Quick note on the poll to clarify, just in case;

"Not this, but maybe instead.." means you don't like this specific suggestion BUT have an idea of what to do instead! Hence, please comment your ideas below. :) In fact, feel free to comment your thoughts no matter which option you voted for, elaboration is always helpful ^^!

Also sorry that the title is a bit weirdly phrased, idk how else to put it rn lol

---

In light of the recent discussions regarding the proposed red giga changes and the surprising amount of dislike for the idea of 'more gem sinks' other than the Wishforge badges, it gives an impression that perhaps the wishforge system itself is something players are maybe not a great fan of? So what with it being Type Race too, it got me thinking - why do the TR points scale with the amount of EXP to hatch eggs (so that the value of 'point' : 'exp' ratio is consistent no matter what you hatch; which is a good thing as it keeps things fair in that respect!) --- but gems don't? Gems are always either one single gem per every egg (disregarding the first hatch of the day) on a regular day, or several on Ravyne boost days regardless of if you hatch a measly 1280 exp magikarp egg or put all the effort in to hatch the 30,720 exp egg of like, a literal god. Especially with continued pushbacks on bonus counter goals, making gem-bonus days less frequent, I feel like scaling gems, similarly to how points are scaled for Type Race - i.e., a 30,720 exp egg could result in 24 gems while a 1280 exp egg would only result in 1 - —> (*EDIT: Please see note at end of post) - would enable even greater freedom of players to hunt whatever they want, without feeling they have to hunt specifically for a low-exp monotype of the particular badge they'd like to upgrade if they want to make any reasonable progress that won't take literal years, haha. It could actually be viable to chain a legendary and still make relatively equal progress on their wishforge upgrades as someone who is chaining a far lower exp egg. This would also equalise the prices between gems, as the difficulty in obtaining say, dragon gems in particular is limited by the exp range of eggs, which in this case - no extremely low exp eggs exist for yet, and so a low exp gem-grinding hunt isn't even possible. It’s much more grindy and thus typically these gems are twice as expensive. I've also seen steel go for double price, despite togedemaru existing (2560 exp eggs), but in my opinion that just goes to further illustrate the point further that some eggs just aren't as desirable to chain, and being.. heavily inclined to do so just because it's your only choice for getting lots of steel gems at a reasonable pace, is a bit limiting. With a new scaling system, they would become of much more similar value. I believe that would be a good thing, and just logically speaking makes more sense to me (they're all the same 'item' of different type with the same outcome (badge upgrades), shouldn't they be fairly equal?), but maybe others will disagree on that. I don't know what the downsides would be other than maybe making wishforge 'easier'/faster, which would perhaps take away from how much of a grind it's (I assume) intended to be. The type race scoring values for how many gems per each egg hatched is just a baseline for this idea, but the actual values themselves could certainly be adjusted so that wishforge doesn't potentially become overly easy - just the concept of scaling them, itself, so that there is greater balance between egg types & egg exp's, and increased enabling of player choice by making different exp hunts more viable for wishforge upgrading, is what I'm mainly focused on. Sorry for the long winded post! I hope it sparks some further discussion and ideas :)

---

*EDIT: With forebodhi’s great suggestion as seen directly below this post (thank you, and thanks to others who have also commented their support for that adjustment!) - I’m revising this suggestion to be that, instead of multiplicative values a la Type Race Points system, an additive scoring should be used and possibly some egg exp amounts ‘grouped’ to keep things in line as listed: Using these example values and running a similar scenario as described before: Person 1 hatching 5 30k eggs would receive (5x4) 20 gems total on a regular day. Person 2 hatching 10 parties of 5 3k eggs, in the same time frame as Person 1, receives 5 gems per party 10 times over for 50 gems total on a regular day. So there would be some disparity still, but it would nonetheless bring them closer together in viability, and perhaps some disparity is to be expected and reasonable with such an extreme example anyway! (Especially as even if they were equally valuable for gem hunting, many people don’t have the resources to hunt legendaries anyway besides those players late game enough that they could probably just buy gems they need regardless.) So to compare a probably far more common scenario, say one person wants to hunt a 5k egg and another is hunting a 2.5k egg - by the time the party of 5 5k eggs has hatched (2 gems per, for 10 total) there has likely been two parties of 2.5k eggs hatched, and so at 1 gem per, they would also get 10 gems total. Especially considering 5k eggs are the most common (and I believe the smallest dragon exp egg you can get, to bring back the point about gem values), the fact that they would essentially be equal in value for gem hunting still broadens player choice while keeping gem numbers from getting out of hand like they would using the TR scoring system. Another great suggestion with regards to gem amounts comes from Kahuna: Fairly self explanatory, the Ravyne counter could be tweaked if necessary so that it’s only adding extra gems to hatches instead of multiplying, so there’s still nobody getting outrageous amounts of gems per hatch, and the change shouldn’t feel like a downgrade considering it essentially functions as additive currently anyway. Thank you!

yes! but, i think the numbers would need to be adjusted, or maybe the type of gem legends give are changed to a medium gem or something like that to scale? it would need a lot of working on to make it balanced. potential: 1k-3k eggs only give 1 gem 5k-6k eggs give 2 8k-10k give 3 20k+ give 4? mostly thats just me spitballing, but i rly think this has a lot of potential!

I totally support this, since now you think about it, maybe you really want a wishalloy water badge so you have to chain magikarp if you want to make quick progress. But like @forebodhi said, the gems should definitely not be based on TR points. That would make very easy gem-making :) Right now it's super unfair for the people who are actually hunting something they love but take maybe 30k ehp to hatch, as opposed to someone hunting magikarp.

i do like this suggestion as a whole, but ive gotta agree with the way forebodhi has suggested rather than getting 1 gem per tr point. the wishalloy grind is difficult, but its definitely meant to be. i do think its a little too grindy as it stands right now (i think ive got 7 wishalloy after being on site for 7ish years? probably closer to 4 years of actual gameplay for clarities sake) but i do think being able to get 24 gems from an egg is a little too op, even if hatching a bunch of legend eggs is kind of uncommon for the average player. i think forebodhi's plan is a good middle ground. great idea overall though, definitely!

I totally support this! I'm working on my first Wishalloy badge and I feel like I have to choose between hunting a Pokémon I like, or hunt for gems. As in, you kind of have to play a certain way (hatch the lowest exp eggs, which as was said, isn't equal for all types!) in order to make any sort of progress rather than accumulate gems passively while hunting the Pokemon you like. I know it's intentionally grindy, but I feel like scaling gems would fit in more with the "play your way" philosophy this game has. I think forebodhi's suggestion on the scaling makes a lot of sense so it's not too OP but still fair for the amount of effort and time needed to hatch high EXP eggs vs lower EXP!

I do think this would be a good change, but I agree that matching exactly with the TR system would be way too many gems. I think if you scaled down the TR system it might work out. Decimals can be converted using the usual RNG factor (ie 2.5 gems = 2 gems + 50% chance for a third). Additionally, if this were to be implemented, I think the Ravyne counter would need to be changed from being multiplicative to being additive. In its current state it essentially functions the same as being additive anyway (1*2.5 is the same as 1+1.5).

I completely agree with the sentiment expressed about different values! I realised when writing the first example on how each player would end up with about 300 gems in an hour that the values were wack but couldn’t think of another idea in the moment haha. So thank you for your responses, and I have added to the first post to note this adjustment as I think it’s a much better idea. :) This is also an interesting idea though I’d be curious to hear you explain a bit more, i.e. how much do you think it should be scaled? Like 10x for example? But I don’t know how that would work for the eggs that would be worth 1 or 2 gems based on the points system, for example, so I’m not as sure about how that would work. I did consider mentioning changing the Ravyne counter but wasn’t sure on how. I like the idea of it possibly changing to additive so that again it prevents gems getting out of hand particularly for those bigger hatches, especially since as you say, it works pretty closely to an additive bonus at the moment anyway.. I will edit the first post to mention this point as well. Thank you!

Thinking about players as individuals, it sounds like a nice buff, but one that would make gems overall at least 2x more common, and likely much more for types with poor EHP efficiency like ice and dragon. Thinking about the in-game economy - it's got to feel pretty bad for users who have spent $$$ on those gems which would be worth much less post-buff? Just something to consider. Personally I stand to gain a lot from gem buffs though, so no objections here. [ Limping along with my bronze/silver badges ]

Partial support. It definitely would provide a nice buff to the types that have a disproportionately high amount of high-EXP eggs (looking at you dragon types), but at the same time I'm not sure how balanced it'd be for the market economy and for wishforge completeness. Overall I think I like the ideas of having legendary/mythicals give medium gems instead of small gems the most, but even that could cause the price of a lot of summons to go up even more than they already are. So in theory I like it, but idk how practical it would be to implement.

Where as I do love the idea I have to give no support. I feel as though if this was implemented gems as a whole would lose value as they would become why more common. Think how dragon has a ton of high ehp eggs and bug as a ton of low the balance would be to off. Niet wanted to give gems more value with the red gig eating them this would help users with that sure but it would also flood the market with a ton of gems bringing down the value. Everyone hunts and sells or uses gems but only a handful of users even use a red gig for getting more eggs. I hope that makes sense.