Talk:Egg cycle
Values
has anybody noticed tha all these values are DIFFERENT from the ones reported in any other Pokémon website? how comes? I checked Aggron, Lairon and nidorino.... they're all less than 255 higher than the values reporde on legendarypokémon, serebii etc. can someone explain this to me? --Ipergorilla 21:15, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
I think these are the stats taken straight from the game. Serebii, LegendaryPokemon and most other websites tell you how many egg cycles you need to hatch the pokemon. Egg cycles remove 256 (255 in gen IV) steps every time they occur. Thus their stats are the egg cycles * 256 Link 23:35, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Cycles
Umm... I was breeding a bunch of Riolu the other day, and it took 6885 steps for them to hatch, not 6630. This is 27*255, not 26*255 like the formula claims. Does this mean that Pokemon don't hatch when the egg cycles/happiness value reach 0, but rather when it reaches -1? I was using Pokemon Pearl if it helps. (If this confuses anybody, imagine a Pokemon egg with an egg cycle of 3. After 255 steps, the egg cycle would drop to 2. A second and third 255 steps would drop it to 1 and 0. If it hatched upon reaching 0, it would be 3*255 steps. But if it had to finish out the 0 phase to reach -1, it would be 4*255 steps instead, which is what I suspect.) --Paranoid Trainer 05:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
list's organization is off
i was hatching magikarp and wanted to know how fast they hatch (really fast). anyway, when I clicked on the little icon to organize the list by order of cycles, magikarp is not first - it shows SINGLE TYPE pokemon first, then after they are done it goes to the DUAL TYPE pokemon. weird, huh? figured i'd point that out. - unsigned comment from Dsaerno (talk • contribs)
- I can fix that. —darklordtrom 00:57, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, that's what you wanted fixed. I found and fixed a different issue. (Really should read the talk page before going in with guns blazing, but hey - it worked for America...) :D —darklordtrom 01:14, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- Its fixed, slightly ugly but it works :D Link 15:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Not quite fixed yet. Trying to organize by number of steps doesn't work. Phantom♫Junkie 19:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- It's been 6 months (since the last post about this issue) and it still hasn't been solved. Someone please fix the tables. Thanks in advance. SaitoFX 21:55, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
You can organize them by egg cycles. I just tested it and that will get it correctly, and it's the same order. And you can still use the other wrong order for something instead of having 2 orders that are the same. Efaj 03:50, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Minimum steps?
The article implies that the number of egg cycles is fixed, and that the number of steps per egg cycle is also fixed at 255. However, it also says the number of steps is the "minimum"? How is this possible, shouldn't it be the exact number of steps, or is there some randomness thrown in there? - unsigned comment from DisgruntledGoat (talk • contribs)
- IIRC, If you retrieve another egg from the daycare the step counter is reset to zero, so you lose the steps already taken on that egg cycle. Also, if two eggs are due to hatch at the end of the same egg cycle, only one will hatch. The other will hatch one cycle later. I don't know if either were changed for Gen V. Werdnae (talk) 20:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Sortable Tables
The tables don't sort correctly (for me, at least). For example, when I try to sort by Steps, a 5355 always tops the list, no matter if it's descending or ascending. I looked at the code, and it all looks fine to me. Does anybody have any insight into this problem? --LimeGreenCharizard-- 10:49, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not getting that problem. 2805 on ascending and 10455 on descending. You try to sort on any of the other column of the table? Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 11:23, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- It doesn't work for me or for the users of the discussion "list of oeganization is off" up there↑. I realised that the list seperates pokemon with one egg group from those with two, I fixed it so it works now, but an admin needs to fix the template to not link to the none group that I added. Pikiwyn talk 11:27, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
