| Forum » General » longer player career or higher progression? | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
Fast progression and short player life, or Slow progression and long player life?
|
||
|
Username
5205 msgs.
Golden Ball
|
I think across the board x2 will achieve the desired result, with a gradual slacking from x2 to x1 to 0 starting at 18-20 and reaching x1 by 20-21, x0 by 21-24. I do not like the 1 training per week idea. beachbernie said: After watching the new training sim for a little while I would like to make a suggestion. I think the new sim is in principal not bad, it's just very, very, very slow. Therefore I suggest to keep it in place and just make it a little faster: junior X 3 and seniors X 2. This would still be a far cry from where we come from. (my estimate is that the old training worked 10 times as fast as the new one does! I remember my highest gains for an individual player were up to more than 1,5 in a single training whereas now my highest is more like 0,15!) To discourage training only one type of player and encourage a more balanced approach to talent building I further suggest to limit each type of training to just once per week. Because otherwise we will still see 17-year-olds with way high averages after implementing my suggestion. This new limit should slow things down for the "specialists" considerably. |
10/10/2011 20:40 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
715 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
beachbernie said: After watching the new training sim for a little while I would like to make a suggestion. I think the new sim is in principal not bad, it's just very, very, very slow. Therefore I suggest to keep it in place and just make it a little faster: junior X 3 and seniors X 2. This would still be a far cry from where we come from. (my estimate is that the old training worked 10 times as fast as the new one does! I remember my highest gains for an individual player were up to more than 1,5 in a single training whereas now my highest is more like 0,15!) To discourage training only one type of player and encourage a more balanced approach to talent building I further suggest to limit each type of training to just once per week. Because otherwise we will still see 17-year-olds with way high averages after implementing my suggestion. This new limit should slow things down for the "specialists" considerably. Good idea about faster training and 17 year olds, but I can't see once a week being passed. To solve this, just make promotion mandatory when the P comes out. |
10/10/2011 21:28 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
6256 msgs.
Golden Ball
|
The thing is, the old sim was fun. You got to watch your players get better every day. The problem with the old sim is you could train Org Mid every day and build a team of super mid and sell them on allowing you to buy the difficult to get positions CF/CDF and GK. What a lot of people are failing to realise is that seniors are limited already under the new sim by the fact that as a stat gets higher it gets harder to train. Also if you look at the trainings themselves there isn't as much cross over between the Forwards/Mids and defenders as there used to be, this will also slow down training. On top of this, not every player could be made into an average 70 or 80 player. There is something else which limits the ability to create super players, you now can't hostile teams with less than 8000 exp. A large amount of these super players that we all see have been hostiled from managers who created an account and then gave up. Can't be done any more If you then add in only two times a week for a particular training type, it slows everything down further.There isn't any need to lower trainings any more. This is after all a game and I personally would like to see the fruits of my work within 3 Real life years. To be honest I wasn't too worried about the super LIM's/IM's and RIM's because having so many people doing it meant they were cheap and hence what was the point of doing it, I picked up a 70 IM for 10m, however a 70 GK was 80m. Market pricing sorts these sorts of things out. If there were hundreds of 70 IM's on the market, they would come down in price even further. The problem I see now being created is a two or three tier game. You have the super teams which include nearly every @ in the game. People like me and the guy above me in this post (beachbernie in case someone else posted) and the newer teams in div 6/7. If you stop the newer teams from ever reaching the heights of the superteams then why would they play? I've seen lots of posts from people in this thread who want a more realistic training schedule. I'll tell you this gents, there are two posts from people in a division less than 4 who agree with this. It is quite frankly an arse covering excersise by those who already have the power not wanting to see others climb the ranks and knock on the door. |
10/10/2011 21:36 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
715 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Very blunt, but well said... | 10/10/2011 21:42 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1835 msgs.
International
|
Good post Grantis. Id add also that it seems juniors are staring with lower averages also compared to last season, which obviously means it will take longer to get them to 50+ or whatnot. |
10/10/2011 21:53 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
2960 msgs.
Best scorer
|
nice said grantis,they already limited lot of things i think they should bring back old training with junior style 2same trainings per week or multiple this new training personaly i like new training but it need some multiple |
10/10/2011 22:38 |
| Mr. Q17 - Div1/Gr1 | ||
|
Username
1118 msgs.
International
|
Well said Grantis, I subscribe almost every line. Most of us agree that something must be done about training rates. The point is that it's not our decision, new @s have certainly given some fresh air, but it's unusual in this game to see player's suggestions traslated into real changes. |
10/10/2011 23:50 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
5205 msgs.
Golden Ball
|
Balearik said: Well said Grantis, I subscribe almost every line. Most of us agree that something must be done about training rates. The point is that it's not our decision, new @s have certainly given some fresh air, but it's unusual in this game to see player's suggestions traslated into real changes. I disagree - it is quite common to see player suggestions turn into new features, just slow. Several suggestions from July are now live (without any fanfare). It is the new @ quest to make all changes publicly documented as part of our job to help get perception in align with reality on both sides of the @ fence. I'm not asking you to trust me, just to watch the forums this week as more stuff is revealed. |
11/10/2011 01:29 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Fiscal
2159 msgs.
Best scorer
|
I don't mind the new training rates, however, i get frustrated with the new simulator itself, the old one was straightforward and user friendly, this one is difficult and i don't think will draw many new managers. New managers coming on here will get confused and leave imo. | 11/10/2011 04:51 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
3547 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Once they found out it will actually take years to train the player. They will eventually leave the game !!! | 11/10/2011 04:52 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
9
