Remote Biomes

[olympe]

Total agreement from me, too.

 

Regarding keeping biomes unlocked: I totally, wholeheartedly agree with that. Even if, though another release, you don't fulfill the unlocking requirements any more, once you have unlocked a remote biome, it should stay unlocked.

 

(How can a release cause you to not fulfill the requirements any more? Imagine you unlocked a remote biome (remote_alpine, for example) by collecting one of each breed from the basis biome (alpine, in this case). Now, two new breeds are released in alpine. Two breeds you don't have yet. So you don't have all breeds from alpine any more, right? Still, you know the way to remote_alpine, and you won't forget how to get there because of a couple of new dragon breeds.)

[Fuzzbucket]

Total agreement from me, too.

 

Regarding keeping biomes unlocked: I totally, wholeheartedly agree with that. Even if, though another release, you don't fulfill the unlocking requirements any more, once you have unlocked a remote biome, it should stay unlocked.

 

(How can a release cause you to not fulfill the requirements any more? Imagine you unlocked a remote biome (remote_alpine, for example) by collecting one of each breed from the basis biome (alpine, in this case). Now, two new breeds are released in alpine. Two breeds you don't have yet. So you don't have all breeds from alpine any more, right? Still, you know the way to remote_alpine, and you won't forget how to get there because of a couple of new dragon breeds.)

Absolutely once unlocked they have to stay that way.

 

And I also agree with Twilit. Though this is still not something I am wild about, to put it mildly !

[olympe]

I can understand your skepticism - to put it lightly. But on the other hand, we have so many really awesome concepts on the completed list that totally deserve to be released. About 500 finished concepts, and about 80% or more of them are totally up to new DC standards - as far as I can tell. That's still 400+ concepts.

 

Now, we only have 6 biomes, some of which are close to being cluttered up with mostly blockers. Once a biome reaches around 50 breeds, it will be as random and bad about blockers as the cave was before biomes were implemented, so adding dozens, not to mention scores of dragons within our existing biomes is a very bad idea, as it would represent a step backwards: It would combine all the drawbacks of biomes (some moving very slowly due to less players being concentrated there and blockage) with all the drawbacks of the old cave (which was often moving very slowly due to blockage). The only way to release a substantial number of breeds into DC is to implement new biomes.

 

Now, it would be a possibility to simply make new biomes available for everyone, and be done with it. But, as you mentioned yourself early in the discussion, people can get overwhelmed with the number of breeds we already have, and adding many more won't help any. However, if we let people play the current version as some kind of basic version first, and let them discover the extra biomes later on, they won't get hundreds of breeds dropped onto them, but can discover new ones at their own pace. It will also give older players more to do than wait for new releases and work on lineages. I'm not saying that either goal is a bad one, but it's not all there is to DC, and the excitement of the first few weeks and/or months that we experienced when almost every egg was totally new to us and would grow into an exciting new adult dragon - they're long gone. We still get a hint of that excitement when there's a new release, but 2 (or 7) breeds won't keep us busy for more than a couple of days or weeks. However, discovering a brand new biome with 20+ new (common!) breeds would be like discovering DC all over again. Personally, I'd love it. I kind of miss the old days when every egg was worth looking up (on a German site that was later taken down, when these kinds of sites were still forbidden by DC policy).

[Pokemonfan13]

I remember someone mentioned having even MORE biomes to unlock behind the initial set. I think that would be really cool. Maybe 6 months or a year after the initial biome release [enough time for people to get the hang of things and maybe finish collecting the new dragons] another set with harder requirements is released.

 

And I like the idea of each biome unlocking individually rather than hitting a single requirement and unlocking them all at once.

[Ashes The Second]

I remember someone mentioned having even MORE biomes to unlock behind the initial set. I think that would be really cool. Maybe 6 months or a year after the initial biome release [enough time for people to get the hang of things and maybe finish collecting the new dragons] another set with harder requirements is released.

 

And I like the idea of each biome unlocking individually rather than hitting a single requirement and unlocking them all at once.

if this was implemented, i agree, although i don't like this idea on the principal that you would have to edit your playstyle, however mildly, to obtain these, although if it were the 'gei all of the dragons from each biome & have the biome stay unlocked even AFTER you remove the dragons that unlocked the biome', i would be perfect with that. i have always wanted another reason to collect.

[Pokemonfan13]

I'd personally say it is totally reasonable to have the biome stay unlocked when you release the dragons that unlocked it.

[Ashes The Second]

I'd personally say it is totally reasonable to have the biome stay unlocked when you release the dragons that unlocked it.

could it be tweaked to be able to have an option of adults or hatchlings (frozen) to obtain the biome? i would be a-ok with that, and it would have my full support.

[Fiona]

May I respectfully suggest again that making the requirement a % of the breeds in a biome is not a great way to set the requirement for access?

 

Let's say that there are currently 20 breeds in a biome and the requirement is having at least one of 80% of the different breeds that drop there. That means a person would have to have 16 different breeds from that biome. However, maybe they don't like 16 different breeds from that biome. Maybe they only like 2 of them. You're forcing them to take breeds they don't want just to have access.

 

Further, say that 3 years down the road there are no longer just 20 breeds in that biome, but 26 breeds in that biome. Now, instead of having to collect 16 different breeds, a newer player must collect 20 or 21 breeds. Their requirements are higher than the people who gained access when the remote biomes were new. That's hardly fair, and it's likely that the number of breeds in each biome will continue to grow.

 

However, if a flat number of dragons from each biome is required, as I suggested earlier, the first scenario is no longer an issue. If a person only likes 2 breeds from a biome, they can still get access to the remote biome by collecting more of the breeds they do like. And people who like to only collect a couple of each breed aren't locked out either because they are more likely to collect 2 of each breed, so they still are able to get the required number of dragons without changing their play style. The actual number of dragons each person must collect to gain access is similar; just the exact requirement is more flexible.

 

Also, the second issue goes away. The requirements for access are based on a flat number, so increasing the number of breeds in a biome has no effect on what people have to collect to gain access.

 

My suggestion was 10 dragons that drop in that biome to gain access. That number isn't hard and fast. 15 or 20 would also work.

 

 

-- I really wish you guys would stop skipping right over and ignoring my posts here. It seems like every time I post something here someone from the "I have my own ideas and so I don't care about your ideas" camp scurries back in, and makes sure the discussion gets moved back to the way they think they want it, and ignore everything I've said. My points get buried and get dropped out of the discussion that way. It's frustrating.

Edited May 7, 2013 by Fiona BlueFire

[Spelunker]

May I respectfully suggest again that making the requirement a % of the breeds in a biome is not a great way to set the requirement for access?

 

Let's say that there are currently 20 breeds in a biome and the requirement is having at least one of 80% of the different breeds that drop there. That means a person would have to have 16 different breeds from that biome. However, maybe they don't like 16 different breeds from that biome. Maybe they only like 2 of them. You're forcing them to take breeds they don't want just to have access.

 

Further, say that 3 years down the road there are no longer just 20 breeds in that biome, but 26 breeds in that biome. Now, instead of having to collect 16 different breeds, a newer player must collect 20 or 21 breeds. Their requirements are higher than the people who gained access when the remote biomes were new. That's hardly fair, and it's likely that the number of breeds in each biome will continue to grow.

 

However, if a flat number of dragons from each biome is required, as I suggested earlier, the first scenario is no longer an issue. If a person only likes 2 breeds from a biome, they can still get access to the remote biome by collecting more of the breeds they do like. And people who like to only collect a couple of each breed aren't locked out either because they are more likely to collect 2 of each breed, so they still are able to get the required number of dragons without changing their play style. The actual number of dragons each person must collect to gain access is similar; just the exact requirement is more flexible.

 

Also, the second issue goes away. The requirements for access are based on a flat number, so increasing the number of breeds in a biome has no effect on what people have to collect to gain access.

 

My suggestion was 10 dragons that drop in that biome to gain access. That number isn't hard and fast. 15 or 20 would also work.

I think your idea is great, Fi. A flat number of dragons would be good.

 

(I'd ideally like it combined with a time-in option, so a minimum number of dragons plus x amount of time gets you in, or more dragons = faster access.)

 

 

Here's the million-dollar question- how do breeds that drop in multiple biomes count?

 

[Fiona]

That's a good question, and one we haven't really dealt with. My view is that it doesn't matter what biome they are actually caught in, they still count. Because why would it really be a problem if people got access a little faster? They are still working to obtain access, and we really don't want access to be very restricted.

 

It would also be possible to only count breeds that are unique to that biome. The problem with that is that there are more breeds that drop in multiple biomes than there are breeds that are unique to one biome. So only using breeds that drop in that one biome severely limits the breeds that would count. I don't know as that's a good choice to make, especially as the breeds most apt to drop in multiple biomes also seem to be most likely to be blockers.

 

TJ has said something somewhere about coding things so the cave can keep track of which biome an egg is picked up in, but then how are breds and ap catches figured? I do think those should count too.

 

and of course, the advantage of combining a time based option with the collection option is that even if a person is extremely selective in what they collect, they still will be able to have access at some point.

Edited May 7, 2013 by Fiona BlueFire

[Spelunker]

Hmm. If the cave could retroactively keep track of where dragons came from, then the egg could "inherit" one of the parent's home biomes.

 

Or, it could be randomly assigned.

 

Or bred eggs don't count, since this is about going deeper into the cave. If you're sitting at home breeding dragons, you aren't exploring, and aren't becoming comfortable enough to go deeper.

 

My vote is that bred eggs and AP catches don't count.

[_Sin_]

-- I really wish you guys would stop skipping right over and ignoring my posts here. It seems like every time I post something here someone from the "I have my own ideas and so I don't care about your ideas" camp scurries back in, and makes sure the discussion gets moved back to the way they think they want it, and ignore everything I've said. My points get buried and get dropped out of the discussion that way. It's frustrating.

I'm Mr. Nobody and my opinion does not count but I would like to let you know that I think that your suggestions are between the best, if not the best ones. They sound fair and balanced. Thank you for providing them.

[Completely Different]

I totally agree with Fi. You can't go with percentage of breeds in a biome, because of all the reasons listed. A flat number is best (though I'm in favour of a time element as well to give players more versatility as well).

 

As for whether or not bred eggs count...I don't really think it matters either way. While I agree that from an RP standpoint it might not make as much sense, I think for simplicity's sake it would be okay for bred and AP eggs to count to the limits. After all, CB eggs are already fairly desirable, no need to add to that.

[Fuzzbucket]

May I respectfully suggest again that making the requirement a % of the breeds in a biome is not a great way to set the requirement for access?

 

Let's say that there are currently 20 breeds in a biome and the requirement is having at least one of 80% of the different breeds that drop there. That means a person would have to have 16 different breeds from that biome. However, maybe they don't like 16 different breeds from that biome. Maybe they only like 2 of them. You're forcing them to take breeds they don't want just to have access.

 

Further, say that 3 years down the road there are no longer just 20 breeds in that biome, but 26 breeds in that biome. Now, instead of having to collect 16 different breeds, a newer player must collect 20 or 21 breeds. Their requirements are higher than the people who gained access when the remote biomes were new. That's hardly fair, and it's likely that the number of breeds in each biome will continue to grow.

 

However, if a flat number of dragons from each biome is required, as I suggested earlier, the first scenario is no longer an issue. If a person only likes 2 breeds from a biome, they can still get access to the remote biome by collecting more of the breeds they do like. And people who like to only collect a couple of each breed aren't locked out either because they are more likely to collect 2 of each breed, so they still are able to get the required number of dragons without changing their play style. The actual number of dragons each person must collect to gain access is similar; just the exact requirement is more flexible.

 

Also, the second issue goes away. The requirements for access are based on a flat number, so increasing the number of breeds in a biome has no effect on what people have to collect to gain access.

 

My suggestion was 10 dragons that drop in that biome to gain access. That number isn't hard and fast. 15 or 20 would also work.

 

 

-- I really wish you guys would stop skipping right over and ignoring my posts here. It seems like every time I post something here someone from the "I have my own ideas and so I don't care about your ideas" camp scurries back in, and makes sure the discussion gets moved back to the way they think they want it, and ignore everything I've said. My points get buried and get dropped out of the discussion that way. It's frustrating.

I agree with you. I don't like the idea anyway - but a flat number is way better than a percentage of breeds, for all the reasons you cite.

[whitebaron]

I'm getting back to the quest idea like Olympe presented, and just want to ask: what do we need as "concepts" to get most playstyles covered?

 

We already know:

• Versatility (amount of different breeds)
• Biome Quantity (amount of adult dragons from a biome)
• Activity (actually going hunting)
• Overall Quantity (amount of adult dragons total)

Versatility should cover all the "Complete your Set" Collectors, if the amount per breed is set to 2 for basic requirement.

 

Quantity would cover the Hoarders, and even though they might only want to hoard one breed, thus might only ever be unlocking one biome, why would they then care? Their reds/pinks/neos/albinos will still drop in the old biomes anyway.

 

Activity should cover everyone who is just out of luck, or does not want to collect many more dragons.

 

Overall Quantity is being discussed as doubling up on trophies, and as thus might not be a good idea.

[ulki]

Maybe we can add something to activity:

 

visiting a biom a couple of days. Like if you have been there (not pickt up anything, only being there and lookign araound so to speak) a total time of 30 Days (not in a row), you know your way around enough to finde the remote biomes.

 

So you need some kinde of activity, log on to the site klick on a biom link, but you do not need to find special dragons, or get them if you do not want to have them.

 

We can discuss what amount of days you have to have visited a biom, to know your way. But I think this would be a way that does not restrict any playstyles. So maybe as an addiditon to the other ideas?

[Fuzzbucket]

We do need a variety of ways to get there, so as to minimise impact on playstyle.

[ulki]

We do need a variety of ways to get there, so as to minimise impact on playstyle.

I agree.

 

They should be simple too, so it will not be to difficult to understand the concept.

[whitebaron]

I agree.

 

They should be simple too, so it will not be to difficult to understand the concept.

that's why I am asking for concepts first, instead of concrete ideas - I, myself, only know of those three playstyles:

 

hoarding, sprite completing, just collecting away stuff which catches our fancy. (which might change over time or once breeding projects are complete)

 

Is there really another major playstyle out there?

(I hereby acknowledge that there exist hybrid playstyles between those three, but that does not make them unique playstyles)

[ulki]

that's why I am asking for concepts first, instead of concrete ideas - I, myself, only know of those three playstyles:

 

hoarding, sprite completing, just collecting away stuff which catches our fancy. (which might change over time or once breeding projects are complete)

 

Is there really another major playstyle out there?

(I hereby acknowledge that there exist hybrid playstyles between those three, but that does not make them unique playstyles)

Where would you put the people that only want to collect certain breeds and never get one dragon of the others? A form of hoarding?

[Fuzzbucket]

that's why I am asking for concepts first, instead of concrete ideas - I, myself, only know of those three playstyles:

 

hoarding, sprite completing, just collecting away stuff which catches our fancy. (which might change over time or once breeding projects are complete)

 

Is there really another major playstyle out there?

(I hereby acknowledge that there exist hybrid playstyles between those three, but that does not make them unique playstyles)

Lineage building - which would mean, for those players, that it would be important for BRED dragons to count.

[Amazon_warrior]

Lineage building - which would mean, for those players, that it would be important for BRED dragons to count.

*nods vigorously*

[DarkEternity]

*nods vigorously*

Yup, yup

[olympe]

I don't think anybody but the naysayers ever said anything about only counting CB dragons. Of course, bred dragons should count as well! Just because your deep sea serpent was bred in captivity, it doesn't necessarily follow that your deep sea doesn't know its way around the nearby waters ("coast"), quite the contrary. I also always supported to count frozen hatchlings as well as adults, and I haven't seen anyone say differently, as far as I remember.

 

As has been brought up before, number of breeds from a biome, number of dragons from a biome and number of visits to a biome should each be able to unlock the hidden remote biome. Whether total dragons should count or not is a very good question indeed. There are some players that only collect holidays and one or two regular breeds. Would they even want to collect new breeds from the remote biomes? If so, they can still unlock them with activity, so there's no need to use the total number of dragons on their scroll for that. But that's just my 2 cents.

 

I think I agree with the idea that there should be flat numbers to unlock the remote biomes via the "number of breeds" and "number of dragons" method. Or the numbers should be equal (or a certain percentage) of the breeds you can find in the remote biome. Example: The biome remote_forest contains 10 breeds at the moment. In order to unlock or "find" it, you need to collect the same amount of breeds from the forest, or five times as many dragons from that biome, or you must have visited the forest biome for 10 times the number of breeds in remote_forest. This way, the amount of work you need to put into unlocking or finding a new biome is directly proportional to the number of new breeds you gain access to.

 

And I still promote the idea of doubly remote biomes that you can unlock by completing a "quest" in the remote biome that's similar to the quest you did in the basic biome. Or through totally different feats. (Like using teleport a certain number of times to "find" a way to a different plane...)

[Fiona]

I don't really think making some sort of "quest" a requirement will work for this. It gets too complicated. Simple is best. I also don't think that excluding bred eggs or eggs taken from the ap is a good choice for this. We don't want to discourage people from breeding or taking ap eggs. On the contrary, for blocker breeds we want to encourage people raising them by any means they choose. Another factor would be complications. Every complication we add to the requirement makes it that much harder for people to understand what is required to access the biomes. Again, simple is best.

 

So, a requirement based on raising x dragons that can drop in that biome, regardless of whether they were actually picked up in that biome is simple. The code easily knows what breeds drop in that biome.

 

A requirement based on how long a scroll has been in existence is simple. Join dates are part of the data anyway.

 

Those two criteria cover every other scenario and proposed requirement. They're simple, easy to understand.

 

If you make some sort of quest fulfillment the requirement to access the biomes, look at how much more data the code will have to gather and maintain. First off, it will have to determine what constitutes a valid point earned. Every action by every player would have to be weighed against possible points. Second, it will have to keep track of those points, per remote biome. Then it will have to check against the number of quest points needed to see if access is granted. For every player. At every action. Even if it can be coded in a way that it stops checking for a player once all the remote biomes for that player are accessed, you still have a lot of data being tracked. And what do you do with the idea that there is another layer behind the first layer of remote biomes?

 

As much fun as some sort of quest system sounds, I just don't think it fits DC.