[Denied]Encountering Shinys: Less Luck based and More Effort Based

[Umbral]

>Says the guy who made a guide to avoid scamming

It was obviously a con to make all of the noobs more trusting of him so he could scam them more easily. I mean, anyone that would make a guide against being scammed is obvs trustworthy, rite?

[Archinix]

It was obviously a con to make all of the noobs more trusting of him so he could scam them more easily. I mean, anyone that would make a guide against being scammed is obvs trustworthy, rite?

Obvi.

Still can't believe he told Squirtle I was a scammer ;-;

[Kababs]

so long as it doesn't get too likely to get shinnies so some luck is still there it's fine.

 

It was obviously a con to make all of the noobs more trusting of him so he could scam them more easily. I mean, anyone that would make a guide against being scammed is obvs trustworthy, rite?

Obvi.

Still can't believe he told Squirtle I was a scammer ;-;

CONSPIRACIES EVERYWHERE!

[Kyu]

1. Aren't MMOs generally supposed to reward those who put more time into a game?

2. Since this would be a largely passive buff couldn't it be scaled such that it wasn't game breaking and would largely apply to people who are already doing other things?

3. If its number of encounters based, then there could be a time limit. Like from the first XXX you encounter you have 1 hour to encounter as many of those as possible, and the more you encounter the higher the odds are increased.  To reduce its abusability there could be an NPC who tells you they hear XXX pokemon has been sighted in rare shades recently, triggering the event that would last for 1 hour or whatever.  This NPC would operate similarly to the TVs and swarms.  (This kind of mimics the point you finished on, but less convoluted).

4. Isn't the inherent nature of shinies (1/8192) itself bad gameplay? Specifically, the notion that all you have to do to get a shiny is grind for a long time and eventually you'll get one isn't really that different from what Emlee is suggesting, except she's saying take 'a long time' and make it 'a slightly less long time'

 

1. Depends on what you want. "I want to work towards a rare cosmetic" is not unreasonable. 
2. I heavily dislike passive buffs because it corrals players into a single gameplay type due to natural desires to min/max. That isn't the main reason I dislike it though; I dislike the idea because it doesn't actually do what you want: Provide a reward. Instead, it provides a chance at a reward. If we're going to make you jump through hoops, we need to actually give you the goods at the end. 
3. Not going to theorycraft on it. 
4. Yes. There is currently no way to gain pokemon cosmetics aside from getting lucky, and that's a gameplay flaw. 

[Dannnno]

1. Depends on what you want. "I want to work towards a rare cosmetic" is not unreasonable. 
2. I heavily dislike passive buffs because it corrals players into a single gameplay type due to natural desires to min/max. That isn't the main reason I dislike it though; I dislike the idea because it doesn't actually do what you want: Provide a reward. Instead, it provides a chance at a reward. If we're going to make you jump through hoops, we need to actually give you the goods at the end. 
3. Not going to theorycraft on it. 
4. Yes. There is currently no way to gain pokemon cosmetics aside from getting lucky, and that's a gameplay flaw. 

 

okay that makes a lot of sense.  You said currently - does that mean you guys have considered/are considering alternative methods?

[fredrichnietze]

 

Yes. There is currently no way to gain pokemon cosmetics aside from getting lucky, and that's a gameplay flaw. 

 

well winning tournaments...........

[Kyu]

okay that makes a lot of sense.  You said currently - does that mean you guys have considered/are considering alternative methods?

 

Nothing off the top of my head. As shiny pokemon are mostly superfluous (aside from how they provide gameplay by creating something to desire),  it's a low priority issue in my opinion. 

 

 

[Dannnno]

 

well winning tournaments...........

 

 

so ~100 additional shines in the market/year.  Lets say 10-30 of those end up on inactive accounts, and probably 30 more are relatively low quality shinies.  Hardly game breaking, and is something that only applies to a very small percentage of players

[JSTUD]

so ~100 additional shines in the market/year.  Lets say 10-30 of those end up on inactive accounts, and probably 30 more are relatively low quality shinies.  Hardly game breaking, and is something that only applies to a very small percentage of players

 

Fine I'll just win more tournaments so we keep these shinies active. 

[fredrichnietze]

so ~100 additional shines in the market/year.  Lets say 10-30 of those end up on inactive accounts, and probably 30 more are relatively low quality shinies.  Hardly game breaking, and is something that only applies to a very small percentage of players

i am only saying that their are 2 ways and nothing more. i agree the current game play for getting shinys needs to be re worked

[Emlee]

I get it, you made this topic because you are mad at all shiny owners because you yourself have not even catched a single one.
Even if they said yes, this would turn around all the marked thanks to you. So how about you build your way up? Thanks, and have a nice day.

No, I actually have a few shinys of my own, thanks for your concern though. Also it seems as though you're unable to comprehend this suggestion.


Also tfw Kyu responds to others responding to my suggestion but not to me lel. Oh well. . .

[Rigamorty]

I have mixed feelings about this suggestion. It really depends on if the whole 1/32000 thing is true or not. If the rate is still 1/8192 then I don't like this idea, if the rate is in fact 1/32000ish, then yes I think this is a good thing. 

 

And I hate the shit out of the idea at ever doing any sort of quest thing with a rare shiny at the end, it kinda ruins the novelty of shinies.

[JonazDK]

I don't like the idea about someone is shiny hunting ( right now if you are shiny hunting you often use 100's of hours with no result), a shiny pokemon is a you shall meet randomly, and allways with same chance 1/8192....

[fredrichnietze]

I have mixed feelings about this suggestion. It really depends on if the whole 1/32000 thing is true or not. If the rate is still 1/8192 then I don't like this idea, if the rate is in fact 1/32000ish, then yes I think this is a good thing. 

 

And I hate the shit out of the idea at ever doing any sort of quest thing with a rare shiny at the end, it kinda ruins the novelty of shinies.

dude no ones talking about this on the forums because we dont want another market crash/people getting banned. 

[JaredZ]

I have mixed feelings about this suggestion. It really depends on if the whole 1/32000 thing is true or not. If the rate is still 1/8192 then I don't like this idea, if the rate is in fact 1/32000ish, then yes I think this is a good thing.

And I hate the shit out of the idea at ever doing any sort of quest thing with a rare shiny at the end, it kinda ruins the novelty of shinies.

1/32000 ?! WTF? why are you sayin that?
and I also have a question guys:
this 1/8192 thing is about every encounters you got on pokemmo or each species?
I mean, you have better chances to find a shiny after around 9000 encounters (whatever the encounters are) or after 9000 encounters of a specific poke?

Edit: and I support this suggestion btw :)

[Ryuken777]

1/32000 ?! WTF? why are you sayin that?
and I also have a question guys:
this 1/8192 thing is about every encounters you got on pokemmo or each species?
I mean, you have better chances to find a shiny after around 9000 encounters (whatever the encounters are) or after 9000 encounters of a specific poke?

Edit: and I support this suggestion btw :)

I'm pretty sure

it's 1/8192 for every encounter

the chance does not raise even if you encounter 100,000

[JaredZ]

I'm pretty sure
it's 1/8192 for every encounter
the chance does not raise even if you encounter 100,000

damn that sucks. yeah I fully support this suggestion.

[Dannnno]

1/32000 ?! WTF? why are you sayin that?
and I also have a question guys:
this 1/8192 thing is about every encounters you got on pokemmo or each species?
I mean, you have better chances to find a shiny after around 9000 encounters (whatever the encounters are) or after 9000 encounters of a specific poke?

Edit: and I support this suggestion btw :)

 

There is a rumor, backed by certain evidence, that the real shiny rate is ~1/32k.  It hasn't been officially proven.

 

Regardless of the shiny rate, its not by species its by total encounters.

[axx]

• I heavily dislike passive buffs because it corrals players into a single gameplay type due to natural desires to min/max. That isn't the main reason I dislike it though; I dislike the idea because it doesn't actually do what you want: Provide a reward. Instead, it provides a chance at a reward. If we're going to make you jump through hoops, we need to actually give you the goods at the end. 

 

This ^

 

I did not foresee this point, but if they implement the buff as this suggestion intends, at the end it will be the same thing, same lucky people will find more shinies than those bad lucky ones that are complaining now and will complain more for "wtf I encountered 15k poochyenas and no one was shiny".

 

Also, I neither like the idea of giving the player a rare shiny after a quest (e.g. rage gyara / shiny haxorus) as this will nuke said shiny/group of shinies rarity and then no one will feel those as "special".

[Emlee]

This ^

I did not foresee this point, but if they implement the buff as this suggestion intends, at the end it will be the same thing, same lucky people will find more shinies than those bad lucky ones that are complaining now and will complain more for "wtf I encountered 15k poochyenas and no one was shiny".

Also, I neither like the idea of giving the player a rare shiny after a quest (e.g. rage gyara / shiny haxorus) as this will nuke said shiny/group of shinies rarity and then no one will feel those as "special".

It really depends on how it's implemented whether or not the same people are having "good" or "bad" luck.

As for quests and the OP I think either can be done right if tweaked in the right way if the end result is effort + luck and not just luck.

I agree quests should never equal a guarenteed shiny but I'm not against quests with a shiny chance at the end.

I will say the OP works well with the current in game me mechanics as they're already "corralled" into one thing. If the future of PokeMMO is quests and such then I am all for that too.

[TheOriginal]

I get it, you made this topic because you are mad at all shiny owners because you yourself have not even catched a single one.
Even if they said yes, this would turn around all the marked thanks to you. So how about you build your way up? Thanks, and have a nice day.

Tries to provide argument thats not there. Reasoning for this suggestion in your mind is not sound, since I do not believe Emlee plays anymore/does not need a shiny, most likely. The market would not be destroyed if the encounter rate is increased, it would most likely boost the values at first and then balance out, less would be found and this gives people some incentive to play the game for longer, which is a good thing for any MMO. 

[Jate]

I fully support. Also if anything this could turn the shiny market to just pure desire, shiny for shiny. Also they could implement something similar to the Madusa method, or shiny chaining if they dont want to do anything not in the actual games.

[jayfeatskydd]

Completely support although I don't like the idea of it being harder for the people who don't try :unsure:

I have so many hours played and I've never encounter a shiny. <_< 
But I really do like these suggestions.

[Summrs]

Why not just have events (day long) (hour long) to satisfy you wanting increased shiny rate.

[JaredZ]

btw guys, it is really impossible to get a shiny with breeding now right? with the old mechanics you could focus on only one poke (eevee for example) and breed it til getting a shiny one. I know, even before the update, it was probably near impossible but really easier than now.. since before that, you could 1. hatch 5 eggs in a row. 2. hatch eggs and nothing else. I mean, you weren't forced to encounter other pokes so that your eggs hatch. now you are. (well I think so.) so my point is, even if you breed your favorite poke forever, you probably won't get a shiny one. Because you will have to encounter X random pokes to unlock some flags. I don't have a number in mind but I think you have to encouter 10ish/20ish pokes to unlock flags even if you pay the cinnibar guy 4,000$ for moves. so most likely, the only shiny/ies you'll get (if you ever get one, nothing is guaranteed) will be random pokes from each X encounters needed to hatch your eggs.
please tell me if I'm wrong about something.