Competition Update is Live!

[Tom]

It might be a good idea to limit the amount of points you can win in each level to discourage the cheating where one player is entering 100+ untrained horses and 1 trained horse in a competition they have created for themselves only, just to boost their own place in the rankings.

Addition: Also to remove the auto-run of non-recurring competitions when 20+ horses have been entered. This makes it very easy for people to cheat and create fast and easy earned points for themselves in order to get to the top rankings without actually competing against other players' horses.

Yeah. My suggestions were more comprehensive and geared toward universally leveling the playing field while also providing varied gameplay options based on what folks are already showing a need for.

Please don't post chat screenshots. If you want to share an idea copy and paste the text as text.

Larissa and I are discussing more changes to the competitions with the goal of balancing things and making HWO a good choice for players who enjoy the sport side of horses as well as breeding.

[BlackOak2]

It might be a good idea to limit the amount of points you can win in each level to discourage the cheating where one player is entering 100+ untrained horses and 1 trained horse in a competition they have created for themselves only, just to boost their own place in the rankings.

Addition: Also to remove the auto-run of non-recurring competitions when 20+ horses have been entered. This makes it very easy for people to cheat and create fast and easy earned points for themselves in order to get to the top rankings without actually competing against other players' horses.

I'm not sure I like removing the auto-run feature. But false-pointing has been a limited problem.

That said, titling a horse (force-pointing) is a service established in this game. For those that like seeing their horses with titles, it has become more integral then maybe we would like to acknowledge, in that aspect at least. But it does appear to be more of a niche for a certain group of people. That said, there is also acknowledgement that titling a horse isn't end-all for the horse's ability, but rather just a title instead. Something pretty to look at.

I don't have an option to suggest otherwise though. Maybe something that highlights the WPS instead or included, as well as the horse's current level? These are much more telling anyway. I don't know how the community will adjust to the new competition limits. It will still be relatively easy to title a horse to champion. I've had a number of mine champion in as little as 10 (give or take) starts. However, the challenge will increase exponentially as the title increases, it seems. Force pointing may be the only way to make certain titles with less-than horses. Perhaps the service will die, effectively eliminating the issue?

I feel as if this service of titling horses will still exist, but the horses sent to these people will be of better stock. And that the title-requested prices will increase. Some of them are already quite expensive.

Hmm... it is something I have some interest in seeing develop and evolve, for better or worse.

Edited to add:
I hadn't thought of the account being boosted however. This does seem like an issue for me and I'm not sure a suggestion otherwise to address it.

[Totina]

I'm not sure I like removing the auto-run feature. But false-pointing has been a limited problem.

That said, titling a horse (force-pointing) is a service established in this game. For those that like seeing their horses with titles, it has become more integral then maybe we would like to acknowledge, in that aspect at least. But it does appear to be more of a niche for a certain group of people. That said, there is also acknowledgement that titling a horse isn't end-all for the horse's ability, but rather just a title instead. Something pretty to look at.

I don't have an option to suggest otherwise though. Maybe something that highlights the WPS instead or included, as well as the horse's current level? These are much more telling anyway. I don't know how the community will adjust to the new competition limits. It will still be relatively easy to title a horse to champion. I've had a number of mine champion in as little as 10 (give or take) starts. However, the challenge will increase exponentially as the title increases, it seems. Force pointing may be the only way to make certain titles with less-than horses. Perhaps the service will die, effectively eliminating the issue?

I feel as if this service of titling horses will still exist, but the horses sent to these people will be of better stock. And that the title-requested prices will increase. Some of them are already quite expensive.

Hmm... it is something I have some interest in seeing develop and evolve, for better or worse.

Edited to add:
I hadn't thought of the account being boosted however. This does seem like an issue for me and I'm not sure a suggestion otherwise to address it.

Isn't that kind of undermining the entire system of titles? If you can artificially create a title for just about any horse, regardless of it's actual potential, then titles don't mean anything and the system is pointless to begin with.

I like the idea Argent had about connecting the titles to certain levels in some way. Maybe even a horse can lose its title if it turns out that it was artificially created (by not performing as well anymore when put to the test against real competition).

Maybe skill books, when they are implemented, will help clear this up if they will tell what a horse's true potential is and then people can't fake a horse's potential with a title that wasn't earned fair and square.

[BlackOak2]

I'm not sure I like removing the auto-run feature. But false-pointing has been a limited problem.

That said, titling a horse (force-pointing) is a service established in this game. For those that like seeing their horses with titles, it has become more integral then maybe we would like to acknowledge, in that aspect at least. But it does appear to be more of a niche for a certain group of people. That said, there is also acknowledgement that titling a horse isn't end-all for the horse's ability, but rather just a title instead. Something pretty to look at.

I don't have an option to suggest otherwise though. Maybe something that highlights the WPS instead or included, as well as the horse's current level? These are much more telling anyway. I don't know how the community will adjust to the new competition limits. It will still be relatively easy to title a horse to champion. I've had a number of mine champion in as little as 10 (give or take) starts. However, the challenge will increase exponentially as the title increases, it seems. Force pointing may be the only way to make certain titles with less-than horses. Perhaps the service will die, effectively eliminating the issue?

I feel as if this service of titling horses will still exist, but the horses sent to these people will be of better stock. And that the title-requested prices will increase. Some of them are already quite expensive.

Hmm... it is something I have some interest in seeing develop and evolve, for better or worse.

Edited to add:
I hadn't thought of the account being boosted however. This does seem like an issue for me and I'm not sure a suggestion otherwise to address it.

Isn't that kind of undermining the entire system of titles? If you can artificially create a title for just about any horse, regardless of it's actual potential, then titles don't mean anything and the system is pointless to begin with.

I like the idea Argent had about connecting the titles to certain levels in some way. Maybe even a horse can lose its title if it turns out that it was artificially created (by not performing as well anymore when put to the test against real competition).

Maybe skill books, when they are implemented, will help clear this up if they will tell what a horse's true potential is and then people can't fake a horse's potential with a title that wasn't earned fair and square.

I don't really know if it actually undermines the system that way. In real life, a person can do the same thing, enter a bunch of rather ugly horses into the same show and a great horse and earn a bunch of points as well... but I have to say, I don't know how titles are given to horses... other than races, as it were. I did have my own gelding (leased) earn a reserve champion title for the year in a training show season. He wasn't anything special. And he lost to an actual, well-bred, well-trained western show horse.

Though it's not a great example, it does fit enough here.

After considering it for a day, I think the most straightforward way to deal with it, is to limit the upper limit of what a horse can show in, not just a lower limit.
For example:
A fully trained horse can't show in anything below level 4, allowing for the untrained and partially trained to take advantage of these lower levels without unsuitable competition. And the system already locks us out as levels are gained. If we can also limit the upper end, say... no more than two levels higher, although I think limiting to no more than three levels higher is more ideal (there aren't always enough shows anyway). This will limit the horses title growth by artificially limiting the type of competition the horse goes against.

If titled, there will already be a level based on the points-per-start. So the horse can no longer enter certain lower levels. And the stock that needs to be used against them must also be of similar level, which would mean all the horses below a certain training and showing level simply won't be able to enter the show of a level outside of their [three or two] level limit. By doing so, in a horse's lifetime, it may take too long to gain certain titles. The limit-per-turn helps to soften the ability to gain titles already.

Here's some math so that I, at least, can understand some hard numbers better...
If a horse competes all of it's life, we'll say... for sanity's sake... age 2 years to 20 years. We'll also do the competitor turn-base of one week every turn.
52 weeks in a year = 52 turns.
2 to 20 years = 18 years.
52 turns x 18 years = 936 weeks.
936 x 10 comps each week = 9360 competitions.

For a good horse (taking one of mine), could earn first title, champion, in as little as ten starts. Which equates to 20pts a start. If that is continued at the same rate.
700 = 35 starts = 4 turns (rounded up)
1500 = 75 starts = 8 turns
3000 = 150 starts = 15 turns
4900 = 245 starts = 25 turns
7300 = 365 starts = 37 turns
10000 = 500 starts - 50 turns
Assuming the horse continues to earn an average of 20 pts per competition, the horse can be max-titled within the first year of it's life, under the new competition rules. But this doesn't take into account leveling out of lower levels or the type of competition the horse goes against. If the max level is altered to limit the points-per-start on the upper end as well as the lower, this would also limit the force-pointing (or false-pointing) to other horses that have already gone through it... UNLESS the horse is already good at what it does. Not all horses that are force-pointed are ugly horses. Some are quite nice and are force-pointed to earn titles quickly to be returned quickly.

In essence, there are still ways to get around the new rules, regardless of also putting a max-upper-level in place as well (should admin think about it). Even with your and Argent's suggestions, there will still be ways of getting around it too. Not easy, for certain, but a diligent player can manage it. I think my best example (though not strong) is my real life example.

Personally, I don't think limiting a title to a certain level is a good thing. Some horses on here are better than others, certainly, but one of my best horses was rarely or never at a level-ten-only start. He was regularly at level 6. Although he could compete well against level 10 horses, he'd regularly pull seconds and thirds instead of firsts. Should this limit him to only every achieving Supreme Champion and nothing above? When his WPS sat at 75% and up, consistently and in multiple disciplines?
The poor part of this, is that he's no longer living so that I can show all his on-paper stats. Well, I actually have two examples of this, father and son.
https://www.horseworldonline.net/horse/profile/1908287
https://www.horseworldonline.net/horse/profile/2064164

Limiting the max title earned to certain levels is unfair for good-solid horses that just don't regularly beat out great horses often enough to be leveled out at ten. Plus, a great horse that can only compete in level 10 competitions (I've had a couple of these, too), may never find enough level 10 competitions and level 10 competitors to achieve the max title. There's that problem as well.

In the end, I just don't know.
This is a far deeper issue than a few quick-fixes and locking-limits may be able to solve (and even then, a diligent player can get around them and we have quite a few of these types here on HWO). What I do know is that what we're facing right now, is little different than what we could face in real life. Perhaps we need to discuss this further and hit on all aspects with a little more math and examples thrown in?
I'm not every player, but when I look at a competitor horse, I take into account the level they're in, their WPS, total starts and also title and then best and average scores before I determine if a horse is good or not. We assume a titled horse in real life is good at what it does, but even in real life, we take into account their scorings, who rode them, who they defeated and who defeated them and even the competitions they entered. We'll even look at who their sire and dame was and the line they came from. Just looking at a title and saying 'this horse must be good' is simply naive, in real life and in the game. A title is only saying, this horse may be good and probably deserves a closer look. The higher the title, the more a closer look the horse may deserve.

-_- Uh... this has tired me and I think I've repeated myself a couple times here. Apologies if I rambled and repeated.

Edited to add:
Uh... did I do my math right???

[Argent]

Personally, I don't think limiting a title to a certain level is a good thing. Some horses on here are better than others, certainly, but one of my best horses was rarely or never at a level-ten-only start. He was regularly at level 6. Although he could compete well against level 10 horses, he'd regularly pull seconds and thirds instead of firsts. Should this limit him to only every achieving Supreme Champion and nothing above? When his WPS sat at 75% and up, consistently and in multiple disciplines?

Not sure what your logic is here. You’ve never had to place first to earn enough points to title a horse.

[Argent]

Maybe skill books, when they are implemented, will help clear this up if they will tell what a horse's true potential is and then people can't fake a horse's potential with a title that wasn't earned fair and square.

Confused by this. Are people assuming a title implies quality/potential? I feel like that would indicate a lack of understanding of how the show system works. The only thing a title indicates is that a horse has been shown enough to accrue points.

[Silverine]

Personally, I don't think limiting a title to a certain level is a good thing. Some horses on here are better than others, certainly, but one of my best horses was rarely or never at a level-ten-only start. He was regularly at level 6. Although he could compete well against level 10 horses, he'd regularly pull seconds and thirds instead of firsts. Should this limit him to only every achieving Supreme Champion and nothing above? When his WPS sat at 75% and up, consistently and in multiple disciplines?

Not sure what your logic is here. You’ve never had to place first to earn enough points to title a horse.

Their logic is, why should their horse be locked to a lower title level if it can compete successfully against higher-level horses, but their PPS doesn't list them at the same level as those horses? Why should a horse that can compete successfully in a level 10 show, but has a PPS that allows them to compete at a lower level, not be allowed to achieve the same title as another horse competing in a level 10 show with a PPS that does not allow them to compete lower? What if the first horse actually outperforms the second horse? How does it make sense that the second horse should be allowed a higher title but not the first?

[Silverine]

Isn't that kind of undermining the entire system of titles? If you can artificially create a title for just about any horse, regardless of it's actual potential, then titles don't mean anything and the system is pointless to begin with.

I like the idea Argent had about connecting the titles to certain levels in some way. Maybe even a horse can lose its title if it turns out that it was artificially created (by not performing as well anymore when put to the test against real competition).

Maybe skill books, when they are implemented, will help clear this up if they will tell what a horse's true potential is and then people can't fake a horse's potential with a title that wasn't earned fair and square.

Personally, I don't think titles really do mean anything. Especially in disciplines like dressage/hunter/western pleasure. It's the same as real life. You can get your horse all the fancy titles you want, as long as you put in the time, effort, and money.

What does mean something is records. Also just like in real life. You might win a race with a horse that's not quite as good as others, but you're not going to break a track record without being quality.

I also personally do not support removing auto-run. But that's because I use it to test my latest foal crops to see who is worth keeping and who gets tossed. Having to wait for the next shows to run to test my entire batch of 36 would be unenjoyable to say the least.

[BlackOak2]

Isn't that kind of undermining the entire system of titles? If you can artificially create a title for just about any horse, regardless of it's actual potential, then titles don't mean anything and the system is pointless to begin with.

I like the idea Argent had about connecting the titles to certain levels in some way. Maybe even a horse can lose its title if it turns out that it was artificially created (by not performing as well anymore when put to the test against real competition).

Maybe skill books, when they are implemented, will help clear this up if they will tell what a horse's true potential is and then people can't fake a horse's potential with a title that wasn't earned fair and square.

Personally, I don't think titles really do mean anything. Especially in disciplines like dressage/hunter/western pleasure. It's the same as real life. You can get your horse all the fancy titles you want, as long as you put in the time, effort, and money.

What does mean something is records. Also just like in real life. You might win a race with a horse that's not quite as good as others, but you're not going to break a track record without being quality.

I also personally do not support removing auto-run. But that's because I use it to test my latest foal crops to see who is worth keeping and who gets tossed. Having to wait for the next shows to run to test my entire batch of 36 would be unenjoyable to say the least.

I do believe what you said, would spread more light though.

'Maybe skill books...will help clear this up if they will tell what a horse's true potential is'

This statement I agree strongly with. Even if they earn a title or multiple titles, the skill books should tell us if they're talented in something at a much quicker look then delving into competition scores, averages and bests.

I do wonder, though, how and what the skill books will tell us? How admin envisions the skill books and what information they'll have? Will they just tell us if the horse will be talented in it or not talented in it? Will it be a score like locals give us so that we can evaluate ourselves? Will they be hard numbers or a sliding bar on the stats included (racing = speed, stamina, strength, speed) where ten (or right) is best and one (or left) is worst? Will conformation (eye-view) of the horse be included? And BR?

Skill books are quite an enigma right now, but hopes are that they'll give us far more than admin may like for us to have. It'll be an interesting day (as many of our releases are) to explore them.

[Jewels Training]

I have some thoughts about this update.

First, I agree with it in principle that you shouldn't be able to just enter as many competitions in one day like you could in the past. The issue I have with it though, is because of the way the feeding / temperament system works, if you want your horse to be in top form, you have to do multiple turns before you can enter him/her again.

For example: The sweet spot for a race horse is one turn before it becomes high strung. This is only true if you are feeding 30 hay / 70 performance mix which is the smallest amount of sugar you can feed a horse without having his temperament go down. There is no feeding scenario in which the horse's temperament stays the same. It either goes up or down. It's never static.

Therefore, after I've entered my max races, I then have to sleep which means my horse either becomes high strung if he's on 30/70, or it goes down if he's on 35/65. (Pasture feeding is even worse because of weight issues). In order to get him back to his ideal temperament, it will require at least two turns. For me, in order to get to the sweet spot, I have to go down in temperament for two turns, then back up for two turns, which puts the horse back in to one turn before high strung. (IE the sweet spot for racing). That means 3 turns before I can race him again, not just 1.

This .. is not ideal because it ages the horse much much faster (and not just him, but any other horses in the stable).

I do not think the competition system as it now stands needs reworking at all. I am quite happy with it. What needs reworking (and this is something I said a few years ago) the feeding /temperament system does.

The feeding system is just kind of broken. A possibly fairly simple change might make it work. (I say possibly because obviously I don't know how your code works) Instead of a drop down where we have to choose a value, allow us to enter a value instead. So instead of having to feed either 30% hay or 35% hay, I could enter 32% instead, thus enabling me to find a feeding ratio that keeps my horse at an even keel temperament wise..

This would be totally awesome. I spend so much time going up and down and up and down in temperament when I'm testing my young horses that by the time I actually know how well they can perform, they are years older than they would be if I could just find that sweet spot/feed and test from there. It's so much more work than it needs to be that I get tired and burnt out and stop playing for months at a time. (Which means I'm not buying any pony tokens!) If this issue was eliminated, I would be so much more willing to play. Please take the tedium out of my world!