Posted by Communication & Breeding Improvements

Heda Vampiric |
Clean Ebony (#56702)


View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-09-05 13:26:40
QY7YLF4.png


Edits:
1. I said gnawrocks passed at 100% at one point in parenthesis. My bad. It is at the parent opacity. My point still holds because none of the girls have the same opacities as the father for every marking.
2. Since this is now an image I'll have to re-give the links, which I shall do here:
Links are in order of appearance in the photo.

[My king]
[Lioness]
[Fail Cub]
[Other Lioness]

[Katze's Post]
^ This link will no longer take you anyplace. For some reason the thread was deleted. I'll say nothing of my thoughts on the matter. But that means there is now no public clarification on the topic (that I know of) other than this thread).

[Triple Celestial King]
[Daughter One]
[Daughter Two]
[Daughter Three]

I have edited in accordance to the the reasons the old was lost. Nothing from the old that was given as a reason has been included in here.




This suggestion has 245 supports and 25 NO supports.



Edited on 11/10/17 @ 10:33:39 by Heda RedBox (#56702)

cin☆vo h2hoe (#106573)

Ill-Natured
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 10:13:24
Exactly - it's a business. And a business depends on keeping their customers happy and willing to spend money on their game. And if they keep making background changes as you say that directly affect the gameplay and screw their customers over without telling us then how can we feel safe spending money on here? The less they communicate about changes the less comfortable people will be about investing money into the game.

Just because they are under no legal obligation to do something doesn't mean we can't complain that they aren't doing it. When I buy something from a store the cashier is under no obligation to be nice to me. They could legally be on their phone playing some game and not even glance at me as they check me out. But they don't. They say hi, how are you. They're pleasant not because they're under obligation to do so but because it helps the business when you do things that the customer wants and likes.


cin☆vo h2hoe (#106573)

Ill-Natured
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 10:19:35
I'd also add that just because they already have a system of communicating changes to us doesn't mean it can't be improved. First of all, as has been said before, news is disorganized. The titles oftentimes don't indicate everything that's in the news post, so searching through the weekly updates for one particular piece of info is frustrating. Secondly, they aren't utilizing the news to give us certain information that has subsequently fucked over multiple people. Katze herself said that the information hadn't been posted anywhere on the site. And that she didn't even know about until she asked. thats an indication of severe lack of communication not only between the staff and the users but also between staff.



Edited on 10/10/17 @ 10:46:33 by cin✨siderealfelis (#106573)

Axel (#6627)

Pervert
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 13:44:39
But why, though?

I dont understand why someone would want the exact same markings in multiple slots? I for one would be devastated if my cub ended up having two gold sable markings, instead of giving me two different ones. It just makes no sense to me. Two markings of the same color will not make a visual difference. (The only exception is brindle that I know of)

Although I do agree with the communication part, I cannot support the wish to bring the old system back. To me it looks like a step backwards.


Maiq the Hoarder (#92244)


View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 14:02:20
Panther is not solid and two copies of clay panther would make the spots stronger without changing the color. That's why I wanted it.

The real point is that they didn't tell us we could no longer breed something we could breed before. Which has made a Lot of people unhappy. Making the customers unhappy is not a good business practice.


Anonymous (#44152)

Demonic
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 14:05:16
@Axel

Sometimes it can help make a marking stand out more than it usually would and also sometimes people just want multiples of the same mark. Also sometimes it's not the same color (they may want the marking in every color it comes in on one lion) it can be a challenge and many players thrive on the challenges they set for themselves when it comes to breeding.


Axel (#6627)

Pervert
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 14:07:04
The real point seems to be about bringing back a system that honestly I dont agree with.

Maybe the two should be in separate threads?
I do support a more detailed 'patch-notes' but I ain't supporting the rest.
I cant support this without needing to support the other.


Typhon {F1 NOCTIS RL
CLONE} (#41384)


View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 14:39:15
If you don't want two of the same markings on a lion, don't breed two lions together with that markings in two different slots. I don't understand why that's so hard for people. Just because you don't breed for it doesn't mean others haven't poured hundreds of GB into it. I don't breed for dwarves or lethals or shiny new markings, but other people do and I respect their preferences. How would you feel of something you'd been breeding towards and had poured all your resources into was suddenly not able to happen, with absolutely zero warning or mention?


cin☆vo h2hoe (#106573)

Ill-Natured
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 14:41:10
We've said multiple times - this isn't about WHY someone would want double markings. We've provided numerous examples of markings that aren't at a high opacity to begin with and I would say that nearly all the markings change when doubled/tripled/quadrupled except maybe zebra and nim.

I don't "agree with" people breeding nimravus marks onto lions. I think it's ugly. But if (and this is a tough metaphor I know) for some reason Lioden was like hmmm we're gonna make it so nimravus doesn't pass anymore but we're not going to tell anyone. I would support a suggestion to bring back nimravus breeding because I think it would be shitty to screw people with projects over without even informing them the system was changing. I also support having aspects of lioden that others enjoy, even if I don't. This applies to tons of things on the site.

"I for one would be devastated if my cub ended up having two gold sable markings" would you really be devastated though? It takes 1gb to remove a marking. In order to get two of the same markings on a lion now it costs however much two ochre gnawrocks is going to cost at any given time. And it will never pass onto cubs. Which is a bigger inconvenience?

for me, the suggestion to change it back is about giving players the freedom to choose how they play the game. More importantly, giving players the freedom to play the game how they used to before it was changed without notification.


Blazi2 (#110355)

Magnificent
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 15:07:00
@axel

I'd like to further give an example of this. I personally don't like primals. To me they are completely out of place with the rest of the lioden mutations and semi-realism straight into the fantasy . I also think they feed the complex of your animal being bigger and badder than their usual animal dimensions. I hate the primal hype and how many primals there are on the site.

But if suddenly no primal studs were producing primal offspring no matter how much GB was spent on pennyroyals because they put an end to primal breeding without saying anything in the news post, that would be messed up. If someone made a thread saying to bring them back and improve on communication, I would support, because this isn't about my personal likes, its about being transparent and respecting the members who pay money on here, especially when they aren't hurting anyone or breaking any rules.

Primals would be perfect for marking stacking seeing how every marking looks so faded on them. Instead of having a bunch of markings, I would have one with 2 or 3 with actual high opacity like it looks on normal lions.



Edited on 10/10/17 @ 15:08:14 by Ningoat (#110355)

cin☆vo h2hoe (#106573)

Ill-Natured
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 15:08:09
Also do we need more examples of how double markings makes a visual difference lol??

It's super easy to just go in wardrobe :P

But let me just provide some for those who can't wrap their heads around it:

one web
two web

one shine
two shine

one vit 6
two vit 6

one cream rosette
two cream rosette

one gold panther
two gold panther

one chocolate freckles
two chocolate freckles

one cream margay
two cream margay

one f8silver
two f8silver

And finally, may I present to you the masterpiece that is: Ten Onyx Rosettes

Z4jgCtD.png

She completely disproves the idea that multiple of the same mark on top of each other makes no difference. Lol.





Axel (#6627)

Pervert
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 15:21:53
It isnt the same as hating a marking because you think it is ugly. You just dont get the marking. But I do get stuck with multiple same-mark cubs I didnt ask for. Sure, I could waste GB to replace the marking with something else but what if I was aiming for a breed-only marking -or a very rare applicator marking-, which I cannot pay GB for to get onto the cubs? Instead, that slot is taken up by the duplicate marking.

So no matter what, both sides have a good argument.

But you must understand why the developers have changed it.

Most of the markings seriously dont change visually if you apply them 2-3-4 times. Those that do change become entirely different markings than what they were intended to look like. If you want them look stronger because you like it that way, make a suggestion about it and make it a new marking or ask them to change the current one.

Like I did. I dont like it how the brindle markings look on males -they are too faded so I would need multiple of it to be visible but that would waste a slot I would need for yet another marking- so I made a suggestion thread and Xylax told me they might consider it if enough people want it.

Some markings are intended to look faded. And if you want them stronger, you got to either do extra work, ask for a change or ask for a new version.

They simply didnt want to burden players with being stuck with 2-3 markings of the exact same color because logically, people want as many kind of markings as they can get to style their lions. If I look around, only a handful people are doing same-mark projects compared to the entire playerbase.

Maybe suggest that the gnawrocks should be divided into more events to make them less expensive and more common, allowing you to still breed multiple markings without increasing expenses too much.

See it as an opportunity. Having multiple marks of the same color on one stud increases the odds of giving one to the resulting cubs -since I think slots roll separately, so even if one slot fails, the other can still roll successfully. This will make double-triple marks far more valuable as time goes, allowing you to increase prices to cover the expenses.

Again, I do agree with communication issues and that it is an important problem that needs solving but I simply cant see the point of the rest for reasons I have stated.



Edited on 10/10/17 @ 15:24:09 by Axel (#6627)

Typhon {F1 NOCTIS RL
CLONE} (#41384)


View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 15:26:13
Once again, you literally don't have to breed those marks together. Just don't breed 2 lions with the same mark in different slots if you don't want that marking twice, it isn't difficult. It takes 30 seconds to check the markings. If your lioness and king have the same mark in different slots, find a stud to use for the lioness.

It takes more work and time to breed lions with the same marking than it does to just not do it. If you don't want to breed something, wow, good for you, don't do it!


Heda Vampiric |
Clean Ebony (#56702)


View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 15:35:52

Adding on to what Typh said, even if there was a circumstance where you bred parents that could result in a double marked child; you're not guaranteed. They were hard enough to breed when it was actually possible, hence their rarity. This is especially true if your king has a marking in the female's double marking slot since 9 times out of 10 the kings marks will fill the spot instead.




🦓 E-quagga 🦓 (#105402)

Buzzkill
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 15:50:27
It's really not that hard not to breed to a stud if you don't want a dupe of a mark he shares with your lioness . . . ? People avoid much harder traits. I, for example, do not like diabolic mane. At all. But, it's everywhere. I'm not the only person with a passionate dislike of it, either, but I nor anyone else is clamoring for its pass rate to be slashed. I just don't breed to studs with that mane - even though it means skipping half of the studs in a search sometimes!

Gnawrocks were valuable before, they'll still be valuable even if multi-pass is restored. People use them primarily for things like mottled rosette and rare raffle marks to avoid wasting high stud fees on fails, or to ensure particular combos. Since without multi-pass, you can only pass two copies of a mark (one per parent) to a cub, people who enjoyed breeding for 3+ copies aren't going to start spending GB to snatch up gnaws. . . because they still can't do what they want with them.

Look at it this way. If you want a mutie, your best bet is to shell out and acquire a 1% lioness, a CRB, a GMO cow, and buffy balls. However, if due to what month it is some of those things are out of your price range, you can still give it a whirl breeding VLFs with no items and your fingers crossed.
Everyone who wants a mutie has a shot at breeding a mutie.

So why can't everyone who wants a multi-mark have a shot too? It doesn't matter if you don't want one - there are people who don't want muties either - it's simply not fair to not let everyone have some chance of playing the game the way they want to.
Especially since we once were able to do it.
If it absolutely has to be more difficult to pass every single mark multiple times without a gnawrock so it's more like mutie breeding, then change the passing rate of successive marks. Give each copy of a mark that rolls to pass after one copy has already passed a chance to fail to an empty slot, or somethings . Just don't completely tank the chance - no other trait in the game has a 100% fail rate without a special item except for mutations that have never been able to naturally pass in the first place.


cin☆vo h2hoe (#106573)

Ill-Natured
View Forum Posts


Posted on
2017-10-10 15:51:13
"But I do get stuck with multiple same-mark cubs I didnt ask for."

I think you are severely overestimating the number of times you would be confronted with this problem.

First of all, when the old system was in place, there were no complaints about double markings. As far as I know there was no big movement to change the system. Doesn't that indicate that there wasn't a problem to begin with?

Secondly, with the way the marking system works, you would never get gold sable twice in place of another mark you wanted. Let's say you had a stud with gold sable in slot 3 and celestial speckles in slot 8. You have a lioness with celestial cover in slot 3 and gold sable in slot 8. The king's markings roll first. So one possibility is that gold sable slot 3 is yes from the king, but celestial speckles doesn't pass. Then, the female's markings roll. There's already a marking in slot 3, so celestial cover doesn't pass from the female. Slot 8 is free, and gold sable happens to pass. You end up with a cub with two gold sable markings. But in no way was the ability for two of the same markings to pass to blame. With the new system, let's say the same thing happens. The king's slot 3 gold sable marking passes but celestial speckles doesn't. Slot 8 is open. The female's gold sable slot 8 marking rolls but is blocked from passing. Slot 8 is empty. Another scenario - the king's slot 3 gold sable passes AND the slot 8 celestial speckles passes. The female's gold sable slot 8 cannot pass because the king's mark has already taken that spot.

See? Either way, new or old system, a second gold sable cannot replace a marking your looking for.

The only way I could see it happening is if you use a stud with two gold sables. In which case, I don't think I need to go on about how incredibly easy it would be to avoid studs with double markings.