LeZenor

These last couple days we have seen posts that are filled with people claiming they want more consistency and transparency from staff while also praising the inconsistency of Art’s permanent ban being overturned. Am I missing something or isn’t this counterproductive? "Staff should definitely be more consistent and treat everyone equally but also thanks for being inconsistent for this particular case 😄". The community really needs to figure out what it really wants before making demands that contradict themselves. Calling out staff for being inconsistent, well now, look how the tables have turned. Yes staff members are human, they are prone to make mistakes just like the rest of us. They’ve unbanned the other player involved in Art’s case because it was a genuine mistake made by humans, which is also why we can’t just corner them and demand that they be able to solve an impossible Schrödinger’s cat-type of scenario in which they should be simultaneously both consistent and inconsistent. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t ask for consistency and transparency, far from it, I think it’s only fair, but we aren’t any better with this approach. From my point on view, Art’s ban was pretty consistent with what staff told us regarding that policy change (or until they reverted it), it just came out as a surprise to most people because it had never really occurred to a player well-known in this part of the community before and most of us thought that it was still supposed to be a temporary ban on first timers. I have no doubt many wintraders still go unnoticed or unaddressed but that’s not really a consistency issue is it? Seems more like it’s pretty damn hard in some cases to know beyond a reasonable doubt if there is wintrading or not. You wouldn’t want innocent players getting banned because of an unfortunate dc. What the discussion should be really about and what we should be demanding first is why this policy change wasn’t made public like when scamming became officially a punishable offense. My main issue right now is how the punishment got more severe overnight and that at some point in time some players got temporary suspensions the day before the changes were made and days later some other players most likely got permanently banned on their first offense. What is going to happen to all those players now that Art got unbanned? What precedent are we setting? It seems to me the damage is already done and unfortunately it doesn’t seem like they are going to meet the same treatment as Art did. In my honest opinion, consistency comes with transparency first. Transparency brings consistency. Had this been made known when the change was made, none of this would have happened. Pressuring staff only made them backpedaled and made them screw even more people. Were they wrong in the first place with Art’s ban? Probably not, cheating is cheating after all. Would Art have done it had he known it would result in a permanent ban? Who knows, maybe, maybe not. There is one thing for sure though is that if the policy change had been made known then there wouldn’t be a case for unbanning anyone.

à quand l’update mdr edit: when is the update lol

This is probably a hot take but if we are looking for more consistency from staff then in that case Art should have never been unbanned. If we’re to believe what Bear said, this isn’t the first case that has been met with a permanent ban since staff decided to change that policy some time ago but unfortunately for those players they also probably did not meet the same leniency as Art did and yet I don’t see anyone asking for justice on their behalf. Art’s ban appeal was first met with a deny which shows staff isn’t usually lenient in that regard but because of the popular outcry staff caved in. I’m seeing a lot of people accusing staff of favoritism or having “mood” swings when issuing punishments based on their perception of how their friend Art was treated while also failing to see how favorably Art was treated in comparison to few players out there who also got their account terminated for the same reason but weren’t shown this same leniency because they aren’t as popular as Art is. This comes off as very hypocritical since this stance favors your one guilty friend vs a bunch of also very much guilty players, while also setting a double standard which you are very much against. If we’re fine with Art being treated favorably then where do we draw the line? Only popular players deserve mercy? That doesn’t seem fair to me, sounds as unfair as what some are accusing the staff of doing with their friends. We can’t just choose when it’s ok or not to be more lenient and ignore it when it’s convenient for us, that’s just arbitrary and also unfair on so many levels. Either it’s ok to be lenient or it’s never ok to be lenient or else we are playing favorites We’ve been told that all wintrading cases aren’t comparable in the sense that it’s not always a clear-cut-case of wintrading or attempted wintrading like Art’s case and that it needs more investigation to establish guilt yet I’m seeing some people willfully ignoring that part of the discourse. Choosing instead to jump on the bandwagon as immediate reaction without any second thought when emotions are running high. And now you’re gonna tell me that it’s the staff that are the ones taking decisions depending on their moods? I have no issue with Art and I kinda like the guy but come on guys, this discussion is heavily one-sided, like a hivemind with some people only confirming their bias and piling on staff. I agree with some part of it like the transparency part, I think that policy change should have been made known when the decision was made and the mute for shouting during events is a bit excessive since they’ve access to colored text but this whole discussion is something else.

PokeMMO ain't your classic Pokemon game though, I don't think you should be looking for 1:1 copy of all og games here. Devs took some liberties with balancing and tweaking the difficulty which makes sense for a mmo. The game is not made to be rushed through as easily as the handheld versions, requires you to think a little bit and invest more time in building your team and prepares you for the end game. It's still very casual-friendly and you can still play at your own pace. It might not be the way a Pokemon game is supposed to be played but it sure should be that way, as PokeMMO addresses a lot of core issues og Pokemon have. Newer gens have gotten ridiculously easy and are constantly holding players' hands every step of the way, it's not something I personally would call fun. But it makes sense for Nintendo business-wise to present only one-very-easy difficulty option since their target audience is very young. With fans of the series getting older they've been fostering a new audience from a younger demographic to ensure perpetuity. And to be honest, older games weren't that much harder too, especially when you're given the option to switch between every K.O or allowing players to clear the entire game with 1-2 pokemon.

Blasphemy! Who dares disrespect one of the Great Old Ones, the Great Dreamer, the eldritch horror lord Cthulhu! Just you wait until he wakes up from his slumber..

You’d have to ask a mod for that

The code of conduct doesn’t really protect players from staff, it’s just the general guideline of how users are required to behave while using their services and if you fail to follow their preestablished rules, rules that we all have agreed upon in order to play the game, they reserve the right to take actions to ensure that you do in the future and these may vary depending on the severity and frequency of the offense. It’s there to protect players from themselves in a way. Now it’s hard for anyone to really judge granted we have no access to your punishment record and no way to know if you’re telling the whole story but I don’t expect anyone to get that it was supposed to be a joke except maybe a few of your friends, especially since you claim you went from Trade Chat to Global chat before getting muted. Also if you or anyone been warned before for the same thing, whether it happened a day, a week or a month (etc.) before, I don’t expect them to have to issue a warning again since it should have been clear the first time

It's not been easy for me and you know I started off in Pallet Town, my father gave me small loan of 1 Million Pokeyens

I dunno, I don’t recall saying that. RMT and botting are serious offenses not taken lightly and it requires gathering evidences with the tools at their disposal. Terminating an account is the most severe punishment and making an innocent player go through that experience is the least desirable outcome, so you want these case to be handled vigorously to prevent that scenario from happening. Still it’s not perfect and even they acknowledge that. False positives is a thing, but these are rare and are dealt with in ban appeals. Honestly though, what would they gain from keeping innocent players banned? I think it’s much more damaging for them to keep anyone wrongfully banned- banned than correcting their mistakes when it happens which I know they do (they even go as far as to compensate players with donator status for causing the inconvenience) but you never hear from them. Nothing compels them to show any evidence or tell anyone how they got caught because they gain nothing and it would also render their tools useless.

From the looks of it, the appeal was already reviewed and denied, which means a higher staff reviewed the evidences gathered by the staff member that issued the ban in the first place and deemed the evidences were sufficient to keep enforcing the ban. Also threatening the devs with chargebacks and legal recourse will just likely result in bans across all platforms and to never be able to play again.. so even less likely to ever be unbanned

why do they keep banning innocent players instead of Dugtrio 😔

Whatever it is going to be, its reward shouldn’t be something huge like a Pokemon not yet attainable (Jirachi for instance) like it’s been speculated. Or if it is the case, then there should be a way to obtain the Wishing Stone again for those who weren’t aware or didn’t bother to grind for it (at any point in time and not only during an event). Given the very limited information we had at the time and how much grind it required to obtain the Wishing Stone, I don’t think that many players were tempted to go through all the efforts for something seemingly pointless at the time. If the Wishing Stone won’t be made available again then I don’t think I would mind if it were to be an exclusive Alpha version of a Pokemon IF the non-Alpha Pokemon and/or hidden ability are also obtainable by the time its content is made available. It wouldn’t be game breaking but it would be a nice collector and a token for the effort.

It’s not an extreme scenario, it happened in the past it’s not illogical to think that under similar circumstances it could happen again. He is not paraphrasing you or misquoting you, he is just pointing out what could happen if we got rid of certain things (from your suggestion) that keep the breeding system in check or make it an actual MMOs

I have been seeing that idea circulating on this thread for a while now and I’m sorry but I have to say it; giving a 500k stimulus or any amount at all willy-nilly is very stupid and naive idea. It’s a short-sighted solution that end up causing more problems long-term than actually solving any problem at all. For a very short time, it may have a significant effect on the economy and "boost" consumption but overall what it really does is enabling a vicious snowball effect. Sudden increase in players wealth means increase in consumption of goods which means more demand over supply which then inevitably means increase in price. In other words, if I initially have 1m in my pocket and I’m given 500k more, I can now buy 50% more goods than I was able before. On a small scale this might seem like nothing but at a much larger scale, let’s say all "active users" start suddenly consuming more all at once, the effect will be noticeable and more impactful. Demand will effectively go up while supply will remain relatively the same or even go down, not enough supply to satisfy the demand will increase price. Congratulations, by injecting money in players pockets, you end up artificially inflating the price of most goods, setting us back again at the initial problem but this time with everything costing significantly more. Generating money haphazardly is never a good thing. That’s why it’s heavily scrutinised by the developers. Take gyms and trainers reruns for instance which are the primary money "printers". They inevitably and inherently create inflation by design because it generates money in the game. But there is something that counterbalances this and it’s money sinks. Money sinks are things that takes money away from players but does not redistribute it to anybody else effectively destroying that money. It ranges from many things from purchasing pokeballs from the pokemart to breeding costs and braces or gtl taxes for instance. In theory you want the money sink to take away money somewhere close to how gym and trainers reruns generates money to have a steady and controlled growth. You also want the money to flow between players so that players can enrich themselves alternatively without generating money. Because otherwise generating money at rates money sinks can’t keep up increases money supply over money demand, more money = more demand for goods while supply remains the same = inflation and money losing value yada yada. Taking away options from players to make money by nerfing Alphas, exp. candies, legendaries or anything that makes trades between players thrive will only lead to more players grinding gyms and trainers reruns and effectively create inflation. But that's not really relevant to the thread though. Game economy per se isn’t a factor that drives players away. I think it's mostly grind and how wealth is acquired that can be a factor that can drive player away. If the game requires lots of grinding for low yielding then yes I can see this being something unappealing. That's something hard to balance because you don't want that to affect the economy badly by making it too easy but also don't want it to be too tedious to keep your players engaged.