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

    • I don't know which would work best, but I do know limiting villagers to only 50 stables is going to really be harsh. Thats only 4 pages +2 stables. Since we had to go down to only 10 villagers, that is a huge reduction in animals, considering each village has 10 types. And with the Rares and SR having long cool downs, you have to hang on to all you get and you would run out of room for anything else very quickly I think.
      The breeding charges sounds like it could work better as long as the Rares and Super Rares had enough tries to be able to actually get a SR bred.
      The breeding potion idea sounds terrible to me. How would that work? What would it be made of and would it be readily available to everyone on the site?
      Honestly, the only reason I play FV is for the pet collecting, so please consider that whatever changes you make to remember that this is a game and should be a fun way to spend my extra time, not a place full of frustration.

    • Also not really liking the breeding potion idea since they're QP-exclusive and every other village will either have to move or pay out of their nose for one EVERY TIME they breed something.

    • #1 seems like it would cause more problems rather than fix them, since the pet population would quickly become overrun with animals with no charges left.

      #2 would reduce the need to build new stables after a point, allowing the wood to go towards repairs of houses and pots.

      #3 will simply reduce the number of animals being churned out each day, although whatever isn't bred one day can just be bred the next.

      As for the Breeding Potion idea, needing a potion for every breeding would require users to stock up on huge quantities of them even if they have a limit of 50 breedings a day, and are invested enough in the career that they will likely meet the limit consistently.

    • Why couldn't every village have their own variant of the breeding potion?? Im not a fan of tossing away 2 animals for 1 potion but what if instead each village had a potion for their group of animals to craft with items/fauna from the respected town,I live in Tigereye Peak so my alchemy breeding potions would be for the animals I could gather here. It would make trading with other villages a lot more fun too!

    • I would personally vote for a combo of #2 and #3. These seem reasonable and I've been kind of surprised #3 wasn't implemented already considering the limits on collecting and other professions.

      #1 would be so absolutely frustrating that I'd likely stop breeding altogether if it was implemented on non-prize animals where it makes sense to keep the population very low. When breeding for rare colors, having a finite amount of time to beat the odds would be maddening and nerve-wracking considering how low the chances are already.

    • My vote would be #3

      Animal Breeding is the one thing that kept me interested in FV in the first place, at least for a while. And then it was the thing that brought me back.

      Probably I will always be just a casual player on FV. Breeding charges, especially with the way breeding works right now, would make me loose interest again at all.

      *Breeding as it works right now: I bred two Brown Rays, and thought, since both parents were brown, the offspring would be brown too. That is how I always understood it. But then I learnt I misunderstood.

      Now, if they had only a few breeding charges, and all of them resulted in lower-rarity-colored offspring again, and I needed to start over again completely, it would just tire and annoy me to start over again and again from step one.

      I could definitely deal with daily breeding limits, however.

    • I like the Breeding Potion requirement idea, since breeding potions are my main moneymaker right now, haha.

    • Yes, Calixita brings up a great point--part of why it's such a pain and WHY people breed so many animals in the first place is because of the percentages.

      There is less than a 10% chance to get anything that isn't Common. Even with Rare and Super Rare pets, it's still only 5% to even get an Uncommon. Less commons would be thrown away like this if the percentage wasn't 1/200 to even get a Super Rare because people wouldn't feel the need to have to be breeding several hundred pets.

      Any limits to how many pets can breed a day or with charges just makes it all more frustrating and as I mentioned before, the market would be filled with pets without charges which is even worse than the current situation.

    • I like a combination of #1 and #2.

      While it does target one of the key issues of animals not being consumed by anything other than the occasional quest and one-time collector items, I don't think #1 would be extremely effective at stemming the flow of common animals. However, it does keep value in uncommon and rarer colored "stud" animals, and adds some value to uncommon females due to their longer breeding lifespans. If coupled with the introduction of a "Breeding Charges Potion" to mitigate the occasional string of terrible RNG causing a player to lose all of their valuable studs.

      #2 is sensible, and forces players who want to focus on Animal Husbandry dedicating multiple villagers to it, again reinforcing the idea put into play with the Worker system that people should be specializing their villages to some degree. With the long cooldowns on breeding comparative to the 24-hour cooldown on switching Worker status, it is possible to rotate a number of villagers around a single Worker slot, but that requires a large investment in getting all of those excess villagers in the first place.

      I don't think #3 targets the core issues that created the problem, but I think it could remain on the table as an option if #2 doesn't prove to be effective at forcing specialization.

      But the more I think about it, the more I think some of the problem (and player frustration) comes from the lack of depth; Suceeding at AH is all about RNG, so you just get more stables and more animals so that the RNG works in your favor. After some thought and some of the discussion in the thread I started in Idea Development, I think what would really help is giving the career a little more depth. Allowing other careers to craft items to improve individual stables or animals increases interactivity, helps people feel less like they have to fight against RNG with huge numbers of animals, and facilitates focusing on a favorite set of animals and making them really matter, instead of dealing with hordes of useless fodder animals. Combined with a low stable limit, players are encouraged to invest in each breeding, instead of in more chances to breed.

      Alternatively, if the goal is to get players to focus on a small set of animals, perhaps a secondary "mastery" could be introduced for breeding, increasing the chance of rare animals by a few percentage points through some kind of interaction that isn't merely breeding that species en-masse (perhaps by having the villager interact with an animal in their stables once per day).

    • Not going to lie, I immediately read the part about breeding potions and went into a money-making mindset (being from QP). As others have said, breeding potions have remained stable in value so far, compared to other recipes. Modifying them, even to make it easier would still give QP a better leg up as far as monopolies go as well as profit. However, if you introduce a new breeding potion (an addition to the current breeding potion), a completely different item that EVERYONE can have access to making, I don't see that as being unfair.

      As popularly stated, I don't like option 1. But, I'm okay with 2 and 3 (especially 3). There may even be some room for a different kind of limit like say; only species outside of your village's species are limited. Those inside, stay unlimited OR have increased limits to those outside of town.... etc... however the site would implement that.