Discussion: Showing

Influence from training is as stated in the latest news - all it adds is a "luck" factor, which is greater for horses at a lower level. It decreases as a horse's training level increases, so horses at training level 5 will have the smallest luck bonus of all.

Okay, I read it wrong then. I thought higher training levels had more of a luck factor. 

Thank you for the clarification. 

<sup>Well that's confusing, what's the point in training a horse if luck bonus decreases? You might as well never train it for maximum luck. 

I was under the impression that it was the higher the horse grade the smaller the luck bonus, but a level 5 local was still more lucky than a level 2 local? In fact, isn't the whole point of training to increase the luck factor with each level? Okay I /swear/ I've seen and been told by multiple people that training increased luck factor as well as stat boosts. So now just doubly confused.</sup> 

Last edited on 2018-05-18 at 12:34:02 by maplɛ

Training does increase stats, there's no question on that.

As for the luck boost, this is my understanding of it (and Abbey can correct me for sure if I didn't get this quite right). There is a score that is calculated for a horse, as stated in the news, which ultimately determines which horse in their show wins. Luck adds points to that score. Because horses at a lower training level will often have a lower overall score, the addition of that luck increases their score more. Since horses at a higher training level have a higher score, adding that luck doesn't increase their score so much that it provides a great advantage.

There is some thought that we may change part of how that works, which is why we're having this discussion, but that's my understanding of how it is working at the moment. The system could be altered to make luck function differently, perhaps as a percentage, which could change the way its influence is applied.

Last edited on 2018-05-18 at 12:48:10 by River

If we have two horses in R4 with similar stats.

One is lv 1 in training and other one is lv 5 in training... does that mean Lv 1 will wins since they have same stats so their scores should be similar?



Last edited on 2018-05-18 at 13:02:10 by Andromeda

Luck is the last thing that is calculated, so any other factor that would give one horse an advantage over the other (like tack or current care status) might be able to break that tie. I don't have an in-depth enough knowledge of the code that is used to answer that for you, I'm sorry. I know only the concepts, not the details.

Okay, I think it will be helpful if you can share what is your and Abbey's vision of EV's future. What are your goals for the show systems? Are you planning to expand it at some point (such as add conformation, higher winning bonus, etc)?

It will make it a lot easier for me to make suggestions if I have better idea what are your plans for EV's future since it is clear that we are going to different direction than what we were promised in old version. 

With no clear goals, I honestly feel like revamping the entire system is our best option since our current system are very flawed in my opinion. However, the current system might is right for the future but I don't know that because I don't know what y'all are planning.

Based on this logistics,
If two horses are basically exact same but have different training levels, then the one with lower training level will do better. That doesn't make sense at all. Better trained horses should do better in shows.


EDIT:
If I have it my way, I would expand the training system into something more sophisticated and realistic. Then, make that into priority factor in winning the show. Conformation is second priority because, realistically, a lamed horse will winds up euthanized if he was forced to race and bust his knee. 
In real life, breeders are selective with horses based on their conformation, temperaments, then natural skills (in game, we call them stats). In real life, natural skills are more based on how muscles are formed. If you breed a fastest horse to other fastest horse, the foal is more likely to be fast as well because foal will get similar muscles from his parents. However, stats/skills are pointless if horse doesn't have any training or good conformation or right temperament. A lazy horse will not run for the race despite being fastest horse in the race. Untrained horse will freak out in stall before the race and injured himself. A lame horse will collapsed in the track and be euthanized.
To add random factor, we can add events such as weathers (snows during winter, higher chance of rains in spring, etc), moods, etc. We will be aware of those events and have to make our decision if we want to risk it and show them or not. In addition to events, we also have small surprise events that we aren' aware such as sudden downpour, flash flooding, or a dog got loose and spooked the horse, etc. 
However, with this random factors, we still know what to breed for (training, conformation, temperament, and stats/skills). With this system, we still have some control in our breedings and strive for the best.

However, I know that this is extremely unpopular opinion. But if you guys want to expand EV to be more show focused in future, this direction or similar direction is better path to go down instead of the current path. Increasing the luck/randoms will only bring more bugs and waste of the time if you guys planning on to be show focused game. A lot of new players will be confused when on what to breed for. I am an experienced player and I am super confused right now because I do not know what to breed for in order to rise to the top in shows. Should I hay-cube my horses or not? Should I train my horses or not? and many more.

if not, then I suppose that you can do whatever with luck and random but sticks with it once you decide. DO NOT CHANGE it again since it will ruins our hard work.

Last edited on 2018-05-18 at 15:16:18 by Andromeda

<sup>Andromeda, they're not looking for suggestions. Just opinions on increasing the luck factor and randomness, but I agree with the training comment, it always seemed that way to me. 

Also it's not that it's too soon to implement changes like these, players mean that it's too soon after the bugs to be discussing this when we don't know how showing is going to turn out due to the bugs. If this was posted after shows had stabilised and people have figured out how they're doing and if anything does need to change then you'd have a lot more helpful opinions. 

I did just want to note that on the training page it still says training could potentially be expanded into how far a horse can run/jump etc, and this is clearly different to a luck factor, so is this completely abandoned or still a viable option for a training expansion? Since training doesn't seem to be how a lot of players thought it worked or expected it to work.</sup> 

@ Maple, I can't share my opinions on increasing the luck factors and etc if I don't know what's plan for future. We were promised with many different things and I don't see that happening yet. I don't know if Abbey intends to keep that promise or not. If not, then I have a certain opinion. If she intend to keep it, then I have different opinion.

As I said in the first post, I'd like to keep discussion here to the question of luck and randomness as applies to showing. Anything else is out of the current scope.

I asked for some clarification from Abbey on the luck matter, so here it is.

Essentially, luck is a graduated system. Horses can receive a luck boost in a specific range based on their training level. That boost range is lower for horses at a low training level, and higher for horses at a high training level. A training level 1 horse does not get a higher range of possible luck increase than a level 5 horse.

The reason a low training level horse will get a greater advantage from the luck boost is because their score will be lower. The luck boost is higher proportionate to their overall score, so adding it makes more of a difference.

Higher training level horses get a higher possible luck boost than lower training level horses. The boost is not such a high proportion of their overall score, however, because that score (based primarily off of stats) is far higher to begin with.

It's like adding 5 to 10 as opposed to adding 50 to 1000. The one adds a higher proportion than the other, even though the second is receiving a greater value increase. (These examples numbers are not based on fact. I'm just using them to explain the concept.)

As for what Abbey would like to see happen in the future, she would like to make showing less predictable, and not have the same horses win every time, and achieve this by increasing the influence of luck.

Okay, since Abbey's goal is to make it less predictable...

I think add more randomness will make shows less predictable. With luck, we will able to find a "loophole" to it and breed to for win which means show will be more predictable. 

HOWEVER, I think a lot players won't be happy about it.

We strive to be top in our category. However, if we cannot breed for it, then we kinda will lose our purpose. Less predictable means that our future foals still have chance of flopping. Once they flop often enough to fall behind in stats wise, they become worthless to our breeding program. Personally, I would be extremely frustrated if I bred a top stallion to a top mare and all foals from those pairs flopped. I will never able to breed that pair again (since they will be dead) and a perfect line went waste.

Again, since it is Abbey's goal, then I will suggest y'all to increase randomness factor.

Randomness might be a better way to incorporate the unpredictable elements that can come up during real shows anyway. Thank you for the feedback.

I feel like adding more of a random factor to showing would make it much more difficult to have horses win. I think that will encourage players to use riding school vs. showing as they can still get stats that way and for a large percentage of players stats are what hold the most value on a horse. 

if the end goal of adjusting the showing system is to make it less predictable and to make it so that the same horses don’t win every time, then adding two random factors is a good way to achieve that. i think that realistically a better (read: higher level) trained horse should be less affected by randomness. For example, a green horse might spook at a blowing bag or refuse to run in poor conditions, but an experienced and well trained horse should power through that. i’m not sure Abbey would want two random factors tied to training though.

I love complexity as it reflects realism, so the concepts of randomness and luck are great in the abstract. however, I’d be pretty frustrated if they make other things like stats, training, and tack level less important, as that would make my personal goal of breeding show-winning horses that much more difficult.

I do like  Kahzie's train of thought as far as the random/luck factor.  There are some things at a show that you cannot predict that will affect your horses outcome/performance. The higher the training level should lesson the chance of unpredictability, however even the most seasoned of horses can have an off day.  That is where the luck factor would step in for the lower level horses.

If there is a good way to bring in that sort of change, while still taking into account the training level, stats,  tack levels, etc. then I foresee it being a good change. It adds a different element to the showing system based a bit more on realism.