Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: When mr. Random stalks you... despite the tactics and the "numbe
@borkos007
Reducing something that is based on random means reducing random. Eliminating injuries and cards in specific case logic is exactly reducing random ..
I'm not sure why you need to replay to every user in the forum are you official lawyer to sokker team?
Reducing something that is based on random means reducing random. Eliminating injuries and cards in specific case logic is exactly reducing random ..
I'm not sure why you need to replay to every user in the forum are you official lawyer to sokker team?
Borkos...it's not something else...it's exactly the same. Injuries, cards, penalties,...
They are all random. Sviktorov just pointed the random factors out separately.
But, you are also right to say it's not the random factor they should adjust, cause that is impossible.
All events are chance based calculations, though not with fixed outcome. This means all events are random.
However...the chance a specific event, or series of events take place, should be adjusted.
This means that the possibility for an injury, a card, a penalty, etc... should be altered in a way that matches with 3 injuries in 1 team...with multiple red cards or with 4 penalties...all missed, should be reduced.
It is very good to have random in the game, but some things should add up too.
F.e. a foul against a player who was on a clear path towards the goal should always be red! A foul with heavy injury should always be, at least yellow!
A penalty should be converted as a series of events. Not 1 random event with advantage for the keeper.
It's lots of small things that can make the game better, as in more justified.
Now, the random factor breaks the game because the disadvantages are too often given.
(edited)
They are all random. Sviktorov just pointed the random factors out separately.
But, you are also right to say it's not the random factor they should adjust, cause that is impossible.
All events are chance based calculations, though not with fixed outcome. This means all events are random.
However...the chance a specific event, or series of events take place, should be adjusted.
This means that the possibility for an injury, a card, a penalty, etc... should be altered in a way that matches with 3 injuries in 1 team...with multiple red cards or with 4 penalties...all missed, should be reduced.
It is very good to have random in the game, but some things should add up too.
F.e. a foul against a player who was on a clear path towards the goal should always be red! A foul with heavy injury should always be, at least yellow!
A penalty should be converted as a series of events. Not 1 random event with advantage for the keeper.
It's lots of small things that can make the game better, as in more justified.
Now, the random factor breaks the game because the disadvantages are too often given.
(edited)
Reducing something that is based on random means reducing random. Eliminating injuries and cards in specific case logic is exactly reducing random ..
again, you're not reducing random, you're lowering the overall number of unwanted negative events in the game
two different things
the random factor will still be there
still one team will get 10 red cards while another will get 1
same with injuries, one team will have injuries regularly, other will have none
that's random
I'm not sure why you need to replay to every user in the forum are you official lawyer to sokker team?
no, on the contrary, I'm very disappointed with what they've done with the game and I'm losing interest again
@Dtox
Borkos...it's not something else...it's exactly the same. Injuries, cards, penalties,...
They are all random. Sviktorov just pointed the random factors out separately.
Yes, they all have a random factor, just like youth school, player talent etc. Whole game is based on random.
But, you are also right to say it's not the random factor they should adjust, cause that is impossible.
Exactly. That's why I said that there is no way to lower the random factor. It's simply needed in every game of this kind.
However...the chance a specific event, or series of events take place, should be adjusted.
This means that the possibility for an injury, a card, a penalty, etc... should be altered in a way that matches with 3 injuries in 1 team...with multiple red cards or with 4 penalties...all missed, should be reduced.
With that I agree, one game should be registered as a unit and have an impact of randomness of more than 1 red card/more than 1 injury etc.
A penalty should be converted as a series of events. Not 1 random event with advantage for the keeper.
Well it's not only about randomness, it's about how the match engine views penalties, chances of striker shooting on goal, chance of GK saving the shot...of course it has a random element and it doesn't work as it should
It's lots of small things that can make the game better, as in more justified.
Yeah, I agree, there are lots of things to fix
At the same time...the owners CHOOSE to have as many injuries and cards as we have now, it's not a completely random number but as You've said it's based on general calculations...
again, you're not reducing random, you're lowering the overall number of unwanted negative events in the game
two different things
the random factor will still be there
still one team will get 10 red cards while another will get 1
same with injuries, one team will have injuries regularly, other will have none
that's random
I'm not sure why you need to replay to every user in the forum are you official lawyer to sokker team?
no, on the contrary, I'm very disappointed with what they've done with the game and I'm losing interest again
@Dtox
Borkos...it's not something else...it's exactly the same. Injuries, cards, penalties,...
They are all random. Sviktorov just pointed the random factors out separately.
Yes, they all have a random factor, just like youth school, player talent etc. Whole game is based on random.
But, you are also right to say it's not the random factor they should adjust, cause that is impossible.
Exactly. That's why I said that there is no way to lower the random factor. It's simply needed in every game of this kind.
However...the chance a specific event, or series of events take place, should be adjusted.
This means that the possibility for an injury, a card, a penalty, etc... should be altered in a way that matches with 3 injuries in 1 team...with multiple red cards or with 4 penalties...all missed, should be reduced.
With that I agree, one game should be registered as a unit and have an impact of randomness of more than 1 red card/more than 1 injury etc.
A penalty should be converted as a series of events. Not 1 random event with advantage for the keeper.
Well it's not only about randomness, it's about how the match engine views penalties, chances of striker shooting on goal, chance of GK saving the shot...of course it has a random element and it doesn't work as it should
It's lots of small things that can make the game better, as in more justified.
Yeah, I agree, there are lots of things to fix
At the same time...the owners CHOOSE to have as many injuries and cards as we have now, it's not a completely random number but as You've said it's based on general calculations...
Who will decide if it's a good job? If someone looses three times in a row, his tactics maybe aren't be as good as he thinks, or don't fit to the opponents. And too many people look only on the number of shots, not on the their quality, to judge tactics. That's a huge mistake if they think that goals and shots should keep a straight relation to each other.
So who? The result? It's like in war: whoever wins writes history. :-)
Yes! 1st) Number of shots; 2nd) play in the half; 3rd) possession. Of course you have to watch the matches to see if everything works well. I see them ALL!
Last season I finished 3rd to 2 points from 1st, but I threw 3 games in the first part in favor of te national cup and training. I made 400 shots, the 2nd best (2nd in the group standings) 308. Suffered 126 shots; the 1st best, and winner of the tournament, 123. I scored 99 goals; the 2nd best, and winner, 72. I conceded 34 goals, my goal difference was +65; that of the 2nd best, and winner, was +49. My average "play in the half" was 70%; that of the 2nd best, and winner, was 57%. My average possession was 54%; that of the best, the 6th in the ranking, was 55%.
Winner average rating: 62.6;
2nd average rating 58,2;
my rating (3rd) 57.3;
4th average rating 60,7.
This season I have 512 shots; the 2nd best, 3rd in the standings, 331. I suffered 67 shots; the 2nd best, 2nd in the standings; 133. I scored 107 goals; the 2nd best, 3rd in the standings; 87. I conceded 20 goals; the 2nd best, 5th in the standings, 24. My goal difference was +87; that of the 2nd best, 3rd in the standings, 48. My average "play in the half" was 77% (+7% last season); that of the 2nd best, 3rd in the ranking, 54%.
My average possession was 55%; that of the 2nd best, 5th in the ranking, of 53%.
Winner (I'm) average rating: 60.4;
2nd average rating 55,6;
3rd average rating 57.1;
4th average rating 54,3.
5th average rating 58,8! (My last tactical opponent languishes in 5th place, last season 4th; what a fate!) :-J
As you can see the Numbers reflect the results! My tactics work great! My wide ATTs work great! It's random that doesn't work great! :-D
Tell Borkos!
So who? The result? It's like in war: whoever wins writes history. :-)
Yes! 1st) Number of shots; 2nd) play in the half; 3rd) possession. Of course you have to watch the matches to see if everything works well. I see them ALL!
Last season I finished 3rd to 2 points from 1st, but I threw 3 games in the first part in favor of te national cup and training. I made 400 shots, the 2nd best (2nd in the group standings) 308. Suffered 126 shots; the 1st best, and winner of the tournament, 123. I scored 99 goals; the 2nd best, and winner, 72. I conceded 34 goals, my goal difference was +65; that of the 2nd best, and winner, was +49. My average "play in the half" was 70%; that of the 2nd best, and winner, was 57%. My average possession was 54%; that of the best, the 6th in the ranking, was 55%.
Winner average rating: 62.6;
2nd average rating 58,2;
my rating (3rd) 57.3;
4th average rating 60,7.
This season I have 512 shots; the 2nd best, 3rd in the standings, 331. I suffered 67 shots; the 2nd best, 2nd in the standings; 133. I scored 107 goals; the 2nd best, 3rd in the standings; 87. I conceded 20 goals; the 2nd best, 5th in the standings, 24. My goal difference was +87; that of the 2nd best, 3rd in the standings, 48. My average "play in the half" was 77% (+7% last season); that of the 2nd best, 3rd in the ranking, 54%.
My average possession was 55%; that of the 2nd best, 5th in the ranking, of 53%.
Winner (I'm) average rating: 60.4;
2nd average rating 55,6;
3rd average rating 57.1;
4th average rating 54,3.
5th average rating 58,8! (My last tactical opponent languishes in 5th place, last season 4th; what a fate!) :-J
As you can see the Numbers reflect the results! My tactics work great! My wide ATTs work great! It's random that doesn't work great! :-D
Tell Borkos!
Congratulations, your tactics "work" with strongest team at level of 4th Italian league and after 4 years of playing you won second to lowest league in the country.
I think you should be the new Italian National Team coach.
I think you should be the new Italian National Team coach.
Congratulations, your tactics "work" with strongest team at level of 4th Italian league and after 4 years of playing you won second to lowest league in the country.
I think you should be the new Italian National Team coach.
In fact I won with only 8 points of advantage because of the random, I miss at least another 6.
I had to see the opponents with the telescope! :-D
Instead I think there is no better NT coach than mr. Random; he will be a master in single matches! How he steals, no one...! :-D
(edited)
I think you should be the new Italian National Team coach.
In fact I won with only 8 points of advantage because of the random, I miss at least another 6.
I had to see the opponents with the telescope! :-D
Instead I think there is no better NT coach than mr. Random; he will be a master in single matches! How he steals, no one...! :-D
(edited)
You waste your time, people think they understand what random means, but actually they do not :)) You cannot explain such basic things if people refuse to open their mind. Its actually funny to read how one can mistake the probability of appearence with the number of appearences. If you flip a coin the probabilities are 50%/50% but this doesnt mean that each time you will get the other side of the coin. You can get 10 times in a row the same side. Same in sokker, if you reduce the probability of getting an injury you can still be unlucky enough to get 3 injuries in a game.
Well! If we add the cards issue we could change the name of this game from "Sokker Manager" to "Pokker Manager"! :-)
I'm kidding...
On injuries and disqualifications I have nothing to complain about until now. I hope the System always calculates to leave a sufficient number of players of a team to play the games.
Disqualifications, injuries and even bad form are incentives for the manager to study systems and tactics to overcome the emergency. Otherwise it would be a boredom.
I'm kidding...
On injuries and disqualifications I have nothing to complain about until now. I hope the System always calculates to leave a sufficient number of players of a team to play the games.
Disqualifications, injuries and even bad form are incentives for the manager to study systems and tactics to overcome the emergency. Otherwise it would be a boredom.