Tackling Competitive Accessibility - A Document

[Andyy]

The game in its current state isn't very difficult, it's just tedious. The major difference between the two is that former is addictive while the latter gets old very quickly and would deter away 90% of the player base.

I agree with you. The game is tedious in its current state (currently we are just trying to win against e4 with a couple of pokemons in sinnoh region.) But, the game is 3-weeks old right? Just give some time - with the addition of new map(s) (I hope jvaloh would be a mix of kanto, johto and hoenn), crew wars, ranked battles, pve quests maybe, (idk the plans of dev team) and etc., the game will not be tedious anymore.

Would you rather that only some people had those 31 IVs while other didn't, and all of that determined by nothing else but sheer luck?

What is luck? Are people lucky or do they make their own luck? For this game, people should make their own luck by hard grinding. So, my answer to that question is yes, I would rather that only some people had 31 IVs because 99% of those people would be hard grinders and they would deserve that IVs

Full IV resets should also be implemented into the game. This item can be both advantageous and disadvantageous. You can have 31 speed IV, but the rest of the stats can be not good. It has a balance in itself
But single iv reset/change is just unbalanced and makes the pokemon perfect or close to perfect

 

[BRUTTOW]

¿Preferiría que solo algunas personas tuvieran esos 31 IV mientras que otras no, y todo eso determinado por nada más que pura suerte?

It is a game for everyone, where we all have the opportunity in a balanced way to have our perfect Pokémon, obviously it is not right that only few have perfect Pokémon through pure luck. That would not be a competitive game.

And well, for those who only prefer 2x31 pokes, those are their tastes and I respect them, but if I am going to enter the competitive field I need my pokemon in 5x31 as a minimum, otherwise I would not compete, in addition to that 2x31 pokemons are useful for battles singles, in double battles you need better ivs possibly and by the way varieties.

 

[BRUTTOW]

Players cannot create their own luck in a video game.
Players have the right to be on an equal footing, not to depend on luck. That is wrong and the game would stop at only seeing the same faces in PvP all the time, and not seeing new faces since many would not be lucky enough to have pokes with good random ivs.
For something the TPC created an easier means of upbringing from the 8th gen so that EVERYONE can play competitively regardless of age.
I agree with the main idea

 

[Andyy]

¿Preferiría que solo algunas personas tuvieran esos 31 IV mientras que otras no, y todo eso determinado por nada más que pura suerte?

It is a game for everyone, where we all have the opportunity in a balanced way to have our perfect Pokémon, obviously it is not right that only few have perfect Pokémon through pure luck. That would not be a competitive game.

And well, for those who only prefer 2x31 pokes, those are their tastes and I respect them, but if I am going to enter the competitive field I need my pokemon in 5x31 as a minimum, otherwise I would not compete, in addition to that 2x31 pokemons are useful for battles singles, in double battles you need better ivs possibly and by the way varieties.

Lets make a quick solution by making all the IVs of wild pokemons 31
too funny
play showdown man. you can have all 31 IVs in that battle simulator. Thats what you want right?

 

[BRUTTOW]

Lets make a quick solution by making all the IVs of wild pokemons 31
too funny
play showdown man. you can have all 31 IVs in that battle simulator. Thats what you want right?

As everyone knows Showdown is a battle simulator, used as a tool to know which Pokémon, strategy, ability, cast of ev's etc. It is the best for your pokemon or team. Showdown helped me a lot in the 2017 lead of the Vgc17 SM season. Where comps players plan the strategies or test the strategies that will lead to the real battles.

For something the great Tpc and gamefreak created the breeding, to have 6x31 or 5x31 pokes.

I like the idea of ​​fragments as points ivs nn without limit of where to put the ivs, but to make it more difficult I think that every 5 pokes of the same spice create a fragment that is worth 1-ivs, so one becomes more fond of the poke n.n

 

[Dontea]

RNG creates variety
It keeps the game fresh and unpredictable

RNG makes games harder and basically difficult games are better games imo. Difficult games gives more pleasure in the end when you achieve smthing

What is the point of playing this game if we can get 31 IVs easily. Instead, I can play pvp in showdown with perfect natures, abilities and all 31IVs
Lets assume everyone using 31 speed in pvp.. Where is the excitement of this?

I saw some people suggesting nature rerolls!! what?? I quit PRO 2 days after I started playing when I learned there is nature rerolls and you can catch legendaries only for once
Some people complain about the time they spend on the game, saying hours of grinding and getting nothing... If you value your time that much, simply dont play games or go play other mmos to get shiny URs easily.

Briefly, this game is supposed to be hard

-----

For your 2nd comment: I dont think it would bring healthier economy. Instead, useless pokemons would be overpriced

I'd like to refrain from a back and forth but I feel a need to point something out in your argument.

You claim that difficult games

give more pleasure in the end when you achieve something

and I couldn't agree with you more.

But. The game in its current state isn't very difficult, it's just tedious. The major difference between the two is that former is addictive while the latter gets old very quickly and would deter away 90% of the player base.

I won't delve into the rest of your points as I've already discussed them but I'll ask you a question instead:

What is the point of playing this game if we can get 31 IVs easily. Instead, I can play pvp in showdown with perfect natures, abilities and all 31IVs
Lets assume everyone using 31 speed in pvp.. Where is the excitement of this?

Would you rather that only some people had those 31 IVs while other didn't, and all of that determined by nothing else but sheer luck?

I just wanted to tack on that time consuming = difficulty is a complete fallacy in gaming. People who mindlessly grind the most do not nessarcily make the "best" players, and thus rewarding purely endless grinds does not actually create a difficult game, just one that caters to people who have a lot of time to spend on games. A good game pairs difficult content with some level of reasonable time gating. Take a game like Runescape (OSRS) for example it is one of the most popular grindfest MMO's but everything in the game is realistically achievable. Meaning I can map out how long it will take me to max out my character doing X activity, and farming enough money to get X gear. Now I can artificially make the game harder for myself using Iron/uim/hardcore game modes but these are OPTIONAL grinds/ ways to play the game for those interested.

Now the game also has things that are not realistically achievable through pure time, such as many of the Boss Pet grinds which can take thousands of hours with no tangible results. The difference between that and this game is that those grinds are optional and purely to flex. Runescape has a simple formula time in = progress made, currently we do not have any such systems. I am one of the hardest grinders and currently have tons of time to spend grinding, I love it. I have spent thousands of hours grinding MMO's and have no issues investing my time into them. But as Acedus cleverly states it currently is tedious rather than rewarding.

The rewards also feel less rewarding and more relieving imo, which is a testament to some of the games issues. Seeing my UR not fail sync feels more like a sigh of relief than jumping out of my chair, because even then it does not have 31 speed.

in terms of the content of the actual suggestion I like it. Many know I am a fan of the 2 limit bottlecap system that I have proposed before, but other creative ways to deal with the IV system can be just as good if not better. Creative ideas like these are going to be what end up making/breaking PBO imo. But there are many good and bad routes to go down.

 

[BRUTTOW]

4.A. A combination of methods 3.D./3.E./3.F. with method 2.C. would be the best course of action.

I totally disagree with this method, with a pocket of at least 62 IVs Pokes n.n

 

[KingOfPvp]

Foreword

Hello,

I am Acedus, some members of the community will recognize me as an older member of the game.
I used to play back when PBO initially released and quit sometime in early 2018 due to a similar bottleneck to the one that will be discussed in this suggestion.
Before we get to the full course meal I believe it is essential to discuss the meat and potatoes, so let's do just that.

What causes a player to feel a sense of progression in PBO?
Is it winning a PvE or PvP oriented fight?
Is it winning an RNG-based competition?
Is it the rush of excitement that is invoked whenever the entire population observes your fortune (or misfortune) as they read the words "Player has encountered a level X Y"?

Well, it's a combination of the bunch, but the main thing that makes one feel a sense of steady progression is obviously the progression itself.
Raw progression in the Pokémon genre (at least at the endgame level) is considered to be the obtainment of a Pokémon with high to perfect IVs, with the right ability, the right moveset, and the right nature.
To achieve that goal at the moment is near-impossible due to the major factor that the game so heavily relies on, in its current state- the RNG.
Personally, my stand on RNG, in general, remains neutral. It's not a bad thing nor a good thing as long as it remains in balance.
Evidently, it isn't balanced which is why I am writing this suggestion to begin with, but we digress.
The main issue I'm aiming to tackle in this post is the IV generation one, what can be done in order to fulfill a sense of progression without ruining the ever-so-praised grind.

Initially, two methods come to mind when tackling such issue. I'll provide brief exposition to each of them:

• Bottle Caps - Oh bottle caps, how original. A linear reward with linear effort, not very interesting and certainly not progressive. For those of you who aren't aware of what bottle caps bring to the table, they basically allow the ability to raise a Pokémon IV to the maximum on a specific stat. The problem with that is that it defeats the purpose of grinding for a Pokémon multiple times and lowers the value of things like swarms for example.

• IV Resets - This one is pretty self-explanatory, you take an item, pop it on a Pokémon of choice and it randomly generates new IVs for it. The cons with this method are pretty straightforward- you're adding fuel to the fire.

Now that we covered the most common banal suggestions, it is time to propose my more elaborate yet flexible solution. A solution that aims to maintain the thrill of the hunt while granting ease of access to the competitive scene of the game.

*drum roll* conversions!

---

Content Suggestion ▻ Conversion
This is a document portraying the concept of ‘shard conversion’ that will be elaborated on in the following sections. The document will provide an objective view over possible solutions provided to deal with one of the game’s core design issues; its accessibility to competitive ready teams, and rewarding progression.

Introduction

1.A. The player will be able to convert Pokémon into shards and then feed said shards to other Pokémon to gain a specific amount of IVs in a stat of their choosing.
1.B. The ratio of conversion will be fixed (i.e UR Pokémon will turn into a UR shard and can be only fed to UR Pokémon ).

Investment Methodology

2.A. Pokémon can only be fed a fixed amount of IV shards.
2.B. Method A - Pokémon will be restricted to two stats which can be fed said shards, chosen by the player the moment they feed a shard into a selected stat.
2.C. Method B - Pokémon will be restricted to 31/62/93 shards or IVs which can be allocated to any stat of the player's choosing.

Value of Conversion

3.A. Shards will have value based on the IVs of the Pokémon that was converted to them. When converted, a shard will be designated with a stat of the player's choosing (i.e Attack Shard [VR]).
3.B. Method A - Shard value will be fixed (i.e 1 Pokémon = 1 IV).
3.C. Method B - Shard value will be divided into 3 tiers:

• 0-10 IVs yield 1 IVs when converted to a shard (i.e Attack Shard [VR] +1).

• 11-20 IVs yield 2 IVs when converted to a shard (i.e Defense Shard [UC] +2).

• 21-31 IVs yield 3 IVs when converted to a shard (i.e Speed Shard [R] +3).

3.D. Method C-1 - Shard value will be dictated by the Pokémon’s IV when initially converted into a shard (i.e a converted Pokémon that was designated to be turned into an Attack Shard had 8 IVs in its attack stat will yield Attack Shard [POKEMON_RARITY] +8) (preferably used with the method mentioned in section 2.B.).
3.E. Method C-2 - Same method as 3.D. but restrict the shard to Pokémon as well (i.e Attack Shard [POKEMON_RARITY] +8 [POKEMON_SPECIE]).
3.F. Method D - Shard value will overwrite the current IV value of the target Pokémon (i.e Attack Shard [POKEMON_RARITY] +21 will convert the target's Pokémon attack stat to 21). (preferably used with the method mentioned in section 2.B.).

Subjective Overview

4.A. A combination of methods 3.D./3.E./3.F. with method 2.C. would be the best course of action.
4.B. Any form of 2.B./2.C. with 3.B. 3.C. will be less beneficial to all parties involved.

---

And that's about it, let me know what you think in the comments, I'd love to hear more suggestions regarding this matter!

+1000 to this post, I think shards are great and I also had this idea, it is satisfying to see that people also thought the same

 

[Hey Siri]

That’s actually a great idea, but there are a lot of flaws. You only assume that players go and catch their ultra rares, but what about those who can go and buy a cheap UR and turn it into a shard? This game is already a little bit pay2win meaning there are players selling donator store stuff for in game currency, atm it is fine as they would only get a slight advantage which is money and access to better Pokémon’s on the market, but in the end everyone is bound by the RNG and IV wise it’s not too hard to get a PVPable Pokémon.

When the shards are actually a thing, all those players who got money will have perfect Pokémon’s with 31 IVs and this is super unfair. Because now at least only a handful of people can get their hands on very good Pokémon’s that are „perfect“ for PBO standards, but with shards it’s always gonna be full Team perfect 31 IV Mons that is too easily achievable. Also it would kill economy, It would be a mess and it’s unpredictable how market will react. The shards would make the removal of breeding in PBO redundant, might as well just allow breeding which we all don’t want.

I like your thought tou, if we could find a restriction to this we might be on to something. For example instead of differentiating shards by the rarity of the Pokémon’s we can just make one universal shard and depending on the rarity you get more or less shards when dismembering the Pokémon’s. Second, create an item like the tickets you need for the move tutor and lock it behind PVP and Crew wars tokens. So basically you go to a guy, possibly in hearthome where move relearned and tutors are, pay the fee with your shards + using a ticket you bought with your PvP / CW tokens so you can reroll IVs. There needs to be a balance between pay2win and doing some effort by playing. It also opens up options to boost the PBO membership a bit. Like boosting earned tokens from CW / PVP / or even Dynite ores by 10% and increase shards gained by dismembering Pokémon’s by 10%, as of now PBO membership has not enough features anyways.

Players who care about IV are players who play PVP anyways, so at least they and all with big cash gotta put in effort to get IV rerolls. Having perfect Pokémon’s shouldn’t be mandatory and shouldn’t be the standard for PBO, same with overwriting your Pokémon’s with the perfect moveset with TMs and literally ignoring their innate moves. Creating your perfect nor Overwriting a Pokémon should never be a thing, where’s the fun in all that? Soft guiding people to play with what they got and their Pokémon’s natural movesets creates diversity and not the same stale meta you get in every competitive Pokémon.

 

[Acedus]

That’s actually a great idea, but there are a lot of flaws. You only assume that players go and catch their ultra rares, but what about those who can go and buy a cheap UR and turn it into a shard? This game is already a little bit pay2win meaning there are players selling donator store stuff for in game currency, atm it is fine as they would only get a slight advantage which is money and access to better Pokémon’s on the market, but in the end everyone is bound by the RNG and IV wise it’s not too hard to get a PVPable Pokémon.

When the shards are actually a thing, all those players who got money will have perfect Pokémon’s with 31 IVs and this is super unfair. Because now at least only a handful of people can get their hands on very good Pokémon’s that are „perfect“ for PBO standards, but with shards it’s always gonna be full Team perfect 31 IV Mons that is too easily achievable. Also it would kill economy, It would be a mess and it’s unpredictable how market will react. The shards would make the removal of breeding in PBO redundant, might as well just allow breeding which we all don’t want.

I like your thought tou, if we could find a restriction to this we might be on to something. For example instead of differentiating shards by the rarity of the Pokémon’s we can just make one universal shard and depending on the rarity you get more or less shards when dismembering the Pokémon’s. Second, create an item like the tickets you need for the move tutor and lock it behind PVP and Crew wars tokens. So basically you go to a guy, possibly in hearthome where move relearned and tutors are, pay the fee with your shards + using a ticket you bought with your PvP / CW tokens so you can reroll IVs. There needs to be a balance between pay2win and doing some effort by playing. It also opens up options to boost the PBO membership a bit. Like boosting earned tokens from CW / PVP / or even Dynite ores by 10% and increase shards gained by dismembering Pokémon’s by 10%, as of now PBO membership has not enough features anyways.

Players who care about IV are players who play PVP anyways, so at least they and all with big cash gotta put in effort to get IV rerolls. Having perfect Pokémon’s shouldn’t be mandatory and shouldn’t be the standard for PBO, same with overwriting your Pokémon’s with the perfect moveset with TMs and literally ignoring their innate moves. Creating your perfect nor Overwriting a Pokémon should never be a thing, where’s the fun in all that? Soft guiding people to play with what they got and their Pokémon’s natural movesets creates diversity and not the same stale meta you get in every competitive Pokémon.

Some very good points, I believe that a compromise that was suggested in one of the comments could be a good solution for your argument. Limiting shards to OT as well as locking it into a specific Pokémon will make it so it doesn't harm the economy quite as hard as well as elevate the grind for people.