Dovekip's Log of Stuff I do

[Dovee]

update

 

[pieguy13]

03/25/2012
-Created Surfspawns for each map

Please have my babies

 

[DaSnowman]

You did awesome on the surf spawns i love it xD

 

[Guest]

The surf spawns give a really nice touch.
As a funny fact, bots in Water lab are now obsolete but in exchange speedhacker came (and it's really hard to fraps them, I tryed yesterday but could't do it, all that people togheter really mess up my fps :-X ).

 

[ash.catchem]

03/25/2012
-Created Surfspawns for each map

can you explain what is surfspawns?? sorry for silly question but i really dont know what it is..

 

[Guest]

03/25/2012
-Created Surfspawns for each map

can you explain what is surfspawns?? sorry for silly question but i really dont know what it is..

Now when you surf (on water) it's the same as when you walk on grass. You will get spawns (fights).

 

[WiinolikePS3]

Wait... are the surfspawns on par with what you find while fishing? If so, fishing is now obsolete. :/

 

[Jinji]

In real Pokémon games, Fishing spawns and Surfing spawns often differ for the same location. I see no reason why PWO would not follow the same lines in future; especially considering our plans to eventually implement all available Pokémon. So I don't see Fishing becoming obsolete with this update, even if right now most of the spawns are the same (I should note I have not actually seen the Spawn lists yet so I can't comment on exactly how similar they are).

 

[WiinolikePS3]

Neither have I, I just saw that people said that speedhackers invaded the water lab, which they would only do if you could get the same stuff surfing as while fishing (Or very similar.) I'll check when I get home, but if the surf spawns are currently EXACTLY the same as fishing, I'd have to guess that it would probably get changed. But hey, all of this is just me rambling based on knowing that surfspawns are implemented, and the Water Lab can be speedhacked. (Or, at least people are trying.)

 

[ash.catchem]

And do that surfspawns also depends upon fishing lvl or we can get any poke just like walking on grass, no lvl??

 

[Maideza]

They said this online...

At the moment, they are exactly the same what you encounter - but doesn't depend on fishing; but eventually it will.

 

[Guest]

The ability to encounter wild pokemon on water (while surfing) without fishing.

 

[Guest]

Hey Are you going to fix that one NPC that says That the negative experience is just a visual problem. It is more than that. It's a bug that has yet to be fixed so I think it should say what it is clearly. I read it and was like "oh ok" and then When I realized I actually had to gain that 8k exp to be where I left off...I was pretty surprised.

Maybe make it say something along the lines of "You may see that your Exp is negative. That is just the cost of evolving your pokemon at the moment and we are working on it" Or something...

 

[Stank]

but it IS just a visual error, the amount of exp is still the same amount you would need even if it wasn't negative -50/100 exp is the same as 0/150 exp. you will still need the same amount of exp to lvl up

 

[Guest]

I don't think so. Some people have negative like 3.5 million to get back to where they would have been if they chose not to evolve.

It becomes a game of catch up. And it isn't a Visual error.

I wasn't negative 8k exp at lvl 16 because of a visual error. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't like playing catch up.

 

[Guest]

I was -8000/4000

At level 16. I had to get the 8000 to get to 0. And from there get to 4k to lvl up. I'm sorry but that's 8k extra exp that I had to gain to lvl up.
I don't think that's because of a visual error.

 

[CheckeredZebra]

I was -8000/4000

At level 16. I had to get the 8000 to get to 0. And from there get to 4k to lvl up. I'm sorry but that's 8k extra exp that I had to gain to lvl up.
I don't think that's because of a visual error.

Two things cause negative exp.

1: You had a pokemon that was around during the exp system change
2: You evolved a pokemon.

The formula is based on the Base Exp gain of a pokemon. For example, pidgey has a base exp of 50. It's evolution has the base exp of 113.

Let's pretend that for Pidgey it takes 200 exp until it reaches level 16 (the level it evolves in PWO). For Pidgeotto to ever reach that level, it would take theoretically 400 exp.
You evolve Pidgey at level 16 after grinding up 200 exp. You evolve it into pidgeotto, which needs 400 exp to be on that same level. Thus you have a debt of 200 exp when you evolve into pidgeotto. THIS is where the visual error happens.

Instead of, when evolving, changing the exp to show "0/400," it instead adds the debt to the wrong side of the bar. So instead, you see "-200/200" instead of "0/400," as stank said. The more you level up without evolving, the more "debt" you accumulate. Some pokemon (like dragonite) have base exp rates of 218.

Now, what happened to pokemon that were around BEFORE the exp change, it simply takes more exp to level to 100 now. Because of that, the exp they had made them go down levels and get negative exp.

So even if this was "fixed" you'd have to train the same amount; you just likely wouldn't notice.

 

[ash.catchem]

I was -8000/4000

At level 16. I had to get the 8000 to get to 0. And from there get to 4k to lvl up. I'm sorry but that's 8k extra exp that I had to gain to lvl up.
I don't think that's because of a visual error.

Two things cause negative exp.

1: You had a pokemon that was around during the exp system change
2: You evolved a pokemon.

The formula is based on the Base Exp gain of a pokemon. For example, pidgey has a base exp of 50. It's evolution has the base exp of 113.

Let's pretend that for Pidgey it takes 200 exp until it reaches level 16 (the level it evolves in PWO). For Pidgeotto to ever reach that level, it would take theoretically 400 exp.
You evolve Pidgey at level 16 after grinding up 200 exp. You evolve it into pidgeotto, which needs 400 exp to be on that same level. Thus you have a debt of 200 exp when you evolve into pidgeotto. THIS is where the visual error happens.

Instead of, when evolving, changing the exp to show "0/400," it instead adds the debt to the wrong side of the bar. So instead, you see "-200/200" instead of "0/400," as stank said. =P

Now, what happened to pokemon that were around BEFORE the exp change, it simply takes more exp to level to 100 now. Because of that, the exp they had made them go down levels and get negative exp.

So even if this was "fixed" you'd have to train the same amount; you just likely wouldn't notice.

But in general, or real Handheld game, there is no extra exp that we have to train becuase evolution automatically gives extra experience, thats why it is said evolution, other wise there won't be any change except some stats and one pic of pokemon....
in your example, the amount here we need is 400exp from lvl 50 to 51 for that pidgeotto, and while from 51 to 52, there is no doubt that exp needed will be around 200-250... but in handheld games, the amount of exp needed to level up increases gradually by a little amount...

I don't think this game should move away from handheld games.. will it?? ???

 

[Guest]

Hmm I see. So wouldn't something like that be an easy fix? I can't really tell cause I don't do any type of programming. But imean if the problem is known, maybe it should be an easier fix.

 

[Guest]

The negative exp is of course a visual error, but the fact that we have to train off the "debt" is a game error. And it should be pretty much easy to fix, just give the evolved pokemon's exp attribute the value it would have on the current level and not just copy the pre-evolution one.