Shiny IV change.

[HitmonFonty]

I think you guys missed Teck's explanation of how he would randomise the IVs of current shinies- if that were to be done. It wouldn't as much randomising as you seem to think, but changing from 28-31 to 22-31 and keeping the IV range the current shinies have. So a max IV shiny would at most lose one IV point and no more, whereas the others have a bit more range to change to.

If you accepted this the ability to change natures would be easier- Teck is rightly saying you shouldn't be able to keep the same ranges AND choose the perfect nature for your pokemon and easily adding further bonus to them. But allowing the IVs to be nerfed in line with the change would then allow natures to be easier to choose for all, which for future hunting purposes would make a lot more sense for everyone.

The suggested new range I most would want is 22-31. This is a range of 10. The current range is 28-31. This is a range of 4. Statistical stuff now so might get technical. I would break it down by a quarter percentile range. For the current range of 4, have it even across the board. 2 for each percentile. For the 22-31 have it broken down into a 2-3-3-2 format. So starting from the highest. 31 in the current range would translate to either a 30 or 31 in the new range (both in that top range). Current range 30 would become either 27, 28, or 29 in the new range (second to top range). Current ranges 29 would become either 24, 25, or 26. (Second to worse range). Finally current ranges lowest possibility, 28 would become either 22 or 23.

Now, if we did either 24-31 you would have a smaller range but a 1-2 displacement.
If we did a 20-31 We would have a larger range of 12 but a 1-3 displacement.

Where the iv would fall in the new range would be random to make it fair.

So if your pokemon was 31, 29, 28, 30, 31, 31 in the current system a sample of what It could be in the proposed system would be: 31, 25, 22, 28, 30, 31. or Worst case senario: 30, 24, 22, 27, 30, 30. Best case: 31, 26, 23, 29, 31, 31.

 

[psychosamm]

So can we like, make a decision here? This is getting to be a bit much even for me. Even if our current shinies were lowered by 1 point that is still unacceptable, especially when it comes to the speed category. Instead of just trying to talk us into everything just make a dang decision... If you're so hard set on doing everything your way then just do it instead of us wasting our time trying to make you understand why we don't want it that way. This whole discussion is going nowhere but circles and frankly i'm a bit over it. So unless something big comes up in this discussion i think i'm done replying. I think we have given more than enough input in this discussion for the staff to understand what we want.

 

[HitmonFonty]

So can we like, make a decision here? This is getting to be a bit much even for me. Even if our current shinies were lowered by 1 point that is still unacceptable, especially when it comes to the speed category. Instead of just trying to talk us into everything just make a dang decision... If you're so hard set on doing everything your way then just do it instead of us wasting our time trying to make you understand why we don't want it that way. This whole discussion is going nowhere but circles and frankly i'm a bit over it. So unless something big comes up in this discussion i think i'm done replying. I think we have given more than enough input in this discussion for the staff to understand what we want.

I was definitely not trying to extend the argument. lol Just pointing out that some here seem to be assuming the nerfing would be a lot more random and severe if it were implemented.

 

[BruNo1989]

How about this one:

31 stays 31.
30 = 26-31.
29 = 25-30.
28 = 24-29.

 

[MasterOfTheHunt]

In my post I meant randomize current natures and leave all ivs the same. I dont dislike tecks suggestion about each iv having a range but I dont like two things about it. 1 is the best case scenario should equal your current stats. The other has been pointed out that people will be losing out on that 31 iv they had spent tons of money obtaining and time just finding someone to sell it.
I would also like to know what would happen to 32 iv stata

 

[AlexLouisArmstrong]

It's incomprehensible to me why you absolutely have to lower existing shinies iv's in order to be able to change iv's... must it be one or the other? I'm just to repeat these most important things:
-new shinies are completely able to be just as good as older shinies even if i'v chances are 22-31... they could still easily find one with 29-31iv stats.
-lowering older shinies speed iv would be unfair as it would allow newer shinies with max speed to beat them 100% of the time instead of 50% of the time.
-People have worked to get the stats they want, if shinies were 22+ iv's people would still want a gyarados with max speed and uber atk to OHKO arcanine and Sala's, and they'd want a max speed arcanine with uber atk to OHKO tyranitars.. And they will get them... just like we did before. As Darcia says ford won't call you about your mustang and tell you they're going to come downgrade you to a 3 cylinder.

 

[Orean]

snip

It is systematically possible for IVs to remain constant as changes are made to the IV-determination RNG (since they're already saved into the database).

If the IVs of existing Pokemon are altered (not confirmatively saying that they will be), it's meant to cultivate equality between both the existing and future players, as PWO moves into the future. The top-notch 4-IV range, prescribed to shinies, is something that the much of the current staff does not agree with remaining in the game, and would be of a wishful do-over to prevent them from being cultivated in the first place. When something that has been advantageously produced in the game for this long, due to a rather regrettable system, it's important to be mindful of the potential inequality it may cause in regards to newer players—those who wouldn't have experienced the same breeding grounds for the defaultedly "uber/epic" shinies that were obtained before them.

It's true that newer shinies in this formula would have the capacity to the achieve the stats of the pre-reformulation shinies, but also under a less likely threshold than what the present/past shinies have already achieved. If the current shinies were produced on the same system in proposal, then simply having the higher end of luck, under the same chances that newer shinies would be bound by, is all that would make them statistically inferior.

If implemented, it'd be inevitably divisive, due to how hard many players worked for their shinies, under the foresight that their stats wouldn't be impermanent; which is why we're looking for the most negotiable change before doing so. Existing shinies would have the same chance as each other for the IV offset (as Teck hinted), within the same range for newer shinies. Unfortunately, this would not recompense those who invested into shiny Pokemon for their max stats, thus it's rather infeasible to have a collateral offset, should this change go through; that's a concern I find very understandable, but it's an ultimate equilibrium that would need to be juggled between both current and future shinies.

tl;dr (sorry, last tl;dr post of this thread hopefully): The shiny reduction is meant to promote balance as the current and newer players intertwine, not to give the older players, who invested into current shinies, the short-end of the stick. Even under the most negotiable change, I could foresee understandable resentment if this change went through, but one decision or another will orient more balance for the game in the long run.

Moreover, I can be considered in a grey zone in regards to changing the current shiny's IVs; I'm not saying it should go through, but I'm giving reasons for people to consider, as some may not look beyond their own personal losses (not going to point fingers at anyone, but it's an easy mindset to have). It's the future playerbase that needs to be considered as well, not just the present one.

 

[EcoWOLFrb]

That's all well and good, but me having a chance at still having similar stats for my shinies that I've worked hard to get wouldn't be ok. Certain pokemon just wouldn't work without certain stats. Now if you did vladslav suggested which was -

31 stays 31.
30 = 26-31.
29 = 25-30.
28 = 24-29.

then I wouldn't mind too terribly much as my kingdra, gyarados, arcanine ect all with max speed wouldn't be effected so harshly. I will say that i'd be upset if my atk fell on arca or gyarados but if it's for the sake of compromise I can deal with it. one more thing I'd like to add is that 32 stays 32. There are non shiny 32iv speed pokemon so for the people who paid millions for shiny versions it'd be wrong to change them.

 

[LanceDM]

I say no to this:

31 stays 31.
30 = 26-31.
29 = 25-30.
28 = 24-29.

For the love of god, i'd rather keeping the ivs as they are as final point, otherwise we'll contradict what we've been saying ... Im ok with natures being random to ''balance'' or you can distrubute a low %% on the current shinys (lets say 1,5 % on every stat? just throwing something in) . They are not gods, but we've paid to have what we have, i've been working for 5 years to buy ''1'' pokemon, can you understand a bit why im so dissapointed? Its ''1'' pokemon! But enough to ruin 5 years of playing !! And how can ''1'' pokemon make the difference in battles ? Sorry if I had a rage attitude, but this is just patetic at some point... I've said what I could in every post, Is not that hard to understand... Nothing will change, you'll bring a lappy to kill a dragonite, you'll bring a jolteon to kill starmie and the list goes.

If you like to think in the future, then close the shiny chance, if I were a new player and I see players getting 1 shiny UC in less than a week (something I couldn't), I can tell you right now that I won't waste more time playing a game that will be owned by people that has big pockets.
On a side note, the idea of changing current shiny ivs will also affect token store shinys, they'll be OP so it will show one more time what Im saying. This is too messy and has many tangling for being an idea that in one way or another is still not as good as others ideas you've had, if you see people not getting agreed, why you insist ? If you have the chance of testing, lets see if new players complain about us first! Then you can come and tell me that I was wrong.

EDIT* Shinys gave me goals to keep playing this game btw... And no, if you think what I think you're thinking, I have ltos of non-shinys with epic ivs... most of them with S stats... but Im still against this, sometimes you say that PWO isnt supposed to be like the Nintendo games, and sometimes not... can you make a choice? Im getting confused...

 

[EcoWOLFrb]

I agree with you mati, I see no reason for there to be changes in current shinnies when people will just look for the best 22+iv shinies anyway and be likely just as good as our shinies... I worked hard for a lot of my pokemon and i don't want to lose out. I don't know why we need to be at a disadvantage first before everyone can choose natures once in a while. I'm simply saying that if it HAD to be like that... that's the most compromise I'm willing to give my approval to. And I know plenty of players, staff, and former staff who feel the exact same way.

 

[LanceDM]

I agree with you mati, I see no reason for there to be changes in current shinnies when people will just look for the best 22+iv shinies anyway and be likely just as good as our shinies... I worked hard for a lot of my pokemon and i don't want to lose out. I don't know why we need to be at a disadvantage first before everyone can choose natures once in a while. I'm simply saying that if it HAD to be like that... that's the most compromise I'm willing to give my approval to. And I know plenty of players, staff, and former staff who feel the exact same way.

I hope so :-\ !

 

[CheckeredZebra]

Let's play with natures, shall we?

Each IV gives about 1 stat point by level 100. So a loss of 4 IVs will give you -4 in that stat. With the current option of a MILD Iv roulette (the system that gave ranges based on the current IV), you will lose at most 5-6 or so stats. (if I understand correctly.)

Natures boost and decrease a given stat by 10. If you are given a random nature, you have a 1-2/25 chance to get something that won't dampen or destroy your pokemon's viability. If you can WORK FOR a new nature in return for taking a chance on IVs, You will make up those 4/5 lost IV points in that super important stat and then GAIN a few more than you already had. This is especially true for pokemon that focus on only a few IVs (Kazam, Skarm, Jolteon, Salamence, etc)

Let's play around in veekun, shall we? (Optional read)

Spoiler

Using dragonite because I'm sure most regular PvPers have shelled out money for a good one.

Shiny Drago: level 100.
First: Max IVs (31) and a neutral nature.
HP: 323
ATT: 304
DEF: 95
SP ATT: 236
SP DEF: 236
SPEED: 196

Second: all 26IV Shiny drago and a decent nature. (I'm guessing people would want + spd, -sp att? I'm not good with dragos, sorry).
HP: 318
ATT: 299
DEF: 95
Sp Att (-10): 207
SP Def: 231
SPEED(+10): 210

The second drago is faster than the one people shelled out millions for and lost about 5 stats in attack. You could also pretend the drago lost a few more IVs in att/def but retained its 31 speed. Add onto that a [+ att, -sp att] nature and you have something pretty good.

Now imagine if your drago kept all 31 IVs but got a bad nature, such [-speed +sp def]. And you couldn't change it, ever. You'd be just as angry then as you are imagining yourself to be if your IVs are dropped.

So while I'm no drago expert, a previously expensive 31 IV-retained dragonite (or anything worth money, really) could be royally screwed with randomized natures.

Not only that, but again, through a random nature quest the change could be fair to old and new players.

I'm sick of people not trying to help refine a fair system. To be frank, if I, despite putting up what seems to be several logical and fair suggestions up here am ignored for "keep IVs randomize nature" arguments, I'm gonna be pissed. Mainly because I haven't been able to discuss the pros/cons of this system with anyone else, and I'd like to get through this subject before I side there.

EDIT: If you guys want to help preserve your goods, I suggest natures over IVs.

 

[Jinji]

Checkered, your objective comparison of how natures could aid a Pokémon with lower IVs or destroy a higher one, makes more sense to me than the majority of other posts I've had the willpower to read within this entire topic.

 

[psychosamm]

Zebs i think your idea is awesome, i said that from the start with your idea. But if its about "Lower current shiny's ivs then add a quest to do random natures" then i don't really agree, as our pokemon are ours and it would be wrong to tamper with them. I'll point to Darcia's car analogy, Ford won't call you up and tell you they're downgrading your engine after you bought it. But if all natures are initially randomized but we have the option of this quest then i'll be more than happy. These are my thought's on the matter:

And if i hear this selfish greedy crap again i'm gonna blow a gasket. Honestly it only makes sense, and it would be for everyone.

 

[EcoWOLFrb]

Zebra I don't want to be looked at as the pessimist or bad guy here for disagreeing with you (as you know I agree with your idea for random natures quest) but in my opinion your logic on the matter is flawed. Sure giving natures would enable you to have a net gain if the current shinies were lowered in one particular stat... but the problem is that it wouldn't make a difference, because some of the other people might choose the same nature with the new shinies, and have an advantage because that stat is max and yours is now say 30. Let's just be honest here and crack down to the point... the one major stat that everyone I've spoken to (myself included) is worried about is speed. Here's the thing, if our max speed pokemon are dropped to 30 and someone catches a good stated shiny with 22+ iv's and applies the same nature as ours that pokemon is now 100% capable of beating ours every time. It's the VERY same issue... the natures make absolutely no difference. Here's a visual aid:

Old shiny: 29 28 31 31 29 31 gets it's iv's dropped to 27 26 31 29 26 30 then natures are added so +/- 10-12 iv to chosen stats = 27 16 31 29 26 40
New shiny: 26 22 28 26 22 31 which BTW it could be even better, then natures are added so +/- 10-12 iv to chosen stats= 26 18 28 26 22 41

Which of these shinies do you think will win? The newer one... which is WRONG right? I certainly think so, everyone else I know thinks so. It seems to be only the staff that have a problem with how things are in reality, everyone else is just desperately trying to compromise so they don't end up screwed. I've not heard one single player complain about the shinies before now.

I had a discussion with some influential members of the battle community last night, and we concluded that a major part of this discussion was to try to make great pokemon harder to acquire, I'm sure the blunt staff will agree. What we don't understand is why they need to be harder to get... there aren't more than a handful of people who have a TON of amazing battlers, so why 1- ruin those battlers that they've worked YEARS to accumulate, and 2- make it exponentially harder to acquire those pokemon. One of my friends "Dajustin13" has been hunting for hundreds of hours in dragons den looking for shiny dratini and bagon. He's had no luck and is likely to continue to have no luck... why would we not reward his efforts with a good shiny pokemon? I think he would literally cry if he found S Dratini and it was all 22iv (some token store dratini's have better iv's). Now I've been compromising and saying that lowering the shiny iv rate could be alright... but in reality deep inside I still don't think it would be a good idea. It's not like the battle scene is DOMINATED by shinies, quite the opposite it's dominated by HR and VR pokemon with epic stats. They don't need to be lowered like they were with the 20% boost because they're not OP. The noobs don't need us to be at a handicap by removing the usefulness of our shinies... I wouldn't call that competition if I were a noob.

TL;DR- Read it all.

 

[BruNo1989]

Future Shinies' values:
Wild-caught Shiny 24-31.
Token Store Shiny 15-31.

Chart to re-write ivs from old shinies:
32 = 32, or 31 allowing choose nature.
31 stays 31.
30 = 26-31.
29 = 25-30.
28 = 24-29.

Nature: +10 and -10 in their respective atrr.
Even newly fresh caught and old pokemons will have their nature sets to 0.Current owners can get a try for a random nature at playerdex.
For the first try, nature will not costs Nature Points meaning, if a nature has 0 value there will be no cost to change.
Nature can randomly be changed through playerdex using Nature Points.

Nature Points:
Are points which can be earned once upon completion of some in-game.
Quests can be anything from a item as quest item or even a pokemon as quest item.
Quests subject may change according with time.

 

[CheckeredZebra]

I don't want to be looked at as the pessimist or bad guy here for disagreeing with you

Please. I've been begging for people to disagree with me for several pages. You're my hero!

I'm going to clear something up before I go further though.

Spoiler

The balance is going to the new players only, and the ones that never bought something over 500m.

have in all my post tried to do what is best for whole community. Both vets and new players. Maybe I wasn't but that's not for lack of trying.

but acceptance doesn't mean that new and new options should be opened for them to get even bigger advantage over average players.

The noobs don't need us to be at a handicap by removing the usefulness of our shinies...

This discussion has almost nothing to do with new players, in reality.

As vets, it will take a good while for anyone to really catch up to us. That is just an inherent advantage of being here for longer; we've had more time to do stuff. I think one of the inherent fallacies people are mentioning in this topic is that "new" players will catch up to "old" ones too easily, or that "old" players aren't being fair to new players, etc.

In reality, nobody is competing with the new players in terms of this update. We're all talking about top-of-the-line battlers. That means you would be mostly competing between yourselves to find a new shiny with 31 IVs. NOT new players. New players aren't going to beat you before the people on your own level would. They probably won't even be able to afford a pokemon team like that for a year or two.
Your competition is the people who are posting here, who constantly PvP, who DO sink loads of $$$ (that aforementioned 500mil) for that 1 IV Not some faceless, potential newbie upstart.

I've been focusing on compromises mostly. I'd have to think about "IV change vs. No IV change" more before commenting on it. But I believe you are correct that the battle scene is dominated by uber normal pokemon. I only use 2 shinies on my team.

But if I did have the opportunity...I'd pay an arm and a leg for a "wild" Pory2 and Blazi. XD
Why? Because they'd be better by default, despite me having one of the better Blazis in the game. I'd have very little chance to get anything that could compete with those shiny stats. Statistically speaking, the shinies will almost always be better, excluding the times one IV in speed makes a huge difference (which is not every PvP pokemon, obviously. My Pory and Blazi don't need +1 stat point to go first against their matchups.)

It's not like the battle scene is DOMINATED by shinies, quite the opposite it's dominated by HR and VR pokemon with epic stats.

The only reason shinies aren't dominating is because the main PvP pokemon are extremely hard to find as wild shinies and cost a buttload. (Of which a few of you have actually spent that buttload on, leading to the problem we're discussing in the first place.) Now, the ones that don't cost your soul? I see them all the time. Kingdra for example. So while they don't dominate the battle scene, it's not because uber normals are just as viable. It's because the PvP viable ones that aren't shiny are near impossible to get with wild shiny stats. If people could get common/rare dratini or some such, the battle scene would be FLOOOOODEEED with them. Because most of them are going to be better. (And look cool, too!)

The only reason it's balanced right now is because of the inherent rarity to PvP-viable ratio that just happened to be there. The actual gameplay balance is, at most, iffy and rarity based. If you made PvP pokemon common, people would be forced get shiny versions or get off the battlefield.

I think he would literally cry if he found S Dratini and it was all 22iv (some token store dratini's have better iv's).

There was a post earlier asking how players would feel if the HRs stat range stayed the same but everyone was like "Nooooo" for some weird reason.

Everyone simply wants to use their shinies in battles because it's cool/fun to do so. This is the real problem, right? People want to protect their hard-earned, battle HRs/VRs because they're expensive and hard to replace. An understandable sentiment! But how much of them would be destroyed by a few IV losses when allowed a better nature? Only the HRs/VRs that rely on a specific speed IV. Suddenly, the pool is smaller. (And how many of them would be destroyed by an ill-fitting nature? That's an ocean's worth.)

The only arguable flaw with my debate is that any hard-to-replace super shiny rare pokemon that depends on 31 IVs to be competitive might be beaten later by a different person (likely a vet) that invested in a faster IV pokemon. Now my question is, how many people have a nearly impossible-to-replace pokemon, that they use regularly, that's viability relies on single a max IV?


EDIT: I made some very...strange typos, lol. Also, adding a tl'dr.

Tl;dr

Spoiler

1. People affected by this aren't competing against newbies, they're competing between themselves and their friends. 2. PvP Shinies would completely dominate the battle scene if they weren't so incredibly rare 3. Only a few people who bought specific, hard-to-replace HR/VR shinies that rely on +1 stats would have ruined efforts 4. The amount of shinies/effort that would be ruined by random natures instead of random IVs would be a crapton.

 

[EcoWOLFrb]

Well it all depends on the battle trends, not all of my shinies are currently competent in battle, but I hope in the future especially with the release of TMs will be. When certain pokemon are popular you're going to see more match ups between them, gengar on gengar wasn't popular before the tournament but now it's going on every other match. Some of my max speed shinies that would be heavily effected if the speed was changed AND would be costly to replace are: Arcanine, Gengar, Ninetailes, alakazam, and mamoswine. I also have 32iv speed shinies that I paid higher than anyone else was willing to pay at the time specifically to give myself a competitive advantage like kingdra and crobat. Kingdra needs this to be competitive with the top battlers which is why I paid 140m for it. That 140m was hard to earn and would be wrong to simply erase. So if all of those shinies were made to be 30 iv speed or even half of them... it would cost me a significant amount to replace, which isn't fair by any means. I don't expect microsoft to call me up about my computer to tell me they're going to lower the RAM on it and if I want to buy another one with the SAME RAM as my previous laptop I'll have to dish out another couple hundred bucks. Pokemon like my shiny lapras and mati's S Drago wouldn't be specifically effected since they're not max speed anyway but why do they need to be nerfed if regular lapras and regular dragonite can beat them already?

But it's not only the money but the emotional attachment I have to these pokemon. When I get pokemon from my friends I cherish them and having to replace them would hurt. My mamoswine is my OT, my Arcanine I got from my friend Charmanda and it has his OT which reminds me of him every time I see it and I never want to get rid of it, I also got my ninetailes from him... My gengar and S Lapras are from dovee (not that i'd be replacing lapras, she does her job regardless of the iv's) and they mean a lot to me.

 

[CheckeredZebra]

Eco, I think those are fair sentiments and will think about them before discussing further. Out of curiosity, how would you feel if the speed IV was not changed on existing shinies, the rest of the IVs were put in the 22 range, and a nature quest was available?

EDIT:
That's about the only system that I could see not screwing up huge amounts of player's work while somewhat allowing an update such as this.

 

[EcoWOLFrb]

Tl;dr

Spoiler

1. People affected by this aren't competing against newbies, they're competing between themselves and their friends. 2. PvP Shinies would completely dominate the battle scene if they weren't so incredibly rare 3. Only a few people who bought specific, hard-to-replace HR/VR shinies that rely on +1 stats would have ruined efforts 4. The amount of shinies/effort that would be ruined by random natures instead of random IVs would be a crapton.

Just want to reply to these specifically
1- What's the real difference? Either way some of us would have to replace our hard fought for shinies, and some wouldn't which is unfair. That isn't to say that all shinies should be nerfed instead of random chances, that is to say that no shinies should be nerfed.
2- You said it yourself, they don't dominate the battle scene so why nerf them at all? Why do we need to choose between random natures or iv nerfing if they're so rare it would hardly make a difference. That is where the noobs that you said didn't play much of a part come into play... that is why we're saying it's catering to the noobs. Because the staff keep saying it would only be fair for them.
3- So just because it only would effect a few of the players means that it's ok? If you agree that it would ruin the efforts of a few people then why is it being considered, it's a double negative. You're systematically destroying loyal players who have struggled for what they have while insisting it's for the greater good of the game in total, but at the same time agreeing that it would only effect those few players dramatically....
4- Same question that's been asked over and over by all of my friends and mysefl... why would we absolutely have to randomize natures without the ability to change them if there's no IV nerf for existing shinies... especially since new shinies would be fully capable of having the same iv's as current shinies with a little luck. I'd particularly like a good answer to this question.