Tyrone
-
Posts
1899 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
Posts posted by Tyrone
-
-
Why do you believe the shiny economy needs a boost?
- SteveDerBaum, Scyllioze, Anthrazit and 1 other
-
4
-
This would completely devalue everstones. Which isn't a positive in my opinion. Also it reduces the pokemon sink by 50% when breeding. Which also isn't positive in the long term.
- Darkshade, Bestfriends and Scyllioze
-
1
-
2
-
You can sell it again if you're not satisfied.
-
So you want to remove the consumable effect of smokeball?
Option A: Make it non-consumable
Option B: Remove the effect
Both options have clear problems design wise.
If you go for option A: You've just created a stronger version of the pokedoll, which reduces money sink.
Option B: Removing effects of properly working items serve no purpose.
Instead of being salty about an intended game mechanic, which caused an unfortunate loss of wealth due to a small player-mistake, I believe it would be wise to learn from it and avoid it from happening again.
-
3 minutes ago, Kyu said:
No
2 minutes ago, Quakkz said:thanks god
I don't like this, because it takes away the uniqueness of owning a legendary.
Before you know it, they're refinable through breeding as well (breedable legendaries plsno).
Would've prefered to see a special system to increase IVs and reroll nature for legendaries by using the species in dungeons. Similar to how gearing works in mmorpgs during raids.
That way its uniqueness is preserved, incentive to run the dungeon for other purpose than HA catching after you've caught the legendary is also generated (up until you've got the nature/IV's perfected, which should be attainable with effort).
Just my thoughts, maybe the solution you've got in mind is better.
-
1 hour ago, Kyu said:
Yes
Will they remain unique as in, you can only own 1 of each at any given time?
-
-
A golden chain necklace with a $ sign or something.
Make it rediculously expensive as a pokeyen sink.
Brothers gotta show their wealth you know.
- DaftCoolio, Scyllioze, Toupi and 3 others
-
6
-
Or maybe the devs want you to commit to gameplay in order to receive a hidden ability... You know, give useful meaning to new content.
It's an mmo, not a battle simulator, so expect to play the game in order to unlock features.
I'm sure there will be relatively relaxed mechanics to breed a HA pokemon to incentivize it, just wait and see.
-
Discussion without data is pointless. We don't know by how much the playerbase has increased, we don't know how much yen is generated and sunk daily, we don't know how much RP is bought daily, etc.
That data won't be made public regardless.
It does feel like there's deflation at the moment, judging by the reduced price of consumables such as leppas and everstones. It probably is a bit too 'difficult' to generate yen at the moment, which is the public concensus.
-
47 minutes ago, Jordzi said:
This would fix the RP market too, which has been utterly destroyed (assuming the items are traded for proper amounts and not the ridiculous prices on GTL).
Absolutely 100% behind it, please implement so lazy people like me don’t have to grind.
It wont change the prices of RP items. I reckon those tickets will be sold for marginally more than donator status tickets of the same RP value.
-
-
53 minutes ago, Goku said:
Yes it'll be a quality of life improvement. I can then snipe and grind at the same time. Can you explain to me as of why it is this way?
Edit: I mean everyone will still have the same chance to snipe. It's not an opportunity lol it's infinite access to the gtl. Lol if you call sniping on the gtl an opportunity that's sad af. Just shows the few ways of one actually being able to make a good buck without having to buy RP.
Why it is that way? Probably coding restrictions from the developpers end. Similar to being unable to open your bag in a battle...
"Set of circumstances" being: There is a good deal on the GTL + You are not in battle + You have enough pokeyen
"To do Something" being: Buying the item/pokemon
How is correctly using the definition of opportunity sad? If you're going to attack my comment, at least try to be in the right.
-
49 minutes ago, Goku said:
Anyone else experiencing this BS?
This is a feature, not a bug, so it's the same for everyone.
In regards to being able to use the GTL while in battle, it would be a QoL improvement for GTL snipers.
Currently there's an opportunity cost for GTL snipers, by going into battle you forfeit the opportunity to snatch great deals.
-
-
I'd be up for that.
Looks like it's sold out though.
Never lucky rubber ducky
-
1 minute ago, KaynineXL said:
2 teams of 4:
@Toast@Flavawhat@Parke@Elcoolio@Tyrone@KaynineXL@SirVector@Platoons
The squad
-
Off Topic wasn't dead last time there was a World Cup
-
22 minutes ago, Raederz said:
Well it's still choice to devs to make it easy to multi-account or not, and to allow it or not, because both measures will impact the amount of players doing it.
There is no way to stop players from playing on different accounts on different devices at the same time.
How would you enforce such a rule? It's not possible.
-
Can't be helped. When a game has a maximum of actions per minute which is lower than a player's tempo, the usage multiple accounts is inevitable.
Fast paced games don't share the same problem.
-
Readerz is right here, but it's difficult to explain to a non-economist.
He assumes price of lottery tickets × number of lottery tickets = lottery prize value.
Arguing this assumption is pointless.
Now the thing that is counterintuitive is that 'giving 20% of the tickets for free to teammates' also reduces your income by 20%. You're using your teammates to buy a risk reduction (risk hedging), since you aren't gaining any money directly.
Statistically, hedging that risk has no impact on the win percentage of participants, cause buying 10% of tickets always provides 10% win chance.
Additional edit:
Even more counterintuitive is that risk hedging an "expensive" lottery results in even less profit than a fair one.
Expensive lottery being: Lottery prize value < Ticket price + number of tickets.
If you sell all the tickets normally, you'd gain the difference between those two as "scam amount (not really but people like to call it that)"If you hedge 20% of the tickets, you lose 20% of that "scam amount" by not selling them.
So it would actually make more sense from the host perspective to make a "cheap lottery" where Lottery prize value > Ticket price + number of tickets, and give free tickets to team members.
In that situation, hedging risk is more profitable.
-
Daryl may leave, but DaryltheMeme will stay
-
-
19 minutes ago, Darkshade said:
That's the point.
There needs to be an incentive to sink shinies, otherwise their value just destabilizes over time instead of remaining at something stable.
I'm almost positive our current shiny breeding system isn't even sinking enough; as it is naturally sided towards common species.
And sided towards males specifically, of those common species.
Legendary Capture
in General Discussion
Posted
Sing
Hypnosis
Spore
Sleep powder