New Member
nobody nobody nobody nobody nobody
|
Post by big on Aug 17, 2018 11:13:32 GMT -5
listen i'm new here and i've only just now read this entire thread but, get this, i have some contributions.
first, i really like classes. maybe its because i like having color-coded names, maybe its because i get to discriminate between different classes and call certain ones names, but who is to say, really? the fact of the matter is that the current app is super minimalist and that's cool and great, but i think removing the option of trainer class removes another facet that makes characters unique from the get-go. like, sure, with the current app you really don't get to know what a person is like based on their app, but at least you have a baseline idea of their *motivations*. you see someone signing up as a fighter you know, okay, stay away from that badass. you see someone signing up as, i dunno, a fisherman and you think i need that man's venmo so i can send him money.
i super dig that not every starter is available to every class. there's enough options that something your character would have is probably on the list, but it maybe isn't their favorite thing ever. this is the same reason why you don't get to just fucking choose what appears out in the wild or in the safari, imo, there's something really cool about making it work with sub-optimal mons. i'd never use x pokemon in the games, it'd never make the cut on my UU shit team, but its enough for my character. this is also why i stand by nova (and staff's) decision to restrict rarity: roleplaying isn't necessarily about your power fantasy, dawg. you don't have to have the strongest mons or be the richest motherfucker on the block -- maybe the real strongest mon is the friends you make along the way.
i do think classes should have perks. i think the idea of an economic perk is maybe a bad one, though, just 'cause if the system is such that it needs to be abused in one (1) way by each class in order to make meaningful progress, i dunno, don't think i'm a fan. there will necessarily be an imbalance between these perks and their money making potential, and breeder becoming 'venture capitalist' is personally antithetical to how i see them loving, nurturing pokemon. maybe toss economic perks altogether so that TMs don't have to be priced around this, so that everyone is on an even playing field insofar as money making, and so that capitalism will one day fall.
my suggestion would be that perks would strictly benefit others. i like the idea of a trainer helping another person by giving them the maximum amount of levels if they fight another. breeders could do some incubation shit or something for others, i dunno. this way, your class is some factor of *pokemon you wanted to start with*, *your IC fantasy for your character*, and *way you want to interact with the other members of the site.*
i also think that events should keep in mind classes, with fighters being called on to do X task while trainers are occupied with Y, professors being nerdy as fuck doing Z. this would be a natural extension of missions, which i also think should be expanded to be a natural perk of being a class -- trainer missions could be reduced to simply VS Seeker type lists of trainers on routes to beat the shit out of, coordinators could do some mini-contests, etc. if missions were more visible, more abundant, and more class-tailored, people might be attracted to the class that fits their character fantasy because they will get rewarded for doing the thing they want their character to do. building on the "your class is how you interact with the other members" thing, maybe trainers could bring breeders along for their missions if breeders wanted to get some exposure to that lifestyle. that might also create a cool dynamic where a professor is LFG because there's a medium mission they really want their prof to go do, forcing new relationships and people outside their bubbles. as is, there's too many generalized "all may apply" missions and this blurs the need of specialization of classes, i think.
finally, don't remove fishermen. please. i beg you.
|
|
New Member
|
Post by Elijah Gray on Aug 17, 2018 12:54:05 GMT -5
tbh, i like the idea of events or missions being built, or even throwing in random areas, where trainer classes could come to mind. perhaps a puzzle on a wall about unowns is a professor could decipher, a ranger could guide the group through a forest, recognizing traps/signs/animal trails, a group of fighters can push this heavy rock out of the way, etc. i think this could be neat to implement. we're talking a slight bit of work on staff for the event portions, and i hope the community would be grateful if they decided to do this, since i've seen some less than grateful members already with the current event.
on the topic of missions, however. i noticed it the other day and thought it was kind-of neat, but the staff allows members to build missions themselves and submit them for review. so essentially if someone has an idea for a mission, and how each class can play a role in it, then even now we cans submit those ideas up and push that idea forward!
and i'll admit i was wrong. everyone deserves their class identity. even fisherman. |
|
New Member
"hey, what's the best way to eat an apple..."
|
Post by Zombie on Aug 17, 2018 14:47:42 GMT -5
I've taken a liking to Comet's idea. It simply combats the initial "problem" (imo) I saw with Breeders, where they didn't seem to have any financial benefits while the other classes did; which didn't make sense when using the games as a reference to class perks. In-game Breeding isn't how Staff wanted to see it done, I know, but that's the main reference I use. /shrug
It also provides an optional incubator like I've asked about to quicken the breeding times, because some of us would like to cut down on the 2 weeks/1 month timer as best we can. Even if it does cost a pretty penny, those of us who are eager to get our hands on a pokemon and begin working with it will surely utilize this when possible. Unless your name is Aero /snickers
However, the pricey license bit is a slight turn-off depending. Although I do understand why we don't want every Breeder able to immediately open up shop by claiming a license and making their own Day 1.
So I would like to ask/propose if other Breeders could be employed by established Ranches, where they themselves have one (1) Breeding/Egg slot on top of the owner's two (2). Perhaps make it a special mentoring thing where only 1 Breeder can be working under another's Ranch, so that one person doesn't have all the Breeders in their ranch.
This would help other Breeders working on the money for their own Ranch to still do their "job", while also providing them further reason to plot and interact with their fellow Breeder(s).
Perhaps a part of their proceeds would go to the Head Breeder/Ranch Owner, but no more than 25-50% (Could be based on the General/Rarity). Reason being is that this money is obviously going to help them establish their own Ranch. And if it's limited to one (1) Breeder being mentored at the Ranches, then we will need more Ranches as the Breeder count goes up, etc etc.
I'm not against these propositions. I like it. It offers plot as well and character interaction, which is what our site is strongly and always about; hence why I added the Breeding License for logical purposes, plus it can also be a new achievement for breeders since they barely have any as well. Welp, if no one has any objections to these ideas for the breeding system. Then people will be able to breed without trading as they can simply show up together with the Pokemon's in question, thus the trading aspect won't be necessary since I know some of you don't like that/find it a hassle. |
|
NPC
Should I play the grieving girl, that my world has gone dark without you. I will sing no requiem.
|
Post by Arceus on Aug 18, 2018 9:13:50 GMT -5
I've taken a liking to Comet's idea. It simply combats the initial "problem" (imo) I saw with Breeders, where they didn't seem to have any financial benefits while the other classes did; which didn't make sense when using the games as a reference to class perks. In-game Breeding isn't how Staff wanted to see it done, I know, but that's the main reference I use. /shrug
It also provides an optional incubator like I've asked about to quicken the breeding times, because some of us would like to cut down on the 2 weeks/1 month timer as best we can. Even if it does cost a pretty penny, those of us who are eager to get our hands on a pokemon and begin working with it will surely utilize this when possible. Unless your name is Aero /snickers
However, the pricey license bit is a slight turn-off depending. Although I do understand why we don't want every Breeder able to immediately open up shop by claiming a license and making their own Day 1.
So I would like to ask/propose if other Breeders could be employed by established Ranches, where they themselves have one (1) Breeding/Egg slot on top of the owner's two (2). Perhaps make it a special mentoring thing where only 1 Breeder can be working under another's Ranch, so that one person doesn't have all the Breeders in their ranch.
This would help other Breeders working on the money for their own Ranch to still do their "job", while also providing them further reason to plot and interact with their fellow Breeder(s).
Perhaps a part of their proceeds would go to the Head Breeder/Ranch Owner, but no more than 25-50% (Could be based on the General/Rarity). Reason being is that this money is obviously going to help them establish their own Ranch. And if it's limited to one (1) Breeder being mentored at the Ranches, then we will need more Ranches as the Breeder count goes up, etc etc.
I'm not against these propositions. I like it. It offers plot as well and character interaction, which is what our site is strongly and always about; hence why I added the Breeding License for logical purposes, plus it can also be a new achievement for breeders since they barely have any as well. Welp, if no one has any objections to these ideas for the breeding system. Then people will be able to breed without trading as they can simply show up together with the Pokemon's in question, thus the trading aspect won't be necessary since I know some of you don't like that/find it a hassle. It looks like im going to have to assign mods to certain areas then. Making sure the money is going to the correct place, as well as eggs are checked, and license purchases sounds like heavy moderation work, --which is what I was against in the first place. |
|
New Member
"hey, what's the best way to eat an apple..."
|
Post by Zombie on Aug 18, 2018 23:12:14 GMT -5
I'm not against these propositions. I like it. It offers plot as well and character interaction, which is what our site is strongly and always about; hence why I added the Breeding License for logical purposes, plus it can also be a new achievement for breeders since they barely have any as well. Welp, if no one has any objections to these ideas for the breeding system. Then people will be able to breed without trading as they can simply show up together with the Pokemon's in question, thus the trading aspect won't be necessary since I know some of you don't like that/find it a hassle. It looks like im going to have to assign mods to certain areas then. Making sure the money is going to the correct place, as well as eggs are checked, and license purchases sounds like heavy moderation work, --which is what I was against in the first place. The license part is something they can buy in the Pokemart/Site Shop. We can even make it an achievement to help show who has their license, while other breeders work toward getting the money for it. |
|
Administrator
|
Post by The Nature Hoot on Aug 18, 2018 23:19:51 GMT -5
n-naaaaah
|
|
NPC
Should I play the grieving girl, that my world has gone dark without you. I will sing no requiem.
|
Post by Arceus on Aug 19, 2018 9:38:54 GMT -5
It looks like im going to have to assign mods to certain areas then. Making sure the money is going to the correct place, as well as eggs are checked, and license purchases sounds like heavy moderation work, --which is what I was against in the first place. The license part is something they can buy in the Pokemart/Site Shop. We can even make it an achievement to help show who has their license, while other breeders work toward getting the money for it. I wasn't talking like they are specifically (singularly) hard work, but all together that is alot of effort on staff and on player just to be able to breed. That's all. |
|
New Member
I've made my mistakes, but my mistakes haven't made me.
|
Post by Derek Hoffman on Aug 19, 2018 22:24:18 GMT -5
I don't want to write another wall so I will just make this brief. Sorry :x
If we wanted to try and stray from the need for Staff to come in and assign money to people for every Breeding transaction, then perhaps the "currency" being used to hire a Breeder could also be allowed to come in the form of items; Whatever the Breeder feels is appropriate.
It wouldn't necessarily be a static price for General/Rare like Comet suggested, but players would be able to make the "purchase" from the Breeder without needing to make a Request thread post since the information would be logged in their Ranch, and thus it could be something that the Staff are willing to trust us with.
The reason I don't think it should be static prices at that point is that some people will actually use the item(s), while others will be forced to sell them for 50% which becomes sorta inconsistent in terms of the worth?
In the event they choose to simply pay money because they don't have much to offer item-wise, then perhaps that is when the static prices are put to effect? I feel like more people would opt to throw a bundle of items at a Breeder, though, and it would be faster for them to "process" that transaction.
...Sorry again. This is longer than I meant for it to be.
But the general idea is for it to come off more like a charitable donation to the Breeders and their Ranch rather than a direct purchase, if that makes sense?
|
|
New Member
"hey, what's the best way to eat an apple..."
|
Post by Zombie on Aug 20, 2018 1:37:09 GMT -5
I don't want to write another wall so I will just make this brief. Sorry :x
If we wanted to try and stray from the need for Staff to come in and assign money to people for every Breeding transaction, then perhaps the "currency" being used to hire a Breeder could also be allowed to come in the form of items; Whatever the Breeder feels is appropriate.
It wouldn't necessarily be a static price for General/Rare like Comet suggested, but players would be able to make the "purchase" from the Breeder without needing to make a Request thread post since the information would be logged in their Ranch, and thus it could be something that the Staff are willing to trust us with.
The reason I don't think it should be static prices at that point is that some people will actually use the item(s), while others will be forced to sell them for 50% which becomes sorta inconsistent in terms of the worth?
In the event they choose to simply pay money because they don't have much to offer item-wise, then perhaps that is when the static prices are put to effect? I feel like more people would opt to throw a bundle of items at a Breeder, though, and it would be faster for them to "process" that transaction.
...Sorry again. This is longer than I meant for it to be.
But the general idea is for it to come off more like a charitable donation to the Breeders and their Ranch rather than a direct purchase, if that makes sense?
Mm, so basically, each breeder possessing their own set of rules involving a "trade me this for a breeding slot" ordeal if I read this correctly? |
|
New Member
Forgive me in all of my sin
|
Post by Ken on Aug 20, 2018 5:41:53 GMT -5
Eh, I mean that doesn't exactly take away the amount of work for staff to process it given they still have to go to the consumer's PSS to see if they have the item and then there'll be folks that buy straight from shop to the breeder for the heck of doing such instead of following simple protocol of just buying the item and then gifting it in the proper forum. Maybe I'm looking too in to it, but this is all just gonna be a buncha work. And then there'll be folks saving their slots for friends, a number of people increasingly waiting for the request thread to bring them income from a certain thread only to lose the spot to someone who can afford it, one breeder may be a total haggle over something so simple. A big ole cluster cluck of things can happen.
Either way I'm still on the big ole revert train instead of overcomplicating the system we have already had (that worked by the way until people got all ancy over a rework that primarily didn't even hurt them in the slightest. But you know 'muh identity' but that's a story for later) #justrevertlivewiththenerf
|
|
New Member
I've made my mistakes, but my mistakes haven't made me.
|
Post by Derek Hoffman on Aug 20, 2018 20:00:38 GMT -5
Essentially yeah @ Comet. Just an alternate route to lessen the need for strictly money-based purchases, which demands Staff to do something, of which Nova doesn't seem too keen on; Which I understand completely. Y'all already had/have to manage the eggs hatch timer & "spawn" them to designate their gender & ability, so it would be ideal to keep it as least work intensive as possible for Staff.
I get what you're saying Alt, but that was why I used the word "trust". So long as members abide by the given rules of "x" slots, I don't see the need for Staff to actively monitor the Ranches to check if the "buyer" even has the items.
We're tasked with keeping our PC's up to snuff with the latest rewards from wilds and threads in general, so I don't see why it would need that kind of Staffly attention if it's not using actual money that an Admin or Mod would need to deduct from their account.
If anything, it should be stated as a general rule of thumb that the Ranch owner(s) are the ones who need to verify if the things are there in the buyer's inventory.
They could even be designed to provide links in a purchase template, so that any ole person can verify if the stuff is there. Because of the PC logs, such a thing should be easy to reference and link in the purchase template. It wouldn't require much attention or moderation at all if this were the case imo.
And if they're buying something from the shop to give to the person instead of just paying the price, I don't see why they wouldn't just pay the Breeding fare. Unless they make it really expensive (over 3k), which at that point we probably won't be seeing it utilized as much for others as opposed to for the Breeders themselves. Which sounds lame, so I hope not. /shrugs
If you guys really don't want more work on Staff's plate, I would suggest maybe making a new "Staff" group. Something like "Daycare/Ranch Mods" and just hire a couple of people dedicated to keeping the Breeder Ranches up to date. I'm sure people will be jumping at the opportunity if it means bringing back Breeding. I'd offer my services for such a cause, but I don't think I am the ideal employee : p I feel like you guys were just looking for Staff though, so I don't think it's the worst idea to have like two more people at most dedicated to such a thing (if it becomes a thing).
|
|
New Member
|
Post by Moltres on Aug 20, 2018 20:24:54 GMT -5
With regards to this whole breeding thing, this all feels needlessly complicated. I admit I haven't read everything in the thread, but I don't see why things needed to be changed so much in the first place. I understand people thinking breeders didn't have a way to make/save money, but that's fine. Because they had the ability to create pokemon no one else could by TEACHING an egg move. If they bred a pokemon it would get to choose TWO egg moves, which is something no other class could do. Sure they had to pay normal price for everything and didn't get any sort of extra rewards, but they made up for that in doing what they were supposed to do best. Making perfect pokemon like no one else could.
I propose that the update the spurred this whole thing be put back into place. No one who actually played a breeder had any problems with it, from what I could tell. And as someone who plays a breeder I saw absolutely no problem with the way things worked. Sure other people could breed if they wanted to mass produce pokemon, but breeders still did it better. And as I said the ability to just give a pokemon an egg move is huge. The only real change that would be needed was to allow other people to put their pokemon up to be bred with so that the pokemon juggling/borrowing trades wouldn't be a thing.
This ranch concept is interesting, but it's also a bit much. We don't need a massive detailed system for one of the least common player classes on the site. If the problems with the ideas I'm talking about have been mentioned in previous posts just point me toward them because again, I admit I didn't read through everything here. Cuz...it's a lot.
|
|
New Member
I've made my mistakes, but my mistakes haven't made me.
|
Post by Derek Hoffman on Aug 20, 2018 20:45:18 GMT -5
None of the Breeders directly complained, no, but some amount of the notes I hit in my own complaints were shared by some of the Breeders. They're gone now, but Shiv was one of them, along with Fonz.
The only reason(s) I advocated against the "old" system(s) was because they didn't offer the Breeders a chance to do what most of the others did financially, nor to be entirely unique in some facet beyond initially being the only ones able to breed (pre-update).
But because there is none of that now, it wouldn't hurt for the Breeding system to be implemented similarly to before, just more skin n' bones. No double egg moves, no trainer tier based increases to shiny chances, etc.
Although I still think it would be cooler to allow Breeders to set up their own Ranch, because while it can be made out to be more complicated, it's still not something that requires a lot of In-Character prerequisites to be met.
Breeders and players still had to go post in the Daycare/Trade center, and they always had a slot limit. Nothing is really changing except the availability and readiness of being able to breed afaik?
Which makes sense, since you can't just start Breeding pokemon in your garage. The sort of thing should be regulated more than just being a Breeder, and this idea settles that while also providing an angle for up-and-coming Breeders to be interned/mentored by somebody whose established and possibly even famous/well-known around the region because of their efforts.
|
|
Administrator
|
Post by The Nature Hoot on Aug 21, 2018 9:59:30 GMT -5
Given recent events and me making an assumption of simple human desire I doubt the rule would be followed and there would be folks looking to make backdoor deals for the sake of getting some rare Pokemon or another. If we couldn't trust people with the old system there are doubts that some would follow the rule of 'x' slots without showing their biases and simply giving to who they want instead of the best possible deal for them. Now we have an entirely new system of people being biased and giving their friends great things while people they don't know as well get jacked up prices.
What could bringing back breeding in a decent spot is the last nerf given it kept everything simple and the only grievance was something about personality issues. You want to speak finances for breeders, Fighters got nothing in the line of money, Fishermen got nothing in the line of money, Coordinators had to compete in contest or else they would get nothing in the line of money, our good friends Virus have missions sure but other than that what do they get again? The option of any starter. Oh yeah, Mediums got nothing in the line of money, out of all of the classes maybe two got something financially beneficial. And if money was such a concern the Breeders could easily move to different classes to appease their desires to be unique.
Speaking of unique, if they wanted to feel so special then they could have switched classes easily. Then again this is an RP, your character is what you make, if you don't feel special then you're either bad at it or you're trying to get too much out of it. Breeders atleast got to determine egg moves and could have gotten shinies, if anything they could have screwed off and any of the other classes I mentioned earlier could have used a buff.
tldr: Not everyone needs an economic perk as one can be successful without the use of money as we have seen from a great portion of our member base.
|
|
New Member
I've made my mistakes, but my mistakes haven't made me.
|
Post by Derek Hoffman on Aug 21, 2018 17:07:05 GMT -5
Referencing the lack of these things for other classes to justify no need for change is one way to go about it I guess. And while it is always going to be opinionated in terms of if these things are even necessary at all, I wasn't a Breeder and personally decided they seemed to be handled less than favorably (to the compared standards I looked at). Enough so to voice some points of interest, some I had adopted from others.
But this isn't whether or not people are bad at anything because they don't feel special, etc. The idea by me saying that was because most classes had their own unique perks. Breeders had ended up losing that. I didn't mean we all need to be our own special snowflake, just that the condition of being truly unique had been compromised. Meaning anyone could then do what they did on top of what their class did. It didn't feel right to me, y'know?
Also you're right, Fighters didn't have any of that either. Which is why I asked if players could organize their own "Events" for fighter tournaments where we could bet on them, and the winners end up getting cash prizes. Fortunately I got the green light.
Fisherman were also something that a few of us dared touching up on, wondering if they could sell their fish pokemon for money (like the food market), or maybe even some kind of rewards for weekly/monthly "trophy" catches that could be pre-determined by Staff similarly to the Safari line-up, just not nearly as many. And those could present a cash reward.
A lot of the others I didn't put time into thinking up potential options for because their initial perks were either already strong enough to directly influence the RP more than others arguably could, or because it just wasn't brought up during the initial discussion(s) I took part in. But it could also be chalked up as being lazy.
I don't think of them as wholly necessary, but the financial benefits are "quality of life" esque improvements that just allow for us to feel like this is our character's job. Not just the role we play, if that makes sense?
I've got to ask, though. What makes you think so much bias will come into effect with this system of breeding? If anything, you could stop that sort of thing by forcing the Ranch Breeders to serve players on a "first come, first serve" basis. This way it reflects the Dragon Den by who posts their commission first, thus keeping things fair.
What other problems need to be addressed before it is viable?
|
|
