XelaKebert

It's both. Players get screwed by the turn 5 forfeit because neither will suffer any ELO effects as a result. Having the rewards scaled based on time encourages time stalling, but removing rewards unless you stall a player out to turn 6 encourages players to forfeit out of spite. There was a similar issue when manual staff tournaments used a Time Clause. The clause basically put an upper limit on the amount of time a battle could go so that players aren't sitting in the semi-finals waiting for first round matches to complete. While the premise was well intentioned, the end result was that some players would intentionally time stall to get both of them DQ'd. Why double DQ? It was because there is no reasonable way to make a correct call as to who should have won due to their still being too many factors to consider. Players who win by forfeit should still be rewarded, but not the full amount. The player who forfeits should still lose ELO as well. The issue will be finding a balance that encourages players to just play instead of worrying about time stalling to get better rewards.

That's still a loss regardless. A forfeit is just a means to prevent wasted time. This is an issue similar to when double DQs were done when Time Clause was a thing. Players would intentionally time stall so that their opponent couldn't advance either. Players doing this are only doing so because they know that the other player won't get rewarded, not just because they know they can't win. I do agree they should get rewarded for the win, but giving a large margin of reward doesn't fix the issue at all. Personally, the player forfeiting should lose a large margin of points, but the winning player should get no more than 90% and no less than 70% of the normal victory reward. We shouldn't be encouraging players to win by forfeit. A forfeit should essentially be a last resort when you absolutely know you cannot win. So the system should encourage players to stay in a match as they feasibly can, but not so long that they are time stalling. There needs to be a healthy balance to the system.

There's always going to be something that feels "cheap" to you. It's not really going to matter what it is at all. It's just the nature of the beast. This is like people complaining about campers in FPS games. Sure it feels cheap and it can get aggravating, but they are also still taking a large risk by staying in one spot.

I think something that is being missed here is that the system was designed to encourage starting earlier in the season to maximize your chances of earning certain rewards. Obviously this season being shorter the time investment will feel like more of an issue, but when the first 12 week season starts it might be a different story. Math for a 12 week season (Rounded Up): Average Wins Per Week: 53 (52.08 exact average) Average Wins Per Day: 8 (7.44 exact average) Assuming the average duel lasts 20 minutes, that means a player would need to invest 160 minutes per day on average (2hr 40min) which averages to a mere 19 hours per week average. This math assumes a given player starts on day 1 of the new season. The longer you wait to start a season, the more time you will be required to invest to earn certain rewards.

PvP isn't the only aspect that needs balancing in an MMO. You have to ensure PvE is balanced as well. The cartridges were designed to allow a single player the ability to experience the full breadth of the game without actually needing to interact with other players. The extra online functions are optional features a player can utilize to complete their dex, battle, or trade. Since those functions are not required for the storyline it's very easy to be able to give the players everything they could ever want. MMOs don't get that luxury without becoming severely unbalanced. The developers have been working on content specific to legends off and on for the past few years. This content would be in the form of dungeons specific to each legend that would allow the players a chance to capture one, but with a very low chance of spawning to preserve rarity. Legends are something that should feel special. If everyone has one then they are no longer special. So finishing off missing features from the existing regions is irrelevant? That's more what they have been doing. The last update wasn't even adding a new feature so much as it was fixing the issues that prevented the Matchmaking functions from being used very much. Players had been asking for Matchmaking rewards for a very long time. Without rewards grinding to the top of the leaderboard just becomes a massive waste of time since you only get bragging rights at that point. There is a Shiny Charm in game though. I don't believe it's specifically called Shiny Charm, but there is an extra item outside of donor status that increases your chances of encountering a shiny by 10%. Look in the GTL Item listings and type Shiny in the search bar. Bear in mind that this game has been around for almost 10 years now. It's been doing pretty well and while there are still aspects missing that would make it feel like a full fledged MMO, they are working on them. With respect to the dungeons, there are many reasons why they haven't come into existence yet. Dungeon design isn't some cut and dry thing. In any game with dungeons there has to be a balanced risk/reward system. If there is too much risk and not enough reward then no one will play that content. If there is too much reward and not enough risk then you unbalance the player based economy in game which will upset a large chunk of players. I'm sure there are other games you feel are better than this one, and if you feel strongly enough about that then perhaps this isn't the game for you.

Everyone has to contend with Critical Hits, but only one player has to contend with increased evasion. There's a difference between a mechanic both players have to contend with and using moves that force the other player to rely on RNG to land a move. Nobody wants to lose to the guy who spams Minimize or Double Team. Evasion teams don't take much thought to setup either. So, no Crits don't have less impact than evasion does. A crit at the right/wrong time can make or break a match, but the guy who spams evasion boosts is effectively able to control the duel from the beginning.

If you farm hordes of 5 your effective rate becomes and impressive 1/4860 since 5 encounters each with a 1/24.3k chance becomes 5/24.3k. While each roll is independent, you are knocking 5 encounters out in one fell swoop.

Compatibility as in it asks you to use Compatibility Mode? If so, just use that and it will be fine. Do be aware that there are performance issues with that mode that may or may not be able to be fixed.

If this is something introduced in the recent PvP update the best reason I can think of for it is that, in order to give incentive to play Ranked Matchmaking, there need to be rewards exclusive to that system. Whether or not they are bound to the player is a moot point tbqh. The same argument would be made even if they could be traded because only players who play PvP would be able to effectively farm them whereas casual players wouldn't be able to obtain them without paying obscene prices for them. In my honest opinion, having Ranked PvP reward items bound to the player is an effective compromise. Sure players are going to be salty about it being difficult for them to obtain, but on the other side, there won't be any salt about the prices for them being obscene on the market due to the difficulty involved in obtaining them. In addition, it's not like you are completely blocked from obtaining your own. Resources exist, as pointed out, that can help you reach the level of PvP play you need to be capable of getting one. So the issue is more in willingness to utilize those resources more than anything else.

Counter proposal: 100% capture rate on non-shiny Taurus. Then you can all be Ash. Serious note though. Unlike the casino, the Safari Zone is supposed to be a gamble. Even in the base games it was always a gamble. If it wasn't meant to be one they wouldn't reduce capture rate when throwing bait while simultaneously decreasing the flee rate on that encounter. On the opposite end, throwing a rock will increase the capture rate, but it will also increase the flee rate for that encounter as well. To a degree, there is some skill in it with balancing when to throw bait/rock/ball, but in the end the majority of it comes down to luck.

The way I see it, things have changed in the past 4 years that a new trailer would make sense. I don't think now is a good time for one though because there are changes set to occur that could be beneficial to include in a new trailer. Things that can be highlighted in a new trailer would include the expansion to 4 regions, GTL, Android support, and the changes to matchmaking once those are released. To be honest, if I were to look at an active MMO and see that the trailer is well outdated despite numerous changes to the game I'd want to give it a pass. In my eyes, a game that isn't willing to showcase their changes visually isn't worth looking into.

Your reward for following the rules you agreed to is continued access to the game server and the continued ability to chat. Anything extra is overkill. If someone doesn't like being punished for breaking the rules then they should review the rules again and leave if they find them unacceptable. It's not a difficult concept to understand, humans have been learning cause and effect for several millennia.

Many times and the answer has always been no as it would undermine the point of updating the game's AI to play smarter than the handhelds.

If you hover over the HP bar you can see the stat changes.

There are plans to add the rest of the legendary species later.

Some things you seem to miss about the system being used for the legends in game are that at any given time only 1 is available. It is literally impossible for two players to encounter a given legend at the same time. Players who go after the legends are already aware of the system and how it operates. Players are subjected to limitations on fast travel. Legends return to the wild if the current holder logs out or attempts to transfer it to their PC. At that point, anyone who wants to take part can go search for it. Your system is a shortsighted amalgamation of the legend system and Matchmaking. You are in an instanced environment when you battle the elite 4, you have absolutely no idea how many other players are also battling and where their progress is with respect to you. In other words, you are already in your own channel when you battle the elite 4. The reason for this is to allow for the cooldowns to be properly tied to you as a player. Multiple players defeating a region's champion at the same time is entirely possible. Tying their fate to RNG to decide who gets the crown is just bad. Nobody wants their fate determined entirely by RNG at all, and yes the changelogs would need to note that champions would be determined by RNG in the event of ties. So a channel dedicated only to challenging the elite 4, but only one person can challenge at a time? First off, that's already what happens as mentioned above. Second, that's just boring. If only one person is allowed to challenge the elite 4 on the channel at a time then how do other players get to challenge them for the crown? Battle the same elite 4 and then get to challenge the champion at the end? Still boring. What makes the system interesting for the legends is that players are able to move around with limitations. You don't have to slog through an entire series of trainers just to get to them. Sure, you can challenge the other players in the area of the person holding the legend, but then you end up potentially losing your shot to challenge for it as well. Do you let anyone in that channel just walk in and challenge? If so, what use does the elite 4 even serve anymore? When a player logs in the server will attempt to place them in their preferred channel. If that channel is full then it will place them in a different channel that is not full. On that same note, when you exit your instance of the elite 4 by winning or losing the server will attempt to place you back in your previous channel if it is not full. This means that it becomes entirely likely a player could just be thrown into this designated channel on login or after exiting their elite 4 instance. Not good design at all. Sure, you could very well make the system not place players in this channel, but then what? How do you make players aware this channel even exists? Chess timers exist in tournament matches because arbitrary time limits suck and tying a player's fate entirely to RNG is bad design. On top of that, placing a time restriction on the match that favors the challenger if time runs out encourages stall tactics from challengers. Think about that for a moment. Who would want to play offensively if they know that they will automatically win once time runs out? Time limits will make this system a battle of who can make the best team of walls. Not very interesting at all. You can't make the system smart enough to decide who would win if time runs out either because there are too many factors to take into account. Tying it to number of Pokemon is bad because someone could still pull a sweep with a couple left. Most players are smart enough to know when they need to forfeit and when they should keep trying. Back when I was on staff, we experimented with time limits on matches with the condition that if a match did not complete when time expired both would be disqualified. The end result was some players intentionally stalling out for time to get their opponent thrown out with them. It was not a good system. Nobody wants to lose because their opponent wants to play heavy stall and runs the timer out. That's also 240,000 P across all regions per hour. If by P you mean Pokeyen, that's incredibly bad. That equates to 5,760,000 yen per day for all regions created out of nowhere on top of the already large amount being created through other means, hello inflation. Battle Points are the closest you will get to currency neutral in terms of rewards, but even then you are cranking a ton out every single day. I don't seem to recall any of the other BP rewards being even remotely as rewarding. Master Balls are useless unless you encounter a shiny that can use Roar, Whirlwind, Explosion, or Self Destruct. They are not even worth effort to obtain extra from PvP instances. Rare Candies have value behind them given the investment needed to make them. Even then, you can't give out tradeable items as rewards in this system. They have to be bound to the player who wins them. I'm going to close this out with this statement. The system you want already exists in the form of Matchmaking, which is getting a major overhaul in the next update. Upcoming changes that have been announced include seasonal leaderboard tournaments for the top players and streak based rewards. The only real difference between this and Matchmaking is the lack of NPC trainers.

Yes they do, but you don't get to arbitrarily decide how long that takes. Standard tournament matches get more time to complete than you are giving players who would be battling in this system. What comp player in their right mind would want to take part in a match where they don't get proper time to really think their moves through? If you want interesting matches then the standard chess timers from tournament mode would be more than enough. You do realize that most players don't use tournament ready teams to battle the elite 4 right? Not every comp team will do well and some are more efficient than others. What you will end up with is a ton of cookie cutter team matches where both players have similar teams. How is that interesting in any manner? It's also entirely possible for 2 players in the same region to defeat the elite 4 at the same exact time. What do you do then? You can't have two champions in the same region. Throwing them into a battle neither is equipped for is poor design. There's honestly no other way to put it. You can't have two champions and you can't throw them into a match blindly. You've created a paradox. Sure, you could throw up a dialog that gives the option to battle for champion, but what does that really solve? Nothing. It will add confusion because newer players, not all of them read the forums, would be confused since they had already become champion to their knowledge and now there is this dialog saying they aren't unless they win some extra battle they knew nothing about. A larger complication comes in when you have more than 2 players defeating the elite 4 in the same region at the same exact time, which is entirely plausible. How do you handle that without frustrating players? In order for the reward system to not be game breaking the rewards would have to be bound to the player, just like items you find during the storyline. If they aren't it becomes very game breaking. Giving out something that can be traded, such as yen, BP, or RP, would be very game breaking.

15 minute battle time is arbitrary at best and making the champion lose the title after said time would make less people use the system. Locking the champion into the same team encourages only counter teaming the current champion and not straight competitive play. Then there is the issue of when the current champion logs off. What do you do then? You can't just arbitrarily award the title to someone. Then the added issue of there being 4 regions with their own Elite 4. Do you propose there be 4 champions at that point? There are a ton of complexities with this.

What if he's really like Mimey in the anime and helps your mother keep the house clean?

Ok, now that I understand better let me frame it differently. Yes, a Power Bracer costs 10k to purchase from the NPC. So let's say I have the cash to buy a full stack of 99 Power Bracers, I have now spent 990,000. Now let's say I turn around and sell them at 70% cost, which would be 7k. I may move my full stack of 99, but the end result is that I only get 693,000 back from my investment; I've now lost 297,000. Why is it a problem that players want to invest in a Sunk Cost Fallacy? Surely the answer cannot be that it's an issue because you cannot move your stock of the same items could it? If a player undercutting you to the point that they are losing money on the investment makes it harder for you to move your stock, let them invest in it. That's 297,000 yen they will never be able to get back. Once those players are unable to maintain that business model, it means that you are in a better position to capitalize on the void provided you don't charge an obscene markup to the initial cost. Besides, if you want a better chance at moving your inventory, put it on the GTL instead of using Trade Chat. You set the price you want per unit and how many you are putting up for sale. The system calculates the value and charges you the appropriate listing fee then lists the item for a period of time. Odds are that, before that period expires, if you have not marked up the cost excessively, your items will sell.

If the moves do not currently exist in Gen 5, they will not be added.

You don't get competition in the market by setting hard values for something that is subjective in the first place. There are 649 species in gen 5, with a good chunk of those available in game. One species alone is going to have a few thousand different combinations factoring into the value. When it comes to determining profit/loss, you can look at what you put into creating it and what the minimum /you/ could sell it for to make back your investment without taking a loss. With those saying they are selling at 70% value or less, they likely didn't put full value into it in the first place so they can take a hit like that. I would strongly advise you to /actually/ learn how player driven markets work rather than trying to apply a blanket solution that is developmentally impractical and, quite frankly, isn't worth the amount of time it would take to implement. I am well aware that players undercut others on prices, the same argument has been made for the GTL as well. In both cases, it's not only impractical, it's impossible to adequately assign values that were arbitrary in the first place. Before yen was tradeable the economy was driven by Lucky Eggs, which had a drop rate around 5% on an already extremely rare and hard to catch Pokemon. If you think this is bad, think about that for a minute and then decide what you would rather have.

That's called free market. Setting minimum prices that are arbitrarily determined is not going to fix anything. Value is subjective and when it comes to Pokemon there are way too many different factors that contribute to the different values you see including, but not limited to, shiny, IV spread, ability, nature, etc. The number of different combinations is much too high to adequately account for disparities in value to even begin to price them on a server level.

Only if they find that a scam did indeed occur. This could take some time for them to review.

If they've already made a report in the Player Reports section on here they have to wait until all evidence is reviewed before they will know if anything will be done.