What, no Pokemon Go thread?

[GasBandit]

Not going to happen. What the article doesn't say is this is a rich white neighborhood in the most segregated city in the US.

That reminds me of the time my family played Hold'em poker with "Lake Oswego rules," where Lake Oswego is a very affluent white-flight suburb in Oregon (which is already pretty white). Basically it boils down to having more control of the board by starting a new bidding round every time a spade is shown on the board, where a player can bid to make the spade "go away" (be discarded), but someone else can then raise them to make the spade stay on the board, and then it goes back and forth until somebody doesn't want to raise anymore.

It greatly offended one of my (white) aunts, but my (black) stepmother thought it was hilarious and joined in with zeal.

 

[Bubble181]

PSA: a new round of nest switches. Full list of what became what can be found on the Silph Road for those interested.

 

[figmentPez]

"Blown away by the stats" on a CP 93 Magikarp. A fucking MAGIKARP.

I did some more looking, and apparently the appraisals actually do mean something.

http://pokemongo.gamepress.gg/pokemon-appraisal

So, apparently your Magikarp has perfect IVs in at least one stat.

See, this is the exact opposite of being newbie friendly. To find out more about my Pokemon (because CP value just doesn't say enough) I have to click a half dozen times, then look up the phrases I'm told in a wiki, and then possibly do some math in order to guess about how good the rest of my stats are.

And this isn't like a normal Pokemon game where your average player can just ignore IVs if they just want to play the single-player game. Well, you can if you just want to collect Pokemon, but if you want to fight at gyms it's going to be increasingly necessary to have at least some idea of which of your Pokemon have good IVs.


Aside from appealing to the hardcore power-breeding, min/maxing, longtime Pokemon player, there is absolutely no reason to make a Pokemon's stats this damn convoluted. Making games tedious is not the same as making them challenging or strategic; it's just wasting my time.

 

[Bubble181]

And this isn't like a normal Pokemon game where your average player can just ignore IVs if they just want to play the single-player game. Well, you can if you just want to collect Pokemon, but if you want to fight at gyms it's going to be increasingly necessary to have at least some idea of which of your Pokemon have good IVs.

Pfft. CP is still a fairly good measure; a CP1500 Eevee will win against a CP1200 Eevee, irrespective of IVs. Attackers will win most of the time anyway. By the time IVs matter you're looking at high-level play, really.
Besides that, the phrases are fairly clear. "Won't make much headway", "above average -> puree those critters. "Amazing" or "unseen" might be somewhat good. And they tell you the highest stat. An "amazing" pokémon with "Attack" as best stat is probably worth keeping. It IS newbie friendly, but pretty much saying "good enough" or "not good enough", without making it a table of numbers.

I admit, I'd personally prefer exact numbers, but the moment they's give you "15/12/13" or "0/7/11" per Pokémon, some people would be overwhelmed and turned off, and others would feel the obsessive need to find the Perfect One.

 

[Celt Z]

Not going to happen. What the article doesn't say is this is a rich white neighborhood in the most segregated city in the US.

You know, I know nothing about this area, and I got that feeling from reading the article. I want to say it's the second time I've read an article about banning Go from an affluent area because "undesirables" we using the public space.

 

[Celt Z]

If they're funded/staffed with the expectation that X to 2X visitors will come per week (outside peaks), and they start getting 10X regularly (pulling numbers out of my sexy booty here) without a corresponding increase in funding/manpower, what are they to do? It's much easier to ask the private company and individuals to follow existing policy (even if it's probably a big stretch, as GO!'s "geo-caches" don't have a physical component) than to get taxpayers to fund them.

They could also sit back and let the park go to shit, I guess? Then we can yell about how lazy public employees are

You can't take funds for public use and then say the public has no right to use it. I am 100% for fining people who disregard the rules of the space to make up needed money. You don't get to act like a jerk because you're playing a game, but you should get treated like scum just because you play a game and follow the rules.

I look at Pokemon Go as a micro-social experiment: we need a reminder how to interact with our community and be respectful to all members of it. It's too easy to sit back, have everything brought to you and live anonymously through the internet. We need to get out in our part of the world and learn to get along with people we may not always see eye-to-eye with.

 

[figmentPez]

I admit, I'd personally prefer exact numbers, but the moment they's give you "15/12/13" or "0/7/11" per Pokémon, some people would be overwhelmed and turned off, and others would feel the obsessive need to find the Perfect One.

I'd settle just for having the appraisal displayed on the Pokemon's stats page by default. Just show the information quickly and easily!

 

[Bubble181]

I'd settle just for having the appraisal displayed on the Pokemon's stats page by default. Just show the information quickly and easily!

This I agree with. But, again, even *this* much info will scare away some players, and they're probably hiding it away, "'not too far" for the interested player but "out of sight" for the casual who just wants to walk and collect.

 

[Reverent-one]

You can't take funds for public use and then say the public has no right to use it. I am 100% for fining people who disregard the rules of the space to make up needed money. You don't get to act like a jerk because you're playing a game, but you should get treated like scam just because you play and game and follow the rules.

How are they saying the public has no rights to use it? They're asking a private company to no longer further incentivize the use of the public space, not kicking people out.

 

[figmentPez]

This I agree with. But, again, even *this* much info will scare away some players, and they're probably hiding it away, "'not too far" for the interested player but "out of sight" for the casual who just wants to walk and collect.

They could always have it so that it appends the appraisal data to the Pokemon's info, so that it's hidden until you seek it out, but so that you don't have to get the appraisal over again if your memory isn't flawless.[DOUBLEPOST=1472056987,1472056880][/DOUBLEPOST]Hell, they could just summarize the appraisal as a nice little infographic. I'll sketch up a mockup later.

 

[Krisken]

How are they saying the public has no rights to use it? They're asking a private company to no longer further incentivize the use of the public space, not kicking people out.

Exactly, public space. Designed to encourage people to gather and use the space as a community. How it is done shouldn't be relevant and they are only mad because as a group we don't fit into the socioeconomic class it was built for.

 

[Bubble181]

Exactly, public space. Designed to encourage people to gather and use the space as a community. How it is done shouldn't be relevant and they are only mad because as a group we don't fit into the socioeconomic class it was built for.

I think that's a very, very limited way of looking at things. First off, not every public space is intended for people to just gather. National parks are public space, but you're not exactly cordially invited to wander around Yellowstone and take a bath in the geisers, either. Parks are public but have different functions depending on the type of park. Nature reserve, relaxation area, recreation, etc. Secondly, saying it's because you "don't fit the socio-economic class" is unnecessarily hostile and a typical modern way of thinking. I'm fairly sure even if all PoGo players were WASP 30-something men, they still wouldn't like having a thousand of them trampling the flowers and littering all over the place. The reaction might've been different, I'll grant you, but that's another matter.

 

[Reverent-one]

Exactly, public space. Designed to encourage people to gather and use the space as a community. How it is done shouldn't be relevant and they are only mad because as a group we don't fit into the socioeconomic class it was built for.

A private company using that space to profit off their product isn't required to be accepted within that public space. Your assumptions about their baises aside, they provided actual evidence of this companies' actions causing problems.

 

[Krisken]

I think that's a very, very limited way of looking at things. First off, not every public space is intended for people to just gather. National parks are public space, but you're not exactly cordially invited to wander around Yellowstone and take a bath in the geisers, either. Parks are public but have different functions depending on the type of park. Nature reserve, relaxation area, recreation, etc. Secondly, saying it's because you "don't fit the socio-economic class" is unnecessarily hostile and a typical modern way of thinking. I'm fairly sure even if all PoGo players were WASP 30-something men, they still wouldn't like having a thousand of them trampling the flowers and littering all over the place. The reaction might've been different, I'll grant you, but that's another matter.

Maybe, but also keep in mind that

1. I live in the city
2. I've been to the park and drive past the mansions on the coast.
3. I've heard the complaining by local residents and runners at the park, while at the park
4. Milwaukee is currently a sore spot in regards to social class

Yes, I'm a little hostile, but that's because I'm feeling the hostility.[DOUBLEPOST=1472060141,1472059742][/DOUBLEPOST]

A private company using that space to profit off their product isn't required to be accepted within that public space. Your assumptions about their baises aside, they provided actual evidence of this companies' actions causing problems.

they don't profit directly off the park. In fact, Niantoc would benefit from NOT having parks as locations, instead focusing on businesses and encouraging lure purchases.

Problems? Sure, like all parks. If they want to have a yearly fee thing, I'm sure most players would still be thrilled to share the park. Everything else is already covered by the citations listed in the article

 

[Reverent-one]

they don't profit directly off the park. In fact, Niantoc would benefit from NOT having parks as locations, instead focusing on businesses and encouraging lure purchases.

Problems? Sure, like all parks. If they want to have a yearly fee thing, I'm sure most players would still be thrilled to share the park. Everything else is already covered by the citations listed in the article

Wait, so you're against a city asking a company to exclude a public park from their game, because you think it's just to keep out people from the lower socioeconomic classes, but you're ok with them charging people to use said public park, as if that's not an even more blatant attempt to do the same and wouldn't disproportionately affect those same classes?

 

[Krisken]

Wait, so you're against a city asking a company to exclude a public park from their game, because you think it's just to keep out people from the lower socioeconomic classes, but you're ok with them charging people to use said public park, as if that's not an even more blatant attempt to do the same and wouldn't disproportionately affect those same classes?

I'm saying as someone who uses the space I am willing to contribute, not unlike national or state parks. Do I like it? No, but I am willing to do what I can to keep the park open to everyone who enjoys it. I'm willing to compromise in a way that is more fair than "GTFO of our park"

I love how you jumped on that though

 

[Reverent-one]

I'm saying as someone who uses the space I am willing to contribute, not unlike national or state parks. Do I like it? No, but I am willing to do what I can to keep the park open to everyone who enjoys it. I'm willing to compromise in a way that is more fair than "GTFO of our park"

I love how you jumped on that though

Their current solution is removing a third party incentive that makes some people want to go to park. This does nothing to stop everyone who goes there for pokemon go from continuing to go there for other reasons, regardless of socioeconomic class. Meanwhile, your solution would involve people no longer being able to go to the park because they can't justify the cost, so that's the one that I'd consider closer to saying "GTFO of our park".

 

[Krisken]

Wait, you think removing the reason people go to the park isn't telling people to stay out and they are not welcome? What if it was a basketball court being removed or a swing set?

Sorry, I don't buy what you are peddling.

 

[Krisken]

Le sigh. This is starting to feel like a politics thread, and I hate it. Just, I don't know, never mind. I'm sorry I brought it up.

 

[Reverent-one]

Wait, you think removing the reason people go to the park isn't telling people to stay out and they are not welcome? What if it was a basketball court being removed or a swing set?

Sorry, I don't buy what you are peddling.

Are you saying that a fee wouldn't disproportionately affect those in the lower socioeconomic classes and isn't telling them they're not welcome? Saying it's ok because you can afford it without thinking about how it affects those worse off than yourself is exactly the sort of entitled thinking of the wealthy that you'd be complaining about if it was someone rich saying that about a option that would negatively affect those in the middle class.

I can see the argument for either solution, but you're the one who put the conversation in terms of the rich trying to kick out those less well-off, and if I'm a hypothetical higher-up in city management and am concerned about not doing that, removing the private company's influence on the park, which has little to with the park itself and more to do with unapproved digital geolocation points, would be my preference over literally adding wealth based gatekeeping to the public space. Especially since geocaching points in that park for anyone else requires prior approval and monitoring the locations for vandalism or property damage. Why should Niantic be immune from these rules for their very similar game?

 

[Krisken]

I'm sorry, I don't want to argue anymore. Like I said, I'm sorry I even brought it up.

 

[Reverent-one]

That's fair, sorry, as might be guessed from the time stamps, I wrote that before your previous post.

 

[Krisken]

That's fair, sorry, as might be guessed from the time stamps, I wrote that before your previous post.

No worries mate. I also can look at it from everyone's side. I just feel that going straight to "Remove the pokestops" is a little overboard. When i was there tonight a lady was spending all her time picking up cigarette butts. I hate cigarettes and find the people who leave them lying around disgusting myself, so it was nice to see. Garbage cans have been put up and in the popular sitting spots there are signs to put garbage in the cans and new cigarette buckets are up through the area.

There is damage, sure, but there has to be a way to make a compromise between everyone.

 

[figmentPez]

The good news, one of my Pokemon has perfect IVs.

The bad news, it's a Ratatta.

 

[bhamv3]

The good news, one of my Pokemon has perfect IVs.

The bad news, it's a Ratatta.

Can we call you Joey from now on then?

 

[GasBandit]

 

[Squidleybits]

Jigglypuff is such a happy, innocent Pokemon.

 

[Squidleybits]

I refuse to change his name, but I thought of this thread when I saw this:

 

[bhamv3]

Caught a Porygon, picked up enough Squirtles, Poliwags, and other miscellaneous Pokemon to final-evolution a bunch of pokes, hatched an Aerodactyl and Dratini.

This was a good weekend.

 

[Krisken]

Caught this guy at 2222cp and invested in him.

And this one I am working on.

Last week was good for Pokemon.

 

[Bubble181]

Two hours of walking the city center, and besides a whoooole lot of Pidgey, Rattata, Spearow and Drowsey, not really anything to show for it. A Pinsir barely worth grinding in the dust, and a Porygon that's just slightly better than the best one I already had. Sigh.

 

[Gruebeard]

Two hours of walking the city center, and besides a whoooole lot of Pidgey, Rattata, Spearow and Drowsey, not really anything to show for it. A Pinsir barely worth grinding in the dust, and a Porygon that's just slightly better than the best one I already had. Sigh.

Hey at least the city center got out for some fresh air.

 

[Bubble181]

Hey at least the city center got out for some fresh air.

It really needed it.

 

[Squidleybits]

Caught this guy at 2222cp and invested in him.

View attachment 21990

And this one I am working on.
View attachment 21991


Last week was good for Pokemon.

Oooh, that Dragonite is a beast. What level are you?

 

[Krisken]

Oooh, that Dragonite is a beast. What level are you?

I'm currently Lvl 26. It takes FOREVER to level up now! And to be honest, Dragonites dwarf everything from what I've seen.