The Ratio Problem - and possible solutions

[olympe]

Okay, so this has come up in the AP thread again: Ratios.

 

Ratios in and of themselves are considered a problem by many players. And there are several different reasons and issues, I think.

 

1) Common vs Uncommon vs Rare: I don't know how badly this actually is, but I know from years of experience that there's that "rares are rare for a reason" crowd out there. Maybe we need to discuss how rare is too rare, and how common is too common. I honestly don't know. However, I don't see that as the main problem at the moment.

 

2) Common x Common breedings: Here, the age of the breed is the deciding factor. If you breed two commons of the same rarity tier (both cost 100 shard in the market) - you're almost guaranteed to get eggs of the younger breed. In the first year, the chance is around 90% or more. Which is badly skewed. How can this be solved? Because this needs solving. Badly. Many players refuse to do breeding projects with new breeds because of this issue, which means that the ratios have a harder time to even out. Some other players decide to breed whole walls of the new breed in order to enforce an eventual effect on the ratios, leading to complaints about one-breed walls in the AP.

 

3) Drops of New Breeds: There has been some discussion lately that new breeds should drop for a little longer at higher numbers after their release. Because there's a rush of people grabbing the new breeds, meaning there is higher demand. However, we also need to consider how long is too long. I certainly remember the Midwinter Madness release ten years ago, where hardly anything but Electrics, Canopies and Nocturnes dropped in the cave for several weeks on end. Everything else - even dirt commons - were so rare that people picked them up as quickly as golds. How long should a new release drop exclusively, almost exclusively, at higher than normal frequency to allow people to catch their first ones easily enough? Consider that, the longer a release lasts, the more fed up players get with the lack of diversity in the biomes. On the other hand, longer drops should have an effect on the breeding ratios so those even out faster.

 

Does anyone see another problem that needs to be addressed?

 

****

 

Personally, I think that there isn't much to be done about #1, as the different rarities are meant to be. The only thing I'd like to propose is an upper limit for rarity to avoid certain breeds going almost extinct. I've seen a time period of 2 years where golds were rarer than rare. It was awful.

 

I think that pretty much the biggest issue is #2, the common x common breedings. I'd really like to see separate ratio workings for both old and new breeds. Like more CB drops for new breeds - at least for a while - but already evened-out breeding ratios. This allows people to do all kinds of breeding projects pretty quickly without having to breed 10+ pairings in the hope of getting an older common. The ability to actually create lineages without going above and beyond normal effort for a simple common x common pairing should actually encourage breeding of the new breeds, and thus help the ratios.

 

Regarding #3, the new releases, I think I'd like to see 24 hours of constant mass-drops without other breeds mixing in. This way, everybody has the same chance to get their first few eggs despite the existence of time zones, work obligations and the like. Demand will stay a little bit higher than for other breeds for a while until the novelty wears off, and I think that higher-than-normal drop rates should reflect that.

However, I don't really know for how long they should last, and at which speed they should even out.

[Keileon]

I feel like the ratio system is something that worked really well... when we had a few dozen breeds to work with. As we get more breeds things start skewing in a way that, however the ratios are coded, it's technically working as intended mathematically but in actual gameplay players feel like it's broken. Without knowing the code and math behind the curtain I can't really number-crunch the system and how it's slowly broken over the years, but in theory the sheer volume of breeds means that newer breeds have longer to catch up, especially when certain older breeds are less popular and thus underpopulated.

 

I feel like the problem isn't so much in amounts and timeframes, but in the base ratio mechanic. My primary suggestion would be for TJ to reassess whatever formula he's using, if it hasn't been touched since before we got 100 or so breeds. If it has, then I think there's just something fundamentally flawed with the idea of using ratios to determine the population of 244 species, especially when that number grows basically every month.

[VixenDra]

1. well, anythig that takes over a year to get 2 of is simply on the badly overdone rarity end. Undeads, for example. Ever since their release I kept working on them, and I'm still missing lots of adults, even the regular western. Undeads are light-years beyond any sensible raroty level. The kill limit is a joke on its own, but combined with the extremelly low success percentage it's just beyond words. And I'm not even refffering to the fact they require sacrifices, often of breeds that can be difficult to obtain especially if you want to make some kind of a tombstone pattern as well(ekhm, Kyanites from Forest was the mistake of my life on DC, any other biome they drop in would end up way easier than Forest:/ I'm just 1 kyanite zombie short tho so that's too late for swapping)...

 

2. heard of that commonXcommon breedign problem and this is just screaming for a fix. CommonxCommon should always be around 50% chance, and the ratios should be evened-out via biome spawns mostly. And a few hours long release flood has absolutely no chance to let those reach a satisfactory level, so it should get severly prolonged as well, to make the ratios capable of settling in.

Perhaps the ratios also need to get reset periodically. Once-twice a year at the minimum.

 

3. In another game I play, new breeds are released for 3-days long exclusive floods. And the floods only affect the biomes that get a new breed released - the remaining biomes remain unaffected, unless all biomes get some release at the time. In addition to that, those eggs are insta-spawned when/if the biome gets cleared, so the supply is literally constant. I suggest exactly that. If 3 days of this is too much, then at least 2 days will still help.

 

Regardless if I'm correct or not, TJ still should seek for ways to fix the problems - which we're not seing happen, and not because it's not announced, but because the problems still occur (commonXcommon breeding being probably the most obvious).

[Fuzzbucket]

I agree - #2 is the big issue. 

 

This is NOT OK.

https://dragcave.net/progeny/6mKdW

https://dragcave.net/progeny/jb1kd

 

I'm pretty much giving up on it right now. (ETA so NOW I actually get a kya ! Well, squeaky wheel and all that !)

 

I don't see the new release drop rate as being connected with the ratio issue, so I really can' get excited about that.

 

And undeads have nothing to do with ratios.

Edited January 5, 2020 by Fuzzbucket

[tjekan]

It's been a long time since I had a math class, but I'm almost positive there is a way of measuring how quickly a curve changes to approach a mean. Whatever it is I'm trying to think of-- THAT is what needs to be adjusted. It's fine if every new breed will be overproducing for the next 5 years. Okay. But it doesn't need to be doing that at a rate of more than 2:1 against any other egg of the same rarity. Let the number slowly coast up instead of trying to jack it up faster with 5 or more times the breeding rate.

 

The suggestion to let us influence breed would also solve the common breeding problem, though it has some potential issues of own.

[Stormcaller]

4 hours ago, olympe said:

1) Common vs Uncommon vs Rare: I don't know how badly this actually is, but I know from years of experience that there's that "rares are rare for a reason" crowd out there. Maybe we need to discuss how rare is too rare, and how common is too common. I honestly don't know....

 

There are definitely some that are too rare.  For example, I've been playing since 2010 and I've yet to be able to catch a Gold. I'll admit that I'm not the fastest catcher, but I'm sure that's not the whole problem. I remember, years ago, I used to see them once in a while, but these days I don't seem to see them in the cave at all.  I do see them in the Trading Hub, however, so there does seem to be some people who are more adept at finding them and catching them. They must be dropping but rarely enough for me to ever see them.  A few months ago I finally broke down and bought one in the Market just so I could have one that wasn't bred by someone else.

 

There are others too, that are rare like Copper and Silver and it would be nice to be able to see more of them.

 

On the other hand, I've had mixed feelings when something I've valued for it's scarcity suddenly became available to everyone.

[BrazenChase]

I will chime in and say that the current ratio system really kills my hype for new releases. We get new dragons which is super fun! But we can't really start making any lineages with them for who knows how long? So when a breed I really like is released, I catch some and then... Sit for a really long time not doing a whole lot with them because it feels really pointless to try and make lineages that aren't PB. I'll breed for checkers and only have one half for months and months at a time just sitting there with little to no hope of a counterpart.

 

Aside from the initial flood in the cave, I wish breeding would just operate based on an assigned value rather than one that moves with ratios. If the rarity of a breed is something determined from the start, that stays static, then we won't have these problems.

 

For example, Lihnseyres release as a common breed. Have that "common" value be a static thing, so that they can immediately interact with other breeds on-site similarly to how other common breeds do. That way it still behaves as a common as intended, but without months and months (or even years) of being "ubercommon/new release" that drowns out all attempts at breeding with other things (including other commons).

 

Edited January 5, 2020 by BrazenChase

[Firefury Amahira]

#2 and #3 definitely strike me as the main issues.

 

With regards to #2, if I recall right, TJ did adjust the ratio formula awhile back so that dragons/eggs older than a certain point no longer counted toward the ratio calculation (whereas before, it was ALL the dragons in the site's population factored into it.) I forget when that cutoff point actually is, but it seems to me that maybe that cutoff point needs to be shortened so that the ratios reflect a more up-to-date screenshot of the site's recent dragon population. Alternatively, re-evaluating and tweaking whatever the formula is based on both expected rarity (common/uncommon/rare/etc) as well as apparent user demand (popular/unpopular). For instance, blacktips are clearly meant to be common, but they're also clearly not much in demand so the ratios seem almost permanently skewed to overproduce blacktips. This exact issue is part of why I keep so many stats on my blacktip mass-breeding results, to provide some tangible, useful data for discussions like these. (Number crunchers, all my data is available here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aea3het7Fymab1dmww2xLut3eL3TfbsuR3MKPz67SLE/edit?usp=sharing) . Ordinarily when I massbreed them, roughly 1/4th of the total eggs produced are celestials; after two years of work the ratios have shifted enough that the market price has budged finally, and my most recent massbreed (and potentially current record wall holder, oops) saw 1/3rd of the total eggs being celestials. Assuming that celestials are also common, ideally that result should be closer to 50/50, not 70/30. Basically, ratios right now only factor in the intended rarity and current population, they probably also need to factor in apparent popularity/demand as well.

 

As for #3, a bigger start to new releases to help get the population in line with the ratios more quickly is DEFINITELY a good idea. I think a minimum 3-day release flood window (only affecting the biomes said new release is in) would go a long way towards that, maybe up to a week. That would ensure that everyone has a chance to grab some during the opening flood even if they can't play daily, and a week at max wouldn't linger so long as to be unbearably annoying the way the already-mentioned Midwinter Madness release was. And maybe some tweak to how the ratio works so that at first new releases are rated more like uncommons, and over time as the population starts to even out they revert to their intended common status.

 

Another possible option might be to tweak availability mechanics. There's almost 250 breeds available right now, with more sure to come at a reasonably steady rate. I forget if some dragons already do this, but maybe it would help everybody out if certain commons shifted to uncommon or even rare at certain times of the year, whether it's a seasonal or a monthly cycle. This could help breeders with their projects if they know that certain times of year they have better odds of getting desired results and help future-proof the cave's ever-growing breed selection by having the mechanic in place to juggle an ever-growing volume of "common" breeds.

[Sazandora]

I do agree that the way new breeds are released right now, the flood of new eggs is WAY too short. You have my utmost support for a 2-3 day continuous flood to alleviate the stress of catching them. And yes, the ratios are absolutely freaking bonkers right now -- took me ages to get Lihnseyres out of Siyats long after their release, and on the flipside it took me forever to not get Siyats from non-Siyats... again, months after their release. And regarding Pipios, @Fuzzbucket, I have the exact opposite situation with this guy and his parents. They've only ever produced Kovos pygmies. It was a freaking miracle to get that 2G Pipio so I could finish the lineage (had a friend breed it for me, got a Pipio on first try).

 

I'd love to do lineages with Aqualises and some other new dragons, but seeing them absolutely dominating the breeding results is discouraging to say the least.

[tjekan]

Thematically, for a collection game whose mantra is supposed to be that you can choose to play it however you wish, it is Very Bad that we are expected to take much more than we want of newer dragons before the game quotas allow us to breed anything else from them, and it does Not Help that users' only available method of speeding this process up is to breed thousands of eggs no one wants and force other people to clog their scrolls with them. We only have 8 egg slots at a time. We can only breed a pair we really want an egg from once a week. Making us repeatedly waste our limited action economy on unwanted eggs because of arbitrary ratios is not fun. 

[Auriene]

8 hours ago, tjekan said:

Thematically, for a collection game whose mantra is supposed to be that you can choose to play it however you wish, it is Very Bad that we are expected to take much more than we want of newer dragons before the game quotas allow us to breed anything else from them, and it does Not Help that users' only available method of speeding this process up is to breed thousands of eggs no one wants and force other people to clog their scrolls with them. We only have 8 egg slots at a time. We can only breed a pair we really want an egg from once a week. Making us repeatedly waste our limited action economy on unwanted eggs because of arbitrary ratios is not fun. 

 

This so much.

 

I really wish ratios applied only to CBs, not to bred dragons. With breeding, the chance of obtaining either breed should be 50% regardless of the species (OK, maybe it could be a bit harder with Prizes), because let's face it - bred rares are nowhere as desirable as CBs and they have almost no significant value on the market now. I suppose that people breeding more of 2nd gen. Golds or Silvers would breed them mostly for their own lineages or lineage swaps, anyway.

[UnicornMaiden]

#1 I don't feel is that much of a problem. Having some breeds which are really difficult to obtain helps keep the game interesting for me. Also, I feel like the introduction of the Trading Hub has resolved any issues I used to have regarding very rare breeds because I have been able to trade for things I wasn't able to catch on my own.

 

#2 is a big problem. I have given up on some breeding projects because of the newer breed being so dominant. It's no fun breeding the same dragons over and over again trying for just one egg of the right breed.

 

#3 is interesting. I feel like adjusting the initial release would be a good idea. If the relevant biome was flooded with the new eggs for a day or two that would help people get them without having a mad rush. It's not often that new releases affect every biome, so people who aren't interested in collecting brand new dragons could still hunt elsewhere.

[Keileon]

Adding onto my previous post, I feel that this is not a problem with the details of the system, but the system itself. Thus, it can't be solved by changing those details (extending release drops, more eggs per drop, etc) but rather by changing how the system works. Extending release drop time or adding volume to those drops is only putting duct tape on a machine that's falling apart-- it works in the short term, but doesn't address the real problem. The real problem, I feel,  is that the ratio system is not built with hundreds of dragon species in mind.

 

My personal suggestions (any one of them, rather than all of them at once):

 

1. Make ratios apply only to CB dragons. This is a common suggestion, I think? Like Auriene said before me, the value of non-CB rares goes down sharply to the point where you can probably ask someone for a 2G Gold and they'd oblige without much in return except for maybe a couple of CB common hatchlings. THAT SAID, I do support keeping rares as harder to breed, but not to the point we currently see. I'm thinking more in terms of common x common breedings, or at least commons in relation to one another. If I breed a Nocturne with, say, a Nebula I should theoretically be getting an even 50/50 chance of either, but that's simply not how it's working now.

 

2. Reset the ratios every 6 to 12 months. I know the current system is such that dragons *stop* counting after a year, but we never seem to have any kind of "blank slate" in terms of the ratios. If I had to pin a date for the reset it'd be annually, on DC's birthday. This is another common suggestion, I think.

 

3. Do away with the ratio system entirely and set each individual dragon species into baseline tiers of rarity. This is a COMPLETE system overhaul. Make breeding based on flat percentages, rather than ratios. Two dragons in the same rarity tier? 50/50 shot of a resulting egg being one or the other breed. Breed a rare with a common? Skew the result so that any egg they produce has a 95% (example) chance to be the common's breed. Breed two dragons of different tiers that have a chance of making a hybrid? Give hybrids their own flat chance to spawn, roll for it first, then if that roll fails, roll for the parent breeds. Compatibility checks remain untouched, chance of getting nothing remains untouched.

 

How would 3 apply to CB generation? Perhaps spawn a set amount of each tier, then every dragon in one tier has an equal chance of spawning in. How would it apply to the market? Simple-- stop the price-change-based-on-population aspect and give them flat prices based on rarity. How would it apply to  new releases? Either give them their own tier that is changed to their intended tier after, say, two weeks-- or implement the "2-3 days of exclusive drops" idea. I know the ratios are one of the oldest mechanics in the game, and that they were meant to add some realism, but while this system worked great in 2012 we just have too many dragons these days and the system isn't doing well with the sheer amount of things it has to balance.

[Chaosdawn]

I really really would like the common x common breeding to be fixed. I'm already frustrated with my leodon x white checker and I refuse to even try the mint x tercorn checker or pipio x magelight. It's very limiting that the ratios are so unbalanced. They're commons, it shouldn't be next to impossible to breed one. =/

[Leidarendi]

The ratios have been a problem for a while now.  I don't have any answers.  I just don't bother hunting in the main cave or breeding anything special - haven't done either, I mean really "play the game", in years now.  I just keep breeding my waters and growing my water army.  Occasionally I'll grab a water if its right there on the main cave to help unblock it for others, and then I'll grab new releases.  That's pretty much all my involvement in this game/site now.

 

Would love to go back to when hunting in the cave was enjoyable and meant something.  Open to all ideas.

[tjekan]

I'm wondering why we even need ratios at all. I mean, what purpose is actually served by trying to enforce users raising the same number of blacktips as whites? If people like whites better, well... is there actually a problem with that? Let them raise what they want to raise. Making it harder for anyone to breed a non-blacktip from a blacktop makes them want blacktips LESS, not more, because they can't breed most popular lineages with them so what do they need more than a few for?

 

Obviously there needs to be some way of establishing rarity (golds shouldnt occur as often as blacktips etc), but that doesnt require across the board rationing. Just make them appear a certain percentage less often.

[Keileon]

20 hours ago, tjekan said:

I'm wondering why we even need ratios at all. I mean, what purpose is actually served by trying to enforce users raising the same number of blacktips as whites?

That's not quite what it is, it's more of a population ratio-- so it's not an equal amount of all dragons, but for example if Blacktips are meant to have twice the population as Whites, the site's RNG will skew towards Blacktips until the 2:1 ratio is reached.

 

As to its purpose, it's a very old mechanic I believe has been a part of the site since conception, or shortly after. It's meant to reflect real-world ecological population ratios, for example how wolves will always be less numerous than deer in healthy ecology. This worked very well way back when. It's lost much of its purpose in recent years.

[cyradis4]

1. isn't a problem. There are multiple methods (including the store, now) to get many of those really rare rares. And Zombies are much easier once each year, then have an increased chance every 31st. 

 

2. Major, major problem. For the common x common, my preferred method of correction would be to use a BSA (similar to the Pinks) that reduces the odds of producing the breed you don't want. Or one that bumps up the odds of getting the one you do want. 

 

3. Also a problem, but I think people are missing how the mechanic actually works. TJ's on record as saying that he doesn't "set" a flood time: the cave mechanics flood the site to equalize the ratios, or some such. I too would like to see new releases adjusted so they flood for at least 3 days but no more than 6: 3 days lets everyone get two full loads of incu-hatchables if they want. This, I feel, will go a long way toward helping problem 2. And @tjekan  is correct: if TJ is using something like an PID loop.... then he's got it over-damped, so it takes a very long time to reach the steady state; 

 

I think something like the 2nd one: stable under-damped overshoot would work best. That'd create a fair bit of fluctuation right after a new breed was initially released: some times it'll be easier and others harder, until it stabalizes, but at least we wouldn't be taking 1 year to reach the steady state. 

 

Cheers!
C4. 

[tjekan]

3 hours ago, Keileon said:

It's meant to reflect real-world ecological population ratios, for example how wolves will always be less numerous than deer in healthy ecology.

 

That's a good concept, but the ratio mechanic doesn't accomplish that. It might have superficially produced the same result back when we had like 16 breeds, but it still wasn't actually mimicking what goes on in real ecosystems. If a particular species becomes underpopulated in an ecosystem, there do NOT suddenly become 5 times more of them to catch them back up to where they're supposed to be. What really happens is that competing species start taking their place in that region.

 

Also, if this is meant to mimic a natural ecosystem then it should not be dictated by the number of dragons on our scrolls and should not be affected by our breeding activities. That's animal husbandry by humans, not anything happening in the ecosystem. It'd be like saying that how many dogs humans breed any given year should change how many wolves are born in the wild.

 

I'd be good with seeing more natural population trends in the cave. Species could be more numerous at certain times of year, or they could go through cycles of increasing and decreasing population. But it shouldn't have anything to do with what WE are breeding. Gold dragons should not suddenly start becoming more fertile if humans stopped raising them in captivity. Blacktip dragons should not become less numerous in the wild because somebody breeds 20,000 of them on a farm. And pet dragons should not lay fewer eggs the more other people in some other location have their breed as pets. That makes no logical sense at all. (As well as being annoying from a gameplay perspective--essentially forcing people to raise more of the dragons they like least if they want to keep playing!)

 

 

 

 

I think something like the 2nd one: stable under-damped overshoot would work best. That'd create a fair bit of fluctuation right after a new breed was initially released: some times it'll be easier and others harder, until it stabalizes, but at least we wouldn't be taking 1 year to reach the steady state. 

 

Cheers!
C4. 

 

Math! Whoo! If replacing the ratio system is not tenable, maybe we could just try a reasonable mathematical solution like graph #2 up there, to make it less oppressive?

 

Edited January 8, 2020 by tjekan

[osmarks]

A partial workaround for the current problems would be to have a minimum probability of 10% or something for getting one breed out of a pairing. So regardless of what's up with the ratios, you would always have at least a 10% chance of getting whatever dragon you want (if you get an egg at all). This would, however, make the ratios fix themselves more slowly, and still be pretty annoying (actually, there might already be something like this, though probably with a lower minimum chance).

 

An actual solution would be to replace the ratios with something else, though what exactly depends on what their purpose was meant to be, which as far as I'm aware is not something known to the userbase. If the idea is to keep actual rarity in line with the "designed" rarity of some species, I can't really think of a better way to do it, honestly. Only applying ratios to cave drops and only calculating them from CBs would work for, well, keeping CBs "in balance", but if TJ09 also cares about the rarity of bred ones then that won't really work. If it's for realism then... well, it's not realistic (real-world animals do not do this or anything like this) and while running a complex ecological simulation is probably a non-starter, making rarity of each breed vary randomly over time based on stuff like the biomes they live in, time of year, phase of the moon and whatever else might make more sense.

[olympe]

Well, as I said - use different ratios for breeding and cave drops.

Cave drops should heavily take into account how old a breed is, as newer breeds are in higher demand for quite a while.

However, breeding ratios shouldn't depend on the age of the breed, but only the intended rarity. So, yes, breeding common x rare will still result in mostly common offspring. But common x common (both of the 100 shards variety, for simplicity's sake) will result in 50:50 of each parent breed. (Unless there's a possible hybrid or some other quirky breeding mechanic.)

[Shadowdrake]

https://dragcave.net/progeny/wmdwk mathematically, if you look at this progeny, there's 36 kids before I stopped breeding, all scripts. That is a minimum of 36 weeks of the non-script mates being on cool down after having bred a script. If we take just non-celestials that is still at minimum 19 weeks of pure scripts. This isn't even counting lack of interest or no egg results. And the mate certainly isn't a rare breeder: https://dragcave.net/progeny/e24em

 

I don't enjoy spending months upon months breeding pointlessly when I picked them for ease of access. Support for making bred results more straightforward. No opinion on 1 or 3.

[Astiana]

Got the feelz so much about that progeny, Shadowdrake. I'd add it gets even more egregious when you think on the RNG for breeding time-gated dergs like lumina or Lunar Heralds - especially LHs (silver and indigo) - where, depending on time zone, you can't get a second breed in within the week because of cool downs - which means to all intents and purposes, they can breed correctly only once a month ... if the RNG feels like cooperating ... even with purples, the results are disappointing.

[pinkgothic]

Regarding common x common breeding, I do agree something needs to be done (I enjoy the idea that's been floating around of making common x common breedings a straight coinflip (50/50) to decide on the species), but I also want to submit some data that may in some cases (but definitely not anywhere near all) be helpful to people:

 

Compare the progeny of Akshabeque x Sinopian and Gunhash x Sangrian. They were bred with equal frequency (as you can see, I eventually began switching). Akshabeque x Sinopian looks suspiciously like what we see with new release breeding, but no - in that particular case, what's happening is that the pair just doesn't like producing Dorsals. They were very compatible with each other - they gave me an egg almost every time I bred them (indeed, my records show they only gave me "no egg" once, and never complained about "no interest"), but it was always a sunstone! The other pair gave me "no interest" sometimes, but was a lot more varied. [I never did get that red dorsal out of my own pairs; but I do have one now, thanks to munificent's help. ❤️]

 

So if you can switch up your mates, try it. It cannot fix the ratio issue, but it might yet help your particular situation. Just sharing in case it ends up helping someone.

[Fiona]

"No Interest" actually means they aren't refusing but are not very compatible. So if you're getting "No Interest" messages, you definitely need to switch up your pairs.

 

Personally, while I'd like to see something done to address the issue of certain breeds dominating any breedings involving that breed I think the ratios as they currently exist are integral to the coding. (something TJ said, which I now cannot find, left me with that impression. Obviously I could be remembering it wrong, but he has said that ratios are staying) I don't want TJ to have to recode his whole game. But I agree it shouldn't be so hard to get something other than say a script, when breeding scripts with anything. Or whichever other newer breed only breeds itself....