Problems [ The awakening ]

[talha.k]

Alright, I got that "30h" thing wrong. Sorry for that. Fonty's explanation cleared it up perfectly for me.
_
229 respondents isn't really a decent sample size because going incognito allowed you to answer the poll unlimited number of times...
_
I see your point Riga, you're pretty much indicating that PWO is thinking of all aspects, especially taking future into consideration. Which is fair in my opinion but I still don't see why making tier 5 would stuff it all up... I don't entirely understand it.

the other half of people that will complain that we dipped down the top rarity rates

Because most, not all, are aware of the huge advantage they've been provided (not implying it was intentional) and they wouldn't like if that was taken away from them. I have a Shiny X which is a tier 4 currently. If its rarity was changed to tier 2, I'd be gutted as well. But with a solid reason to back it up, I would understand. I definitely would still be mad, but if I actually believed that there was a solid reason for the decision, I would stop complaining or blaming you guys for my loss...

Also, I do not agree with "i was able to sell this for X and now i can only sell it for Y"... Everything (except may be the rarest stuff) will decrease in price in a similar ratio, so they're only losing little OR even gaining in fact.
_
Most people who like tier 5s being this hard are the ones who already have them or the ones who could sell their 32 IV shiny etc. for 200m+ and buy the tier 5 they want... From what I've seen that is. There is not one player (among the ones I've spoken to of course) with less than 10m cash who does not complain about tier 5s. Or the ones who hunt day in day out for tier 5s...
_
This is my last post in this thread. See y'all later.

 

[xPecT]

quoting talha.k

Most people who like tier 5s being this hard are the ones who already have them or the ones who could sell their 32 IV shiny etc. for 200m+ and buy the tier 5 they want... From what I've seen that is. There is not one player (among the ones I've spoken to of course) with less than 10m cash who does not complain about tier 5s. Or the ones who hunt day in day out for tier 5s...

This is the inconvenient truth. Much of the people that already have them will try to argue in different ways trying to cover this up with any reasons they can think of but in the end what they think for themselves is this. Even if they don't admit it. They don't wanna lose the advantages.

 

[Electrofreak]

quoting talha.k

Most people who like tier 5s being this hard are the ones who already have them or the ones who could sell their 32 IV shiny etc. for 200m+ and buy the tier 5 they want... From what I've seen that is. There is not one player (among the ones I've spoken to of course) with less than 10m cash who does not complain about tier 5s. Or the ones who hunt day in day out for tier 5s...

This is the inconvenient truth. Much of the people that already have them will try to argue in different ways trying to cover this up with any reasons they can think of but in the end what they think for themselves is this. Even if they don't admit it. They don't wanna lose the advantages.

I was going to wait until your next post since others seemed to jump on your case before replying as a courtesy, but I won't even bother responding to what you said to me considering the tone of the quoted post above.

Thanks for admitting you are not actually open to discussion and instead would much rather assume the viewpoint and motives of everyone else who you presume to be in the camp of old players. Thank you for completely showing that you subjectively and fallaciously reject any viewpoint different from your own because of a presupposed construct within your own mind that you cannot possibly defend.

You are making an entire assumption as shown by your inferential statement that you cannot possibly epistemically justify. Do not expect anyone who is actually trying to reason to take you seriously after admitting what you just did.

 

[xPecT]

quoting talha.k

Most people who like tier 5s being this hard are the ones who already have them or the ones who could sell their 32 IV shiny etc. for 200m+ and buy the tier 5 they want... From what I've seen that is. There is not one player (among the ones I've spoken to of course) with less than 10m cash who does not complain about tier 5s. Or the ones who hunt day in day out for tier 5s...

This is the inconvenient truth. Much of the people that already have them will try to argue in different ways trying to cover this up with any reasons they can think of but in the end what they think for themselves is this. Even if they don't admit it. They don't wanna lose the advantages.

I was going to wait until your next post since others seemed to jump on your case before replying as a courtesy, but I won't even bother responding to what you said to me considering the tone of the quoted post above.

Thanks for admitting you are not actually open to discussion and instead would much rather assume the viewpoint and motives of everyone else who you presume to be in the camp of old players. Thank you for completely showing that you subjectively and fallaciously reject any viewpoint different from your own because of a presupposed construct within your own mind that you cannot possibly defend.

You are making an entire assumption as shown by your inferential statement that you cannot possibly epistemically justify. Do not expect anyone who is actually trying to reason to take you seriously after admitting what you just did.

OFFTOPIC:I said MUCH of the people. Not saying everyone. Not saying that you are one. You at least explain your point of view. Zooks even tho he has a different point of view of mine i'm sure he would always think of the server first and then his own gains. But there are some players that take the "If we change this it will create an even bigger problem" phrase first said by Bluerise if i'm not mistaken and just drop it without having any knowledge how the things would turn out neither do they care how the things would turn out. All they want is the "Don't change anything" thing, for the good or for the bad of the server they don't care. Their only concern is their own profit.

You know that i'm right in that one. And im open to discussion , you are the one that is taking everything like an offense. If i'm wrong you are free to prove me wrong.

And many of the people that are / and will forever be against any change for the good or for the bad of the server are not even here reading this topic. They just ignore the discussions. But in case that a change is imminent they are the first to raise their voices for that not to happen.
Let's stop with the offtopic from now on.

ONTOPIC: There are old players that like to hunt instead of using their money to everything and even they complain about the difficulty of Tier 5.
Of course that people that don't hunt the pokemons themselves and just buy them or get them in a trade don't really care about this since their effort to get them is 0,0%
Anyway if this is meant to be a nolifing hunt that can be unsucessfull for every Tier 5 pokemons you might want the things to stay the same.
The time relation between finishing all the game content / capture a Tier 5 pokemon is so big that removes the joy of the game. And it's greater here than in most of the others MMOs out there. Any type of MMOs considered.

 

[Electrofreak]

Please stop making assertions you have no idea how to make. I am not taking everything like an offense, but rather I am calling out your ignorance in that you make statements and act as if they are facts when you do not have the LOGICAL ABILITY to make such claims as true factually. You can only make a subjective claim and not a truth claim in such instances. This is what is referred to as ontology in modal logic. Ontology refers to states of being.
You have the following states of being for any substance or claim:
1. Possibility (An apple can possibly be green or red.)
2. Necessity (2+2 is necessarily 4)
3. Impossibility (2+2 is not 5)

When you make a blanket statement about motives of players, you cannot assume their ultimate motives as a statement of fact. You do not have knowledge of the minds of every player on this. This is merely a technical correction I am making in the philosophical sense. Most people do not understand the difference between subjective and objective claims. That was not me being offended, but rather just saying you are technically wrong at the foundation level on this. By getting this wrong, you then don't allow the conversation to move forward because the entire premise of your argumentative construction is wrong.

The bottom line here is you CAN'T know the motives of most people. You can only assume, and you cannot base an entire logical argument on an assumption of that magnitude. It is not a self-evident claim, but rather, it is inferential.



A treatise on IVs version 320943290209 (cuz apparently people still don't get it):

You use niche situations to then say things matter, when the real issue is whether or not it causes a real problem between new and old players. This person needs to fight a salamence with low sp def, while using those specs, WHILE THE SALA IS FULL HP, with the salamence player not switching.

Why would any salamence user in their right mind risk it vs a jolteon when specs is one of the 2 main items used on it? (life orb doing similar functions) You were talking about people who are knowledgeable battlers but simply don't have the "strong" pokemon right? The smart player would switch in such a matchup unless he/she is carrying focus sash and earthquake on that salamence. A chance to OHKO vs and assurance to OHKO is still not something to be gambling with when you are dealing with numbers as high as 25%. Any smart player would have a balanced enough team to avoid that situation and make a defensive switch.

Furthermore Jolteon can and does carry HP ICE, so why on earth would a salamence user risk that situation either?

You need to make a CUMULATIVE case of why this matters, not a niche situation. The MAJORITY of cases are not reliant upon ivs, but rather upon the species. Furthermore if you have one lower iv, you need to play around that. My salamence is not max speed and has high special defense, but you don't see me risking my salamence vs a jolteon or another salamence because I am aware of its deficits.


Let me clarify the question about ivs since my wording did not seem clear enough to you the first time. (I assumed context since this has been posted so many times that you must have been aware that this has been said by so many people in various threads already that have been answered already, and for that I apologize.)

What systematic advantage do old players have in terms of battle outcomes due to their ivs? How can you provide data that the IVs are what make the difference and not player skill? How do you distinguish between when a new player becomes an old player? How do you provide evidence that the new players cannot reach a level similar to old players when there hasn't even been enough time yet for those new players to have played a few years with the new setup yet? So far ALL OF THIS, is an assumption you have to make to say the things you are.



As far as the statement of "You know that I'm right in that one." Not really sure, nor does it matter. Are there a good chunk of people that just want to selfishly operate? Oh yes there are, but I definitely wont go so far as to say majority since I do not have personal experience with the majority of our thousands of players and their innermost motives. I do know SOME, but I dare not make an assumption for most as an assumption of that magnitude is dangerous and unfruitful at best, ostracizing and divisive at worst.

 

[Electrofreak]

One obvious thing I want to point out as well is that people with a general knowledge about battling outside of PWO have time to plan and acquire those pokemon more cheaply from those who do not. There is a correlation between older players who have better stuff and those who do not simply because they plan ahead. That being said, the skillful, over time, often end up the ones with good pokemon if they play the game consistently.

A perfect example of this would be those people who picked up chansey/blissey/skarmory before working/egg moves for them. Those people got a sudden boost in their wealth and battle worthiness based on prior planning and thus perform better than those who lacked that knowledge. However this also translates directly from their higher knowledge and skill base of pokemon.

 

[xPecT]

Please stop making assertions you have no idea how to make. I am not taking everything like an offense, but rather I am calling out your ignorance in that you make statements and act as if they are facts when you do not have the LOGICAL ABILITY to make such claims as true factually. You can only make a subjective claim and not a truth claim in such instances. This is what is referred to as ontology in modal logic. Ontology refers to states of being.
You have the following states of being for any substance or claim:
1. Possibility (An apple can possibly be green or red.)
2. Necessity (2+2 is necessarily 4)
3. Impossibility (2+2 is not 5)

Yes you are right on some things you said except calling out my ignorance. Yes i'm making assumptions (that are mostly right in some cases) but they can't be given as facts and that is why this is a discussion and not an affirmation of "I'm right in every aspect and you are wrong in every aspect". I make my assumptions and we discuss them, but the point of Tier 5 being too damn time consuming for MOST of the players and making you nolife much times without results stands as a "Necessity" and not as a "Possibility".
If i had proofs and facts that everything i said is 100% right here we could already close the topic and proceed to make the changes...
But thanks for the philosophy lesson about modal logic.

One obvious thing I want to point out as well is that people with a general knowledge about battling outside of PWO have time to plan and acquire those pokemon more cheaply from those who do not. There is a correlation between older players who have better stuff and those who do not simply because they plan ahead. That being said, the skillful, over time, often end up the ones with good pokemon if they play the game consistently.

A perfect example of this would be those people who picked up chansey/blissey/skarmory before working/egg moves for them. Those people got a sudden boost in their wealth and battle worthiness based on prior planning and thus perform better than those who lacked that knowledge. However this also translates directly from their higher knowledge and skill base of pokemon.

You are right and wrong at the same time ( assumption here! not fact. otherwise you will judge me badly again)
So we should start getting already them Blazikens and Brelooms and Gliscor more cheap now that they don't work to full effect for example that when natures and abilities start to work on full they will be really good right? But then again if we use our money that is not extensive exclusively preparing for the future what will we do now? People want to have fun and try to have the best conditions right here right now. Life is all about the present not constant thinking of the future.
You can do your work and plan ahead but then you will lose most of the present.
Tough decision to make right there.

 

[Electrofreak]

Um, if you do that you help no one. It just makes everything worth nothing and then makes players have no long term goals. If you don't even have the foresight for future planning and why it is important, then there really is no point in having this discussion.

I would rather not have this be our reality in PWO:

 

[Electrofreak]

Also, just to clarify. The way you are wording your statements are that of truth claims. Words mean things. You can call it a discussion all you want, but when you start saying things like "prove me wrong" that means you are trying to make a truth claim which has to come from an objective source. At that point it becomes an assertion and not merely an opinion.

So again, ignorance is not incorrect in this instance. It is not an insult either. It is just a factual statement regarding your understanding of what is and isn't a truth claim. If you want to sit there and say everything you say is up for discussion and yet hold it as opinion, then you can't go and say "prove me wrong." Proof is a very strong word and can only deal with the objective. Subjectivism can always result in an infinite regress because the standards can always change without a firm foundation.

This is why post-modern thought is rejected within academia and in any form of serious debate decorum. It goes nowhere, helps no one, and is merely a philosophy that just allows people to assert their opinion with a perceived ability to retreat from any attack just by calling it an opinion. It commits the fallacy of self-contradiction. You CAN NOT, make a claim and say "prove me wrong" which deals with objectivity then turn around and say it is your opinion. That is not how that works. It is either objectively true or it is subjective, which is in itself an objective statement.

The logical conclusion given that position is that you cannot infer objectivity of any source since the framework is entirely subjective, thus removing your ability to make a case for what is true in any sense.


So which is it, an opinion you want to just keep saying over and over, or is your position a factual one that you want to defend? You can't have both as subjectivity and objectivity respectively are antitheses to each other.

I'm not here to argue with an opinion. I couldn't care less about those. I only want to deal with facts, not "inconvenient truth" that is just an opinion used to push an agenda. I'm leaving this thread until an actual argument is made that is thought through from start to finish, with conclusions and side-effects on other systems that this relates to. Until then, good luck talking to the others.

 

[Future~Sight]

All I've learnt from this topic is how to nail jello to a wall.
*continues buying tier 5s using money I clearly haven't worked hard for*

 

[Georgelzr]

Typical casual player. Dude, you need to hunt 23 hours per day, 50 minutes sleep, 5 minutes eat / drink and 5 minutes shower to increase your chance to get bad IV HR / Tier 100 pokes. Seriously, they need to reduce the tier 5 timer spawn to every 2 to 3 hours so people wont die to starvation, boringness or over nerdness ( whatever that means ).

I agree with this post and everything that Eletrofeak have said.
Admins,let s be seriously,isn t everything perfect we don t have to hide,i can t imagine what it will happen with my pokes if they have wrong nature ,i ll cry for them ,i invested a lot of time and others,i can t hunt again 100 hours *i have 500 at all * for an evee with good ivs and make it a good jolteon with a good nature,that is true pain and it means time
This is not a game for kids ,we are kids from 90^ ,some of us have childrens allready (Thanks God i don t have ,yet, my parents would have killed me).So ,please reduce the hours for/to
-increase population
-make the markert as it was ,,back in the days”
-have more good pokes
-making more battlers
-making more hunters and colectors
don t know what to say more,but i guess is enough.
I don t want to beg ,but is quite like a beg ,so please do something with the hours

 

[Rigaudon]

what will we do now? People want to have fun and try to have the best conditions right here right now. Life is all about the present not constant thinking of the future.

Some important information to know/consider before making any points:

*PWO's systems create room to grow/builds for the future almost exclusively.
...
If people make suggestions or respond without taking all of the above into mind, staff can still take opinions into account...BUT, we cannot directly make any factually-based decisions based on opinions. AKA, if the above is not accepted or at least acknowledged, I simply can't do much with the post because at that point I'd be abandoning factual stats/etc and embracing "does this feel right". That approach might work on an individual level but does not when we're trying to balance for a "1,000+ people play a day" level.
[later]
I am going to reiterate that PWO is building for the future, and I cannot take points that state "but we don't have that right now" at full value...I will only accept logic based on PWO's health in the future unless I am given temporary fixes that don't do much more than fix whatever is on the table. So for example completely lowering the economic ceiling by having everything jump down to T4 at max would have huge effects spanning years. Therefore, this particular suggestion would have to work for PWO for the indefinite future in your supporting points.

I say this with utmost respect, but this is the last chance I will personally give this particular suggestion topic. Staff's design motto is for quality and long-term health. I have laid this and other standards on the first page in detail. If a suggestion fails to meet those standards, it will not move forward onto serious inner-staff discussion and then the to-do list. I don't say or do this because I'm mean, stubborn, or scared of change, etc. I do this because PWO is currently balanced on a razor's edge and any major change (such as this one suggested) has to be proven absolutely solid before it gets queued.

Calling people who aren't even looking at/debating with us in this topic selfish won't really help anything, because every aspect of it (be it you or any other assumed selfish player) fails to present the information staff need. It is irrelevant, as I laid out some useful details and perspectives that would help with discussion earlier (that haven't been addressed yet). Staff work and implement design almost purely based on analysis of cause/effect and consequences, or at least that is the goal. I essentially need to know "What good things will happen? What bad things will happen? What is every possible feature/system/behavior this could effect and how?" as a starting point.

EDIT: Just realized I might have misunderstood this post, and that you were referring to people's spending habits. But, as I think I've explained ingame before...I don't want to reward people for thoughtlessly/impulsively buying stuff. I want to reward people who do think ahead of trends and make informed decisions. I drop hints of what is to come all the time/I literally will tell people to hold onto some specific things that will only increase in value later. The only argument I have received back about that is "well I and other people don't feel like putting in the effort/will sell everything immediately anyway." That then implies that people who do not put in effort or self-constraint should be rewarded anyway, which kind of defeats the point of a video game, let alone an MMO. Not to mention that it becomes literally impossible in a game that has player-to-player trade to prevent people who will think ahead of trends to get more profit anyhow.

Granted, that's still way besides the point and I'd rather we get on-topic. If it can't, I'm going to consider this declined for the time being.

 

[xPecT]

EDIT: Just realized I might have misunderstood this post, and that you were referring to people's spending habits. But, as I think I've explained ingame before...I don't want to reward people for thoughtlessly/impulsively buying stuff. I want to reward people who do think ahead of trends and make informed decisions. I drop hints of what is to come all the time/I literally will tell people to hold onto some specific things that will only increase in value later. The only argument I have received back about that is "well I and other people don't feel like putting in the effort/will sell everything immediately anyway." That then implies that people who do not put in effort or self-constraint should be rewarded anyway, which kind of defeats the point of a video game, let alone an MMO. Not to mention that it becomes literally impossible in a game that has player-to-player trade to prevent people who will think ahead of trends to get more profit anyhow.

Granted, that's still way besides the point and I'd rather we get on-topic. If it can't, I'm going to consider this declined for the time being.

I aggree. That's why i'm trying to explain that people that actually put effort into things like hunting should be rewarded somehow and i'm trying to find the solution to minimize the discrepancy between people that put effort into things everyday and can't get to the point they want and people that got the things years earlier because the things were easier then because of the flux of the pokemon was higher and medium average population online per minute was higher making it considerably easier ( not saying that they didn't put an effort then just saying that now even if you put an effort u might not achieve the goal ).
My idea can be imperfect but that's why we are discussing here in the first place.
Fact: Less people online + Token Store with restricted pokemon = Less pokemons floating around = Prices inflatuating for rarer pokemon.

Take into consideration that i'm not saying that TS should be restored to what it was. I'm just saying that it makes influence into this. I'm 100% with you with getting a solution in long term BUT that it starts fixing the problems there are right now. I consider that taking a decision based on the present and his influence on the future would be for the best , than just making a decision based purely in the future.

I have nothing to add for now. Thanks for taking this into consideration Rig.