Oh no. I understand. No worries!

I was just trying to point out something I saw, that's all. And I know you're not being rude. I should have given a similar response to my own post. It's late here for me too. My post wasn't meant to be rude in anyway. ^^;

You have liked this post!

Note in advance: when I finished this, I couldn't think of anything to remove, but I wanna be clear that I'm not upset with anyone in this thread, or even with staff. I just want the definitions to be consistent, and the bases to fit their defined shades. So I went through and pulled sources as best I could.
Tordron, I understand what you're saying, but if that's how the staff chooses to define 'solid' and 'countershaded?' They need to explain it better on their own wiki. Right now, the wiki states them as the following, word for word:

"Countershaded colours are bases that have more than one colour in its makeup. They can include bases that have a dark topline and a light underside, or a light topline and a dark underside.

Solid colours are bases that are completely or nearly the same colour throughout the entire coat. Don't be fooled, though! Solid shades can have different colours, and even some shading details—they're just more "solid" all throughout."

By these definitions, labradorite, haze, and locust absolutely should not be solids, and yet all three are. "Completely or nearly the same color throughout" in no possible way describes Labradorite or locust: both are, as you mentioned, very light on the blending, but they are absolutely not the same color throughout even remotely. Countershaded's definition is, I will grant, far more open to interpretation, however: with solid defined so clearly, countershaded really is just 'everything that isn't solid' and that's okay!
What's not okay is staff trying to say that locust, lab, and other similarly multi-shade bases should be solid because it's easier, or unusual. Xylax himself even said this on a post about locust in particular, in response to someone pointing out locust is made up of 5 separate colors and fits countershaded's definition:

"With this we should put everything in CS and just put flat colours in solid - nobody wants that. I like to put soft and visible countershading with unders to CS and more unusual patterns to solid."

Obviously my issue with this is that nowhere on the wiki does it say that 'unusual colors' should go into solid. Which makes it harder on literally everyone. If countershaded should only apply to 'soft, visible countershading with unders' then what's the point of the countershaded category at all? Either the wiki needs to be updated with new definitions that explain why things like Lab are in solid, or the bases need to be moved; preferably, the latter, as the current definitions seem fine to me.

Okay, long rant over. If I could support this 100 times I would, because this really does irk me with each successive new base coming out.

You have liked this post!

support this <3 it definitely confuses me and I can't be bothered with breeding goals at the moment because I find genetics confusing to begin with and this even more confusing.

You have liked this post!

My only complaint is maroon should be a solid, nuummite and interstellar should go to countershaded

You have liked this post!

Interstellar and nuummite aren't countershaded though - they're speckled, but they're basically one solid colour in terms of the actual base tone. Maroon is pretty iffy either way - it's got a bit of a lighter undersides but it's not violently countershaded. That could be moved I guess but I'd say nuummite and interstellar belong in solid.

You have liked this post!

There's a few that, imo, fit both. Maroon isn't really solid, but it's not super shaded, either. I moved it for the sake of breeding, as it could go both, but it's more "helpful" in Counter (for Orchid and Sunrise breeding, specifically).

Interstellar and Nuummite, as Frightech said, aren't countershaded; they're speckled. The color under the speckles are pretty solid.

As I've said, I won't be moving anything, but staff can take everyone's inputs into it of they decide to fix the genetics.

You have liked this post!

While I dislike some of the places particular bases were put (tbh, lab. doesn't "belong" anywhere, and I'd personally leave it in gold for golden colorbomb breeders)...

SO MUCH--

"In fact I'm much more upset that we started the whole genetics haul to fix this sort of confusion and the Admins somehow defeated the whole purpose by placing bases in categories that don't even match."

No. Seriously. What was the point in several genetics rehauls, ruining projects over and over again, to end up with the exact same mess?

You have liked this post!

Lab's a mess, but the fact that it's predominantly saturated brown and blue, and both of those go into Black genetics, makes me believe it fits better into that group than it does Gold. I mean, the brown in it is pretty similar to Chestnut, and the blue is pretty close to Arctic, and they certainly fit into the Black grouping. It just "fits" better in Black than Gold, imo.

You have liked this post!

Alma already suggested this, but support anyway

You have liked this post!

Berenos, can I get a link? I couldn't find a suggestion like this when I posted it but I could have overlooked it.

You have liked this post!

I'm afraid we cannot share threads of others', but if you search "Iridiscent Gradient" it should appear right up :')

You have liked this post!

This bothers me so flipping much... like yes, obviously all yon tricolor random-as-heck bases are one solid/nearly solid color despite sporting blue, bright pink, and orange all at once. Totally.

*clicks support button, breaks mouse with force*

You have liked this post!

Berenos, I would argue that a genetic rehaul that works within the given categories is not the same as a suggestion that creates a whole separate category. They're similar in that both propose to change the way bases are placed, but one only requires the data of some bases be tweaked, and the other requires a massive coding overhaul to create a whole new category for those bases to be in.

I'm still not over Mobola and Topaz being solids....actually, all three NCL exclusive bases are solids, as I recall, and....Mobola and Dhahabi...are not.

You have liked this post!

Ah, that'd explain it. I didn't count that suggestion as being anywhere close to mine, because all I'm suggesting is to move bases about, not to actually add anything. I'll be keeping this up, then, since it's a completely different suggestion.

You have liked this post!

Oh, no, I didn't mean to say that in the sense of "this is a duplicate thing", but in the "this was suggested in another thread and still isn't a thing yet", I'm sorry for the misunderstanding :'D

(Also, Dhahabi and Asali are countershaded, only Mobola is solid currently)

You have liked this post!