Instead of sacrificing parents, make bred Pokemon Untradeable/Unsellable

[Necroka]

Sacrificing two Pokemon to get one is already strange, and doesn't suit Pokemon's world, story, themes, etc for a lot of people. It's detrimental and unapproachable to various types of play that isn't cold, stat-driven, competitive play, and likely isn't necessary for the competitive side of things either.

 

I say likely, because perhaps I'm missing something, but so far it seems the main concern it addressed was trying to prevent an overflow of high-powered Pokemon in the Global Market.

 

If that's the biggest concern it addresses, why not just make bred Pokemon untradeable and unsellable? This would keep the global market from becoming saturated, and make it so those who want bred Pokemon can't just buy a piece of the process, or a battle-ready Pokemon. They have to grind it themselves with what they've caught themselves, and works well for an MMO. People who want to breed for competitive can do so without other players having to sacrifice their Pokemon just for an interesting move they wouldn't otherwise get. It also lets the more RP heavy players do things without grinding in an unsatisfying, uncomfortable, or depressing way. Additionally, players won't think they can breed Pokemon only to find out they can't (as they have to choose between their hard-earned Pokemon and a baby they've never used in battle yet), or that the process just isn't worth it.

 

[CaptnBaklava]

So every one will buy a few Dittos and is sorted out. 

 

Since the release of alpha Dittos it's so easy and relatively cheap to get 4 IV Dittos. 

 

 

[kuuai]

I think making the cultivated Pokemon unsellable/non tradable is a bad thing.

 

The reason is that doing so would make PokeMMO's proudest trading system useless, only able to trade some of the most basic wild Pokemon and some props and fashion.

 

At the same time, this also makes it difficult for some people who do not want to waste time cultivating Pokemon to obtain the perfect Pokemon through the convenient way of trading.

 

There are also people who have cultivated perfect Pokemon, but they cannot be perfectly utilized or are of no use, cannot be sold, and can only be released to the wild in pain.

 

There are even more than just these reasons, but all I can think of for now is so much, but these already make the gameplay inconvenient.

 

In addition, in my impression, the staff has previously explained the reason for sacrificing both parents to obtain offspring: retaining a father or mother may make the breeding price cheaper (if I remember wrong, please forgive me)

[Johnwaynee]

long answer short:

Because its a MMO and not the singleplayer. Just look on the trade corner how much ppl enjoy trading or breeding comp mons. Its a huge part of the game; of any MMO.

And that would completely ruin it. "Make untradeable comps" is prolly the worst approach to the economy, and in general, i've seen so far.

[lMadara]

sacrificing two pokes so that they give you one in breeding is the best mechanic ever created, if they remove this the entire game is completely destabilized

[Necroka]

5 hours ago, kuuai said:

The reason is that doing so would make PokeMMO's proudest trading system useless, only able to trade some of the most basic wild Pokemon and some props and fashion.

 

At the same time, this also makes it difficult for some people who do not want to waste time cultivating Pokemon to obtain the perfect Pokemon through the convenient way of trading.

 

There are also people who have cultivated perfect Pokemon, but they cannot be perfectly utilized or are of no use, cannot be sold, and can only be released to the wild in pain.

 

There are even more than just these reasons, but all I can think of for now is so much, but these already make the gameplay inconvenient.

 

In addition, in my impression, the staff has previously explained the reason for sacrificing both parents to obtain offspring: retaining a father or mother may make the breeding price cheaper (if I remember wrong, please forgive me)

The trading system wouldn't become useless - buying people's unwanted wild Pokemon or extra items is already an amazing use for it. It doesn't need to be more than that, and the prices people are putting on some Pokemon just for being alphas are already insane. The economy wouldn't be hurt by taking bred Pokemon out unless shinies and alphas were also taken out. It has it's place.

 

Additionally, if someone wants to be competitive, I think that should take the extra work. There's lots of people in the game, and legendries are fought over. It makes sense for the competitive play style to do the grinding to be strong without sacrificing the casual play style to adventure, try things out, and have fun. I can't take Pokemon and their kids into a new zone together like I could in Gold or Silver, and that is a reduction of gameplay for a player like myself. If a parent is sacrificed, there's no reason for the system to exist - it ruins it for those who don't care about becoming competitive and just want to enjoy the game.

[Johnwaynee]

3 minutes ago, Necroka said:

The economy wouldn't be hurt by taking bred Pokemon out unless

"I just started and have no idea but pls fix the game for just me"

 

Frankly,  I'd suggest playing for a while before throwing in wild ideas that would ruin big parts of the economy and whole playstyles revolving breeding/selling in one swipe. (which includes many person like you mentioned; casually enjoying the game)
I see its frustrating comming in, expecting to be equipped with everything in no time - but that would 100% ruin the purpose of a mmo. You have clearly no idea how big the breeding market is and how many people deeply enjoy breeding their comps/pve's/whatever.

 

 

 

[Necroka]

20 minutes ago, Johnwaynee said:

"I just started and have no idea but pls fix the game for just me"

 

Frankly,  I'd suggest playing for a while before throwing in wild ideas that would ruin big parts of the economy and whole playstyles revolving breeding/selling in one swipe. (which includes many person like you mentioned; casually enjoying the game)
I see its frustrating comming in, expecting to be equipped with everything in no time - but that would 100% ruin the purpose of a mmo. You have clearly no idea how big the breeding market is and how many people deeply enjoy breeding their comps/pve's/whatever.

 

 

 

No reason to insult someone, dude.

 

I can't be the only one that plays the way I do, nor do I expect to have everything in no time.

So far there's been no proper response that breaks down why they should be tradeable, or why that would hurt an economy that clearly wouldn't need it to survive. If it hurts a play style, then that makes sense as an argument, but then why choose a playstyle of sit back and buy other people's hard work over adventuring and experiencing in an adventure game? It's not an unreasonable suggestion to want a Pokemon-based game to feel like a Pokemon game. I could say the same about you just "not understanding", but that's just not a good argument for anything, is it? Calm down, and explain what it really adds to the game, or why you think an economy that has plenty to trade would oddly and suddenly crash without something it shouldn't actually need. If I'm missing something, explain it.

[CaptnBaklava]

24 minutes ago, Necroka said:

No reason to insult someone, dude.

 

I can't be the only one that plays the way I do, nor do I expect to have everything in no time.

So far there's been no proper response that breaks down why they should be tradeable, or why that would hurt an economy that clearly wouldn't need it to survive. If it hurts a play style, then that makes sense as an argument, but then why choose a playstyle of sit back and buy other people's hard work over adventuring and experiencing in an adventure game? It's not an unreasonable suggestion to want a Pokemon-based game to feel like a Pokemon game. I could say the same about you just "not understanding", but that's just not a good argument for anything, is it? Calm down, and explain what it really adds to the game, or why you think an economy that has plenty to trade would oddly and suddenly crash without something it shouldn't actually need. If I'm missing something, explain it.

If you want a Pokemon based game that feels like Pokemon consider dusting off your Gameboy. 

 

 

For how long do you play? 

 

I'm quite sure no one with a couple hundreds of hours or more of playtime will support your cause. 

You just seem like the type of player that we have every other week around here complaining because the game is to hard or takes to much time just to vanish after finishing the E4's. 

If that is the case that is no problem, the game isn't meant to be liked by evryone. 

Just for now consider that there are people around here for 10 years still enjoying the way it's handled right now. 

 

Maybe you'll revisit this thread in a year but I doubt it. 

Will give you a follow just in case haha

[BrokenJoker]

 

13 hours ago, Necroka said:

Sacrificing two Pokemon to get one is already strange, and doesn't suit Pokemon's world, story, themes, etc for a lot of people. It's detrimental and unapproachable to various types of play that isn't cold, stat-driven, competitive play, and likely isn't necessary for the competitive side of things either.

 

I say likely, because perhaps I'm missing something, but so far it seems the main concern it addressed was trying to prevent an overflow of high-powered Pokemon in the Global Market.

 

If that's the biggest concern it addresses, why not just make bred Pokemon untradeable and unsellable? This would keep the global market from becoming saturated, and make it so those who want bred Pokemon can't just buy a piece of the process, or a battle-ready Pokemon. They have to grind it themselves with what they've caught themselves, and works well for an MMO. People who want to breed for competitive can do so without other players having to sacrifice their Pokemon just for an interesting move they wouldn't otherwise get. It also lets the more RP heavy players do things without grinding in an unsatisfying, uncomfortable, or depressing way. Additionally, players won't think they can breed Pokemon only to find out they can't (as they have to choose between their hard-earned Pokemon and a baby they've never used in battle yet), or that the process just isn't worth it.

 

How dare you suggest something that goes aganist the pokemmo norm xD

 

I like the idea of keeping both parents during breeding for sentimentality reasons. But its not going to happen because the economy > all on pokemmo. 

[Hatusan]

The current breeding system is perfect, just with the idea of retaining parents the market would collapse, it would be easier to look for shinies by egg, competitive 5x31+natu would be worthless since they would be so easy to breed, farming dittos, magikarps, breeds by egg group, all of that would be lost, much of the economy is based on breeding, supply and demand would be completely absurd with this suggest.

 

If you have not been playing for a long time, of course it will be difficult and rare to lose your breeders, but at the end of the day this is an MMO, the difficulty gives quality to the hours of play you give it, you entertain yourself, you strive and have fun, reaching your first million pokecoins is a very nice way.

Recognizing the pokemmo market is important to know that this idea is completely absurd.

[LeZenor]

18 hours ago, Necroka said:

Sacrificing two Pokemon to get one is already strange, and doesn't suit Pokemon's world, story, themes, etc for a lot of people. It's detrimental and unapproachable to various types of play that isn't cold, stat-driven, competitive play, and likely isn't necessary for the competitive side of things either.

 

I say likely, because perhaps I'm missing something, but so far it seems the main concern it addressed was trying to prevent an overflow of high-powered Pokemon in the Global Market.

 

If that's the biggest concern it addresses, why not just make bred Pokemon untradeable and unsellable? This would keep the global market from becoming saturated, and make it so those who want bred Pokemon can't just buy a piece of the process, or a battle-ready Pokemon. They have to grind it themselves with what they've caught themselves, and works well for an MMO. People who want to breed for competitive can do so without other players having to sacrifice their Pokemon just for an interesting move they wouldn't otherwise get. It also lets the more RP heavy players do things without grinding in an unsatisfying, uncomfortable, or depressing way. Additionally, players won't think they can breed Pokemon only to find out they can't (as they have to choose between their hard-earned Pokemon and a baby they've never used in battle yet), or that the process just isn't worth it.

 

Yet it suits a Pokemon MMO very well. Perhaps from your POV alone, this option looks more appealing but you have to look at the bigger picture here. Imagine the effect it would have at a larger scale with thousands of players. Retaining breeders would have a devastating effect on the game economy. It means no more requirement for breeding (2 pokemon cost) all the while allowing an infinite amount of competitive pokemon to flood the market. The market ends up saturated and the overall value of breeders and bred/competitive pokemon would collapse to nothingness (Demand < Supply). Sacrificing parents is a cost that creates demand over time and if you remove that, you just end up with an infinite supply and close to zero demand and that's not good for a healthy economy.

 

Also, what the point of removing the ability to trade Pokemon/bred Pokemon... in a pokemon game? Isn't trading like, one of the biggest part of Pokemon in general with the whole catch'em all thing? Beside, you just end up removing an entire business and interaction in a mmo, might as well just stick to playing on your own at this point.

 

Edited April 20, 2023 by LeZenor