Log In

Breeding Limits Discussion

Posted by Admin-Mat on 2 Nov 2016, 6:08 pm


It's no mystery from looking at the Giving Tree and the User Shops that many common and uncommon animals have lost their value due to overbreeding. In animal husbandry, players should still be able to sell their common animals and make money from their breeding. It appears that exponential growth of animals, overbreeding, and unlimited breeding charges have devastated the value of animals, and will continue to do so as more players join animal husbandry and continue breeding.

So, the question is, how do we curb overbreeding to reduce the amount of animals entering the economy? There are a couple of good suggestions that have popped up over the last weeks and months which can be boiled down into the following:

1) Using the breeding charges. Some may have already noticed that the contest prize animals have breeding charges. This feature is built into all animals, and limited breeding charges ensure that animals cycle out of the economy and do not continue to produce more animals indefinitely. Common animals should have low breeding charges (say, 2-5) so they cycle out fast, while rarer animals should have more (upwards of 100 for Super Rare animals) so they can be used for a long time, as they took a while to be earned.

2) Stable Limits. It's been suggested that stable limits would help with the economy as players would no longer be able to farm animals of every type, and instead would be encouraged to focus on their favorite animals. This encourages trading as players focusing on one type of animal would trade with another player focusing on another, as both players cannot focus on all animals. Disrupting the massive breeding farms ensures that there isn't a large amount of commons being born and devaluing animals as well. One common suggestion has been limiting each villager to 50 Stables.

3) Account-wide breeding limits. Another suggestion has been simply to limit the amount of breedings a single account can perform per day. One common number has been 50-100 breedings per day. Similar to stable limits, this helps disrupt large breeding farms and limits the amount of animals entering the economy, while also encouraging players to focus on their favorite animals.

Our opinion is that some combination of #1 #2 and #3 would help the value of animals immensely. What would you change to ensure that common/uncommon animals retain their value?

Another idea: revamp the Breeding Potion to be required to breed a pair of animals. This would give Alchemy a good new kick in value. The Breeding Potion could use some adjustments like making the ingredient list simpler, but it would add a dimension of complexity to breeding and connect Animal Husbandry to Alchemy.

Write a comment 261

    • (( also i just feel the need to clarify that limited stables would indeed help when you look at people with A LOT of stables ))

      I see a lot of users saying that people can just do the good ol' inventory shuffle, which is definitely true, I would do it too!
      but if I cleared my inventory/storage/stall just for animals, I could hold and shuffle about 700 animals, which is 500 less animals than my stables currently hold.
      rn if I were to try to fill my inventory/storage/stall anD stables with animals I could hold nearly 2000 animals. it's a miserable shuffle to move things around that tightly, but iT COULD BE DONE.

      so yeah, think big when thinking of stable limits !!
      they really will help scale down some of really big AH operations ;w;

    • I kinda feel like choice #3 would be the best, although I wouldn't be all too against choice #2 either. Choice #1 could cause a lot of problems i.e. the common animals who lose all their charges become completely useless, and getting unlucky with using a rarer animal that just produces more commons and uncommons with all of its charges would just be frustrating.

      I definitely disagree about the breeding potion change. That would probably make QP even more of an economic powerhouse than it currently is, if it remains a QP-exclusive recipe.

    • I would want to try a combination of 1 and 3. in general, I think using both 2 and 3 would be excessive? and probably anger players a lot more than whatever good is done by both that can't be accomplished with just one. I say 3 over 2 because it'd be easier for players to plan their limited breeding while having all their animals in front of them, and many players are persistent enough to continue breeding as much as they can while swapping out animals in their limited space. I think that'd just concentrate who is spamming animals in the tree and filling stalls further instead of meaningfully lowering the amount floating around the site

      not sure how I feel about the breeding potion idea. I'd have to see exactly how much easier to obtain you'd make them

    • Thank the lord you're speaking to us about this instead of just putting it in!!

      I kind of like #3 the best, personally! Or a combo of #1 and #3 maybe? The breeding potion idea isn't too bad either; it would help price things better and get some trade going I think!

    • The first option is just bad .. But a combination of option 2 and 3 is a good idea, I keep only 2 extra stables per AH villager anyway but still produce a number of common animals at each breeding cycle in my overall breeding goals (a pair of everything, lol)

    • Also, the Breeding Potion idea is horrible on so many levels. It'd become another "wood" in the market, reaching too high amounts to be used by newbies and even beta players.

    • Only due to the amount of time and money I've spent acquiring my animals (which is nowhere near other players,) I'd suggest number 3.

      Some players have spent their entire time on Furvilla collecting as many animals as they have. The stable limit would hurt them so much.

    • The first option is, in my opinion, out of the question since there's no way to get rid of 'limited' classed animals like a butchery job or selling them back to the server. Half the breeds that end up in the Giving tree are impossible to sell back to the servers. Before the Giving tree and Quests, people would sell their excess to the server to clear out the extras which helped keep them scarce. Since that's not possible for a large number of animals now... Well it's caused a large section of the problem. If possible I'd suggest a blacklist based on item rarity be made for the Quest system instead of the current change to specific animals of being 'limited' and as such 'not able to sell to the server'

      About the time that the Giving Tree popped up there was also a drop in sales of Breeding Potions, meaning that fewer people felt the need for them. Likely because pets they wanted were available for free to start in both genders they needed.

      Otherwise the second and third options aren't so bad, as long as they aren't both used. Too many modifications to control the 'problem' and it'll be way too restrictive for new players to feel like they want to even try starting the career.

      Animal husbandry is intimidating as it was with an almost unlimited amount of villagers/stables/charges, and keeping track of all the animals is hard. it'd be nice to be able to just sell them back to the server when I have 100 of those 'limited' animals instead of throwing them around the giving tree.

    • 1) Not a good idea, in my opinion. What would animals with no more charges do? Do we sell them? Do they disappear? I'm afraid people could sell those animals to other players (especially newbies), scamming them.
      2) I kinda like this idea, but I still feel like those who want to focus their gameplay on animal breeding won't be on the same level as those who focus on exploring or other careers, especially now that there's no more limits to some of them. I mean, I could have 10 explorers and have them farm items like crazy, but I wouldn't be able to have 10 animal husbanders. (I still think the 10 workers thing is a very wrong change, as many said)
      3) Still the same problem as above, with the addition of it being even more crippling to those who want to focus on it (newbies would be mostly hit by this, since beta players would have better chances due to the rarer animals obtained during the beta).

      Another suggestion could be making breeding even more challenging by adding that not all breedings end up with a cub. Whether common or rare animals get higher chances of successful breeding it should be discussed, as rarer animals have longer waiting times yet should remain rare.

      My best suggestion (taken from an old game similar to this) would be to implement some sort of merchant that exchanges animals for various rewards. The rewards would be low amounts of money and common stuff (seeds, wood, basic materials, etc) for commons and then rarer and rarer stuff (high value materials and items, FD, maybe plushies, etc) as you climb the ladder, so that people would feel compelled to trade their animals to the merchant instead of cluttering the shop.