Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: [idea] What users really want
slavista to
All
Last week the results of the official poll were released. Favoring by far (63,25%) the option 3 (12weeks, 2league matches per week, 2-4 official matches per week) with 475 votes. The second most voted option (for leaving the league system unchanged) received only 14.51%. Immediately after seeing the results, I was suspicious about the numbers. I would say I have a good awareness of what users want and it just did not correspond with the results at all.
I don't belive that external poll is the best way to gather opinions of users. I don't say Devs manipulated it, anyone could, but I think that it would be a mistake to base further crucial decisions on incorrect findings.
To figure out what users really want, I decided to ask all Czech (261) and Slovakian users (138). I received 88 responses so far and the new ones are still incoming. Some people responded just by one word or one sentence to every question. Some were very talkative and delighted that someone was interested in their opinions. I copied the users' answers into the groups, most of them unchanged, some I shortened. The results confirmed my original presumption.
My idea is that this could be done with all sokker users. Sokker staff could send them direct SK mail translated in their language either with questions or with link to the forum where voting could take a place. Both ways are reliable, with direct questions in SK mail I expect higher response rate. Unfortunately I put the questions so users often formulated their answers more vaguely, but I believe it is possible to gather the information in more efficient way.
@Raul: So here are the numbers to support my statement, no conspiracy theories and certainly not me being unable to imagine the opinions outside of the forum bubble.
Results of Czechoslovakian survey about the changes
1) Season length
(40 users for this option) for 15-16 weeks or more
(14) for 14-15 weeks
(6) for shortening up to 12-13 weeks
(15) would accept a shortening of the season, but did not state by how much
For off-season break
(11) Cancel it
(14) Keep it or modify it
2) Competition system and number of matches per week
(29) for one league match per week
(14) would accept both variants - one or two league matches per week
(25) for two or more league matches per week
For a new competition
(27) New International Competition
(9) New national competition
(8) Other changes in competitions
3) Number of teams in the league
(24) to keep the current number of teams in the league
(18) to increase the number of teams in the league
(13) Under certain conditions, both options would be acceptable (8 teams in the league or more teams)
4 Training system
(14) To keep the current system
(47) For changes in the training system
Linking training to minutes played
(4) For linking
(7) Against linking
(2) For both options
5) What game changes would you like
(25) Juniors
(15) Matches and tactics
(7) Finance
(6) Flash
(6) Player transfers
(4) Newbies
(3) Mobile applications
(21) Other
List of detailed answers and questions asked can be found here:
https://sokker.org/forum_topic/ID_forum/62076/ID_topic/3446961/pg/0#new
(edited)
I don't belive that external poll is the best way to gather opinions of users. I don't say Devs manipulated it, anyone could, but I think that it would be a mistake to base further crucial decisions on incorrect findings.
To figure out what users really want, I decided to ask all Czech (261) and Slovakian users (138). I received 88 responses so far and the new ones are still incoming. Some people responded just by one word or one sentence to every question. Some were very talkative and delighted that someone was interested in their opinions. I copied the users' answers into the groups, most of them unchanged, some I shortened. The results confirmed my original presumption.
My idea is that this could be done with all sokker users. Sokker staff could send them direct SK mail translated in their language either with questions or with link to the forum where voting could take a place. Both ways are reliable, with direct questions in SK mail I expect higher response rate. Unfortunately I put the questions so users often formulated their answers more vaguely, but I believe it is possible to gather the information in more efficient way.
@Raul: So here are the numbers to support my statement, no conspiracy theories and certainly not me being unable to imagine the opinions outside of the forum bubble.
Results of Czechoslovakian survey about the changes
1) Season length
(40 users for this option) for 15-16 weeks or more
(14) for 14-15 weeks
(6) for shortening up to 12-13 weeks
(15) would accept a shortening of the season, but did not state by how much
For off-season break
(11) Cancel it
(14) Keep it or modify it
2) Competition system and number of matches per week
(29) for one league match per week
(14) would accept both variants - one or two league matches per week
(25) for two or more league matches per week
For a new competition
(27) New International Competition
(9) New national competition
(8) Other changes in competitions
3) Number of teams in the league
(24) to keep the current number of teams in the league
(18) to increase the number of teams in the league
(13) Under certain conditions, both options would be acceptable (8 teams in the league or more teams)
4 Training system
(14) To keep the current system
(47) For changes in the training system
Linking training to minutes played
(4) For linking
(7) Against linking
(2) For both options
5) What game changes would you like
(25) Juniors
(15) Matches and tactics
(7) Finance
(6) Flash
(6) Player transfers
(4) Newbies
(3) Mobile applications
(21) Other
List of detailed answers and questions asked can be found here:
https://sokker.org/forum_topic/ID_forum/62076/ID_topic/3446961/pg/0#new
(edited)
This is very interesting and seems more like what is reflected from what I have read in forums since coming back to the game.
Awesome work with a lot of manual effort too (this are definitely time consuming when you open up for people to talk a bit).
I'm not sure what is going on with the external polls, but somehow they aren't an accurate representation of what people want, which is only bad for Sokker moving forward.
Thanks for the time you took with this, and doing some hard yards to verify the truth behind what seemed to be very odd results indeed
Awesome work with a lot of manual effort too (this are definitely time consuming when you open up for people to talk a bit).
I'm not sure what is going on with the external polls, but somehow they aren't an accurate representation of what people want, which is only bad for Sokker moving forward.
Thanks for the time you took with this, and doing some hard yards to verify the truth behind what seemed to be very odd results indeed
I don't belive that external poll is the best way to gather opinions of users. I don't say Devs manipulated it, anyone could, but I think that it would be a mistake to base further crucial decisions on incorrect findings.
Well, we think, that major problem with first poll was rather just 3 options, with 2 first of them without rule to find one day for each type of competition. And thats probably why results seems for you so unclear with forum discussion (lot of users decided to take 3rd option even, if they prefered 3 games in week). But thats why we finally decided to move back and prepare another poll. Conclusions about problems with external polls are a bit to fast (we just had one), and as we mentioned before - for that kind of detailed polls we need more advanced tool than SK polls. In current option we can analyze data with different perspectives (like to select only votes from small countries, etc.).
We dont think, that there is any serious problem with external poll. But sure, if you want to do own research, no problem with that, we will check them too, same as we follow discussions on forum. All gathered knowledge will be usefull in final decisions.
Well, we think, that major problem with first poll was rather just 3 options, with 2 first of them without rule to find one day for each type of competition. And thats probably why results seems for you so unclear with forum discussion (lot of users decided to take 3rd option even, if they prefered 3 games in week). But thats why we finally decided to move back and prepare another poll. Conclusions about problems with external polls are a bit to fast (we just had one), and as we mentioned before - for that kind of detailed polls we need more advanced tool than SK polls. In current option we can analyze data with different perspectives (like to select only votes from small countries, etc.).
We dont think, that there is any serious problem with external poll. But sure, if you want to do own research, no problem with that, we will check them too, same as we follow discussions on forum. All gathered knowledge will be usefull in final decisions.
Previously I was of the opinion of having 8 teams and only 1 league match per week, but thinking about it I don't find bad the idea of having 12 teams and two league matches (sunday and wednesday) per week with a week off. In total, 13 weeks, with a week off very important that most people want (maybe this week could be used for the "European Super Cup", I think it would be a match that would like to see everyone).
With this format leagues would be more interesting, and prestigious international tournaments could be organized. I think the international league was only in the case of a league match per week, but now it makes no sense. Maybe would be more interesting and motivating for users have prestigious tournaments and not a long and boring international league not according to the reality that would be used to train.
So, we would have:
- 3 matches per week (2 league matches + 1 of national cup) giving importance to football reality where other tournaments are based on the league. New users look for the real things to motivate themselves.
- 1 week off (week 13)
We would have an intermediate thing between 14 weeks and 12 (eternal discussion).
PS: I don't know if I have done the accounts well for 12 teams per league xD.
(edited)
With this format leagues would be more interesting, and prestigious international tournaments could be organized. I think the international league was only in the case of a league match per week, but now it makes no sense. Maybe would be more interesting and motivating for users have prestigious tournaments and not a long and boring international league not according to the reality that would be used to train.
So, we would have:
- 3 matches per week (2 league matches + 1 of national cup) giving importance to football reality where other tournaments are based on the league. New users look for the real things to motivate themselves.
- 1 week off (week 13)
We would have an intermediate thing between 14 weeks and 12 (eternal discussion).
PS: I don't know if I have done the accounts well for 12 teams per league xD.
(edited)
No intermida discussion was between 16 and 12 13 weeks is not that 14 was the compromised solution....
Yes, I know it, but it's clear that the season is going to be shortened by devs because it was one of their premises, and we must decide between 14 or 12 I think. I like more 14 than 12 (for sure).
PS: I don't know if I have done the accounts well for 12 teams per league xD.
I did the accounts wrong.
14 weeks fit with 14 teams, week 14 week off. I didn't keep it in mind to fill out the poll :S, I ruled out this option.
(edited)
PS: I don't know if I have done the accounts well for 12 teams per league xD.
I did the accounts wrong.
14 weeks fit with 14 teams, week 14 week off. I didn't keep it in mind to fill out the poll :S, I ruled out this option.
(edited)
that is exactly what super annoys me we change everything just to achieve reducing more and more weeks ... and we do not think what is best of the game
I'm not sure this is the topic to discuss what we individually want as I think we have all said what we want in other discussions, more to discuss the polls, results of Slavistas internal questionnaire etc.
But just to comment on you last spot " but with 13 "there are no fights" I very much disagree with this. 13 is not a compromise between a 14 week fixture and a 12 week fixture, it is a 12week fixture with a week break. You can't do an 8 team, home and away season in 13 weeks. You can't have a regional/continental cup that most countries can participate in during a 13 week league (at 16 weeks, all countries can participate in their continental cup, even Poland). So as you see, it is not a compromise, it is a 12 week fixture with a weeks break.
I am totally opposed to two league matches per week, would prefer to have another challenge in the form of another league. That is more exciting than playing new teams added to the league that are too strong to beat or too easy to put up a challenge, it adds nothing.
I am not against making it a 12 team league, but as stated above, it adds very little.
However a 12 team league could work if it was international with promotion and relegation, because every leagues managers would have very similar skilled teams, so having 12 instead of 8, wouldn't add more challenge, but more variety of opposition (challenge would be about the same either way). But of course an interesting play-off that was made by OLIVER wouldn't work (but I'm sure he still could make another that would).
But in the end, this forum is not so much what we want, as we have stated the pros and cons, and all I am looking for is equity for all managers to make sure 95% of people have maximum fun, not 35% of countries have more fun.
What this really is, is to show how different real world results, collected by Slavista, are from the polled results which go in the face of everything that has been said around forums for the past couple of years. If however the polled results are correct, it could also be that one country is heavily slanting the results in a certain direction due to their own experience, rather than thinking about everyone in sokker. Who knows, the only people who get the final say are the DEVs, regardless of what the poll says.
In the end I just want as many people as possible to have the maximum amount of fun in this game, and I think that sometimes means going against what I may personally want (and what I have presented as ideas, aren't always what I would personally prefer, but rather what I see works for most people), and putting myself in other players shoes.
Sometimes one option makes the game a medium amount more fun for one segment, but completely kills the game for another segment, whereas another option makes the game a bit more fun for all. I would always select the second option, even if I was one who would benefit from the first option. Everyone having more fun, more competition, and being less reliant on those managers and bots around them, is always going to be best for the game, both in fun and growth, otherwise we might as well all just restart, join in Poland, and then just aim to train our home countries youths and manage their NT instead
But just to comment on you last spot " but with 13 "there are no fights" I very much disagree with this. 13 is not a compromise between a 14 week fixture and a 12 week fixture, it is a 12week fixture with a week break. You can't do an 8 team, home and away season in 13 weeks. You can't have a regional/continental cup that most countries can participate in during a 13 week league (at 16 weeks, all countries can participate in their continental cup, even Poland). So as you see, it is not a compromise, it is a 12 week fixture with a weeks break.
I am totally opposed to two league matches per week, would prefer to have another challenge in the form of another league. That is more exciting than playing new teams added to the league that are too strong to beat or too easy to put up a challenge, it adds nothing.
I am not against making it a 12 team league, but as stated above, it adds very little.
However a 12 team league could work if it was international with promotion and relegation, because every leagues managers would have very similar skilled teams, so having 12 instead of 8, wouldn't add more challenge, but more variety of opposition (challenge would be about the same either way). But of course an interesting play-off that was made by OLIVER wouldn't work (but I'm sure he still could make another that would).
But in the end, this forum is not so much what we want, as we have stated the pros and cons, and all I am looking for is equity for all managers to make sure 95% of people have maximum fun, not 35% of countries have more fun.
What this really is, is to show how different real world results, collected by Slavista, are from the polled results which go in the face of everything that has been said around forums for the past couple of years. If however the polled results are correct, it could also be that one country is heavily slanting the results in a certain direction due to their own experience, rather than thinking about everyone in sokker. Who knows, the only people who get the final say are the DEVs, regardless of what the poll says.
In the end I just want as many people as possible to have the maximum amount of fun in this game, and I think that sometimes means going against what I may personally want (and what I have presented as ideas, aren't always what I would personally prefer, but rather what I see works for most people), and putting myself in other players shoes.
Sometimes one option makes the game a medium amount more fun for one segment, but completely kills the game for another segment, whereas another option makes the game a bit more fun for all. I would always select the second option, even if I was one who would benefit from the first option. Everyone having more fun, more competition, and being less reliant on those managers and bots around them, is always going to be best for the game, both in fun and growth, otherwise we might as well all just restart, join in Poland, and then just aim to train our home countries youths and manage their NT instead
I feel like talking to a robot that is programmed to give the same output no matter what arguments I use. It makes me feel really hopeless. Anyway this is probably my last project in Sokker. I love this game but too often I get discouraged by Devs' behavior and feel that all my work is for nothing.
A brief analysis of the information I gathered so far. It is 35 pages of users' opinions.
1) Season length
Reducing the number of weeks to 15 would satisfy most of the users. I believe 14 weeks would be the minimally acceptable number of weeks for most of the users.
off-season break
I think that it could be both kept or canceled and users would be ok with it. It is not so important matter for them
2) Competition system and number of matches per week
I was surprised that this ended pretty much equally. Half of the users for only Sunday league and a half for the Wednesday/Sunday league system. One thing that seems to be clear is that users do not want more than 3 official games per week. So it seems it is either 2 league matches and no international competition or 1 league match plus international competition
3) Number of teams in the league
This really depends on the final competition system. It is obvious that users that voted for 2 league matches voted also for a higher number of teams.
4 Training system
This is by far the most popular Devs decision. Most of the users wanted some kind of training changes and many agreed for change of training to several formations
5) What game changes would you like
I intentionally asked this question so openly. So I would not influence the users in any way. Most of the users who responded to this question mentioned the juniors system as one of the top priorities that need to be fixed.
A brief analysis of the information I gathered so far. It is 35 pages of users' opinions.
1) Season length
Reducing the number of weeks to 15 would satisfy most of the users. I believe 14 weeks would be the minimally acceptable number of weeks for most of the users.
off-season break
I think that it could be both kept or canceled and users would be ok with it. It is not so important matter for them
2) Competition system and number of matches per week
I was surprised that this ended pretty much equally. Half of the users for only Sunday league and a half for the Wednesday/Sunday league system. One thing that seems to be clear is that users do not want more than 3 official games per week. So it seems it is either 2 league matches and no international competition or 1 league match plus international competition
3) Number of teams in the league
This really depends on the final competition system. It is obvious that users that voted for 2 league matches voted also for a higher number of teams.
4 Training system
This is by far the most popular Devs decision. Most of the users wanted some kind of training changes and many agreed for change of training to several formations
5) What game changes would you like
I intentionally asked this question so openly. So I would not influence the users in any way. Most of the users who responded to this question mentioned the juniors system as one of the top priorities that need to be fixed.
It is fantastic info, and a great, brief summary of what you have found.
I do hope it isn't your last post, but completely understand how it can feel.
I know way too many good people who have given up making any comments because they are over hitting their heads against the wall in the past. All have opinions that are important but some of these people have incredible thought processes like yourself, which can make the game better for everyone.
I do hope it isn't your last post, but completely understand how it can feel.
I know way too many good people who have given up making any comments because they are over hitting their heads against the wall in the past. All have opinions that are important but some of these people have incredible thought processes like yourself, which can make the game better for everyone.
I didn't really want deflect the thread, I consider very useful slavista's topic. I only wanted to say that I changed my opinion A BIT about before due to I have analyzed things differently.
I corrected that part of "there are no fights", because I prefer 14 weeks much more.
I respect your opinion. I liked international league before, but now I am totally against if we play 2 league matches per week with more than 8 teams. I much prefer this option before having an unreal international league. In national league you have the same format, and you compete with users of your level, some stronger than others, don't you think that exactly the same would happen in the international league or do you think everyone will be competitive? I think it will be the same. I only like international league for training and this is not motivating...most users will use for it, or they would do in national league...it would be a very unrealistic game with little motivation for new and old users like me and other I know.
(edited)
I corrected that part of "there are no fights", because I prefer 14 weeks much more.
I respect your opinion. I liked international league before, but now I am totally against if we play 2 league matches per week with more than 8 teams. I much prefer this option before having an unreal international league. In national league you have the same format, and you compete with users of your level, some stronger than others, don't you think that exactly the same would happen in the international league or do you think everyone will be competitive? I think it will be the same. I only like international league for training and this is not motivating...most users will use for it, or they would do in national league...it would be a very unrealistic game with little motivation for new and old users like me and other I know.
(edited)
In national league you have the same format, and you compete with users of your level, some stronger than others, don't you think that exactly the same would happen in the international league or do you think everyone will be competitive?
I definitely do not think the same thing will happen in International league.
Currently in Australia A-League, our range of marks for last week went from 55.1 (high) to 34.7 (low) 21pt diff. To prove this wasn't a once off, that last week from last season range was 62.5 (high) to 44.8 (low) 18pt diff.
This is due to lack of users in the country. Expanding this to 12 teams only makes this gap even larger.
In an international league, where there is promotion and relegation, there are more teams competing for spots, which means less of a difference, it will be more like the difference seen in middle poland divisions, but even closer (because more teams).
So taking a couple of random Poland divisions
II.01 - 76.2 -> 68.7 (8pt diff)
III.14 - 70.6 -> 58.6 (12pt diff)
IV.23 - 66.2 -> 52.1 (14pt diff)
There will always be exceptions to the rule, and a better measure would probably be to remove the lowest one (as they are likely to be an Auto promotion), but with user numbers, you get closer and closer leagues, because there is always someone to take your spot, or another league to move up in too. Whats the biggest league sokker could have? Everyone!
So this is why I don't think it would happen, especially in an International league system which has 1 league at div 1, 2 leagues at div 2, 4 leagues at div 3 etc, but it would work with the current system too.
If you look at the ratings from my country, how much fun do you really think the top team is having? Until last season when I beat him with an 8 pt rating disadvantage (so good tactic plus luck), he was on a 100+ league game undefeated streak, and was often pulling in close to, or over 100 goals per season. Does this sound like fun to do 7 seasons straight? And it is worse in some countries.
A combined International league, where he can fight for promotion and relegation on his own terms, would give him something to have fun with until others can increase their strength and fight in the national league. As shown by the Poland example, he would be, at worst, playing teams within an 8-14pt difference from top to bottom (and I argue less because of how numbers affect quality of a league), as opposed to his current 18-21pt difference.
And this isn't even mentioning how much his ranking points and sponsorship are suffering. Most teams if he wins 8-0, he will still lose ranking points against due to the formula.
(edited)
I definitely do not think the same thing will happen in International league.
Currently in Australia A-League, our range of marks for last week went from 55.1 (high) to 34.7 (low) 21pt diff. To prove this wasn't a once off, that last week from last season range was 62.5 (high) to 44.8 (low) 18pt diff.
This is due to lack of users in the country. Expanding this to 12 teams only makes this gap even larger.
In an international league, where there is promotion and relegation, there are more teams competing for spots, which means less of a difference, it will be more like the difference seen in middle poland divisions, but even closer (because more teams).
So taking a couple of random Poland divisions
II.01 - 76.2 -> 68.7 (8pt diff)
III.14 - 70.6 -> 58.6 (12pt diff)
IV.23 - 66.2 -> 52.1 (14pt diff)
There will always be exceptions to the rule, and a better measure would probably be to remove the lowest one (as they are likely to be an Auto promotion), but with user numbers, you get closer and closer leagues, because there is always someone to take your spot, or another league to move up in too. Whats the biggest league sokker could have? Everyone!
So this is why I don't think it would happen, especially in an International league system which has 1 league at div 1, 2 leagues at div 2, 4 leagues at div 3 etc, but it would work with the current system too.
If you look at the ratings from my country, how much fun do you really think the top team is having? Until last season when I beat him with an 8 pt rating disadvantage (so good tactic plus luck), he was on a 100+ league game undefeated streak, and was often pulling in close to, or over 100 goals per season. Does this sound like fun to do 7 seasons straight? And it is worse in some countries.
A combined International league, where he can fight for promotion and relegation on his own terms, would give him something to have fun with until others can increase their strength and fight in the national league. As shown by the Poland example, he would be, at worst, playing teams within an 8-14pt difference from top to bottom (and I argue less because of how numbers affect quality of a league), as opposed to his current 18-21pt difference.
And this isn't even mentioning how much his ranking points and sponsorship are suffering. Most teams if he wins 8-0, he will still lose ranking points against due to the formula.
(edited)
I can certainly see why you don't want an International cup/league if we play 2 matches a season for the national league, but how does this help a small nation?
The example in the previous post from our current A-League. So we add 4 more teams in (bringing the bottom rating to 32), and he now gets an additional 8 matches to win 8-0,10-0,12-0. This adds no fun, but this is the reality for most small nations. Many you would literally just be adding 4 more bots to the league, which is another 8 matches vs bots. No fun. Lose Ranking points. Lose sponsorship money. Lose gate takings and overall, season on season, your team gets weaker because of all the above lost money.
Thus why an International League is so important for all the nations out there that don't have a competitive 2nd division (because you need a competitive 2nd division, to make a strong first division).
So whilst you, in a country of 294 users, may get a little added enjoyment out of a 2nd match, an expansion to 12 teams, it is at the expense of every country with less than 40 managers. Whereas an International League, you would get some fun out of, and so would all those other countries
The example in the previous post from our current A-League. So we add 4 more teams in (bringing the bottom rating to 32), and he now gets an additional 8 matches to win 8-0,10-0,12-0. This adds no fun, but this is the reality for most small nations. Many you would literally just be adding 4 more bots to the league, which is another 8 matches vs bots. No fun. Lose Ranking points. Lose sponsorship money. Lose gate takings and overall, season on season, your team gets weaker because of all the above lost money.
Thus why an International League is so important for all the nations out there that don't have a competitive 2nd division (because you need a competitive 2nd division, to make a strong first division).
So whilst you, in a country of 294 users, may get a little added enjoyment out of a 2nd match, an expansion to 12 teams, it is at the expense of every country with less than 40 managers. Whereas an International League, you would get some fun out of, and so would all those other countries
It's a eternal discussion but Do you think that an international tournament that doesn't exist would attract new users? even some users from small countries reject this, in fact the idea of more prestigious cups and not this unreal and boring cup comes from one of them (cibao from Republica Dominicana where there are 17 users). There will continue to be differents ratings in international league because users will use for training or they will focus on the national league or vice versa (even the national league could stop being important). With 12 teams for example, if a user disappears there are 10 others teams and for sure more of your similar level.
If you have 12 teams (for example) in national league and 2 league matches per week it wouldn't be so boring.
The idea was great and I supported it but thinking about training.
If you do an international league with promotion/relegation, then delete national league. It's the same.
(edited)
If you have 12 teams (for example) in national league and 2 league matches per week it wouldn't be so boring.
The idea was great and I supported it but thinking about training.
If you do an international league with promotion/relegation, then delete national league. It's the same.
(edited)