Grab multiple clutch eggs

[Ruby Eyes]

I'd prefer to keep multiclutches the way they have been for the past years.

[JavaTigress]

I have to speculate here, but I am assuming that TJ had his reasons for implementing the 'you only get to keep one eggie from multis' thing in the first place.

Again... I have to speculate BECAUSE that decision was made before I ever joined this site, and BY that time, multis were ONLY a thing for holiday breeds during holiday seasons. There must have been some thought behind it.

 

WHETHER or not those reasons still hold true, however....I am not sure.

AFTER all, for most breeds multi clutches aren't even an issue anymore.

 

 

Edited January 18, 2018 by JavaTigress

[VixenDra]

19 hours ago, Dragon_Arbock said:

My bottom line is, multiclutches have always worked this way. It's not some new change that you can't keep more than one, so I don't see how it's a flawed system when you knew what was going to happen when you made that decision to breed with multiclutch-producing dragons.

 

Least valid argument against ANY kind of change, including this one.

 

Some samples of the PLENTY of implemented things showing how invalid such argument is? Some are good and some are horrible, yet they happened, though those things had been always working certain way and now they work a different way (better or worse), some were there and changed later, some were added and introduced something breaking former rules&patterns:

Zombies used to be always doable on Halloween only and not have variants ->year round and number of variants still growing, success chance infuenced by date&time of the day

CBs of Holidays were only obtainable once in DCs lifetime and from the regular biome/s of the given year -> every year from special seasonal biome (that's how the Garland announcement was formed)

Cheeses and Papers were gendered and breedable -> ungendered and unbreedable

GoNs were completely unbreedable and limited to 2 -> breed Avatars and limited to 3

Holidays were TOTAL limited to 2 -> CBs limited to 2, lineaged not

all dragons had growth stages consisting of hatchlings at least -> Sinomorphs having no stages at all

S1 frozen hatches still were growing -> S1 keep the freeze correctly

valid trading-allowing system didn't exist -> Magis&Teleport

Rare x Rare could NOT breed together -> can

no dragon combination would produce a hybrid ever -> hybrids are a thing

CB Hybrids and CB female Hollies were given to HMs -> no longer available in ANY means, no HMs

There were no RNG-only exclusives -> CB Prizes & raffles

Purples were female-only -> Purples have both genders

Frills and Bright Pinks were obtainable and common -> got retired and completely unobtainable -> got reintroduced, BP changed names to Arias and is no longer female-only

ALL dragons produced multicluches only -> only holidays -> + Celestials

No New releases in November -> a release in November 2016 -> no release in November 2017

Unpredictable releases at random days of the week and month -> predictable releases at last Sundays of a month -> semi-predictable releases around weekend close to the end of the month

Solstice wing colour revealed on adults only -> on S2s

No holiday BSA -> Aegis' Enrage

No rares with a BSA -> Aeons (relatively rare even during initial release before BSA was known about)

Renaming impossible -> possible

.

.

.

should I countinue?

Some I only read about but many happened when I was already a player. One even completely ruined the game for me, putting me on the verge of quitting(Sino's lack of stages), some would have if I was a player sooner and now only frustrate the hell out of me coz some have them while I didn't even have a chance(e.g. Cheese and Papers breeding true, CB female Hollies)... Many improved the game though, despite the fact they were dreaded by the forum community to ruin things either, yet they didn't when they got implemented.

 

TJ has made plenty of mistakes in DC, and also plenty of changes that fixed or improved some of them.

 

Fear of change is the worst enemy of improvement, and this is what I keep seing around.

Edited January 18, 2018 by VixenDra

[Amazon_warrior]

*coughs*

 

Cheeses were never gendered or breedable.  Papers were once gendered, but never breedable.

[VixenDra]

26 minutes ago, Amazon_warrior said:

*coughs*

 

Cheeses were never gendered or breedable.  Papers were once gendered, but never breedable.

hmm... I recall seeing some old Cheese or Paper lineage in-game and talking about those with an ooold player, that's why I got this somewhere in the back of my head...  (idk, maybe it was one of those old TJ's exceptions for the chosen people or a glitch result? like those pancakes thing or missingno etc... or it was a fake screenshot but it somehow doesn't feel like it was the case, idk it was too long ago) Still, even if this one was not true, there are plenty points leftxD

Edited January 18, 2018 by VixenDra

[Amazon_warrior]

While "things should never change" is a poor argument, so is "X has changed, so it's fine to change Y" - particularly if you have no idea about the underlying mechanisms of X or Y and how they differ on a gameplay level.

 

I do not support changing the multiclutch mechanism as it stands because it is one of the few features of the game that appears to work to close the yawning gap between "wealthy" and "not-wealthy" players.

[RealWilliamShakespeare]

38 minutes ago, VixenDra said:

Least valid argument against ANY kind of change, including this one.

 

Some I only read about but many happened when I was already a player. One even completely ruined the game for me, putting me on the verge of quitting(Sino's lack of stages), some would have if I was a player sooner and now only frustrate the hell out of me coz some have them while I didn't even have a chance(e.g. Cheese and Papers breeding true, CB female Hollies)... Many improved the game though, despite the fact they were dreaded by the forum community to ruin things either, yet they didn't when they got implemented.

 

TJ has made plenty of mistakes in DC, and also plenty of changes that fixed or improved some of them.

 

Fear of change is the worst enemy of improvement, and this is what I keep seing around.

Thank you, VixenDra, I really agree with your points. It's how I feel: like just because something has been there from the start doesn't mean it needs to stay.

 

6 minutes ago, Amazon_warrior said:

While "things should never change" is a poor argument, so is "X has changed, so it's fine to change Y" - particularly if you have no idea about the underlying mechanisms of X or Y and how they differ on a gameplay level.

 

I do not support changing the multiclutch mechanism as it stands because it is one of the few features of the game that appears to work to close the yawning gap between "wealthy" and "not-wealthy" players.

 

But, we do have an idea of the mechanisms. We aren't looking blindly at the fact that things have changed so we should get to change whatever we want, it's that we see benefits in the changes.

 

I don't really see how the system pivotally closes the gap between "wealthy and not-wealthy". Everybody, and I mean everybody, has a chance to grab rare stuff from the biomes, and some super rare lineages and stuff seem to breed on request. I don't feel like the really nice lineages that everyone wants tend to even breed with Celestials anyway, so I really don't see how wealth comes into it.

[Stromboli]

... I feel like this might cause more grief than not, but just a thought to throw out here: What if when you had a multi-clutch it rolled to see how many of the eggs you keep? Like, you're guaranteed one from the breeding, and then for each additional egg produced you get basically a coin flip to see if your dragons let you keep an additional one.

Like how vampires have different levels of success?

 

Dunno. Just, like, splitting the difference between "want to keep more eggs" and "want multi-clutch eggs to go to the AP."  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[angelicdragonpuppy]

@RealWilliamShakespeare Catching in the biomes usually gives you a split second to grab, whereas good luck in the AP is often less spur of the second and, thus, can go to slower players. It’s also very, very rare to find some of the best lines available on request. If you know people giving away Prize and SA babies for free, please, tell me.

 

Again I agree that Celestial breeding is limited in impact, but this opens the door to the same treatment of holidays. As I’ve said many times, the amount of super nice lines hitting the AP would likely drastically drop were this implemented. Even if most people never see those eggs anyway, the mental change of realizing your odds just got slashed viciously is quite the bummer. I still don’t feel that anyone has made a compelling argument for this.

 

Some play styles would enjoy it. Some play styles enjoy the way things already are. The latter system has been in place for ten years. In the lieu of a compelling widespread reason to suddenly promote the other play styles at the latter’s expense, I’d say leave the decade long system alone.

 

Because slashing the amount of SA, Prize, and beautiful lineaged eggs getting sent to the AP via the bounty of multiclutching WOULD hurt my play style. Even when I already enjoy holidays here for many other reasons, having a drastically lower chance of finding such gems would definitely hurt my enjoyment, even if odds are I wouldn’t find one either way.

[Fuzzbucket]

RWS has already said that alt blacks was just an example. But yes, I agree with you. And I don't want it to change anyway. Celestials and their odd habits add a bit of EXTRA interest.

[VixenDra]

23 minutes ago, Stromboli said:

... I feel like this might cause more grief than not, but just a thought to throw out here: What if when you had a multi-clutch it rolled to see how many of the eggs you keep? Like, you're guaranteed one from the breeding, and then for each additional egg produced you get basically a coin flip to see if your dragons let you keep an additional one.

Like how vampires have different levels of success?

 

Dunno. Just, like, splitting the difference between "want to keep more eggs" and "want multi-clutch eggs to go to the AP."  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Support from me.

Sounds like the golden middle between the 2 opposing sides of this argument as it both gives people a chance to keep up to all from the clutch if they also choose to (either for their own scroll or for trading and less random gifting/raffling) BUT it also guarantees some of the unvoluntary AP share we currently have and those so strongly defended 2g SA offspring there for grabs

(because really, after the past CBs re-release, let's be honest, the only so valuable and untradeable thing one can catch there left are the 2g SAs (and Prizes) and I bet everything they are the main, if not only, reason auto-APing of the multichlutches is so desired and defended, it's also not the AP getting empty - it wouldn't and TJ even implied he considers the holiday walls needing a REDUCTION if anything. What else is left to defend those auto-APing clutches except those 2 things? and why Celestial multiclutch-keep is so much less argued against than the holiday?).

Adn for Celestial it also reduces the chance of havign to AP the very egg that will Alt.

Anyways, it's still a good compromise, a perfect inbetween (though I'd rather have a guaranteed keep or more holiday true-breedings a year anyways. Bet the Op also would rather have a guaranteed keep fur such things like workign for that elusive Alt. But yeah,).

Edited January 18, 2018 by VixenDra

[olympe]

Not every compromise is a good one, and the suggested one that's, once again, based on sheer dumb luck (like getting a CB prize) isn't something I feel like supporting. I'd much rather see an infertility BSA (maybe for turpentines?) that will ensure you don't get a multi-clutch. Because, even with a limited abiltiy to keep more than one egg from a multi-clutch, I still see potential for abuse. (I'd still breed my metals to Celestials on the off chance to get 2 metal eggs.)

[JavaTigress]

4 minutes ago, olympe said:

Not every compromise is a good one, and the suggested one that's, once again, based on sheer dumb luck (like getting a CB prize) isn't something I feel like supporting. I'd much rather see an infertility BSA (maybe for turpentines?) that will ensure you don't get a multi-clutch. Because, even with a limited abiltiy to keep more than one egg from a multi-clutch, I still see potential for abuse. (I'd still breed my metals to Celestials on the off chance to get 2 metal eggs.)

What IF though for each additional eggie you got to keep the likelihood of the NEXT eggie also being kept was reduced?

 

Just asking as a 'what if' NOT to indicate my support of the idea or lack thereof.

Edited January 18, 2018 by JavaTigress

[Amazon_warrior]

11 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

RWS has already said that alt blacks was just an example. But yes, I agree with you. And I don't want it to change anyway. Celestials and their odd habits add a bit of EXTRA interest.

 

If they'd presented any other concrete example, then I could refer to that instead! 

[Stromboli]

12 minutes ago, olympe said:

Not every compromise is a good one, and the suggested one that's, once again, based on sheer dumb luck (like getting a CB prize) isn't something I feel like supporting.

 

Eh. Personally, I don't see it as terribly more sheer dumb luck than, like, breeding producing the right egg in general. Or vampire success, or zombie creation. 

I wouldn't mind additionally having a BSA to prevent multi-clutching altogether, but I'm not sure that directly addresses the "I want to grab multiple clutch eggs" issue.

[olympe]

And that's just the issue I see: Grabbing more than one egg from a clutch, no matter what for, is a bad idea in general. No matter how random. And for those people who don't want any eggs bred by them to end up on any other scroll, the BSA would be a workable compromise.

[angelicdragonpuppy]

I don’t really like the idea of a BSA that exists solely so people don’t have to share with others. 

[Fuzzbucket]

It does seem a bit - negative.

[angelicdragonpuppy]

Why spread joy to others at no cost to yourself when you can go out of your way to use a BSA to not do so??

 

I’m not feeling it. Doesn’t even help with the two cases made for keeping extra eggs anyway.

[Stromboli]

I mean, there've been plenty of times I've seen offspring of my dragons named something questionable, and for people who are really attached to their dragons' progeny and only want themselves or people they know to have 'em... I get it. 

But that does only seem to offer a solution for one of the reasons people dislike the current multi-clutch implementation.

[Amazon_warrior]

But it seems like "I want to control all eggs bred by my dragons" is not actually the same as "I want to keep a whole multiclutch"?

 

The first suggests that you want to ensure that no "spares" are produced to go to the AP.

 

The second suggests that you want multiple eggs, but you want to eat your cake keep them all as well.

[olympe]

What was the other? Being able to get more eggs more quickly? No matter how many people want this, I still think this shouldn't happen, and do not support it at all.

[Dragon_Arbock]

Complaining about what other people name your dragon's offspring is the same argument I see people on Flight Rising having. Once it leaves your scroll, it's no longer yours. If you don't like other people having your dragons, don't breed with dragons that can produce multiclutches. (and if it is a really bad name, you can report it if it's against the rules).

 

@VixenDra Some, of the things you've said are flat-out wrong. Cheeses and Papers could never breed, Rare X Rare could breed before they couldn't and then could again, wouldn't consider the Aeon a rare dragon, merely uncommon and in demand, and if you have to list something with multiple arrows, that's not an example of something 'always being that way'. 

When it's a game mechanic you can choose whether you participate in, in the case of breeding celestials, I don't see it as a problem. It's a case of 'you knew what you were getting into.' The mechanics were never changed, unlike the holiday limit and having frozen hatchlings, for example. So there's nothing you would have done differently with different rules.

[Stromboli]

23 minutes ago, Dragon_Arbock said:

Once it leaves your scroll, it's no longer yours. If you don't like other people having your dragons, don't breed with dragons that can produce multiclutches.

Oh yeah, I'm not arguing the "once it's off your scroll, it's not yours" aspect. It's just unfortunate that people who do care a lot about where their progeny ends up have to write off entire breeds from lineage possibilities, particularly when nearly all of those breeds are the special holiday ones.

But this is probably a discussion for another thread, if this BSA has been proposed? Or will be?

 

Anyway, I may be in the minority,  but I don't have a problem with people being allowed to keep multiple eggs from a breeding. Particularly if it had a chance for some to get kicked to the AP, similar to with vampires. 'Cause I don't really see the "Celestials produce up to 4 eggs at once, so it makes up for them only breeding once a month" as really making up for breeding once a month, when you only ever can have one of those.

[purplehaze]

And then when your Celestials only give you one egg . . .

I don't deal with Celestials because I don't like their breeding mechanism, not because I can't keep more of their eggs but just because I hate not being able to breed them for a whole month.

Anyway, no one has yet said anything that convinces me there is a real need for this suggestion to be implemented. I don't think it would be a game-breaker, though, if it only affects Celestials and not Holidays.