While I do find your idea very interesting and I'm definitely open to the concept of mutations on dragons (obviously with less awful handling of the mechanics than the eyes update got)
Right now I feel like the dust would settle if they just let us have a copy of the genes that got changed, as if we were "refunded" for what we spent on our dragons, and also to encourage people to check out the corrected version
(Maybe clanbound, so it doesn't sink prices? Idk, I still can't stop being salty about money)
While I do find your idea very interesting and I'm definitely open to the concept of mutations on dragons (obviously with less awful handling of the mechanics than the eyes update got)
Right now I feel like the dust would settle if they just let us have a copy of the genes that got changed, as if we were "refunded" for what we spent on our dragons, and also to encourage people to check out the corrected version
(Maybe clanbound, so it doesn't sink prices? Idk, I still can't stop being salty about money)
I don't mind the concept of variants. But this suggestion is more complicated than it needs to be. It can simply fit in with the way genes and breeding works right now.
No support for the change to breeding mechanics. If a parent has the variant, then the variant would be passed. If a parent has the base gene then that one would be passed. If you want chances for both, then you would breed one of each together.
I don't mind the concept of variants. But this suggestion is more complicated than it needs to be. It can simply fit in with the way genes and breeding works right now.
No support for the change to breeding mechanics. If a parent has the variant, then the variant would be passed. If a parent has the base gene then that one would be passed. If you want chances for both, then you would breed one of each together.
@
vihuff
Apologies I managed to confuse myself with the notes I was taking, front post is updated accordingly now
@
vihuff
Apologies I managed to confuse myself with the notes I was taking, front post is updated accordingly now
[quote name="vihuff" date="2020-01-08 00:55:29" ]
I don't mind the concept of variants. But this suggestion is more complicated than it needs to be. It can simply fit in with the way genes and breeding works right now.
No support for the change to breeding mechanics. If a parent has the variant, then the variant would be passed. If a parent has the base gene then that one would be passed. If you want chances for both, then you would breed one of each together.
[/quote]
Pretty much this. No need to make it complicated, if you have a variant on a dragon that is what offspring would inherit. If you have the regular gene on the dragon, the offspring get the regular gene. If you want the option of both, you breed a parent with the variant and a parent with the regular gene
vihuff wrote on 2020-01-08 00:55:29:
I don't mind the concept of variants. But this suggestion is more complicated than it needs to be. It can simply fit in with the way genes and breeding works right now.
No support for the change to breeding mechanics. If a parent has the variant, then the variant would be passed. If a parent has the base gene then that one would be passed. If you want chances for both, then you would breed one of each together.
Pretty much this. No need to make it complicated, if you have a variant on a dragon that is what offspring would inherit. If you have the regular gene on the dragon, the offspring get the regular gene. If you want the option of both, you breed a parent with the variant and a parent with the regular gene
I'm all for more customization. There are so many genes that would work better for me if they were just slightly different! Lustre would be lovely, as would Contour without the leg bits, I was just thinking about that yesterday!
Initially I though this could just be done as separate genes, but really having separate scrolls for minor variants would be cluttered, while this would be a nice clean new system that would enable LOTS more gene customization once it was implemented.
Other variants I'd like:
- Squiggle without the second color
- Trimmings without the wing circles
- Thylacine without the gradient
- Starmap/Constellation without the white lines
I'm all for more customization. There are so many genes that would work better for me if they were just slightly different! Lustre would be lovely, as would Contour without the leg bits, I was just thinking about that yesterday!
Initially I though this could just be done as separate genes, but really having separate scrolls for minor variants would be cluttered, while this would be a nice clean new system that would enable LOTS more gene customization once it was implemented.
Other variants I'd like:
- Squiggle without the second color
- Trimmings without the wing circles
- Thylacine without the gradient
- Starmap/Constellation without the white lines
I've never seen this idea before, but I genuinely love this! With this admins can adress a lot of popular nitpicks people have for the genes without changing the original. I agree that the variation can only be picked when applying the scroll and only this selected variation should be passed on to children. The only downside I see to this is variations might clutter the Scrying Workshop. Maybe there could be a new dropdown menu added under each gene (Primary/Secondary/Tertiary) to choose a variant?
I've never seen this idea before, but I genuinely love this! With this admins can adress a lot of popular nitpicks people have for the genes without changing the original. I agree that the variation can only be picked when applying the scroll and only this selected variation should be passed on to children. The only downside I see to this is variations might clutter the Scrying Workshop. Maybe there could be a new dropdown menu added under each gene (Primary/Secondary/Tertiary) to choose a variant?
|
.....
|
|
-.-
|
|
-.-
|
|
I'm sorry but I'm gonna have to say no support.
I really can't abide with multiple variations of the same general gene. People already get confused with the Ancient/Modern variations of the same gene and even if the Marketplace was given better sorting options I can guarantee you that people would still get confused.
That's not even considering the fact that asking staff to focus on mutations of the same genes could impact the variety of unique genes we get. Heck, there was already a significant amount of griping about how "similar" Veined was to Crackle (even though those genes are clearly different) and I seem to recall people didn't even like Metallic/Alloy at first either when it was released because it was "basically Iri/Shim 2.0". I don't even want to think about the griping that will arise if, instead of something "new" or "unique", Staff releases "Stripes Ver. 6".
Honestly, at what point would something be considered a "variant/mutation" and what's a "new gene". Past a certain point one could make the argument that it'd make more sense to just have Speckle, Jaguar, Leopard and any other future spot-style genes just be re-labeled as "Spots Version 1+" and so forth.
Finally I just cannot support any suggestion that forces FR staff to utilize art that has errors, is old/out-dated, or is otherwise not within their vision just because a section of the FR community happens to like it. This extends to genes, apparel, familiars, even the dragons themselves honestly.
I'm sorry but I'm gonna have to say no support.
I really can't abide with multiple variations of the same general gene. People already get confused with the Ancient/Modern variations of the same gene and even if the Marketplace was given better sorting options I can guarantee you that people would still get confused.
That's not even considering the fact that asking staff to focus on mutations of the same genes could impact the variety of unique genes we get. Heck, there was already a significant amount of griping about how "similar" Veined was to Crackle (even though those genes are clearly different) and I seem to recall people didn't even like Metallic/Alloy at first either when it was released because it was "basically Iri/Shim 2.0". I don't even want to think about the griping that will arise if, instead of something "new" or "unique", Staff releases "Stripes Ver. 6".
Honestly, at what point would something be considered a "variant/mutation" and what's a "new gene". Past a certain point one could make the argument that it'd make more sense to just have Speckle, Jaguar, Leopard and any other future spot-style genes just be re-labeled as "Spots Version 1+" and so forth.
Finally I just cannot support any suggestion that forces FR staff to utilize art that has errors, is old/out-dated, or is otherwise not within their vision just because a section of the FR community happens to like it. This extends to genes, apparel, familiars, even the dragons themselves honestly.
@
nika
Some awesome suggestions, added to the front post
@
neonhorns
You make a very good point, I like the idea of a separate drop down box and have added a section addressing that on the front post
@
Twizz
I understand your points on how similar some genes are, and how it could impact the variety of unique genes. Certainly something that's worth thinking about. I also agree with you that I wouldn't want to see staff use art that has errors, I've bolded some text highlighting that the suggested alloy/metallic variation use the correct shadow layers. I think for any art error related variation fix, it would be up to staff on how best to handle it. I imagine there could some scenarios where a new variation would not be adequate to fix a problem, and the base gene itself just be fixed, like the recent update, especially if the gene colour is not affected.
@
nika
Some awesome suggestions, added to the front post
@
neonhorns
You make a very good point, I like the idea of a separate drop down box and have added a section addressing that on the front post
@
Twizz
I understand your points on how similar some genes are, and how it could impact the variety of unique genes. Certainly something that's worth thinking about. I also agree with you that I wouldn't want to see staff use art that has errors, I've bolded some text highlighting that the suggested alloy/metallic variation use the correct shadow layers. I think for any art error related variation fix, it would be up to staff on how best to handle it. I imagine there could some scenarios where a new variation would not be adequate to fix a problem, and the base gene itself just be fixed, like the recent update, especially if the gene colour is not affected.
Oh wow, I love this idea!
I support this for:
- met/all
- iri/shim
- squiggle
This would be great for many future genes and would expand everything greatly. I love this mechanic. Please, staff!
Oh wow, I love this idea!
I support this for:
- met/all
- iri/shim
- squiggle
This would be great for many future genes and would expand everything greatly. I love this mechanic. Please, staff!
Ooooh, yes! This sounds amazing! I´m still nervous thinking about the iri/shim shininess because it looks great to me and I fear they´ll take it away one day. I don´t wanna buy the scrolls if the dragons start looking drab all of a sudden. D:
Full support to gene variations and full support to simple breeding mechanics - if it has variant gene, it passes down variant gene.
Additional Suggestions:
Firefly, but shiny.
Gembond that matches Cry/Face (or is otherwise more gem-like)
Ooooh, yes! This sounds amazing! I´m still nervous thinking about the iri/shim shininess because it looks great to me and I fear they´ll take it away one day. I don´t wanna buy the scrolls if the dragons start looking drab all of a sudden. D:
Full support to gene variations and full support to simple breeding mechanics - if it has variant gene, it passes down variant gene.
Additional Suggestions:
Firefly, but shiny.
Gembond that matches Cry/Face (or is otherwise more gem-like)
