Recently, in the lifespan thread, the question was brought up regarding lifespan and generation. The supposition is that the further down the line, the longer a monster lives.
Now, the real question is, does the monster live longer because of an increase in natural lifespan as opposed to actual lifespan. If that doesn't make sense, natural lifespan would be the number of weeks a monster is rated to live, according to the lifespan thread, plus any additions due to disc chips, peaches, bananas, etc. The actual lifespan is what the monster actually lives, so you're takiing into account lifespan loss due to battles, errantries, etc.
Until someone actually studies the memory areas for lifespan for many different generations of monsters, we can only go on observation. I know that I, like most of you, have had later generation monsters live longer than thier previous brethren. However, I do not believe this is due to an increase in natural lifespan, no matter what you've heard about peaches carrying over, etc.
Instead, I think we're seeing only an increase of actual lifespan. Why? It's simple. The further down the line, the easier your monster's life is. They start with several techniques, so you don't need to send them on errantry as often. They start with higher stats, which means if they start with a higher lif, spd, or def (or even pow or int, since they reduce damage as well, and skill since it helps Ko your opponent before they do the same to you), you'll see the indirect effect of those higher stats on lifespan. Also, and especially in the early-mid stages of the game, you will recieve house and stable upgrades, have more permanent inventory items, and have more money to spend on items to help ease your monster's life.
So, if you ask me: no, later generations of monsters don't have a longer lifespan. They will live longer if you treat them more easily, just like any other monster, which is what usually happens.
-- B Campbell (apparatus@@juno.com), March 28, 2000
Actually I DID run a few tests on later gen monsters and so far my findings tend to back up what B has said. Natural lifespan does NOT increase with generations. Later gens tend to longer not because of "inherited" lifespan but because of easier battles, fewer errantries, and overall better living conditions.
DP, what I' like to see are some tests done with varying ages, and then with the effects of various items. If you have time, try loading a monster up with a few dozen drugs, combining it, and checking the offspring. Same with silver and golden peaches.
-- B Campbell (apparatus@@juno.com), March 28, 2000.
My own experience with this leads me to believe that peaches effects do not pass on to later generations. Last night I raised a pure Pixie (2nd Gen) that lasted 7 years. Neither of it's parents had been given any peaches, but it was made with a plant chip. My 11th generation Pixie lasted only a little more than 7 years, but I never took it to errentry, while I took my more recent one twice, and it's parents about 8 times each. I currently believe that raising style, the barn improvements, and the extras that make the monster happy and healthy are what improve lifespan. -Berge
The only way to actually gain life span from a new generation would be to combine a monster with another that has a higher natural lifespan. but this should only take effect if you were to get an entirely different breed altogether. ie. Joker + Mock = ebony (this would actually lower a mocks life but Im just trying to get my point accross).
-- John Doe (www.---@whatever.com), March 28, 2000.
True John, but thats not fully what they're talking about, cause then its an entirely different monster, instead of the same type and the same lifespan. Its stuff like this that makes me happy, because it really proves wrong people like Sir Ruby Knight(Fade's Board) and Golem Man on this board, they both claimed to get 20 year old monsters, and if this is true, its practically impossible...
I think I get what your saying. My first Draco Hopper named Adolph only lived to three years. When I combined him with my Gordish, I got another Draco Hopper named Alice. She was born with all but one of her father's moves, better starting stats (can't think of them now) and she lived for 4 years. She also got to B class (and unlocked Undine and Niton), while Adolph only got to C class.
-- Megan Fleming (m_e_fleming@yahoo.com), March 28, 2000.
Well, one thing I noted was to find out the lifespan of the monsters to be bred and the possible outcome breeds (control stuff, basically newborns). I've tried giving one (or both) of the monsters peaches before breeding. I've given them drugs. I've tried combining monsters of differents ages from newborns to freezy-pops. I've even tried improving the combos to see if there was a result. Actaully I was HOPING to find lifespan carry-over. but so far to no avail. To find this stuff out, I just use the Gameshark Pro's memory editor to observe the contents of the memory location governing lifespan. It's quicker and much more precise than just raising them.
Thanks DP. I'd be interested to know if the same principal applied to guts regeneration or if there is any carry over.
-- Argos (stanrock@uwm.edu), March 30, 2000.
By Nate Railsback on Tuesday, April 18, 2000 - 07:10 pm:
Actually, I sincerely believe that the effects of Peaches carry on to later generations. It can't be mere coincidence that I would often raise 1st generation and 4th generation monsters side-by-side, and the 4th generation ones would live 3 years longer at least. This includes comparisons between two monsters that would hardly ever fight, and two that were fighting all the time, and in both pairs, the one with the better pedigree lived far longer. And lest you think that racial type has something to do with it, I'm comparing a 1st-gen Color Pandora/??? with a 4th-gen Kato/Joker, for instance.
By Dark Phoenix on Wednesday, April 19, 2000 - 12:14 am:
Have you kept track of the errantries each monster has been on? Errantries are notorious lifespan zappers and I believe later gen monsters live longer because not as many of them are required.
And as for the Peaches, I tested for carryover in a variety of situations and found no difference in the lifespan variable outcome in the offspring. It could also be that some monster are more "durable" than others, as in that they may be more or less likely to lose lifespan due fatigue, stress, battle, etc. This could be a generational factor as well as racial, but testing "durability" is much slower than just glancing at values because you have to observe those values over time. There does seem to be evidence of this however. I noticed certain monsters such Pixies and Ghost seems to be stressed no matter what I seem to do wheras Eagle Fierce's Dad raised a Gaia (Henger/Golem) which took TREMENDOUS punishment (as in Spartan traing style) yet still lived to be over 6 years old.
On another note, an experienced trainer named Berge used an extensive breeding program in order to get a Pixie to live over 10 years. For the first several generations there was a general increase in lifespan, but at around the 8th to 9th gen the lifespan started to level off at a level that roughly matched the predicted lifespan on my lifespan chart. BTW, I did some testing on barn upgrades and found that they DO increase monster durability, at least as far as Fatigue was concerned.
By torey_luvullo on Wednesday, April 19, 2000 - 05:13 am:
yeah, it's berge's research i recall best as refuting the peach carryover theory. if peach effect did carry over, then that carryover would continue and extend through all succeeding generations, and the curve of lifespan increase would go up at a steady pace, because peach increase of lifespan is a constant. but berge reported that lifespan increases stopped at higher generation numbers[and he used the strict definition of what is a generation].
Home
LC