robborover wrote:lol nothing like a barney! anyone know where rubens went to?
You mean the manager of Caracas F.C. ? At least that was his name on the test-site. He once told me that he was going to quit playing on the test site because a lack of time. Maybe that's why he doesn't visit the forum anymore.
@ Kameel: In SP you have to look at 1 day as 1 week IRL. So it is logical that you play 4 games a week, because that's the same as 1 month in real life.
I found it in english. I still dont get what the hidden value is. I see the value... but I dont konw exactly what it means, nor how the tool can know how long I have to pots on players as i dont know the pots.
This is a fun game! I also play http://www.freekick.org, which I can recommend if you want a tad lower tempo than SP.
Kameel wrote:in real life players dont play 4 competition matchen per week
I was using this as an argument! A sarcastic remark, you know...
When a day is a week, top players have 5 trainings per week, so on sp it's correct according to me
Kameel wrote:
Blue wrote:
Kameel wrote:in real life players dont play 4 competition matchen per week
In real life, a day isn't a week
that's what i was saying smartass
As I already told him!
So, if you still don't get it krcgenk, I'll explain in dutch
Kameel wrote:in real life players dont play 4 competition matchen per week
I was using this as an argument! A sarcastic remark, you know...
When a day is a week, top players have 5 trainings per week, so on sp it's correct according to me
Kameel wrote:
Blue wrote:
In real life, a day isn't a week
that's what i was saying smartass
As I already told him!
So, if you still don't get it krcgenk, I'll explain in dutch
Actually, it's smartarse, but I won't tell anyone if you won't
Tell me, how are we supposed to know it's a sarcastic remark if you don't say so? There's no intonation with words [/b]
The Minster Men
Season 9: 5th in F.95
Season 10: 3rd in F.95
Season 11: 1st in F.95
I think that you have a point. But how can we change that?
why does it need to be changed? if anything i'd make more games a day! plus it takes a good 3 seasons for a youth to be trained so why is that too fast? other games play one/two games a week and they get very stagnant because you spend your time waiting for something to happen. at least in sp players train and games are played at a rate which is worth logging in everyday.
Initially I was also a bit concerned with how fast my players were progressing, but then seeing how long it was going to take for youths to train (and eventually every team will need a full squad of players who began as youths) I wasn't too bothered, seems about right. Perhaps the only thing I could think of is slowing down the training somewhat but leaving youths beginning at a higher level. (say 20-30 in each stat).
Taking a very much larger leap, addressing the "super player" issue leaving a bigger spread of ratings, say the worst players capping at ~50 and the best ~85/90 as now might be a nice addition but it would seriously skew the differences between leagues. With ratings as the are now even there is a big difference between say a full team of 70 rated players and a full team of 75s.
Yet changing ratings while leaving the balance the same would result in some engine changes which is a rather major change to make when things are working well enough in the back end at present. (Say for example a 65% maxed player becomes a 45% under the new system yet still "performs" in the same real level. ie. If you rated performance of players generally as 1 for a 65% player and 25 for a 90% player and the new system left the 65% player now rathed 45% and the 90% rated still 90% the actual performance levels would still be 1 and 25 on the scale.)
But then doing so just so players don't have high rated would take a hell of a lot of work on whatever calculations are used, probably resulting in umpteem bugs, and isn't needed when the system does work rather well currently.
yeah but what everyone is forgetting is that players need experience. there's no point having a 90% rated player if his experience is 5% because his performance will be very low. therefore, i don't matter if players train too quickly.
I thought experience only added a few more rating points as it went up? (ie a player might be rated 90 at 50 XP, but, say, 92 at 80 XP?)
Thinking on things a bit more there may be another simple, very simple, solution. The addition of another hidden stat (along with the hidden stat and injury sensitivity as there is currently) namely "training speed" which could simple be a muliple <= 1 which is factored onto the current training rate.
Lets say now, with about 2 points per training session, the factor is 1. Every new player gains a random, hidden, "Training factor stat" if this was, for example, 0.5, the player would only progress at 1 point per training session. (To make things even more interesting you could set the current level to 0.75 or 0.8 and hence some players with > 0.8 would now train faster).
It would make the transfer market a lot more interesting as well. Now you don't know when a player will cap OR how fast he will get there!
This would also, to an extent, address the super-player issue if it really was completely random. (ie even players with huge maximum potential with a training stat of 0.2 would be terrible for a long time) while also adding another interesting aspect to the game.
Last edited by Arkzein on Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Arkzein wrote:Now you don't know when a player will cap OR how fast he will get there!
And I think your proposal will make that even less predictable.
Actually there is some kind of difference in training speed. Players under 20 years train slower than players between 21 and 30. Players that are older than 30 gain less each training.
krcgenk wrote:
And I think your proposal will make that even less predictable.
Indeed it would, very nearly my driving point in fact. Who wants to know exactly how things are going to go all the time? If that were the case you could simply do away with training entirely and give players fixed, known, stats the moment the come into the game and a set, known, time until they reach them.
The current varying, unknown, max out levels brings in one noise factor, as does the hidden stat and to a lesser extent injury sensitivity, this would be another just.
krcgenk wrote:
And I think your proposal will make that even less predictable.
Indeed it would, very nearly my driving point in fact. Who wants to know exactly how things are going to go all the time? If that were the case you could simply do away with training entirely and give players fixed, known, stats the moment the come into the game and a set, known, time until they reach them.
The current varying, unknown, max out levels brings in one noise factor, as does the hidden stat and to a lesser extent injury sensitivity, this would be another just.
sounds like a good idea. could be timeconsuming editing all the current players though but it would make the game harder to play.
just to add players do gain global rating through experience, but i was talking about performance in games which increases with more experience. so you can have an unexperienced player with a high rating, but he doesn't perofrm as well as a player with less global rating but more experience. you can see this effect in the spmt.
Wouldn't be too hard for current players, just assign them all randomly, though most will have allready maxed out. Or it could be implmented incrementally, ie only every "new" player having it. (but then you'd have problems with new teams at a disadvantage in the lower leagues and higher teams only wanting to buy or hold onto "old" players)
Hardly likely to be implemented, but can't hurt to keep churning out ideas on the off chance one is actually seem to be beneficial.
yeah definitely. its a shame more ideas cant be implemented though. but sjarel and co do a good job, especially considering they also have jobs and stuff!
