Dontea

Hence why all OP legendaries are banned. Read the thread Chameleon linked, all legendaries over 600 base stats are banned, all Pokemon (bar the legendaries) at 600 base stats or lower are player-obtainable, you can obtain pokemon with more base stats then Raikou. Let the man have something unique for serving a year as staff, really dont see why all players have a stick up their [Censored] about it to be honest. Theres legit hundreds of ways to counter a Raikou, and if you cant, you shouldnt really see Ranked PvP as something to be frustrated over as it just isnt for you if you fail to find a counter for an electric pokemon. Your "notification that staff can use these pokemon in ranked PvP" is also the thread linked by Chameleon. Its needless to have an ingame pop-up for this matter. I clearly state I do not think Raikou is broken in my initial post, adding to that I think the banned pokemon list is fair(although nowhere does it clearly state that staff may use any legendary under 600 base stat just that they have abused legendaries in the past). I do think however that if Raikou is to be used(in pvp) he should not be exclusive to staff, but I understand your stance on him deserving something unique for his service and that Raikou is not broken (I agree). In terms of the notification, unless I missed it in the initial post it never explicitly says staff will be using legends not on the list, it is only fair that people should know the possibility of what they may be facing up against.As I stated in my other post this isn't a big deal and anybody being overly dramatic such as OP whom won easily against it should chill.

Isn't this not as much a problem of if he deserved it or not but the accessibility of a Pokemon to the general public? I am not going to argue that Raikou is some meta breaking pokemon that can't be stopped but he is certainly viable. In my opinion any pokemon usable in pvp should be able to be gained by just playing the game as a player and not be exclusive to staff. Whether Viktim deserved it is a non issue, but whether he should be allowed to use exclusive staff pokemon in pvp is entirely another conversation. The differentiation between earning the Raikou and Suicune is that, one was accessible to all player and he earned it in an open competition, where as viktim earned it for his dedication and work as staff which. This is not an opportunity all players have open to them, and while this isn't a huge deal I think the differentiation needs to be made. It is on some level an "advantage" regardless of if he is good at battling or if Raikou doesn't have the highest base stats. Regardless this isn't a big deal I just think that their is a clear distinction in how and why these two earned the legendaries, at the very least some sort of notification of the pokemon staff might use in pvp(that aren't publicly accessible) would be good so people are not caught off guard by things such as this.

Their is no definite way (for regular players) unless they are stuck in some obvious shitty loop for like 5 hours, such as if they get stuck and aren't in grass etc. I am not sure how good the bots are in this game yet I am assuming not great, in other games I have played just by watching it would have been hard to differentiate between them and a real player, making recording bots that aren't stuck in an obvious loop pretty much useless. The best way outside of that is looking at names - hours, where they are farming for such a long time. It would not surprise me if many players whom have a large amount of legit hours on a main account bot on alt accounts, and either launder the money grinded over. I have seen some people messaging suspected botters and if they don't respond they believe they are likely botting, this is obviously not full proof and once again I would say is fairly weak evidence as anybody could have it turned off or not paying attention to the game entirely. If you see anybody named 160903 or any number combination with over 200 hours it is pretty safe to assume that it is some botting alt account. Botting as I have previously said is a problem best removed through discouragement rather than finding and banning bots, the latter is important but rules should be changed to discourage botting as much as possible. You will never ban or remove all the bots from a game once they infiltrate it they are here to stay, that is the unfortunate truth.

I am fully aware of the difficulty of getting rid of bots but the point I am making is that the current policy isn't strict enough. Most games don't even allow a single multiple account never mind four, especially on separate emails. The current rules should be stricter even if it will hurt some (i am guessing very few) legit players who are actually utilizing four accounts. Two accounts is more than enough, I actually don't know why you would want more than that. The best way to stop bots is to make people not want to bot, I am not going to claim I know the best way to do that, but having stricter rules and banning people who utilize more than two accounts would be a good start imo.

Who even cares about it looking bad design wise? As long as it works and keeps the game (especially economy) healthy, no one should mind answering a capture once every hour or so. Honestly, there better alternatives such as for example, forced special activities or events similar to Runesca-pe or any game with a similar botting solution. Just slapping a captcha on the game is lazy. (Not referring to development wise, but design.) -EDIT- Oh and let's also include the fact that possibly some players (who play fairly or even the people who don't understand the English language) will hate the captcha and start ranting just like currently that either it isn't effective, or too effective and annoys actual players. I am not sure how much this has been discussed but why not have stricter limits on the number of accounts as a way to discourage people from botting on alts and then just laundering the money/pokes. This will obviously not stop botting altogether but the current allowance of four accounts per person basically lowers the risk of botting substantially. If their was the threat of being banned for multiaccounting instead of just botting people would either A. bot on their main accounts which is huge risk depending on previously invested time or B. bot on an alt and risk both accounts being banned for being on multiple accounts. If their is no way to truly remove botting which is the case in most games shouldn't you put in as many ways as possible to discourage bots? The current system of allowing so many accounts is almost incentivizing botting. What is the purpose of having four accounts besides to use them for botting/laundering or bidding on the sale of ur own pokes all things that should be discouraged. I have quite a few people whom I suspect bot due to their activities on multiple accounts, but unless I track them down in-game and record them which is weak evidence in and of itself I am powerless to do anything about it. You need to add systems and or change rules to increase the risk of botting as a way to discourage people rather than focusing on changing the software to ban bots since even the largest games have problems doing so. Look at attempts in real life for how discouragement systems work better, such as the drug trade almost all Supply oriented bans and policies have failed and in some cases backfired to increase the supply of illegal drugs specifically Coca plants in Columbia. Where as demand oriented anti-drug policy while not garnering incredible results has had some success in developed countries of stopping youth from wanting to partake in drugs while understanding the dangers( for example IV drugs have a very negative stigma). If bots cant be completely stopped ever the best solution is to make people not want to bot, and current account policy does the opposite.

It should just reset monthly, no reason to complicate it with random start-end dates when a monthly system reset is effective.

All valid points feel free to offer what you think is fair ^^

15m insta taking all serious offers.

Just looking for some rough estimates of what these two bad boys are worth.

Just coming back and looking to see what my stuff is worth now after all the inflation.

While I am inclined to agree with you on some points here, I think you are missing a key component that regardless of the value in the end, the investment required is ridiculous. To get 5k points with the current system, at 40k a day, assuming I get around 200 points a day, it would cost me 1.1m (including the price of the permit) and roughly a month to reach the 5k benchmark, which is when if at any point it will be worth it. This is a gigantic investment regardless of the end results, and seems to me like something that even if it is worth it with such a huge time and money investment gates off casual players, and makes the divide between more experienced hardcore players and new ones even larger. You are right to say that the change in price is not tested and that the only way to truly find out is by some people going into the fire. Part of my doubt from the developers stems from how I believe they mishandled this change, and didn't think through the initial excavating system. With that said I think it is perfectly rational to have some skepticism on if the mods have made a good change, and have thought this out especially with the small amount of time between people actually using the system and them making the change. Edit: I would also like to add that I would prefer to have a lesser overall investment with lesser rewards, I don't think there is a need to have what I believe should be casual daily content only reward the hardcore rich players.

The main problem I see in this thread is people are assuming anybody who thinks that 5-10k is to much also wants the price at 1k. They are then attacking these people because they think by agreeing with the mods they are doing right by the game itself. The mods can be wrong, this change could be bad, it is ridiculous to assume the majority of people can afford 40k a day with an initial cost of 100k, to use something that is supposed to be daily content. A more manageable price exists and it isn't 1k or 10k.

So because it is free nobody is allowed to criticize or complain about mechanics in the game? What if they decided to delete everyone's account or wipe money at that point am I still supposed to be grateful that the hours I put in were wiped away because it is a free game(which has micro transactions, free or not they are gaining revenue from)? They do provide a service that is creating and maintaining the game but their is certainly an interest to make money, as they have a cash shop that is expanding. As such they have an interest with people being critical of there game and giving them feedback on how they feel about changes. Telling people they should feel grateful is pretty ridiculous and seems like some white knighting, regardless of what your true intentions are that is how it comes off. The game developers benefit from people having controversial opinions and giving them push back on changes, all of these things are good and are a sign of a healthy community. You will never make everybody happy, but having people who will give honest feedback to try and improve the game are vital. Shutting those people down and telling them to be "grateful" instead is a disservice to the game and the community overall. Also to your second point that "Staff have obviously thought things out with this" I disagree, first of all they have been working on hoenn for quite some time now and i assume this mechanic has been worked on quite a bit. With that in mind they changed the pricing within a matter of days of release without having seen how the lower price would actually effect the game. They also bumped the price by huge margins. This shows a lack of insight when making the system originally and having no understanding of how it would effect the game, so with months to create a manageable price they failed to do so (I agree that 1k is to low) and now within days of release they update it again with a price that is even worse. I think 1k was obviously to low but 40k a day is a bit 2 much one week of excavating costs almost 300k, one month is 1.1m, with the current conversion of (300k per ms) $ to in-game money that is $20 a month to excavate. I understand that this is a money drain but it is still to much. The 5k sites should be moved to 3k and the 10k sites to 5-6k, assuming you keep the rarity of items/Pokemon the same. While I am sure the Mods are looking at this issue I usually do not post on the forums but this was a part of the game I thought was pretty creative, and I think they changed it for the worse.

1.7m talonflame

375k ^^