Breeding Questions & Suggestions

[Keantha]

*chuckles* I think the idea of a double-cert for life mates is adorable, but I completely agree. I don't think there should be anything extra just because you decide to lifemate your soq. I actually chose to lifemate one of mine ealier today, but only because the pairing works well together and it is something both I and Minty had been thinking about for awhile.  

[`raze]

endejester

I'd suggest increasing the amount of time between breedings but I think I'd be shot.

Honestly though with the number of soq increasing by at least 2 for every breeding its going to be harder and harder for low luck couples to get slots and there will be increasing numbers of them as well.

I agree completely. xD''
A two month period isn't really long enough to let other pairs try. From the pregnancy to the adults the time passing is four weeks usually (or longer/shorter, just using as an estimate), so that's practically one month waiting for the kids to grow. Then wait one more to try and make kids again? It's just not fair to the pairs that haven't gotten a breeding once.

I also don't believe it's a long enough time to work up a stronger connection between the two Soquili and their new family. I'm a firm supporter of plottage/rp and then breeding attempts however, so my opinion is biased and doesn't necessarily apply to the pairs that are not rped. So dismiss if need be.

As for a suggested length, three-four months? The latter may be a little long, though. But mathmatically, if it is a four month wait and whomever is trying is successful three times quickly, they just maxed out their Soquili in the length of a year. I think that sounds okay after that period of, as ELF put it, 'silence'.

But err yeah, my two cents. n__n''  

[Meeki]

I think the suggestion for a double cert for lifemates was really a nice one. I think that would be absolutely charming. Maybe they could pay a small fee for it or something, to whoever would be certing it. That is, if something like that ever came to be.  

[Celeanor]

I completely agree with a majority of what has already been said, and would like to add a quick squee over the Lifemates double cert.

Likewise, I also do not think that lifemates should get any extra perks over any other couples trying... that'd kinda undermine the whole 'special' part of being lifemated... as many have already pointed out.. folks would do it just for the perks.


However, I'm a little torn over the low luck couples issue. I like the half-suggestion-comment-thing-that's-not-a-suggestion to increase the time span between couples that have already bred since, realistically, why not give other folks a chance? On the flip side, if that were to happen would those folks then be classified as 'low luck' after they'd been 'silenced' for four months and then gave it a try for a month without luck? Seems like an awful lot of bookkeeping to figure out timetables for when pairs could legitimately call themselves low luck if that were put into practice. Of course there is always the option that low luck must always mean no baskets ever. (I say that since I vaguely recall seeing a 'low luck' pair that had had baskets once before... don't quote me on it though, I'll check and verify.) Edit: Yeah, found some.

On another note, how would people feel about decreasing the breeding limit to say, 2? It might help to lower the odds.. or at least just even them out as the number of soquili increase. *puts on some armor plate for that suggestion*  

[Meeki]

But isn't the breeding limit already two? Since each person can only win two baskets a month and no more? Or are you recommending something else?  

[Celeanor]

Meeki

But isn't the breeding limit already two? Since each person can only win two baskets a month and no more? Or are you recommending something else?

Meaning per couple. Like Amarinne and Crousader can only breed twice instead of three times. ^^  

[Sabin Duvert]

I think she means limiting the total number of breedings each soquili can have, which is currently 3, and I disagree with.

There are several soquili now that have had all 3 of their breedings, and that would be unfair. Not to mention, the limit to number of owners for a bribe, auction or RL soquili is 3 because that way each owner can get 1 breeding. If you limit it to 2, suddenly you have a mess on your hands.  

[Kamiki]

I don't agree at all with limited the number of baskets you can receive a month. I still think the whole co-ownership/breeding rights is a bit unnecessary and overly complicated, but I'd much rather have that than a blanket rule that says how many baskets you can it.

@Cuter - sorry for name dropping. I didn't mean to insult you. it was early and I was just livid that I was outright accused of abusing the breeding system when I haven't. I don't see why the fact that I co-own several (not even most) of my Soquili with Sabin means I'm automatically apparently planning to fleece the breeding raffles for they're worth - especially when all evidence has shown that we've been respecting the status quo anyway (when Sabin didn't have breeding rights, he didn't get a basket, etc). The point I was trying to make is that ANYONE who DOES co-own any of their Soquili has the potential to abuse the system, but I found it incredibly rude to be preemptively accused of doing so just because I chose to share one of my most precious hobbies with someone I care about.

@the rating system - I'm still fond of it. I think the colorist should have the right to choose whether or not they will pass on clothing. So if a All-decked edited Soquili is ONLY "heavily edited" because of his clothes, and the breeder doesn't want to pass on clothing, then for breeding purposes the Soquili wouldn't be heavily edited. *shrug* Just consider it a 2 or 3. When I say edits, I'm usually referring to body edits/racial edits anyway. Clothing/jewelry passing on should be 100% up to colorist. I think its neat when it does, but I always viewed it as a perk. It doesn't make sense "genetically" and all. But the colorists have done some neat things with it before.

@lifemating - I... don't think there should be a special perk for life matings. If there was, I think people would lifemate just for the sake of getting the perks. As some people have said, some couples just don't really fit into the whole "lifemating' mindset, even if they happen to stay together. For example, Sabin and I have had Balrof and Stormwild for years, they've already had children together, but they've just not gotten to a point in the RP where lifemating "works" for them. I like how it currently works, where Breeders can chose to add a lifemating category if they want to. I know Ameh done several like this (and lucky for happily for me, that's how Belle and Zhuri got their last children). The double cert for a lifemated couple would be cute I think. So, perhaps, a free plushie of their mate when their lifemating becomes official?


I think and extra breeding for Elders would be neat. I could go either way with that.

(off topic: More Elder opportunities plz?)


I also think extending the time limit between breedings to 3 or 4 months would be awesome. I'm not too fond of cutting the amt of breedings to 2, especially when in some circumstances there can be 3 owners.  

[Meeki]

Celeanor, the only problem with that is it's not fair since some had bred three times already and it wouldn't be fair to the others to be forced two.

Personally, I think it would be better to limit each pet to only one raffle win per year. They'd be welcome to bribe for the rest of their breedings or wait 12 months for their chance to breed again in a raffle. It would give them time to concentrate on the families and give those pets that have not won that year more of a chance.

I'd also limit the individual owner to no more than six raffle wins an entire year. But some may see that as harsh.  

[Celeanor]

Valid point Sabin. I was just thinking in terms of statistics and lowering the wait time for folks. *doesn't co-own often so rarely thinks of that* sweatdrop  

[Celeanor]

Meeki

Celeanor, the only problem with that is it's not fair since some had bred three times already and it wouldn't be fair to the others to be forced two.

Personally, I think it would be better to limit each pet to only one raffle win per year. They'd be welcome to bribe for the rest of their breedings or wait 12 months for their chance to breed again in a raffle. It would give them time to concentrate on the families and give those pets that have not won that year more of a chance.

I'd also limit the individual owner to no more than six raffle wins an entire year. But some may see that as harsh.

So it would be a grandfather clause for the earlier generations who already have three, but honestly I'm not that attached to the idea. It can burn. XD

As for your other points, I once again completely agree. Though I might lower the number per owner... *shot*

Personally, I'm not a big fan of seeing five foals in someone's signature, and I would admittedly like to see more newbie events out and about instead of an increase in breedings.  

[endejester]

Wouldn't it be dreadfully unfair to those with costumed soquili if their rather considerable edits were not considered due to a whim when 'skin layer' edits were? It just seems to me like it would be... an unfair advantage to those people whom had been gifted or could afford mutated soquili like my Taiki and his scales and uniqe tail.  

[TheMadHatter]

I don't agree with limiting how many breedings someone can have in a year. A lot of people -dont- Rp their soquili so there would be no reason for them to want to work it out with the family or anything like that. It would just be putting a restriction on the to give other people a chance

Edit: It's also -extremely- unfair to people who only have one or two soq's. They would then only get one breeding in an entire year. Vs people like me and you who have upwards of 40 to try with in a year.

It is -breedable and changing pets- so there shouldn't be restrictions on how often you can breed your pets. It's nice to have the limit to three breedings ever per soq but limiting how many times you could win a year is just bullshit.

I think the "low luck" stuff has gotten old by now XD If you dont win raffles, bribe, if you can't afford a bribe enter raffles and deal with your chances. It would be awesome if there was an easier and more friendly way to breed things in soq but without re-doing the entire breeding system there's just not.  

[Skye Starrfyre]

Meeki, how would waiting a year be any more fair to the people who have fewer Soqs? Person A has two Soqs, and two pairs, thustly... Person B, on the other hand, has 10 Soqs and 10 pairs... Person A would then only get to have two breedings, if they were lucky, and Person B could keep trying?



Aaaand.... Back on the subject co-owning...

If you don't like the rules as they stand don't co-own so much. Solves lots of those pesky co-owning problems when it comes to raffles. The rules are there to keep people from abusing the system and there really hasn't been a problem with them that I've seen until the fuss raised just now.