Jump to content
  • 50

Can you buff competitive prizes?


xXBlu3BreathXx

Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
21 hours ago, RysPicz said:

We started from turning someone's comp pokemon into a shiny and now we are at point where we receive something with no value whatsoever (as we cannot trade it) and we can't show it off either due to fact that it's not shiny.

That is not where we started, from what I remember though...
I believe the starting point would rather be to get a tradeable, OT Squirtle Shiny which could possibly have all bad IVs
But I haven't been here from the start, so I don't know how it was before that
Just compared to those prizes, the current 4*25 + 2*31 IV Shiny prize is actually a huge buff already.
 

21 hours ago, RysPicz said:

How an existence of something that is untradeable provides economic value? Gift shinies absolutely do not affect the game's economy. Player who won such comp, cannot trade it at all meaning he cannot get any economical profit. Please explain.

I can think of multiple things that might (or maybe might not - just ideas from the top of my head) have an influence big enough to worry the devs:
- The demand of the player winning the shiny (this can go both directions)

   > the player who would have wanted to buy that shiny on the market now won't need to anymore because he got what he desired -> decreasing demand
   > the player who won now wants to buy a second, similar comp shiny to be able to switch between two sets/make scouting the shiny comp less easy -> increasing demand
- demand of others if a rare species is given as a shiny prize

  > something like the snob effect might apply, basically making you desire a shiny less if you already know that someone else has one (especially if none of that species   existed as a shiny on the server before) -> influencing how much you are willing to pay for the speices, how much time/effort/money you are willing to invest to obtain/find that shiny
- demand of others if high IVs are given on the shiny prize
  > somewhat similar to the snob effect someone might be less willing to invest into breeding a shiny comp if there were 6*30-31 IV shiny comps given as a prize as for the difficulty to surpass those via breeding, while surpassing the current shiny prizes by breeding is somewhat more feasable -> if this applies it would negatively impact the effectiveness of the shiny sink
Considering the way the comp shinies are aquired it might also be worth to mention that via breeding the "material" is lost while via winning a tournament the used comps are kept, so the missing sink on the PvP part might be a reason for the not perfect prizes (though we of course could argue that the winner has to sink all used comps if he in return would get a better prize). 

 


Apart from the argument if a 4*25+2*31 comp is less valid than a 6*30-31 one; is it actually the main issue considering the already limited applicability of the shiny comp because of it being more easily scouted? 
If it weren't and this were mainly about the appreciation shown towards the playerbase, maybe other prized with less economic impact would be a better choice?
I could think of unique vanities that might be desirable or instead of a gift (shiny or non-shiny) pokemon, the winner could get untradable breeding items (braces+ability pill) in a high enough quantity (I remember that being the prize at least once before)...


Concerning the current seasonal: Maybe it would be neat to give that Dragonite Multiscale as its abilty and 'simply' ban it from use in PvP until that HA is available to everyone? Just similar to that shiny Hydreigon with the nyi Draco Meteor...

Link to comment
  • 0
On 4/7/2018 at 12:00 PM, Squirtle said:

2. This will not be happening as we have stated in the past we believe these types of prizes provide too much economic value that affects the rest of the population. 

how does untradeable shinies (with better ivs) affect the economy at all? oh ye..maybe the dead shiny trainers will quit the dead shiny market to play competitive and win shinies.. wait they wont. first because they bad and cant and second because they "enjoy" shiny tradingSince they can't trade nor win gift shinies I'm 100% certain that better ivs on gift rewards wont have the slightest effect on the economy.

 

We enjoy competitive. let us compete with our rewards, that's what competitive players want, not useless trophies (that is what shiny collectors might want, it's completely different. also they don't play competitive so ye).

 

and ye, I personally consider a 2x31 rest 25's shiny ferro cute and all but useless as fuck for anyone who takes the competitive seriously why would competitive players want that reward then?

 

actually just boost the 25s to 27s and it'll look a hell lot better.

 

also: non shiny rewards lul

 

Edited by FNTCZ
Link to comment
  • 0

Imo, the main reason why the prizes for the OU championship look bad is because these prizes are comapred to the ones we had in previous seasonals. The 2016 Doubles Championship raised the bar for prizes way too high, so in the future the best thing would be to never host a doubles championship again or only give doubles players terrible prizes xD

Link to comment
  • 0

I'm pretty late to the party and i will mostly focus on the cash aspect of tourneys but anyway.

 

As someone who came back to PokeMMO with Gen5 i can tell you it is extremely hard and expensive to even win the first few rounds in a tournament.

 

Most of my comp pokemon from the past gen were useless so i basically started at 0 (i didn't really know much about gen 5 comp either).

 

The fact that breeding is so expensive and that you need to breed a lot means that the 1-2m for winning a tourney is just not enough. 

Plus you need to invest a lot of time in reading about movesets, calculating stuff, trying movesets on showdown or some other shit just to breed something that just doesn't work how you hoped it would. I bred a lot of pokemons and some of them just didn't really fit my team as well as i hoped they would or they were just not as good.

 

Now i have pretty decent experience with gen3 and gen4 comp and i still don't manage to get far in a tournament, i don't even wanna know how hard it is for completely new players.

 

It's fact that breeding comps and getting into the comp scene + have a chance to win something is extremely expensive, time consuming and sometimes just frustrating.

 

So i can totally understand when players won't put up with any of that just to win 1-2m.

 

 

Hope you all can understand what i mean :) I'm not a native english speaker.

Edited by tMuse
trying to fix some spelling :D
Link to comment
  • 0
6 hours ago, tMuse said:

As someone who came back to PokeMMO with Gen5 i can tell you it is extremely hard and expensive to even win the first few rounds in a tournament.

[...]

The fact that breeding is so expensive and that you need to breed a lot means that the 1-2m for winning a tourney is just not enough. 

[...]

I'd like to raise the question if a higher cash prize pool would actually help any player that tries to get further into a tournament?

Considering what has been said here in this thread before...

On 7.4.2018 at 8:43 PM, RysPicz said:

[...] especially for a competitive player who needs to have few boxes of comps [...]

On 8.4.2018 at 5:26 AM, Toast said:

[...] any good comp player will have more than one set of the same pokemon [...]

On 8.4.2018 at 7:48 AM, OrangeManiac said:

[...] to have a legitimate chance at winning a tournament it's not enough to have six good Pokemon but rather like 20. Scouting and counterteaming is such a crucial part of the competitive scene that if you're not counterteaming yourself you have to at least constantly change your team in order secure deep tournament runs. There's lots of players with lots and lots of skill in the earlier rounds of tournaments but I'd argue the main reason keeping them from becoming the "top tier players" is simply the fact they do not have the resources to change their team. Not only is winning a 64 man tournament difficult to begin with but your resources has to be up to par as well. [...]

...isn't it most consequential to assume that the player who will win a - maybe buffed (cash) - prize is already one of the wealthiest comp players around?

(wealthy in terms of how many comps he was already able to amass to actually be able to win)
If one of these players might win the prize (maybe even every time) I fail to see how a higher cash prize could in any way help a new player?
It would not even the chances to win but rather make the playing field even more uneven.

This, and taking into account that

6 hours ago, tMuse said:

breeding comps and getting into the comp scene + have a chance to win something is extremely expensive, time consuming and sometimes just frustrating.

it would in my opinion simply make more sense to advocate an easier way to obtain comps if you want to improve the situation especially for newer players.

 

Link to comment
  • 0
38 minutes ago, Anthrazit said:

I fail to see how a higher cash prize could in any way help a new player?
It would not even the chances to win but rather make the playing field even more uneven.

This is because neither I or anyone else in this thread has said that tournaments should even exist to help new players. And they shouldn't. It's a competition, an event with a purpose to reward the player that achieved the most in this particular event. There's no reason why in a competitive event the emphasis should be on the players who are behind in the competition.

 

44 minutes ago, Anthrazit said:

...isn't it most consequential to assume that the player who will win a - maybe buffed (cash) - prize is already one of the wealthiest comp players around?

(wealthy in terms of how many comps he was already able to amass to actually be able to win)

The player usually is one of the more wealthier players but not comp players. I make this distinction because the phrase "wealthiest comp players" assumes that the wealth was gathered through playing competitive and that simply isn't the case. Every wealthy competitive player has had to do the boring in-game grind to even become that wealthy player to have that chance of winning those prizes (unless they had wealthy friends or teammates who had to do the same aforementioned grind).

 

48 minutes ago, Anthrazit said:

it would in my opinion simply make more sense to advocate an easier way to obtain comps if you want to improve the situation especially for newer players.

While I definitely agree with this point, it's a completely separate discussion from "should the winner of tournament be rewarded properly for their achievements".

Link to comment
  • 0
5 hours ago, Anthrazit said:

I'd like to raise the question if a higher cash prize pool would actually help any player that tries to get further into a tournament?

No, it is way too expensive for new players to even have a chance in tourney so a larger price pool won't help them at all.

 

12 hours ago, tMuse said:

It's fact that breeding comps and getting into the comp scene + have a chance to win something is extremely expensive, time consuming and sometimes just frustrating.

 

Quoting myself to clarify.

I was not trying to say we should help newer players with higher cash payouts, i just wanted to point out how hard and expensive it is to even have a chance at winning.

 

Even when you already are in the comp scene (so ignoring the "getting into the comp scene" part) you still have to invest millions into your team to be able to switch and counter other players in tournaments. With the current cash reward you can breed 1~2 comp pokemons, depending if you get lucky with nature or it's just a cheaper pokemon to breed.

 

On 6.4.2018 at 10:52 PM, redspawn said:

[...]but not only this feels really small, people rather take RP than cash as cash is so unrewarding rn to take.

Raising the cash price pool would help players to stay ontop of the game and i think it would feel more rewarding.

 

5 hours ago, Anthrazit said:

[...]the player who will win a - maybe buffed (cash) - prize is already one of the wealthiest comp players around?[...]
If one of these players might win the prize (maybe even every time)[...]

The thing is that i could go and catch pokemons when a tourney is going on and sell the 31IVs for cash and get more money than placing 2nd with the rewards being as low as they are.

Since the chances to win a tourney aren't really high i just don't see a point (beside RP and a shiny that's just not that great for comp) to play a tournament.

6 hours ago, Anthrazit said:

It would not even the chances to win but rather make the playing field even more uneven.

So i don't think it would make an uneven playing field but rather get more people involved with playing comp as it would be actually rewarding to do the grind and the work to get into it.

Link to comment
  • 0
10 hours ago, OrangeManiac said:

This is because neither I or anyone else in this thread has said that tournaments should even exist to help new players.

From what was posted it did seem to me that the difficulty to advance in a tournament was addressed, but maybe it was not meant to be a main issue.
 

10 hours ago, OrangeManiac said:

 the phrase "wealthiest comp players" assumes that the wealth was gathered through playing competitive

Just to clarify I did not mean to insinuate that at all.
I really meant "wealthy in terms of how many comps he was already able to amass to actually be able to win".

I realize that if you support a higher prize pool it is not meant to help "the players who are behind in the competition", but couldn't there be a solution where it felt more rewarding for both the winner(s) as well as competitors?
As tMuse said there are "ooportunity costs" attached to play in a tournament instead of doing something more profitable/rewarding

5 hours ago, tMuse said:

The thing is that i could go and catch pokemons when a tourney is going on and sell the 31IVs for cash and get more money than placing 2nd with the rewards being as low as they are.

Since the chances to win a tourney aren't really high i just don't see a point (beside RP and a shiny that's just not that great for comp) to play a tournament.

So i don't think it would make an uneven playing field but rather get more people involved with playing comp as it would be actually rewarding to do the grind and the work to get into it.

Would a solution be to add/raise BP/RP payout for every win during a round of a tournament - with a higher payout for wins in later rounds and thus rewarding the winner/2nd place/... the most and still reward others that advanced for "the grind and the work" to do so?
Or are there reasons somethin alike would not be practicable?

 

Edited by Anthrazit
Link to comment
  • 0
12 hours ago, Anthrazit said:

Would a solution be to add/raise BP/RP payout for every win during a round of a tournament - with a higher payout for wins in later rounds and thus rewarding the winner/2nd place/... the most and still reward others that advanced for "the grind and the work" to do so?
Or are there reasons somethin alike would not be practicable?

So if i understand you correctly you mean.. for example if i win the first round in tournament (ofc only if i battled and not if not enough players registered) i get like 500-1k BP and it increases for later rounds in the tournament? and raise the cash price for place 4-1? because i think that would actually be a good solution.

 

I mean it wouldn't need to increase by much to feel rewarding, and maybe you wouldn't even need to increase the cash price if you add BP for every round and they increase since BP are kinda like cash since you can sell the BPs.

 

Because then it would actually make sense to invest time in a tournament even if you just win 1-2 rounds since the BP payouts are more than winning a simple PVP matchmaking game.

Link to comment
  • 0
On 07/04/2018 at 7:00 PM, Squirtle said:

2. This will not be happening as we have stated in the past we believe these types of prizes provide too much economic value that affects the rest of the population. 

I would like to have more details on this one.

 

I mean, which part is affected ?

 

Such a prize (we're talking about making shiny gifts fully customable, allowing 6*31), may affect comp market in once hand, and shiny market in another hand. Maybe we can also talk about a comp shiny market.

 

In the first case, the effect is true. but the "too much" is not justified here, as we have hundreads of comps bred everyday. This part of the economic value should be ok.

 

Second case, the shiny market. This may be harder to estimate because it's way less dynamic than comp market. But as the comp prize of a specifc specie are only given every x time, following cooldowns, this may easily be adapted (if it's not already well made) to make gifts generation marginal regarding natural generation. Over that, we can accept that, in shiny market (not regarding ivs here), the introduction of a gift has less impact than any natural and tradeable introduction.

 

Third case, the shiny comp market : This part is way too situational to be discussed without exact statistics, this market is not dynamic at all, so we can make any theory based on player observation.

Still, I would like to share and experience, on another game having currently 500k+ active acount, which is far from its best periods.

This game used to gift an item for creative events (and these are rare for a game of this size). This used to be tradeable for the 5 first events, and then it became undradeable. Today, it's been maybe 12 years since this item was created, and something like 50 of them have been generated. Well, the price of the 5 tradeable never flinch, even everytime an untradeable one is generated. 

My opinion is that the target are not the same. People who build value of the tradeable items are not the same people who actually get to win some of the untradeable ones. If they never happen to meet (i mean, meeting throught a market, we dont really care about social aspect here), value has no reason to be affected.

Shiny comp market is different in some points, but I keep thinking it's marginal. And tradeable shiny comp keep being generated : It's a good point for the 6*31 gifts, meaning that with time, they're even less relatively affecting the market.

 

Well, it just discussing, I dont even play comp so it's wont change my life, but I'm curious to know better the pokemmo economy mechanics. Don't take my words as a global truth, studying economy I know how easy it is to make misleading statements by not taking the right variables in account, or stuff like that.

Link to comment
  • 0
4 hours ago, tMuse said:

So if i understand you correctly you mean.. for example if i win the first round in tournament (ofc only if i battled and not if not enough players registered) i get like 500-1k BP and it increases for later rounds in the tournament? and raise the cash price for place 4-1? because i think that would actually be a good solution.

 

I mean it wouldn't need to increase by much to feel rewarding, and maybe you wouldn't even need to increase the cash price if you add BP for every round and they increase since BP are kinda like cash since you can sell the BPs.

Yes, that is what I meant.
Just seemed right to compensate for the time invested - as you correctly said one could (better) use that time to farm elsewhere, for example farming BPs during the same time via Matchmaking.


Also, comparing it to participating in a catching events: There you have a chance to catch breeders, if you get really lucky even shinies (at least three caught during the last catching event) so there is already an incentive to participate even if you don't win.

 

2 hours ago, Raederz said:

I mean, which part is affected ?

[...]

In the first case, the effect is true. but the "too much" is not justified here, as we have hundreads of comps bred everyday. This part of the economic value should be ok.

 

Second case, the shiny market. This may be harder to estimate because it's way less dynamic than comp market. But as the comp prize of a specifc specie are only given every x time, following cooldowns, this may easily be adapted (if it's not already well made) to make gifts generation marginal regarding natural generation. Over that, we can accept that, in shiny market (not regarding ivs here), the introduction of a gift has less impact than any natural and tradeable introduction.

 

Third case, the shiny comp market : This part is way too situational to be discussed without exact statistics, this market is not dynamic at all, so we can make any theory based on player observation.

Still, I would like to share and experience, on another game having currently 500k+ active acount, which is far from its best periods.

This game used to gift an item for creative events (and these are rare for a game of this size). This used to be tradeable for the 5 first events, and then it became undradeable. Today, it's been maybe 12 years since this item was created, and something like 50 of them have been generated. Well, the price of the 5 tradeable never flinch, even everytime an untradeable one is generated. 

My opinion is that the target are not the same. People who build value of the tradeable items are not the same people who actually get to win some of the untradeable ones. If they never happen to meet (i mean, meeting throught a market, we dont really care about social aspect here), value has no reason to be affected.

Shiny comp market is different in some points, but I keep thinking it's marginal. And tradeable shiny comp keep being generated : It's a good point for the 6*31 gifts, meaning that with time, they're even less relatively affecting the market.

 

Well, it just discussing, I dont even play comp so it's wont change my life, but I'm curious to know better the pokemmo economy mechanics. Don't take my words as a global truth, studying economy I know how easy it is to make misleading statements by not taking the right variables in account, or stuff like that.

I agree that considering the first case scenario/the introduction of one more comp might not influence the economy much or at all.

I thought of some possible economic effects of the 2nd and 3rd case in the first post of this page - and there are likely more that maybe someone else/a dev might add...
Concerning the 2nd case any effect might possibly be stronger the rarer a species given as a shiny prize is.

The 3rd case is the most interesting though.
I argued that the person (theoretically) given the 6*31 + nature shiny prize does not need to be the same as the "target" to already have an influence on the economy.
I don't know about the untradable commodity in your example so I don't know how well it compares, but in PokeMMO this specific commodity=shiny comps are obtainable through other means than as an event prize - most notably shiny breeding and that is where I would see the economic effect (as said in the earlier post: disencouraging shiny breeding -> sinking less shinies...)

But the 3rd case is also most interesting for the possible motivation behind it/why this is asked for as a price
From an economic point of view I believe a main drive here is - too - the snob effect
Quote from its explanation and possible application to our case:

Spoiler
Quote

The snob effect is a phenomenon [...] where the demand for a certain good by individuals of a higher income level is inversely related to its demand by those of a lower income level.

This situation is derived by the desire to own unusual, expensive or unique goods. These goods usually have a high economic value, but low practical value. The less of an item available, the higher its snob value. Examples of such items with general snob value are rare works of art, designer clothing, and sports cars.

In all these cases, one can debate whether they meet the snob value criterion, which in itself may vary from person to person. A person may reasonably claim to purchase a designer garment because of a certain threading technique, longevity, and fabric. While this is true in some cases, the desired effect can often be achieved by purchasing a less-expensive version from a reputable brand. [...] Ultimately, wealthy consumers can be lured by superficial factors such as rarity, celebrity representation and brand prestige.

Collectors within a specific field can suffer from snob effect, searching for the rarest and often most expensive collectibles. [...]

The reaons why I think this applies is that access to this specific commodity - a tournament prize - is very exclusive: As mentioned before only a specific group of our playerbase will be able to get them (arguably the most "wealthy" ones that are "ontop" because they have access to the broadest pool of experience/comps - both owned by themselves and those they may borrow because of the trust they were able to build/...).

An argument brought forth for a "perfect" shiny prize is that our current "2*31+4*25+nature" would not be viable competitively. (Another discussion in itself whether it is or not).
The inconsistency is: Even a 6*31+nature shiny would in any case still be less viable than a non shiny comp since the latter is not as easy to scout.
Yet those non-shiny prizes are considered "shitty" -> which means how usable the given prize is in PvP is not the main motivation/does not work alone as motivation

If the motivation would be to get both something perfectly usable in PvP as well as a trophy, the solution that would still work better than one perfect shiny as a prize would be: One perfect non-shiny prize and in addition a random (e.g. neutral nature + 6*15) shiny of the same species - the non-shiny functioning as the more viable option in PvP and the second as the trophy

If all current and proposed solutions are still non-satisfying, the explanation I'd see would be that it is not only usability in PvP+Trophy but in addition to that also snob value - which does make sense considering how exlusive tournament prizes are and how shinies are possibly the commodity the most sought-after in our game.
Just seems logical to want them in the most "unique" version that could possibly be obtained (=perfect).

I'd simply doubt that it is needed to satisfy the snob effect and would also question if it is even possibly in the long run or if the same people would not eventually arrive at a stage where they feel unsatisfied just again...

Link to comment
  • 0
57 minutes ago, Anthrazit said:

Yes, that is what I meant.
Just seemed right to compensate for the time invested - as you correctly said one could (better) use that time to farm elsewhere, for example farming BPs during the same time via Matchmaking.


Also, comparing it to participating in a catching events: There you have a chance to catch breeders, if you get really lucky even shinies (at least three caught during the last catching event) so there is already an incentive to participate even if you don't win.

true that, would be nice to hear some staff thoughts about this.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.