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 506 supports and 563 NO supports.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

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

Katia (#134163)

True King
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-17 03:51:56
No support because inbreeding is really only a danger if done continuously over multiple generations and/or done with extremely close relations like parent/child or sibling/sibling. In fact even having kids with your 2nd cousin will only slightly increase your chance of disabilities.
Source

In fact there have been studies that suggests that a small amount of inbreeding can even be healthy.
Source

On top of that this would make some marking even harder to pass on, for example did you know that there are only 8 active studs with feline 6 silky across all 4 color groups? This would also spell trouble for newly released special lioness markings since it would make it that much harder for them to spread out.

So with this in mind, from both a practical and a scientific standpoint, I can't support this.




Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?


Edited on 17/02/18 @ 04:01:30 by Katia (#134163)

Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)

Resurgent
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-17 03:59:15
@Katia

That actually makes me want to revamp the suggestion, but I'm not sure how that would go :'D



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Katia (#134163)

True King
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-17 04:01:53
What can I say? Science can be a bitch.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

🅱️oneless (#123346)


View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-19 10:56:34
I'm not a fan, as it would encourage people to inbreed, which.... a lot of people are not okay with. It's a repulsive practice, so the idea of doing it isn't really great. No support.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Vanii [Main] (#36229)

UwU
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-19 11:08:39
“Repulsive Practice”

Meanwhile me: https://www.lioden.com/lion.php?id=794114765388

I’ve always liked inbreeding as a concept to add or make changes to the game. Heritages and bloodlines should make an impact. Other games don’t even allow any inbreeding but liodens has been really...nonexistent.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Kitsune (#103569)

Sweetheart
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-19 13:08:09
No support, inbreeding is a bad thing as seen from the human perspective. Wild animals have very little care for inbreeding. Cats in real life will mate with their brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers ect. Lions wouldn't put up with cubs from other litters. If this game was more realistic all the cubs in our pride should die when we king a new king because that's what happens when a new lion takes over a pride. Inbreeding is a concern sure, but not only over time and when it is close, and only with specific genes. There are plenty of healthy very inbred animals and there are plenty of unhealthy inbred animals. Unless we are adding genes so we can responsibly breed inbreds and irresponsibly breed inbreds it's still not realistic. Inbreeding isn't just about how inbred an animal is it's the genes behind it and so many other factors.

One thing you have to put out there is mutations and malformations are just as common in unrelated animals as with inbred animals. It is the recessive genes animals have that you are bringing out that cause the health problems in inbred animals. One reason you could relate mutations with inbred animals is because it is easier to pass the same traits in related animals since there is less genetic variation. If you have a rare trait you want to bring to the forefront such as a natural mutation/recessive trait you have to eventually breed it with related animals just because that 'ancestral' animal is where you are getting the trait from. Although how related those animals are when they are bred varies.




Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Pain and Suffering (#93497)


View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-19 17:57:08
play the way you like but dont try to force it upon everyone.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

CaramelTurtles (#136947)

Interstellar
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-19 20:31:13
With a little revamping, this could work, I know it's not the same but some dog breeds are really really unhealthy due to breeding practices, as in, being very inbred, however, most of these breeds didn't get too bad until relatively recently (I wanna say Victorian era is when the breeding for looks started). So yeah, no support, the inbreeding should be rather extensive before stats and infertility become a problem



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

CaramelTurtles (#136947)

Interstellar
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-19 20:44:28
Also, to add to my last post, I'm not entirely against this, as this game is supposed to be semi-realistic, and inbreeding is not good for a species in the long run, as pointed out by others, it's just not as sudden as you breeding cousin lions and suddenly the children debilitating conditions, it's a gradual buildup of harmful recessive genes that are the problem here, as well as a lack of genetic diversity



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

ChaosDeath🐱 (#2790)

King of the Jungle
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-19 21:14:52
I literally keep 99% of my cubs, and rarely tree them. I don't enjoy buying because I like breeding my own inbreeding or not. I LOATHE this suggestion, and honestly I'm not part of the problem sorry. I'm not going to buy cubs because you try to force me to not inbreed, and making people have to find studs to breed their own while forcing min stud fees/limited slots/etc is just not right.

Plus some of that comment is condescending. How is other people's inbred lions affecting your own bloodlines? That's just... Don't buy those cubs, don't breed those kings, stick to people who agree with you. Simple as that. @Alexxi

This suggestion is likely to make the site feel hostile, and drive people off or make them at least re-think investing money in it. Trust me, as soon as a site feels too hostile in some way people's wallets snap shut or at least tighten. In this case, had one have to worry about investments being screwed over like that, especially for the reasons said, I know many who wouldn't bother with it at all.

Lioden isn't really realistic, it's just realistic enough to facilitate gameplay. That's it. Back in Alpha you didn't even have to feed or interact with your lions, but there was realistic bases/markings and there wasn't stat passing. And people got bored with that. Most of the changes haven't been realism so much as adding gameplay. Like sure, it's not realistic to not have to feed them, but I think they added them leaving because if not why even bother?

Alternatively, inbred or not has been established as more personal playstyle. If they wanted it to be like that, they probably should have established that sooner. At this point with the whole clean vs dirty debates, if the implement it it's going to look like they are picking a side tbh.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

bwa 🦑 mott
rose/sunrise (#118913)

Total Chad
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-19 22:11:45
If the lioden Moderators would have wanted to add this to the game awhile ago, they would have done so accordingly, but as you see, they haven't. If you haven't noticed, Lioden is CERTAINLY NOT a very realistic game. If it were, all the bases would be bases of BROWN YELLOW AND ORANGE. There are blue and green bases for gosh sakes! I play this game because I ENJOY it! I didn't play this game for the "realistic" aspect. It would change ALMOST EVERYONE'S gameplay style. There is also inbreeding in the wild as well. If you play this game with "clean" breeding sure go do so but don't waltz in around here and ruin my fun of playing this game. It's pixels for gosh sakes. It would be a whole nother thing with REAL animals but it's not! I respect your way of playing but don't force your playstyle on all of us, please. I want to enjoy my time here.
P.S. Edgar Allan Poe married his first cousin whence he was 27 and she was 13 so uhhhhhh



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Bezthiel 🍉 (#81210)

Lone Wanderer
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-20 05:57:12
Because I'm not actually against inbreeding having an affect, I've been thinking about this on and off. That comment by Katia reminds me: we do have some evidence of what happens when a population is extremely inbred!

We could always take a page from Cheetahs, Sea Otters, or Tasmanian Devils - they have fairly low reproductive success (already thrown around for an idea) and high adolescent mortality. Tasmanian Devils are so inbred that their cancer can't distinguish individuals and has effectively become contagious to them.

Add in an mechanic for our adolescent lions to die. The chance would be higher the more inbred a lion is, and there'd be an item (or possibly you could keep the adols under protection) to assure it's survival. Adolescence isn't a safe time for any predator, so just in general a small chance for adols to get into some trouble would be an overall realistic feature. And hopefully small enough not to really infuriate anyone.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)

Resurgent
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-20 06:12:31
@Bezthiel

Now that is interesting :O

I wonder how that would turn out. Adolescent lions don't seem "protectable" by broodmothers to me - I mean, they could, but I imagine lionesses would prefer to watch over the younger, more vulnerable offspring, plus teens would get to wander off, accompany submales on patrols or the adult lionesses on hunts. If the survival bar is still around for their teenhood, does this mean we have no way of protecting them those 11 months left until adulthood?

...We could take something else from real life, too, and add some kind of "group safety" to the adolescents. The more you have around, the lower the chance of them having an accident like cubs would, because it's not the same for other animals to take on a single teen than a dozen, but every lion could have a set "probability of survival" based on how much inbreeding got involved for their creation. It'd imply modifying how the survival bar works as a whole, but it'd be interesting :o

Would you mind sharing your thoughts, expanding your original idea for the teens and what you think on this, too?



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Bezthiel 🍉 (#81210)

Lone Wanderer
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-20 06:34:52
I was thinking of various ideas to implement. I know you used to have to protect cubs until they were 2, and if that coding is still attached to adols, it might be easy to let them be watched by broodmothers again.

Otherwise I had a thought that the various "interact" options could add more survival chance to adols, depending on which you choose - such as Tussle raising their survival more than their happiness, since your lion is teaching his kiddos how to fight/hunt in play fights. Or perhaps that taking adols out on hunts and patrols can help their survival (since they're, again, learning how to survive out there with the adults!), which might help encourage people to be more particular about the lions they want to keep as well. Cuz we still have a cub population problem, judging from those 300+ male cubs always at the tree.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)

Resurgent
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2018-02-20 06:42:55
@Bezthiel

The struggle to keep the survival bar the highest possible sounds like a good challenge! The different interactions having their own amount of Mood and Survival gain sounds really interesting, too, but I'm not sure how it'd be. It's true that tussling and playing often give a skill stat - because the lions are excercising and practicing their moves, I guess? - but for survival all the three sound good to me: playing would be a gentler form of tussle, where the lions practice mock-fighting each other, but wouldn't grooming be a healthy thing, too? You get rid of parasites, strenghten the bonds with others, that sort of thing. It sounds good for survival, too.

But I see now that the safety in numbers thing might only encourage mass breeding



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?







Memory Used: 669.13 KB - Queries: 2 - Query Time: 0.00136 - Total Time: 0.20838s