On-site Hatchery

[Fuzzbucket]

Send them to nursery. Like humans do

[Alrexwolf]

I find myself agreeing with TJ on this one. If y'all don't want to interact with others, that's understandable. That's fine.

 

But an on-site hatchery or trading feature would literally have no more impact on interaction than the segmented ones already do... It ("we don't want to have to interact with people!") feels like a guise to keep the game from expanding or improving. 

 

This site is BASED on interacting with people. I think that's where most of the weirdness of this site comes from for me. You need to interact, or at least need other people to interact, with your eggs and hatchies to get them to grow. Yet every time someone suggests making interaction easier or more user friendly, it gets shot down. Even if it would make DC easier to use and a more coherent game.

 

Forums just aren't what they used to be - the very fact that we HAVE hatcheries is proof that the formula DC is based on (share this link for views and clicks!) is borked. If you tried to share your eggs only on other websites, you'd need to either spam like every website you know or post a ton on one website - which they mostly don't appreciate.

[Fuzzbucket]

The specific interaction many of us do not want to see is direct scroll to scroll contact. I agree that an on-site hatchery wouldn't demand that - but when you say it is all based on interaction with PEOPLE - no, it isn't. Posting your eggs and clicking those of other people does not require actual interaction with people, just with webpages and pixels. If I click your eggs - you don't have any way of knowing it was me, and on the whole I wouldn't know it was yours I was clicking. In fact, most fan sites have an autoviewer and I don't have to do a thing to give views, just leave the page open. That's hardly contact with other people.

[JavaTigress]

On 3/31/2018 at 5:22 PM, Stromboli said:

Yeah, I don't know that an in-site hatchery would be the best solution to viewbombing.

That said, I would really like one. It'd be nice to be able to play the game entirely within the domain of DC, rather than depending on non-DC forums and fan run websites to get views.

I am agreed.

 

It wouldn't solve the problem of view bombing itself. I think something ELSE might need to be done to address THAT issue.

THAT being said, this would certainly be an option IF we were to lose any more hatcheries. ( So far as I am aware we have NOT,yet, thankfully)

ALSO I DO see the concern about lag, HOWEVER... given that we don't really KNOW all of the mechanics of the site, I also see TJs point that it may be hard for us as users to guess how MUCH of a problem that might be. As others have said, I view this as an absolute last-ditch,last-resort fix for if hatcheries were dieing and no other solution worked.

[HeatherMarie]

4 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

The specific interaction many of us do not want to see is direct scroll to scroll contact. I agree that an on-site hatchery wouldn't demand that - but when you say it is all based on interaction with PEOPLE - no, it isn't. Posting your eggs and clicking those of other people does not require actual interaction with people, just with webpages and pixels. If I click your eggs - you don't have any way of knowing it was me, and on the whole I wouldn't know it was yours I was clicking. In fact, most fan sites have an autoviewer and I don't have to do a thing to give views, just leave the page open. That's hardly contact with other people.

 

This, very very much. Despite what some people might say, DC is *not* a social game and does *not* require interaction of any direct kind. I enter my dragons into hatcheries, and let the hatcheries refresh to give other dragons views.... That requires no actual interaction at all. Sure, dragons need other people to view them in order to grow, but 'other people viewing them' does *not* equal direct interaction. And I like that. And I hope that never changes.

 

I'm not *against* an on-site hatchery (although despite what TJ says I can't imagine it not causing lag), AS LONG AS it's my choice whether or not to use it. (Same with on-site trading, if there is an option to disable it so I never have anyone contacting me on-site, then it doesn't bother me as much). I do *not* want an on-site hatchery to *ever* be the only hatchery available, and I don't want to feel pressured to use an on-site hatchery instead of the ones I prefer. As long as none of that happens, I'm not against it. I still don't see a need for it though.

[Irabane]

6 hours ago, Alrexwolf said:

But an on-site hatchery or trading feature would literally have no more impact on interaction than the segmented ones already do... It ("we don't want to have to interact with people!") feels like a guise to keep the game from expanding or improving. 

 

I honestly feel this way as well. I totally understand that as a relatively new player I don't have the nostalgia that many long-term players likely do regarding the way Dragon Cave is/was, however I feel the desire to keep things as they are sometimes suppresses the game's ability to evolve (that certainly isn't to say that these arguments are always invalid or that all suggestions are worthy of being implemented into the game). People not wanting to interact with others is entirely reasonable if that's how they want to play the game, but the reason why I take slight issue with that as an argument against the implementation of on-site trading/hatcheries (etcetera) is because no one would force players to make use of these features if they were added. Furthermore, I'm sure settings that prevent a player from being contacted or interacted with via on-site features would be fairly simple to implement, essentially eliminating the impact of these potential features on players that don't want to use them (whatever they're reasoning may be).

 

On a slightly different note, perhaps this is just me but I don't find the lag on Dragon Cave to be very bad at all. I also agree with TJ that the performance impact that features like on-site hatcheries might have on the site is far too speculative to truly justify using it as a substantial argument (although it is good to bring up simply as something to be aware of)... plus a lot of the time lag is likely more of an issue with an individual's ISP (or any of the other countless things that can go awry with wireless internet connection) than the Dragon Cave servers themselves.

[RealWilliamShakespeare]

Sorry for leaving this thread for so long, real-life stuff popped up c:

 

I updated the first post a considerable amount to accommodate to everyone's discussions, as I realised there were lots of loopholes to the viewbombing theory that I hadn't considered. However, I would like to return conversation to it somewhat, because it's a huge problem, and I feel like the hatchery could be adjusted to help the problem. Regarding @StormWizard212's question, I'm kind of at a loss with thoughts of countering viewbombing, considering some people have a problem with hiding their scrolls just for the hatchery - understandable, if you're proud of your scroll (unlike me with my ungodly mess). My counterargument to that would be that obviously you don't have to hide your scroll forever, just for when you have eggs you don't want viewbombing, I guess. Like I say though, I'm really looking for help with the viewbombing theory because I'd like this suggestion to help with it, but it has a lot of loopholes!

 

I'm happy that @TJ09 mentioned the lag thing, because like he says, it isn't something we should worry about, and he knows more about how to help that issue as it's his site.

 

Not really sure how the interaction argument is that relevant - the on-site hatchery would be passive, just as other self-serving/automated viewing hatcheries are. You would not require direct interaction with any eggs or hatchies, just an auto-refreshing viewing window as we are all familiar with.

 

Another problem mentioned was that of the hatchery being optional - of course it would! All hatcheries are optional, and the existence of an on-site hatchery wouldn't mean the end of other third party hatcheries which many users seem to prefer. TJ also mentioned this, saying that the addition of this hatchery would only serve to shift existing volume around. c:

 

On the whole, I really agree with @Alrexwolf and @Irabane's points - an on-site hatchery, I feel, would be a good addition to the site, and one that many people would benefit from (and apparently have been waiting for!)

[Fuzzbucket]

Don't get me wrong - I'm fine with a hatchery as long as TJ is right about the lag; I am still concerned that quite often when many players report it he finds that there is none - that is not our experience.

 

But what we were also discussing - interaction - isn't a matter of waning the game to stay the same and not evolve as such; it is that many of us are here just because we don't have to interact. If interaction with other players became a necessary part of the game I would find it far less appealing. I'm not one of those who says do it my way or I'll quit - but I might just want to do that anyway. I don't want to interact with other people when I'm playing my scroll. Sure I come here for lineage work - but I could carry on on my own without that, and as things are I don't have to be interrupted by other players when I am playing my scroll. I am deeply antisocial; that's why I like DC so much.

[olympe]

Well, intereaction =/= on-site hatchery.  Just saying that I think that interaction should be discussed in a thread of its own, not in a thread about a potenital future on-site hatchery.

[RealWilliamShakespeare]

1 hour ago, Fuzzbucket said:

But what we were also discussing - interaction - isn't a matter of waning the game to stay the same and not evolve as such; it is that many of us are here just because we don't have to interact. If interaction with other players became a necessary part of the game I would find it far less appealing. I'm not one of those who says do it my way or I'll quit - but I might just want to do that anyway. I don't want to interact with other people when I'm playing my scroll. Sure I come here for lineage work - but I could carry on on my own without that, and as things are I don't have to be interrupted by other players when I am playing my scroll. I am deeply antisocial; that's why I like DC so much.

?? An on-site hatchery would do nothing towards interaction. You just add your stuff, refresh the page a few times in return, and leave... Just like you would on Allure, for example.

 

24 minutes ago, olympe said:

Well, intereaction =/= on-site hatchery.  Just saying that I think that interaction should be discussed in a thread of its own, not in a thread about a potenital future on-site hatchery.

I agree with this: interaction really isn’t to do with this topic anymore, as it’s been stated that it isn’t relevant here

[LadyLyzar]

14 hours ago, TJ09 said:

I think I've said this in response to similar attempts at shutting down suggestions, but "would cause lag" is a baseless claim that's best to let me worry about, given that there's enough complex factors (like the entirety of how things are built and run) that are required to really evaluate such statements. In this particular case, for example, the vast majority of load from a hatchery comes from the individual images. Except that's something that currently already happens—all of the eggs out there already get viewed many times, and I expect that an on-site hatchery would (at least at first) only shift existing volume around.

 

This sort of thing would represent a pretty fundamental shift in the site, though. Dragon Cave was originally created in service of forums and other online communities. It's certainly possible to take steps that make the site more self-contained, and it's also reasonable to say that the online landscape has shifted in such a way that it's necessary (there are definitely fewer standalone message boards than there were 12 years ago, and many communities now exist within existing services such as Facebook/Reddit). Similarly, "mobile web" was barely a thing back when the site started (iPhones literally didn't exist yet), whereas now phones represent half of all web traffic.

 

Thank you for the clarification.  I had thought lag because of not being allowed to post eggs on the forums.  Granted, I had assumed it was because it would slow the forums down if everyone had eggs in their signatures.  If that's not the case, so it goes.

However, your 2nd paragraph does indicate, at least to me, a need for evolution.  For example, the messageboard that I discovered DC on no longer exists.  I remember when hatcheries were new, but their ease of use has made them mainstream.  When using a hatchery, no one has to worry about breaking messageboard rules since that's the site's entire purpose, and managing your dragons is so much simpler.  From observation, hatcheries have taken over the role of hatching dragons nearly entirely (correct me if I am wrong about this).

[HeatherMarie]

4 hours ago, Irabane said:

 

I honestly feel this way as well. I totally understand that as a relatively new player I don't have the nostalgia that many long-term players likely do regarding the way Dragon Cave is/was, however I feel the desire to keep things as they are sometimes suppresses the game's ability to evolve (that certainly isn't to say that these arguments are always invalid or that all suggestions are worthy of being implemented into the game). People not wanting to interact with others is entirely reasonable if that's how they want to play the game, but the reason why I take slight issue with that as an argument against the implementation of on-site trading/hatcheries (etcetera) is because no one would force players to make use of these features if they were added. Furthermore, I'm sure settings that prevent a player from being contacted or interacted with via on-site features would be fairly simple to implement, essentially eliminating the impact of these potential features on players that don't want to use them (whatever they're reasoning may be).

 

On a slightly different note, perhaps this is just me but I don't find the lag on Dragon Cave to be very bad at all. I also agree with TJ that the performance impact that features like on-site hatcheries might have on the site is far too speculative to truly justify using it as a substantial argument (although it is good to bring up simply as something to be aware of)... plus a lot of the time lag is likely more of an issue with an individual's ISP (or any of the other countless things that can go awry with wireless internet connection) than the Dragon Cave servers themselves.

 

I feel the need to respond to this since I'm often one of the ones pushing against certain changes.... I love DC, have been here nearly a decade now, and of course I want it to evolve in a way that makes it better and possibly draws in more users. Looking around here I don't really see anyone who is resistant to *all* change... Just change that may negatively impact their experience with the game. You say no one would force players to use these features.... And yet in *many* suggestion threads we have to argue and *push* for it to be optional, for a way to disable it if we don't want to use it. The first suggestions of an in-site trading market, for example, many of us had to step in and say that there *must* be some way to opt-out so that we aren't bombarded with trading requests we don't want. You are a new-ish player so you may not have seen all the drama that Suggestion threads can cause, but a lot of us have... A lot of us are not resistant to change at all *as long as* interaction is optional, and often suggestions are made that are not optional, and we have to speak up. 

 

Anyways, regarding @RealWilliamShakespeare's post.... I get that you want to figure out some way to help fight viewbombing, but I really really don't think an on-site hatchery is the way to go with that. If an on-site hatchery is implemented that's great, whatever, but I really don't see how it could possibly help stop viewbombing... The *only* way I can see it affecting viewbombing is what you originally mentioned about being able to add a hidden scroll to the on-site hatchery, so that you could simply keep your scroll hidden 24/7 and still grow your dragons... But even that's not 100%, because people can still add codes to outside hatcheries when a scroll is hidden. Someone earlier in the thread mentioned a flag you could check to indicate that dragons can't get views in outside hatcheries... While I have no clue if that's even actually possible, I still don't see it as a solution to viewbombing. 

 

The thing is, viewbombing is a big issue that happens in *many* different circumstances and is done in *many* different ways.... It feels like trying to manipulate an on-site hatchery feature to possibly cut down on viewbombing is like putting a bandaid on a huge wound. It may help in one way, sometimes, in specific circumstances, but it wouldn't help the *overall* problem of viewbombing. 

[Alrexwolf]

Except, it absolutely would if it was programmed like EATW used to be (though I suppose that would take the "challenge out of it... but we all just throw our hatchies in and forget about them when it's time anyway so what's the difference)... if it was the ONLY hatchery and you could ONLY display your hatchies/eggs there for views (obviously they could still be shared on other sites, just not for the purposes of growing), viewbombing would not exist. 

 

You guys say that hatcheries/clicking don't involve other people, but you have to remember hatcheries weren't what the system of this game was designed for - it was designed FOR interaction. For you to post on OTHER sites for OTHER people to see and click on your eggs. The fact that hatcheries became big is because of a need for alternatives - fourms aren't what they used to be, it would be nearly impossible to hatch eggs the "correct," way, so we all got used to using hatcheries. It's a luxury, not how the game is "supposed," to function as it is now.

 

An exclusive on-site hatchery would:
+fix viewbombing, as views from outside sources would no longer count
+provide more money for the site by way of more ads (each hatchery page reload = new ad!)

+create more activity on the actual site, directing traffic to this site and not spread out over many others

+remove the need for scrolls to be hidden, though of course the option would still need to be there.

+allow you to safely show off your eggs/lineages/etc, without worry 

+remove any incentive for click begging/baiting on here or any other forum

 

I play other sites where the owner absolutely will not allow any toggle suggestions. They say its a lot of coding work to make exceptions - and the philosophy is that if you're going to take a step forward on a site, people will either get used to it or get upset and quit, and you can start to move forward with a user base that actually wants to participate in the game how you want it. I'm not saying that it's right, but I am saying that with how impossible viewbombing would be to prevent off-site, I think having it be optional is just leaving everyone vulnerable because some people have learned habits they don't want to break.

 

I even think an on-site hatchery would also make sickness more explainable. As it is right now, your eggs are in an... area? and people... look at them.

How I imagine a hatchery would work is there would be some sort of NPC person who's an expert hatcher/researcher, who agrees to house your eggs in the "Optimal Nests" in exchange for data and research. We are all a part of the research "team." The problem with that is that the rest of the team can be a little less than gentle - and eggs left for too long with our co-researchers while still forming are at risk of getting sick from over-handling and being fussed with. 

 

idk, just an idea.

[HeatherMarie]

13 minutes ago, Alrexwolf said:

Except, it absolutely would if it was programmed like EATW used to be (though I suppose that would take the "challenge out of it... but we all just throw our hatchies in and forget about them when it's time anyway so what's the difference)... if it was the ONLY hatchery and you could ONLY display your hatchies/eggs there for views (obviously they could still be shared on other sites, just not for the purposes of growing), viewbombing would not exist. 

 

You guys say that hatcheries/clicking don't involve other people, but you have to remember hatcheries weren't what the system of this game was designed for - it was designed FOR interaction. For you to post on OTHER sites for OTHER people to see and click on your eggs. The fact that hatcheries became big is because of a need for alternatives - fourms aren't what they used to be, it would be nearly impossible to hatch eggs the "correct," way, so we all got used to using hatcheries. It's a luxury, not how the game is "supposed," to function as it is now.

 

An exclusive on-site hatchery would:
+fix viewbombing, as views from outside sources would no longer count
+provide more money for the site by way of more ads (each hatchery page reload = new ad!)

+create more activity on the actual site, directing traffic to this site and not spread out over many others

+remove the need for scrolls to be hidden, though of course the option would still need to be there.

+allow you to safely show off your eggs/lineages/etc, without worry 

+remove any incentive for click begging/baiting on here or any other forum

 

I play other sites where the owner absolutely will not allow any toggle suggestions. They say its a lot of coding work to make exceptions - and the philosophy is that if you're going to take a step forward on a site, people will either get used to it or get upset and quit, and you can start to move forward with a user base that actually wants to participate in the game how you want it. I'm not saying that it's right, but I am saying that with how impossible viewbombing would be to prevent off-site, I think having it be optional is just leaving everyone vulnerable because some people have learned habits they don't want to break.

 

I even think an on-site hatchery would also make sickness more explainable. As it is right now, your eggs are in an... area? and people... look at them.

How I imagine a hatchery would work is there would be some sort of NPC person who's an expert hatcher/researcher, who agrees to house your eggs in the "Optimal Nests" in exchange for data and research. We are all a part of the research "team." The problem with that is that the rest of the team can be a little less than gentle - and eggs left for too long with our co-researchers while still forming are at risk of getting sick from over-handling and being fussed with. 

 

idk, just an idea.

 

Unless you are TJ I really don't think you can say for sure what DragonCave was designed for. We DO NOT KNOW if TJ wanted originally wanted DC to be about interaction between people, unless he comes in here and specifically says that. However, whether or not that's how he originally envisioned it, that's simply not how it is now (and not how it's been for a long time). And there are a *lot* of users who *like* it that way. Who prefer DC over *any other* animal-raising game *because* we aren't forced to interact with people. Why on earth should that be taken away from all the users who *want* to play it that way?

 

I do not do not do NOT want an exclusive on-site hatchery. I do *not* want an official DC hatchery to be the only way I can make my dragons grow. I do *not* want all the other wonderful hatcheries, with tons of extra tools and sometimes a really fun feel to them, to be shut down because of an official hatchery that blocks access to any other hatchery. No no no no no no. I will fight *hard* about that, I do *not* want to be forced to use one specific hatchery and only that. 

[olympe]

My previous point still stands: An on-site hatchery doesn't have anything to do with direct user-to-user interaction. Why do you argue about a point that doesn't even tie into the suggestion this thread is for?

 

That being said, I'm still skeptical about an on-site hatchery, and for very different reasons than those mostly stated.

First, there's the question whether an on-site hatchery would be the only way to raise dragons. If not, it won't prevent viewbombing, anyway. If it is, it will kill all the other hatcheries out there. Which I'm against.

Second, if everybody can only use hatcheries, I'm not sure how well and far DC will still spread. I was lured here by a linked dragon on another forum, and I still see DC dragons on the very few forums I still visit occasionally.

[Alrexwolf]

All I mean is that, if this game wasn't meant for interactions, then something like an on-site hatchery likely would have been included from the start. Or our eggs would grow on a timer instead.

 

On-site, coherent features don't have anything to do with interactions - but you need interactions for your dragons to hatch. Whether you consider it personal interaction or not, someone has to click your egg. Someone has to view your egg. Many more than just "someone," many someones. 

 

We have all these features that hogtie this. Sickness, fogging, hiding scrolls - I just don't understand how hobbled this site is. The base formula is user puts growing pet on another site = someone clicks site = someone sees site = pet gets closer to growing. DC doesn't grow when you hide your scroll. DC grows when people are free to share their lineages and eggs out on the internet, elsewhere, just like any site. DC grows with interactions. 

 

I think it's a disservice to this site and preventative of growth that sickness / hatcheries exist in the first place. I'm not looking at this from a "what a user wants," POV - I'm looking at it from a "what would probably help DC grow the most, make it more user friendly, and appeal to more users," perspective. I don't personally care at all if anything is ever changed; DC works fine for me as it is right now. I'll continue to play; but I won't stifle the thought that the game could be more coherent just because some users don't like that idea. I would be much happier if the community and site were expanding. It just makes me sad to feel like the site / forums are stagnating. I feel like the disconnect has a lot to do with that.

[Irabane]

5 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

But what we were also discussing - interaction - isn't a matter of waning the game to stay the same and not evolve as such; it is that many of us are here just because we don't have to interact. If interaction with other players became a necessary part of the game I would find it far less appealing. I'm not one of those who says do it my way or I'll quit - but I might just want to do that anyway. I don't want to interact with other people when I'm playing my scroll. Sure I come here for lineage work - but I could carry on on my own without that, and as things are I don't have to be interrupted by other players when I am playing my scroll. I am deeply antisocial; that's why I like DC so much.

 

1 hour ago, HeatherMarie said:

 

I feel the need to respond to this since I'm often one of the ones pushing against certain changes.... I love DC, have been here nearly a decade now, and of course I want it to evolve in a way that makes it better and possibly draws in more users. Looking around here I don't really see anyone who is resistant to *all* change... Just change that may negatively impact their experience with the game. You say no one would force players to use these features.... And yet in *many* suggestion threads we have to argue and *push* for it to be optional, for a way to disable it if we don't want to use it. The first suggestions of an in-site trading market, for example, many of us had to step in and say that there *must* be some way to opt-out so that we aren't bombarded with trading requests we don't want. You are a new-ish player so you may not have seen all the drama that Suggestion threads can cause, but a lot of us have... A lot of us are not resistant to change at all *as long as* interaction is optional, and often suggestions are made that are not optional, and we have to speak up.

 

I have complete respect for the stance of players like yourselves who want to be able to continue playing Dragon Cave in a solitary manner, part of what makes many games so great is the ability of the player to choose the manner in which they play! I also feel that on-site features that would enable interactions among players, such as trading, would frankly be poorly implemented without adequate privacy settings to cater to players who simply aren't interested in an inter-player experience (particularly in a community where I feel it is clear that there are a decent number of people who feel this way). All of that being said, I don't feel that the argument of not wanting more player interaction on-site is a good reason to outright not support certain suggestions (in most cases). As you said @HeatherMarie, it absolutely is important to bring up your perspective and make it known that such features should include settings that allow players to opt out of the interactive portions of the game if they so choose (and perhaps even state that you wouldn't support a particular suggestion if such settings weren't available), however being particular about the terms on which you'd support something being implemented is very different than simply saying that you aren't fond of a suggestion due to it potentially leading to more on-site player interactions. It might seem silly to support features you'd never personally use, but it's important to consider the health of the game as a whole, particularly its usability for new players (as I honestly feel the divides between one's scroll, hatching and trading are far from ideal for players who aren't already familiar with the game).

 

In short, definitely advocate your views and make it known that some players still desire solitary experience, however I don't think it's productive for the site's health and growth to use that as reasoning to simply quash certain suggestions in lieu of attempting to find a happy middle ground.

[Fuzzbucket]

9 hours ago, Alrexwolf said:

Except, it absolutely would if it was programmed like EATW used to be (though I suppose that would take the "challenge out of it... but we all just throw our hatchies in and forget about them when it's time anyway so what's the difference)... if it was the ONLY hatchery and you could ONLY display your hatchies/eggs there for views (obviously they could still be shared on other sites, just not for the purposes of growing), viewbombing would not exist. 

 

You guys say that hatcheries/clicking don't involve other people, but you have to remember hatcheries weren't what the system of this game was designed for - it was designed FOR interaction. For you to post on OTHER sites for OTHER people to see and click on your eggs. The fact that hatcheries became big is because of a need for alternatives - fourms aren't what they used to be, it would be nearly impossible to hatch eggs the "correct," way, so we all got used to using hatcheries. It's a luxury, not how the game is "supposed," to function as it is now.

 

An exclusive on-site hatchery would:
+fix viewbombing, as views from outside sources would no longer count
+provide more money for the site by way of more ads (each hatchery page reload = new ad!)

+create more activity on the actual site, directing traffic to this site and not spread out over many others

+remove the need for scrolls to be hidden, though of course the option would still need to be there.

+allow you to safely show off your eggs/lineages/etc, without worry 

+remove any incentive for click begging/baiting on here or any other forum

 

I play other sites where the owner absolutely will not allow any toggle suggestions. They say its a lot of coding work to make exceptions - and the philosophy is that if you're going to take a step forward on a site, people will either get used to it or get upset and quit, and you can start to move forward with a user base that actually wants to participate in the game how you want it. I'm not saying that it's right, but I am saying that with how impossible viewbombing would be to prevent off-site, I think having it be optional is just leaving everyone vulnerable because some people have learned habits they don't want to break.

 

I even think an on-site hatchery would also make sickness more explainable. As it is right now, your eggs are in an... area? and people... look at them.

How I imagine a hatchery would work is there would be some sort of NPC person who's an expert hatcher/researcher, who agrees to house your eggs in the "Optimal Nests" in exchange for data and research. We are all a part of the research "team." The problem with that is that the rest of the team can be a little less than gentle - and eggs left for too long with our co-researchers while still forming are at risk of getting sick from over-handling and being fussed with. 

 

 

I can't see how you imagine an on site hatchery could prevent all these things, even if it were the only hatchery. EATW was brought down by a carefully programmed targeted bot. If an on-site hatchery were the only hatchery available - if that were indeed possible - those who like to do such things would have to attack the whole DC site - including the game itself - to damage players. And don't for one moment think they wouldn't  give it a shot. I'd much rather see it spread out all over, as it is now.

 

8 hours ago, Alrexwolf said:

I think it's a disservice to this site and preventative of growth that sickness / hatcheries exist in the first place. I'm not looking at this from a "what a user wants," POV - I'm looking at it from a "what would probably help DC grow the most, make it more user friendly, and appeal to more users," perspective. I don't personally care at all if anything is ever changed; DC works fine for me as it is right now. I'll continue to play; but I won't stifle the thought that the game could be more coherent just because some users don't like that idea. I would be much happier if the community and site were expanding. It just makes me sad to feel like the site / forums are stagnating. I feel like the disconnect has a lot to do with that.

 

DC is growing all the time. Who says it isn't ? And I have drawn people here myself, people who gave up on Ostlea and Chicken smoothie exactly because they wanted a quieter life.

 

I am one of those who think we need sickness so that people have to actually take care of their eggs. But I don't favour there being only an on-site hatchery. And crucially, I don't see how it could possibly prevent viewbombing.

 

7 hours ago, Irabane said:

 

In short, definitely advocate your views and make it known that some players still desire solitary experience, however I don't think it's productive for the site's health and growth to use that as reasoning to simply quash certain suggestions in lieu of attempting to find a happy middle ground.

 

Sure - BUT - some suggestions that have changed things very much have been implemented with promises that they wouldn't change things - and they did, of course. I was one in favour of teleport - but there were many voices raised against it, and many of those individuals still hate it with a passion. But the way of "trading" we had before (an unintended accident, TJ said) - where you could pass a code to people to grab as fast as they could - is gone, and is lamented by many - and there was no middle ground. I and I for one said loudly what would happen to messaging in this forum if we upgraded, as I had lived through it and it killed my other forum  (and I do know we had to upgrade in the end) and I don't know anyone who is happy with the way it is now.... No middle ground there either.

 

Sometimes a change will "not affect the game" but in the end it will, as enough people using a feature will mean that a player will lose out by not doing. Teleport is a classic example - we used not to be able to trade at all.

[Nimrodel]

I would be thrilled if something put an end to viewbombing, I certainly don't appreciate the idea of my scroll possibly being targeted and having to keep an extra close eye on my critters, but I don't quite see an official DC hatchery in addition to the fansites as a solution to that. 

 

SO, viewbombing aside. I would still rather appreciate seeing an official hatchery, simply because I would consider it convenient to have everything I need to play the game right here, rather than having to rely on other sites, much as Stromboli said early on in this thread.

[HeatherMarie]

People talk about what's 'good' for DC, what will 'help' the game, etc etc.... But do we actually know that an on-site hatchery will positively affect the game in any substantial way? No, we don't know that. We can't possibly know that, because no one here can actually predict the future. It's just as possible that people will get annoyed with their favorite hatcheries being forced to shut down, and decide they really don't want to use an on-site hatchery. It's just as possible that an exclusive on-site hatchery won't actually do anything at all to stop viewbombing. It frustrates me that people push so hard for certain suggestions because they seem *certain* that it will make DC oh-so-better, when really no one knows that for sure. 

 

10 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

 

I can't see how you imagine an on site hatchery could prevent all these things, even if it were the only hatchery. EATW was brought down by a carefully programmed targeted bot. If an on-site hatchery were the only hatchery available - if that were indeed possible - those who like to do such things would have to attack the whole DC site - including the game itself - to damage players. And don't for one moment think they wouldn't  give it a shot. I'd much rather see it spread out all over, as it is now.

 

This is a very, very good point, and says what I've tried to say multiple times (but much better then I did!). Viewbombing is *not* going to just suddenly go away because an official on-site hatchery gets implemented, and frankly it's concerning that people think viewbombing is so easy to stop. If the worst (in my opinion) does happen and an on-site hatchery is the only way for a dragon to get views, determined viewbombers will simply move their efforts to that on-site hatchery. And that would be a *lot* more harmful then what currently happens, since right now attacking one specific hatchery only reaches a certain amount of users, but if the on-site hatchery was the *only* hatchery then an attack would affect *everyone*. 

 

Seriously, an on-site hatchery is simply not the solution to viewbombing. I'm not really that *against* an on-site hatchery (as long as it is *not* the only way to get views!!), but this idea that it will eradicate viewbombing is simply not true at all. And I really don't understand the push to implement something as huge and game-changing as an exclusive on-site hatchery in order to deal with viewbombing when there are so many other, *better* ways it could be dealt with (caps on how many views can be obtained in a certain amount of time, sickness not able to kill a dragon until it's been sick for a certain amount of time, etc etc etc.)

[Guillotine]

If anything, an on-site hatchery would make any viewbombing that much easier; it's really not hard to program a bot capable of taking out a site, we saw that with EATW. The risk of it taking down DC wholesale is quite real.

 

I'm not against a non-exclusive on-site hatchery, but you do need to consider the risks to the rest of the site considering what we've seen happen to dedicated hatcheries.
 

[Fuzzbucket]

Exactly. Scary stuff.

[Irabane]

1 hour ago, Guillotine said:

If anything, an on-site hatchery would make any viewbombing that much easier; it's really not hard to program a bot capable of taking out a site, we saw that with EATW. The risk of it taking down DC wholesale is quite real.

 

I'm not against a non-exclusive on-site hatchery, but you do need to consider the risks to the rest of the site considering what we've seen happen to dedicated hatcheries.

 

This is assuming an on-site hatchery would operate exactly like the fan-made ones that currently exist. The power of an on-site hatchery is that TJ would likely be able to set up ways to track who is viewing what (via IP or Dragon Cave account if one is logged in), in addition to all sorts of other information such as how often certain IPs/users are viewing things. This information could then be used to actually catch and punish viewbombers, or notice that an abnormally high number of views/connections are coming from a particular IP/user and automatically block their access to the hatchery or even the entire site until the situation can be investigated further (and action potentially taken if a perpetrator can be identified, either by their account having been logged in or via IP association). Of course this all depends on how an on-site hatchery would be implemented, however to say that an on-site hatchery doesn't even have the potential to eliminate viewbombing (or at least greatly minimize it) if thoughtfully constructed is simply wrong as far as I can tell.

 

For it to have this effect, as many have already said, an on-site hatchery would seemingly have to replace all of the current ones, which is honestly something I'm unsure about my position on (leaning towards not wanting to eliminate fan-made hatcheries though). I feel this could be remedied with the addition of an account option along the lines of "Allow views from external sites? <Yes/No>" as this would allow players to decide whether they wish to use external sites in addition to an on-site hatchery for growing their Dragons, instead of being assigned to one or the other.

 

Also @Fuzzbucket, you make a very valid point; new features will always have unintended consequences. I feel the best we can do though is to try to account for as many major ones as possible ahead of time, and deal with the unforeseen ones as they come.

[RealWilliamShakespeare]

13 minutes ago, Irabane said:

 

This is assuming an on-site hatchery would operate exactly like the fan-made ones that currently exist. The power of an on-site hatchery is that TJ would likely be able to set up ways to track who is viewing what (via IP or Dragon Cave account if one is logged in), in addition to all sorts of other information such as how often certain IPs/users are viewing things. This information could then be used to actually catch and punish viewbombers, or notice that an abnormally high number of views/connections are coming from a particular IP/user and automatically block their access to the hatchery or even the entire site until the situation can be investigated further (and action potentially taken if a perpetrator can be identified, either by their account having been logged in or via IP association). Of course this all depends on how an on-site hatchery would be implemented, however to say that an on-site hatchery doesn't even have the potential to eliminate viewbombing (or at least greatly minimize it) if thoughtfully constructed is simply wrong as far as I can tell.

 

For it to have this effect, as many have already said, an on-site hatchery would seemingly have to replace all of the current ones, which is honestly something I'm unsure about my position on (leaning towards not wanting to eliminate fan-made hatcheries though). I feel this could be remedied with the addition of an account option along the lines of "Allow views from external sites? <Yes/No>" as this would allow players to decide whether they wish to use external sites in addition to an on-site hatchery for growing their Dragons, instead of being assigned to one or the other.

 

I really agree with these two points - the last one in particular I love! The idea of external hiding would be so so useful, because that way things would be viewable on the actual site of Dragon Cave, but just... Not be able to be added to external sites. I really hope it’d be possible, because that means the issue of not wanting to hide your scroll is solved! Oh, I hope something like that would be do-able. Once I’m off mobile I’ll add that point to the first post :3

Edited April 5, 2018 by RealWilliamShakespeare

[olympe]

2 hours ago, Guillotine said:

If anything, an on-site hatchery would make any viewbombing that much easier; it's really not hard to program a bot capable of taking out a site, we saw that with EATW. The risk of it taking down DC wholesale is quite real.

 

I'm not against a non-exclusive on-site hatchery, but you do need to consider the risks to the rest of the site considering what we've seen happen to dedicated hatcheries.
 

I think this is utter nonsense. The attack on EATW didn't shut down DC, so an attack on an on-site hatchery wouldn't do that, either. And I'm reasonably sure that TJ is very capable of making sure that any attack on the (still hypothetical) DC hatchery could be stopped automatically, maybe by limiting the number of "people" (or bots, in case of an attack) viewing stuff through the hatchery. An algorithm that recognizes unusual spikes in "user" activity and puts a cap on it if necessary. I'm also reasonably sure that most programmers (who made their own hatcheries) would be able to do the same. EATW was only susceptible to the attack because it was the first of its kind, and thus far unheard of.