Minimum Stud Fees/Foal Limits

[Carole Hanson]

I read the 'Stallions' thread where The Steward wrote:

However, it is the official position of SIMHorseRacing.com that you are allowed to handle your stallions however you want.

So if that is the case, can we please have the foal limits and minimum stud fees lifted since that also comes under the 'handle your stallions however you want' umbrella? I'd love to be able to make his fee lower than $20k, but right now I can't go below $24,550.

[Andrew Chillin]

You can’t go bellow 24,550? What kind of communist stuff is that? I’m just a new guy what am I missing here? I can understand limits because you pay for more so like money in the sim.com bank so we don’t have to pay to play

[Danny Derby]

Good point. Forced minimum stud fees essentially render some sires nearly completely non-viable. Look at Thanos for example.

He won the Desert World Cup and earned over $4M on the track, which is good. However, his gallop numbers to date have been less than stellar. Despite this, I can't set his fee any lower than $23.6K. He might be a valuable discount prospect in the $10K range, but he only saw a total of 10 mares last year at the price I'm forced to stand him at. His limited book further restricts his opportunity to attract more mares, have more foals, and perhaps throw some good ones.

[Ali Hedgestone]

Thanos is an absolute steal at $23.6k.

[Danny Derby]

Thanos is an absolute steal at $23.6k.

While I agree, the market clearly does not.

[Gwayne's World]

Has there ever been any interest, in allowing owner's of studs, to accept or reject mares?

Or, is that even practical?

Just curious?

[The Steward]

Has there ever been any interest, in allowing owner's of studs, to accept or reject mares?

Or, is that even practical?

Just curious?

We've thought about it a lot, but honestly it sounds like one GIANT drama.

Maybe it could be a Game Point or Sim money drain feature, where you have to set your stallion at that "level" of control.

[Nena Olson]

Has there ever been any interest, in allowing owner's of studs, to accept or reject mares?

Or, is that even practical?

Just curious?

We've thought about it a lot, but honestly it sounds like one GIANT drama.

Maybe it could be a Game Point or Sim money drain feature, where you have to set your stallion at that "level" of control.

To me it sounds like you like getting mail with people being mad lol

That sounds like the worst headache when it comes to planning breedings, honestly. Stallions books are a big enough headache without having to email/wait for owners to decide if you are worthy or popular enough to breed to their horses.

[Carole Hanson]

Any thoughts on the topic of this thread from The Steward? Any temptation at all to at least change the minimal fee thing?

[Stormy Peak]

Has there ever been any interest, in allowing owner's of studs, to accept or reject mares?

Or, is that even practical?

Just curious?

I don't like the limits the game has put on stud's foals, nor the fee. I wouldn't think it was a bad thing if each owner could determine foal limits...and of course set the stud fee for what they wish.

However... I don't think it would be fair to the players to have a stud owner just pick and chose which mare is good enough for their stallion. Some players might have a decent mare, and would want to use a stallion to upgrade their broodmare line by breeding that mare and getting fillies. And some players might have the perfect match for a stallion, but because the stallion owner might not like the other player...then for reasons that have nothing to do with the game as far as breeding goes...they can deny that person use of the stallion.

It should be, if people have the money to pay, they should all have equal shot at a stallion. I also think it would slant breeding trends weird if a decent stallion's owner only accepts the best, while someone with a better stallion and a more generous outlook on things allows anyone to breed...but that might keep that stallion's numbers not looking as great...showing more allowances, productives, or whatever.


I think higher stud fee alone can also keep people with cheaper mares, and thus, probably lower stable funds, from using higher end stallions...so that kind of self polices things in a way.

Stormy

[The Steward]

Any thoughts on the topic of this thread from The Steward? Any temptation at all to at least change the minimal fee thing?

Do you have any ideas on how to make people police themselves fee wise, so that superstar stallions can't have 400 foals at $1?
**Not meant to be snarky, really asking!

[Abby Brooks]

Any thoughts on the topic of this thread from The Steward? Any temptation at all to at least change the minimal fee thing?

Do you have any ideas on how to make people police themselves fee wise, so that superstar stallions can't have 400 foals at $1?

"However, it is the official position of SIMHorseRacing.com that you are allowed to handle your stallions however you want"

[Andrew James]

Any thoughts on the topic of this thread from The Steward? Any temptation at all to at least change the minimal fee thing?

Do you have any ideas on how to make people police themselves fee wise, so that superstar stallions can't have 400 foals at $1?
**Not meant to be snarky, really asking!

I do not. Thought about tying it to Alw or better Gallop percentage instead of earnings but then you run into sample size problems. Could maybe do something on a standard bottom limit based on division but that also feels worse.

Edit - Best idea I've got, no idea how you'd code it.

You can lower your stallions stud fee but it solidifies your foal limit. For example. Carole's horse's minimum is 24k. She can lower to 14k but it will solidify the foal limit at 120 total foals. Maybe make the max lower, lower amount half again the current minimum.

Prevents Anointed level abuse of the system but allows people to be able to lower fees to a quarter of the earnings.

[Ronnie Dee]

Thanos is an absolute steal at $23.6k.

While I agree, the market clearly does not.

If Thanos is an absolute steal at $23.6k, why is the stud fee of the much better bred Ketchikan only $20K?

Getting back to Danny's original post on Thanos, I agree that he would see a lot more mares if his stud fee was around $10K. Further, I am an advocate that the existing stud fee minimum be modified to the smaller of .5% of earnings or $10K.

[Nini Panini]

Any thoughts on the topic of this thread from The Steward? Any temptation at all to at least change the minimal fee thing?

Do you have any ideas on how to make people police themselves fee wise, so that superstar stallions can't have 400 foals at $1?
**Not meant to be snarky, really asking!

I do not. Thought about tying it to Alw or better Gallop percentage instead of earnings but then you run into sample size problems. Could maybe do something on a standard bottom limit based on division but that also feels worse.

Edit - Best idea I've got, no idea how you'd code it.

You can lower your stallions stud fee but it solidifies your foal limit. For example. Carole's horse's minimum is 24k. She can lower to 14k but it will solidify the foal limit at 120 total foals. Maybe make the max lower, lower amount half again the current minimum.

Prevents Anointed level abuse of the system but allows people to be able to lower fees to a quarter of the earnings.

If this/something similar is possible, I think it would be a really good compromise.

Edited for grammar lol.