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 nยบ1 here" but not "insert inbreeding feature nยบ2 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)

Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)

Resurgent
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 06:36:53



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

๐Ÿ˜ธ Chonk ๐Ÿ˜ธ (#54568)

Deathlord of the Jungle
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 06:41:07
Fair enough about the markings, you are right. I like the idea that the mutations you would get would be truly negative ones like stillborns that nobody would want to breed for. Nobody should be rewarded for inbreeding.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)

Resurgent
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 06:43:42
@Locust

Of course! It isn't meant to be either a reward or a punishment. Just something else people need to weight out before taking the decision of breeding to this or that stud, while helping to regulate a bit the market, and realism.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?


Edited on 02/04/17 @ 13:44:14 by Berenos (#84593)

Heda Vampiric (#56702)

Prophet
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 06:44:26

Yes I saw that, but if you look I posted all of that before your reply was posted. You still have not actually acknowledged the Anti-Statter, pro-mutations argument I have repeatedly posted. Also, even if the chance for still born is higher than lethal, the fact that you want a higher lethal at all is my point. You could mass breed for lethals. Even more so, you can 1% + CRB + inbreed for even higher chances (Black stallion, breed that 1% in a single go.) The overall post, still, as I have tried pointing out multiple times, seems to be aimed at taking down stat breeders (Which wouldn't actually take down the guys up top, just us trying to get to the top because we would have to breed to many studs and sometimes the other studs are inactive or waaay to expensive (I have like 2 LB studs I breed to. If I had to breed to the others it would be too expensive), while bringing up mutation breeders. If anything this suggestion should JUST be something to take down stat breeders. The boost to mutation breeders is very unfair. If anything, and I still wouldn't support as I said before, it should be ONLY a stillborn chance. There should be 0 increase in mutation or lethality chances.




Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Raamiah [rolls on
Sundays] (#83061)

Deathlord of the Jungle
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 06:45:25
Of course there is no bad blood, Berenos! I think suggestions are wonderful, we get to all share our feedback on each other's ideas in a civilized and friendly manner! Some of the new suggestions - Like Locust's idea for a new personality - are really fascinating, too :) Whatever happens, I've enjoyed reading this thread, and I think your English is flawless... I would never have guessed that is isn't your first language! :D



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Lucifer~ 2.8k stat
harlequin! (#86490)

Deathlord of the Jungle
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 06:51:24
I work nights and sleep most of the day then repeat for 5 days and possibly 6-7 days if I do over time... I don't have the time to search for the studs to breed to, and there are some players who have a life outside of lioden {granted I'm sure most of us wish we didn't so we could spend more time here x'P} I've been working trying to save money to buy 440gb on my birthday :P that way I can try more stat breedings, but if this is implemented I may spend my money elsewhere :/

I don't think I'd like to spend my money for a chance of bad cubs or lower stats, maybe if the stats the cubs are born with are close to that of the parents, then I wouldn't mind the slightly lower stats :/

btw bro {crow} I still may not make enough money in four months for buying gb on my birthday, depending on my expenses, so any deal you wanted to make for some of that gb will have to wait until your birthday next year when I buy {possibly} you 440gb.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?


Edited on 02/04/17 @ 13:54:34 by ~LuciferThorne~| ~MAW~ (#86490)

Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)

Resurgent
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 06:52:42
@Heda RedBox

I apologize, this is getting such a response is so little time that it's taking a toll on me.

Regarding the higher lethal chance, I just thought of something "nice" to get out of this if it was implemented, while keeping it realistic and Lioden-friendly. I get that you think it is anti-statter and pro-mutation, but I didn't mean it in that way in the least. More like something a mature player could enjoy, a challenge when you weight if you want to risk it and try to breed repeatedly these lions amongs themselves to get the looks/stats you want, or go at a slower, much more secure pace. The stat-monsters need to be addressed nonetheless, and I sincerely thought this could be the way. It is thought to do so at a slow pace, I admit, but as I said, short of the admins modifying their stats, there's nothing I can thing of other than this to regulate the high stat studs. I get they worked hard to get there and all of the other reasons as to why you and others may think this is not going to help it any way, but the thing is, I do think it will. Those studs will eventually die off, have many miscarriages in the meanwhile - with many other cubs being normal-ish - and Lioden will have a system to prevent stat mosters to rise ever again, or at least, stave the off better than it's doing now.

And, again, the lethal mutation is meant to rise the chance of the mutation being lethal, not the chance of the cub being mutated overall.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Berenos|On hiatus (#84593)

Resurgent
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 06:56:47
@~LuciferThorne~|~MAW~

I don't know what else to say. I get it will be harder and another thing to adjust to, but I also think this would be a great addition nonetheless. The overhaul of the stat heritance system is another thing entirely, I'm not sure how changing it for this to be implemented would help the market any.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

๐Ÿ Detective (#19805)

Protector
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 07:02:14
In nature, it often can take 5 generations of inbreeding in lions before you start noticing issues. I don't really see the necessity of this for the game :)



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

IzzCake (#99827)

King Of Hearts
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 07:03:20
The roll already decides if the cub is to be mutated, I don't think that's where the problem is coming from with the lethality, if it's already decided the cub is to be mutated then the chances of it being lethal are raised because it is inbred. The stat decrease will not deter people from trying for lethals because they are either going to freeze them or let them die so ultimately stats will not matter. I think this is the problem everyone is referring to with the raised lethality, at least this is the problem in my eyes. If this was to be implemented I know a few people who would get lions and inbreed them continuously for a chance to get a lethal.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Whale Biologist ๐Ÿ‹ (#35355)

Pervert
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 07:04:45

@Berenos at the bottom of the main post, there are suggestions mentioning inbreeding or breeding an older lioness. Such as cross-eyed, toothless, clawless, etc. I think these mutations would be cute and I would inbreed with the risks stated to try and get them, as well as the possible detriments of the mutations themselves. Because, well I love mutations, like a lot of people do, and the drawbacks are heavily outweighed just by my love of the way they look.


I want to add, I support using inbreeding in animals. My parents have bred dogs for many years, and have many breeder friends. Inbreeding can keep very important traits and health aspects in your line. But like on Lioden, using the same stud all the time can be a big problem. With my parent's breed, there are one or two studs that everyone used, so now it is extremely hard to find a nice looking stud that is not related to them. If everyone still just bred to him and his offspring, we would eventually doom the breed to extreme ugly looks, health problems, short lifespans, infertility, etc. But instead we outsource to unrelated studs to keep things diverse and healthy. I think Lioden should consider this option, too. Just because we have no illnesses and can remedy infertility with chasteberry doesn't mean inbreeding doesn't affect us already, as many people have stated.

Having read some other people's opinions, I don't think stillborn should be implemented with the other affects. I too would be extremely unhappy if I used a lot of items and SB/GB to have a good litter and lost them because I chose to inbreed. I still support every other aspect, though. I think we threw 'keeping mutations expensive/rare' out the door when MoDs and passing mutations were added. I don't see how massbreeding NCLs to get primals is any different than mass inbreeding to get lethals or those suggested inbred muts, but please someone correct me if I'm wrong (other than that would be another bunch of cheap muts).




Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

Heda Vampiric (#56702)

Prophet
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 07:05:32

Once again, if you want it to be a suggestion to control stats it needs to be just that. While you are not wanting to increase mutation chance, it would increase lethal chance, which is all the worse. To quote myself as before;
"Even more so, you can 1% + CRB + inbreed for even higher chances (Black stallion, breed that 1% in a single go.)"

If you stacked chances like you suggested before I assume the chance for lethal would be even greater? That's worse.

In my very honest opinion, if you want to ruin the leaderboard studs, you need to do it in a way that is not helping those who just want to make money off of mutations. They can and will take advantage of that system and instead of having a broken stat system, I truly believe we will have a broken mutation system.

While I understand that inbreeding can cause mutations in real life, especially in 3-4+ generation inbreeds, this is not the way to do it. It is unfair in my opinion to boost one and tear down the other. It needs a single cause. Either have inbreeding cause lethals, or have inbreeding ruin stats. Not both.

Also, I really like the point Detective made.
("In nature, it often can take 5 generations of inbreeding in lions before you start noticing issues. I don't really see the necessity of this for the game :)")




Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

SlashNHack (#102040)

Kind
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 07:06:34
What even is a stat monster, is this a dumb question?



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

๐Ÿ˜ธ Chonk ๐Ÿ˜ธ (#54568)

Deathlord of the Jungle
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 07:12:19
Has anyone ever did a study on inbreeding effects on populations of lions? If so link to the data? I know in dogs and humans at least it only takes one generation to give a good chance for a negative outcome.

The researchers examined four studies (including the Czech research) on the effects of first degree incest on the health of the offspring. Forty percent of the children were born with either autosomal recessive disorders, congenital physical malformations, or severe intellectual deficits.Oct 11, 2012



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?

๐Ÿ˜ธ Chonk ๐Ÿ˜ธ (#54568)

Deathlord of the Jungle
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-04-02 07:17:34
I dont get how this suggestion would ruin stats. All it would do is force breeders to spread their studdings between a few different high stat studs instead of just one. It would make it more challenging, but it would also encourage more people to get into having high stat kings. Since the effects would only go back to grandparents, it really wouldnt be that hard to do.



Hrt Icon 0 players like this post! Like?







Memory Used: 668.66 KB - Queries: 2 - Query Time: 0.00055 - Total Time: 0.00516s