i agree with what Lorne said here. As i am also an end game player and find myself coming into all of those listed issues when hunting. I can max out my daycare and shelter very easy when on a hunt and then it's either spend gp on dcp that i am not making enough profits from the specials hatched unless i get lucky with a melan or i am spending tons of credits on supplier eggs and waiting for them to show up before i can hatch them. As hunters we don't have very in-expensive ways to hunt pokemon unless we play on the site less. I am also very much against the v wave having anything to do with pairs. i love the v wave but it's very annonying sometimes as well when you keep waiting for the wave you want and don't get it for the longest time.

My probem is my pokemon aren't the same species /D; About half of all my pairs (excluding ditto-required ones obv) aren't the same species for aesthetic reasons. I'd rather not have to make them the same species because I like the dimorphism, but it's just an annoyance to fix, not a huge complaint. edit: unless I totally misunderstood it? I'm saying, for example I have a Growlithe/Arcanine pair. As I understand it, it's % would go down because of the size difference under the new calculations and I'd improve it by making them both Arcanines.

I think the V-Wave change could be interesting honestly. It's not like your pairs would be highly nerfed on days that don't match - they would be BOOSTED on days they DO match. So it would just be extra easy on those days to make eggs - from my understanding at least. I can understand the hesitation around it though. Especially since we don't know what the percentage "boost" will be. If theres a bug v-wave and everyone who's hunting bugs is suddenly able to make a million bugs, will the shelter clog up and make it harder to find my eggs? Again, this is all hypotheticals, so we dont know for sure. But I can see a case for, and against this.

---

@Lucifer Ah, yes that part I don't have a response to. I was mostly discussing the "having to remake all my 99% pairs or not" part. Unfortunately I think the specific thing you're struggling with is pretty niche and doesn't sound like its able to be preserved well.

I need help to absolutely understand the phrase "same species (not just the same evolutionary line)." My Pokémon taxonomy knowledge may not be up to snuff. Say, for instance I have a 99% pair with one partner a Larvesta and one partner a Volcarona. Is this pair an example of them being in the same evolutionary line but not same species? Thanks in advance.

Yup! They need to be the same evo stage of same family line for best pairing under the newly proposed system, whereas before as long as they were the same evolutionary/family line they could be max

That's the issue I have too! I have a bunch of mixed evvelutions I have been making pairs with and my favorites are when the pair doesn't "perfectly match". exact-match pairs are more fun in my opinion, especially since the game offers that flexibility. Not to mention thinks like gender-specific evolutions (aka nerfing any Combee/Vespiquen, Gardevoir/Gallade, Sandalit/Salazzle, etc pairs.) something else kinda bothers me about it but i struggle to put it into words that make sense ^^;

Q: If I understand clickback well, a user will not show up anymore in our clickback if we did 6 clicks or more, right ? Does it only count party clicks for this, or it also count fields clicks? For comparison: The current system stops a user showing up on your clickback list if you have interacted with them even one time. The new system will have a user show up on your clickback list if they have more things in their party than you have made clicks. This does indeed mean that if you have clicked someone 7 times then they will not show up (since your Party caps at 6 Pokémon) whereas someone who you have clicked 3 times will show up if they fill their party, meaning you can click them. I again do not like this. This means that i can not get rid of people with empty parties except i manualy go to their field and click 7 times? Nope. Dont like this.

Just a few little notes here... I mean... that was already the case. There isn't much of a difference from the time the poll was conducted when it comes to that. Like I said before, the bump in DP cost might help, but I would once again like to mention that nincada was over-hunted for exactly that reason because getting enough DP for a hunt is a pain (it is even with nincada), and it's entirely possible that this boost won't even be enough to properly help. Which is why this is a problem. People suggested nincada be changed in that thread if the system got a complete overhaul to make it less painful to get DP, mods agreed, and frankly, I don't think a boost to DP prices constitutes a "complete overhaul" of the DP system, which is likely exactly why people feel they weren't listened to. I think for this to work out and for people to not be annoyed that they weren't listened to, there needs to be more ways to get DP. And as for this: I have a huge problem with this. It feels like a change that is completely and utterly unnecessary and unfairly punishing. With all due respect, if something isn't broken, it doesn't need to be "fixed." The new system seems to be intended for pair making to be easier, but changes like this are just an unnecessary restriction to the process. It feels like a very weird addition. And people have brought it up already, but... eevee and it's evolutions will be unfairly affected by this especially. There's no reason two different eeveelutions shouldn't be considered a matching pair. They would be perfectly compatible.

I have the shelter to thank for my alola dex entries (still a wip since Fini is being dificult to find)

Goodness me, is this the kind of panic and bedlam I wake up to? The FAQs were supposed to resolve this, not make things worse! Before reading these responses, please be aware that I may be a little on the blunt side at some points, but none of these responses are intended as any kind of attack on anyone. With that said, let's get started... If you have 99% compatible pairs then at least one of them isn't your OT, because if they were then they wouldn't get the full bonus for trading both partners from different sources. Therefore, under the new system, they will still get the full benefit of trade bonus. This "worry" is a non-issue, it is not a problem that exists.

---

Every mention I have made about trying to encourage different gameplay styles has been with specific focus on newer users who are (because of my poor design choices) using the Shelter as a way to bypass entire features of the game and shortcut their way to completion. Never once have I mentioned anything about how I don't want the Shelter to be useful for endgame hunting. This is why in every draft of the proposal so far, the cost balance of "how many eggs can you adopt per day for hunting purposes" has been unchanged (subject to RNG on the initial proposal, now actually unchanged). This "worry" is a non-issue, it is not a problem that exists.

---

We don't need to look up someone's entire trade history to know that their trainer card shows them as having joined after the RMT ban. Just saying...

---

I've been quite clear that the RNG component only counts for about 8 percentage points. Even if I changed nothing else, the worst-case of an RNG reshuffle, if you get really unlucky, is that your 99% pair would become 91% if it went from the max roll to the min role by sheer bad luck. You were really worried about it becoming 10%? This "worry" is a non-issue, it is not a problem that exists.

---

Here we go again with me offering users a pure buff, and it being declined because *checks notes* "I can't control how big of a bonus I get." XD At least this person gets it. KitsuneofDreams' "worry" is a non-issue, it is not a problem that exists.

---

You understand correctly, breeding different evolution stages of the same evolutionary family will not be optimal under the new system. But that's okay! You can't always pair aesthetics with 100% optimal gameplay, and it's not like the difference in compatibility resulting from this will be that drastic. Certainly something that can easily be overcome by use of modifiers like Happiness at the very least. :)

---

The condition for a party to show up is "(number of things in Party) IS GREATER THAN (number of clicks you have made to the user)" If "number of things in Party" is 0, ie. an empty Party, when would it ever be greater than "number of clicks you have made to the user" - a strictly non-negative number? Can you think of any situation in which 0 > N for some natural number N? I don't think so. :D This "worry" is a non-issue, it is not a problem that exists.

---

All hunted Melans will, on average, when you consider the Shinies and Albinos you get along the way, yield approximately 2.45x as many Delta Points as they currently do. Balance that against Nincada in particular having its "base" value cut in half because of the Shedinja nerf. Last time I checked, 2.45 > 2, therefore empirically the boost will be more than enough to make up for the Shedinja nerf, and even Nincada will be worth more post-update than it is now. o/ This "worry" is a non-issue, it is not a problem that exists.

---

Flareon: has a body temperature of 900°C Glaceon: can be as low as -60°C Mhm, yeah, "perfectly compatible". XD