Increased player supply

Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29
  • #1 2019-02-16 10:39

    Hello

    During the season update the formulae for scout-generated players and CSM-agent players were revised

    Considering the amount of players generated on both :
    - already a dozen of brilliant scout-generated players --> indicating a major modification since odds to get those players are extremely small.
    - dozens of "good" players (= capable of playing decently in Champions League once heart-related bonuses kick in) --> again a major modification, before the update there were those players on a regular but balanced basis, you could already get them at OK prices.

    I am writing to tell you guys to reconsider how the formula works and nerf it a little bit.
    I understand the need of good players. But if the market becomes flooded to the point where managing finances becomes useless, then what is left to play the game ? Most people already don't do tactics (anymore).

    Big bankrolls should not be favoured. But managers capable of handling their incomes/expenses properly should be rewarded and flooding players does the opposite.

    Thanks

    E: meant to put it in 'feedback' 🙂

    Last edited by scw- at 2019-02-16 10:58
  • #2 2019-02-16 11:03

    Interesting point scw, but is there not an argument to say the opposite is true?

    I would argue that an increased 'competitive' player supply actually goes some way to reduce the prices of those players, reducing the barrier of entry to international competition for a broader range of managers. Where a more level playing field actually puts the emphasis on managers working on tactics to rise above the rest?

    I'd liken it to restricting manufacturers in motor racing, so the 'assets' are more balanced, and the teams/drivers that succeed are those who strategise most efficiently and have more natural talent.

  • #3 2019-02-16 11:05

    I understand where you are coming from.
    But don't you think that it improves competition at all?
    If there are more above average or decent players, market prices for those players go down. This allows people who don't have such a huge bankaccount to get better players resulting in more people playing for upper ranks.

    Edit: Rickton was faster

    Last edited by Wrath at 2019-02-16 11:07
  • #4 2019-02-16 11:11

    I totally agree. It should be nerfed a bit, also when it comes to medicore players, imo there are just too many of them.

    Although it's nice for newcomers and managers with a low budget.

    My main point is; you should have an advantage of being more active than others, especially on the transfer list.

  • #5 2019-02-16 11:42

    I agree to a certain extent Rickton and Wrath

    However I think / fear it will help most those who do things wrong when it comes to players :
    - overpaying badly
    - buying at the wrong time
    - badly taking care of their own players
    - and more generally wasting resources, be it money or anything else

    I think it is good they changed formulas, just that they went a too far, the changes are really drastic.

    Putting emphasis on activity is good, but as rebbyd pointed out its not limited to tactics. Being active on transferlist and on your team is as important. Pulling bargains and doing things better than competitors should keep being rewarded and my point is that you're removing that aspect by flooding players.

    Last edited by scw- at 2019-02-16 11:43
  • #6 2019-02-16 11:46

    scw- wrote:

    Most people already don't do tactics (anymore).

    But is it "competitive" that managers can idle for 3 years and have a 5 mill bank, buy a godlike team that a regular/new manager have no way of competing against, even if he is 10x more tactically active, just because some dude have been sitting on his bank for multiple years doing absolutely nothing?

    Wouldn't this change be for the better, considering the gap between godlikes and close-to-godlike players are smaller, which means you have to win by being tactically active? Isn't that what the game is about? Godlike players haven't been touched, at least according to the season update news.

    I regards to the bargain/transfer list issue you and rebbyd pointed out, that I can agree with. But it's gonna be hard to balance the two if we also want easier access to close-to-godlike players.

    Edit: posted this before I saw your most recent reply. Also moved your topic to feedback.

    Last edited by timow at 2019-02-16 11:58
  • #7 2019-02-16 11:53

    I've written the exactly same thing in our community fórum.

    Part of being a good manager is finding the best deals. Exoloring the market and figure it out the best timming to sell/buy players.

    I can't agree on scouts lol. I got a 5.5.5 since day 1 of update, got a few trys, kicked all.

  • #8 2019-02-16 11:55

    There are clearly two schools of thought here, and it's likely that my own opinion is biased by the fact I'm now on a new account. Alternatively, its given me a fresh perspective that I probably wouldn't have had if I was still using my old account!

    It comes down to what the powers that be want to do; retain the existing user base, or retain new users. Obviously the best outcome would be a sensible balance of the two, but I'm not convinced we'll ever find it.

  • #9 2019-02-16 12:22

    And it's fair enough Rickton.

    I think altering starting scores would be a more efficient and 'linear' approach in lowering the gap.

    For instance today a player with 0 in a skill he performs at 0%, tomorrow they could implement something like this:
    Skill = 50+50% * score
    À player with 20 plays at 60 still doesn't do much, a player at 90 plays at 95.
    Not as much need to put the TL on steroids and totally screwing some users to the advantage of others. When you have player that can be maxed to 100 he'll still do better than others, but with less margin than today.
    Because it is the biggest issue in terms of competitiveness. The gap between a player than can be taken to 100 and one you can only take to 96 is spectacular (for offensive skills especially)

    If you want to make the gap even thinner when your players are in the 80s-90s skills, you can introduce a ln function or a squareroot one.
    For instance with squareroot, if you do this
    Skill = sqrt(score) * 10

    64 would become 80, 81 would become 90, 90 would become 95, etc.

    Last edited by scw- at 2019-02-16 12:33
  • #10 2019-02-16 13:16

    rebbyd wrote:


    My main point is; you should have an advantage of being more active than others, especially on the transfer list.

    Exactly. I'm not saying that this upgrade is bad or good, but why not to increase prices f.e by winning 1337, CL / WWT play-offs, trophies etc..? (In generally, rewarding being active) So that banking at lower leagues for ages wouldn't give so huge advantage compared to those, who've been playing at top constantly? Currently it is just a cruel fact that you pretty much can't manage a godlike team, unless you've had a nice bank, before you got your ass to int trophy games.

    In my experience, when I played pretty much ~30 seasons winning 1337, int etc.. trophies more or less constantly. I never was able to improve my team, it maintained the same, approx ~35-40k / seasonal price players. You simply can't earn more than that, unless you couldn't do business, which I wasn't able to, cus I always had to buy another player, before the next one died already. Still my team never was "that" good, maybe was top20-30 team, but definitely not top10 team ever. And difference was pretty huge, when you had to face another really good and active manager, but with mega god team.

    So all in short, boost top level money income instead of doing changes on TL, that would be the most fair solution in my opinion.

    Also agree pretty much everything that timow said. And yes, by being a good manager handling your finances should give you a slight advantage over others, but currently that advantage between players is way too huge, as 1 player could easily cost the same or even more than other manager's whole team (which makes nosense imo). That also will drive new users away from the game.

    Last edited by zoif at 2019-02-16 13:27
  • #11 2019-02-16 13:24

    Afraid of loosing advantage? Managing finances will always stay no matter how much they boost this. Godlikes haven’t lost their value only gained as now everyone has more to spare after buying 4 competitive players.

  • #12 2019-02-16 13:29

    I don't think no one in here are afraid of loosing advantage Ludis. The advantage is big enough as it is.

    I totally agree with you zoif.

  • #13 2019-02-16 13:36

    Winning should be rewarded but 70 seasons ago they had other plans in mind when they nerfed league prizes and sponsors. And they were right, it wasn't fair.

    There is too much disparities between countries to reward clans winning games in league. It would be unfair for a CSM country clan and a clan from Latvia for example.

    maybe put the money in WWT quals, WWTs, cups, cl etc

    Last edited by Rainette at 2019-02-16 14:01
  • #14 2019-02-16 13:36

    zoif wrote:

    rebbyd wrote:


    My main point is; you should have an advantage of being more active than others, especially on the transfer list.

    Exactly. I'm not saying that this upgrade is bad or good, but why not to increase prices f.e by winning 1337, CL / WWT play-offs, trophies etc..? So that banking at lower leagues for ages wouldn't give so huge advantage compared to those, who've been playing at top constantly? Currently it is just a cruel fact that you pretty much can't manage a godlike team, unless you've had a nice bank, before you got your ass to int trophy games.

    In my experience, when I played pretty much ~30 seasons winning 1337, int etc.. trophies more or less constantly. I never was able to improve my team, it maintained the same, approx ~35-40k / seasonal price players. You simply can't earn more than that, unless you couldn't do business, which I wasn't able to, cus I always had to buy another player, before the next one died already. Still my team never was "that" good, maybe was top20-30 team, but definitely not top10 team ever.

    So all in short, boost top level money income instead of doing changes on TL, that would be the most fair solution in my opinion.

    The problem with boosting e.g. 1337 income is that the weaker 1337 leagues will instantly have the advantage over competitive leagues but otherwise the other ideas are great (CL, WWT, cups, etc).

    However, won't having access to more godlike/good players also help solve this issue somewhat? The prices will fall, making those players cheaper and more affordable to maintain at peak age. I think that changes to both of these things would be beneficial for everyone.

    If you only boost top level income and scrap TL changes, or at least don't make it easier for newer managers to close the already huge gap somehow, you end up with a system that only rewards older managers that have the funds and are capable of competing for int trophies due to their years of playtime. Rich gets richer.

    Last edited by timow at 2019-02-16 13:43
  • #15 2019-02-16 13:50

    Actually I agree with both views here. I think both older managers and newcomers should see some in game changes regarding their best interests. Increase the prices on top tier competitions might be a good solution cause actually, like zoif said, it’s pretty hard to maintain a top level team for many seasons cause you don’t earn enough to replace your players for similar ones, it’s almost impossible imo. The changes that were made on tl will benefit mostly newcomers as this will lower the gap between low/medium clans to the top ones. With this being said, I just think that something should be done as well to benefit and to encourage people to play on top for more consecutive years, throwing rebuilds out of scene cause tbh, this only brings inactivity to this already inactive as fuck game.

  • #16 2019-02-16 13:52

    Could be a simple fix.

    Less users in country / divide the league prizes by a certain percentage.

    Denmark, Sweden and Germany for example should get a higher 1337 league prize. Maybe introduce top6 prizes for those countries that get cl spots for top6.

  • #17 2019-02-16 14:33

    Merging those countries could also be a solution...
    There are lots of countries which don't even have an "active" div 1
    Which means you can idle in 1337.

  • #18 2019-02-16 15:21

    Ludis wrote:

    Afraid of loosing advantage?

    I can run a team when being skint, I've done it before (everything up to cup gold @s71). But thanks for enlightening us once more

    I want competitiveness to be improved in a smart way. I think resorbing the gap through supply exclusively isn't smart at all.

    Making those "middling" players hit harder, thus resorbing the gap through performance would be much more useful to everyone.
    It considerably raises chances for "upsets", still allows big bankrolls to spend big on brilliant players if they want to, while putting more pressure on them to succeed and giving a better fighting chance for others.

    Last edited by scw- at 2019-02-16 15:56
  • #19 2019-02-16 19:39

    scw- wrote:

    - already a dozen of brilliant scout-generated players --> indicating a major modification since odds to get those players are extremely small.


    way more users are accepting and analyzing tryouts now. which can make a huge difference in a more or less undercrowded game.

    scw- wrote:

    - dozens of "good" players (= capable of playing decently in Champions League once heart-related bonuses kick in) --> again a major modification, before the update there were those players on a regular but balanced basis, you could already get them at OK prices.


    if you have the patience to lose with them till they have big hearts. it seems to be more fun to manage better and being able to buy players who can perform immediately.

    timow wrote:

    which means you have to win by being tactically active? Isn't that what the game is about?


    this game is still about being a better manager than a tactican according to it's name. being a good manager should always give you an advantage by being able to build and maintain a better team than the average manager.
    the increase was made for "good" player who may not be considered as that good for a lot of 1337 managers. the really good ones weren't touch in supply.

    scw- wrote:

    Making those "middling" players hit harder, thus resorbing the gap through performance would be much more useful to everyone.
    It considerably raises chances for "upsets", still allows big bankrolls to spend big on brilliant players if they want to, while putting more pressure on them to succeed and giving a better fighting chance for others.


    the current performance scaling of the offs is quite misleading for new leaders who may think that a offlimit of 80 is good and 90 already very good. the changes you suggested require more longterm testing and are harder to implement as they make a lot of managers losing or gaining market value on their players over night. consider the current changes as alternate update to please the casual and mainstream crowd who don't have the time or cash to farm the TL for the really good or top players.

  • #20 2019-02-16 20:44

    scw- wrote:

    I can run a team when being skint, I've done it before (everything up to cup gold @s71). But thanks for enlightening us once more

    I want competitiveness to be improved in a smart way. I think resorbing the gap through supply exclusively isn't smart at all.

    Making those "middling" players hit harder, thus resorbing the gap through performance would be much more useful to everyone.

    Wasn't active at s71 to comment on that. Someone could say you were not favorite with godlike team at s101 also but lets not make this a joke

    Main point from me is that I can't really see the difference between making "middling" players to hit harder with changes now - making then cheaper. As read below.

    scw- wrote:

    It considerably raises chances for "upsets", still allows big bankrolls to spend big on brilliant players if they want to, while putting more pressure on them to succeed and giving a better fighting chance for others.

Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29