Leaderboard
Popular Content
Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/25/20 in all areas
-
So I was thinking about the World Quest and how it works, recently I've seen a few world quests being failed. I was thinking of a reassurance clause for some players who get 3% of the total IVs which in return once the World Quest is completed then 2 tickets will be given, you have to understand this is alot of time spent and it's very disheartening not getting the 2 tickets becuase the whole server failed the quest, so I suggest a sort of compromise where even if failed, those with 3% of the total IVs will still get 1 ticket, rather than the 2. However this is just my opinion on the matter and some will agree or disagree. I hope others agree to this and hope the Dev's/CS would implament this awesome change. Thank you all for reading, have a great day. P.S. if you do not know what the World Quest is, take a read of this Guide.2 points
-
2 points
-
I think those who disagree don't understand how long it takes just to get 3% on a WQ with over 100K IVs. I spent around 14-15 hours online yesterday and only got up to 2,4% percentage in the end. If I was lucky, I met a Skiddo every 45 minutes and if I was really unlucky, up to 2 hours between each. And the fact the IVs where trash on top of all that, is even worse. I think a fair compensation for those who got at least 2,5% or above should be rewarded nonetheless of the completion of the World Quest. The fair amount of time I put in on my first WQ yesterday, was a waste of time in the end, because of the special outbreak also taking place in the midst of things. I could have done other productive things, but I wanted to try out the WQ for the first time and it saddens me to see people ditching the WQ, because of the reward not being better than a special outbreak and because of that, all my 14-15 hours invested was nothing but an unproductive time-space.2 points
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
Username : Noturbusiness Server : Silver Country/Timezone : New Zealand / GMT+121 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
Username: waleed1301 Server: Gold Country/Timezone: England (GMT + 1) Good luck to eveyone participating.1 point
-
I have no strong feelings either way. Regardless of the result, I would like to see a robust procedure set up for suspect testing at this opportunity. Better late than never.1 point
-
With all due respect, the current policy with regard to PvP has no basis in suspect tests and bears almost no relation to the concept. Suspect tests are conducted to gather information on the Pokemon, move, item, or ability in question. Banning Baton Pass before any consideration is not a suspect test. Asking if a Pokemon that has been available for two weeks but is difficult to access (reroll tickets + ability capsule) should be banned is not a suspect test. There has never been a suspect test on PRO, because half the voters in any given test have never played with nor against the thing being tested. There needs to be a real mechanism for suspect testing, preferably one which artificially inflates the usage of the topic in question - as the things the community at large consider broken are inaccessible to many. If staff prefer to continue to manage the metagame by decree, that is perfectly fine, but neither this nor other recent actions have resembled a suspect test at all.1 point
-
1 point