| |
|
Hi all, I am tracking the training on my mares and I havent been playing long enough to know what is poor, average, or good training for different ratings. I don't want to waste my time and money on mares that have poor training and therefore won't produce as well but I don't even know what is good and I can't find a good outline in the guides section. Something like this format would be really helpful, or maybe no one really knows and its all just a best guess. EEE Poor: Week 4- none up Week 9- none up Average: Week 4 - 2 up Week 9 - 2 up Good: Week 4 - 4 up Week 8: 2 up (note: this is all just me guessing off the top of my head so please change it to be more accurate lol) EWE combo Poor: Average: Good EWW combo Poor: Average:
Good: WWW Poor:
Average: Good: I have some EWE combo mares that train worse than my EEE mares and its just tough to decide if my EEE mares that do are way above average or if my EWE mares are way below average. Also would be handy to know what baseline everyone has to just cull a mare right away vs keep her and test to see what she produces. I have seen the culling theory to give her 3-5 foals and if she doesn't outproduce herself once in the 3-5 to cull her but I haven;t seen anything on training to cull off the yearlings/2 yos before you even start breeding them. |
|
|
| |
|
I have a blog as well as several others with average "good" training if you'd like to check that out :) - it is mainly geared towards WWWs, but should be of help <3 |
|  |
|
| |
|
Ah thank you so much I didn't think to look for blogs! |
|
|
| |
|
I found this blog too for anyone else who might have the same question: |
|
|
| |
Moderator |
Additionally I want to say, that training gives absolutely NO clue, how the horse is going to be breedding wise! We saw a lot of 4/7/8 week wonders that totally flopped and did not even manage to reproduce their own ratings. And we saw some "poor training" horses with stats down in the "important weeks" that were awwesome producers and placed decent to quite high on the leaderboards. Training is not linear over the weeks - and with a couple of weaker/better training sessions in a row might make a horse look weaker/stronger than it is at the end. |
|  |
|
| |
|
Kuewi knn stable said:
Additionally I want to say, that training gives absolutely NO clue, how the horse is going to be breedding wise! We saw a lot of 4/7/8 week wonders that totally flopped and did not even manage to reproduce their own ratings. And we saw some "poor training" horses with stats down in the "important weeks" that were awwesome producers and placed decent to quite high on the leaderboards. Training is not linear over the weeks - and with a couple of weaker/better training sessions in a row might make a horse look weaker/stronger than it is at the end.
^^ big time! |
| |
|
| |
|
Good to know but also how frustrating lol. I thought there was some sort of hidden game mechanic that tied the training to the rating and that there was a mostly direct correlation. So in reality it's just a complete crap shoot and training is to hopefully match to a complementary horse? How important is matching in that case? |
|
|
| |
Moderator |
Training gives a small clue on weaker / stronger traits. This is important to match horses - like pair weaker traits with strong traits. But we have seen horses with - for example - strong Mv and low Int in the first 4-10 weeks. And after 40+ trainings it turned out the Int was way stronger than Mv. So yes, at the end it is all luck and random, which keeps the game interesting even after 15+ real life years! (sorry, my keyboard is broken and acts up with w and d) |
| |
|
| |
|
Ahhh that makes alot of sense. So in that case how would you match that horse? As the 40+ trainings would suggest or how they trained to start? |
|
|
Sunshine with a Solar Eclipse
