Deformities/illness?

Sango · July 2005

Well, I own a rescue(vet) account, and as of right now, there's no reason to vaccinate and what not. I was thinking, maybe we could have deformities, birth defects and illnesses? Like, if you breed bad pups, they could come out missing a leg or something and may die young or something. and maybe they could catch illnesses? like if they arent vaccinated, they can get rabies?

NitaraDahmpiel · July 2005

LMAO The deformities may be a little extreme but the diseases sound like a good idea.

Sango · July 2005

lol yeah, but it would make it more realistic, I mean it doesnt have to be anything graphic like no stomach wall or something like maybe misformed ears, or missing ears or something like that. for example, I watch thats my baby occasionally and on one show they had a litter of yorkies and one was born hairless, that type of thing btw, if you say no say why!

SableAntelope · July 2005

I agree. And I agree with whoever who suggested adding breed specific problems ages ago as well. I mean it would be frustrating if you bred say your champ GSD studs and came out with a beautiful pup but was carrying hip displasia but it would be more like real breeding. Sometimes it happens. So you could nueter and show him or choose to release him or *dum dum dum* breed him into your lines any way and hope the roullette of the disease carrying or not is kind to you. I dunno it'd be a neat challange and would help induvidualise breeds. And it could effect other things too. Like a Golden Retriever who gets 'hot spots' when shedding might need more grooming. Or unless recieving regular vet treatment from a rescuer would do less well in showmanship or confirmation because of his lesser quality coat. I would LOVE to see more variables added to dogs. Like 'appearence' and 'movement'. They could be maximized through grooming and diginity etc to get to be 200 and pass on. Because in the showing side of thinsg versus the working side of things the way a dog moves and just generally looks over all can make a big difference to judges. I think it'd be nice to add more stats to the dogs. Plus adding the movement and appearence stats might be fun for people. Say within German Shepherds you could have lines focusing on appearence and lines focusing on working. Just like in real life with a lot breeds. A super strong, bulky GSD bred for working wouldn't do as well in showing as GSD from lines bred for appearence and moves and the show-bred GSD wouldn't do as well in working as the working bred GSD. Would be neat I think.

Ravette · July 2005

add more stats to the dogs So besides the ones you meantioned what other ones would you like to see? I love the idea of having all of this lmao makes the game that much better if you ask me. *twiches at the golden hot spot thing and glares at her golden*

Sango · July 2005

yeah, breed problems would be great too, like I have a bichon in real life and one of her disk slips occasionally, small long backed dogs have back problems

Italian Greyhound Breeder · July 2005

I agree this would make the game MUCH more interesting and I agree with Sable about the breeding Working Lines into your dogs or whatever else. Like since the greyhounds have all advantages in racing it would be nice to say breed showmanship into your Greyhounds which would lower the chances of it winning in a race despite the fact its a greyhound and I dont know about the deformities idea but I think illnesses would be extremely cool and I dont think all dogs should die just because they turn old, if your dog gets sick and you dont care for it then it would make sense for it to die. Great Idea and I would love this to be added!

darcy · July 2005

I'd like to see the illness too, deformities may be nice because all pups from the same parents are the same size, what's up with that? If they're all the same size why not make the pups have all the same stats and stars, heaven forbid that, we should have them be different sizes. Like if we bred a pup that would exceed both the parents size we could choose that pup to be bred to increase size for our stock.

Sango · July 2005

Thanks Italian. Defomities would be rare in maxxed out parents, but it would help stop all the puppy mills. Say someone breeds 2 untrained parents and they all came out with skin conditions, then no one would buy them. that would stop puppy mills faster then not buying the healthy horribly statted pups, ne? B/c even though we know not to buy them, novices still will buy them to continue breeding untrained dogs

MaryamOvaci · July 2005

Well, with the untrained = illness thing, I think there would be some problems, because then conformation breeders (who generally don't train, as you don't want the stars to move too much in the next gen) would end up with an inordinant amount of ill puppies.

SquallXIII · July 2005

As someone who just paid a huge stud fee and didn't get what I was looking for so I'm out that money, I really don't want to see all sorts of illnesses and stuff added to the game. I have a hard enough time trying to get what I want without that. :? VHR has west nile virus. Do you know what people do when their horse gets it? They put it up for 0 on the marketplace where it sits wasting space for months, because no one wants it. The marketplace here is clogged up enough without a bunch of sick and deformed dogs no one will take in.

Kiarei · July 2005

Totally agree with you, WoS. Though it would add an element of challenge to the breeding process, it would almost certainly clog up the marketplace much more. People do buy puppy mill dogs, unfortunately, but any noob with half a brain cell can tell a good quality dog from a bad one if the bad one has an illness or deformity. They wouldn't buy it, and since puppy mills generally breed untrained dogs, the illnesses would abound, and as Maryam mentioned, conformation dogs are trained very little. They would get sick. I think that illnesses could come from not grooming your dog (it doesn't effect the dog during training when you don't groom it regularly) or rather, parasites such as lice or mites. And rescue (vet) kennels could use an "items" skills to create flea and mite dust type stuff. I think that Nef should add an "item making" skill to the sponsor skill repetoire, however the color dyes such as VHR has should NOT be introduced. They destroy a whole element of breeding that can be most exciting: breeding more uncommon, or your favorite, colors. My best friend is a VHR person and she finally got a gold champagne colored Arabian stallion. We were both so excited and happy not only because it was male (which is rather rare), but because it had one of it's breeds "rare" colors. Well, along came the $1k color dyes. And guess what: Champagne and Gold Champagne were among the colors sold for so cheap. Though it was male, my friend's colt's value dropped immensely even though it was naturaly colored Gold Champagne. We cannot let that sort of thing happen on VP!

SableAntelope · July 2005

It happens in real life though. You pay the big bucks and sometimes the pups don't turn out. I'd still like to see it added. Get some challenge back to breeding instead of just training to 200 for five generations and getting a like 7/8/9 x 4 dog. Where's the fun in that?

SquallXIII · July 2005

I guess I don't see the point..no one would want the sick/deformed dogs, so they'd either be released or put on the marketplace for 0. West Nile on VHR can be cured at least...if you add deformities those can't be cured, so it would make those pups worthless. In real life you wouldn't be able to show deformed or sick dogs, so all dogs who got sick/deformed should be unshowable as well. AND any sick or deformed dog should be bred instantly neutered like the mutts because no breeder in their right mind would sell pups for breeding that were that way. Personally I think people want too much stuff that VHR added to here, I don't PLAY VHR anymore and if VP keeps getting closer and closer to VHR I won't be playing here either. I play VP because it's different than VHR, I would have NEVER paid money to play VHR. As for the training five generations to 200 for the stars, some of us have been working our tails off on training/breeding since VP started and haven't got anywhere near what we're getting now, the most we'd gotten was a half a star better in 30 some generations of maxxed dogs, that was a bit absurd. So yes, after that much time working our tails off for nothing it's nice to actually see a 'reward' now. If you max 30 generations of dogs and get nothing to show for it..it seems kind of pointless and makes you feel like you're wasting your time and money playing. :roll:

SquallXIII · July 2005

Of course if you wanted it REALLY realistic... Why not have stillborn pups? Why would females get pregnant EVERY time they're bred? People wouldn't complain if they paid a million dollar stud fee on here and their pups were born dead or their female didn't get pregnant the first time?

SableAntelope · July 2005

Well when you think about it in a way we already have the still born puppies thing. It's sort of like the litter size variable. I mean one or two puppies does not really happen unless the other puppies pass away. And I think breedings failing wouldn't be so bad either. I mean people say they want to treat the dogs like real dogs and not just pieces in a strategy game so we should go for all the realism we can. That doesn't neccesarily appeal to me but I think the game is in a bit of a long term downward slide game play wise right now and could really use a boost of something so maybe some changes would do the trick. And since the majority of people treat this more like a mostly virtual pet and less of a strategy game some more realism in the dog care and breeding and training might be nice.

Ravette · July 2005

SableAntelope wrote:

And since the majority of people treat this more like a mostly virtual pet and less of a strategy game some more realism in the dog care and breeding and training might be nice.

I think adding more realism for dog care,breeding and training would be great. Come on people "care" about the dogs getting abused but don't want to add more realistic things it to the game? I kinda of don't get that one lmao!! Adding diseases,genetic disorders,1st breedings not taking(you happens SOOO often in rl). When my parents used to breed Cocker Spaniels it took more like 3 to 6 breedings while the female is in heat to do the job. Breeding would become so much more selective and it would teach kids to be more responsible. It would also give rescue sponsors a point for the vet option....

Taurus · July 2005

i don't no if this is the best idea but i think it also can be a good idea it would make it harder to get a good breed and some times thats good and somtimes thats bad if i had to pick if it was a good idea or a bad idea i would say bad idea

Aren · July 2005

A definite yes from me :!: I love this game but I have to admit having perfect puppies all the time can get a little boring :oops: Anyways to get to the point, I love all the suggestions so far (the ones that are for the idea) and would be way more active with that coded in. Lol not that you care if im active or not but you know......I care if im active xD Yeah.......anyways I think I'll go to bed now because Im starting to ramble and Im not sure if Im making much sense anymore. :roll:

BluegumAussieBulldog · July 2005

Wos Wrote:

Why would females get pregnant EVERY time they're bred? People wouldn't complain if they paid a million dollar stud fee on here and their pups were born dead or their female didn't get pregnant the first time

I agree with that there should be something else added. I bred Australian Bulldogs and had a female that would not get pregnant, all she had were "phantoms" I spent money on AI, so much on vet bills including blood tests & xrays and got absolutely nothing. So I am all for that to be added. Then maybe there would not be as many pups being born & most novices wasting all their breedings, breeding crap dogs, sorry to say. And that problem should be across the board too. Not just for novices, but sponsors have that problem aswell.

Rowen · July 2005

darcy wrote:

I'd like to see the illness too, deformities may be nice because all pups from the same parents are the same size, what's up with that? If they're all the same size why not make the pups have all the same stats and stars, heaven forbid that, we should have them be different sizes. Like if we bred a pup that would exceed both the parents size we could choose that pup to be bred to increase size for our stock.

Yes! I'm in BIG favor of that! (pardon the unintentional pun). Maybe a height cap could be placed on a dog, so we wouldn't eventually end up with Yorkies the size of Shnauzers. But I would like it when I breed my 39 kg dobie to a 38kg dobie, that the resulting puppies don't all shrink to 37kg. I'd like it we had height variables too, we don't seem to have many, dogs vary more by build, but they're all about the same breed-standard height, give or take 2-3 cm. If only to end up with a dog that's proportionally correct. (Fave, example: Keeshonden. Height: Weight/Build. 46cm: 60kg :: 23in:132 lbs. That doesn't even look right.

SableAntelope · July 2005

Ravette wrote:

SableAntelope wrote:

And since the majority of people treat this more like a mostly virtual pet and less of a strategy game some more realism in the dog care and breeding and training might be nice.

 I think adding more realism for dog care,breeding and training would be great. Come on people "care" about the dogs getting abused but don't want to add more realistic things it to the game? I kinda of don't get that one lmao!! Adding diseases,genetic disorders,1st breedings not taking(you happens SOOO often in rl). When my parents used to breed Cocker Spaniels it took more like 3 to 6 breedings while the female is in heat to do the job. Breeding would become so much more selective and it would teach kids to be more responsible. It would also give rescue sponsors a point for the vet option....

My thoughts very nearly exactly. It's all about realism until it makes it harder. :P Besides now that we have 10 by 4 dogs just shows things have gotten too simple. (yes I know people worked to get that, just I mean it's basically at the heart just a of matter of training to 200 generation after generation though) I'd hate to see things go the way of VHR and we end up needed a VPO.

Marleen · July 2005

If nothing else, I'm all in favor of the size variations. Right now, If you don't get the size you want in a litter, no sense repeating the breeding because every pup you get from that pair will be the same size. You could theoretically breed a pair 6 times, and get 60 pups with the same build. Another point for congenital defects is that it could give rescue kennels another thing to do; the 'vet check' option for breeding stock. It could increase the value of the pups to have the parents 'certified' free of certain defects before breeding.

MaryamOvaci · July 2005

I'm really starting to like the idea of congenital defects and illnesses inherant in foundy stock. This would mean that you could "breed it out" of your lines, and would need to work harder when introducing new blood

Anything that makes this game more challenging, is a sure sign I would love it XD Hard game = greater feelings of accomplishment! Maybe if height/build/illnesses were as hard to breed for as hyper, there would be more hard-core conformation players? Again, the one thing I would not like to see is illnesses being greater in untrained dogs, as that would be a big blow to the conf. breeders. And hey, a puppy with an illness would sell for less anyway, so they'd be more likely to be bought by new novices, so that when they got the chance to upgrade and see how good a sponsor could make a dog, and how healthy, they'd be a little more encouraged, eh? ^_^

Italian Greyhound Breeder · July 2005

Maryam Wrote:

Anything that makes this game more challenging, is a sure sign I would love it XD Hard game = greater feelings of accomplishment!

I agree, I liked the feeling that if you bred a dog and got half a star up you were thrilled, now its jumping from 0x4 to 5x4 in just one generation, its starting to become easy the perfect starmaxxed dog was just bred, that gives nothing to work on anymore unless you just want to event your dogs and not focus on breeding very much, I think it was way too hard to get a good dog before now its FAR to easy. I would like that if maybe in two generations you could get up to about 2x4 star. I liked having to WORK for a quality dog, now if you want a good dog all you have to do is breed to dogs with 200 in stats and you get oodles of 4 star stats. So if there is anything that will make this game more challenging I am ALL FOR IT![/b]

SquallXIII · July 2005

Well I can see Mutts getting more popular if this comes in because in RL mutts have less problems than purebreds. What would happen with foundation dogs then? Would you just have to max and breed them to see if they had defects then have to buy more imports if the ones you bought already were bad? What if you bought several goodie import sets and they were all bad? Would you get a refund on your money? I don't know...guess it doesn't really matter to me because I only breed to outside lines/pay a fee when it's a color I want, otherwise I use my own stock but I can just see people paying million dollar stud fees and not getting a single good pup then coming on here and complaining. As for the 10x4 and being too easy...I guess some people would've rather we never were able to improve stars at all because I bred 30+ gens of maxxed dogs before the fix and got half a star improvement..and you get to the point then you say why bother and move on to another game. Just because some people worked hard and got high stars doesn't mean the breeds are going to instantly start popping out all pups that high. People who work hard SHOULD get a reward for their work, and those who don't want to work that hard just complain. If it was too easy then all dogs would be 10x4 by now. I'd really want some guarantee for breeding if this went in though...and if everything's curable by rescue/vet kennels then what's to stop people from just getting all their dogs cured and never having to worry about it? I don't know..guess it's just me..one of the reasons I quit VHR was because I could never cure my horses because I could never find cures or vacs or vets to cure/vac them. Hate to see that happen on here.

Kiarei · July 2005

Good points, WoS. If it was too easy, all of the breeds would be 10x4 by now. Hyper is much harder to get up to 4 stars in a calm breed, so 10x4 is a real accomplishment.

I do agree with the "live, undeformed pup guarantee" for breeding to public studs. Perhaps there could be separate stud fees, say, a lower one for no guarantees, and a higher one for guarantees, sort of like color guarantees on VHR, only into the coding of the game. So, when you go see a stud's page and see the little link that says "Breed to this dog" and the price, there could be two. The top one could be unguaranteed and the bottom, for say 150% of the unguaranteed price, is guaranteed. This might help the problem of overbreeding. If pups with illnesses would die overtime, not only would the server clear up, but puppy mills would be hard-put to replace their stock, leaving less time for breeding. And seeing as they would have to buy new dogs each time plague ravashed their junk dogs, they would run out of money sooner, a blessing to us all. ^_^ Of course, people who worked hard to heal their dogs when they got sick and vaccinate their stock, such as good breeders, would have little to worry about from disease. Maybe every 3 real months or so, Nef could code in a plague and those sponsors and novice that could afford the vaccines (by now, puppy mills would be broke) would keep their dogs through the plague. And since I know that you are protesting right about now, I think that there should be "Kennel Hygiene" levels. If it is at 100, after you purchased a discontaminator or something, then plague cannot tough your kennels. It would offer a great challenge, and the server would be cleared up so much. And rescue kennels would have a purpose, rescuing dogs in abandoned kennels before the scheduled plague. Then, for the big finale, those novices who lost their junk dogs and pups to the plague, would be forced to buy GOOD dogs from good players. I know that almost all good breeders have less high-quality lines that are available to the public. The novices would be forced to buy these good dogs and even if they overbreed them, plague would wipe out whatever they bred (if they didn't buy kennel hygiene products, that is) and the lines would once again be pure. The dogs would disappear, basically go to kayninica, so that they couldn't even be found in K9 Heaven. This would insure that the server remains clear. I think that any people serious about their dogs could easily afford the kennel hygiene discontaminators, while puppy mills, broke from all their dog's foos costs, wouldn't. This is an easy and safe way to get rid of many puppy mills.

RoseCooper · July 2005

I don't know if this has been said but Golden Retrievers are pron to (It's a blood lines thing so some of them are and some aren't) Epalectic Seazers and hip problems. Our golden got the E.S. thing from his father :x

If this all did come into play and it was a bloodlines thing I think it would be good because it would make the good bloodlined dogs valualbe.

Sango · July 2005

Italian Greyhound Breeder wrote:

now its jumping from 0x4 to 5x4 in just one generation

not always, bichons dont jump to any 4 stars after breeding 2 maxed dogs. i still need to see what the 2nd gen throws though

MaryamOvaci · July 2005

WoS wrote:

What would happen with foundation dogs then? Would you just have to max and breed them to see if they had defects then have to buy more imports if the ones you bought already were bad? What if you bought several goodie import sets and they were all bad? Would you get a refund on your money?

I think it would be neat if there were, say, an X% chance of an import having a certain trait or illness, then if you bred to a "clear" dog, all pups born carriers, then another "clear" generation and half carry, half are clear

That sort of thing, just like you breed out a gene in real life. Then if someone bought two carriers, the consequence of not checking would be puppies that could show the trait. Know what I mean?

That'd be awesome.

Marleen · July 2005

Okay, I know I'm going to upset a few people here, but this is something that's been on my mind for quite a while now. Sorry if it bugs you, but... Two factors that affect the health are mood and stress. There's been a lot of research that shows the benefits of a positive attitude in healing and the negative effects of depression. Also, people and animals that spend a lot of time tired and depressed show signs of aging and are more susceptible to disease. I'm not saying that every time your dog is exhausted or very sad should affect its health, but I think that those poor dogs that are repeatedly overstressed or constantly depressed should be more likely to become ill. Exhaustion affects Loyalty? Not logical.

Howdy, Stranger!

Deformities/illness?

Comments