Aye, no I can't speak for anyone but myself (and a handful of friends, some of which don't feel inclined to post for their own reasons).

All I know is the amount of slots we already can possess is extraordinary, and that currently the way the clearings happen now is essentially a DDoS attack at 3pm potentially every day. Maybe the site handles it fine on the back end but as a player its nothing but errors/white pages/horrible lag as autorefreshers take down the site.

Maybe none of this is a problem, but I still feel the 2 free slots (QaT/loyalty box) we get a year is more than enough.

I support increasing the price on pet slots after hitting a certain mark, then creating a hard cap. People who really want more pets will gladly pay the extra amount, meaning that more money will go into supporting the site.

Since this is about pet slots, I'm going to address that first. I do think that at some point in the future a hard limit on pets will be needed. I didn't realize the site was at the point where the players with the most number of pets had reached the 90s and a 100 does sound like a nice even number. As it stands, 100 is I agree an extraoidinary number and I'd definitely support a hard 100 cap. I always kind of assumed that at some point the site would need to curb pet slots because the amount afforded each user was getting so high as is. I'm only at 66 myself and still nowhere near all my max pet slots nor do I think I'll finish and max them out anytime soon, simply because I haven't bought them all. Technically with loyalty boxes, the limit of pets is already technically unlimitable assuming there's no limit on the every loyalty box pet slot choice and that's more than enough.

If I'm being honest, I agree with Kestrel. I'm not an ID person, never have been. To be honest, I couldn't care less what ID number my pets are though yes, it's the only unchangeable aspect of a pet. With names though I tend to center most of my pet stories, to some degree on their names, whether it's real or fiction. I find a name and then work a story around that name and it's been that way since I joined the site. I'm on a couple other pet sites where the pet id isn't tied to the name and thus, not unique and the fact the names are free for all means the name by itself loses meaning to me.

That said, I'm not one of those people who waits and then constantly auto-refreshes for names. If I want to change a pet's name I either adopt or have several alternatives if a name I want isn't available. The vast majority of names of pets I've had haven't been ones in huge demand so I've never really had to worry all that much for random people scrambling for the same names I wanted for my pets though.

I wonder what people do with 100 pets..

I have to agree with this, I feel like there are so many sites already where the only things that really matter are IDs and making your pets look pretty. I still play some of those off and on because I think the designs are nice to look at, but I have zero investment in those pets as characters. I think half the fun of Subeta is getting names that are intriguing but kind of a question mark and finding a way to make it inspire you. If I wanted OCs without any naming limitations, I'd just have off-site OCs. There's other sites where I can post them and write about them/etc. Honestly, as much as I love this site, Subeta hasn't been the greatest place for that anyway considering how many times we've had to fix all our pet profiles in the past few years.

I think everyone who tries for common names can understand the frustration of missing those names or not being able to find something close to what you wanted. Hell, I used to get so disappointed by this that I stopped letting myself give a name to a character before I had something secured. It's something everyone deals with, no matter how good their percentage of success appears to be.

All of this, mostly. I am personally pretty indifferent to the pet slot cap. I do think it would be beneficial to have a cap but on the other side of the coin, Subeta could lose out on money from CSC purchases for slots from those capped users, so I do not believe that would be a thing. I am sure they still make decent money with slots, name changes, and other pet-related things and that could cease if a cap is placed.

I do not support non-unique names as I find that a fun sport of this site. As has said, many users including myself would be upset if something that large was implemented after spending lots of money on this site and I know many others that would feel the same. If anything, I feel that would do more hurt than good. Not to mention how stress that may put on the server with everyone making their RN pets not being limited to actually search for pet names. If I want a character enough, I think of a RW or less common spelling which fits the design/OC/Fandom I am planning. (unless Subeta is up for refunding money spent for name changes, ext I do not see this going well.)

I am also not an ID person so if this non-unique dream became a thing, that would make those who have been collecting IDs "ahead of the game" so to speak, for those who wanted something a bit more to do now that names would no longer be relevant. I think that this late in the site's life that would be a bit foolish.

Also this.

True, but it's still kind of a complex situation. ._. The MC slots have kind of nestled their way into the system as a very nice sP sink after quest-a-thon madness. And the CSC slots are (at least IMO) the counterpart of the CW market, for those who aren't into fashion. Hard capping them would not be good because you're effectively limiting what people are going to spend their CSC on, as said.

Maybe limiting their release somewhat? 2 instead of 5 new slots, and alternate CSC or MC slots every year?

Then again, I also believe that, if pet slots were truly as much of an issue on the servers, we would not be getting as many as we have been in the past few years. fwiw I didn't notice errors or lag at 3pm, but that could just be me? The pets.php page is always laggy for me.

That aside, if the hard cap and price raise are going to be implemented for pet people, I also request that it applies to CW makers. You get increasing prices the more clothing you release, and you have a hard cap on how many items you can make. If you really want to make more wearables, you'll gladly pay extra. And if you hit the cap? Well, maybe they can add an extra CW slot reward to the loyalty box and quest-a-thons.

re: "I wonder what people do with 100 pets" because I am not sure if snarking or not: we basically do the same thing people with thousands of wearables do - enjoy getting them, having them and getting creative with them. Different folks, different strokes.

I guess part of it depends on how much revenue pet slots actually bring to the site. It could be that having a hard cap of 100 may not result in a large potential revenue loss. I'm not sure how many people are close to hitting the limit, but the people who aren't close to that limit probably outnumber the amount of people who are. Subeta could still earn pet slot revenue from all of the people who aren't at the limit, even if they can't earn pet slot revenue from the people who have.

That's true! That slipped my mind, thanks for pointing it out! :'| It would still feel like it's limiting older players that still want to give to the site and have something fresh to work towards, though, and I don't really like that aspect of the suggestion. I like it even less if it affects loyalty slots and quest-a-thon slots (and can get hit by using those).

Yeah, the event slots were something I wasn't sure about. I imagine people won't be happy if they have one less thing in their loyalty box than everybody (and give them something that the uncapped people wouldn't have is also unfair to the uncapped people), and they would also receive less prizes from QaTs. I'm not sure how Staff would balance event/loyalty boxes to make it seem fair to everybody.

As someone who is currently at the cap (95), I've honestly considered and mentioned in the past few years that I wouldn't be against a hard cap of 100. I like the idea of knowing where I will eventually have stop. However, being the absolute crazy pet person that I am, as long as I have the opportunity to get pet slots, I plan to get them.

I don't care for the idea of non-unique names, being able to use the name for links and navigation is amazing and far less of a headache then it was to have to look up the ID anytime I was wanting to link to it.

Ohyep, people really won't be happy about that. Especially if Subeta caps the petslots, but keeps releasing more new species and colours. :'D

If they're going to make a hard cap, it should apply to everybody. No exceptions. None of that "oh we're 10 more petslots from the cash shop, but sucks to be you if you're already capped haha" garbage. 50 cash shop slots max, 40 MC slots max. (or 60/30 respectively) That's 90 slots, plus the 10 you start with = 100. Any and all bonus slots, reward slots, or early totem slots do not count toward the cap.

I'm not against having a hard cap on pet slots, or if the site decides to stop releasing any buyable slots anymore. But yep I'd feel very betrayed if we abolish the current unique name system. I don't care about the CSC I spent on renaming, but I would care about the 10 years of effort to search, snag, and adopt names, and all the joy, heartache, "near heart attacks", and new friendship that came with it. I'm sorry if this sounds selfish, but changing a long-term essential feature of a site completely would either make it or break it. Please think long and hard before doing anything!

I'm on the fence about a hard cap of 100 slots (I have 35 pets and it was tedious to put them all in the lodge). Though if more slots are added to the site anytime soon, I'd like more MC slots.

I....personally don't care for RN/RW names because I feel a bit limited in what stories I can make with those pets. Granted, my naming scheme consists of combining two words together in one name to make sure its unique. Examples are LumiDestiny, OpalAmore, Gleamsnowette, etc.

I'm against that hard cap thing ('tho I doubt I'll ever get to 100 pets, but we never know). If you don't want more pets, you simply don't adopt/create anymore. No one is forcing you? Let people who are working towards their many goals have the change to get their slots. Not necessairly having that unique real name, some people like me enjoy browing made up names from the pound or simply coming out with names.

I doubt I'll get to 100 pets either. I've actually slowed down considerably with obtaining pets; this is the first time I've had a open pet slot for such a long period of time. I'm going to get some angel potions during the BF sale and see if any new ones come out for lumi.

I tend to adopt pets with interesting names as well. Plushy Stitch, Nuran, and ChubberWubz for example.

My guess is having to slog through putting them all in the inn if you don't have a gold account. 😆 That's what happened to me recently; I have 35 pets!

I support a hard cap of 100. Seriously, there is a point where you gotta stop.

I also support names not being unique anymore, this is absolutely a thing I'd love :D

Perhaps this is petty and selfish of me but I would not be happy if pet names became non-unique. Yeah, that would mean that I'd be able to have pets with names I've wanted for years, but it would also mean that the names I hunted and stayed up for would have little meaning anymore. That sense of achievement would be gone. I'm all for sites having non-unique names [I]when they start out that way[/I], but to have that sudden change would be (at the risk of being overdramatic haha) devastating to me.

As for pet slots, I agree with others that a hard-cap would be good.

^ ahem. King Keith there beat me to it. Programmatically, it’d be be easy to change to an ID-based system.

My two cents! Separate from my quote; my personal opinion follows:

I like having a hard pet cap. Makes me choose. So as crazy as it sounds, instead of wanting more slots... I'd want a cap at 100. 100 is a good, even, rounded up number that hasn't been achieved by a user yet.

It probably won’t come as a surprise based on my above comment, but I am very pro non-unique names.

And, it’s been hinted by several people, and I must be forthcoming: I want to see the DDoS attacks at 3pm EST stop (which are exclusively driven by unique names). Yeah, yeah... there are other solutions. I’ll take any, truthfully. But as it stands, additional slots will exacerbate this issue.

I understand why the idea of non-unique names, 14 years in, would be really unsettling for people who've spent a ton of time/effort/energy collecting names over the years. I'm one too, I've been here a very long time. I've been collecting IDs for a very long time, and have spent a great deal of money renaming pets and swapping names around. I really have.

However, it doesn't take long to notice how "back burner" pets are. It's easier to release wearables, especially when most news comments claim "but why not wearable" on every non-wear that's released. We don't get the number of pet releases we did years ago, it's to a trickle now. People who aren't hardcore about pets, typically just don't pet at all. When the pool of pet people never grows, there's even less reason to go all out.

There's an optimistic part of me; the part of me that doesn't want to see that news post one day that says "90% of pets are owned by the 1%, releasing new pets is a waste of resources therefor that aspect of the site is being retired" (which frankly, I feel like has already happened), that feels like having non-unique names would really open a large door to bring pets more to the for ground.

The people who just battle or just wardrobe or just collect or can't afford/make fabulous profiles, art, or write; those people could have whatever names they want. More slots would be sold, more renames to bring in revenue for the site. It could help bring pets back into the mainstream of the site. Hell we could have as many potential slots as the site can handle. People could bring all of their characters being housed off subeta, and bring them here. More people in our part of the site, would potentially bring more species and colors. More TC items, more features. Yes, it would kill the elitism that comes from having the only Max on subeta, but if that meant more users caring about pets and seeing more pet content released then I have no problem with that.

More importantly it means the site wouldn't die almost every day at 3pm EST thanks to autorefreshers. If nothing is going to happen, and if we get more slots regardless, I want to see something change in that regard. I shouldn't fear trying to do anything on this site from 2:30-3:30 (CST) every single day because my battle loot will be eaten, my books read will be eaten, my profiles will be eaten, etc.