Talk:Kalos Route 2

Caterpie

I think the list of wild Pokemon should be revised. I found a Caterpie in the forest and I'm playing version X --Dunsparce can learn Double-Edge. |B) DEAL WITH IT. (talk) 00:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

In Santalune Forest, not here? 'Cuz that'd be right. Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:53, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Calculating Percentages

Can we calculate the percentages of how the wild Pokémon appear? Or would it be too speculative? My calculations are that Caterpie, Weedle Pidgey and Zigzagoon each has a 11% chance of appearing while Fletchling, Scatterbug and Bunnelby have 22% chance. Although, I'm not totally sure. Any of them can be off. In fact, the percentages would total up to 99% meaning one of them can have 1% more. Can someone figure out these calculations? I would like to see numbers to be consistent with the other regions. SeanWheeler (talk) 18:33, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't know wheter it's okay or not, but an important question is: what kind of numbers do you have? My thoughts are that 100 encounters might (maybe) be okay to base approximations off of if there are only a few Pokemon that can appear, but I'd consider 200-300 encounters (if not more) to be better, especially with many Pokemon or an especially rare Pokemon (with a low encounter rate).

Personally, I think it would be good to use approximations until we can derive the numbers from the games directly, because who knows how long it'll be before that happens. But I also kind of think that if we did go this route, it'd be nice to have a record of the numbers people have derived the percentages from, so there's some measure of "accountability"/verifiability. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:48, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

I think for the percents we should do some rounding i think its more likely caterpie/weedle are 10% not 11% and pidgey is 15% not 14% I gonna change it feel free to change it back its just look back at most routes the percents are normally nice nummbers that are multiples of 5 Pokemonisawesome2 (talk) 16:18, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

The numbers that are currently on the page were not derived from simple observation. They should be the actual chances in the game (barring mistakes). Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:43, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Percentages

I'm a bit confused about what the percentage means where it talks about the pokemon in the route? Also why is it different on some other pages where it will say it is rare,common,average etc. ? - unsigned comment from Rafelia (talk • contribs)

The percentage means the likelihood of a wild Pokémon encounter being that species. For example, on this route each wild Pokémon has a 20% chance of being a Fletchling. As for your other question, those also mean the likelihood of encountering a Pokémon, just using those words instead of numbers. Litwick96 16:15, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Forced Pidgey encounter

Anything special about it that should be mentioned in the article, beyond its level and Ability? Set nature? Set IVs? Can it be Shiny? I mean, I don't think they'd Shiny lock a friggin' Pidgey, but then, they did Shiny-lock the Route 7 Snorlax, so I don't even know anymore. And if they set it to always have Keen Eye, then it makes one wonder what else is set about it, y'know?- unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 15:43, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Of the other routes which have forced encounters no special detail is given about the relative Pokémon, be it all the encounter Pokémon on route 101, or the Starly at Lake Verity - not even the ability of the Pokémon is given. Imo the Pidgey shouldn't be a trivial point, and be added in the list of Pokémon found on the route, much like the approach for route 101, or in the route description, like in both route 101 and Lake Verity. Xolotl (talk) 16:31, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

The major reason Route 101 has the first-encounter Wurmple specifically in the list of Pokemon is simply that its appearance cannot be accounted for by the normal encounter table. Pidgey (and Starly), on the other hand, is.

And we can't just say, "Well then, the normal encounter tables are all we need", because Pidgey's Ability is notable here. The Starly and Wurmple examples that you say give "no special detail" cannot be compared to Pidgey like that. For one thing, both Starly and Wurmple only have one Ability, so there's absolutely no need to mention Abilities for them in the first place. And at Lake Verity, Starly cannot be captured, so it'd be moderately pointless to note its Ability anyway.

It'd be possible to move the note out of the Trivia section, though; that was just the easiest place to put it originally. Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:16, 20 August 2015 (UTC)