Jump to content

JavaTigress

Members
  • Content Count

    2,780
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by JavaTigress


  1. Happy Halloween to me! 

    XD

    I managed to catch a couple more CBs! 

    AND I managed to snag a few pretty bred eggs so! Locked now so time to hatch some before I head back out for more.

     

    ALSO the weeping angel treat is cute!


  2. 3 minutes ago, Lurhstaap said:

    No, there won't be any CB Vampires. There weren't last year either. They're not considered "official" Halloweens for some reason. Alas! I'd've snagged those too happily.

    This. I would have LURVED a chance at a CB vampire or two of my very own!
    Any one esle having absolutely ZEROluck at all catching CB s in the Biome, right now. XD

     

    I keep trying but FAILING epically to get anything I go for.


  3. On 9/29/2018 at 3:19 PM, olympe said:

    Well, fact is that at least some women feel regret after an abortion. Offering them help without enunciating all the good reasons for their decision isn't necessarily an evil plot to shame them. There are at least dozens of possible reasons for an abortion, but they are not what might make a woman seek out help afterwards. 

     

    Also, letting a woman listen to an embryo's hearbeat can be a way to drive home the point so many people prefer to ignore: Abortion ends a human life, no matter how developed. Personally, I'd rather have that point made before going through with an abortion instead of after, when someone else might point it out - maybe even your best friend who just happens to be happily pregnant and tells you about her own experience of listening to her unborn child's heartbeat. However, leaking personal information (your name, your desire to have an abortion performed) to other people, even significant others, is an absolute no-go and, at least where I'm from, would be punishable by law.

    I think @olympe makes a valid point here, @HeatherMarie. As even YOU point out, an abortion IS a very serious decision, WHATEVER your reasons for deciding.

     

    The very fact that the issue IS so hotly debated proves that it is COMPLICATED and fraught with emotion ( Whatever your stand on it)... should we be surprised if some women at least ( not necessarily all) have regrets or second thoughts about their choice? Isn't that part of the responsibility that comes with making choices? WHY is pointing out that those feelings MIGHT arise (And they might) necessarily 'shaming'. ( THOUGH I will agree that the discussion needs to be handled carefully OR else it could easily become so!) Is wanting women to be INFORMED about all of the possible consequences of their decision a bad thing?

     

    AFTER all... even IF you assume that an abortion is nothing more than a medical procedure ( leaving aside the ethical argument about it).... when a patient is proscribed a medication by their doctor, or they require some OTHER medical procedure, AREN'T they usually informed at that point of all the possible side effects and complications that COULD occur ( whether or not those happen to THEM personally)? Why shouldn't that be the case with an abortion, too?

     

    Again.... don't get me wrong, it is a discussion that DOES need to be handled with care, BUT necessary, I think.


  4. On 10/16/2018 at 12:40 PM, osmarks said:

    I mean... it'd be something... but would still involve throwing shards at a wall for a tiny chance at winning.

    This.

     

    I don't MIND so much placing my usual entry by doing things I would be doing anyway...BUT paying shards for extra entries, I dunno, it'd feel a BIT like buying a lottery ticket to me ( Which I don't DO because I feel pretty sure the odds are 'not in my favor')... giving up something DEFINITE for NO guarantee of winning. To add to that, also agreed with those that point out there would be likely frustration from those that DID dump a bunch of shards on the raffle and come up with nothing to show for it. I would be more in favor of INCREASING the number of winners drawn, OR perhaps even of allowing prizes to be for sale in the market ( IF TJ were agreeable to that), over this option which, seems to me, might spell more trouble than anything.

     

    At said, I DO think @pinkgothic makes a point.

     

    EXTRA entries I would oppose, BUT I think allowing a person to choose to use their shards to buy their entry ( ONE, SINGULAR) rather than collect a breed they don't want might be an idea. ALSO I second what @Starscream said about punishing those that cheat the system to get an unfair advantage ( IE- via multiscrolling or such like that!)


  5. 21 hours ago, animatedrose said:

    I'd be in support of a holiday AP. Not so much reducing the multiclutch size. Those extra eggs are good for spreading lines around and helping newer users get their hands on dergs that they might not be able to get otherwise. Especially since, last I checked, it's still not guaranteed that the holiday biome will return. I know 90% of my holiday dergs come from the AP because I couldn't get most of the CBs last year due to slow internet.

     

    I like the big multiclutch. I actually had a chance at getting some bred dergs that were, imo, impossible for me to grab CBs of in the holiday biome (like Hollies, RIP any chance of ever catching those in-biome). Less multiclutch means less breeding, less eggs in the AP, while the number of people grabbing them either remains the same or grows larger. I'd rather see a separate AP for holidays than see it reduced. Then there's no worry for regular eggs dying behind the holiday wall.

    This. Very MUCH this. ( THOUGH I am HOPEFUL for a return of the Holiday Biome!)

     

    AND I would say this goes ESPECIALLY if the holiday biome is to be an established 'thing'. 

    Because here is the thing!  If holiday dragons have their OWN special biome... why NOT their own SPECIAL AP?

     

    The beauty of it? A person could then hunt holidays IF they wished.... or ordinary eggs if they had no interest in them.... or EVEN a combination!

    It would allow players more possibilities and options which can ONLY be a good thing.

     

    So, in short, I support a holiday AP to solve the problem, NOT reducing clutches for holidays. They only get to 'reproduce after their kind' once a year, after all!

     

    As for the OP's suggestion about nixing the cooldown on newly adulted holiday dragons and increasing the breeding window...I would say I am of two minds about it. I can see why lineage breeders would like more time. AT said, I would ONLY support it in conjunction with a separate AP for the resulting eggies. AT way those that aren't interested aren't hindered. For NEW release breeds at LEAST I think the  'artificial' cooldown should stay in place. On breeds from previous years.... not so sure. Again, I can see why this annoys the lineage breeders as other breeds can be bred to produce eggies as soon as they adult.

     

     


  6. OK, I am unsure HOW big a problem this is for the majority of players BUT I thought that I would pitch this suggestion and see how it flies.

     

    What I would like is something BIGGER than that tiny little box we get for editing and writing our dragon descriptions. These are longer than our dragons' names, naturally.... so WHY do the boxes need to be so small? it makes it HARD to look for typos and grammar issues and such. I don't recall that it USED to be so tiny? AND Mind you this is on a desktop computer I am talking about ( It may NEED to be smaller on a mobile devise , for all I know.) As it stands NOW scrolling to look through what you have written is a PAIN, since the scrolling buttons are quite touchy.

     

    Anyone else care to chime in on this idea of mine?


  7. 1 hour ago, Awdz Bodkins said:

    You are clearly a better person than they are, as they wanted to troll you more. Most games have a "report" button for abusive players; if you encounter that one again, I hope you are able to use it. You deserve to be complimented for playing a game that most find challenging just to start. I wish you the best of luck and better company in future games.

    I surely WOULD have reported them... if I could have figured out how.


  8. *Sigh* Something is BOTHERING me and I need to 'get it off my chest'.

     

    Yesterday I was playing online chess, as I often enough do...so nothing unusual there.

     

    The trouble IS that the other player it pulled up as my opponent?
    Well, turns out they wanted to 'chat.'

     

    NOW normally i don't chat much while playing chess... I find it somewhat distracting and would prefer to focus on the game itself...anyway MOST aren't that chatty either.

    AT said, I am not necessarily ABSOLUTELY opposed to a quick,' Oh, Hi' , 'good move' or such as that.

     

    The trouble IS that this particular person very quickly became rather abusive

     

    Things like : " You must be the stupidest American to ever play chess".

     

    NOW mentally, of course, I realize that this individual is a TROLL and that the things that they said reflect more on THEM than on me.( AND as a matter of fact I TOLD them, flat out that they were a troll and I didn't see fit to talk tot hem any further... when they couldn't get anything more out of me after that, they then let the timer run out on the game.) The particular individual EVEN had the unmitigated GALL to ask me for a rematch! Ha! I very quickly shot that down. The problem is that it all sort of struck a nerve for me because I have said things mentally at LEAST as abusive to and about my own self. The truly bizarre thing? I don't LIKE it when those sorts of things are said to me by others and they tend to make me angry more than anything...but I almost half believe them when I say them about myself.

     

    Losses are bad enough, but I truly didn't NEED that.

     

    ANYWAY...Mentally I know I should be over it, but emotionally... I keep chewing on what was said.

    It's hard to 'let it go' when your own mind keeps whispering...."BUT what if they are RIGHT."


  9. 29 minutes ago, purplehaze said:

    People are entitled to their own opinion of things. No matter how amazing a dragon is there will be some who are not over the top about it.

    I have to admit I was a little disappointed myself when I first looked at it. I had expected something smaller from the size of the hatchie. Also all the hype about it from people who had seen it in DR and loved it had raised my expectations to an extremely high level. On looking at it a bit more, I do realize the detail and the artistry of it, but still will not consider it my favorite among the pygmies. Sorry if that offends. I do think that @Mewtie shows a lot of talent and has given us a lovely addition to the cave. I will be looking forward to more of her work in the future, certainly! Congrats on becoming an in-cave artist!

    This... is a fair point.I mean... NO dragon is gonna be EVERYONE's thing.

    There are always SOME who aren't as pleased with a  new release as are others. Just a fact of being an artist, I think.

     

    AT said, I DO get the point about pygmies being more difficult to do WELL because of their small size.


  10. 21 hours ago, cbussiere said:

    I'm REALLY liking the look of those pygmies. So detailed, well-colored, and well-proportioned for such a tiny sprite. It looks like really skilled work.

    It does! I already stocked on FIVE of their adorable little eggies! Two pair plus one!

     

    AND I grabbed a pair of gusties, too, so as for me I am happily locked with brand neweggies for the moment.... or not QUITE!


  11. On 9/27/2018 at 9:14 AM, Nat said:

    I can sort-of see the logic of banning fur from animals raised only for the fur, although I agree with everyone who thinks a better idea would be to make the fur-raising industry follow the  animal cruelty laws, rather than flat-out banning the product.

    This... is an interesting point!

    I mean.... IF there are laws governing the treatment of animals raised on farms( For eggs, milk OR meat!) WHY would those same laws NOT apply to a farm that raised animals for their fur?

     

    Doesn't make sense to me, QUITE aside from the argument over the ethics of using fur.

     

    AND I agree with what @RubyEyes said about it getting people to talking and thinking about it. I want to think the discussion CAN be a healthy one.


  12. 37 minutes ago, DarkEternity said:

     

    Lore of GoNs are directly based off Lugia and Lugia can canonically breed in the Pokemon anime. 

    Well... 

    Quote

    DragonCave is not Pokemon. There are similarities, sure, and some breeds do seem to take inspiration directly from Pokemon or other things, but that doesn't mean that DC should automatically do everything they do. DC is it's own game, with it's own universe and lore. It needs to be treated as such. If a suggestion is made it should be made because it would be beneficial to DC, not because some other game does it.

     

    edit: I thought I'd clarify, I don't mean 'not a good argument' for me personally. I mean for Suggestions in general. Threads in this section are generally taken more seriously if there is sound reasoning behind the suggestion, if the poster can give good arguments for why the thing would make sense for the game. Threads that are just 'DC should be more like this other game' usually don't get a lot of support.

    This states my thoughts pretty well.

     

    BESIDES which, even IF we go by " 'GONs' are Lugia "... I would assume that Lugia,being a very RARE pokemon, would only successfully give you a baby LUGIA a small percentage of the time.


  13. 6 minutes ago, DarkEternity said:

    I n f i n i t e  G o n  A r m y

    The only WAY this could be worth-while is IF the limits on them were lifted entirely WHICH I, quite frankly, don't see happening.

    Increased, maybe, but NOT lifted totally.

     

    The GONs are supposed to be very powerful and rare dragons, after all, so it makes sense if they aren't as common as some other breeds.

    AND it makes sense if the don't 'reproduce after their kind' the way other dragons do ( Or not often?)

     

    So... that is another nope from me.


  14. On 9/19/2018 at 11:24 AM, GhostMouse said:


    ... some people enjoy abandoning things to the AP on purpose and auto-abandoned vampires save them a step when doing this. I don't bite eggs often but I would be very sad if an egg I wanted to send to the AP instead vanished forever into the wilderness where no one could enjoy it.

    Even if it isn't what you intended, your suggestion comes off rather mean spirited, in a "if I can't have it no one can" kind of way. Also, many members who play don't use the forums and can't take advantage of the giveaway threads, and the trading hub isn't great for gifting, so the AP is really their only chance of getting a vampire.

    This. Very much this.

     

    I have no issue with the possibility of repulsing being possible. 


  15. 6 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

    @JavaTigress I bet you quite often DO have meatless dishes. Never have Mac and cheese ? Pizza Margherita ? Four cheese Pizza ? Scrambled eggs ? Spring Rolls ? Pasta Arrabiata....

     

    Many people - when faced with this subject - suddenly seem to feel that they have meat or fish with every meal. But we don't.

    That is very likely true. AS someone pointed out... some dishes are meatless by nature, while OTHER dishes can be made with or without meat ( like pizza!).

    AND as that same individual pointed out, some cuisines make far less use of meat than others do.


  16. For MYSELF, myself, personally... I am not a vegetarian,much less vegan ( unrepentant omnivore, here. ;) )

     

    THAT being said I don't think there is anything inherently WRONG with making that choice.... just that I don't think I could, myself, personally.

     

    I WILL also comment that I think the behavior of the 'meat-eaters'  that @Herk mentioned was pretty reprehensible.

    JUST because I choose to eat meat ( and dairy and eggs ) doesn't mean that there aren't other ways of thinking and points of view on the matter. People may have a variety of reasons for choosing NOT to partake in meat. AND IF I disagree with them it doesn't mean that I shouldn't' treat others who happen to think about it differently than I do with respect. In FACT, even IF I DO normally eat meat I wouldn't be opposed to TRYING the veggie dishes, necessarily. Who knows! If you try them you may even FIND that you actually LIKE some of those meatless dishes, whether you are a full time vegetarian or NOT. IMHO, they shouldn't have created so much DRAMA about it.

     

     


  17. 4 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

    I kind of agree about leather - EXCEPT that there aren't farms for leather like the vile fur farms, and on the whole, I believe most leather comes from animals who were slaughtered for their meat. On the other hand, leather is a major landfill problem, as it takes thousands of years to degrade.
     

     

    My SO is vegetarian and almost vegan but has to wear leather shoes as his feet go all horrible in synthetics. Most people I know who are in jobs where they are on their feet a lot say the same - especially nurses !

    I am not sure about furs, but as far as leather goes, I have no issues with its use.

    I always had the idea that , as @Fuzzbucket says, LEATHER primarily comes from cattle who were raised for meat anyway.

     

    It seems to ME that it is better that, if a cow is going to become a steak either way, the hide is put to some use.

     

    At said, if the leather itself is a landfill problem, It WOULD be good if we either had a better way of disposing of it .... or of reusing it.

     

    Furs... furs, as I said, I am less sure of.

    THAT said, it seems to ME that this law wouldn't stop someone who really WANTS a fur coat or such from going to another city to buy it.

     

    THEREFOR in my view sort of a silly law in that it achieves NOTHING. the people that don't believe in wearing fur are already NOT going to be buying it, and this law ISN'T going to change the hearts and minds of the people who believe it is OK to use fur and leather. 


  18. 3 minutes ago, Kith said:

    @JavaTigress

    Then there should be some sort of waiver available to absolve them of legal responsibility, should someone decide to sue after the fact. I had to sign one before getting my lower back x-rayed, just in case it made me sterile, so it's not like inserting that sort of paperwork into the preparation for sterilization couldn't be done... I don't know why it isn't already part of the process, really.

    That, actually sounds like a perfectly reasonable way to deal with it, to be honest.

     

    I am not sure why that ISN'T how it is handled , already, to be honest.


  19. 1 hour ago, Alrexwolf said:

     

    This is a very, very big thing also. I was recently at the doctors and, when learning of a sterilization procedure I had never heard of (that spares the uterus/ovaries completely), I asked more about how one would go about getting something like that done. I'm an adult. I am over 18, and can make legal medical decisions. Yet, I was told I was too young and that was the end of the conversation.

     

    I never want children. Any pregnancy would be unwanted. I can barely, in reality, care for myself - let alone another life. And, like some other people in this thread, babies seriously freak me out. Yet, because I'm young, I seemingly don't have a right to say what happens to my body. I can't get sterilized because I'm too young - there are plenty of people like me, over 18, who know they don't want children. Period. They don't have the option to get sterilized because, as Kith said, doctors are aggressive about it. Pro-lifers are aggressive about it. 

     

    Then they turn around and tell people who would have otherwise gotten sterilized if they had the option/were allowed but got pregnant on accident that they're irresponsible and murdering a child. THAT situation in particular really grinds my gears.

    To be FAIR , though, @Alrexwolf, that situation isn't really JUST on 'pro-lifers'.

     

    Matter of fact, I am totally in favor of someone being able to decide to be sterilized if they feel that that is the best choice.

    I have no problem with preventing a pregnancy BEFORE one exists.

     

    I think , more to the point, Docs are AFRAID that if they allow a person to go through with something like that, and that individual later changes their mind, well... that they will be held liable. People sue over some pretty silly stuff AND it isn't difficult for me to imagine this from the Doc's perspective. I am not saying you are WRONG about it being a problem ( I very much believe that it is... if a person NEVER wants kids and KNOWS they NEVER, ever will, why can't they make that choice? Certainly I find that preferable to abortion if/when pregnancy results.), just that docs may have their ( not totally pro-life related...) reasons for taking the stand on it they do... unfortunate though that may be.