FFA Reform

FFAs pay too much. I know this statement may be unpopular, but it is a problem. Sure, everyone enjoys the high payout, and it's a great and easy way to make money, but why do we want to play in an RPG in which it is easy to advance in (acquiring more mons/TMs)? It's like having a system where it's really easy to get Pokemon *coughtnationalpark*. This problem is further exaggerated by the frequency of FFAs. They happen almost everyday, sometimes two times a day. People can make money easily and too quickly.

Furthermore, payout is not relative to the skill or tactic involved in placing high in an FFA. You shouldn't be rewarded as much in a style of battle where luck, chance, and simple diplomacy are the contributing factors to winning instead of strategy. To win FFAs, it becomes less about eliminating others, and more about others eliminating each other for you, while you sit back. A common way to play involves setting up Substitute and buffing your stats, while hoping not to get attacked in the process. Here is another thing you can do: Contact everyone in the FFA and ask for a truce. Almost everyone will accept, and you are almost guaranteed to get a high position. It will be interesting to see how effective this is as more people try it out. However, my point is that it doesn't take much thought to win or place high in an FFA, and therefore you shouldn't get as much money as you do currently. Look at this battle; Stinky (Michael) got third place and $14,500 using Wobbuffet. He just called random Mirror Coats and Counters. I know this kind of stuff is unavoidable, but it's further evidence that FFAs can pay too much money in relation to effort. Yes, time is spent in an FFA, but most of it is spent waiting or insulting Near.

My proposal for payment is 500 for the first two people out, 1000 for the next two people out, 1500 for the next two people out, and so on, except first place gets an extra 1000 than they normally would from this pattern.

As for refs, they are overpaid as well. They get twice as much money for reffing a battle with the same amount of Pokemon. In a 6 VS. 6 battle, a ref is paid 3000 for reffing a battle with 12 Pokemon. In an FFA, a ref is paid 6000 for a battle with 12 Pokemon. Refs should be paid 500 for every 2 Pokemon in the battle. If there is an odd number, ignore the remainder for ref payment.

I also think FFAs are diminishing the frequency of normal battles, you know, regular one on one battles. You do remember them, right? Heck, even more double battles wouldn't be that bad. Single battles are really the heart of Pokemon, and Pokemon was designed to be played in singles (and doubles later I suppose). FFAs are our own creation, and they can be fun and all, but the moves and abilities don't support FFAs as much as they do 'normal' battles.

Another thing about FFAs I would like to discuss are rule decisions. I'm sure we've all seen some really crazy, bad, or fun rules. I'll admit to making some of the bad ones. However, one rule I never use is Auto Taunt. The main problem with Auto Taunt is not that it takes away from the strategic aspect (what little there is) of the battle, but that it makes the FFA incredibly simple and easy to ref; therefore, it makes the battle overpaid even more (for the ref at least). Another bad rule type I'd like to discuss is one that enables you to use Pokemon you don't actually own in your stats. I don't think this type of FFA has occurred anytime recently, but it seems like it's deviating very much from the URPG, and the collecting, working your way up aspect of it.

Dicuss.

 

I agree. It's becoming ridiculously hard to find a ref for normal battles since they're all in FFAs. And your right, most of what goes on that takes 3 HOURS is dissing you-know-who and making sex jokes. I thought the speed rule was a pretty good idea since it shortens FFAs. The thing is, my Pokemon suck too much to get past the first few rounds, so I walk away with nothing, and I can't get any money from regular battles since all the refs are always in FFAs.

However, the National Park is important for those of us who are lazy to write over 9000 characters. *coughme* Seriously though, I'm not going to write for 2 hours just so I can get a Pikachu.

 

But yah they do pay wayyyy to much. And Refs host them way to much. IM tired of asking someone to ref and I get an invite to an FFA. I think some people dont even battle anymore because they can get all the income they need from the million-a-day FFAs. I mean, FFAs, you just get a big allience to protect your ass and u do nothing, and you get paid 10k. Regular battles that are not gym leaders/elite are becomeing obsolete.

I vote that the ability to host FFAs be reduced to one a week

 

Laziness should get you no where, so I'm glad the national park is getting a second thought to it, plus 9k isn't that hard, just think of it as a fun little project, or go to the NP when it isn't as bad as it is.

Also I only get money from gym battles, regular battles, and FFAs (and the occational voting for story competitions) so the FFA is my main source of money and while refs/graders/rangers get wages and get a large amount of cash every month, I only get a dividened of that. It's hard to keep up and TM mon when you're always low on cash.

Personally I like how it is becuase I get a good bundle of money (from 2.5k - 8k) every time I'm in one (which isn't as often as every day) plus the main reason why people don't do 1vs1's anymore is becuase you don't get any money unless they're basics.

 

This. I enjoy FFAs (or at least I'm sure I would if I ever got invited to one ;- but it's really hard to get a ref other than Ataro to ref regular battles.

This too, but not the laziness part

Seriously though, the URPG should be a fun, accessible thing, and if the ONLY way to catch mons (and by "catch mons" I mean "catch mons that people actually would like to use in battle") is by storywriting, then the URPG would be riddled with suck.

I mean, if the National Park closed, the only way to get mons would be to write stories or buy them (aka fail a lot before you can fail a little less). And if you suck at writing stories, then there is almost nothing you can do. With the National Park, it lets people who can't write / have no good ideas have a shot at catching Pokemon.


Wow, that kinda went a little off-topic <.<

Back on topic, imo FFAs should have less cash payouts, and I reckon it should be a requirement that Refs hosting one post in that little thread announcing they are doing so.

EDIT: I also like that one-a-week limit

/massive rant

 

I for one do not think FFAs pay too much, maybe you are blinded by the humongous ffas ST refs. Those deserve all the money they award blush because of the time they take.

They definitely do not pay that much.

However, these FFAs are too frequent I think...three 25 man or so ffas a day is too much.

I never liked the one ffa a week per ref rule, but sometimes it's just insane. One a week however is also insane.

And I agree that FFAs where you use mons you don't own should be kept to a minimum, but that doesn't mean they aren't fun. Random mons is fun occasionally but 'pick any mon you want and it has every move ever' is to be quite honest, stupid and lame.

 

I don't agree that it doesn't take skill. It's just a different form than that of a regular battle, there's a slightly different goal and thus there are different ways to achieve that goal. I do agree that there have been to many FFAs going on. There used to be a ref can only host 1 FFA a week and if that was put back into motion then I think it would work out any of your concerns of people getting too much money.

The moneys shouldn't get decreased though because there are still the small 8 man FFAs and you would get what, 2k for winning a potentially 2 hour long event? I would never do that and I don't think anyone would. Plus, the large ones can last even longer at times so more money is definitely deserved.

Summing up, I vote yes to bringing back the refs get 1 FFA a week rule and NO to lowering the pay.

(Plus if there was less FFAs aaaaand you lowered the pay, that would be depressing. xP)

Also if people need a ref, add me to ur AIM ;D.

 

Seconded.

 

Free for alls are fun. Before, no one would do them. And the only reason a lot are going on is because ST does them. Almost everyday. I see no problem in a daily FFA. Nor with the prices. Sure, it may take 3 hours of dissing Near, but still, that's 3 hours you've spent.

 

I'm gonna agree with this, mainly cause refs are banning random shit due to laziness. Intimidate, weather damage are banned in just about every FFA, and Auto-Taunt is pretty popular, as are "Every turn a Pokemon dies" special rules. Its just a ploy to make the FFAs faster and easier, so the Refs can get money faster. i like the One FFA per week per ref thing too.

 

Story Deals/Trading. Problem solved; but the NP shouldn't be closed, just it's effort level should be risen, just because you aren't a good writer doesn't mean you deserve whatever you want, you should show that you put effort into it, that you really care, that you gather all your english and writing abilities ( and ask others for help) and write a decent story, or a decent RP to earn the mon you want. Not go in, deliver crap, and take-take-take.

But on topic I think one a week might be a little... slim, maybe two a week PER ref, then everything wil be okay, but no on the lowering the amount of money, it just makes since- (Or just lower the first 3 people out to .5k then go one from there with the whole adding .5k to the next runner-up becuase you get .5k for losing a battle anyway.)

 

Story Deals wouldn't work. You'd still need to buy a Pokemon for that to work, which means you need to raise money, which means you need to battle, and that links into the scenario I described above (need to fail a lot to fail a little).

But yeah, I agree with making the National Park a little harder. Maybe weight the dice rolls a little more so that the Common/Medium Pokemon are more common than they currently are.

 

I must reiterate that most of the time spent by an average FFA battler is waiting, chatting, and surfing the web. Not actually battling and calling a move. Thinking about what move you want to use takes a max of like 5 minutes (especially since it's a common rule to send within 5 minutes xP).

I'm fine with 1 FFA per week per ref.

By the way, this is not the National Park Reform thread. :spin:

 

I think the one FFA a week per ref is way too restricting.

Make it three (also make it so they can't do more than one a day or something) if they are big ones, and 5 if they are small ones like 6-8 man ffas. This is a stretch, as we have TONS of BMGers and I can already see them complaining about lack of FFAs because they can't participate. Not everyone will get to be in an ffa and people will complain!

 

I was thinking this over and I thought instead of cutting the pay from FFAs you should limit the amount of money a battler can get from FFAs per *insert time period here*. This was more ffas later in this time period will have newer members and give those who normally get out quickly a better chance. It also promotes regular battles since members who are unable to FFA will have to resort to other means. Plus reffing FFas will become less appealing for refs since less members will be available. FFAs with 6 or 7 people are usually unappealing

This brings me to my other point. If there is a pay cut, refs should keep their pay. Honestly, FFAs are not easy to ref. They can take hours and unlike for a battler, the ref basically has to be paying attention to it for the entire time. If we're gauging this on effort rather than number of Pokemon, on average an FFA with 12 people will last a lot longer than a 6v6.

Oh and about those rules. Auto Taunt should be banned. It's basically just idiotic that it hasn't already been. Also random FFAs where basic and fully evolved are involved should be banned. This is a no-brainer.

Again this is just an alternative suggestion to Pidge's

 

I agree with whoever said 1 FFA per week, but I think that could be negotiated if it seems too "restricted" or scarce. Not everyone is that active with reffing, and not every ref is interested in doing FFAs, so that would be a long, extensive drought of FFAs.

As to pay, I pretty much agree with the battlers pay - not so much the refs. Keep in mind, that with the increased size of FFAs, they can take pretty damn long. Depending on the special rule, they can even be longer. AIM FFAs with generally around 10 people can take around 2-3 hours depending on move choices and stalling. I think the ref deserves to get a decent amount of pay, at least. It's not like he does a tiny bit of work for reffing it, he's reffing for multiple Pokemon which can be a handful.

And I'm not saying that because I want to get a lot of money. I barely ref FFAs, or ref regular battles for that matter.

 

I'd love to know why everyone is agreeing with this 1 ffa a week rule thing, that doesn't even solve the ffa 'problem' itself...especially when only a few refs ref ffas in the first place.

That is way too restricting especially with all the new members from BMG. There are others ways to go about things, but thats not one of them.

 

You can spend 2 hours and have 10 quick aim battles, and make 10k. You can spend 2 hours in a FFA, and make less then that.

I don't see the problem.

Also, story deals don't help much. No ones gonna write a story so they can trade for your pokemon you bought at a mart, when they could just buy it from the mart themselves.

 

You say that like they need to have FFAs -.-

 

So some people get to have a fun luxury and others don't because something trivial like different time zones or school or other things they can't help stops them?