Breeding/Training & Contracts

KittKattize · June 2011

On very rare occasions I have sent an unnamed dog to be trained and it comes back named. Breeding kennels that are supposed to release/retire pups from another persons litter keep the dogs. I really think that when a dog is out on contract that options for the dog are limited. For instance: Naming/Neutering/Releasing/Retiring/Changing Color shouldn't be an option for a dog on lease. As for breeding a dog on lease in order to avoid a breeder that will keep the pups my suggestion is... When the pups are born they are automatically on an expired contract from the kennel of the mother/leaser. That way, the leaser of the female can then claim all the pups back right away and would have to release/neuter unwanted pups from the litter themselves. As well, the options as I have said above would be unavailable to the Breeder. The only problem I see with this is that Breeding kennels will no longer be able to place unclaimed pups in another kennel/boarding. Meaning that the leaser would have to stay online to claim their pups right away and breeding kennels will have to wait until pups are claimed before breeding someone else's dogs. Don't know if this makes sense or how complicated this will be. Maybe there is a simpler solution.

Aziu · June 2011

I agree that naming dogs on contract should be disallowed. I believe neutering, releasing, retiring, and color changing are already unavailable on leased dogs. I have a feeling that coding to make newborn pups automatically on contract would get rather complicated and I can see it being a drag on the server, considering how many pups are born daily. Another consideration is: what if someone is loaning/brood leasing another player their female for the purpose of the stud owner producing a gift colored, 10x4, or otherwise valuable pup? If the pups automatically reverted to the owner of the female, the potential for poor conduct is still there. Also, if a player is leasing their female from another of their kennels to their breeding kennel, they might not want the pups going back to that holding kennel; if they want the pups to stay in their breeding kennel, they then would have to transfer the pups back. What it comes down to using when public breeding services is exactly the same as leasing out for training: find someone you can trust.

KittKattize · June 2011

I figured that as much. Lol, just thought I would throw the suggestion out there. I kinda knew the coding would be complicated, but hey it was worth a shot.

Baseballboi355 · June 2011

I just am thinking, breeding kennels make the least money of all kennel types. So taking away the money they get from neutering and releasing would just be unfair. Just my opinion.

Niscus · June 2011

i agree brutis they do make less money then all the others

Aziu · June 2011

brutis355 wrote:

I just am thinking, breeding kennels make the least money of all kennel types. So taking away the money they get from neutering and releasing would just be unfair. Just my opinion.

The suggestion was just to take away the option for all kennels to neuter/release a dog that is on contract, ie, not owned by the kennel. Breeding kennels (as well as all others) would still be able to neuter and release any dog they owned.

KittKattize · June 2011

I understand that Breeding Kennels make the least amount of money, but I feel that the way prices are fluctuating in game breeding kennels are the only ones who have not raised prices. Also, thinking about having the pups auto contract would be pretty useless.

Howdy, Stranger!

Breeding/Training & Contracts

Comments