Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[soulmata]

I noticed one of the bug fixes for the most recent version was changing how ORIENTATION works for animals and that should no longer stop them from breeding.

Does this mean that having a male and female pair allowed to come into contact can guarantee breeding? It was kind of annoying to have to embark with 6 pigs at 51 points each to get a decent change of a single breeding pair.

[KittyTac]

I noticed one of the bug fixes for the most recent version was changing how ORIENTATION works for animals and that should no longer stop them from breeding.

Does this mean that having a male and female pair allowed to come into contact can guarantee breeding? It was kind of annoying to have to embark with 6 pigs at 51 points each to get a decent change of a single breeding pair.

Well, there are no homosexual pigs IRL or in any fantasy work, so...

[soulmata]

Domestic animals absolutely do have sexuality in DF. You can have gay pigs. In the previous version, that or the orientation issue frequently resulted in no breeding.

The ORIENTATION bug was fixed, but I am curious if sexuality still affects domestic animals being able to breed, as Toady specifically says he fixed the "commitment" part of animals not breeding, but didn't mention the sexuality component.

[PatrikLundell]

I do not think pure homosexuals ought to breed, but the commitment part was clearly a bug, fixed some versions (and over a year) ago. Dwarf Therapist doesn't display the whole truth about animals (and can't do so without adding additional display features), so animal sexuality are still displayed according to civilized conventions, which doesn't provide the suitable slaughtering guidelines.

[MachinaMandala]

Now only 5% of your animals won't breed, instead of 25%. Still pretty crappy since that means you have about a 10% of getting a non-breeding pair.

[soulmata]

5% seems pretty good then. Still I think overall the concept is dumb  - you're trying to found a new colony in fortress mode, you aren't going to take animals that aren't known good breeders with you.

But if it's 5%, then 2 of each means less than 1% chance they are not going to breed, as opposed to 6.25%, which is pretty significant, right? I wish DT could tell me if that was the case.

[PatrikLundell]

5% seems pretty good then. Still I think overall the concept is dumb  - you're trying to found a new colony in fortress mode, you aren't going to take animals that aren't known good breeders with you.

But if it's 5%, then 2 of each means less than 1% chance they are not going to breed, as opposed to 6.25%, which is pretty significant, right? I wish DT could tell me if that was the case.

I made a suggestion/request in the DT thread for animal sexuality being calculated differently from "civilized" critters. We'll see if Clément finds it to be a good idea.

[Fleeting Frames]

Small part of the issue is that there's no universal "will love you romantically but not commit to marriage" letter (I've used darker colouring/ring though) or "will marry female/male but only engage/date male/female" letter (I've solved it by blinking, but not exactly ideal...), although that sort of behaviour isn't exactly unheard of in, say, Afganistan or Japan.

In truth, the civilized display has the same issue where a F dwarf who will only take F as lover and F dwarf who will take M as lover and F to marry are both reported as equally homosexual, so it isn't exactly to rely on either.

[Saiko Kila]

But if it's 5%, then 2 of each means less than 1% chance they are not going to breed, as opposed to 6.25%, which is pretty significant, right? I wish DT could tell me if that was the case.

Not only less than 1% but even closer to 0.5%.
Chance to have non-breeders (i.e. you don't get at least one male and one female breeder):
1 pair = ~1/10 (9.75%)
2 pairs = ~1/200 (~0.5%)
3 pairs = ~1/4000 (~0.025%)
and so on. That's assuming the chance to be a non-breeder is 5% for each animal, and that there's no funny distribution in RNG results.