Follow me, and you will win the game - competitive gaming group experience and conflicts inside it.

Being a competitive game player, and working as a team for a competition.

Back in 2010, I was absorbed in to playing a game called 'Defense of the Ancient (DOTA)'. If I were to describe how much I was into it, I was a member of a group consisted of 5 people, who one the second place for the competition, which made me able to have an experience to play in the WCG 2010, which took place in Singapore, as one of the two teams representing my home country. One might think like 'it's just a game, you just play and you get the result, what's so hard about it?' Well, the fact is that competing with players of top tiers around the world and trying to win over them is not that easy. As a matter of fact, it's really hard, and I would like to describe it as 'making the plays into art.' Our team, although we did not have any sponsors like other famous teams, gathered and practiced the game plays for around 8~9 hours every day for around 9 months. Even the practicing was really intense, and since our mindsets were not too much different from the professional game players while we practiced, I would consider this as a work experience.

To explain a little bit more about DOTA, it is a 'multiplayer online battle arena mod' type of game, which simply means you choose a hero for yourself inside the game and destroy everything that is not your ally. By earning more resources through killing the enemies, one gets an advantage over the enemy team. Thus, making the gear difference through earning more gold is the most important task for the game. there are 5 players for each team, and the sub-objective to win the game is to cooperate and overwhelm the opponents with better tactics. Although individual performance helps, cooperation is the main focus of the game, just like a basketball game.The team with the better cooperation and tactics will win the game, and to perform such a thing, the 5 players are expected to experience games together as a team for a long time.

Team cooperation 101: follow the leader's order.

We ranked 3rd place in the tournament, and we earned $1000 as a result. It might not seem too efficient and cost-worthy if one looks at the prize amount, but the main point was to challenge ourselves in a competitive environment, which was a great experience that I would never get again in my life. So, as mentioned earlier, the main point of the game was to be familiar with how the teammates are going to act in a certain type of situation, making less errors which would minimize the loss for the team and win the game by gaining more gold and gear advantage from the gold. This sounds easy, but the team fight phase ends in about 8~12 seconds, and each player has to 'calculate' which skill should be used of the four skills he has in about 2 seconds. The decision of which skill is to be used should be based on the composition of the team's heroes, the location of where the team is fighting, and which enemy hero should be prioritized. So again, it requires a lot of teamwork and practice. 

When we practice in a game, each of my team members were one of the finest players in my home country for DOTA. Individual skills were the highest tier, and everyone had the general idea of what to do in the game. However, each member had their own unique personal characteristics, and mediating the differences were especially hard for us during the practice. For example, people had their own thoughts for how to act in a certain type of situation, and sometimes ended up losing the team fight because of failing to complying with the other team members. Although our team had a leader, we struggled a lot because members thought they should do what they think is right for the situation. We kept on doing this for the first three months of our practice. Our team won a lot during the practice, but also lost a lot. It was really hard for us to tolerate the losses, even from the public games which we were not expected to lose. 

We had to come up with a solution for this matter. Our team gathered up, and discussed this crucial problem that we had. Team members were quite direct about their opinion; they didn't think that the order coming from the leader was not the best decision for the situation. We agreed that it made sense, but thought had better ideas that could resolve the team fight phase much better. However, this difference of opinions induced dispersion of the coordination which was the most crucial thing, and resulting in losses that was not necessary, even if we won the team fight. The solution to the problem was rather simple. We decided to just follow the lead's order without any personal thought. This was not easy at all; the habit of analyzing the situation was a part of ourselves, and this took around another 4 months to get used to it. However, after we finally got used to it, our end-game statistics were significantly improved compared to the games when we were not following orders so directly. Thinking about it now, we wouldn't have achieved 3rd place in Asian WCG if we didn't actually make that decision to mindlessly follow the lead's order.

It was really hard for us to overcome our habits. Although every one of us had a seemingly better plan, we were not able to explain the details of the plan in 2~3 seconds while the team fight was going on. It would have been much more efficient that if we realized that following under a single order would enhance the cooperation for the team as a whole, which meant almost everything in the game. In the end, we did fix the problem and saw what could happen if we had better coordination. Even though we still saw better, more ideal solutions for each team fight, we learned to keep silent and get the most out of coordination under a single lead.

I'm selfish, and I know it - The concept of equity, what matter?

You never want less, you always want more: we never change even if we grow up!

It is normal for people to want more for something that they have put effort into. One just knows that the result should be about this amount for his or her effort, but it never hurts to get more. If the work was done individually, there would not be too much of a problem about the result though. You do the job, you get the result. However, many of the problems occur when there is a collaboration of work between or among people, and there is not a fair distribution for the result process. The article '

How to Get the Rich to Share the Marbles' by Jonathan Haidt introduces an interesting result about  the equity concept, or in other words, who gets which part of the pie. 

Equity, unlike efficiency, is more towards non-economical sciences such as psychology, sociology, or politics. It is more about reasoning than doing the calculations in my personal thoughts. Of course, some calculations are necessary, but the distinction to make the distribution is  based on the criteria created by human minds. The distribution process will be affected largely by the individual's characteristics if it is taking place in a partnership. If the size of the group that distribution is taking place gets larger, things will be more complicated and there has to be a set of pre-designated rules to avoid the conflict (which will be rigged anyways by some people who can use individual resources to make the game in their favor, according to the article). 

Problems even exist in the smallest form of group, partnership.

I once had an experience to enter a application development contest for cell phones in Korea with a junior in my high school. We were quite close as friends, and we planned it for this contest from quite some time before. We had the second prize as a result, and we were both happy about the achievement that we made. However, there was a problem in the distribution process; I was a senior and was not able to participate as much as my partner did for the app development since I had SATs to take and personal essays to write for the colleges, and the prize of $1000 had to be distributed into two pieces (certainly it was not to be equally distributed). However in this case, it was quite the opposite for the problem from the usual cases: I wanted the prize money to be unequally distributed, based on the amount of work that we did respectively, and my partner wanted to share the prize in equal half, which was $500, since we both participated in the contest as a team.

To tell you the result first, we divided the money in 3:7 ration, which I got the three part. It was not really hard to convince him to get the seven part, since nobody dislikes getting more. However, the reasoning part was quite thorough in my side. Although we both entered and won the prize in the contest as a team, I believed that there should be clear distinction of who gets what, regardless of anything else, including the age (yes, age matters in Korea. The older you are, the more superior you are.) More than having a fair distribution, my partner wanted to treat me as a older 'senpai' (a Japanese term for indicating a senior in the hierarchy, in this case, school) and understand my reasons for being unable to participate fully due to the college entrance preparation. But we had an agreement to divide the money into 3:7 ratio, since I convinced him that I did not want half of the prize, because would doing so would make me feel terrible in regards of the distribution being 'unfair'.

This is one of the experiences that make me thing the equity concept is closely related to human characteristics. Even if the group's size gets bigger, it is human beings who creates the laws and criteria for distribution. Of course, we saw too many bad examples of how the law is abused during distribution phase, but the bottom line is that if the group is consisted of people more willing to share, the distribution will be much more flexible and lenient. In the opposite case, it will be very similar to the third experiment that was introduced in the article by Mr. Haidt, which people will collaborate as a team, but distribution fails since people who have more resources to make the rules in favor for them will rig the game for personal profits. Sadly, our society shows the latter type of examples much more than the former one. The way to make people willing to share more will have to be on the matter of 'did you get the result in a fair way?', appealing on their good, moral side of the personality.

What would it be to take risks in terms of your future? - Managing risk for the incoming future.

Who would want a bad, unprepared future? Certainly not me...

As soon as you realize the fact that you can't really be dependent from one's parents for the rest of the life (the sadness of the puberty ending... yes...), one starts to think about the future in terms of what successful future is to him. It would specifically depend on one's idea of a successful future how he or she should be risk-taking or risk-aversive, but nevertheless one would not want the upcoming future to be a bottomless pit of agony. 

For me, things have changed over the years about how I think about a successful future. I would like to explain this in a little bit detailed manner as I go through this post, but I will start off with some general information in regards of how I prepare for my future.

The majors that I chose: Why?

I initially chose economics as my first major. Of course, like most of the other students, the reason for choosing economics was to have a firm background on how economy goes around in preparation of having a career related to business. I was personally thinking about consumer preferences which was, and still is a hot topic in the market. If I were not to think about the future and take the major I would have wanted, instead of writing this post, I would be practicing piano in the Smith hall at this moment. So economics was not the most favorable choice that I wanted to make. However, it was one of my interests to have a firm understanding of how decision making is done for a wide spectrum, from individuals as consumers to how government makes its decisions for a policy, besides playing the piano professionally. 

The second major that I have is computer engineering in the ECE. I added this major to prepare myself for one of my dream jobs, which was being a patent lawyer. When one wants to be a patent lawyer, it would be much beneficial for that person to have professional knowledge in technology, since he or she is to view lots of papers with new ideas of technology. Although my graduation is being delayed for a certain amount of time, it certainly helps me to understand the skill concepts related to computer systems. 

To be honest, I found out that going law school right away after my bachelor's degree is almost impossible. Dealing with the tuition is not really easy for me right after graduating my undergraduate degree, and I had to make the decision to work and accumulate some wealth before I do anything. Even though things go around like that differently from how I have planned, ECE in this university is certainly helpful, since I can choose my future job from a much wider spectrum, not only from the business sector, but also from engineering jobs too.

Summer works, and earning money.

I had to spend most of my summer time working to pay my tuition. For the work, I tutored English in Korea. I was able to make enough money to pay my tuition, and as a result, I do not have any debts regarding the student loans. However, in regard of my future job, tutoring is not really helpful in terms of experience. It did save me my tuition but when I apply for jobs and interview with the recruiters, it would not be as helpful as doing an internship on a related field.

Self-protection and Self-insurance, what means most to me when it comes to my future?

\

 I learned in class the concept of Self-protection and Self-insurance. To be honest, I think my self-protection and self-insurance decreased as my concept of successful life changed over time. This thing is quite personal, and I will have to compare my current thoughts with those of my high school year’s thoughts. Back then, I was passionate for the so-called ‘worldly successes’. Making lots of cash wouldn’t hurt me at all when I thought about it, and I saw no reason not to have a great job and consume myself with tight work schedules. However, as I was thinking about what would be truly important for me as time went by, it was not the all-fancy jobs that really mattered in my life. Of course, as I said above, it wouldn’t really hurt me, but it was not the thing that I wanted to focus in my life. My current view of a successful life is to have a ‘responsible’ job that could support my future family, instead of getting the best job that I can get.

Since there was a change inside my thoughts, the aspect of self-protection and self-insurance went through some changes within me also. When I applied for college, the self-protection part was to focus most of my time on studying, which had relationships with my self-insurance, which was getting the most out of the grades that I can get. For now, I don’t really spend my time on studying as much as before. As I have become less enthusiastic in getting a good job, I do not spend most of my time studying. I do the things that I like more, and try to rather focus on trying to know what people around me are like in depth. The self-insurance part did not change, but the reason towards having a good grade is not because I want a great job in the future, but to fulfill my duties as a student.

As one can see, I had some changes over time, and due to it, my concept of the 'future' significantly changes from the past and the present. I am not as ambitious as I used to be, and I am easily satisfied with my future conditions. It does not mean that I would be okay living out in the street, but as long as I have sufficient income that I could be responsible for maintaining my future family, I wouldn't really argue about my future. Because of these changes, I think managing my risks for the future lies in somewhere between the past and the present concept of how much I think about my future and how far I am willing to take risks.

Your ticket to the front of the line: Illinibucks!

To everyone, with love from the school: Illinibucks and your shortcut.

Although very likely unrealistic, Illinibucks is an interesting idea to think about transfer pricing. Nobody in this world would like to wait in a line with 35 person in front of him; it tests one's patience while creating immense inefficiency time-wise. That's good if you can actually get the job done. If you have to wait for registering a class because you are a sophomore, the chances that you would get into the class you prefer is significantly low unless you ask a senior to actually hold a spot for you on a certain course. Due to vague assumptions, it was not really easy to think too deeply on the consequences of the Illinibucks, but here are my thoughts on this subject:

Each student gets Illinibucks

: Every student is receiving this particular service! Since there are no specifications, I would assume that everyone gets the same amount on the same time if I were to consider the characteristics of the university, which should be fair to all students instead of giving privileges to a certain student or a particular group.

So, this ground-breaking concept of 'making the cut in line legal' is introduced. I would not prospect it to have good results, but never mind my thoughts for now. Then follows the question: Use of the Illinibucks would occur at a pre-specified price set by the campus. What sort of thing would be a candidate for this?

If I were to handle the pricing problems of where the Illinibucks would be used, the first thing that comes into my mind would be 'the importance' of that certain activity. Since this particular service is to give students 'a cut in line pass' to the services that the university provides, thoughtful students will tend to use this in their preference, or in other words, what is important to them. In that reason, I think measuring the weight of the importance of the activity that it is spent in is a valid method to price the activities. 

So for example, if the Illinibucks is spent in registering for classes, which is a major problem for students to apply their preference in the form of class (which is a big deal) and furthermore, to meet their graduation requirement, a lot of demand will gather around the class registration process, thus making the price of this particular activity high proportionate to the demand.

Okay. So there are prices now, and people would start spending. I'll be one of the consumers of Illinibucks, and of course, I will use it for my own benefits too. Like most of the other students, I would certainly use it for the most prior things that are related to my duty, which is studying. It would be a bad idea to not use it for registering for classes, since certain classes have severe competition to get into. However, I wouldn’t use up everything for the registration. I would save some for health care issues such as going through the line in McKinley center when I am of in desperate need for medical services. Also, I would save some for my personal pleasures, such as cutting in line for the lunch meal in the basement of the Illini union building since there are too many people using at that time.

 

Price failures: Too High or Too Low !

The prompt wants me to assume how things would be when the prices that the authority gave out for spending Illinibucks was too low or too high. This is the part where I thought it would be much more interesting if there were hypothetical details for this topic. Well, back to the topic, what issues would arise if the administered price was too low?

In my opinion, if the price was too low, everyone would have enough credits to satisfy themselves more, causing the depreciation and ultimately, the inflation of the Illinibucks. Further problems would be identified if there were specific information about the rules of using Illinibucks, but since no rules are revealed, I guess this is the general concept of what would happen. If the situation gets out of control, Illinibucks will lose credibility to the people and the authority would have to shut down Illinibucks.

Too high? This would cause Illinibucks to have more weight than the authority would have anticipated. To be exact, it will give more power to the person who has more Illinibucks. But we assumed that each student was allocated Illinibucks, where we can say that nobody got additional amount of this particular service compared to others. So If we start on the same basis, and if more Illinibucks means privilege on certain aspects that can influence one’s situation and duty of a student, one does not have to be a genius to figure out that people will try to get additional Illinibucks by trading with other goods. We did not assume if the trading of Illinibucks is available, and if there is a way to trade it if it was legal. If there was absolutely no way to trade the Illinibucks, inefficiency will be created, and the authority that handed out this service will have to either lower the price to make it more efficient in terms of its usage, or shut the service down due to its uselessness. If there were some way to trade Illinibucks, whether it was legal or illegal, there will be a bartering market for the Illinibucks. The perks that it gives out is simply too great, and for those who think Illinibucks is valuable (freshman or people who don’t have James Scholar in terms of class registration), they will try to gain more Illinibucks at a reasonable trade with other goods. On the other hand, for those who does not value this service worthy enough for them (seniors or people with James Scholar in terms of class registration) will try to get other types of goods, such as money, since they would not benefit from it too much. 

The information provided is simply too abstract, and it would be going too far to assume certain situations, but these are the results that I think would happen in each situations.