Breeding Questions & Suggestions

[Felmino]

Syaoran-Puu

Rule change suggestion
----------------------------------

I have been thinking alot about this rule lately, and although it doesn't effect me I believe it should be considered for change.

Currently LL only applies to a couple when trying for their first lot of babies, however this seems unfair to lifemated couples when they try for their second lot of babies as a flinged stallion for example would still be counted for LL with a new partner where as the lifemated couple would not. I do not believe they should be counted as LL as early as couples who are trying for their first set of babies but I think the rule should allow them to be classed as low luck if they have been trying for twice as long as the LL bar for first time couples.

So to explain,
If a colourist says "To be LL you must have been trying for 4months" this would mean that first time couples must have been trying for 4months, but second time plus couples must have been trying for 8months.
After all if they have been trying for so long and still have no children I think it is only fair that they have the opportunity to finally get them.

Thanks for listening smile (or rather reading!)

That's not actually how Low Luck works anymore.
Every unsuccessful raffle entry (master CC list does not count, raffles with multiple colorists still only count as one raffle) by a couple gives you one LL "point".
Getting baskets resets your LL counter to zero - you start accumulating "points" again with unsuccessful entries AFTER your last baskets.
When you hit the LL threshold (currently twenty failed raffle entries, but this may go down as we run out of LL qualified couples), your couple is Low Luck until you get baskets.

Does *not* affect Low Luck Status:
How many breedings you've had in the past with that couple
Lifemated versus Fling
Time between raffles (multiple unsuccessful entries in the same month each count)
Missing/skipping/entering a different couple
Offical Rules on Low Luck couples can be found here.

@ Roniel - I've got a RP slot in my February breedings? =)  

[Revolutionary Roniel]

@ Felmino: I see that! biggrin Thank you!  

[Tara de Draiocht]

Rule Suggestion;
Just wanted to speak my mind, I can not speak for everyone when i say this but I'm sure some are thinking it.

I suggest one breeding per month per person. Reason I say this is because since this shop is so popular and lots of couples enter, my suggestion would give more people a chance of winning. Instead of having the same person winning TWO breedings (or sometmes three) per month, that extra breeding could be given to someone that either hasnt won a breeding slot in a long time (i know some people who have been trying for a while) or to someone who hasnt won a slot at all.

Though I can understand too, that it wouldn't be fair to the owner of the mate to that person who already won a breeding but still just throwing my opinion out there.  

[Ragers]

Agreed with Sparrows.

As somebody who hasn't bred Soqs at all (11 failed attempts with George and LM), it makes me a little bit sad and frustrated to see people winning 2 or even 3 breedings a month.  

[Sayuri_Nitta]

That would make it far worse in my opinion. Yes, it can be frustrating to see people winning 2 breedings, but that's not their fault, just the luck of the draw.

If I'm entering with a couple, and the owner of the mare/stallion wins with their own seperate couple that means I would be unable to enter the couple I'm trying to win a breeding with for an entire month. And if it's the ONLY couple I'm currently trying with then I'm completely unable to enter - why should I be penalised because the other owner won a breeding that wasn't our couple?  

[Ragers]

Sayuri_Nitta

That would make it far worse in my opinion. Yes, it can be frustrating to see people winning 2 breedings, but that's not their fault, just the luck of the draw.

If I'm entering with a couple, and the owner of the mare/stallion wins with their own seperate couple that means I would be unable to enter the couple I'm trying to win a breeding with for an entire month. And if it's the ONLY couple I'm currently trying with then I'm completely unable to enter - why should I be penalised because the other owner won a breeding that wasn't our couple?

One month isn't really a long time compared to June '08. D: *How long we've been trying to breed LM and George*

In fact, the one-breeding-per-month rule seems to be the case for most B&C shops. Have a look around.

Alternatively, we could have more 1st time parent slots (like Fel had in her raffle).  

[Nisshou H]

I'm with Sayuri on this one. It sucks to lose raffles, yes, but each raffle you lose ads up to low luck which will eventually narrow the field you're competing in.  

[-Nessus-Euenos-]

Not in favor.

I feel the above would simply complication things for owners with multiple pairings.
I believe she was referring to the fact that if Person A and Person B win a raffle, it's not fair to Person C (who has a pairing with Person B) to NOT be able to enter THEIR pairing for the duration of the month in with Person B has won... Yes, they still have the Master CC entry, but the couple can't win their either since the "1 breeding win per month" rule would still apply.





Regardless, at the moment an owner can enter 2 pairs per raffle per month (or, if they have already won one slot, one pairing). An owner can also win 2 breedings per month (not counting bribes.)

If the rule were to be switched to ONE breeding win per owner per month... then I feel it would only be fair to only allow ONE breeding pair entry per raffle. It makes no sense for a person to be able to enter multiple pairs if they can only win with one. (And besides, who wants the colorists to have to re-roll wins? :C)  

[EchoLimaFoxtrot]

I know this isn't a debate thread, I just wanted to add to the conversation.

I would not be in agreement (I know I am just a shop-goer xD) with only one per month. Others should not be penalized, and the two per month has been around for quiiiiite awhile. It took a long time to get down to the only 2 entries per and 2 winnings per month. The system, regardless of how frustrating it is, does work - for raffles, etc. It comes down to just luck (good, bad, or otherwise)

A suggestion or alternative might be for colorists to have slots for people who haven't won any (or less than a certain number) slots (CC included) or raffles in how many months, lists. For example, "This list is for people (both owners or only one of, co-owners that have rights included) who have won 1 or less breeding raffles in the past 4 months." Of course, the numbers can be changed.

However, that is a colorist decision, not regulated by the shop.

(Edit to save space)

Nymphalidae

Rule Change Suggestion

I'd like to propose that the ban on skinwalkers lifemating be removed. Since there are now new benefits added for soquili who are lifemated, I feel that it's a little unfair that not all soquili can have a chance at that if the owners don't wish to breed their soquili with any other soquili. I do understand why, ICly, that it isn't allowed, since skinwalkers are a purely evil breed -- however, I think that skinwalkers can be capable of staying with just one partner even if their connection isn't about love. (For example, my mare skinwalker is incredibly selfish and possessive, and I had hoped to one day 'lifemate' her even though her idea of love is really just obsession and greed and her inability to share anything.) I also think that lifemating could be taken OOCly, too; maybe the soquili in question are not in love, but the owners of the soquili never plan on breeding them with any other soquili -- which would make lifemating work for skinwalkers, too. It's true that just because skinwalkers cannot be officially considered lifemates doesn't mean the owners can't use all three of their breedings with their same pairing, but they would still be missing out on the benefits all the other soquili get.

Anyway, there's my 2 cents on the matter! Thanks for reading and I hope my proposal is considered. :3 heart If there's anything I said that was unclear just let me know!

Sorry, adding.

I am not for or against. Despite having had to not lifemate one of mine with another because she became cursed, I understand both sides.

I just wanted to say, Skinwalkers are the only one that cannot be "lifemated" in the permissions thread, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There is no RP requirement needed to lifemate a couple - that is an added "benefit" in the qualifications thread. So, by definition there should not be a RP-justification to say that Skinwalkers cannot be lifemated for breedings. Though by all means, the prohibition on it for RP-reason makes sense. I just think since there should be a set separation of RP-Qualified and Lifemate-Permissions for breeding raffle/occurances, and that it should be consistent across the board without discrimination.  

[Syaoran-Puu]

*adds her say*

Topic one: One breeding a month
Totally disagree, I am usually so unlucky and despite having two couples entered I have only had a couple of breedings after a year and half of being here so that would just cut chances down. Plus it would not be fair to have one owner penalised because the other owner has already filled their own breeding. Usually one person does not tend to win lots and lots of breedings each month but only a couple -it doesn't really make much difference if both of these happen to be in the same month when they have had no luck for ages *points to Maion and Sengdroma as they had been trying since Nov 08 for their first breeding*

Topic two: Lifemating SW's
Agree. Despite the fact that they won't actually be lifemating for them it would be more a need to keep the species pure and to continue the race, I know my Pure SW will only breed with other pures as she doesn't want to tarnish the genes and two of her breedings will be with the same stallion as she considers his genes to be strong and good enough to blend with her won. So for SW's it wouldn't be conventional lifemating but rather a need to continue the race.
Plus I do not think it is fair to discriminate them from the added bonus of lifemating UNLESS you also make them a special exception and SWs automatically have an added chance of three baskets.

-------

Also... on my previous suggestion. Thanks Fel for replying XD I had been on haitus and hadn't realised the LL rules had changed since Dixie was looking after our LL couple (Maion/Seng).  

[Sabin Duvert]

The one breeding per month idea is tricky. While at its basic, it's something I could get behind, especially considering the number of breeding slots that have been this month. If everyone could only have a max of one breeding per month then it increases everyone else's chances in every other slot. Hell, I think most people would not only be okay with "only" winning up to one breeding per month, but eager at the chance for that to be a more likely occurrence by making this a rule across the board for everyone. (A lot less compeition for the slots if you shrink the lists by 1/3 or 1/2).

BUT, it's that backswing of the years of tradition of entering two couples per raffle, and the same issues that everyone else has brought up - that you'd be S* outta luck if you're trying with a couple, and the owner of the other soquili wins a different breeding. Not only are you locked out of trying with that pair for the remainder of the month, but that might have been the only pair you were trying with.
Even if you DO have alternate pairs that you could swap out in other raffles, there's probably a reason they aren't your primary pair, and it can make things complicated if you're dealing with yet another co-owner that has to enter raffles with your alternate couple on YOUR terms.

Alternatively, it could be changed that you can only enter one pair, but that also would really suck for people who have been trying with two pairs for so long to suddenly have to cut one. And again, what might be a primary couple for you might be the 2nd priority breeding for the other owner. Not to mention, it is kinda nice to have two different breeding ideas to try with in raffles - adds an element of surprise or excitement, and makes for those really really long stretches of attempts (talking about those pairs that you've been trying with for a year +) to have an extra entry slot that you can try with along side them. Sounds strange, but for me at least, it keeps things from feeling QUITE so head-bangingly repetitive. That if you have a really cool new idea or plot you're excited about you could put that in as a second pair and still keep trying with the couple you've been trying with forever.

What I've been rambling on without really hitting much point, is that I can see both sides. One breeding per month limit would be cool, but I don't see at this point a very applicable or fair way of implementing that without potentially screwing people over.

For the skinwalker lifemating issue, it's something I can bring up at the next staff meeting to see how staffmembers feel about this issue.  

[mouselet]

Nymphalidae

Out of curiosity, why does an RP thread have to be two weeks old from the first post before they can be eligible for RP breeding slots?

I believe it stems from Soquili having to be a month old/adults for a month before they are able to breed. You can RP two Soquili becoming a couple before they are able to breed.

Also we don't want to see people whipping something up just to qualify for the RP slots. Coming back at least two weeks later takes more effort than churning it out and dumping it in the thread after just a day or two.

Sadly, at this point it's more worth your while to lifemate the pair, instead of just applying for RP qualification.  

[Revolutionary Roniel]

What about, instead of one breeding per month... two breedings per two months? That way, no one would have to cut down on their pairs the enter...

So you enter your normal two pairs... and if you win a breeding in month A you can only enter one couple in month B... and if you win two breedings in month A you can't win any in month B.