Breeding Questions & Suggestions

[Kamiki]

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.

in my opinion no, only because its already been established that clothing edits are not considered a "trait" and already aren't required to pass on. At least I thought that was the rule. 99% of the cosplay Soq have edited hair, which imho is one of the coolest thing a Soquili can have. I'd take a reg Soq with custom hair other an otherwise uberedited Soq in most cases.

Also, I still don't think it has much to do with "being able to afford" edits. there are a lot of Soquili that are 2nd gen or lower with edits. Also, lots of the free event Soq now have edits on them, too.  

[Valdmir Talamore]

Would it be totally crazy idea to suggest this for lowluck couples:

After a period of oh say five to six maybe eight or nine months of trying, not including months that the couple was not entered into a raffle. The couple upon request can be moved to a Low luck waiting list when a colorist decides they have the time they may take the first couple on the list. The catch with this being that the price of breedings would be increased 100k to 500k? Its sort of like a bribe waiting list, but because they are low luck the price is down from what a normal bribe would be and it would also have the same rules as a raffle.

I don't know just an idea?

________

While I see the logic behind limiting to 2 breedings I also do not agree with it, it gives a strain on co-owners.

________

I adore the idea of a double cert for Lifemates, I also think it would be great if you had twins?

________

I also agree with extending the time between breedings. If your couple has a basket enjoy it before trying to have them pop out another.

________

I'm not sure about the one raffle win per pet a year Meeki, but at the same time I like the idea.

The problem it presents for me personally is that I currently have a plot concerning one father two families kinda deal. And while I don't mind waiting between the breedings an entire year can but a really be stall/dent in a plot and when plots lag they tend to fall apart.

Perhaps it could be a 12 months for non rp and six months for rped pets?  

[Kamiki]

Maybe a way to take the strain off low-luck couples... just a suggestion of course, but maybe if Breeders chose to do a low-luck raffle they just make it 6 or 8 months as opposed to the 3 or 4 which most have seemed to be lately?  

[TheMadHatter]

Since people are still up in arms about the chance of actually landing a breeding ..

How about changing the time that it takes for a Soq to grow? As of now it takes less the a month usually to go from pregnant female to adult, which is pretty damn fast all things considered. If it took longer for soquili to hit their adult stage, and then with the two month limit, it would cut down on the number of soq's each month that were old enough to breed, thus reducing the number of breeding couples  

[Kamiki]

TheMadHatter

Since people are still up in arms about the chance of actually landing a breeding ..

How about changing the time that it takes for a Soq to grow? As of now it takes less the a month usually to go from pregnant female to adult, which is pretty damn fast all things considered. If it took longer for soquili to hit their adult stage, and then with the two month limit, it would cut down on the number of soq's each month that were old enough to breed, thus reducing the number of breeding couples

I'm actually very fond of this idea. Of course I get really really antsy-excited to see foals grow, but honestly I think this would be a great way to slow things down a bit. Maybe a min 2 weeks in a basket, and 1 month as a foal?  

[Skye Starrfyre]

Naysha Aysha

Would it be totally crazy idea to suggest this for lowluck couples:

After a period of oh say five to six maybe eight or nine months of trying, not including months that the couple was not entered into a raffle. The couple upon request can be moved to a Low luck waiting list when a colorist decides they have the time they may take the first couple on the list. The catch with this being that the price of breedings would be increased 100k to 500k? Its sort of like a bribe waiting list, but because they are low luck the price is down from what a normal bribe would be and it would also have the same rules as a raffle.

I don't know just an idea?

I actually think this is a pretty awesome idea. XD  

[Valdmir Talamore]

I also like that idea Hatter, sometimes you don't even have time to rp your foal before is grows. Also perhaps the teen stages before they become fertile should be extended for the next generation of soquili and on?  

[endejester]

And yet pass-onable traits on lower gens would still in the majority stem back to people whom could afford heavy mutations, or high end raffles as most flat sales have little, to, more rationally no edits whatso ever.

It was also established early on that while they can be considered WTF that many people do rather enjoy the jewlery/clothing/accessories being passed on. (I believe it was Sabin but I could be wrong, I think he and you are both wearing pink at this point? Or were earlier.)



I'd rather not cater to one side and not the other just to make a system that...really I think isn't objective enough, even -as- a colorist whom does appreciate a degree of free reign.  

[endejester]

Skye Starrfyre

Naysha Aysha

Would it be totally crazy idea to suggest this for lowluck couples:

After a period of oh say five to six maybe eight or nine months of trying, not including months that the couple was not entered into a raffle. The couple upon request can be moved to a Low luck waiting list when a colorist decides they have the time they may take the first couple on the list. The catch with this being that the price of breedings would be increased 100k to 500k? Its sort of like a bribe waiting list, but because they are low luck the price is down from what a normal bribe would be and it would also have the same rules as a raffle.

I don't know just an idea?

I actually think this is a pretty awesome idea. XD

....I like that <3  

[Talencia]

I would like the term "rights" better defined. I gave entire breeding rights to Uta for Bella. To my mind, this means I have no say in who she breeds with and no say in who gets the resultant baskets.

I was NOT aware that by handing her breeding rights, I was dictating when she could and could not choose to give me a basket. Now granted, we have no agreement or even discussion on the matter... but if I'm heavily trying to manage two breedings of my onw rp'd, plotted soquili.... I'm basically denying her the chance to gift me with a Bella basket in the meantime, according to the apparent understanding of the term "rights".

So if I'm to understand it, "rights" is not defined as having a say in any decision relating to breeding.... instead "rights" means ability to recieve a basket?

It is strictly my opinion, logical or not... but I really don't feel like making a fuss if someone DOES try to exploit the supposed co-owner loophole. To be honest, it doesn't really alter my chances of winning a slot. If someone is dishonest to earn themselves more baskets, so be it. I refuse to be so clingy to every tiny scrap of luck that I might or might not have... so they get a third basket from a breeding that pair won? Whether they get the basket or not doesn't change my own chance for having gotten that slot!

Let me illustrate:

OwnerA enters with Owner B's soquili.
Owner C enteres with Owner A's soquili.
Owner A co-owns with Owner D, but has no breeding rights.
Owner D enters the soquili they co-own with OwnerA, with Owner E's soquili.

Let's just say THOSE THREE ENTRIES win. Whether OwnerA gets a basket from that third entry or not, DOES NOT CHANGE my chance for getting the slot! So why does it matter where the baskets go??

It seems to me it's the greedy that want to exploit the loophole, and it's a similiar mentality to try and slap restraints on everyone to prevent it.

::shushes now::  

[TheMadHatter]

Talencia ... the reasoning why has already been explained about 20 times XD There's really no point it arguing it anymore as at least three people if not more have explained in detail why it matters where the baskets go.  

[Talencia]

::shakes her head;: Just because someone gets three or four or TEN baskets doesn't much matter, unless folks are deciding to be jealous. This business of co-owning being the loophole isn't really much of a loophole, since ANY owner can obtain that many per raffle if that is how owners choose to give them.

No matter how many baskets they end up with, it STILL does not change the chances for others to win, which should be the focus here, rather than how many baskets are obtained.

Of course, this still all relates back to how "rights" are defined.  

[TheMadHatter]

it's not about how many baskets are obtained o.O. I dont give a s**t how many baskets someone has XD

It's about the fact that you are only allowed to have your name on more than two Soquili tags in a breeding raffle if you state -you do not have rights to one of the couples- Which means that you are agreeing to not get any baskets from -that particular breeding-. So long as you did not enter two other couples yourself then your co-owner can be free to give you whatever gift baskets they want. It's not a hard concept to understand or an unfair one.

It bites everyone who co-owns in the a** fairly XD  

[viatorai]

No Rights Equals NO RIGHTS.

If you give up your rights to own a basket from a breeding with a Soq you co-own, you have NO RIGHTS to any resulting baskets. Not even co-owning for sig purposes or as a gift because THOSE ARE RIGHTS.  

[Celeanor]

A gift (by Webster's Dictionary) is not a right... just to clarify.


*scoots off to sociology final*

edit: Meh, if folks are wonky enough to circumvent the pretty water tight system... leave'em too it. It's on their conscience, not mine.