We need your feedback: Bigger, less frequent pound openings?

[Enbees]

I probably can't speak for much, being a newer player, but personally I'd prefer more frequent openings, partially because, being a newer player, I'm not solely seeking out especially rare pets, just anything that looks cool that catches my eye, but also because I get the feeling that a few extra hundred pets isn't going to help enough to justify fewer openings. If anything, it seems like that would make more people crowd to it at the same time because they know they may not get another chance that day, and pets would go just as fast.

I think it would be nice, of course, to be able to get the pet you want easier, without being told it's already been adopted, but I think that's just a natural part of the way the pound is set up. Tons of people fighting to get the same pets; it will always end up with one person happy and far more people disappointed. That's not really something that can change.

And more to the point, the pound, as far as I'm aware, has never been intended to be "rare+ pet distribution," nor a way to get specific pets. I highly doubt "making sure everyone gets a rare" is high on the priority list of reasons to change the pound, because that isn't the point of the pound! It's redistribution of pets. That's all. You are not guaranteed anything, nor will you ever be, because that is not the point. When hundreds or even thousands of users are fighting for the same pool of pets, nobody will ever be guaranteed anything. You're meant to feel lucky and excited if you get something cool, not to expect to always get something cool.

[.Vellichor.]

So I gave it some thought and I have a handful of ideas I wanted to throw out there.

Get rid of the pound timer that appears, but make openings smaller and more frequent.

More chances to stumble upon a pound opening by sheer chance minimizes the effects of having a legion of players on the same page all at once when it opens because more than half of the online users were on that page refreshing until it opened. It might run faster. And everyone flocking to the pound at the same time because they know it's opening results in entire pages of pets being claimed in mere seconds, so maybe more, smaller openings will help lessen that frustration. To make up for the amount of openings and keep it fair and balanced, maybe limit pound claims to 1 pet per 12 hours, no matter how many times the pound is open in that time.

However, I have to assume there are peak times of day where more pets are donated, so the quantities for openings might vary significantly. The number of pets per pound opening would also probably tend to peak during openings that occur at a certain block of time, just like the donations. So the opening that corresponds with that batch of donations might be abnormally large compared to all the others, assuming the pets that appear were all collected between that opening and the one before. If you wanted to make a more even distribution per pound opening, that would probably require a major overhaul to how the pound accepts and distributes pets, possibly including a function that sorts all those donated pets into batches with a staff-determined rarity distribution and holds them until the next opening.

I know there's a lot to consider and this idea probably has lots of holes in it, I just wanted to toss it out there, feel free to pick it apart.

Get rid of the ability to "preview" pets from the Pound account by making them invisible to players.

I might get some boos and hisses for this but... I've been here for what feels like eons and I only just learned yesterday that you can do this. I already feel like my experience is worse for knowing it. It doesn't make it more likely the page you get will have the pet you're eyeing, because we don't really understand the formula for who sees what pets or how rare they are. And rather than telling us, I think we should take care to avoid making visiting the pound into some technical art someone has to learn to benefit from it. It makes the site a little more hostile to new players.

This is Chicken Smoothie, we're effectively collecting stickers of dogs. We're not EV training Pokemon with the perfect nature for competitive play, or min-maxing stats and gear for a MMORPG character for high-tier raiding. There is no need to artificially make it even more difficult to learn the ropes. Obscuring the pets on offer from view until they drop might make pound openings more casual, and less of a feeding frenzy.

I know I definitely like it better when I don't know what will be there and I can either get very lucky just by chance, or just simply grab a random common wishlist pet for my collection. If I get something I had, oh well - more fodder for later. I just think what ends up being in a pound opening should be a surprise you only discover upon the pound actually being open.

The pound is objectively a terrible way to get rares because of the issues being highlighted in this thread, but I don't see a reason to structure how it works around that desire for rares. Personal gameplay choices are obviously going to be different, I get people want fodder from the pound.

But let's be real: people don't visit their local animal shelter expecting or looking for purebred AKC dogs and if they do, people would understandably look at them like they're from Mars. I think not being able to see the pets until it actually opens is more in the spirit of what a "pound" is supposed to be. How the pound works right now, it feels more like a Black Friday doorbuster sale with a huge crowd outside peeking in the windows at the discounted 4k TVs, only to get upset when someone else gets to the aisle first. Just feels weird to me.

Thanks for listening!

[foxcloud19]

-snip-

But let's be real: people don't visit their local animal shelter expecting or looking for purebred AKC dogs and if they do, people would understandably look at them like they're from Mars. I think not being able to see the pets until it actually opens is more in the spirit of what a "pound" is supposed to be. How the pound works right now, it feels more like a Black Friday doorbuster sale with a huge crowd outside peeking in the windows at the discounted 4k TVs, only to get upset when someone else gets to the aisle first. Just feels weird to me.

Thanks for listening!

Wow! You hit the nail on the head with this comment! Although I will say, the pound is one of the only ways for many players to get rares+ baring December 18th (which we really need another Dec 18 during the year but that’s a separate discussion). I feel like maybe letting the pound be a place for only euc and below and redistributing rare+ pets in another way would be the best course of action. But I also know a lot of people would not go for that so idk really. We need something to be better and things to change but no one can seem to agree on what. At this point, I almost feel like staff should just make the changes they’re gonna make, and we just have to live with it. If people really hate it, they can change it back and try something else. I know that’s a lot of work though.

[.Vellichor.]

Wow! You hit the nail on the head with this comment! Although I will say, the pound is one of the only ways for many players to get rares+ baring December 18th (which we really need another Dec 18 during the year but that’s a separate discussion). I feel like maybe letting the pound be a place for only euc and below and redistributing rare+ pets in another way would be the best course of action. But I also know a lot of people would not go for that so idk really. We need something to be better and things to change but no one can seem to agree on what. At this point, I almost feel like staff should just make the changes they’re gonna make, and we just have to live with it. If people really hate it, they can change it back and try something else. I know that’s a lot of work though.

Honestly, I really like the idea of not putting high-rarity pets in the pound openings at all and distributing them in a different manner. A second December 18th-style event like you said would certainly be cool!

I hear you on just living with it, yeah. For users to make truly informed decisions about a site feature, they need to know how it works... But giving users access to too much complex technical information about it makes it easier for that feature to be exploited. Making your users feel like their voices are being heard is important but there's definitely something to be said for keeping it simple sometimes!

[Teekl]

I would honestly be in favor of keeping rares in the Pound in addition to another Dec 18-type event. I think if users had more opportunities to get rares+, they wouldn't be as devastated when they miss something in the Pound.

I also agree whatever happens, someone will be unhappy. I mean, it's been said on this thread already, but there are always going to be people upset with how the Pound works. I don't think it can be "fixed," I think this is just a symptom of a wider economic issue with the site. It's increasingly difficult to complete collections because many older pets are sitting unused in locked groups on dead accounts. I understand any trading game is going to have its challenges, and it wouldn't be gratifying if it was easy, but at the same time, you do want to make sure enough of a pet are in circulation so that your game experience stays "challenging" and doesn't escalate to "nightmarish." I know this is delving into a separate issue but I do think they're interconnected.

[foxcloud19]

-snip-

I also agree whatever happens, someone will be unhappy. I mean, it's been said on this thread already, but there are always going to be people upset with how the Pound works. I don't think it can be "fixed," I think this is just a symptom of a wider economic issue with the site. It's increasingly difficult to complete collections because many older pets are sitting unused in locked groups on dead accounts. I understand any trading game is going to have its challenges, and it wouldn't be gratifying if it was easy, but at the same time, you do want to make sure enough of a pet are in circulation so that your game experience stays "challenging" and doesn't escalate to "nightmarish." I know this is delving into a separate issue but I do think they're interconnected.

Fully agree with you there! The economy is so messed up on this site. I’m so glad to see staff trying to make changes but it’s just not enough. I hope this is because they’re doing it in smaller portions so it’s not as much of a shock for players, and not that they’re hoping these small changes will fix everything. Like you said, the pound is a symptom of a much bigger problem. I’m grateful to the staff and Nick and Tess for listening and trying to change things though. I hope it continues and bigger changes come!

[exile.]

<snip>
However, I have to assume there are peak times of day where more pets are donated, so the quantities for openings might vary significantly. The number of pets per pound opening would also probably tend to peak during openings that occur at a certain block of time, just like the donations. So the opening that corresponds with that batch of donations might be abnormally large compared to all the others, assuming the pets that appear were all collected between that opening and the one before. If you wanted to make a more even distribution per pound opening, that would probably require a major overhaul to how the pound accepts and distributes pets, possibly including a function that sorts all those donated pets into batches with a staff-determined rarity distribution and holds them until the next opening.
<snip>

hey, just to clear something up for ya there:

the number of pound openings and the amount of pets in each one is not at all influenced by the amount of donations at any given time!

the pound already has a pool of 780k pets, any new donations go into that large pool, not directly into the adoptions, and for each opening random pets are pulled from that entire existing pool. the next opening can have a pet donated today and a pet donated/confiscated 10 years ago.

and the amount of pets in each opening stays relatively similar, it normaly is in 1300-1400 pets range, and the rarity distribution in those also tends to stay at around the same percentages each time.

(additional fun fact - the only reason we have any data on the amount of pets per opening and their rarity distribution is the ability to view the adoption pool. that is one of the rare cases where we can gather actual solid numbers for anything cs related. making that invisible will make it impossible to calculate any sort of pound odds, turning it into yet another guessing game we have to play. while it may seem not that significant, data such as this helps us understand a lot about the inner workings of cs, and as it has been said by staff multiple times that we're not getting solid number ranges for pet rarities, a thing such as the pound rarity distribution grants us some useful insight into those larger-scale numbers)

[Teekl]

I would find the Pound significantly more boring if there wasn’t even a chance to get a rare out of it. I’m personally against that idea, as part of the fun of it (for me, at least, obviously can’t speak for everyone) is that anticipation, the exciting thought of maybe getting a valuable rare on my page. Even if I don’t actually get it, the anticipation in itself is fun. Plus I like that feeling of everyone crowding around waiting for the opening, it’s kind of a bonding moment if you’re in a Discord server chatting with everyone about what pets are there, what you hope to grab, etc. Which, by the way, also would have some of the fun sucked out if pets were made invisible and we could no longer see what was there.

[Silver Tiger~]

Personally I want another Dec 18 because as it is I don't get ANY rates from the pound. Please give me some of your luck, people who get so many. The last rare I got was a WL deer not a lot people even knew was rare. I didn't even know it was rare, to be clear. It was just on my WL.

Also there are so many old rare pets now and most of them are sitting in abandoned accounts. This is a totally different subject but it is getting brought up because we do need a better way to get players older rare pets, and the pound is clearly not working.

[.Vellichor.]

snip

(additional fun fact - the only reason we have any data on the amount of pets per opening and their rarity distribution is the ability to view the adoption pool. that is one of the rare cases where we can gather actual solid numbers for anything cs related. making that invisible will make it impossible to calculate any sort of pound odds, turning it into yet another guessing game we have to play. while it may seem not that significant, data such as this helps us understand a lot about the inner workings of cs, and as it has been said by staff multiple times that we're not getting solid number ranges for pet rarities, a thing such as the pound rarity distribution grants us some useful insight into those larger-scale numbers)

Thank you for the information; I think I misinterpreted how the pound stores pets between myself looking at the Pound account yesterday + everyone's brief mentions of it.

Regarding statistics, I get the temptation but I respectfully don't think users should be picking apart everything staff touches trying to "look behind the curtain." It seems to me that the more information we get, the more frustrated players get about the next missing puzzle piece, and the more room there is for misinterpretations like mine. When players start needing data collection teams and spreadsheets to play a kid's game about collecting animal jpegs, I start worrying about how much longer it'll last.

The pound went from "come get a new friend!" to players feeling it's mandatory to make any sort of progress with a collection and I think that suggests a greater problem with the game's economy. Which also tells me that no matter what we do to the pound, it likely won't fix that greater issue.

CS has a rarity system that already takes into account the amount of a pet that exists on the site and the amount of players the site has, and it updates as needed. While even I use the user-made rarity system, staff has no obligation to even acknowledge it exists, much less give us information to further develop it. When other games have done this, it historically hasn't gone well (see Animal Jam Classic). I would just like to see CS not make this mistake.