Make an item which makes a lethal mutie's lethal mutation basically just cosmetic
|
Posted 2023-06-01 19:42:16
|
 Torch_Blazing #72046 |
|
Posted 2023-06-02 03:29:11
|
 Su̶l̶l̶e̶n̶ Night Chat #112631 |
|
Posted 2023-06-04 17:32:56
|
Torch_Blazing #72046 |
|
Posted 2023-06-11 22:42:59 (edited)
• • • Lethals (specifically polymelias, conjoined twins, and polycephalies) are one of the only types of wolves that are still worth a pretty penny if you manage to breed one. They are one of the only types of wolves that still give veteran players something to strive for and dream of. I have experienced the joy of hitting that RO button and seeing the achievement pop up for breeding my first conjoined twins, and I want others to experience that joy. If an item like what you suggested is added, it will basically defeat the purpose of lethal collecting. No one is ever going to experience that joy again because lethals won't be special or unique or rare anymore. So yes, it does affect everyone, even if it is "optional." I can see how it may be tempting to have an item that can give you a polymelia for a few hundred SC, but this would be so heartbreaking to those of us who have put dozens of hours and hundreds of GC into our lethal collections. Cosmetic or not, if an item came out that essentially made my lethals worthless, I would not be a happy camper. Their rarity and uniqueness is what makes them special and valuable. It's not about gatekeeping lethals so that newbies can't get them. Breeding polymelias, conjoined twins, and polycephalies is totally random and could happen to any player. I've seen week-old accounts breed them. There's nothing you can do to majorly increase your chances of breeding them. That's what makes it so great! |
 mercurie #35270 |
|
Posted 2023-06-19 21:04:25
Again, Tw for Existential crisis inducing text.  |
Readytest #120513 |
|
Posted 2023-06-19 21:38:51 (edited)
Even Brachys aren't that rare because they're genetic, what I think is sad. And it SHOULD be challenging. When you get a lethal mutation pup, you need to get a free immortal slot (when you don't have one) as well as a jellyfish. Life is hard in the wild. Maybe there could be an option like they can grow up with a very rare chance, but because they only be oder if they aren't immortal, you don't know that. But when they were adults, they shouldn't be breedable and should have life struggles and restrictions. But I still wouldn't like this feature very much- It's my own opinion and I don't want to just repeat what other players here already said. |
 Midnight #116791 |
|
Posted 2023-06-20 18:09:11
A point I don't see anyone hitting on though (or I missed anyway,) is the art part of this. There are 4 lethals in-game currently. That means 4 new adol stages and 4 new adult stages, with every new marking, base, and eyes to update. Now I'm not going to say what isn't worth it for the art team to do, that's for them to decide. But that's quite a lot of work for very rare wolves that most players are never going to see, let alone interact with. Unless the implication is to alter the lines of pre-existing poses, which would be messy imo. I have a Spontaneous Blindness wolf and I love her to death, but she's completely worthless. She does nothing for me. If lethals were given the ability to live to adulthood, they would be treated with the same dismissal. Especially if they could be bred to pass the mutation on. Lethals dying at such a young age and requiring immortalization is what makes them so fascinating to players that collect them. It makes them unpredictable, it makes them different, it makes them coveted. It gives players, old and new, something uncommon to strive for someday. An end-goal achievement that can be treasured forever. Letting them live like any other average wolf would kill the very thing that makes them special: That they aren't like any other average wolf. TL;DR: I oppose, too many cons compared to pros. |
 Whirligig (Active: Event) #11137 |
|
Posted 2023-06-26 15:03:56
|
 TearlessRain #6752 |
|
Posted 2023-08-04 15:45:28
In a non-existent online game I'm thinking of, I'm thinking of, would give these once lethal mutations, could have different buffs -- and downsides, especially when you choose them as leaders. Branchy could have a small debuff ( 10-20% debuff ) of all birth stats, BUT could be of help to their pack ( haven't figured out a boost to the mut rn ) Polymelia could have more evasion stats ( or any stat that determines the probability an enemy could hit ) BUT their speed birth stats would be lowered quite a bit. Two heads and conjoined twins -- they say two heads are better than one, so they might have an intelligence boost -- or any stat that decides the accuracy of the wolf's attack. But the differing thoughts of them both could slow them down in some events. |
Readytest #120513 |
|
Posted 2023-08-04 18:42:35
One point I'm not seeing brought up is - what's wrong with something being out of reach of new players? The whole point of a game like this is to give people things to work towards to keep them coming back. If every brand new and/or extremely casual player can get everything in the game super quickly, what's the point of playing for long? So, yeah, 500 SC would NEVER be a realistic option. 50k SC, maybe. The reason Osha is cheap is because it removes the desirable trait for the most part. People tend to like and want mutations! Naturally something that lets them keep mutations, while removing the negative impact of that mutation, would be more valuable, not less. It actively adds value while Osha can be argued to remove value. As others have said, at that rate, it would be easier to get custom decor of the mutation to apply to a different wolf. As for custom decor costing GC, well, then go to the trading center and buy the GC for SC. At the time of this writing, you can get 10 GC for less than 5,000 SC. That's still pretty easily obtainable, honestly. Even casual play can make that within a month with a little planning. If the item is VERY limited or rare, as your initial argument was, it will also be excessively expensive, and therefore out of the reach of new and casual players. You can't have very rare or hard to get items that are also cheap and easily obtained from very early on. And excessively expensive on wolvden is more expensive than the 10 GC that custom decor would cost. Go look at the Lunar Event base and marking apps as an example, they're still achievable but expensive. As for it being impossible for something to be impossible (yeah, I caught the double standard), well, just because something is technically possible doesn't automatically mean that it is productive or worth implementing. The game was designed with lethal mutations designed specifically to be lethal. Why would the game designers actively go against their own plans and ideas of how the game should function to remove this? As others have pointed out, it would cause a lot of excessive work and problems solving to change something that most players are not actually dissatisfied with. It would take a significantly large portion of the population to want them but not want them to get them changed in any way. Some things are triggering for some people. Okay, yes, they are. But if we removed ever potential trigger for every potential person from the game, there would literally be no game left. Some people don't like the idea of animals being hurt, so hunting is out. Wolves dying might trigger people (one of my wolves died the same day as one of my pets, so it can be hurtful), so no wolves can die ever for any reason. Illnesses and injuries can be triggering, so illnesses is entirely out. Some people consider herbalism akin to magic (I've known more than one person who thought this, so I know it exists), which is against many religions, so herbalism has to go. There are people who may have issues with breeding (Personally, anything related to reproduction is revolting to me), so that's out too. Some people might start playing, then have a bad experience in life that leaves dogs/wolves triggering (Dog lover attacked by dogs? Wolf lover who's pet is attacked by coyotes and can't stand the look of wolves after that?), so I guess we should remove the wolves too? See, if you delve into it then literally anything can be considered a trigger at some point for someone. So, where does it end? What's the standard? At some point, people have to take some measure to avoid their personal triggers for themselves and play the rest of the game as best they can (and can enjoy) while just avoiding the parts they don't care for (Like me, I just don't breed my wolves and keep an all male pack). If their very existence is so triggering, making it more accessible/prevalent/last longer would not fix the trigger issue. If the issue is the death - all wolves on the game die unless made immortal. If the issue is them dying young, then avoid them. People and animals die young in real life too, so it's mere existence can't be that triggering as to be unavoidable or real life would be unlivable. Arguing the "Trigger" angle is either arguing for their complete and total removal from the game, or is a red herring. It should have some negative impact on gameplay to have them so it's not just cosmetic - it already does. They die. That's the penalty of having the mutation. Why make it more complicated than that? No wolf lives forever naturally in the game. All wolves need to be made immortal to be kept beyond the span of their pre-programmed lives. So, this one is earlier than others. Why is it worth having to basically re-work half the game just to keep these few specific wolves around a few months longer? If there is a legitimate answer to that, something that makes the amount of work worth it for the outcome being sought, then by all means share the answer. Because right now, it doesn't seem like it would be worth the time, effort, resources, and impacts on the rest of the game to implement. And just to be clear - I personally have no interest in Lethals. I don't really care for them. I don't care for how early they die. I also don't really care to have immortal wolves of any age. So I'm not saying these things because I actively want things to stay how they are. I just find the current reasons given to change them to be unconvincing and/or impractical. |
timber #2500 |