Abandoned Page Compendium - Display Suggestions

[HeatherMarie]

6 hours ago, Tawanda001 said:

Would it be possible to 'slow down' breeding? We have the wait limits on killing, freezing, abandoning freshly caught eggs, etc. Couldn't the same principle be applied to breeding? If you breed x amount of eggs in a specified period some kind of cool down comes into play. It wouldn't have the ability to stop breeding but it would require more effort as more eggs were bred.

 

We already have limits on breeding. Each dragon can only be bred once every 7 days. I really don't see a reason to add more limits. And I'm unsure exactly what you are envisioning here? You say a 'cooldown comes into play', but then you say 'it wouldn't have the ability to stop breeding', so what exactly would the cooldown do? Because some sort of 'breed x amount and then no more' is certainly 'stopping' breeding. 

 

I really really don't think limiting people's play is a good idea no matter how you word it. Cooldowns, thresholds, limits, it's all deliberately screwing with the way people play. Which is exactly what this suggestion is trying to *stop* (stopping mass-breeding affecting AP-hunter's play). 

[Firefury Amahira]

7 hours ago, purplehaze said:

2. How many egg slots would we have to add to really have any effect? Also sort of rewards one play style over another.

What if it was made even? Double the amount of slots per trophy level, make half out-of-the-biome-only and the other half out-of-the-AP-only. Doesn't change things for folks who hunt AP only or cave only, but certainly provides an incentive for people to diversify their play style and grab from both. I mean, I mostly hunt the AP, but if I had extra biome-only slots, you can bet I'd fill those up for good measure; I imagine similar would apply to folks who primarily opt for the biomes.

 

I dunno, I'm horribly sleep deprived this week and not braining too gud. 😅

[Fiona]

I don't think adding AP-only egg slots is a very good idea. It favors one type of play over another and that's something we're trying to get away from. Plus, adding egg slots in general is only something to be considered after long and careful thought due to how it changes game pacing.

 

Limiting breeding in some way also is favoring one type of play over another. I don't think we can do either of those things fairly.

 

Limiting by breeder or by breed what shows in the AP isn't telling those breeders what to breed, it just makes it so AP hunters' preferred style of play isn't hampered by someone else's.

[Tawanda001]

1 hour ago, HeatherMarie said:

 

We already have limits on breeding. Each dragon can only be bred once every 7 days. I really don't see a reason to add more limits. And I'm unsure exactly what you are envisioning here? You say a 'cooldown comes into play', but then you say 'it wouldn't have the ability to stop breeding', so what exactly would the cooldown do? Because some sort of 'breed x amount and then no more' is certainly 'stopping' breeding. 

 

I really really don't think limiting people's play is a good idea no matter how you word it. Cooldowns, thresholds, limits, it's all deliberately screwing with the way people play. Which is exactly what this suggestion is trying to *stop* (stopping mass-breeding affecting AP-hunter's play). 

But play is being limited when the AP is effectively walled up, or is this game only for breeders? Limiting how often a particular dragon breeds does nothing to limit how many eggs one or a handful of  breeders can release to take over the AP, and this is the problem isn't it?

I don't know enough about the mechanics to suggest actual numbers but my idea would be something along the lines of a 1 hour cool down if you successfully breed 100 dragons in x amt of time, if you then breed another hundred for 200 eggs in 2x amt of time your cool down is now 2 hours, breed 300 and the cool down becomes 3 hrs, so on and so forth. You can continue to breed, but the cost to you becomes higher in the amount of time you need to wait before you can continue to breed.

When I freeze or kill a dragon I think about it carefully before I do it because I know there are limits.

I think putting some sort of additional limit on breeding is the only way to solve the wall problem. I'm skeptical that only allowing a certain amount of a breed, or breeder's eggs, at a time will actually make a lot of difference in the long run. Will all those other mass bred eggs waiting in the background for their turn to be visible cause a traffic jam so to speak, will some of the eggs from other breeders still get stuck behind them like they do now?

[HeatherMarie]

14 minutes ago, Tawanda001 said:

But play is being limited when the AP is effectively walled up, or is this game only for breeders? Limiting how often a particular dragon breeds does nothing to limit how many eggs one or a handful of  breeders can release to take over the AP, and this is the problem isn't it?

 

Well yes, that's exactly what this suggestion is about, trying to find a way to change that. What I'm trying to explain is that the answer to 'breeders controlling AP-hunter's play' is *not* 'control breeder's play'. We are trying to look for solutions that will take *away* the negative influences of other's play, not move it from one place to another. Yes, the AP-walls are an issue (to many people). But punishing breeders for it isn't the answer. Ideally, something should be changed that doesn't negatively affect *anyone's* playstyle, regardless of if you are an AP-hunter, biome-hunter, breeder, etc. 

 

Another way to put it: People are upset/angry that mass-breeders control the AP. So in retaliation they want to control breeder's play? That's not a good solution. That's a spiteful solution. There are other suggestions in this very thread that *don't* negatively impact *anyone's* play, so suggesting that we instead deliberately limit breeders when there are other solutions... No.

[StormBirdRising]

52 minutes ago, Tawanda001 said:

But play is being limited when the AP is effectively walled up, or is this game only for breeders? Limiting how often a particular dragon breeds does nothing to limit how many eggs one or a handful of  breeders can release to take over the AP, and this is the problem isn't it?

 

Yes, that is exactly what the problem is. That's why I thought of another option: to have 2 APs, not different biomes in the AP, but 2 APs.  Reprogam the auto abandon system so after X amount of eggs being bred on the same scroll go to the AP, the rest of them will go to a special mass breed AP. It could last for 24 hours or 48 hours or whatever is reasonable and will prevent a wall in the original AP. So one AP would be filled with all the rest of the eggs and hatchies and the 2nd AP will be filled with the mass breeds.

[tjekan]

59 minutes ago, Tawanda001 said:

Will all those other mass bred eggs waiting in the background for their turn to be visible cause a traffic jam so to speak, will some of the eggs from other breeders still get stuck behind them like they do now?

 

They shouldn't, no. Basically the idea is that all of a single breeder's eggs stack up behind the first 3, or 5, or 6, or however many TJ decides upon, and then appear only when those first eggs are picked up. Meanwhile other eggs are continuing to advance to the front of the AP where people can take them, instead of getting stuck behind the massbred wall like they currently do.

 

It would definitely be a real improvement.

[Shadowdrake]

1 hour ago, Tawanda001 said:

Limiting how often a particular dragon breeds does nothing to limit how many eggs one or a handful of  breeders can release to take over the AP, and this is the problem isn't it?

 

Yes, and several of the solutions being suggested is to prevent this by making it impossible for breeders to take over the ap no matter how many eggs they breed, instead of preventing them entirely from contributing their way to the game. I wouldn't be surprised if a breeding limit hurts people during holidays when you only need about 30 pairs to breed 100 eggs.

[11th]

Just in case anyone is confused about how well stacking by breed(er) could work, here's a quick visual example (using one wall + six eggs per breed/breeder):

  → 

 

Yes, the stacked eggs would probably be picked up slower than the rest of the AP. However, once they hit 4d 0h people will be much more inclined to pick them up regardless of lineage. (Especially if the rest of the AP is much higher timed.) People like easy hatchlings to work towards higher trophies, for frozen armies, for zombie fodder, etc.

 

The lowest time eggs already show first, so nothing should die via time behind the condensed wall. If they're stacked by breeder, then the only eggs that they could even "hurt" are their own anyway, which may naturally deter some users from breeding superwalls.

 

 

"But what if a few people breed walls around the same time?"

There would still be a more variety to the eggs than there is currently because they would all be from different users who have different breed and lineage preferences. Example:

 

Row 1 - Mostly messy and inbred high gens of a Breed A

Row 2 - 2nd gens from from Breed B and Breed C

Row 3 - Checkers of various length and breeds

Row 4 - Lower gen and "lesser" messies of mixed breeds

Row 5 - Mixed BSAs

 

Even if all five rows were the same breed, not everyone likes the same lineages. Not everyone collects/breeds messies or even non-CBs, so there would be better lineage variety.
Even if there were five different breeds with the same super messy lineages, that's better than 30 eggs of a single breed because not everyone likes every breeds.

[Fuzzbucket]

7 hours ago, Fiona said:

I don't think adding AP-only egg slots is a very good idea. It favors one type of play over another and that's something we're trying to get away from. Plus, adding egg slots in general is only something to be considered after long and careful thought due to how it changes game pacing.

 

Limiting breeding in some way also is favoring one type of play over another. I don't think we can do either of those things fairly.

 

Limiting by breeder or by breed what shows in the AP isn't telling those breeders what to breed, it just makes it so AP hunters' preferred style of play isn't hampered by someone else's.

 

I agree with Fi.  And no to more egg slots.

 

7 hours ago, Tawanda001 said:

 

I think putting some sort of additional limit on breeding is the only way to solve the wall problem. I'm skeptical that only allowing a certain amount of a breed, or breeder's eggs, at a time will actually make a lot of difference in the long run. Will all those other mass bred eggs waiting in the background for their turn to be visible cause a traffic jam so to speak, will some of the eggs from other breeders still get stuck behind them like they do now?

 

I could not agree less. I also think it is completely unreasonable. I mind less about walls than most here, though I'm not  particularly supportive of them either - but it is the breeders' right to play the way they want to, just as it is mine not to make a wall, or to make massively inbred lineages, or to insist on only CBs on my scroll.

 

6 hours ago, HeatherMarie said:

 

Well yes, that's exactly what this suggestion is about, trying to find a way to change that. What I'm trying to explain is that the answer to 'breeders controlling AP-hunter's play' is *not* 'control breeder's play'. We are trying to look for solutions that will take *away* the negative influences of other's play, not move it from one place to another. Yes, the AP-walls are an issue (to many people). But punishing breeders for it isn't the answer. Ideally, something should be changed that doesn't negatively affect *anyone's* playstyle, regardless of if you are an AP-hunter, biome-hunter, breeder, etc. 

 

Another way to put it: People are upset/angry that mass-breeders control the AP. So in retaliation they want to control breeder's play? That's not a good solution. That's a spiteful solution. There are other suggestions in this very thread that *don't* negatively impact *anyone's* play, so suggesting that we instead deliberately limit breeders when there are other solutions... No.

 

Exactly. Breeders could equally argue that your spoiling their game is just as spiteful as your belief that they are deliberately spoiling yours. Most of them make walls for their own valid reasons - they are thinking of your play style exactly as much as you are thinking of theirs when you say they have to be stopped. Nobody "must be stopped."

 

5 hours ago, tjekan said:

 

They shouldn't, no. Basically the idea is that all of a single breeder's eggs stack up behind the first 3, or 5, or 6, or however many TJ decides upon, and then appear only when those first eggs are picked up. Meanwhile other eggs are continuing to advance to the front of the AP where people can take them, instead of getting stuck behind the massbred wall like they currently do.

 

It would definitely be a real improvement.

 

Yes indeed.

[tjekan]

7 hours ago, 11th said:

Even if all five rows were the same breed, not everyone likes the same lineages. Not everyone collects/breeds messies or even non-CBs, so there would be better lineage variety.

 

Yes, and even if all of that failed--even if there was a group massbreed of messy mints and the whole AP was messy mints from 6 different breeders--it would still be no worse than it is now. Even the WORST case scenario is no worse than the current status quo. And coordinating multiple people to spend hours breeding the same thing is hard and wouldn't happen very often. I personally never minded AP walls back when they were happening a few times a year. If it goes back to that, terrific.

 

And if it turns out to be a persistent problem, the number of eggs per breeder can just be reduced further till it isn't. 

 

Thanks for the clear visual example, 11th, I think this should really help!

[purplehaze]

1 hour ago, tjekan said:

Even the WORST case scenario is no worse than the current status quo.

Exactly.

But the chances of it ending up that way are vanishingly slim, I think. We might get people trying that a time or two to see if they could, but I think it would be hard enough to do that it would keep them from making a habit of it.

 

I'm squarely in the "didn't mind the walls when they were a rare occurrence" camp. It was kind of fun to see them and most of the people who did them at first weren't breeding junk and didn't drop literally thousands of eggs. Now it seems that nearly every day we are faced with a new wall or two and some of them go on and on and on! I am quite willing to allow those people to breed as many dragons of whatever lineage they choose as long as it doesn't interfere with the majority of AP hunters.

Edited November 15, 2019 by purplehaze

[Uther_Pendragon]

11th!!! Thank you! That is really cool to see what it could look like!

 

Adding extra slots might not address the wall issue, because it wouldn't guarantee the wall eggs got picked up, so we'd be right where we are.

Incentivizing still feels like forcing ppl to raise eggs they don't want to clear the ap, which is where we are now, minus the small chance of winning something in the raffle.

 

There have been mentions that there are benefits to mass breeds, like helping getting the rare in a common x rare breeding pair, which is valid, and potentially helps everyone who breeds anything.

A floating ap idea is cool! It pops up when the game sees that there's more than 30 eggs of one breed, then goes away when the wall, or walls are done. (Like the Holiday biome pops up during the holidays, and is gone when the holiday is done) 

 

The x eggs per breeder visible seems to have the least impact to different play styles.

Eggs from other breeder's shouldn't get stuck behind anything in this solution, because only that one player's eggs are in the multi-egg stack.

(if it were to stack by breed, then, yeah, that could be an issue)

 

 

 

[purplehaze]

1 minute ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

The x eggs per breeder visible seems to have the least impact to different play styles.

Eggs from other breeder's shouldn't get stuck behind anything in this solution, because only that one player's eggs are in the multi-egg stack.

(if it were to stack by breed, then, yeah, that could be an issue)

That, to me, is the best argument against stacking by dragon breed. Although they would eventually surface it is entirely possible that they could be under 3 days and couldn't be influenced, which would be a real shame if they had nice lineages.

 

[Fuzzbucket]

1 hour ago, tjekan said:

 

Yes, and even if all of that failed--even if there was a group massbreed of messy mints and the whole AP was messy mints from 6 different breeders--it would still be no worse than it is now. Even the WORST case scenario is no worse than the current status quo. And coordinating multiple people to spend hours breeding the same thing is hard and wouldn't happen very often. I personally never minded AP walls back when they were happening a few times a year. If it goes back to that, terrific.

 

And if it turns out to be a persistent problem, the number of eggs per breeder can just be reduced further till it isn't. 

 

Thanks for the clear visual example, 11th, I think this should really help!

 

To those who are troubled, this is absolutely true. Nothing TJ could do would make it WORSE.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

 

The x eggs per breeder visible seems to have the least impact to different play styles.

Eggs from other breeder's shouldn't get stuck behind anything in this solution, because only that one player's eggs are in the multi-egg stack.

(if it were to stack by breed, then, yeah, that could be an issue)

 

5 minutes ago, purplehaze said:

That, to me, is the best argument against stacking by dragon breed. Although they would eventually surface it is entirely possible that they could be under 3 days and couldn't be influenced, which would be a real shame if they had nice lineages.

 

 

Breeder rather than breed, yes..

[tjekan]

Stacking by breeder rather than breed leaves each breeder in their own driver's seat, which I prefer. If it's stacked by breed, then one breeder can get caught behind another one who happened to breed their dragons first. If the first breeder laid down 1200 inbred mints and the second one dropped a bunch of upside-down-mint-and-shimmer checkers, the second breeder would have no way to help their eggs get to the front page in time to be influencable--they'd be at the mercy of luck and earlier breeders.

 

But if it's stacked by breed, then if a breeder has eggs they really want to be able to be influenced, like checkers or prize stairsteps or something, then they can make sure they drop those first, before breeding other eggs whose gender doesn't matter to them, and the gender-sensitive ones would always appear before anything else in their stack.

 

It leaves the tools for planning drops in the hand of each breeder, so that's why I like it better. I'd still be fine with stacking by breed though, as it would still be better than the current situation.

[Fuzzbucket]

12 minutes ago, tjekan said:

Stacking by breeder rather than breed leaves each breeder in their own driver's seat, which I prefer. If it's stacked by breed, then one breeder can get caught behind another one who happened to breed their dragons first. If the first breeder laid down 1200 inbred mints and the second one dropped a bunch of upside-down-mint-and-shimmer checkers, the second breeder would have no way to help their eggs get to the front page in time to be influencable--they'd be at the mercy of luck and earlier breeders.

 

But if it's stacked by breed, then if a breeder has eggs they really want to be able to be influenced, like checkers or prize stairsteps or something, then they can make sure they drop those first, before breeding other eggs whose gender doesn't matter to them, and the gender-sensitive ones would always appear before anything else in their stack.

 

It leaves the tools for planning drops in the hand of each breeder, so that's why I like it better. I'd still be fine with stacking by breed though, as it would still be better than the current situation.

 

I agree - till your last sentence. The loss of stunning lines because someone else got there with less exciting ones is not OK. (I want a shimmer upside down checker now !)

[tjekan]

To be fair, that would be pretty awesome even if it gendered wrong. 🙂

 

But yes, I think the stacking by breeder proposal provides the best options for everyone--mass breeders, small breeders, and egg-raisers alike!

[Uther_Pendragon]

..And stacking by breed instead of breeder also affects those who *do* hunt for dropped cb's for whatever reason; lower time, slow internet, etc (yes, I know the biomes are all cb, but there's been reasons stated why ppl AP hunt for them, if we're taking into acct a variety of concerns that have been voiced.)

Stacking by breeder seems to allow the most variety of styles to be represented.

[olympe]

20 minutes ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

..And stacking by breed instead of breeder also affects those who *do* hunt for dropped cb's for whatever reason; lower time, slow internet, etc (yes, I know the biomes are all cb, but there's been reasons stated why ppl AP hunt for them, if we're taking into acct a variety of concerns that have been voiced.)

Stacking by breeder seems to allow the most variety of styles to be represented.

On the plus side, if "anyBiome" is considered another "breeder", we won't have CB holiday walls after the Winter Holiday of choice or Valentine's event any more.  Since it probably won't really matter any other point in time (since there usually aren't that many CB eggs in the AP at once), I'm all for making CB eggs stack like any breeder's eggs, too. 

[Jazeki]

On 11/12/2019 at 10:49 PM, LadyLyzar said:

• Do nothing. 
• Limit breeding per scroll. 
• Limit the number of eggs one breeder has displayed. 
• Limit the amount of eggs of one breed being displayed. 
• A way to filter what you see in the AP.
• Paginate the AP
• Split the AP into biomes

I skimmed the thread so here's my 2 cents.

 

1. Do nothing. Preferable, but not opposed to changes in the best interest of game play.

2. Limit scroll breeding. No. When I do massbreeding, I try to do as many as possible in a sitting. It's already tedious. I don't need additional constraints beyond what we have now (no egg, refusal, etc.)

3.  Limit egg number. I'd be ok as long as it was something more than three eggs. Four is the lowest I'd go (like a holiday clutch).

4. Limit egg breed. Meh. We can't always control what breed we get (unless it's purebred) and some good lines could get lost behind the limit.

5. AP filter. I'd be ok as long as we could prevent cherry picking for rares/special lineages.

6. Paginate AP. I'd be ok with this and the idea of a floating AP that appears when we go over a certain amount of eggs.

7. Biome AP. Also ok as long as there as each "biome" has 30 egg slots.

[Fiona]

I really think the original post needs updated with a bit of information from what TJ posted, such as the infeasibility of numbers 5, 6 and 7. And the general unpopularity of number 2. And the stats he posted that shows why number 1 isn't really an option anymore.

[Fuzzbucket]

16 hours ago, Fiona said:

I really think the original post needs updated with a bit of information from what TJ posted, such as the infeasibility of numbers 5, 6 and 7. And the general unpopularity of number 2. And the stats he posted that shows why number 1 isn't really an option anymore.

 

Oopsie; deleted.

Edited November 16, 2019 by Fuzzbucket

[Fiona]

She did. Scroll down.

 

 

As she said when she updated the first post, all the suggestions carry at least a risk of negative consequences. However, limiting the display by breeder or by breed carries the least risk. TJ's thought was if he limits how many eggs per breeder display then he'd start with a higher number and adjust as he sees it's needed.

Edited November 16, 2019 by Fiona

[Fuzzbucket]

Oops, I wasn't on line for a bit.  Breeder is WAY better than breed.