I'm not going to contribute much on the breeding side of things, 'cos I pretty much agree with Xav and she's put it more clearly than I ever could. But I wanted to address one of your points:

"Not being able to buy pets you would not have known where for sale to begin with is not punnishment. If you did know they where for sale, and wanted them, you should have bougth them when they where up."

and

"And the biggest idea towards limiting sales is one that again should not affect active players/breeders/salespeople. And that is making sure your pet is fed before selling. A pet that is starving can't stay on sale. This way the huge amount of pets still on sale by players that have been gone for years will be cleaned up. There are more then enough worthwhile pets for sale by active players even withoud the pets belonging to inactive players."

So, I'm a collector of themed lups. When I started collecting, the only way I could get some of the older themes was by buying up pets from inactive users. Even now there are older lup themes for sale on inactive accounts. It's not that I don't want to buy them... there are a number I hope to snag eventually. There are just a lot of new themes coming out all the time that I tend to focus on those first, and then go back and get some older ones in between when I have the gold to spare. It'd be sad if I couldn't ever get them just 'cos I waited too long while collecting other things.

I definitely think some measures to combat the high volume of pets for sale would help, and I lean more on the side of releasing incentives. But I'm not nearly knowledgeable enough to give major input on most suggestions, which would be better or worse in the long run. Any changes made will need to be done carefully and with great consideration to how they will affect the site.

My issue with avi items aren't that everyone will have them, but that everyone only needs, at most, one of them. Which means that any of those items that are obtained randomly will start to simply 'back up' in the system, as new players can obtain their own, and thus won't be likely to buy from other players (some will, as they might want the item now, but others won't, and once those ones who DO buy from other players do so, they won't need a second copy). Rotating avatar items could work better.

I wouldn't mind scales, but I feel the scale shop would need a serious update, as there are pretty much two things I see people talk about from it: pet dyes and philters of amnesia. Both are very useful, but if there was a sudden influx of scales, due players being able to release pets and obtain them as well, I would be afraid it might tank those two items.

The only reason I would prefer tiers instead of shops is because of the random chance, that way the items don't depreciate in value as fast, though shops, if they had enough items that players will want to use again and again, wouldn't be bad.

I love the idea of the themes rotating, but not quite retiring, so that older players can still get ones they missed, but there will nearly always be new ones to obtain, and newer players can still get the old ones occasionally.

It could work out that a two pronged approach, where things like the color scatter vials would be in the shop, to allow people to work towards them, while things like egglings would be a random chance from releasing, to prevent too many egglings from being brought into the game (which is sort of the opposite of what this was meant to do) and keep those themes a bit more rare than if anyone could pretty much buy an egg at any time (especially if the currency were scales, since you could get those from both nurturing and releasing)

As for hatchery tabs, my only worry would be when you obtain egglings from rewards and such, if you are out of room. However, as long as the hatchery tabs stay, like stables, and don't have to be rebought every so often or it isn't a 'buy one egg slot and when you use it, it goes away' then I am fine with it. I don't know how it is handled if you are out of stable space and win a pet (though since most pets are sent as egglings, it would mean that htere would probably need to be some sort of stance on whether or not you could win an eggling from the various contests and such. With the seasonal festivals and their sculptures, a player could quickly run out of room. If there are contests running at the same time and a player wins, it is feasible they could run out of room to accept another eggling, so would they still be eligible, or would the site do like gryffs does, where if you win a gryff, but are at your limit, you can still get the gryff (or gryffs if you win a pair), but you cannot obtain any other gryffs until you get rid of two gryffs (or three) so you are below your limit again)

(and yes, to pet dyes, I am someone who DOES take 'dishwater' pets and dye them, so I always need dyes, but I haven't been able to make myself nurture lately. *hmmm* may need to rearrange my stables to give my dye projects their own stable so I have more room for them :D)

I also agree with Somn that any changes, whether to breeding or releasing, should be carefully considered, because once something is done (such as remove all pets from inactive accounts from being available for sale), it is likely it can't be redone. Breeding especially needs careful consideration, so as to not chase players off, since that is one of the main draws to the site. (at least for many people, ironically, despite my stance, I don't actually breed anything myself out side the occasional 'hmmm maybe' type pets).

Any input is apriciated so thanks for that. As a community it's importand we communicate witheachother I think. Also when we do not agree.

And people putting time and efford into wording how they feel about a subject is something that always gets my respect (even if perhaps that isn't always clear. I can be rather fierce at times or come across as stuborn or brash, or even angry, when I'm in truth just very passionate and sometimes that walks away with me and I overwhelm people a little. Which I try not to do.. but you know :P

So I'm always glad when I can have a conversation with people.

I get that to collectors of themed there is some value in being able to buy pets of inactive players. However I still feel there is more gained then lost when pets of inactive players stop being on sale.

Because it would remove a lot of filler/dishwasher and 111.111.111 and above priced pets that will otherwise NEVER go away..

The main reason I came up with that idea is to get rid of those pets. Not so much the ones that have normal pricings.

So if you have an idea on how to get rid of the pets in that pricing rage of inactive players withoud getting rid of all of them I'd love to hear it.

Personaly I do not really wish for those 111.111.111 and 999.999.999 pets to remain for sale forever as nobody will ever ever buy those.

And people like yourself who frequently buy pets that have been for sale for years are a minority I think. Most themed collectors buy in stock when they can when pets come out, and when they find pets of older themes they go for it right away. Likewise, your kind of proving my point when you say you chose to buy newer themed pets and save the old ones for later if you have the time/gold by then. This kind of proves how those pets are not a priority to you. New themed pets are.

You could likewise buy the old pets first before they are gone, then focus on the new ones which are more likely to be put on sale by active players giving you plenty of time to buy those.

It's your choice to save the older ones for later. If a new system where to happen where inactive player pets are no longer for sale, you would simply miss out on pets that where not a priority to begin with. You'd be sad of course, but then move on to the new themed. Or if you knew such a system was comming, you could take that chance to buy up all the old themed you want. Who then also become more worthwhile once the other ones are released.

Even so the older themed that have been for sale for years are not popular or wanted enough to really use it as an argument againts such a system, because again, if they where so wanted, they would not have been on sale for so long. If you really wanted them, they would have been your priority to avoid other people buying them before you do.

And to keep ALL old pets, just for the few that are sort of wanted, to me, feels like keeping a lot of clutter around for very little payoff in comparision.

Oh certainly. Everything new added needs to be taken into carefull consideration. And every new thing will rubb at least some players the wrong way. This is unavoidable.

But the solutions with the more reward then punnishment as people like to say, should be fine. Even if not perfect.

I do not agree that pets from inactive acounts not being available is something that is truly such a potential problem though. Because people would gain a lot from that as well.

For starters all those 111.111.111. mil pets would stop being around. There are over 30 pages (I stopped counting at that time) with only pets of high unreasonable pricings of inactive players. Players who put them up like that to show they are up for sale, then go offline withoud putting the pets off sale. Now we have pages upon pages worth of high end mil priced pets.

Should those pets just stay on sale untill the end of time? Because nobody is ever going to buy those. Lets be real about that.

If we wish to clean out the pet sales, the huge amount of cheap pets is a problem, but so are these 111.111.111 mil ones. because these extremes make it harder for the normal/proper priced pets to shine and be visible quickly to people.

The crazy priced pets and the dirt cheap ones need to go as much as possible.

There are many solutions for the dirt cheap ones. But what about the 999.999.999 mil ones of inactive players? What solution would you have for those if not pets of inactive players no longer being for sale?

you keep going on about overpriced pets and ' cluttered ' pet sales. whats the problem w/ overpriced pets? no one will buy them, fine, whats the harm if they sit there? the advanced search is unlimited.

Link: https://www.sylestia.com/forums/?thread=87107&page=2#16 Author: Encryption Time Posted: 3/20/2020 at 3:53 PM you keep going on about overpriced pets and ' cluttered ' pet sales. whats the problem w/ overpriced pets? no one will buy them, fine, whats the harm if they sit there? the advanced search is unlimited.

I have to say I agree with this.

If overpriced pets get to you, simply filter them out using the price limiter.

They aren't actually taking up any space, because the Advanced search is limitless. (other than their owner's space, which is a different issue)

If the issue is that you can't find pets from active players listed for that price to negotiate, I would agree that perhaps a filter to be able to list only 'fed' pets, thus removing any from inactive accounts.

It is kind of limited though.

There is a max of 1000 pages it can show at once. Which is by a long shot not all the pets that are on for sale.

Thats kind of not the point though.

Overpopulation is a problem many people seem to agree upon. So people are looking for solutions against the overpopulation. But the overpopulation is contributed by several different factors and I'm just trying to find solutions to several of those factors opposed to just one.

Fact: those high end overpriced pets contribute to the overpopulation/ to many pets on sale problem. So I suggest a solution to that part of that problem.

People who don't have ishues with overpopulation would not mind of course, but likewise there are people who do not mind the huge amount of cheap pets either. They would likewise ask whats the problem with many cheap pets?

The thing is, what can be a problem to some won't be a problem to others and vice versa. That is of course perfectly legid and fine.

But when discussing the overall problem of to many pets for sale, I, as part if the group of people who does think this is a problem, like to try and find solutions to help in that problem.

There is no harm in them sitting there, likewise there is no harm in overpopulation. Harm is a strong word to use. It is an annoyance, and it contributes to the problem of having to many pets for sale in the advanced search (which is limited in the sense of what you get to see naturaly, you have to add all kinds of filters to even have a chance of finding the decent pets. That in my opinion should not be the case. The pets people put time money and efford into breeding, max stat pets, pet dye project pets etc should be the norm when you open the advanced search. Not 1000 pages of ''dishwasher'' pets. Not over a 100 pages of 50.000.000 plus priced pets. Maybe once the advanced search system is upgraded/changed that could be a game changer and the problem solves itself.

But with the current advanced search it would be great if the majority of pets you saw for sale where the pets you just know people put efford and time into.

Not the high 50 plus mils and low 1 golds .

So as people brainstorm on one side of the problem, they ignore the other extreme side of the problem. I want to see a balance. So I offer suggestions to find that balance. Simple as that.

I have yet seen anyone make any other suggestions to combat that side of the overpopulation. I'm a perfectionist. It's in my nature to tackle a problem whole, not just bits and pieces of it. I like making things orgenised for everyone, clear, clutter free. And I would love for the best pets to get the best spots in the advanced broker naturaly withoud needing to add all these filters. And even with those filters it can be very hard to find the well bred/ beautifull project pets.. because there are just to many pets for sale. The pearls get lost between then sand. And ''shopping'' for pets becomes a whole lot less fun this way. To the point one can almost not be botherd because of how many filters you need to apply and how many pages you still need to scroll trough..

All of that being said, I find it kind of sad everyone is focusing only on the ideas they don't like instead of offering fun ideas themselves or adding something positive to the ideas they do like.

We should work together to solve what we feel is a problem, not debate about that 1 point for so long. There has been a whole list with ideas, a bunch of those having nothing to do with selling or breeding restrictions in general. Why not add your opinion to those as well?

I do not wish for this thread to focus only on that one thing, but on many ideas in general. Maybe instead of focusing on the stuff we don't like, we can start focusing on the stuff we do like. More positive flow, less negative flow.

To be fair I am still in the process of learning that myself as well so it's as much a suggestion to you and others as it is a reminder to myself.

So come on everyone, lets focus on the ideas that you do feel would work for you. This way we can see which ideas are popular, and what could work for most people, instead of only looking at what doesn't work which doesn't really solve anything or offer solutions.

See my reply to Encryption

And the biggest idea towards limiting sales is one that again should not affect active players/breeders/salespeople. And that is making sure your pet is fed before selling. A pet that is starving can't stay on sale. This way the huge amount of pets still on sale by players that have been gone for years will be cleaned up. There are more then enough worthwhile pets for sale by active players even withoud the pets belonging to inactive players.

The biggest oversight with "pet must be fed to be sold" would be themed pet collectors. If someone new is like "I want 1 of every Vorpa theme :D" they'd be facing even more difficulty than the task has already; the majority of older themed for sale would have been arbitrarily wiped off the market, because many players with old themed pets stopped playing years ago and the pet is starving.

Strictly off the first two pages of themed for sale starting with the oldest...

https://www.sylestia.com/view/pets/?petid=163093
https://www.sylestia.com/view/pets/?petid=166809
https://www.sylestia.com/view/pets/?petid=334476
https://www.sylestia.com/view/pets/?petid=343125
https://www.sylestia.com/view/pets/?petid=343319

That's 5 out of 10.

You might say that starving pets owned by inactive players aren't valuable, but others might disagree - either now or in the future. There may even be a day that I leave, and I'm pretty sure people would still want access to the pets I have for sale - hungry or not, they're still maxed stats and gorgeous.



As for this...

Like for example the suggestion somebody made to reduce base hatchery space and being able to purchase extra space like with stables. Responsible breeders can invest in the extra hatchery space and make their money/gold back and breed as much as they always have.

To be completely transparent I'd say I'm investing enough. It takes a minimum 24 dyes to get a project pair, usually that's more like 30+ even as much as 40 given how terribly off the results usually are. I'm already dropping millions of gold on dyes alone to get A breeding pair; to recoup that cost I usually have to sell ~10 of that design which doesn't often happen - and that's strictly to cover the dyes, let alone the philters for stats and feeding all of these breeders for 1-2 years. Despite having pet sales, I really don't have the means to invest, a SECOND TIME, in more space; I think I spend enough on that with the 500k+ stable tabs and the 500 diamonds per stable...


And even outside of a breeder's perspective, this would also lead to trouble for, say, festival events where players "make" their themed pets. Even non-breeders often rely on the hatchery space when they're cranking out exclusive eggs left and right.




As for this comment:

When I say that I feel it's strange when people are agains overpopulation but also against any and all limits to breeding, I mean that in terms of suggestions like this as well. Suggestions that should not impact serious breeders, but does discurage casual breeding more. Or at least encourages it a bit less.

This one I'm feeling slighted by.

Honestly I don't think you understand the project breeders' perspective enough to make a fair judgement on whether or not these suggestions would impact us. You say it "should not" impact us, but I - one of those breeders - is saying "it will impact us, and here is precisely how and why."

Most of us already operate on a loss and either throw real currency at the site for diamonds or sell other things to fund the project costs. Festival tokens? I sell them to fund my projects. Themed pets I find? I sell them to fund my projects. Anything else not directly related to my projects? I'm selling it to fund said projects! Would I like to engage in other aspects of the site? Of course! I'd have a collection of themed ryos and lighs if I had the option! But can I afford to? No, not if I want to keep breeding stats pets. So even the things I personally WANT for myself, I give it up, because projects are already so ridiculously expensive that selling everything else is the only option I have to keep them funded.

With rare exception of something insanely popular, most projects will never make a full return on the investment that was put into it. Telling us "Oh you just have to spend more currency for hatchery space :D" is like cutting our Achilles tendon and telling us we can still run because we've already run a whole marathon. Not trying to be harsh here but it seems that no one really gets it. Everyone assumes "you're a project breeder who sells stats pets so you must be rich!!" but that couldn't be farther from the truth. It's more like "I spent a ridiculous amount to make this project so others can have a maxed stats ____ at a fraction of what it would cost them to make their own; I might not make that money back but I'm happy to provide people with a pet that's both beautiful and powerful. :) "

Someone who doesn't breed stats projects telling us "you can afford to spend more" without even having a full understanding of what we're already putting into projects is very narrow-minded. Regardless of what you see from the outside, the hatchery-limiting suggestions would be punishing us. Players without ambition will still breed random dishwaters. They'll still beg people to buy said dishwaters. And cheap pets will still be flooding the market. Meanwhile project breeders will be fumbling over yet another expense.


Even if it's tied into some "release currency" thing, unless it's retroactive I know for a fact I'd be boned. I always keep my projects cut to a bare minimum; that means anything I can release is already gone. Can't boot anything more til I've made more project progress. And if I can't breed en masse to get a good RNG result, then I can't make any progress to be able to boot things. ONLY if it's a retroactive "you released X in the past so get you ___ release currency" would I survive such a change.



Nicer release message? Sure. Think it's been suggested a few times but Krin has either ignored it or I think years ago he responded that it just didn't seem like a worthwhile change to make. I think it'd be a step in the right direction so people don't feel the immense shame and guilt of throwing a pet into the wild. Even I felt that way at first. Now I'm a merciless stats breeder who sees everything as either 1: a failed result to be booted; 2: a stepping stone to be booted once no longer useful, or 3: the prized final result of all of those booted stepping stones! But it did take time and a handful of projects to become that callous. >_>;


Incentivizing release of pets? Definite yes and I'm still keeping my fingers crossed that when Krin overhauls the scale shop, releasing pets from thereon will give us scales. It's the simplest fix overall.


Anything limiting sales capacity or hatchery sizes... It'd do more harm than good. Believe it or not some people actually WANT to breed cheap pets for cheap prices and think that 10k gold is an insanely expensive price to pay for a pet, and people are jerks to sell a pet that high. Hatchery limits won't do a thing to change that; that's a mindset feeding into the problem, not a game mechanic.