Un-evolvolution

cosmicbrambleclaw • 10 January 2014 at 10:01 PM

@Ian Ok I had this great idea while looking at my fully evolved Trenka. Before I get to the idea I need to explain this to explain where the idea originated.

Backstory: The trenka was a gift and a stage 1 creature. I wanted her to stay stage 1, but didnt have the money at the time for a Essence of Litsdnats. A few days ago she evolved to a stage two trenka. The problem with that is, I dont like stage two trenkas ^^;

Idea: Ok, so my idea was, to have a 3rd potion in the Cash Shop Park. A Unevolve potion or some witty title like "Essence of Litsdnats" (clever spelling standstill backwards with 1 less L XD)

The purpose of this potion would be to reverse the effects of evolution on a creature, age regression in a sense. The creature would retain all views feeds and clicks it already has, but users would be able to de-volve creatures they werent able to Litsdnats. This can be very helpful because sometimes creatures are frozen at a final or close to final stage, and its almost impossible to find a egg or 1st stage of that creature, and users may want to de-volve the creature obtained in a trade to be frozen at the lower stage. It also benefits people like myself who werent abot to Litsdnats their creature due to lack of funds, and sadly the creature evolved.

Its a win win situation honestly, you make more cash to pay your staff and for spending purposes, and us users can de-volve creatures to our favorite stages 😊

Edit: Another idea I had shortly after this, is a sort of "Un-eternal youth potion" thing in relation to the De-volution Potion (I decided to name it that if thats ok) it could be called the Re-evolution potion (just came up with that typing this lol) and it would do like the U-EYP does to the EoL and instead of reversing a creatures evolution it would forawrd it back to the stage it was regressed from. The only catch to this potion is that the creature would have HAD to have been regressed first. This feature would prevent cheating by forwarding your creature to the final stage without the clicks or feeds or views.

I hope you like the ideas ^^

june • 11 January 2014 at 7:25 AM

@cosmicbrambleclaw
Well, this would be a huge problem for rarities.. even though I do like it as I have some creatures I'd want to devolve 😋

For the rarities, an onny egg seems to be worth more than an onny. People with hatched onnies could devolve their creatures to make them worth more. See what I mean? It would be problematic and confusing. And worse, for Jokers (being incredibly rare in egg stage) it would be just.. 0.0

Also, if the creature already had Litsdnats, and they used Devolve, would they keep the Litsdnats? Just a question.

clayosaurusrex • 11 January 2014 at 7:47 AM

@cosmicbrambleclaw

This would not work at all. It's been suggested, many times, and has always been shot down.

Like what @lemonade said, an Onny egg is worth more than an Onny. If everyone who had an Onny had CC, they'd all probably turn their Onnies into eggs. Then there'd be no grown Onnies, and everyone would wan a grown one. It's keep going back and forth.

Also, if a de-evolution potion WAS created, it'd have to be worth more than a CC creature. The idea is simply too valuable to offer for just a freeze. I've seen people trade a second stage Tine and MULTIPLE CSPs for a first stage Tine. I've seen frozen first stage Tines go for up to seventeen THOUSAND CC. An egg I worth at least 2-3 times that amount. Imagine if everyone who had a first stage Tine suddenly turned it into an egg.

These items would cause a collapse in the EggConomy bigger than the one brought about by the removal of CC trading.

june • 11 January 2014 at 7:55 AM

@clayosaurusrex
YES, thank you. The results of this would be.. chaotic. catastrophic.

cosmicbrambleclaw • 11 January 2014 at 3:19 PM

@lemonade it could pose a problem or two, but overall I consider it a decent idea, and yes Litsdnats would keep effect

@clayosaurusrex there would be a couple issues such as that, but still it is rather irritating when you dont have the danged money to buy Litsdnats and your favorite creatures evolve into a stage you dont like at all :I (sorry for snapping at you, but it has been a stressful morning) Im not saying its a perfect idea, but its a good one at the least when it comes to commons or some LE's

jazzyleia • 11 January 2014 at 4:15 PM

@cosmicbrambleclaw

Its a risk you take with all creatures. I agree with the above people, I could just unevolve all my creature and make them.worth more, it is a not good idea

cosmicbrambleclaw • 11 January 2014 at 4:31 PM

@jazzyleia *sighs* Im just saying it seems like a good idea :I maybe it can be not in effect for certain creatures such as Onny's and others, but for the majority of creatures, who happen to be common or semi-common, it wouldnt really effect the value. Its incredibly frustrating when a creature you want to stay a certain stage evolves because you dont have the money for Litsdnats, Im sure if that ever happened to you before you can understand where Im coming from

jazzyleia • 11 January 2014 at 4:41 PM

@cosmicbrambleclaw
Then I just normally put it on my side until I can get a freeze, there are many ways around it but I personally don't like this idea. Not saying you are wrong but as stated before, this has been suggested before and has never worked...kinda like the EC to CC converter

cosmicbrambleclaw • 11 January 2014 at 4:55 PM

@jazzyleia I understand and repect what you're saying. I even said myself the idea wasnt completely perfect, but few things in this life are after all. It is just a thought after all and can be tweaked, there could be a list of creatures that its inaplicable for if necessary *shrugs* I mainly just wanna de-volve my Trenko, and Im sure Im not the only one with issues similar to that. If there needs to be a list set for creatures that it cant be used on then by all means let there be one, I dont want to screw up the economy here, I just want to help others who have the same issues I have.

if I seemed snappish when I replied, Im sorry. I've had a rough morning and you caught me in the middle of writing a vent journal on a seperate site, so my temper was kinda leaking out

wolphire • 11 January 2014 at 6:01 PM

@cosmicbrambleclaw

I have to agree with everyone else, unfortunately. As much as I'd like the idea, it just works better the way things are now...

olimpt • 12 January 2014 at 9:06 AM

There is a way to make this work, by not ruining the value of older creatures. You should only be able to use this potion if your creature evolved within the past 3 days. If the creature was previously frozen, you would not have the ability to use the potion on said creature.

purrclan • 13 January 2014 at 9:21 PM

@olimpt
That could work, in theory at least. It wouldn't pose the normal problems of devolution suggestions, but there may be things we haven't considered that could be problematic.

jemmie • 16 January 2014 at 8:19 AM

@cosmicbrambleclaw
I personally don't agree with this, much like @clayosaurusrex.

However, @olimpt 's idea may be useful too.

As for yourself, that's what secret sides are good for. xD

cosmicbrambleclaw • 16 January 2014 at 2:16 PM

@olimpt the whole point of this idea is for people like myself who dont always have the funds to pay for cave cash and werent able to buy lidsnats. if somebody doesnt have the money within three days then your idea kinda screws them over :/ other than that I like the idea. maybe instead of 3 days if can only be done by the person who had it in their cove when it evolved, and trading it makes the potion void? that could easily be done if the CC trading feature were reintroduced which I believe it might be, then you could just send the cash to the person to devolve your creature before a trade *shrugs*

the idea isnt without flaws, but I think the easiest solution would just be to have a blacklist of sorts, with certain creatures the potion wouldnt work on, that would be the easiest to encode for Ian, and it would be less complicated than a 3 day or "in the cove it evolved in" feature