is that enough patch.
I think that set up would work well but it isn't currently how the rewards do work from what I can see.It is not serious. I would hate the processes of getting JC if it constrained my play that much. Right now JC is non-constraining, and a reflection of the contribution one makes towards running games. If you ref semi-regularly, you don't have to worry about JC. I don't think it is supposed to be the resource of concern. If I had to worry about having enough JC to claim my rewards, I'd start to hate JC and the processes needed to get JC, and feel "forced" to ref.
This patch made it punishing (JC Negative) when aiming for high value rewards, and rewarding (JC Positive) when aiming for low-value rewards, like grinding for EXP. I am "forced" to ref if I am aiming for legendaries or Z moves or other high-level facilities, because those runs cost a lot more JC than the average battle pays. It isn't even a "forced" to ref situation, and more like an incentive to ref in the form of rare pokemon and techniques.
Idk all the ins and outs or thoughts behind the JC system, but it would be bad to make people pay to claim.
New decree is you can only evolve (L0->L1) one pokemon per battle, caveat being they dont have to see combatIIRC you can advance any Pokemon that participates in a Level 0 battle to Level 1 for free, but I'd support a bigger TC prize regardless.
You can find the mentioned change in this Tower post, now that I've finished repeatedly revising it.IIRC you can advance any Pokemon that participates in a Level 0 battle to Level 1 for free, but I'd support a bigger TC prize regardless.
Current | Proposed |
---|---|
| Each player is scored as follows:
|