Michelle

Seems perfectly reasonable! You might even want to create your own thread for this suggestion. Gonna cry?

Though I personally don't utilize this function, this seems like a reasonable request! I would also suggest just making the first time window itself slightly bigger to allow for a bit more flexibility in the morning time. Upvoted!

If the goal is to watch over certain listings, or avidly stay on top of recent listings, the templates and refresh button are there for your convenience! Utilized correctly negates the need for multiple windows.

I might be misunderstanding what's really being suggested, but if I'm not, I would simply learn to utilize the Trade Chat/Trade Corner(forum) better-- as there is no listing times or limits there. If you are re-listing to game some sort of 'recently listed' queue, you aren't listing a good enough Pokémon/Item, or pricing it properly. Most things will sell. The way the GTL works, there is a fairly consistent flow of sold goods, and reason to search out most things, especially if priced well. If your listing price becomes red, you are above the average listing price, yellow is typically the color you'd want to see when listing. The Trade Chat can also be used for taking bids on an item, while a promise of payment can't be made, you can still make it work with some time and effort. I have seen this done with many ultra rare cosmetics with no real listing prices available from the GTL or forum's Trade Corner. Bids can also be taken on the Trade Corner section, though in my experience it is slower and ultimately more difficult to use in that way. It is best utilized to post Pokémon/Items and their price directly so that you might get a request to meet and make the trade. I don't mean to take away from the idea, an auction function of sorts could be appreciated in some scenarios, it'd just be difficult to properly implement with the ease and accessibility of the systems already in place.

Here is an helpful post from an ex-GM that gives some insights as to why keeping players consistently informed is unlikely to happen. I do understand the stance you're taking, but I also very much understand the levels of trust that must have been achieved with staff behind the scenes, as they are decades in the making. I would also never discourage presenting your own ideas as to how this could be efficiently implemented alongside anything being worked on currently. It's just always going to a difficult thing to approach no matter how skilled you are or present yourself to be, because the small development team behind PokeMMO has already achieved what was considered to be impossible by many less than knowledgeable people. Their motivations might not align with yours or others, and that's just something you can't change with foot stomping petulance alone(not to say that's what you're doing, just being hyperbolic).

Here's a comment from staff when a similar opinion was expressed(regarding the 'they can so they should' logic), funnily enough this reminds me of when I was somewhat outraged by changes being made. It seems I could've taken my own advice back then, or perhaps my perspective on how staff views these opinionated posts simply widened since then. Regardless, patience can and should try to be afforded when it comes to something as small as just a video game you enjoy. Though I won't pretend I've never experienced feelings like that!

This is regards to viewing what's important vs. what's priority. Meaningful is a relative term in this regard, only highlighting the fact that complaints about what you feel is lacking shouldn't be the initial position taken. I haven't seen a single suggestion thread describing how they would like HA to be approached, and it'd certainly be better to approach it with a more constructive mindset before allowing impatience to take the wheel. I could of course be totally wrong about their context, it's just how it read to me.

Considering the last major update was only 5 months ago, and contained countless changes to existing Pokémon(Gen 9-3 Move Changes for example), I would say this is an unfair conclusion. It is far more likely there are just things that are higher priority, and are just more difficult to perceive without direct comparison/engagement with said changes. I would also remind that one of the major updates preceding the update I'm referring to here was to release an entire playable region, I just can't understand the perspective personally. It's unfortunate that Patience isn't an 'egg move', but I encourage you to learn it by leveling up a bit. ❤️

Gen 3? I thought they were adorable, but ultimately was just a lot of sprites wiggling at each other. 😆 I remember feeling the same, but after playing for a long time, I'm glad that some less impressive moves follow that logic to ultimately speed battles up around the more complex moves. Also, thanks for the giggle, I forgot how menacing Digletts are.

Some animations are simplified and used more globally for simple attacks, like Thrash. Having unique animations for every move is tasking on the client, and often it serves to benefit the player to have smaller & faster animations used. There is also the matter on which animations to use when there are multiple options for 1 move, and if I'm correct FireRed's animations are first priority when the moves originated from that game, and so on. I'm sure there are special cases, but I can't mention any off the top of my head right now. Hope this helps!

No need to get upset when you can't present what's being asked of you, it's not difficult to remain on topic while presenting legitimate points of your own. You've yet to do that, and just stating generalized opinions with unfounded conclusions doesn't take ideas any further. Suggestions are just that, and there's no need to just post insults when you're no longer interested in the discussion around someone's idea.

This is a very refreshing response, I know there are many players who are uncomfortable knowing such things could occur at any moment, and having an open dialogue about what actions taken ultimately mean is very much appreciated. I just wanted to say thank you for clearing up the perspective of the staff on these matters. Perhaps responses like this could lead to less of an outrage culture when players make posts highlighting any shortcomings of the moderation team, as they're also just people trying to what's best, even if it sometimes has less than desired outcomes. Edit: I will say, should any infractions occur during a TT, could actions not be taken after the TT if they do not persist? Also, perhaps implementing a way to restrict certain chat channels without a universal mute would be helpful in situations such as this. ❤️

The suggestion is pointing towards testing teams, borrowing the typical choices from youtube videos, competition alley or team members is not exactly what's being suggested here, and the OP is looking for an avenue for a broader type of experimentation. As far as I know, there is no real way to simulate this experimentation outside of spending time & in-game currencies, which is what their issue seems to be, and I would say that's a fair point when starting from the ground level. I do think there is a middle ground that could be achieved here, without linking to inaccurate battle simulators, and speaking inside the competitive scene's meta bubble. This is a nice highlight of how scattered and ultimately limited the actual resources are though, I still believe there is room to improve when introducing new players to PvP. I myself have spent countless hours helping players grasp PvP, and typically it is no comparison to simply getting in to a match and feeling it out for yourself(which again, take a LOT of trial an error).

You should link to these resources, as the person making the suggestion is clearly new and could use such things. I'm not aware of any resources that are indicative of the true PokeMMO PvP environment personally, and if there are "so many," I'd be interested to hear about them. Even the private showdown server linked above is more of a teambuilder, and has little to no restrictions when compared to PokeMMO, and virtually no realistic PokeMMO-like matchmaking opportunities. It's strange that you can agree and yet still be so argumentative. Why not present an idea of how you would better introduce PokeMMO pvp? The cost of entry is quite big when it requires a handful of hours to put together a team(after passing certain points in the story, which is more time sunk), throw it at the matchmaking for another handful of hours, re-assess and cycle through the motions again.

That's also a good example of how large of a cost it is to simply want to test things out, which could also be viewed as an unnecessary trial and error cost by new players. PokeMMO has a fair amount of unique changes/additions to mechanics, and could help to bridge some skill gaps.

If I recall correctly, the engine use is made from scratch using Javascript and coded using things like Lightweight Java Game Library among other things. It'd require a tremendous amount of work to accomplish an engine switch, and the reasons for doing such a thing certainly wouldn't be faster development/bug fixes. PokeMMO is developed by a small team, and it is a passion project, meaning there is no real time frame surrounding such things being implemented/fixed. These things happen simply because the developers want them to happen, it's best to just appreciate what's been accomplished so far, and anticipate development/fixes occurring based on past update timeframes. Should this not suit your needs, absolutely nothing stops you from researching and engaging in your own development of a similar project. Hope this helps!

I think this could be accomplished with a rental mechanic of sorts(12-24hr rental/trial per species, 1 time usage, minor RP cost beyond the initial "trial" for additional 12-24hr rentals), otherwise it'd be difficult to truly test them in a realistic PvP environment. Upvoted because it is definitely an interesting idea and could serve to stir up current metas with more experimentation possible. That being said, it could effect money sinks where breeding out of curiosity is concerned, but ultimately help along breeds you're more confident you would want. Certainly an interesting idea! I would also add that any "testeams/rental mons" should have a unique ribbon of their own for indication.

Considering a small iteration of this idea is already present in the game, this reply is just useless & malicious. Feel free to offer your reasons as to why you think this is 'wild.' I understand there will be opinions ranging in the extremes with a suggestion like this, but at least take the time to make real points.

Here is an important post from an ex-GM that gives some insights as to why this is unlikely to happen.

Thank you! Also..

I never spoke to what the suggestion was meant for, this is just how I would approach it personally. Ultimately I had said the idea needs more consideration, nothing to be upset about, I just have no issue advocating for additional reasons to support PokeMMO.

After some thought, I believe it would be very nice to have an "Account-wide" toggle on any box available to users with Donator Status active. Encouraging playing PokeMMO in different ways whilst providing another reason for Donator Status to occur account-wide. Currently that feature is lacking and has little draw anyways, and could only offer flexibility and convenience where supportive users might need it. The idea has some potential, it just needs a bit more consideration, even if it's not what I've suggested here.

This would also be great if implemented alongside an account-wide item storage. I believe this could also be accomplished by removing the "Cannot be held by Pokemon" rules in place on the Ocarina items, they could then be placed in the account PC box via stored Pokémon. However it's accomplished, +1! Don't forget that liking is less effective than using the upward facing arrow to upvote the suggestion.

I do appreciate the perspective, but this approach is better left to just encouraging playing the vanilla games. The differences noted here are changes made after years of lessons learned by turning this in to a functional MMO environment. Encouraging reversing the balances made only hurts the integrity of the decisions made.

If that were the issue, wouldn't the problem more likely be that they were too popular, so there are more available on the market due to abundance?