Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Posts posted by Kyu

  1. Changelog: August 14th, 2019



    • Added Characteristics, the most important feature of the game
    • Initial support for Discord "Rich Presence"
      • This feature is optional, and may be toggled in the Settings menu
    • Added "Share" functionality for Android in some locations


    • The minimum Java version has been increased to Java 8.
      • This does not affect modern Desktop installations or Android platforms. This primarily affects portable / legacy PokeMMO installations prior to 2016.
      • This is increased from Java 7. For affected Java 7 systems, please update to Java 8 using https://java.com or redownload the installer package from https://pokemmo.eu/downloads

    Bug Fixes

    • Improved support for keyboard input/controllers in many UIs
    • Fixed screenshot alpha channels
    • Many other minor changes

  2. There won't be any purely passive amulet coin like the old implementation in the future. The reasoning for the change is that, when you create a passive buff which sets rates ahead of baseline, and there's no penalty/cost for using the item, it becomes the de facto rate.


    If we want to set rates similarly to the old amulet coin passive buffs, we'd do so by increasing baseline trainer money gain instead of introducing another item for you to stack together. This would have the benefit of applying to all players as well.

  3. I'm happy to see such universal support for our Mayor, Bestfriends. It touches my heart. With his many years of community contributions, he truly deserves the role.


    I've never seen a 100% vote rate for a candidate, but I think this election deserves a special commemoration. I'm happy to announce that Bestfriends is now the Eternal Mayor of PokeMMO. I'm sure he'll make you all proud.

  4. 39 minutes ago, reallyy said:

    Now, he explain how he came to an agreement with Kyu and Squirtle to let him play again just for being youtuber and promoting the game.

    No he didn't


    39 minutes ago, reallyy said:

    Is this real??



    40 minutes ago, reallyy said:

    Please tell me that it is a lie, that this "offer" he mention is a lie and a desperate attempt to get attention again, it would be sad really that just because he are youtuber he have the option to evade the rules, and working for the game with a pay.

    It's a lie, and if he plays under more accounts, he'll probably be permanently banned again by the GMs.

  5. 2 hours ago, Gilan said:

    @Havsha If I were still a GM, I wouldn’t reply to this thread, for a couple of reasons. And negative, “mean” responses are not one of them. I also don’t think that “saying something dumb” is a reason I wouldn’t reply either; I’d just start my post with “In my personal opinion, and not representative of staff as a whole...”


    I just think there are reasons that I don’t know if I’m allowed to discuss here...

    I'm not taking pot shots at the GMs, but it's not really their place to discuss things like inflation because it's not their expertise. Half this topic was devoted to the current state of the economy, half of it is tournament prizes and general PvP stuff which they don't really know our plans on. It was meant to be more of a joking comment because topics like these are tiring, but I'm not upset at our players for being mad at us or anything, and I know the GMs would handle it if it were a GM-y matter.


    I'd be mildly perturbed if someone who didn't know what they were doing showed up and tried to lecture you guys about the goings-on of the economy and all that, because it's misinformation from an authority figure, even if it's meant in good faith. Also, if you have to ask, the answer would probably be "Please do not."

  6. 2 minutes ago, Havsha said:

    I appreciate that you responded to us, it's always nice hearing some form of acknowledgement when the community feels abandoned, and I do apologies if what I said comes of as some sort of attack, that was never my intention. However, I do find it quite disconcerting that the GMs refuse to answer me or replies like mine because we're mean or scary or they just are disinterested I dunno. As it stands silence doesn't build much confidence, and I truly wish I did not have to bother you to get my voice heard by the people who have the type of power needed to answer our concerns. If they just reached out to us like you have, there wouldn't be an outcry from the community. 

    It's not really because of "mean replies", it's just draining as hell to sit here and get yelled at. This is an all-day event, because I can't disengage halfway through without looking like a jerk. My initial reply took an hour to write, and the turbonerds who provide feedback spent a few hours debating the topic between themselves prior to me doing so, but it's not really a good use of anyone's time if we can help it.


    They do try to listen, though. Most of them just aren't very good at the economic details, and don't want to say something dumb, because that becomes "the staff response."

  7. 8 hours ago, Havsha said:

    There's clearly something wrong with the current system of tour prizes, so your solution is to ignore it?

    Tl;Dr Give us tour prizes worth our time

    Yes. This is literally "not my department", I don't have any say in tournament prizes, and the only thing I can recommend (I can poke the GMs and say hey guys you're doing something dumb) is based on whether I believe the economy is stable, or whether the prize tiering is too uneven. None of the GMs wanted to touch this topic because of replies like yours, so I'm the best you get, sorry.


    6 hours ago, Dazuzi said:

    Fair enough, but if this were to happen, I believe the proper way to do it would be to make them a little different, so people could still distinguish which one is from 201X and which one is from 202X. 

    That'd probably be a good way to recycle them, but I can't recall whether the motivation of it was purely for asset reasons (we are, eventually, going to run out of ideas), or whether there was some economic reason to it being brought up. If it were just for asset reasons, highly derivative stuff like that would be an ok way to manage it imo.


    6 hours ago, Dazuzi said:

    The answer to that is simple, they do. There has been a fair amount of debate on the P2W subject in this thread and I believe the claim that you can 'pay to win' in this game has been dismissed, although it's true that a player can 'pay to skip grinding', whether that is a good thing is another subject.

    What I was alluding to in my original post was whether free players have access to items which are immune to inflation without having to dump money into the game, and without having to trade with another player. Currently, within our current event model, they do. They still do even if we stop giving them away, it's not like we're tiering tradeability based on how much money you threw at us, but being able to access that class of inflation-immune item by themselves helps kind of bridge the divide between free/paid players, and probably helps players resent us less. But, maybe I'm overthinking it, and nobody really cares. I think this knowledge of inflation-immune items only recently became a topic of the public consciousness as the rest of the system showed cracks, so maybe they care now, though.


    7 hours ago, razimove said:

    @Kyu gimme your opinion on berry farming npc selling, and why its not nerfed to the ground like alt runs were.

    When it comes to discussing economic issues, we usually don't want to comment on specifics like this, because if I said in this moment "We're nerfing berries into the ground", the market would probably hyper-inflate as everyone rushes to get as much money as they can out of it. I'll write you a book sometime later though.


    1 hour ago, DoubleJ said:

    But in all serious, we've done this a few times and I continue to appreciate your responses. The economy bit was more so of an avenue to build a larger conversation about the tournament prizes. Yes, we competitive players get upset when we see non-Shiny prizes for a 3-4 hour event that we committed 3-4 days, or more, preparing for. We get even more upset when we realize that those non-Shiny prizes have IV's that are worse than what we could breed or even lack the customizable ability to be used effectively, for instance on Trick Room teams that require a Speed IV of 0-1 or a suicide lead that may require lower HP, Def, and SpDef IV's.


    Personally speaking, I don't think most of us really care what Pokemon it is so long as it has some viability in some tier. We know you can't (won't) give out the good stuff anymore like the customizable "Pick-Your-Own-Mon" or even something as great as a *gasp* Starter. What we simply ask for is that competitive "official" tournaments hosted by staff ALWAYS have a competitive Shiny Pokemon as a prize and we really, really would love to start seeing customizable IV's so I thank you for taking the time to look into it.

    So, like I said above, this is literally not my department, but yeah, the IV stuff is just a technical issue which hasn't been addressed. We do want to dump a few months into PvP, it's a little bad atm, and the tournament prizes didn't change when the meta's IV importance did. It's literally impossible for them to assign anything other than 4x25,2x31 atm iirc, so that's really our fault.


    I'll ask one of the prize tier people to look at this topic, but I'm pretty sure that conversation is going to go like this:



    We are very concerned over whether staff-driven events cause issues in-game due to prize distribution, but I think those concerns may just be outdated as it's all a drop in the bucket compared to our playerbase now. So you might get a lecture about how staff event-driven inflation is bad for the game, or you might get silent changes, or maybe nothing will happen, because hey, making sweeping changes to a standardized system during times of economic volatility probably really is a bad idea.

  8. 2 minutes ago, Dazuzi said:

    Darkshade mentioned a couple of months ago that event vanities might be re-released in the future, yet you just addressed them as a 'free version of limiteds', could you elaborate if you guys made a final decision, whether event vanities will, in fact, all be exclusive to the specific year when they were originally available or if they might possibly be re-released in the future? And if yes, could they actually get 'time-limited/exclusive to event20xx' label on them like event particles? 

    It's something which we're debating internally, iirc. The last time we talked about it was probably Christmas or Halloween 2018. We're considering re-releasing them after an extremely long period of time, e.g. a few years from now, but I'm not sure we ever will. Depends on if we get to the point of running out of ideas for events, or if we run too many (3x per year already feels like too many imo, but this was an exceptionally bad year due to how much work was required to make them work in NDS areas, so we'll see throughout 2019).


    Good catch though, I completely forgot about that. That would push the debate of whether free users have the same opportunities as paid users.


    2 minutes ago, Dazuzi said:

    Are there any plans to re-introduce the party hat? Personally, I think it doesn't look terrible. (The item is not labeled as seasonal or time-limited AFAIK)

    I don't know man, it's so bad. It's the worst hat we ever sold, it's a meme at this point. I don't think the guy even realizes he has one. Unless it's you, in which case, congrats. I guess someone already told everyone.

  9. Hi, so, I see we have a bit of an inflammatory topic to bait me into posting, so here you go:


    On 3/5/2019 at 2:35 AM, DoubleJ said:

    Put a ceiling on the amount of raw yen a player can have, such as 200,000,000 and purge any excess yen they have now to that value. 


    This has been covered several times by other posters so far, but I just want to note, this isn't Venezuela. Lopping zeroes off your currency doesn't solve your problems. We only did that once, and it was because we made an irreparable mistake at the time which forced a hard reset.


    I think what you want is to try to address inflation, so I'm just going to give a brief overview of inflation in MMO economies real quick:


    - Yen Inflation
    When you build a berry or you explode a gym leader/NPC, you get gold. When you get gold, you spend gold, on players or on NPCs. When you spend gold on players, you're not actually destroying gold, you're just moving it around. If we made a mistake here, the proper way to address it is to either stop the gold flow or make you spend more.


    - Item Inflation
    When items are built, the supply of "built items" becomes inflated. You turn gold into items. The items don't degenerate in our game. That means we need to have planned obsolesence built into our game's release schedule, which is why your items "degenerate" whenever a new metagame develops by way of a major content update. That's why you get mad at us when you start thinking about HAs and Gen 4.


    So, the way that we've historically managed this problem is by cutting money supplies, then forcing you all to build new items in some way. We have several major "reset buttons" left, with Sinnoh, HAs, Legendaries, etc. We just have to actually deploy them. While I'm always concerned over hitting a proper level of money flow within the game, I'm not overly concerned about oddities like these past few months, because we have leeway to make mistakes.


    You should note that I didn't mention any vanities in that paragraph. Those items don't expire. Infact, they're the only items which are immune to inflation by design, because they're released once. RuneScape also has this, although it's called the "party hat economy". Whether that makes the game better is debatable, because while it may seem "pay2win" (protip: we release free versions of limiteds literally every event, although they're not perfectly equatable to paid variants due to natural supply/demand of free vs paid users), it not only provides a store of wealth where it's otherwise impossible, but it ensures that goods traded between players for normal gameplay are able to be consistently inflated (HIGHLY AVAILABLE) by pegging peak wealth against something which is untouchable, which helps user adoption during the mature stages of a game's life by allowing us to make sure that gameplay-affecting items are inflated while retaining the prestige of having something valuable. Probably.


    Wealthy players don't play the same way that you do, anyway. They shift gold/items around for most of their gameplay. There are no inherent costs to doing this by design, because stifling trading by introducing taxation is pretty toxic for the game on a fundamental level. Wealth inequality within a game is not inherently bad imo, but taxing this type of player is not easy, because you either need to break the promise of wealth being stored in certain types of items (we're not going to do this), you need to deflate their assets, or you need to tax the process of trading. Alternatively, you can just try to convince everyone that a hat is worthless. All of this value is imaginary, and created by you.


    If I had to pick and choose what "the real problem" is, I would say that there's a disconnect between yen / item inflation which is making players mad because they're finding that it's faster to just throw $5 at us than actually play the game. That's an indicator of yen inflation, and I don't really like the level of inflation we're currently seeing, which you can see in our last patch notes, so we'll continue to make adjustments.


    (Fun fact: There's one player who has the rarest hat in the game, the only one of its kind, which is completely worthless because he not only didn't sell it, but it looks terrible.)


    On 3/5/2019 at 2:35 AM, DoubleJ said:

    In regards to the competitive community, there's very little incentive to play anymore. Prizes just aren't worth it.

    The GMs aren't actually going to do anything in the short-term, unless there's something really dumb going on with prize distribution (1st vs 2nd vs 3rd is too different). They would want to see long-term trends of monetary inflation before considering the adjustment of prize pools against the current state of the economy (when they make a decision). You guys get really mad when they reduce prizes, so they don't want to overbuff then say "oh no we messed up" and nerf it again, so they're always going to be tepid about it. The fact that I'm posting this will tell them that, no, they really shouldn't be touching prizes, it's a really bad idea to do it during a volatile economy regardless of how many angry people there are.


    On 3/5/2019 at 2:35 AM, DoubleJ said:

    Re-Introduce super rare vanity items such as Desu Labcoat, The Electric Storm, Knight Helmet, etc into the Giftshop but prevent them from being traded

    No. We made a promise that they would be released once.


    On 3/5/2019 at 2:35 AM, DoubleJ said:

    Just stop the trade of rare vanity items that are introduced seasonally or by event in the gift shop. Trade items should only be introduced by random drops in box items for events.



    On 3/5/2019 at 2:35 AM, DoubleJ said:

    Official events should dedicate themselves to two qualifier series each year, with at least two official tournaments per week with Shiny Pokemon prizes that have appropriate IV's with the ability to customize them to 0-31. We can supplement this with player-hosted events and continue to have CC's with lesser prizes such as non-shiny comps.

    We have been looking at reforms for formatting of official PvP events for a few months now, although we haven't had the opportunity to realize them yet. You'll understand why fairly soon, but we're pretty busy behind the scenes atm. I'd like to dump about 2 months into the PvP system fairly soon, I think you'd be happy with it by the time we're done. I'll make sure to keep the IV request in mind.


    Sorry for the informal tone for all of this, this thread is long. This is a very complicated set of questions which requires a lot of thought, and is definitely not addressed by "just make em all poor lol." This probably doesn't have the answers you want, but hopefully it'll give you a bit of insight to the thought process behind it all.


    6 hours ago, razimove said:

    On point, JJ. Problem is, old dogs don't learn new tricks, so we're unlikely to see them fixing stuff.


  • Create New...

Important Information

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