Djing Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 I hatched a shiny Staryu once. It had a bad nature though. Also found a shiny Graveler on a double wild battle. Thank Arceus it didn't use Explosion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DodgeDusk Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 Hmm, let me think... Shiny Numel in Ruby (gone) Shiny Mankey in Fire Red (gone) Shiny Pelipper in Diamond (gone) So yeah memory is telling me I got none at the moment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sylphid Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 Shiny Drowzee in gold. Shiny Carvanha in Sapphire, but it killed my team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrom-ulent Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 You'd seriously ditch a shiny Rayquaza just because his nature is bad for a competitive set!? Do you know that some people do countless restarts just to get a shiny one? Okay, bad phrasing on my part. What I meant was that I would have been okay with perfect Speed / wrong nature even if it was non-shiny. If it's shiny, nature doesn't matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DodgeDusk Posted October 12, 2013 Share Posted October 12, 2013 Just found a shiny Mr. Mime on X. Make that four now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freohr Datia Posted October 12, 2013 Share Posted October 12, 2013 Just found a shiny Mr. Mime on X. Make that four now Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat After several years I haven't found one And you find one in less than a day ;n; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DodgeDusk Posted October 12, 2013 Share Posted October 12, 2013 I've had it since Thursday, although I'm surprised I've already found one. Not surprised that the the pokemon I DO find shiny is one that I don't like <_< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuuco Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 Is it just me or are shinies ALOT easier to find in xy. I've already found a shiny and alot of other people have as well ._. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Espinosa Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 Is it just me or are shinies ALOT easier to find in xy. I've already found a shiny and alot of other people have as well ._. Well, encountering 5 Pokemon at once has to help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iHeartLibra Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 It was PokeMon Emerald in the Safari Zone when a shiny Girafrig galloped before me in all it's blue-horned glory! I nearly dropped my GBA in my excitement, but did break it when I threw a Safari Ball and it ran...D: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skynstein Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Short list: Gold: Gyarados, Slugma, Drowzee, pretty sure there's another one I'm forgetting. Platinum: Hoothoot (stupid Cheryl killed it), Roselia Black: Watchog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBM Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 I don't know how often horde encounters pop up, but if there are 5 pokemon in a horde, the odds of at least one being shiny is 1 - ((8191/8192) ^ 5), which I think roughly translates in fractional terms to something like 1/1666. So that's quite a bit higher (as might be expected, approximately 5 times higher). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elli Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 (edited) I caught my first ever Shiny Just yesterday in Pokemon X a shiny Loudred, though you can hardly tell the difference its just a few shades lighter than the normal Loudred lol First Shiny I ever encountered though was back in Diamond on victory road, a Shiny Graveler that used Self destruct... Edited October 15, 2013 by Shelie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chocolate Kitty Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 i ran into a shiny geodude in a hordde battle yesterday and because there was no gleam or shimmer i just ran without thinking and then i noticed it anger x10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fruity Insanity Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 (edited) I don't know how often horde encounters pop up, but if there are 5 pokemon in a horde, the odds of at least one being shiny is 1 - ((8191/8192) ^ 5), which I think roughly translates in fractional terms to something like 1/1666. So that's quite a bit higher (as might be expected, approximately 5 times higher). More like 5/8192. Why in the world would the chance grow exponentially? Each one has a 1/8192 chance in appearing. Add them and that's 5. EDIT: Never mind, I get it now. Edited October 16, 2013 by Fruity Insanity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwall Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 you don't multiply 1/8192 by 5 because the pokemon in the horde of five are presumed to be shiny/un-shiny independently of each other. pokemon 1 (of five) being shiny does not preclude pokemon 2 (of five) from being shiny. bbm's calculation is consistent with what we understand of X/Y at this point, though it is entirely possible that, for example, the shininess rate has changed from 1/8192 for any given pokemon, or that the developers have coded something preventing multiple shinies from appearing in a horde, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fruity Insanity Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 (edited) Apparently, I wasn't thinking clearly, lol. Edited October 16, 2013 by Fruity Insanity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 (edited) Exactly. Which is why you add. Because they are independent from one another. Nessie is right. Think about it like this: there is a 8191/8192 probability that a pokemon isn't shiny. If you want 5 non shiny pokemon, you have to multiple 8191/8192 x 8191/8192 x 8191/8192 x 8191/8192 x 8191/8192. The probability of having at least one shiny is (1 - that). Believe me, I studied statistics. Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution Edited October 16, 2013 by Nobody Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwall Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 You're still wrong. You generally add things when they are mutually exclusive: for example, if I wanted to find the probability of getting a one, two, or four when rolling a fair die with six faces, in that case it would simply be 3/6 = 0.5. Rolling a one is mutually exclusive from rolling any other number. In this Pokemon example, having one Pokemon in a horde of five be shiny is not mutually exclusive from having another Pokemon in that horde of five be shiny. Independent events are different; two events are independent if the occurrence of one doesn't influence the odds of the occurrence of the other. Events A and B are independent iff P(A and B) = P(A) * P(B), where P(blah) denotes the probability of blah occurring. Going back to the Pokemon example, then, if the probability of any given shiny Pokemon appearing is p_s, then the probability of a non-shiny occurring is 1-p_s. If we look at a set of five Pokemon, assuming that their shininess is independent, the probability that none are shiny is (1-p_s)^5 going by the P(A & B) = P(A) * P(B). The probability that at least one is shiny is 1 - (1-p_s)^5, which is what BBM has written. For a simpler example, note that flipping a fair coin twice does not guarantee me a heads, even though heads will occur on 50% of attempts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fruity Insanity Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 (edited) You're still wrong. You generally add things when they are mutually exclusive: for example, if I wanted to find the probability of getting a one, two, or four when rolling a fair die with six faces, in that case it would simply be 3/6 = 0.5. Rolling a one is mutually exclusive from rolling any other number. In this Pokemon example, having one Pokemon in a horde of five be shiny is not mutually exclusive from having another Pokemon in that horde of five be shiny. Independent events are different; two events are independent if the occurrence of one doesn't influence the odds of the occurrence of the other. Events A and B are independent iff P(A and B) = P(A) * P(B), where P(blah) denotes the probability of blah occurring. Going back to the Pokemon example, then, if the probability of any given shiny Pokemon appearing is p_s, then the probability of a non-shiny occurring is 1-p_s. If we look at a set of five Pokemon, assuming that their shininess is independent, the probability that none are shiny is (1-p_s)^5 going by the P(A & B) = P(A) * P(B). The probability that at least one is shiny is 1 - (1-p_s)^5, which is what BBM has written. For a simpler example, note that flipping a fair coin twice does not guarantee me a heads, even though heads will occur on 50% of attempts. Didn't really pay attention to the text, but I'll take your word for it. :P My thinking was just: "Hm, if there are five Pokemon in a horde, and each one has a 1/8192 chance of appearing, then since there are five Pokemon, it must be 5/8192." Edited October 16, 2013 by Fruity Insanity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwall Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 (edited) Didn't really pay attention to the text, but I'll take your word for it. :P You shouldn't just take my word for it. You should attempt to confirm or falsify my claims by performing some analogous experiments: for example, try rolling a die six times. There is only about a 1.5% chance that in that set of six rolls, all six numbers (1 through 6) will be observed. My thinking was just: "Hm, if there are five Pokemon in a horde, and each one has a 1/8192 chance of appearing, then since there are five Pokemon, it must be 5/8192." The actual odds are very close to 5/8192; you can see why if you write a Taylor expansion of BBM's expression. The first-order term is 5/8192. The higher-order terms make the probability, well, not quite 5/8192 (but still close). Edited October 16, 2013 by Nessie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fruity Insanity Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 You shouldn't just take my word for it. You should attempt to confirm or falsify my claims by performing some analogous experiments: for example, try rolling a die six times. There is only about a 1.5% chance that in that set of six rolls, all six numbers (1 through 6) will be observed. The actual odds are very close to 5/8192; you can see why if you write a Taylor expansion of BBM's expression. The first-order term is 5/8192. The higher-order terms make the probability, well, not quite 5/8192 (but still close). Too lazy. So... I'm right and wrong at the same time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred Kamon Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 Whoo, just found a shiny Jigglypuff. It's a little grey with green eyes. Cute! Now that it's a Fairy, it might also be useful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freohr Datia Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Hey, Rein told me that they boosted the chance of encountering a shiny now =o He said they made it about 10x more likely now? Around 1/800 now or so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orpheon Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Hey, Rein told me that they boosted the chance of encountering a shiny now =o He said they made it about 10x more likely now? Around 1/800 now or so I would like to believe this is true, and I don't want to be that guy, but.... source? I haven't found anything that neither confirms nor denies this statement. However, I'd be ecstatic if this were the case :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.