F0, F1, F2... how do you label your generations?

[Mazzy]

I was perusing the trading threads, clicking on various eggs, and I noticed that many people label their generations incorrectly so I'm wondering if it's just done differently for DC or if people really think that's how you label "generations" (so that I can do it "correctly per the DC way")?

 

So - CB parents are NOT truly "first generation", they are Cave Born. In real life, we would label the specimens "F0" because they are the start, not a "generation" in the line. A "generation" by definition, must come FROM WITHIN the line. So the FIRST egg from CB parents is NOT "2nd gen" it's actually FIRST generation. But that's the way it's done in real life and so maybe not in this game.

 

And there in lies my question - in Dragon Cave, is the adding of a generation/calling the parents "first generation" instead of F0, the way it's supposed to be done here in DC or is it just that someone didn't know how to properly label gens and it caught on OR do some people label first egg from cave born parents 1st gen as is the correct format per real life labeling and some don't?

 

If people are doing it both ways then I'll just adopt the correct way of labeling generations (CB parents = F0 and first egg is F1, etc on down the line), but if everyone has adopted this other way of labeling generations then regardless of what I know to be correct, if that's the accepted format her on DC, then I'd just follow the crowd so as not to cause confusion, especially where trading is concerned.

 

Any clarity on this would be appreciated. TXS!

[emerald7fire]

Huh, I never knew that was how people IRL label generations. I suppose people decided to establish this system (CB as 1st gen) instead of the RL system, but knowing they were technically wrong. I'm not 100% sure but that's my take on it. It could be the other way as well, the trend that caught on.

[Sookan]

I did know this (as it's the way you number floors in a house; ground floor, first floor, etc.).

 

I believe in this interpretation, whether or not it is canon:

 

The dragons who produce eggs for the biomes are what you would describe as 'Ancient' dragons, if anyone recalls the Ancient spriting project. The progenitors of their respective species. They are the 'base', the 'ground floor' and 'F0'. The eggs they produce are their first generation, and although they are unseen themselves, they definitely exist (and are mentioned on every biome as well as the main page).

 

If you are talking solely about the trading aspect, then yes, most people have adopted the CB>2nd>3rd method of terming an egg's generation, and I do agree that it's wrong (and my personal way of thinking about it is just abstract).

[Mazzy]

Okay, great, thanks! I don't much care if people do it right or "wrong" in the game, I just want to make sure I do it per the way the rest of the gamers do it so that I won't be saying "no this is a first generation dragon" and the tradee is telling me "no, you promised me a CB egg when you said 'first gen' and now you're trying to give me a bred egg" kinda thing.

[JOTB]

I've always considered CBs to be F0 and mark their offspring as such (gen 1 has CB parents, gen 2 has CB grandparents, etc).

[Mazzy]

Hmm... then hopefully a few more people will weigh in because if it's just 'whatever an individual gamer wants to do' then I guess I can do it either way and they are both correct for the purposes of this game.

[Herk]

I would have used the CB = F0 method myself but the official counting like it's used on generation counters on fan sites and as TJ has confirmed in at least one post I read some time ago is that the CB's are generation 1.

 

And I've never seen anybody use it anyway in trading. So I would be pretty surprised and maybe even angry if I traded for a second gen and got a third gen (in DC terms).

[Obscure_Trash]

My ground floor is my first floor and upstairs is the second floor. x3

 

As is, my CBs are 1st gen and etc., which, as far as I know, is the standard on DC. ^^

[dragonpuck]

If you had a picture of yourself, your mother and your grandmother, you would call it a picture with three generations of your family

 

not two generations and grandma

 

In dragon lineages, the CB pair may be F0 but they still represent the 1st generation of the family tree

[Teez]

And I've never seen anybody use it anyway in trading. So I would be pretty surprised and maybe even angry if I traded for a second gen and got a third gen (in DC terms).

This, basically.

 

The "right" way for DC, based on what's used, just happens to be different from the right way of doing it IRL. I've never seen the offspring of CBs labeled as anything but 2nd-gens in trading threads and such, and would never label them any differently myself.

[Painter]

Yup, almost everyone considers CBs 1st gens. Occasionally you'll see someone calling a 2nd Gen a 1st Gen, but that's pretty rare.

[BlazingAces]

I've always considered CB's 1st gens because that's the way people taught me when i first joined DC. I've only seen it done in reverse a few times by people without a forum account.

 

The majority of DC(forum/trade wise) lists CB's as being 1st gens. The generation trackers also list CB's as being 1st gens in a lineage.

 

If you take a look at the trading forums you will see pretty much everyone there lists their dragons the same way.

 

 

[Ytak]

I know that technically that CB aren't first gen (took me a little while to understand that was how it was done for the game) but it doesn't really matter for the game so long as people use the same terminology, IMO.

[skauble]

I think that CBs count as gen 1 because we know that they came from parents (that's who we stole them from), we just don't know anything other than that. So, for trading purposes here I go with the CB = gen 1 option because that's how many people are going to evaluate a trade.

 

The only place that it gets tricky is with the upswing in popularity of deadlines. Most people will count the tombstones as gen 1 and then count up from there, but I think it's slightly disingenuous to present them as 2nd or 3rd gens without adding the "deadline" tag - but that's just personal preference because I've seen it done both ways here.

[Red2111]

when i started i'd considered any offspring from CB's to be 1st gen, because its the 1st gen they've produced.

 

but after a few trades here on DCF i revamped it to CB=1st gen labeling style.

 

that said, on my scroll, each gen has the coorosponding # at the beginning of it's name. CB's have no numbers', 2G have the #2 or some variations, ect. and inbreds don't get a name. makes breeding and remebering gens easier.

[Varekis]

not two generations and grandma

^ That part made me laugh for some reason.

 

~

 

I view my CBs as being the first generation - it's how I learned about the lineage system on DC. Plus I think it's just easier to look at it more literally. Since I don't deal with science, biology, breedings or whatever IRL, I've never heard of the F0 method so it wouldn't have occurred to me to apply that theory to DC and label my dragons as such. x)

 

So basically I just go CB, G2, G3, G4... etc.

[dragongrrl]

If you had a picture of yourself, your mother and your grandmother, you would call it a picture with three generations of your family

 

not two generations and grandma

 

In dragon lineages, the CB pair may be F0 but they still represent the 1st generation of the family tree

Totally agree! Grandma's generation is certainly not zero in my book, and the whole concept of a "Zero" generation has always seemed absurd, even if it has some use in genetic study.

 

CB is the first generation, because it is still a real generation.

[Mazzy]

Well thanks guys. I'll consider that "answered" - DC calls CBs F1 and so will I.

 

And on a related but not DC note - the reason the first set of parents being called F0 is because they are the first who's offspring will have no genetic variation when mated - their pups will always be genetically identical to the parents. The reason then for the 'F0' is that, in order to create a stable genetic line that won't ever throw a mutation in the mix, you must do at least 10 back-crosses (pups mated back to parents or to each other bro/sis style) in order to ensure that genetic stability. So, when you get to that 10th set of pups, they won't be a "generation" because they will be the absolute first that can start the new line of 'variation free' offspring. They will be the Founders of this new line so they have no previous generations = F0. ~shrug~ in case you were interested. lol

 

Oh, and of course we don't do that for humans so we'd never have an F0 grandma - we want the genes as spread out as possible for humans (or domestic animals). Plus, using the family photo as the reference, we say "a pic of three gens" (or however many are pictured) but not "a pic of first, second, and third gens" because grandma isn't the first, she's just the oldest.

[WraithZephyr]

I always label Caveborns as the 1st (F1) gen because they are the first generation from a pair of unknown/unseen wild dragon stock (F0). Being unknown/unseen the parents of the cb dragons are not listed in their lineage. Eggs do have to come from somewhere.

Edited March 18, 2012 by WraithZephyr

[Merenwen]

I always label Caveborns as the 1st (F1) gen because they are the first generation from a pair of unknown/unseen wild dragon stock (F0). Being unknown/unseen the parents of the cb dragons are not listed in their lineage. Eggs do have to come from somewhere.

that is what I think too

[Cirvihi]

I knew this as well, but I didn't find it very beneficial to use those terms on DC. When everybody else is labeling generations differently it would make it much harder on trades/projects/etc. to label them the 'correct' way.

[HollyTheColliegirl]

If you take a peek into trading, you will rarely ever see a "1st gen from Breed x Breed" because on here, F1s are most always Cb and therefore purebred. I also play on a horsebreeding game and they use the same CB = 1st gen kind of deal. It seems like internet breeding games don't use the standard RL labeling system, which is strange. It would be highly unusual to hear "1st gen" on either site, since they are CBs on here and called foundation [horses] on the other site.

[Ashywolf]

I personally don't label generations on my scroll.

 

In trade I go with the majority and consider CB as "1st".

[Ashes The Second]

I use CBs as the 'base generation' = the baby from the cb parents would 2nd gen.

[ArynChris]

I was perusing the trading threads, clicking on various eggs, and I noticed that many people label their generations incorrectly so I'm wondering if it's just done differently for DC or if people really think that's how you label "generations" (so that I can do it "correctly per the DC way")?

 

So - CB parents are NOT truly "first generation", they are Cave Born. In real life, we would label the specimens "F0" because they are the start, not a "generation" in the line. A "generation" by definition, must come FROM WITHIN the line. So the FIRST egg from CB parents is NOT "2nd gen" it's actually FIRST generation. But that's the way it's done in real life and so maybe not in this game.

 

And there in lies my question - in Dragon Cave, is the adding of a generation/calling the parents "first generation" instead of F0, the way it's supposed to be done here in DC or is it just that someone didn't know how to properly label gens and it caught on OR do some people label first egg from cave born parents 1st gen as is the correct format per real life labeling and some don't?

 

If people are doing it both ways then I'll just adopt the correct way of labeling generations (CB parents = F0 and first egg is F1, etc on down the line), but if everyone has adopted this other way of labeling generations then regardless of what I know to be correct, if that's the accepted format her on DC, then I'd just follow the crowd so as not to cause confusion, especially where trading is concerned.

 

Any clarity on this would be appreciated. TXS!

Lol. RL breeders generally hate this game. There are no recessive genes, inbreeding is frowned upon regardless of the generation it happened in, CB = 1st generation, and none of these creatures ought to be able to breed with each other due to size and obvious genus constraints.

 

To be clear, while it may or may not have anything to do with a misunderstanding of generation labels in reality, dragcave rules are thus:

 

0 gen = the imaginary wild dragons that spawn eggs in the biomes

1st gen = caveborn

2nd gen = child of two caveborns

3rd gen = child of two 2nd gens OR child of a 2nd gen and a CB

etc., the longest line in the lineage determines the gen.

 

 

Anyone who does it differently may or may not be confronted, but it's confusing and tends to quietly piss off traders who're just buzzing through threads quickly to find what they're looking for.

 

On my scroll, if I mark the generation, I tend to use Roman numerals. There are exceptions, but in general, I don't like digits mixing with words or names... unless it's l33t, but that's still rare on my scroll.