someone else brings up will change my mind will be curious to follow this idea as it progresses 0 players like this post! Like? |
Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)
Resurgent View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-05 19:48:08 |
So, now that this post has calmed down a bit - in the replies amount of new replies received, I mean - I'd like to post an apology of sorts. I never posted this suggestion out of malice, and I honestly thought it'd be a good solution for the market issues. I'm sorry I haven't replied to every one of you, but the amount of posts makes it a bit hard, because every time I reply to one there's three new replies. As far as I could tell from the amount of replies this has had, there's three main problems with the idea. The first is that it makes it harder to breed rare bases and markings, because certain bases - be it raffle only or others - have a significantly low drop rate even in the best of breedings - which are breeding the same base to the same base -, or because certain markings are introduced one in a slot at a time, which makes it so that the lions with that marking in that base are always related. This could be avoided if the idea of special studs outside of the Droughts Event was implemented, but I was unable to find anything related to it, so I guess it was taken down for whatever reason. The second is the stillbirth thing. I understand people don't want their cubs to die, specially if they've spent a lot in that particular breeding or they are particularly attached to the lions they bred. It'd upset me if it happened, but I thought this based on the belief that there are more cubs being born than the game can handle right now. And many of you will be thinking "Oh, sure, but you don't inbred, you hypocrite", but that's only now; non-inbreeding is a game phase, just like when you fancy colorful lions for a time and then try to breed other things the next, or suddenly want to breed more for stats than looks. The third, and the one that people have either loved or hated this suggestion more over, is the stat penalty. As I've said countless times before, I understand high-stat breeding takes a lot of a player - or players -, that the stud is only worth it for a brief period of time, and that no one is forcing anyone to breed to the highest stated studs, but at the same time, it was my understading this was in need of some kind of regulation or limitation? At least people complaining about it made me believe so. I don't think this was ever posted here by anyone - if it was, I'm sorry I didn't notice -, but there's been more than one case of people kind of abusing of the Rollover feature to keep their lions alive more than they would - Rolling over once every week, or every two weeks, and getting out of studding slots that very day, for example -, and getting a lot more out of them than what they would usually because of it. I love the Rollover feature. It let's us keep our things as they are, regardless of if we have the time to play everyday, every two days, or whenever. We can safely go on hiatus and come back to see our things as if it was only yesterday we last played. Perhaps others will see the practice mentioned above as a normal thing but, if it is between keeping the Rollover or implementing some other feature to prevent these pseudo-abuse - be it this suggestion, or any other that comes after - I'd prefer to keep the Rollover. Because right now, people can just Rollover once every week, while playing on another account if they wish, and even announce beforehand on the site when they'll Rollover the other account, and that doesn't seem fair, to me. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Bezthiel π (#81210)
Lone Wanderer View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-05 23:32:34 |
Huge leap into blaming the rollover system. Why isn't it fair? There's nothing keeping anyone else from spending their own money to buy stat foods, toys, train up a 2k heir and feed him stat foods and eventually get him up to 8k+ yourself if you really wanted to. And once again, that just takes time, for the most part. People who are going to put that time in may also have very busy lives and don't want to waste a month of game time of their kings life if they can't get that level, stat goal, or what-have-you in that rollover. For some reason this sounds very much like blaming stat breeders for how they choose to spend their time online. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Lunar Lords (#86479)
Brave View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-05 23:55:33 |
I can't agree with Bezthiel more. I have no idea why wanting to breed for stats is such a "problem" at all. No one says "you have too many mutants we must change it". 0 players like this post! Like? Edited on 06/04/17 @ 06:56:02 by Lunar Lords (#86479) |
Bezthiel π (#81210)
Lone Wanderer View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-06 00:00:30 |
I second that. I mean, I have 14 mutants in my pride. Every. Single. One.? Basically an accident. A piebald stud happens to have some markings I want. I got four piebalds out of him. My king has piebald just because I like the under-mark look of piebald light. He spits out piebalds like bad-candy. My side king pops out Primals like it's going out of style. But this isn't a problem? My actual hard work and effort towards stats is the problem? 0 players like this post! Like? |
Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)
Resurgent View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-06 00:02:45 |
@Bezthiel I'm not sure blaming is the apropate word...? Other sim games usually go with server time, which means that every day counts, no matter if you log in or not. The Rollover enables this practice with the permission to have two accounts per person. It doesn't seem fair because it means that you can get more of currency than you would normally. Does it take a lot of time to get there? Yes, but that doesn't mean it is fair. And I'm not speaking about people with busy lives, I'm speaking about those who would do it with premeditation and knowingly, to take advantage of it. Hipothetically speaking, what's stopping you from having a king you Rollover once every week, breeding however lionesses you do, having more cubs than you'd do normally, gaining a lot of currency, with which you can then use to override the offers of others because you keep up with things in the other account? And it goes on, and on, and on... That is what I see as an abuse, although the las ToS update addresses the power imbalance it creates already. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Lunar Lords (#86479)
Brave View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-06 00:04:50 |
Since EVERYONE has the same opportunity and the only one stopping them is themselves, how is it NOT fair? 0 players like this post! Like? |
xXDruidXx (#74535)
Nice Guy View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-06 00:08:52 |
I see where Berenos is coming from, because those who don't want to play their game that way are forced to play that way, or be sucked under the market as those who do play that way take advantage of it! No not everyone does, but it only takes a couple of players to do it. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Lunar Lords (#86479)
Brave View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-06 00:21:35 |
I'm not talking about the market, I'm talking about stats and rollover. Every stat "solution" I've seen has been proposed by someone who "doesn't get" stat breeding. You don't want to breed for stats, that's fine. But that doesn't mean the market is "unfair" just because people like and will pay for stats that you can't be bothered with. The administrators are already making a *huge* impact on stats by limiting egg yolk intake and even more by adding clan horde rotting. Do you hear me complaining about that? No. Because it's going to affect everyone in the same way. THIS idea is painting a target on stats and giving a boon to mutation breeding that they do not need and forcing everyone to go "clean" heritage or loose their hard worked for cubs. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Bezthiel π (#81210)
Lone Wanderer View Forum Posts Posted on 2017-04-06 00:22:39 |
No one is forced to play any way at all. For instance, I don't play all day every day on both accounts, but I still managed to get a sub up to 4.5k by only patrolling, from 1.6k. No stat food, no stat toys, just setting timers and pure time spent logging on to check hunts and patrols. If I'd wanted to spend currency, I could probably have gotten him on the leaderboard for more than just number of patrols. I spent 5 minutes max (every half hour) playing, went about my business, and used only a single account by myself to do so. There's really not as much of a limit as people want to pretend. And honestly, if I had to log in every single day to check up on my pride, I'd quit. I don't have the time or energy to devote every day to this. So I'm glad there's a rollover system, it means I can leave for a month or six if I want and don't have to worry about rebuilding just because I didn't have the time to play for a while. There are other games that use purely server time, yes. I've played them. I've quit them all in succession because I don't have that kind of daily devotion to pixels. 0 players like this post! Like? |