Jump to content
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
slidingpanda

Pokedex Locations - More specific encounter rates

Question

How is it now.
In Pokedex > Wild Locations of a given Pokemon we can see a column that shows Rarity aggregated into groups like  (Common, Uncommon, Rare)

 

wTTeit2.png


Suggestion.
I suggest that the Rarity is shown as percentage as well as it is divided into day  / night encounter rate. 


 61XTrov.png

(I made up these numbers, I don't know exact encounter rates)

Motivation

On multiple occasions it occurred to me that the Common, Uncommon, Rare groups are too wide and that we lack night encounter rates.

 

For example during last wingull catching contest some people went to Slateport to catch their wingull although it turned out later that encounters at route 103 are waay more common. Pokedex shows common for both locations, though which is kind of misleading.

 

It's the same for rare Pokemon where things that you need to look for 15 min to find one (like togepi, clefairy, mantine, etc.)  are labelled 'Rare' same as some other things that you meet every few Pokemons (Minun, Plusle, Illumise, Volbeat, etc.)

 

Similarly for day and night. Pokedex currently only shows daylight encounters so for night encounters information is very misleding. For example during day the route north of Pallet town has many pidgeys and rattatas. At night, though, there are mostly or only caterpies. Pokedex won't inform you about it atm.

Share this post


Link to post

22 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

I would defenitly desagree with the percentages, there's nothing like that in the games and I don't think its a good idea in general; but on the other side, I really like the way you split it in 2 to make it day & night.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I would defenitly desagree with the percentages, there's nothing like that in the games and I don't think its a good idea in general; but on the other side, I really like the way you split it in 2 to make it day & night.

 

I'm sorry but I don't think that the fact that something like this wasn't present in original games is any argument to deny the improvement. In fact we have many mechanisms that were not in original games (like eg. visible exact IVs) that we are very happy to have here and there is nothing wrong with having them.

 

Why are exact numbers in this case anything bad? I don't think it does any harm and is actually way more informative than what we have now.

Right now something with 0.5% enc. is as 'Rare' as something with 5% . Or something with 95% is equally common as 50%.

Because of that I still prefer checking outside websites rather than in game Pokedex when looking for a specific Pokemon. 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

What if instead having the percentages visible, we get an option to order the encounter rate by the most common to the most rare ( or vice-versa), using the percentages known only by the game.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I'm sorry but I don't think that the fact that something like this wasn't present in original games is any argument to deny the improvement. In fact we have many mechanisms that were not in original games (like eg. visible exact IVs) that we are very happy to have here and there is nothing wrong with having them.

 

Why are exact numbers in this case anything bad? I don't think it does any harm and is actually way more informative than what we have now.

Right now something with 0.5% enc. is as 'Rare' as something with 5% . Or something with 95% is equally common as 50%.

Because of that I still prefer checking outside websites rather than in game Pokedex when looking for a specific Pokemon. 

Sure, I still don't agree with it; the percentages we have here are not the same as in the game's so its really no use checking in websites, as they won't be as accuarate, for that you are better checking the pokedex as it is right now.

 

 

What if instead having the percentages visible, we get an option to order the encounter rate by the most common to the most rare ( or vice-versa), using the percentages known only by the game.

I actually think this is not bad!

I mean, I really like that; I'm sure this idea would get alot of support if you explain it better in a thread for itself, really cool, mindblown, why didn't I think about this at any point?

 

NwKXNav.gif

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Sure, I still don't agree with it; the percentages we have here are not the same as in the game's so its really no use checking in websites, as they won't be as accuarate, for that you are better checking the pokedex as it is right now.

 

Why don't you agree with it then since your first reason was refuted? What damage does having exact percentages do?

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Why don't you agree with it then since your first reason was refuted? What damage does having exact percentages do?

I really don't think its something that important that it needs to be in the pokedex, and with that we would get everyone in the same spot, like for e.g. everyone wants to catch a rattata, and it says it is common everywhere; with % people would always end up in the same place (where the percentage is higher) and it having 50% or 70% really doesn't matter that much.

 

Also, I don't think percentages fit the type of MMO PokeMMO is.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Why don't you agree with it then since your first reason was refuted? What damage does having exact percentages do?

Exactly

I really don't see what damage adding percentages would do. How is the players having more knowledge about encounters a negative impact on Pokemmo? If anything it would help a lot, whether it would be EV training, shiny hunting, or anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I really don't think its something that important that it needs to be in the pokedex, and with that we would get everyone in the same spot, like for e.g. everyone wants to catch a rattata, and it says it is common everywhere; with % people would always end up in the same place (where the percentage is higher) and it having 50% or 70% really doesn't matter that much.

 

Also, I don't think percentages fit the type of MMO PokeMMO is.

 

But everyone goes to the same spots for ev training, everstone hunting, etc., why does it matter in this case?

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I like this, it sounds good. I doubt this would happen though because I don't think the devs like giving exact information about their game, for the same reason they don't give exact information on pickup rates, item held rates etc.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I like this, it sounds good. I doubt this would happen though because I don't think the devs like giving exact information about their game, for the same reason they don't give exact information on pickup rates, item held rates etc.

Pretty much I guess, rates like that don't really belong in an MMO to begin with-

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I really don't think its something that important that it needs to be in the pokedex, and with that we would get everyone in the same spot, like for e.g. everyone wants to catch a rattata, and it says it is common everywhere; with % people would always end up in the same place (where the percentage is higher) and it having 50% or 70% really doesn't matter that much.

 

Also, I don't think percentages fit the type of MMO PokeMMO is.

I'm going to use Eevee for my example.

 

We can capture Eevee on route 116, that is what it states in the pokedex, however with it just being rare it is discouraging to try and capture one. I mean me and my girl friend were wanting to capture an eevee on that route and we spent 2+ hours looking for it. So what could be done is to show a range instead of exact percentage. Such as if Eevee had an encounter rate of 5% you could say 1-5% with this it won't give exact percentage. Just like how IVs were originally only showing a range. 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Sure, I still don't agree with it; the percentages we have here are not the same as in the game's so its really no use checking in websites, as they won't be as accuarate, for that you are better checking the pokedex as it is right now.

 

 

I actually think this is not bad!

I mean, I really like that; I'm sure this idea would get alot of support if you explain it better in a thread for itself, really cool, mindblown, why didn't I think about this at any point?

 

NwKXNav.gif

 

That is exactly the reason I would like to see the real percentages here, actually. 

 

I really like the idea of sorting and it would be nice to have with or without percentages shown as well.  One thing I don't undestand is why you like it so much since you hate the idea of people hunting in the same place. It will have exactly the same outcome - everyone can find the best place for a given pokemon after sorting the encounters...

 

I'm still looking for other staff or devs or whoever decides on which suggestions are implemented or not to give their insight on this. I'd really like to hear some convincing reasons for not showing % (if of course the rest of the staff also thinks its bad). Of course you can leave it as is with 'no because we don't give such information'  or 'no cause it does not fit MMO' reasons, but I really think only good things can come with this change. I don't see how this information can be abused in any harmful way.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I'm going to use Eevee for my example.

 

We can capture Eevee on route 116, that is what it states in the pokedex, however with it just being rare it is discouraging to try and capture one. I mean me and my girl friend were wanting to capture an eevee on that route and we spent 2+ hours looking for it. So what could be done is to show a range instead of exact percentage. Such as if Eevee had an encounter rate of 5% you could say 1-5% with this it won't give exact percentage. Just like how IVs were originally only showing a range. 

 

That is literally exactly what the current system does - except it uses easy to understand phrases instead of numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

That is literally exactly what the current system does - except it uses easy to understand phrases instead of numbers.

Yes, but there are only 3 ranges (Common, Uncommon, Rare) which I think  is limiting our information too much. And from player point of view looking for a given pokemon for 10 min vs 2 hours is a pretty big difference. For the system though, both are 'Rare'.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

That is literally exactly what the current system does - except it uses easy to understand phrases instead of numbers.

Not really, when you don't know a range of percentage when you see common/uncommon/rare. I mean say for instance Krabby is 20% encounter rate for fishing, for all we know that would be considered as "rare" (I can't pull up the pokedex with krabby atm but it's a mere example in principal) With a range of a percentage at least this way we would know exactly how rare is rare regarding pokemon like Eevee. I know Skitty is rare and I had ran into about 20 within those couple of hours while I didn't run into 1 eevee. While my girl friend didn't run into 1 skitty within those couple hours. This would give the player base a better of an understanding of what the devs consider rare or uncommon.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Pretty much I guess, rates like that don't really belong in an MMO to begin with-

people should find out the numbers by themselves.... but still, there should be more ranges

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I think I can agree with Pereiraa. The percentages of encounter rates arent really... needed?, and should flux. Or, atleast have an appearance of fluxuation. Which I think is part of what they meant when they said its not for this style of MMO. Its kinda of hard to explain other than it takes away from the "whimsy" a bit, having to hunt and explore for pokemon. Im not sure if Im accurately explaining myself lol but I see where Pereiraa is coming from against a set-in-stone percentage being shown.

 

I also agree we need something a little more specific than the current rates. My one specific example is Corsola. It says in common and ONLY found in Kanto. I have over 1000 hours in the game and I have fished all over kanto with a super rod. I have not ONCE encounctered a Corsola. I dont believe it is common. And its the first pokemon Ive had this problem with, but Im sure there are other examples. 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Another thing came to my mind connected with this suggestion. I'm still for showing the rates in % as is but if it's considered to easy or too specific how about making it more of a challenge to get these rates.

 

It could work like this:

 

- At first for each Pokemon you met you start with the situation as is now so you see all the locations and info - Rare, Uncommon, Common

- To get exact % rarity you need to explore each route and meet a given pokemon in a way given in pokedex entry.

 

So in my example of  Wingull once you meet it at route 103 in grass and during daylight you will be able to see that 20% rate in a pokedex info all other rates for example night rate of this entry or route 103 but water entry would still be showing ranges cause you didn't yet meet it that way.

 

Pros:

- It adds a challenge and will be a fun activity for those types of people who like to collect/unlock stuff. Can be seen as some form of end game achievement same as catching all pokes in pokedex is.

- Its an optional activity so those who were fine with just ranges and dont feel like running around checking each route can simply ommit it.

- After gaining exact percentage rate it fixes the problems mentioned in original post and comments.

 

Cons:

- Obviously more advanced thing to implement, quite a lot of data would need to be stored on server side to remember each player, each pokedex entry unlock state.

- Not sure how many people will want to use it without any additional incentive

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

From what I understand, everyone is asking for more specific or accurate rarity classes. Why not just add a few more? Many MMO games use a 5- or 6-tier system (the sixth tier being "Legendary", of course. That could be added when legendary Pokemon are implemented). Someone suggested adding two more rarity tiers being added. I think that would be the best way to do this. But I would also like to see a specific guide telling us what percentages fall into each rarity tier. For example, anything in the 50-70% is common or whatever. This would give us more specific data in our Pokedex while also telling us how rare a Pokemon must be to fall into a certain tier. It would allow the devs to keep their phrase-based rarity classes while allowing players to find the information on the forums to better understand what the devs consider "rare".

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

From what I understand, everyone is asking for more specific or accurate rarity classes. Why not just add a few more? Many MMO games use a 5- or 6-tier system (the sixth tier being "Legendary", of course. That could be added when legendary Pokemon are implemented). Someone suggested adding two more rarity tiers being added. I think that would be the best way to do this. But I would also like to see a specific guide telling us what percentages fall into each rarity tier. For example, anything in the 50-70% is common or whatever. This would give us more specific data in our Pokedex while also telling us how rare a Pokemon must be to fall into a certain tier. It would allow the devs to keep their phrase-based rarity classes while allowing players to find the information on the forums to better understand what the devs consider "rare".

If they decide to go this route, then this could be easily implemented as a little popup. You can hover over some text saying 'Rare' and it would say for example '< 5%'. 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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