Another Announcement? Or Just a New Ref/Judge?

So a lot has changed lately. And we need people to be able to keep up with these changes. Therefore, INSERTNAMEHERE is a Ref SOMENAMEGOESHERE is a Judge the fiercest among battles shall reward more to their brave trainers!

New payment structure
2v2: $1,000/$500 (unchanged)
3v3: $1,500/$500 (unchanged)
4v4: $2,500/$1,000
5v5: $3,500/$1,500
6v6: $5,000/$2,500

Gyms (+$500 to winner):
3v3: $2,000/$500
4v4: $3,000/$1,000
5v5: $4,000/$1,500
6v6: $5,500/$2,500

Elite Four and Champion:
6v6: $8,000/$4,000

 

This may be a silly question, but would you mind posting the current payout structure for reference? For some reason, I can't find the old one.

 

In the rules thread. They aren't edited yet.

OLD WAGES (ie do not use anymore except ongoing battles on the forum):

Normal Single/Double Battles
1v1: $1,000 / $500
2v2: $1,000 / $500
3v3: $1,500 / $500
4v4: $2,000 / $1,000
5v5: $2,500 / $1,000
6v6: $3,000 / $1,500


Gym Battles
3v3: $2,500 / $1,000
4v4: $3,000 / $1,500
5v5: $3,500 / $1,500
6v6: $4,000 / $2,000

 

Just something that's been on my mind for a while.

There have been quite a few changes to URPG in the past couple months, most of which, I think, were implemented very well and will end up affecting URPG positively in the long run. Special rewards for long-term dedication, more freedom for Pokémon-related creative pursuits, a near-total migration to a chat application that isn't complete trash, and those are just a few. Of course, there are bound to be changes I don't personally agree with, but that is inevitable; on the whole, I believe Staff know what they're doing more than fairly well.

However, there is what seems to be an oversight. With the recent changes we know these three things to be true:

- Powerful Pokémon are, on average, more expensive and harder to acquire

- Battle profits over time of basics have been reduced

- Battle wages have been increased to compensate for the above

Despite all this, referee wages have not been increased accordingly. As a result, the value of the external rewards that reffing brings is now relatively lower by a considerable amount. Previously, a referee's pay for any one non-Gym non-Multi battle equaled 100% of whatever the winner earned (not counting specific bonuses during certain tourneys or events). Now, however, this has been reduced to 80% - 60% of whatever the winner earns; in a regular 6v6, the referee only gains $500 more than the loser of the battle, and a whopping $2,000 less than the winner. And, on top of this, stronger Pokémon are still more expensive.

I do not believe the Referee profession is being adequately rewarded at the moment. It is a profession that is, and for the past year has been, in high demand and low supply. For obvious reasons, the job is crucial to the existence of battles and, though at times mindless, still requires a fair bit of effort. I was of a mind that professions were meant to be greatly encouraged in the URPG, but I feel disincentivized when I see that simply battling instead can offer much more.

I am requesting that Staff consider increasing referee wages to be closer to or on par with what battlers can potentially make from the battles we host. Though it may seem greedy, and quite frankly is to some degree I suppose, I simply want the wages to be increased along with all the other increases that have been made.

I also realize that many parallels between this and the other professions can be made but I don't have enough insight to say anything about them rip

tl;dr more $$ pls&ty

 

There has been discussion on this point, but the consensus has been that reffing is actually a fairly easy job and the current pay is a good reflection of the effort involved. As always, we will listen to feedback and decide if further changes are needed.

Also, for a long time reffing paid so much better than literally everything else.

 

Also to add on to what Ash is saying: if a battle does exceed the normal effort involved, Senior Refs DO have the power to award extra pay at wages time so that pay for that match adequately reflects all the effort expended.

On the most part, however, 500 per mon per side is way more than enough.

 

I disagree with these points for a few key reasons.

I don't believe powerful Pokemon are significantly more expensive or more difficult to acquire. A Torchic costs $10,000 when it once cost $8,000 - that's a very minor change which was offset by the fact that TM's became cheaper. That is now further offset by the fact that battles pay more than they did previously. Between starters and pseudolegends alone, the Pokemart offers enough for any player to be competitive.

To say that ref wages have been reduced is incorrect and is a misrepresentation of facts. The percentage relative to what the winner earns has decreased, yes, due to the increase of the latter. The staff collectively believe that winning a battle takes more effort than reffing one, and the payments reflect that.

Reffing, at it's core, has only gotten easier over time. Compare the current online calculator to the one I passed my test with. No items. No abilities. No statuses. No weather. We definitely didn't have a bot to look up moves for you (which currently doesn't work, I know, ssshhhh). Not to mention the Desktop calc, which can handle Subs and Team Storage for you, with the ability to switch Pokemon in and out. Without pay changing, the amount of effort required from refs has decreased.

As for reffing being in high demand - battles aren't even in high demand. I agree, the job is crucial to the existence of battles, but it's a symbiotic relationship. Battles actually happening are crucial to the existence of the job. Hell, I probably could replace the referee with a bot and break that symbiotic relationship, but I have absolutely no desire to do so.

This also ties directly into the new "Work for a Legend" thing - we factored the current ref payments into what we thought was an appropriate target to earn a legend, and how long that could potentially take. This isn't really a block, but it's probably something you should be aware of. If we increased ref wages, we would likely shift the ref legend target to $1,500,000 or something. At URPG's peak activity I could have earned a legend in about 8-10 weeks, though I'm fully aware that doesn't reflect current activity.

I'll admit, I'm pretty biased in this field for a number of reasons. This might sound arrogant, but I did it the hard way. I stepped up when referees where at even lower supply and MUCH higher demand than they are now, and I broke URPG records doing it. Then I made the improvements and developed new versions of the reffing tools to make it easier on myself, other refs and future refs to come. There was once a period when even with the new tools, you had to use that old calc without the extra features to pass your test. And I did all this reffing and made all these improvements without being paid anything extra to do so.

I genuinely don't mean to be shooting you down. These are all the reasons why we're currently against changing it (apart from that last bit which is just me ranting really). I'd genuinely suggest getting involved in the battles more - that's why I wanted to point out the symbiotic relationship. You'll earn more money and if the balance actually does shift towards battles paying a lot, refs being understaffed or nobody willing to do the job, then it more than likely will get incentives. Payment changes would be a topic of that discussion. But right now, we need the driving gameplay.

 

I'm not sure what you're referring to with the increase in price of Torchics and decrease in prices of TMs, as those have stayed the same in the year I've been here. I was referring specifically to the change made a month ago that focused on balancing Pokémon's difficulty ranks with their effectiveness in URPG battles. Many effective and popular 'mons have had their median price increased by $10,000: Ralts, Cottonee, Gligar, Abra, Gastly, Litwick, just to name a few. Other popular 'mons, such as Fletchling and Nidoran M, have been raised by a bit less than $10k, and some, such as Riolu and Scyther, have been raised by a bit more. I'm not sure I've ever seen a player attempt to stick to or be content with sticking to solely starters and pseudolegends so I can't comment on that.

And I did not mean to insinuate that the amount of referee wages per battle had been reduced. Of course that would be false. I simply meant that they are proportionally lower, making the opportunity cost of reffing higher, which I think is my biggest concern with the current payout, at least with 6v6s.

There is only so much time to URPG. You can ref a battle or participate in one. Ref two at once or ref one and participate in another. Hell, I've even seen four battles reffed by the same person at once, but of course they weren't participating in any at the time. When you ref, those are hours spent not battling, and it has always been my opinion that battling is much more enjoyable. Like you said, it takes more effort, but for good reason - it requires critical thought and very real strategy. I would love to battle as much as I ref (automated refs pls???) but for some reason the statement "i'm down to battle or ref" always ends with me reffing. And that's fine; I do enjoy reffing and I do enjoy giving back to URPG. However, not getting to battle despite wanting to was always a problem for me, and it seemed like it was a problem for others at times as well.

This was always offset by the fact that I was making as much as the winner of any battle. So I didn't really feel like I was losing out, hell, I was makin' bank. Hundreds of hours poured into reffing for y'all definitely paid off and I do not regret it at all. Not like I had much of choice lol, it was that or hang around refusing to ref and hoping for a battle. Now winning a 6v6 pays much more than reffing one, and imo that simply rewards sitting around and not giving back too much. An extra $2,000 every 3 hours is no joke, and neither is an extra $10,000 for every 'mon. But if Staff collectively agrees that winning a battle should be rewarded more than reffing one, so be it.

Does Staff think losing a 6v6 is worth nearly as much as reffing one? Or that the opportunity cost of reffing as opposed to battling does not exist? I don't think this would be the case.

This post is getting too long though and I don't want to end this complaining with no solutions or suggestions of my own. imo a minor fix of a $1,000 increase to ref wages for standard 6v6s would reach a happy spot between the winner's and loser's wages, lowering the opportunity cost of reffing as opposed to battling while also being a slight bump to match the inflated Pokémon prices.

 

Yes, those effective and poplar Pokemon have been increased in rank, making them harder to obtain. This was the desired effect.
Giving you more money because these now cost more to acquire would be counter-intuitive to that desired effect, wouldn't it?

I'm not familiar with the phrase "opportunity cost", so apologies if I misinterpret this. Google says "the loss of other alternatives when one alternative is chosen" - so if you choose to ref you can't battle and vice versa. So by this cost changing, I'm assuming you're saying one opportunity is more likely to be chosen. It's possible, but the changes haven't been in place long enough to determine if there is an imbalance between battling and reffing. Incentives for more people to battle, assuming they do, directly provides more opportunities to be the referee. It's always been a volunteer job - you can work more to get paid more and this, at least in theory, provides more opportunities to take that work.

I've reffed four battles at once before, it was awful lol. And yes, battling is more enjoyable, but so is sitting at home playing video games instead of going to work. I still go to work because I need the salary. I know what it's like to have limited time to play URPG which is why I rarely do anymore. The free time I do have is better spent doing other things.

You know, I could definitely argue that losing is worth as much. We're all agreed that battling is harder and requires far more effort than reffing when we talk about how much the winner gets paid, so why not the loser? They didn't emerge victorious, but assuming they didn't throw the match and gave it their best then yes, I absolutely think it's worth as much as reffing one. I could ref that battle with a few button clicks and typing while playing my Red nuzlocke run and make a few grand.

As for the opportunity cost (again, apologies if I misinterpret this), I think I have to be a bit blunt. If you don't want to ref, don't. Battle instead. Don't get me wrong, I'm thankful that you and others are willing to ref, but on occasion just ask for the battle if you want one. There are other willing refs in URPG who will facilitate that.

I explained earlier why bumping wages to match inflated Pokemon prices would be counter-intuitive to why they were inflated in the first place. I'll consider/discuss it, but I wouldn't get your hopes up. Changing wages for any battle means adjusting other tiers too, it's never quite that simple.

 

Oh, and I assume it wasn't a serious suggestion, but I could automate reffing if we want to kill the profession entirely.

Battling is fun, but RIP all that other potential income.

 

I guess you'd all just have to become graders and curators. MUHAHAHAHA.

 

Nah, just going to write a script that counts characters, works out your average word length and standard deviation, number of times your target Pokemon was mentioned and then run it through Turnitin for a plagiarism check.

All hail our new robot overlords.