Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: »Training
benmor78 [del] to
All
According to Islander:
hey, at least you provided a substantive answer this time.
I think low demand is actually a good thing. It can help keep inflation in check. there will always be demand for excellent players.
Well, what you are talking about seems to be increasing the amount of training each player gets each week. Because if you are talking about keeping the training *rate* the same, you can mix your training in whatever percentages you want (I do 50%/%25/%25 striker pace tech).
If you increase the training rate, you flood the market with players. What you term an "excellent" player is, in fact, a rare player. What I would suggest is that if you want "excellent" players, you train them. This is a long term game, you can't just say "I want a triple magical striker in a season and a half through mixed training."
Truth is, every single game I play, soccer or hockey, has individualized (or partial group) training on some level.
This is by far the least fun to actually manage out of all the sims I play as a result of the lack thereof.
Obviously, I don't agree with that. I don't think you're thinking the consequences of your suggestions through. Right now, with the current training system, training is about managing opportunity costs. What you are wanting is to do away with some of the essential decision-making and sacrifices entailed in the training system so that you can train an "excellent" player. Hey, you can train one... you just have to make other sacrifices.
obviously, I'm not alone as the numbers here drop as fast as they go up.
Although as I indicated in the previous post, there are far more reasons then this as to why the game struggles here.
You can't assume that the reason the game isn't expanding is because the people leaving the game feel the exact same way you do about training.
I still also find it laughable they expanded to 64 C leagues a couple seasons ago too. Oh yeah, because it was 'needed'. All they did was bore the crap out of new teams whose first experience in the game is joining a league with potentially one human opponent and six bots in it. Wheeee...that's fun.
Sticking every new user in an already populated league would also mean that the earliest all of those new teams would be able to get out of C league would be 7 seasons. Wheeee... that's fun.
It's not a matter of me being able to do it 'better'. from a conceptual standpoint absolutely I could. But I'm a network engineer, I leave coding to the monkeys with pocket protectors, tiny arms, and beer guts.
If you can design a better game (and from a conceptual standpoint, obviously, "absolutely you could"), do so. I could conceptually design a better soda than Coca-Cola. I could conceptually design a better automobile than BMW.
Bottom line is, this game, like others, has some very serious problems. Whether they want to believe it or not (at least as far as our country's sports gaming community is concerned).
Meh... opinions and assholes, I guess. When I was playing HT, Sokker is what I wanted HT to be. Visual match representation, individual plays and players making the match. I'm very happy with the game. You constantly bitch about undeservedly being stuck in B league, but there are plenty of people up here in A that aren't moving up, either.
hey, at least you provided a substantive answer this time.
I think low demand is actually a good thing. It can help keep inflation in check. there will always be demand for excellent players.
Well, what you are talking about seems to be increasing the amount of training each player gets each week. Because if you are talking about keeping the training *rate* the same, you can mix your training in whatever percentages you want (I do 50%/%25/%25 striker pace tech).
If you increase the training rate, you flood the market with players. What you term an "excellent" player is, in fact, a rare player. What I would suggest is that if you want "excellent" players, you train them. This is a long term game, you can't just say "I want a triple magical striker in a season and a half through mixed training."
Truth is, every single game I play, soccer or hockey, has individualized (or partial group) training on some level.
This is by far the least fun to actually manage out of all the sims I play as a result of the lack thereof.
Obviously, I don't agree with that. I don't think you're thinking the consequences of your suggestions through. Right now, with the current training system, training is about managing opportunity costs. What you are wanting is to do away with some of the essential decision-making and sacrifices entailed in the training system so that you can train an "excellent" player. Hey, you can train one... you just have to make other sacrifices.
obviously, I'm not alone as the numbers here drop as fast as they go up.
Although as I indicated in the previous post, there are far more reasons then this as to why the game struggles here.
You can't assume that the reason the game isn't expanding is because the people leaving the game feel the exact same way you do about training.
I still also find it laughable they expanded to 64 C leagues a couple seasons ago too. Oh yeah, because it was 'needed'. All they did was bore the crap out of new teams whose first experience in the game is joining a league with potentially one human opponent and six bots in it. Wheeee...that's fun.
Sticking every new user in an already populated league would also mean that the earliest all of those new teams would be able to get out of C league would be 7 seasons. Wheeee... that's fun.
It's not a matter of me being able to do it 'better'. from a conceptual standpoint absolutely I could. But I'm a network engineer, I leave coding to the monkeys with pocket protectors, tiny arms, and beer guts.
If you can design a better game (and from a conceptual standpoint, obviously, "absolutely you could"), do so. I could conceptually design a better soda than Coca-Cola. I could conceptually design a better automobile than BMW.
Bottom line is, this game, like others, has some very serious problems. Whether they want to believe it or not (at least as far as our country's sports gaming community is concerned).
Meh... opinions and assholes, I guess. When I was playing HT, Sokker is what I wanted HT to be. Visual match representation, individual plays and players making the match. I'm very happy with the game. You constantly bitch about undeservedly being stuck in B league, but there are plenty of people up here in A that aren't moving up, either.
if your text is in non-italics then i'd be agreeing with you.
As an add on, the training regime is part of what helps the SK economy controlled instead of ballooning and dropping way out of proportion..
(edited)
As an add on, the training regime is part of what helps the SK economy controlled instead of ballooning and dropping way out of proportion..
(edited)
the italics is Islander's thoughts from the New USA Teams thread.
btw, my thoughts on individualized training is that it won't DRAMATICALLY change the balance at high levels (high level players are generally be trained appropriate because teams that can afford players like that generally know what they're doing) and will make things easier in general for the average user (hell, easier for all of us)
HOWEVER, i think it does dramatically decrease the strategic planning required to excel here.
So, it may help newbies, and it may even help grow the game as a result. But it will decrease the enjoyment of players like me who actually enjoy making a training plan and executing it, thereby giving GMs like me (and most of the top teams, i'm not unique by any stretch - jonandabby probably does this the best in the USA) an advantage and an enjoyable aspect to the game.
HOWEVER, i think it does dramatically decrease the strategic planning required to excel here.
So, it may help newbies, and it may even help grow the game as a result. But it will decrease the enjoyment of players like me who actually enjoy making a training plan and executing it, thereby giving GMs like me (and most of the top teams, i'm not unique by any stretch - jonandabby probably does this the best in the USA) an advantage and an enjoyable aspect to the game.
I actually like having to juggle positions and orders to get training for the max # of people who need it. I switch almost every week. I play all kinds of weird orders and tactics to maximize it.
I think either you or I are misunderstanding what Islander actually wants in terms of "individualized training."
I think guac and jon know exactly what Islander is talking about. The 3 of them play HA together.
Well, since no one is contradicting the fact that Islander is proposing an increase in the *overall rate of pops*, then I'll assume I understand as well.
What I don't understand is why guac would understand that the devs want the *overall rate of suspensions due to cards* to remain constant, which would mean that if cards reset at season's end, more total cards, but not see the analogous point in regards to increasing the overall rate of training pops.
What I don't understand is why guac would understand that the devs want the *overall rate of suspensions due to cards* to remain constant, which would mean that if cards reset at season's end, more total cards, but not see the analogous point in regards to increasing the overall rate of training pops.
I do not want to see training change. I think it is a strategic decision they every manager has to make every week.
I play HA, FK and TM, all have individual training. And honestly I do not enjoy those games aswell as I find the bordering on the boring side. I play managerial games to make managerial decisions.
I play HA, FK and TM, all have individual training. And honestly I do not enjoy those games aswell as I find the bordering on the boring side. I play managerial games to make managerial decisions.
Yes, they know exactly what I'm talking about.
What I was providing in the other thread was simple reasons why this game is struggling to keep people playing it in the US.
Benmor has chosen to take one of the many reasons I gave and try to again, be derogatory for no good reason.
Look, in the end, Sokker can either make changes to grow, or just accept the fact that it's not going to get much bigger - in the USA at least.
I understand the reasons why people who are successful like the way it works. Just because I dislike it, doesn't mean I lack understanding of why others do enjoy it.
Ultimately, the way training in sokker is set up... just doesn't coincide with producing a product that the masses in this country will enjoy. I've heard it time and time and time again from the people I've brought over here - either from HA where I have a ton of pull on the population, or from TM. I've given up recruiting people here as a result.
If you maintain the game as it is, and other things don't change around it, then this is the population we're always going to have, give or take 10 players every season. The fact that it takes 50 days to lose a team overinflates the amount of active teams we really have.
Trophymanager is famous for this too, apparently there you can be inactive for 12 weeks if you time it right, and not lose your team.
(edited)
What I was providing in the other thread was simple reasons why this game is struggling to keep people playing it in the US.
Benmor has chosen to take one of the many reasons I gave and try to again, be derogatory for no good reason.
Look, in the end, Sokker can either make changes to grow, or just accept the fact that it's not going to get much bigger - in the USA at least.
I understand the reasons why people who are successful like the way it works. Just because I dislike it, doesn't mean I lack understanding of why others do enjoy it.
Ultimately, the way training in sokker is set up... just doesn't coincide with producing a product that the masses in this country will enjoy. I've heard it time and time and time again from the people I've brought over here - either from HA where I have a ton of pull on the population, or from TM. I've given up recruiting people here as a result.
If you maintain the game as it is, and other things don't change around it, then this is the population we're always going to have, give or take 10 players every season. The fact that it takes 50 days to lose a team overinflates the amount of active teams we really have.
Trophymanager is famous for this too, apparently there you can be inactive for 12 weeks if you time it right, and not lose your team.
(edited)
-------------------
HOWEVER, i think it does dramatically decrease the strategic planning required to excel here.
-------------------
ehm, i'm not sure about that, but when i think that a strategic change can make me win a game, i switch to PACE training for that week so i don't have a problem with order switch, but i only train 10 players regularly and they are all YP of mine, so i'm not really looking at the market and i don't need to maximize training becasue i invested big money in big trainees.
just my 2 cents.
About Islander topic: i like Sokker, and i welcomed every change they made or will make. I consider myself succesful team so far (and lucky as well), i'm menthoring as well new teams and the last few of them quit the game after few weeks. I'm not a pushing Menthor, becusue i like people discovering the game by themself, and learn from mistakes, i normally warn them , and answer all of them questions, i don't have a line that i normally suggest as my team is kinda of extreme to follow (no market, USA only players, and YP training only).
I learn the game myself, reading only Sokker USA (i don't read International or Italian) and in my FED where actually i was the Menthor, originally ( my italian friends all stay, and some of them quit HT and play SK only now)
I don't think USA will grow more than this, in Sokker, just becasue soccer management is not a priority game over here!
^_^
HOWEVER, i think it does dramatically decrease the strategic planning required to excel here.
-------------------
ehm, i'm not sure about that, but when i think that a strategic change can make me win a game, i switch to PACE training for that week so i don't have a problem with order switch, but i only train 10 players regularly and they are all YP of mine, so i'm not really looking at the market and i don't need to maximize training becasue i invested big money in big trainees.
just my 2 cents.
About Islander topic: i like Sokker, and i welcomed every change they made or will make. I consider myself succesful team so far (and lucky as well), i'm menthoring as well new teams and the last few of them quit the game after few weeks. I'm not a pushing Menthor, becusue i like people discovering the game by themself, and learn from mistakes, i normally warn them , and answer all of them questions, i don't have a line that i normally suggest as my team is kinda of extreme to follow (no market, USA only players, and YP training only).
I learn the game myself, reading only Sokker USA (i don't read International or Italian) and in my FED where actually i was the Menthor, originally ( my italian friends all stay, and some of them quit HT and play SK only now)
I don't think USA will grow more than this, in Sokker, just becasue soccer management is not a priority game over here!
^_^
I think it's ludicrous to state that the training is what's constraining sokker's growth here in the USA.
And i don't really care what you hear from the people you bring over, honestly.
And i don't really care what you hear from the people you bring over, honestly.
To compare the training in a game where a team needs 11 players for a competitive match where a team needs 25 players and multiple lines doesn't make sense. You still aren't thinking about the consequences of what you're saying.
A more active forum would probably go a long way towards keeping people. That's what keeps people playing HT.