The Money Earning. (Yes, it's going to be debated again)

I figured I would chime in on the money issue. If we implement the new stuff that is coming with G5, there is going to have to be some balance shifting as there will have to be price increases on TM's and stuff. Thus, there will have to be a shift in pay if that does get put into play. When that time comes, only then should there be a pay raise as there will be a checks and balances type deal.

Would I like a pay raise? Yes
Do I think it is necessary right this second? Not a chance in hell.

I hold a position that pays extra but I generally shy away because I want to improve my team. If there are refs willing, I can get 20K a day without FFA's if I am really active. Its all about activity when it comes to making money. Yesterday I made 1K which is below what I usually make.

My point is that there will be a time and place when a pay raise will be needed but for a few months, and that is only if the new systems get integrated into the URPG.

 

You're assuming that people aren't going to set up easy 2HKO battles, which is a pretty faulty assumption.

THANKS FOR ALL THE MASSIVE STRAW MANNING. GREAT ARGUMENT, RIGHT THERE. FLAWLESS.

1. If we were going to make the system sensible, we'd need to go Russian nihilist on its arse a half a dozen times. And then once we were done with that, we'd need to do it again. Half a dozen times. The system is never going to be "sensible" enough for everyone.

And on that subject, take a moment to look at the title of this topic. You may be vying for a change that is legitimately deserved, but you're doing so in a place that has its argumentative roots located in the veins of the "MORE MONEY EASIER" idea. That undermines the entirety of your premise. ("This isn't about getting more money for yourself." --> based on the assumption that people won't use the alterations to get more money for themselves).

2. You're assuming they'll take five times as longer, which, again, faulty assumption. Speed money-earning battles are pretty common; if there's a no-stakes way to earn twice as much money in three extra minutes, people will utilize it.

3. lol

4. Battling and writing have fairly even payouts, barring the disparate values placed on Pokémon versus cash (which no one will ever agree on). In the time it takes to write one story, you can fight a few dozen battles. Whether you want 20k or a Snorunt is up to you. Earning rewards through both systems is an accumulative process: You put a whole bunch of time in, you get a relatively marginal reward out. The processes are a bit different, though; you can write a crap story 80k story in two hours (as opposed to the usual five or so) and try to capture a Porygon-Z, but you won't be able to. It's a tougher system to abuse, in some ways, because you're forced to put a certain level of quality into the product. Upping pay for 6v6s, again, makes for easy abuse. People don't have to fight the battles.

And, uh, I think you mentioned grading/reffing/judging to Leman in defense of the "fun" position. These are all irrelevant, as they are, again, acquired and maintained through merit and effort. But I'm not sure where the argument is on that end, so feel free to ignore this paragraph.

Baha.

Entire paragraph is based on you thinking people aren't going to abuse the system. We don't need to make it easier.

 

You're assuming they are, which also seems to be pretty faulty.

And your point is what exactly? We're debating a proposed change to the monetary system, as was stated in the first post. Maybe we've gone off of what OP wanted us to do (which was rather extreme). We hijacked the thread, so what? I really don't see the point of this argument, are you trying to say that all of our points are moot because it doesn't say so in the original post?

Uh, what? Please tell me where people are doing speed money earning battles- all people ask me to ref are basics and gym/dojo battles. Really, do tell me- I'm interested in where you're getting your facts. :spin:

Maybe because people won't? As Pidge said, frankly its more time-efficient to do two 2vs2 battles than to do one 6vs6 with higher payout. And even still, if people wanted to make the same amount of money, they could challenge a gym or dojo, which has the possibility of earning you an extra TM/

 

Typo? :mail:

 

My point was that easy 2HKO 2vs2 battles ARE able to be set up already. Don't you see if anybody wanted to abuse something, they would use the current payout of 2vs2 already? Why would you even look at 5vs5 battles if they pay 2000/1000, if you can do two 2vs2s quicker and make the same amount.

The purpose of these threads are mainly to convince other people what really is sensible. We aren't changing everything, we're changing one thing (at a time).

The first post is based off logic. I can't help if one or two people created a platform based on illegitimate reasoning.

Requesting logs of the speed money-earning battles.

I was saying that even if you're doing something for fun, you should still be rewarded for any extra time and effort. Maybe I should of used a different example. Let's sat you think cooking is fun. You can make me a bowl of cereal for $10, or you can make me a cake for $10. If it's really so fun for you, you shouldn't mind making the cake at all.

Yes, thanks for that.

---

Additionally, if anyone is having quick battles without the intention of trying to win repeatedly, I believe refs should have some discretion on whether the battle was legitimate or not and contact someone of authority about it to prevent the individuals making money. This can be a problem with or without an increased pay for larger battles. However, I haven't really seen it happen.

 

2v2s are easier to abuse than 5v5s. Two 2v2s is a 4v4, and that would pay the same as a 5v5 in proposed system. Then the question needed to be asked is why does it matter? The people who like to have big battles will still do big battles, and the people want money will still just do 2v2s. Whats the point then?

Pidge isn't understanding my argument about 'fun'. It doesn't matter if battling can be boring and reffing is fun. It matters that in their current state, battling, writing, partaking in contests, and going through the park are regarded as hobbies, hence the lower payout. You do not need to go through a 'battling test' to be able to battle. Reffing, grading, judging, and rangering are jobs. You have to take tests and stuff to get those positions. They require substantial more effort to obtain, and then to do those jobs, hence the high pay. It doesn't matter if you enjoy it. If you love being a lawyer does that mean its not an occupation? You would pay for a lawyer who went through law school to show up at your hearing, right? You wouldn't pay for a high-school kid who likes to hang out at a courthouse to show up, would you?

 

If there's something to abuse, people abuse it. That's how things go.

I'm not making my own argument; I'm pointing out the flaw in Pidge's "not for money" argument when the basis of the argument is "for money." You guys realize that only the first paragraph of my initial post had anything to do with your cause, and I fully acknowledged that it was a fairly valid change? The rest was aimed at the people arguing for an overall switchup who were still sticking around, and a response to Pidge bombarding an argument that wasn't made against him. ._. I, uh, don't seem to have included a clear enough transition.

Eyewitness over time? Mainly when I was just starting out, and hanging around the fellow newbies. A lot of them would get refs and have massive amounts of quick battles for TM cash. You can't really deny that it happens, even if you don't ref them. :x

Depends on the method. For instance. Three turns to Swords Dance and kill five Pokémon takes less time than taking six turns to Swords Dance and kill four Pokémon. Eight turns to ten turns, plus the transition time between battles for the 2v2. 5v5 is faster.

My response to Stinky stands.

Yes.

...Only the first paragraph of my initial post was directed at the 5v5 6v6 increase argument. The rest of it was to the people who were still lurking to argue for the first post and similar ideas. I should have made the break in my thought process more apparent, it would seem.

My point was that you're jumping off the platform, so you can't claim that the purpose of your argument has nothing to do with money. It has to do with money, for most intents, purposes, and definitions.

Uh, I haven't witnessed any since I stopped navigating the battling circles a year ago. No idea where the logs are. I doubt they've ceased, though.

That example is more counterproductive than the other one. XD You're actually straw manning your own argument, now. You're basically saying more time and effort should be paid equal amounts of money as less time and effort, even though you don't mean to say it. And yeah, I have no problem with 5v5 and 6v6 being rewarded for extra effort. The only issue lies with the fact that abuse is easy, and could occur. I am not arguing that the 5v5 6v6 change shouldn't be made; I'm arguing that the room for abuse is genuine. It needs to be taken into account by those arguing for it.

Also, I am arguing with you only because (besides the fact that the abuse is entirely possible and shouldn't be discounted) you argued with my post, which wasn't actually directed at your argument. So this is somewhat fruitless on both our ends. Sorry about my fail transitioning. XD

 

Wait. One of your arguments is that '5v5s paying 2k wont be abused because 2v2s will still pay more.' Now you are saying I don't know that for sure?

People will do big battles for fun, no matter the money for the battlers. The problem with those big battles is not the payout, its the time/effort involved in them. Increasing the pay won't make them more popular, except for abuse, which your plan doesn't involve.

How does it make more sense? Because they are bigger? You are rewarding a group whose attitudes wont change with a reward they don't really need. Ingame payout is dependent by the type of trainer you face, not the number of Pokemon in their party.

I ignored the third part of your post because it is repetition of what you already said, and you basically ignored what is quoted above it.

 

You don't know if the increase in pay would not change whether or not more people would do larger battles. This is what I mean by that. I personally would be more tempted at the 6v6 circuit myself if the change was implemented. I've already elaborated about how this can't be abused anymore than 2v2 currently can.

It is not an award. It's giving justice to time/effort. Ingame isn't the ruler of all URPG policies, a cmmon theme in trainer's court.

Are you saying a battle is more of a casual thing than these 'jobs'? And you're saying due to this formality of "jobs", they should get higher pay? Agreed. This change will still keep that status quo. Refs will still make more than battlers. Also, I don't really think it's accurate to describe battling and such as "hobbies" and "jobs" when it is all part of a massive game that is a hobby itself.

 

Who cares how formal they are? Becoming a ref requires work. Reffing itself requires work. Any Tom, Dick, or Sally can battle. All you have to do is make one little post in the Starter Requests thread. Learning to ref takes time and work.

 

What is your point?

 

Well, you were at least insinuating that refs don't deserve higher pay. My point is that they clearly do more work than battlers do in any given battle, thus justifying their higher pay out.

 

No, I was asking for clarification to see if I understood his quoted point correctly. Anyway, I changed that part to be more clearer on what I was saying.

 

Can I be the one to just come in and say that everyone is pretty much repeating themselves? ^^' *Is shot.* X__x

At any rate, to everyone opposing this: Why do you find it so god-awfully opposing that the earnings of larger battles should be increased a bit? I fail to see how anyone could abuse it if they don't already abuse the earnings for a 2v2. And honestly, if people do abuse it, then uh, maybe the ref can say, "Hey you guys abused this rule, no money for you"?

I think people are getting far too anal over a game on the internet. No offense to anyone, of course.

Oh, and guess what? I currently have 3/4 positions and I agree with increasing the battle earnings. I don't Grade these days because I don't have time and until I get a computer I won't really be too active on the Ranger front, but I Judge plenty of Contests and if I had to say, I've probably gotten maybe between 10-20k within the past few weeks. The thing is, I have jobs and make money with them, but even I think it makes sense to increase the earnings for larger battles, and not just to earn more money. Everyone keeps saying, "OMG WE BATTLE FOR FUN NOT MONIES" but it's not all that fun to me to lose a 4v4 or a 5v5 and only get 500. Your argument is "Well don't do it if it's not fun", but that's exactly the point. It's supposed to be fun but it isn't, so shouldn't we tweak things a bit to try and rectify it?

And in the worst-case scenario, if it doesn't work out just switch things back to the way they used to be.

This post turned out to be longer than I meant it to be XD.

EDIT: Lol Pidge I got your top spot this time .

 

Thank you so much, fellow Bleach fan. Everything was starting to get confusing, and all over the place. I appreciate your making some nice clear arguments.
And you're right, if it doesn't work out, we can always change it back. Trial and error.

 

I think the big issue is one side going: It wont change much so why not? And the other side going: It wont change much, so who cares? I'm pretty sure the argument will go in circles unless someone makes an autocratic decision/we vote on it.

 

Dammit Leman, I was hoping it would die out on its own.

Anyway, we'll have the URPG leaders discuss it. I'm going to give it a few more days for anyone to make any last remarks and then we'll figure it out.

 

I don't see any need to increase the money. Seriously, I would love the money, but people wouldn't ref, grade or judge as much if it was easier to battle and you made more money.
For those people that have problems with 5v5's and 6v6's, don't do them. If you want a fun exciting match then you should do it. But if you only are doing it for the money then why not abuse basic battles >_>