Eaty

Hello! In the next client–server update, we are adding Pokémon Tags. These can be created, edited, deleted, and assigned however you like. Additionally, you: can use a selection of emotes for your tags. can search for your tagged Pokémon with tag=. can assign any number of tags to a Pokémon. cannot delete a Pokémon with at least one tag. can see all tags assigned to a Pokémon by hovering over the tag icon in the storage. Only Pokémon with at least one tag will display the icon.

Hello! If you want to revisit the last box you had open before closing the client, you can click the arrows next to the search bar. The undo button lets you return to your last visited boxes and search results.

Please be honest. Don't blame a bug if there wasn't one, because our team will spend time and resources trying to find it. We won't recover a single Pokémon if it turns out that what you said isn't true.

Hello, we intentionally set the timer to 10 seconds because we expect a minimum level of attention, and we believe that 10 seconds is more than enough time.

Hello, your suggestion does make sense if you only use it on Pokémon that already have good stats, but as you correctly pointed out, IV-Reduce Tickets often make more sense in that case. In the scenario you described, HP-Reroll Tickets make less sense, and they weren’t designed for that. But HP-Reroll Tickets are more useful for Legendaries with poor stats. We don’t plan to change the HP-Reroll Ticket or make it cheaper.

Hey, I don't have any plans to implement that. I'm generally not a fan of players being able to release the Pokémon in their team anywhere.

Refunded.

I replaced it with the regular S Moltres Mount.

Implemented in the next client.

Implemented in the next client.

Implemented in the next client.

Implemented mass release in the next client.

Implemented in the next client.

Implemented in the next client.

Implemented in the next client.

At this point, it’s just spreading misinformation and rage bait. That’s why I’m closing the thread now. If this happens more often, I’ll have to take further action.

Absolutely nonsensical post. I can understand the frustration that comes up when there haven’t been updates for a while, but I’ve repeatedly provided updates explaining the longer wait time and also posted an extensive upcoming changelog for the next release, so you are not left in the dark without information. The text fix in the guild tab you mentioned is also part of the changelog. https://pokemonrevolution.net/forum/topic/3146-update-logs/page/25/#comment-1602280 On top of that, I posted multiple status updates, expanded the changelog, and even shared videos of the box rework, the actual reason for the longer wait. I think we did a lot to keep you all properly informed. And as I already said many times before, the forms have no impact on the release. Artists work on them separately from the rest of the release, and we should be grateful that they dedicate so much of their time to giving us such a wide range of high-quality forms. That should never be seen as a point of criticism in that context.

Hello, I don’t quite see the advantage of your suggestion. If I understand correctly, you want players to no longer have the option of whether or not their name shows up in the global form announcements. Either everyone is shown, or no one is. But what’s the benefit? Even if we displayed all players, from my perspective that wouldn’t really change anything.

Hey, we thought about adding more PvP formats before. We also monitored how it went in other games, and unfortunately, formats like UnderUsed were barely played and in some games discontinued. I can definitely see us occasionally adding a new format for a season, but there are no plans to add a permanent format alongside OverUsed and Random Battles, at least not until our PvP community grows significantly. But if it ever comes to that, then we won’t add a custom, but an existing format.

For some of these forms, players had to complete large quests that were time-consuming and exhausting. The reward was a form that was exclusive to that year, and that’s why I want to keep it that way. I wouldn’t be against making the old quests repeatable or adding new quests, but the rewards should be new forms or chromas instead of the old forms. But that’s something that falls more into the area of our content teams than mine, though.

I absolutely see the usefulness of this and agree that it’s a good idea. But it’s not that simple from a technical standpoint with how the Pokedex is currently implemented. It would require a bigger rework, and right now I just don’t have the time for that. I’m also not sure if I’ll have the time and motivation for it in the future.

Hi, we already made some changes in the past that will allow us to anonymize PvP matches in the future. This would only affect the opponent’s name, not their Pokemon. I feel like in this thread people were often talking past each other. As far as I understood, it’s only about usernames, not anonymizing the team itself. Team Preview and Enemy Team View will stay the same. The idea is just to prevent situations where you instantly know all of your opponent’s moves and preferred held items because a guildmate played them earlier. I do plan to implement this in the future, but priorities are currently elsewhere, so it may still take some time.

Hey, as you already said, the auction house is on my to-do list, but I haven’t worked on it yet. Right now, I’m reworking the storage system, which will also benefit the auction house since I can reuse the new filter system for it. It probably won’t be my focus for a while, since there are other projects I currently prioritize, like the server merge, multi-character accounts, and account variables. I do plan to implement an auction house, but it would be more like in Path of Exile, where trades still have to be done manually. I want to keep player interaction intact. The auction house would guarantee that the player actually owns the Pokemon/items and prevent trading until the auction is over, but it wouldn’t handle the trade itself. I’d like to comment on these mechanics first. I don’t have an issue with mechanics like IV rerolls or lootboxes, but only as long as they don’t involve real money. I think other games follow a different philosophy, which is why it’s so common there, in my opinion. I’m not a fan of the idea of changing the IVs of regular Pokemon. We allow it for Legendaries, because each player can only catch them once. That said, I do understand the frustration with forms and shinies. I have a few ideas that might help make things more tolerable in the future, but nothing concrete at the moment. But it'll definitely go in a different direction than you suggested. A quest helper is definitely planned, but most of the work for that will fall on our scripters. Right now, though, it’s not high on the priority list.

Hey, I never want to create a situation again where there’s one mount that’s objectively better than all others. We already had that in the past with the Jetski mounts, which were faster than every other surf mounts. Players naturally ended up using only these, even if they actually found them pretty ugly. That’s why I decided to make mounts that can be used both on water and on land slower when used on land. This way, players have a choice, either prioritize comfort over land speed, or use the mount mainly in areas where there’s a lot of alternating land and water.

This is just my personal view, even though I’m saying we. If the other PvP Coordinators see it differently, they’ll surely respond as well. When it comes to PvP bans, it’s not about what the majority of players want but about what makes the PvP meta in the current state healthier. A lot of this was backed up with numbers showing how often Pokémon are used across different rating brackets and how they perform. Alomomola very quickly rose to the #1 most used Pokémon in normal ranked PvP. Players in lower rating brackets performed relatively poorly with it, which likely gave many the impression that Alomomola with Flip Turn isn’t that strong. But the picture looks very different starting in the 200+ rating range. There are many teammate combinations with Alomomola plus Flip Turn that reach a 60%+ win rate or even much higher. We unfortunately can’t rely on the majority opinion, since it has no real substance. We need to focus on the strong arguments for and against a ban and then weigh what makes the most sense. In this case, we also need to consider how Alomomola with Flip Turn performs in the hands of skilled players and use that as the basis. We have given players multiple opportunities over a long time to bring up arguments against a ban, but the arguments made weren’t convincing enough to justify keeping it allowed.