Kizhaz
-
Posts
3888 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Posts posted by Kizhaz
-
-
3/10 psl hall of fame thread was better. It's nice to read others thoughts though
- fredrichnietze and DoubleJ
-
2
-
-
-
4 hours ago, DoubleJ said:
So, considering the playoff picture, The Tactless Tangelas (God bless them) or Dank Express can still leapfrog VGC, Strawhats, and/or Red Scale for a spot. This is probably the most dank Week 7 we've ever had as all 8 teams can still make the playoffs. HYPE?!
~Tangelas need to win and Strawhats to beat VGC and they make it
~Dank need to win and either Strawhats to beat VGC/VGC to annihilate Strawhats or Transformers to beat Redscale and they make it
Both teams have rather reasonable chances to make it considering the circumstances
- SweeTforU, DoubleJ and JIceJDragon
-
3
-
9.) Do not make threads, or post in threads asking how to customize, if you can't find a tutorial elsewhere, send a PM to someone in this section who may know.
-
3 hours ago, RysPicz said:
The definition of salty suite would be me vs jj
Did I travel back in time?
-
11 hours ago, Bilburt said:
You know it sucks when Kiz doesnt even like it anymore
I was away gosh!!
-
-
-
We already have seasons, they alternate monthly
- EmoDuck, EazyL, CursedLehnwa and 2 others
-
5
-
-
3 hours ago, Kole said:
Yea sure when I finish it. There are a lot of little things that have to be converted over to dark style. A lot of the selectors/css in general is reused in multiple places that were all white, so when you change something to dark and another to blue and another to light, that css won't look good on all of it so I have to do a lot of custom work to fix it. I'll let you know when I get it mostly done, then you can help me identify some bugs or places I missed.
I can give it to you now if you want to go ahead and start using it I guess. I believe you can "check for updates" right on stylus?
I also need to Ok this with @Desu @Kyu @Squirtle and ultimately find the best place to release it. I'm sure the staff would want to check my files for security purposes as well.
Just following the usual Client Customization rules would do. It would be a welcome change
-
-
Decisions on ban appeals are final
-
1 hour ago, Hyperchaser said:
Limiting shinies would mean to be loosing in it after an amount of time? I never suggested that, or limit label on vanities mean u will loose it after a given period of time? What all this post is about is how the shiny market is rolling and why players are buying vanities. I have spoken already about that and its clear we got 2 different opinions in this post. Comparison to Vanitymmo is not ridicoulus since ur best goal would be to own a vanity in a pokemon game. I am still waiting for suggestions on how can the limitation of the numbers of shinies can be succeeded since they have insanely increased. That if anybody agrees with me and think that its needed. Also we know what supply and demand is we dont need someone to point that out so the real problem can be covered. Its a shame that holding a vanity will make u rich but holding a shiny will bunkrapt you. Also lets not forget it was Staff's idea to put limiteds in pvp boxes, and because of a minority that cried out about it they got removed. It was wrong to be removed and it should be back. Vanities and Shiny pokemons are 2 different things we are all well aware, but saying they have nothing to do with each other is something only a player that has never traded would say. Since every player has a number of pokeyen and is using it to afford just 1 or 2 limited vanities doesnt that mean he wont have enough to buy a shiny?
Ok so if the goal of this thread is to find a way to raise a shiny Pokemon's value then the only way to do so is to limit their supply. This can be done the way Tyrone mentioned by making a daily cap of how many shiny's can be found, by capping how many of each species can exist in total, by making them "lose their shiny" overtime etc. These are all ways that their price can be increased however the problem is every way of limiting a shiny will greatly affect other areas of the game such as shiny hunting and in the overall scheme of things be taken as a massive nerf to majority of the playerbase. If there is a way to limit them without affecting such things, I've not thought of it nor has anybody else.
1 hour ago, Hyperchaser said:Vanities and Shiny pokemons are 2 different things we are all well aware, but saying they have nothing to do with each other is something only a player that has never traded would say.
No, their sale price have nothing to do with each other. This is not my or anyone elses opinion but a fact. As I said in my previous post they are independent of each other
-
11 hours ago, awkways said:
I think you don't understand what limited actually means.
They tried that with Kyu hat and knight helmet but ultimately it amounts to Staff being liars and the players lose faith in the gift shop items they're buying. They SOLD them (for real money) as limited items, advertising them as never to return. Players pay for these because they will never return and mainly only buy them as an investment as a result. This is why they're tagged as limited. The supply is limited and will remain limited.
Ultimately, this thread is just a bunch of people complaining because they don't understand (or don't like) supply and demand.
Limited vanities will continue to rise in value with more players because there is continually more of a demand and competition for the same limited supply. Shinys will continue to fall with more players because they are unlimited and having 10 shiny charmanders being sold at the same time makes more competition to sell for lower prices. If you're just now noticing this then it's your own fault. This is nothing new or surprising. Everyone saw limited vanities rising for years and that's why there's a million flaming skulls on the market, a lot of people invested big.
Both the ideas proposed here are stupid. You can't make certain shinys limited so some players don't lose money. Shinys were never intended to be limited or ever advertised to be limited. You always knew that some randoms can go hunt for 10 mins and get the same exact shiny you spent a year working to buy. That's a risk you signed up for, now deal with it. On the other hand, If you didn't invest in limited vanities (with in-game money or RP or trading or w/e) you knew you were going to lose out on a potentially big investment in the future. That doesn't mean they should be re-added vanities because you want them again without having to fight for the limited supply that is left along with everyone else.
At the end of the day, shiny trading and vanities have nothing to do with each other. They're two separate markets. Just because shinys are falling and you feel salty that vanities aren't doesn't mean that changing the vanity market would somehow magically help shinys hold value. If you returned all the limited vanitys to gift shops tomorrow to stay forever, shinys will continue to fall at the same exact rate. It's just supply and demand affecting 2 separate markets quicker than in the past because there's more players.
This post was well constructed and basically explains the reasoning behind most the questions in this thread. In order to make shiny Pokemon valuable again there needs to be a better sink for the valuable ones (nobody is using male Charmander as fodder). But the way to do this would be to have them be limited, just like those vanities you guys hate so much. Unfortunately making shiny Pokemon limited is a terrible idea because as I'm sure everyone in this thread can agree, nobody want's to lose their precious shiny after x amount of time. This whole comparison to VanityMMO is ridiculous on the otherhand as shiny prices and vanity prices do not affect each other, they are independent. Lowering Vanity prices by no longer making them limited would not suddenly make shiny Pokemon more valuable because there are still more and more shiny Pokemon being found everyday.
-
-
Myself and Butlerrr in 40
- DrButler, DaftCoolio, MaatthewMLG and 3 others
-
6
-
-
On 10/1/2018 at 11:01 AM, EpicVerde said:
Wiri sent me the request and I accepted, but in the battle, the game did not allow me to apply the dnd
Not to reignite the flame but I think that whole section about Epic not paying attention to chat can be proven otherwise by his comment in this thread. Somebody also mentioned he typed ./dnd in normal chat. If anything I would be questioning if he knew how to activate dnd in the first place
-
@RLotus I very much doubt either player was coached, but this shouldn't mean that they should not be punished. The rule is to have /dnd on, not "do not get coached". The difference being one is enforceable whereas the other can never fully be.
-----------------
Regarding the 2 Yellow over 1, I too was confused as to why the hosts chose to go against their own rules, however if both players were warned during the match to put it on and chose to ignore it then I think it can be justified. Problem then become if they had whispers enabled to see the warning, or if they were on mobile. I think given the response of the players this shouldn't be too much of a concern
-
-
-
[PSL X] FINALS - TENTH EDITION!
in Competition Archive
Posted
Of all the matches Matt recorded, I wish that were one of them. It was a good match