Jump to content

OrangeManiac

Members
  • Posts

    4477
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    57

OrangeManiac last won the day on February 2

OrangeManiac had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Finland

Recent Profile Visitors

38164 profile views

OrangeManiac's Achievements

  1. I don't think I have ever seen an economy-related suggestion getting everything this wrong in forums before. First of all, you don't deserve getting your investments getting raised in value. Like every economic investment, it's a gamble. Based on the fact that some people have made profit with this strategy, doesn't mean you are entitled to get rewarded just for buying a vanity and holding on for it a long time. The reason why vanities even have raised in value before is that (some) people have had more money than they have known where to use it for. The hint is on the name, it's a vanity item. You don't need it for anything. However, because people had more money than uses for the money, they started using that money for vanities. Because there were more and more players with too much money, people were able to ask high prices for old limited vanities. The fact that even old limited vanities have lost a bit of value recently means that people actually are using Pokeyen for game-related things. From MMO economy point of view, that's a great thing. You don't want an over-inflated game because then everyone has money and the money is basically useless. You were able to see this effect a lot in GTL. Sometimes the cost of buying a ready competitive Pokemon was cheaper than making one for yourself. Breeding braces was one of the main money sinks in the game and people clearly rather than wanting to buy comps were trying to get rid of them by sometimes selling them at a net loss. Yes, part of it can also be that the bubble has burst. Everyone was investing into vanities with the expectation it "has to increase in value". Well guess what, if everyone invests with this mindset, the opposite will happen. Yeah, a lot of my vanity investment have lost in value. Almost all of them recently. I'm not gonna cry about it. I can at least appreciate people have clearly some better things to do with their money now.
  2. Perish Song Follow Me + your own physical set up Phasing moves like Roar/Whirlwind A lot of Taunt Be untouched by Chansey in the endgame and win PP stall It's annoying for sure but there's ways to beat it
  3. Full support for this suggestion. It's really frustrating for experienced players to get something that is completely worthless because wealthier players aint touching those sub-perfect mons. They can be valuable to newer players and that's fine but with this both new and older players could get at least some value out of those 4x25 2x31s.
  4. Sounds like you're the one trying to control the market. The sales of vanities work based on free market principles. The old vanities are expensive because people are willing to pay a lot of shit for those so people can ask high prices for them.
  5. The fact people are even talking about 1,3x / 1,4x Sharpness already shows the kind of awful precedent this has set for competitive discussions, instead of agreeing that arbitrarily throwing a random number is just fundamentally a bad idea. Edit: Ok fine, I'll elaborate this a bit further. Why do we must insist Gallade has to be an OU Pokemon no matter what? I have no opinion whether Gallade in OU is too much, I'm not too deep in the metagame to have a good opinion about that. This whole conversation to me just seems stupid. One day, the devs just decided we are going to give Gallade Sharpness. Maybe for their great surprise, OU metagame was not quite ready for that power and coverage just like that. If we are to decide that Gallade with Sharpness is too much for the game, why can't we revert back to the time when Gallade didn't get Sharpness? We already decided we are not going to update everything (looking at you 90 power Outrage). The problem for devs has always been "nothing should be out of use in competitive play". Removing Sharpness from Gallade would still allow Gallade to do its old usual thing in NU. So, can someone explain to me why do we need Gallade in the OU tier? The point of topic seems to be is Gallade too strong or not. If it is, remove Sharpness from it. If it isn't, leave it as it is. I've already disliked when we need to forcefully keep Pokemon from going Ubers, with SD Garchomp and Draco Hydreigon. But at least, with those Pokemon the question is "Does this solve a problem, yes or no?". With Gallade, the question isn't currently "yes or no", it is "how much?". And from tiering discussion point of view, question of "how much" is just an awful discussion to have. You can move the goalposts pretty much endlessly in that discussion and there's never going to be an agreed multiplier where Gallade is supposedly okay for everybody. Also doing such weird numerical adjustments for things opens up a whole can of worms, especially if there ever is going to be another thing supposedly broken. How are we going to numerically adjust multiple points of discussion at the same time?
  6. Money sinks are something that literally takes money out of the game, reducing the amount from the total playerbase and not just one player. A lot of what you mentioned is just money moving from one person to another, rather than being deducted from the game in general.
  7. From economic point of view, the game needs some sort of money sinks. Post-game wise, PokeBalls and breeding braces are some of the only money sinks the game has. Sure, people would have more money but with no money sinks the value of money goes down with the inflation. As a result, all collectibles, including the one you mentioned would just heavily increase in price - making the added saved money effectively useless.
  8. It's delayed because of the implementation of Paldean region.
  9. One of the most innovative and successful players this game ever had, was nice having you here!
  10. What comes to the PvP suggestions, you need to keep in mind that people generally don't enjoy finding out their resources are useless. What's the point of implementing legendaries that you get no use for despite some fun battles with no rewards. Many players may use a lot of resources to a legendary just to find out they can't effectively do anything with it. Same point applies to just randomly banning things to "diversify" things. People don't enjoy finding out something they used so much resources for has been banned "just for the heck of it". And this is also clearly the stance of devs as well by insisting no Pokemon should be banned to Ubers but rather complex bans should be implemented. If you want diversity, play lower tiers. If the problem is that people don't play it enough, well, people then aren't even asking that much for that diversity.
  11. I just don't understand the "all or nothing" mentality behind either having LC "as a tier" or completely nuking it from the game. Was LC representation notably lower than other lower tiers? Yep. Was LC taken less seriously by the general playerbase? It seems that way. But why was the solution to remove it from the game completely, though? I understand the smaller representation but what's wrong with recognizing LC a gimmick tier in comparison to OU/UU/NU/Dubs and give it slightly smaller representation in the scheduling calendar? Why would it be bad to host at least occasionally a tournament here and there to give LC enthusiasts something to do and something to build for?
  12. Swords Dance never deserved to be removed from Garchomp to begin with, in regards to Doubles. In the current state of the meta, Swords Dance Garchomp would become an absolute game changer. Garchomp is already strong but Intimidates have always been its main downfall. Now that it can boost more than getting affected by Intimidate in a turn, teambuilding will completely change. That being said, for the life of me, I can't call it broken because it's a mon that literally gets crippled by one of the most common speed control moves in the game (Icy Wind). So people would just shift counter Chomp from Intimidates to Icy Wind and I think that's probably fine. While I thought that Hydreigon having access to Draco is actually mandatory for healthy Doubles metagame (to punish mindless set up, but also the -2 drawback is massive for future turns), I don't think the game needs SD Garchomp. But in all honesty, Garchomp never deserved to have its Swords Dance removed from Doubles point of view. What comes to Shaymin-Sky... I know you all like to complain how relevant flinches are in Doubles. You remember those moments when a Tyranitar Rock Slide or Togekiss flinch decided the game. Anyone who has played more than 10 games of Doubles has experienced this. Then we remember Tyranitar and Togekiss are actually some of the slowest Pokemon in the entire metagame outspeeding barely half of the metagame and they still have such a huge effect on the game with their flinch moves. With Shaymin-Sky, you have a Pokemon that essentially outspeeds the entire metagame besides Crobat with 60% chance to flinch its target. You have essentially a Scarf Togekiss, on steroids, without the drawback of being locked to a Choice Item. Oh and if that wasn't bad enough, you have a Serene Grace boosted Seed Flare that is basically always guaranteed to go first. Practically a Fake Tears 80% of the time, that also does 120 STAB damage. Neat. All in all, just absolutely no, it makes the whole gameplay an absolute meme that we do not need or want.
  13. There's probably not a single Pokemon in the game that the Recover PP nerf hurt more than Milotic. 8 PP instead of 16 makes Milotic incredibly short term option to so many things, especially the Flame Orb set. Milotic needs multiple Recovers to "recover" from the damage (pun maybe intended) it takes from switching in against anything. It might consume 3-4 PP by just even Recovering to full and countering the Pokemon it was supposed to counter. But if you're wasting half of your PP by countering a Pokemon once, you're hardly a "counter" to begin with.
  14. Yeah I don't really like the idea of one person controlling the "community's suggestion thread", furthermore some of these ideas in the thread are very old, had multiple discussion threads about it and had some very deep discussion. Linking some new thread about the topics with 1 upvote and 1 comment makes it seem like the whole topic is much less discussed and much less important than the topic actually is. Also what comes to expanding on the topic, you can just post to other people's threads.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.