Leaderboard

I have two suggestions that I think could make auctions clearer for players and potentially reduce work for Trade Moderators. 1. Making transfer responsibility more visible This first suggestion is more of an idea in theory than something I strongly feel needs to change. Personally, I'm perfectly happy with keeping the Cross Server section as it is. The only reason I bring it up is because players don't always read the auction rules consistently, particularly the rules explaining who has the responsibility to transfer in a Cross Server auction. If everyone took the time to read and understand those rules, then there really wouldn't be much of an issue. In practice, though, we know that not everyone does. Some players may see "Cross Server" and simply understand it as meaning that offers are accepted from both Gold and Silver. What they may miss is the additional responsibility regarding who has to make the transfer once the auction ends. So, purely as an alternative idea, perhaps the forum could keep just the Gold and Silver auction sections, which would indicate where the Pokémon is currently located, and then make transfer responsibility part of the visible auction details. Transfer responsibility: Buyer / Seller This could appear alongside the usual Start Price, Minimum Raise, Insta Price, Duration, etc. That would make the arrangement immediately clear without requiring someone to already know what the Cross Server rules say. The Gold/Silver section tells bidders where the Pokémon is currently located, while the transfer field tells them exactly who is responsible for moving servers. Anyone considering bidding can then make their own assessment about whether the auction is worth participating in based on the Pokémon's location and whether they would personally need to transfer. Again, I'm not necessarily suggesting that Cross Server needs to be removed. I'm happy with how it currently works when the rules are understood. My only reason for raising the idea is that we can't realistically expect every player to read every rule consistently. Making something as important as transfer responsibility visible directly within the auction details could prevent confusion before it happens. 2. Prevent players from bidding more than they actually have My second suggestion is more of a development/coding issue and may only be something that can be considered further down the line. Ideally, players should only be able to place auction bids that they can actually afford. If there were some way for the forum auction system to communicate with the dashboard/account system and check a player's available balance, a bid could automatically be rejected if the player attempts to bid more than they currently have. For example, if a player has 1m available and attempts to bid 1.1m, the system simply wouldn't accept the bid. However, this shouldn't be limited to a player's Pokédollar balance, as they may have other assets available to make up the value of their bid, provided those payment methods are accepted under the auction contract. Taking recognised alternative payment methods into account as well. If things like Coin Capsules, IV Reroll Tickets and other commonly accepted forms of payment were tracked against an account, their value could be calculated based on the value of each set out in the auction contract. That way, when someone places a bid, the system could calculate their overall available value rather than looking at Pokédollars alone. Example: Lacomus - 5.000.000 - 2026-09-08 09:52:36 (4m Pokédollars + 2 Coin Capsules at 500k each = 5m total). If a player intends to place a bid using Pokédollars alongside another asset, they can select the relevant checkboxes for Pokédollars, Coin Capsules, IV Reroll Tickets, and other eligible assets, then enter the exact amount of each asset they wish to include. Before the bid is submitted, the system verifies that the player has the specified amounts available and automatically checks the calculation to confirm that the total bid value is sufficient. Once validated, the bid is submitted with a complete breakdown of the transaction, stating each asset and quantity included in the bid. It gives the seller information on what they would be receiving and how the bidder intends to make up the value of their bid, making things clear from an informational perspective when it comes time to complete the transaction. I'm not sure how practical that level of integration would be technically, or how difficult it would be to implement, but it would prevent invalid bids at the point they're made rather than leaving Trade Moderators to deal with the consequences afterwards. Update (08/09/2026): I've edited and expanded on this idea, as I didn't go into it as thoroughly as I could have originally, to cover all bases in terms of what players may have available across their total assets and how that could be calculated. The downside is that taking all of this into account would make the coding and the way the system checks and calculates a player's available assets more complicated, therefore taking considerably more time and effort to implement. But it was just an idea and something that could maybe be implemented one day. The next level would be for the system to go a step further and automate the transactions themselves once all the relevant calculations and checks have been done, although again, the time and complexity involved would need to be considered.

The entire alt acc argument doesn't even matter. Same as for valuable items such as CC, RRs, etc. so I don't even understand why this was a part of the comments at all. Either you have the needed payment method on the account you are bidding from or the bid is invalid, it's that simple. It's very clearly stated within the rules. +1 overall but a massive -1 to the automating transaction idea

+1

Then I +1 every word of this now ^^

Ready to take orders now, customers!

Update: I've expanded on my second point after @Godredeye and @Magikarpsh raised the point about other assets (what else counts towards a player's available balance). I've added to my original answer to cover that and better explain what I meant about preventing players from bidding more than they actually have.

I’m big +1 on the transfer responsibility thing However about money it’s not as straightforward as it seems because as Godredeye said, you could have more money stashed on alt account / borrow from friends / Pay with CC’s and that would not show up in your actual bidding account balance (+ reading rules may not be that obvious for the whole community, it sounds like common sense that you should not bid money you don’t have 👀)

+1 and -1. I understand your point, and I think the first suggestion is reasonable. However, I don't think the second suggestion is possible to implement fairly. Let's say I bid 100m on a Pokémon. I may not personally have 100m in cash at that moment, but does that mean I can't afford to buy a Pokémon for 100m? Not necessarily. I could hold my wealth in items such as CC, RR, RC, or other valuable items that I can sell. Because of this, it's very difficult to accurately determine a player's actual worth based solely on the money they currently have available.

Hi there @Phuprika! I'd like to extend an apology for the inconvenience you've faced so far, I know how unpleasant it feels to be unknowingly stuck in a quest with the feel you're unable to progress As aforementioned by Mysticwind, you do in fact need the caught data for every non-legendary Pokemon in Hoenn. The change that you are thinking of is actually the removal of Evolution data within most quest's requirements. Hopefully once you have the caught data of the remaining Pokemon, you'll be smooth sailing through the rest of the quest and the proud owner of either Latias or Latios. Hopefully this finds you well and your issue has been sorted, though if it hasn't and you're in need of further assistance, please don't hesitate to let me know! Warmest regards, Auroraveil

Are you sure you have all the gen3 pokemon caught data excluding legendaries ? It is a requirement to be able to pick one of the eon and go into the island.

I do understand that alt accounts and story services could be affected. However, people should be motivated to finish the story themselves, or alternatively, the price for story services could increase. Implementing this would also have a positive side effect. It would reduce alt accounts farming event islands without even having finished half of the story. It was intentional that I didn't mention that part initially, but overall, the benefits heavily outclass the negatives in my opinion. For me, the shortcut "PRO" refers to the fact that the game should be challening, not easy. "If you don't want your Astrella Day 1 experience ruined, then simply don't look up a guide for it, such things will always exist." yes, but the game shouldn't be designed arround making rushing the default. Astrella was just an example, since it will be the new region for those of us who have already finished all the currently available regions. But for brand new players, that initial experience starts in Kanto, Johto, Hoenn and Sinnoh. In the past, there used to be play time requirements before you could obtain specific things, though those were eventually removed. I assume the staff members who originally implemented them envisioned an environment where players would actually spend time in the game rather than rushing through everything. As I have said many times, for me, this is an actual game, and not just a battle simulator where you want to skip the story and use shortcuts or purchases to immpediately get the Pokemon or Items you want. Doing that removes the entire point of the gameplay and the grinding aspect, it takes away the hard player experience.

Hello @Barsonball Sorry for the Delay, Please complete the trade within the next 48 hours, if you still need help after the deadline, let me know by using the report button. Do not forget to post trade evidence. best of luck, Glitterwing

May I please have this one restored, I accidentally deleted it when I was cleaning my box.

Hello @1villain Usernames are permanently reserved once registered. This applies even if the account is later banned, the name cannot be reused for a new account, and it cannot be reassigned to an existing account via rename, even with coins. Ban status does not change this. If your account is banned, you can appeal the ban, and a staff member will review it.