ChrisChris

I feel like anyone who pressures them like this with such tedious details are only going to lead to the Devs getting annoyed. To the point where they might not care BECAUSE people keep bothering them about such unnecessary details. Who cares where the game goes development wise? Just enjoy it. They don't owe you or I or anyone anything. They don't owe us a complete PokeMMO experience. It's greedy to just assume they should do anything else after the most recent update. Be thankful they've even come this far. Just enjoy the damn game. And whatever else that might get added in is just a bonus.

I've already suggested this idea numerous times. But this version of the idea is ludicrous and too much. 1 ) For a PokeRaid to even be considered "possible", you have to look at what game mechanics have already been done at the most; 3 Vs. 3 Battles are the biggest battle you can have in the games. 2 ) You would need to address a "Party System". But the maximum being only 3 Trainers in a Party. 3 ) Most MMOs also allow for individual Party members to run off and explore/battle on their own with the option of a friend suddenly coming up to help them finish them off. You can't do that in PokeMMO. Which would make it difficult to get around. The only way you could do so is every Battle before the PokeRaid's Final Encounter are for Trainers to individually battle by themselves. Primarily Wild Pokemon Battles (with uncatchable Pokemon). End of certain paths would end in 3 Vs. 3 Battles to advance further into the PokeRaid. 4 ) The Final Encounter itself, while logical to have it just be a single, very powerful Pokemon that has been augmented somehow, would probably have to be a variation of: 1 Single Over-Powered Pokemon & 2 Smaller Minions. Or 3 Evenly Powerful Pokemon. To have 3 Trainers battle just a single Pokemon would take away from the already established 3 Vs. 3 mechanic and would make coding a Hell of a lot easier. 5 ) Pertaining to the "what happens if someone leaves mid-Battle" problem. Instead of a cooldown system where it skips their turn, why not just have a randomization occur after 20 seconds where the game would choose 1 of that Trainer's Pokemon's moves at random to use? 6 ) How many Pokemon could a single Trainer bring with them? Logically, a single Trainer's team is 6 Pokemon maximum. In a battle, that's all you can carry. 3 Trainers in this sense would be 18 Pokemon which would be overwhelming. Instead, before each PokeRaid, have a PC beside the NPC that allows you to enter the instance where you can deposit 4 of your Pokemon, bringing only 2 with you. 3 Trainers x 2 Pokemon each = 6 Pokemon total. This way if one of your Pokemon faints, you can still have a back-up and not feel completely useless. 7 ) As for "Loot". Instead of giving some kind of PokeMMO-exclusive item or something overly powerful. And this is going to sound potentially impossible... Why not find a way to code in a whole new area in your Item Bag for "Avatar" and allow people to earn all 5 available colors for their Avatar (Red, Blue, Green, Cyan, Black)? But possibly piece by piece? Hat, shirt, shoes? You could have various combinations of colors on Players running around endgame which would make each Player look a little bit more different than everyone else. Added fun? Have spriters create whole new color schemes for special times of the year like Christmas/Halloween/Easter/Summer/Winter/New Years/etc. that you can earn too?

And that's why you get paid the big bucks. Well, imaginary bucks anyway.

The only problem I can see with this is someone making two accounts, one already having all the Safari Pokemon and then passing them off to the other account and saying "OMG I GOT 'EM ALL" so they win. If that even is the goal of this Hunt. You'll have to find a way to prevent that sort of cheating.

Are... are you trying to act superior by basically telling people who play this game we have no lives while you do? I really hope I'm missing the point here. Because if not, I can only laugh.

... or you could make ME the cookies instead and pretend like he doesn't exist so I get all the cookies. >.>

Offer him cookies. Everyone will do anything for cookies.

I don't even... "makes me wiggly"... what.

Fair enough. Here's hoping it works.

The problem I still see with this is the fact that people will irregardless troll the chat with questions anyway, and even then some "new" players will still flood questions anyway because what's easier? Typing the question and waiting for someone to respond within seconds? Or click a hotkey, going through a long drawn out animation showing them how to do it? The concept is fine, but it still seems far more tedious than just typing a question and waiting for a quick response. And with the constant and consistent influx of players, it's going to become a chat full of "Consult your Teachy TV." every single line when they ask a question. When we can just instead respond to their question right then and there.

It's unfortunate that nobody will use it still and will only immediately post to Global anyway.

Think about it this way: o You & Partner Vs. Opponent A & Opponent B. o Your Pokemon are all Level 30. Your Partner's Pokemon are all Level 12-15. o Opponent A & B have Pokemon Level 30. Looking at that, the opponents will more than likely concentrate on knocking off you, since you have the stronger Pokemon. They know they can easily take down your Partner. However, what happens if your Partner starts throwing around status effect attacks? Sand Attack, Screech, Growl, Tail Whip, etc. That's going to frustrate them and make it harder for them to hurt you. Suddenly what was once a simple "beatdown you, finish partner." now becomes "Finish partner in order to have no interference against you." It's a strategical thinking game. Although I do see your point arising if your opponents have type advantages, then it dissolves into being unfair. However it would be impossible to judge a level restriction since one player could have a variety of levels, not all of his Pokemon having one. It would be better if the restriction process involved how many Badges each Player has. You can only link to a Battle Partner if they have the same Badges as you do.

An easy fix to that would be using the same "Battle Partner" system I suggested above, but in every new City include a new House called the "Doubles Building", and inside is a bunch of trainers specifically designed for Co-Op Battling with a friend/another player. And can only be battled when linked to a Battle Partner. We all know there's already tons of houses with NPCs inside that don't do anything or unnecessary to the game, swap them out for something actually useful such as this.

An easy solution for 2 Vs. 2 Battles would be to use the already established Friends List. Create a second tab in the Friends List Display for "Battle Partners" where you can click a + next to their name to add them to a "2 Vs. Party" (only one partner can be linked at a time). Prompt would of course pop up on their screen asking for confirmation of Partnership. After doing this, you right click the opposing Player you wish to Duel and instead of "Duel" a new option for "2 Vs. Duel" would be below it. When you click that, a challenge prompt would appear on theirs, their currently linked partner, and your partner's screen and a battle would immediately start, 2 vs. 2. It would already use established mechanics programmed into the game, aside from programming how each player would take their turns compared to normal 1 Vs. 1 battles (wouldn't imagine it would be too hard), and everyone would be able to easily use the system since it's all pretty straight forward stuff. For added visibility to make sure you're linked to a Battle Partner, you can have their Colored Avatar and name under it (similar to the "Character Select Screen" when you first log in) appear in the top right corner of the screen (nothing is there already so it wouldn't be blocking anything important.