While RMT is against the rules, a charge for an in-game currency or trade has seemingly been allowed in the past for art commissions or even theme designs. Don't take my word on that, I'm not capable of seeing when such threads are taken down. Best to contact a mod to be sure.

 

That being said, I could see this service being quite nice for some. Often times people just rely on what mods are available and have their own desires for sprites set aside.

12 hours ago, LiveLaughHate said:

If we're talking PVP QOL and improving clarity can we remove the ability to nickname pokemon another pokemons name. It makes it significantly more annoying to scroll back through the battle logs to check damage calcs when you have to remember that "Dragonite" is actually a Tyranitar.

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

15 minutes ago, SweeTforU said:

boo hoo.

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.

2 minutes ago, Godhelll said:

 

I agree that we have to put things into perspective.

 

But I feel like they could make a little more effort to respond to the community on the forums, and keep us all informed about where things stand and what's to come, which they never or very rarely do, unfortunately. It can sometimes be likened to a form of contempt towards the players, to be honest

 

 

It's true that there are things that require time, investment, and work, and we don't complain that these things can take years to see the light of day. What we complain about, along with many community members, is that minor and major changes are not implemented and remain unaddressed. A simple example, for example, a lap counter in a match for the rain, trickroom, etc., I don't think it would take much for them to do.... If they lack the manpower to introduce changes as small, I also think that they are easily able to recruit new efficient people who will be able to improve the game on these few small important details, and the big news takes years to arrive, it is legit and not a big deal

 

 

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).

4 hours ago, Godhelll said:

 

The staff largely has the knowledge and technical skills to quickly implement some progress that would greatly change the quality of the in-game experience for everyone, without it costing them any sacrifices. On the contrary, if they improved the game a little, they would be the first to benefit. I think they're already getting rich enough and that doesn't encourage them to make an effort for the players.

The problem is that they don't care at all and they don't want to make any effort to please the community, they want to make the minimum effort and it's a shame because with a little work but not too much, they would be able to greatly improve the quality of the game. But it is not their priority, and it will surely never be, as long as the minimum continues to make the game survive, they will continue to do as little as possible.

 

The community's investments and their ideas are of no use, since they are never listened to, nor even responded to, let alone applied. Objectively, it's rare to see a game who regards his community so much with contempt, it's a real waste.

 

 

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!

15 minutes ago, panicishere said:

I mean the majority of them were released initially or shortly thereafter in the following events. I don't think it's fair to say that since then the release of them has been at a speed at which they will all be out in less than 2 years.

You can add body slam to 100 Pokémon and that doesn't really constitute meaningful change. Lets be real here. I'm sure there were a few relevant Pokémon given relevant moves, but come on now. To say something like this is a meaningful change is disingenuous at best.

 

No one in this thread is arguing that updates don't exist and that the game hasn't underwent big changes over the time it's been out.

Adding a whole region is huge in term of an addition to the game, but that isn't what this thread is about. It's about PVP.

 

 

 

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.

5 minutes ago, panicishere said:

I get the notion that you believe; however if you so infrequently update the game, such that the last time new HA's were added to the game was almost a year ago and before that another 6 months. It's ridiculous to think that so few should be added over such a long period of time. 

 

Sure there is plenty of additional side and end game content that would appease a lot of people and content to a certain degree needs to be added over time, but the speed at which content that exists already in game  (HA's in particular) is added is pretty laughable.

 

At some point, there obviously needs to be a plan to extend past generation 5 pokemon or the game will run out of things to add for the current ones is true; however, at the rate HA's are added, we're looking at a solid decade or more before they add them all, which is a bit beyond spreading them out over updates.

 

A lot of the things people want, like updated rewards, more HA's, counters for weather are very easy additions and while there are some arguments against dropping all legendaries and HA's immediately, it's hard to argue that small qol and even a drip feed of HA's would be better than the very sparce changes currently taking place.

 

 

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. ❤️

7 hours ago, budadeth said:

remember the old animations? jahahaha 

Gen 3? I thought they were adorable, but ultimately was just a lot of sprites wiggling at each other. 😆

 

3 hours ago, souwaylier2 said:

It would be nice to have a choice, I don't mind having a bulkier client.

 

My initial question was sponsored by seizuring Digletts spamming Bulldoze.

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!

6 minutes ago, razimove said:

I won't get baited into answering this troll 

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.

13 minutes ago, Bearminator said:

 

As I explained in Art's thread, screenshots are not the ideal evidence, and the case was investigated later—the player was not taken off our radar. GMs have the same policy to follow, and they do. The difference between those cases was that with Art, the action was taken immediately due to additional, clear evidence about the case. I already explained also why the outcome was changed. We will aim to inform a bit better if the case is still in investigation or not, cause even if we close the ticket, it doesn't mean we close the case.

 

It goes without saying, but we don't care about the player's nationality, and each case is judged according to the evidence. 

 

Some of the players mentioned were already banned iirc, but the posts were hidden to prevent any edits or manipulation, just in case. This doesn't mean they will not be investigated.

 

This is actually something that comes out now and then since I've been on staff and probably longer—just because you don't see the action or investigation doesn't mean it will not happen. 

 

 

 

Our priority as a ref is EN chat because it is the language in which we are hosting the TT/non-automated tours. This includes all announcements and information given by the host and sometimes players. We also get lots of whispers asking to change channels, information about matches, and much more. 

 

However, we are working on fixing related issues, so this shouldn't be an issue in the next TTs. I agree moderation should be fair to everyone.

 

I agree. While this soft rule is known for players who attended TTs in the past or non-automated tours, Staff will be instructed to hide messages with a warning instead of muting for it for the first time per player; I will also add it to the rules.

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. ❤️ 

11 minutes ago, Strodex said:

 

Also youtube has plenty of resources to help players, and before you say that that's not an official source and therefore shouldn't count, I should probably remind you that PokeMMO doesn't exist in a vacuum and that people do utilize other platforms to learn. 

 

The forums also encourage people to look around, so even if you're new you should be able to utilize that perfectly. If you're looking for in-game solutions, there are plenty of people who'd be willing to try and help out. There are teams that help newer people learn (all of these suggestions are still catering to newer players, anyone not new wouldnt really be struggling to find these resources)

 

And if the hypothetical new person doesn't want to use forums, youtube, or talk in-game for some reason, they can use pvp stats to trial and error pvp as well as watching matches. That's of course if they're the most bare-bones, "I dont want to do anything" person. I don't think that you aren't aware of any resources, they're literally everywhere.

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).

6 hours ago, razimove said:

?? there are so many resources out there to help you have a good grasp early on regarding metas, that its irrelevant.

 

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.

6 hours ago, razimove said:

it is trial and error for everyone doesnt matter if beginner or someone with experience. Should there be a better introduction towards pvp? Sure, but the cost of entry isnt that big. 

 

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.

6 minutes ago, razimove said:

Given you can build 6 semi comps for like 1-1.5m if you make them yourself, I dont think there is a necessity

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.

12 hours ago, Andr3a281093 said:

I was on another Pokémon MMO's forum in the last few days, and I've been thinking about something
Have you ever thought about moving PokeMMO to another game engine (such as Godot or Gdevelop for example)?
In this way maybe some implementations can be easier to apply, and some bugs could also be fixed more quickly (custom battle sprites huges when evolving -cough cough-)

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.

1 hour ago, Akshit said:

Why stop at characters, allow box linking across multiple accounts then.

If we're really shooting our shot for a crazy wild idea why limit your imagination.

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.
 

 

On 7/10/2024 at 11:47 AM, Diano said:

We are oldies now, bahaha, always here for the support! 

Thank you! Also..

13 minutes ago, Sawwario said:

I don't think the suggestion was meant to enhance any pay wall, I also do think that us as a community SHOULD totally NOT try to push pay walls.

If anything this suggestion does the exact opposite of that, giving to everyone the possibility to have more Boxes available without spending real money on it.

 

quote: 

I never said anything about losing boxes! Just merge all boxes from the characters.

For example:

If your main character has 20 boxes and your 2 secondary characters have 10 each.

It would be 40 boxes shared on the account. No loss of boxes.

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.

On 7/13/2024 at 6:14 PM, posey999 said:

Just a simple question to those who play PokeMMO. If the devs were to create a second server where their antics of making the story Competitive (Limiting Items, encouraging you to go about and breed for better mon for stuff like E4 and late Gyms, and making it so that you have a level cap) were non existent in said second server, shiny odds were the regular 1/8192, but we still had most QoL addons; like flutes, vanity items, items from rocks, etc., would you switch over to that other server. Yes you wouldn't have access to the Player Market from server 1 on server 2, but if that were available it would crash the market on the first server. And yes, if you have hundreds of hours on server 1 you wouldn't be able to move anything other than money(Donation) items to the second server. I feel that having a non-comp server would be beneficial as it would allow you to choose to either play on the more competitive side, or just play casually with friends.

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.