Planets

[Romain42]

I already said it before, but the planets are not an economical system, like capitalism, but a tool as old as the oldest communities on our planet designed to help communities to organise themselves.

As long as there are money and exchange, it's an economical system. Barter economy is itself a kind of economy, even if often considered as less efficient. Once, you told you believed the coppers system should motivate the tmuf-community to be more active in creation, which is what an economical system is made for.

I would recommand to really take it as a game since this is why games are done: to enjoy having fun with extra-ordinary things and to also experiment and potentially learn from it.

Great: i'm on the same wavelength!

Some hard questions, however:

Aren't the economical points useless in this system? What is their purpose? (except to lowen the amount of planets in circulation without being accused to be an evil tax-taker)

Regarding advertisement, do you think really normal to have to give coppers to advertise for an event one organizes? The organizer provides a FREE service to the community: is it normal that the provider of a FREE service has to pay? Do you think it would be better to ask the players/teams for planets to take part to a tournament? Do you think it could increase the number of teams involved in tournaments?

Regarding the prices, how will the price of ingame advertising be adjusted? By the supply and demand equilibrium, leading to lower prices if less persons organizes events? Or will the price be fixed, leading to less announcements if some organizers lack planets?

Who will sell the ingame advertisements? Nadeo? Where will go the planets earned in that way?

Don't you think this system could lead to have the things more rigid? I mean, if a team builds a server that runs very well with lots of players, this team will earn lots of planets. When it becomes inactive or semi-inactive, it can still spend the planets to get its server higher in the list, even if it's a ghost one. Don't you think it gives a competitive advantage to old demotivated teams compared to young dynamic ones, that are not already rich enough? Couldn't it be harmful for the renoveling?

Hm, enough for today i guess.

[_Junky]

Aren't the economical points useless in this system? What is their purpose? (except to lowen the amount of planets in circulation without being accused to be an evil tax-taker)

I think that's precisely the point, it's like "I'm going to take 500 planets from you this month because you have too much, but look, I'll give you some points in exchange so you can brag about it !"
Maybe they'll serve a purpose in the future though...

[BigBuddha]

Will we get a message when losing planets due to stabilazing the amount of them?
'Cause I can already see loads of people complaining their planets disappeared...

[Hylis]

I will try to give my best answers in english, but I can make a lot a misunderstanding here I think, especially because of the concepts we are talking about

As long as there are money and exchange, it's an economical system.

I totally agree, but what I was trying to say is that the existence of the planets does not define the system, the planets are only the money.

I would recommand to really take it as a game since this is why games are done: to enjoy having fun with extra-ordinary things and to also experiment and potentially learn from it.

Great: i'm on the same wavelength!

Some hard questions, however:

Aren't the economical points useless in this system? What is their purpose? (except to lowen the amount of planets in circulation without being accused to be an evil tax-taker)

It is not evil to have taxes, so at least my answer can be simple. But to make it more evolved, I would say that from the two verbs that governs a lot of our existence: to have or to be, I would say that if we take from one, it is better to give to another, or that maybe our society lacks of "be" values and that I woud like to observe what happens when there is because economical points can say many things, but one could be that we acknowledge the influence on the economy of someone. I don't say it is good or bad, but it "is". And like I said, it is to stabilize the economy, but I think it is logical to have both concept at the same time. I would even say that if we would put ranked titles (like "lord of the economy") we would think as former days when "titles" would mean some sort of social level like money would mean some sort of social level more today.

Regarding advertisement, do you think really normal to have to give coppers to advertise for an event one organizes? The organizer provides a FREE service to the community: is it normal that the provider of a FREE service has to pay? Do you think it would be better to ask the players/teams for planets to take part to a tournament? Do you think it could increase the number of teams involved in tournaments?

Advertising is like a real estate. It obvious that to "share", you need to "share", and this is what organizers have to share: the visibility. So, instead of having dictatorship from us, or other players, I think it is more fair to establish the equation based on social contribution measured by the quantity of planets acquired by the organizer. if the tournament is great, they can increase the registration cost in planets and have more visibility, which is logical.The organizer will provide a paying service to the community, against their planets. if you talk about free as in real money, then you should also read that planets are free for the players. But, if you go further, organizers can make audience and potentially bring more attention to their sponsors, enabling them to eventually bring some revenues to help to organize.

Regarding the prices, how will the price of ingame advertising be adjusted? By the supply and demand equilibrium, leading to lower prices if less persons organizes events? Or will the price be fixed, leading to less announcements if some organizers lack planets?

Who will sell the ingame advertisements? Nadeo? Where will go the planets earned in that way?

Supply and demand. Nadeo will own the real estate of space, off course, the there is one account dedicated to each different parts of this, like independant agents. This account will convert to economical points, like others, but will not be ranked, rest assured ^_^ Somehow, all the sums that Nadeo collect should compensate a little the daily revenues, but the system around the planets (;)) does not require it, because it enables adding planets into it and making the balance at the end of the month.

Don't you think this system could lead to have the things more rigid? I mean, if a team builds a server that runs very well with lots of players, this team will earn lots of planets. When it becomes inactive or semi-inactive, it can still spend the planets to get its server higher in the list, even if it's a ghost one. Don't you think it gives a competitive advantage to old demotivated teams compared to young dynamic ones, that are not already rich enough? Couldn't it be harmful for the renoveling?

Not really, because if another server is better, it can always spend some days on top and collect more on the period of time. Sure, it will provide a long term stability to bigger owner, but it is also positive for community to build and stabilize. And even about this, the economical points conversion should help to go a little against that. What was rigid was when some manialink site where listed. Now, it will be dynamic.

Hm, enough for today i guess.

unfortunately, like I said, it is in english and that's a little trickier to do this there. Even in french, people says that it is quite complicated for summer time ^_^

I have made two posts today about this, but in french
http://www.trackmania.com/fr/forum/view ... 412#876412
http://www.trackmania.com/fr/forum/view ... 433#876433

and thanks to advertising, some big companies like google offer translation

[banjee]

so if i won an online match versus a bunch of other people back in TMUF i would have gotten an amount of LP now in TM2 do i get Planets?

[Hylis]

if your amount of LP cross for the first time, let's say 2000 LP, then you will receive on the day after, 100 planets.

[Romain42]

It is not evil to have taxes

It was to understand in an ironical point of view... Because people often don't like to be taxed. Thus a strategy to avoid taxes haters to complain it to make them believe they are not taxed: this is something else...

Probably, this strategy works, but i think it's better to assume what one do (especially when there is nothing evil in it).

Do you think it would be better to ask the players/teams for planets to take part to a tournament?

if the tournament is great, they can increase the registration cost in planets and have more visibility, which is logical.

In other words, you believe it's better that tournaments admins ask for registration fees? That's what i wanted to know.

I feel bad with that because it means the end of free exchange. Then, you have to pay for everything you want to do/get, and you have also to pay for everything you create, and it's not the kind of behaviour i want to have in a hobby. It's like in personal life. Who would charge his wife when he repairs her car? Who would pay her when she cooks the lunch? (/cliché)...

I think it is more fair to establish the equation based on social contribution measured by the quantity of planets acquired by the organizer.

It's like if you said non-profit organizations are useless in the world. gg.

Do you think ET is a bad tournament organizer because they don't earn coppers? Isn't the number of teams involved in a competition more relevant than the amount of coppers the organizer can give?

Supply and demand. Nadeo will own the real estate of space, off course, the there is one account dedicated to each different parts of this, like independant agents.

Ouf!

This account will convert to economical points, like others, but will not be ranked, rest assured ^_^

That was not my main concern. I rather wondered what could happen if this responsability has been transfered to players, and i wanted to understand how this source of planets for nadeo would behave in the global emission/reception of planets.

I have made two posts today about this, but in french
http://www.trackmania.com/fr/forum/view ... 412#876412
http://www.trackmania.com/fr/forum/view ... 433#876433

and thanks to advertising, some big companies like google offer translation

Lol, i'll watch at those topics.

EDIT : I watched those topics and it was interesting, but it does not answer to my concerns.
You should involve in politics.

[Hylis]

In other words, you believe it's better that tournaments admins ask for registration fees? That's what i wanted to know.

I feel bad with that because it means the end of free exchange. Then, you have to pay for everything you want to do/get

not true. Look, there are many tournaments where the money does not come for registrations. And you can still make a tournament, but do not want/need to advertise it, so no need of planets etc. It is an option, but it has to exist if organizers want to fairly share the visibility space.

I think it is more fair to establish the equation based on social contribution measured by the quantity of planets acquired by the organizer.

It's like if you said non-profit organizations are useless in the world. gg.

don't jump to conclusion like that please, otherwiser that would be useless to discuss. Donation is part of the system, I would like to remind you that non-profit organization makes a lof of use of the currency. And even if there is no money organization at all, it is more difficult to have a way for them to grow. And I don't say it is perfect, I say it is likely to be more fair than someone like me spending time to rank them.

Do you think ET is a bad tournament organizer because they don't earn coppers? Isn't the number of teams involved in a competition more relevant than the amount of coppers the organizer can give?

how can you know? if I do a tournament and I give a candy to everybody who participates, or if I do a tournament that only requires to click one button to subscribe and that the match starts right away but without referee etc. If you don't have a unit, it is more difficult to advertise fairly. It does not prevent all people who like ET to make them a big donnation.

EDIT : I watched those topics and it was interesting, but it does not answer to my concerns.
You should involve in politics.

If politic is trying to make a better place for a community, then I am ok with that, but I doubt this is your defition seing your comment, which point that you should do more politic than me (at least yours) And you used "gg" in a debate to try to say something that is probably not really constructive but more for the shape of the debate itself. So maybe it is you that should do politics and me still make games (this smiley is highly political and designed to say that I am talking for the fun of it here)

[Romain42]

I wrote the "gg" (with the previous sentence) because you wrote the earnings are a good measurement (at least, satisfying for you because you don't look for others) of the social contribution, which implies non-profit = no contribution = useless (except if i'm dumb).

I overreacted because i found something shocking/disappointing in this sentence, but it was not intended to offend or provocate you.

And yes, i think you are able to create strategies to convince your projects are good, and it's probably a quality politicians needs (except dictators that can force rather than convince). Arguing is not dishonnest. Intelligence is not faulty. And i think you would not have been able to quote the references you quoted in the french forum if you wasn't interested for true in welfare. There were no offense in this sentence.

I'm not totally against the use of coppers/planets, but i think it shouldn't rule everything. See the real world, one can buy everything, even love*... I don't mean such transactions should be forbidden (provided that both are adults and consenting), but should it be the unique possible way to come to love? ???

With reflexion, i think you have a more professional point of view than us, which is normal because Trackmania is your job. But remember it's not our.

*Innocent word to not hurt innocent people.

[Hylis]

I overreacted because i found something shocking/disappointing in this sentence, but it was not intended to offend or provocate you.

You know you made a quote without the full sentence, with even the luck and default of the english langage that I does not spell i maybe you overreacted to your own trick ^_^

So, instead of having dictatorship from us, or other players, I think it is more fair to establish the equation based on social contribution measured by the quantity of planets acquired by the organizer.

And there is, off course, something better than only planets to determine social contribution. I would like to have social economical power (planets) and social economical recognition (ep) which are based on "have" and "be". In my sentence before, I removed the "economical" from social contribution, because I wanted to show a little how a unit can help for our society because when someone use this unit, they actually make a little vote than that is better than that for them, and it is a huge shortcut, off course. But cut are allowed