Rigaudon
Youngster
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2013
- Messages
- 1,309
- Points
- 38
We might be able to add a line that "1 is easiest and 5 is hardest" when we update it. That's a solid suggestion.
The main issue is the conversion formula needs to be redone when it comes to the labels. Donar/another DEV would be able to explain this more accurately, but I'll try to leave it as simple as possible without being misleading (take this with a grain of salt; if I'm wrong they can correct me if they so wish).
The old system worked something like 0.1 = common, 0.01 = rare, etc. However, that's not how probability works from map to map when how many Pokemon you have in total varies. It ended up being horribly inaccurate, which is why what was at first a simple "change where Pokemon show up and their rarity within the old system" turned into "redo literally everything."
What we have right now is much more reliable/accurate but also much more complicated; the label system also needs a similar rehaul. From what I understand, for the label system to accurately show rarities, more will have to be redone (potentially requiring more work from me as well in terms of spawn rarity conversions). If we just turned it back on right now, for example, some commons might look like "rares". Or, well, other strange inaccurate labels.
The main issue is the conversion formula needs to be redone when it comes to the labels. Donar/another DEV would be able to explain this more accurately, but I'll try to leave it as simple as possible without being misleading (take this with a grain of salt; if I'm wrong they can correct me if they so wish).
The old system worked something like 0.1 = common, 0.01 = rare, etc. However, that's not how probability works from map to map when how many Pokemon you have in total varies. It ended up being horribly inaccurate, which is why what was at first a simple "change where Pokemon show up and their rarity within the old system" turned into "redo literally everything."
What we have right now is much more reliable/accurate but also much more complicated; the label system also needs a similar rehaul. From what I understand, for the label system to accurately show rarities, more will have to be redone (potentially requiring more work from me as well in terms of spawn rarity conversions). If we just turned it back on right now, for example, some commons might look like "rares". Or, well, other strange inaccurate labels.