| Forum » Doubts and questions » School Players Suck Now! | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
Username
366 msgs.
First-team player
|
mudetroit said: @shivmister It is worth noting that some people do pay real money to play this game. When you start accepting money for a service, there is a some what reasonable expectation of response to questions and concerns. I agree with this statement. At this point, I don't care so much about getting the explanation. What I'm most concerned about is that the admins have stated that certain functions (like training) currently have problems. Perhaps the schools are experiencing the same type of problems, because in some ways, they are part of the "training". As long as we know whether to either (a) cut our losses, close our schools or stop building new ones or (b) assume that school players will get better averages once promoted to Junior Team again, and just keep the players in our school unpromoted until this happens. It's just frustrating because this is either a yes or no answer. |
21/09/2011 04:49 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
2737 msgs.
Best scorer
|
one very important question that no one asked yet: will the progression of free players be the same is was last year? Will there be free juniors with 70+ prog? If the answer is yes, then schools will be useless as you can get 30s juniors with high progression from scout. If the answer is no, then schools are still usefull because those rfee 30s juniors will have low progressions. |
21/09/2011 05:12 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
997 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
shivmister said: @Romasik2000 First off you are comparing apples and oranges... You pay real money for internet from ISP. You pay fake money which is easy to make up in this game for schools. Edited by shivmister 21-09-2011 04:30 If you look in my profile it says: "Usuario Pack Manager", I got it with "real" money. Do I really need to explain how "free" online games work? The problem here is that last season's juniors were 25's-35's average from good schools, and now the average got cut in half or more. We got a word from Bisho that it was a glitch last season, although nowhere in the past it was mentioned as a glitch. The new updates list came out and it was all about training and tactics and nothing about new juniors being half as good as previous seasons. Problem #1: This creates a huge gap between players who joined a week ago and between players who joined two days ago. The players (managers) from a week ago or any of the last seasons have juniors at 20-30 av. to start with and now new managers have junior teams at 5-15 av. Check Div 6 Gr 1 for example. Some guys have juniors at 30 Av. starting, and some have 10 Av. starting. Same goes with senior squads, some are 40's and some teams have 25's average players. If that's the way it supposed to be, then I think it's not fair to new players. Problem #2: There was a comment something like: "it was done so that teams don't have 90 average players". And why the hell not? I've been here for over 6 months now and I should have a good team with all the effort I put in it. Problem #3: I've trained my junior squad all last season, and sold a lot of them at the beginning of this one to make room for new juniors from my schools. Noone said anything about juniors out of schools will be third of the potential that the ones I had, so now I sold my best juniors for pretty cheap, expecting new talents from schools, and those schools don't give me much back. Schools were not a problem last season. If you wanted good players you had to pay big bucks to build an excellent quality school, and it paid off. And that's the way it should work. You make a big investment, and you get good return. So, why try to fix something that's not broken? So my two excellent quality schools gave me two players with average 6 and 18, at 53% and 56% progression. Those are 80% and a 100% schools. So if players from those kind of schools come out with those averages and low progression now, what kind of player will other people get with lower quality and lower rating schools? |
21/09/2011 05:25 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
366 msgs.
First-team player
|
Romasik2000 said: shivmister said: @Romasik2000 First off you are comparing apples and oranges... You pay real money for internet from ISP. You pay fake money which is easy to make up in this game for schools. Edited by shivmister 21-09-2011 04:30 If you look in my profile it says: "Usuario Pack Manager", I got it with "real" money. Do I really need to explain how "free" online games work? The problem here is that last season's juniors were 25's-35's average from good schools, and now the average got cut in half or more. We got a word from Bisho that it was a glitch last season, although nowhere in the past it was mentioned as a glitch. The new updates list came out and it was all about training and tactics and nothing about new juniors being half as good as previous seasons. Problem #1: This creates a huge gap between players who joined a week ago and between players who joined two days ago. The players (managers) from a week ago or any of the last seasons have juniors at 20-30 av. to start with and now new managers have junior teams at 5-15 av. Check Div 6 Gr 1 for example. Some guys have juniors at 30 Av. starting, and some have 10 Av. starting. Same goes with senior squads, some are 40's and some teams have 25's average players. If that's the way it supposed to be, then I think it's not fair to new players. Problem #2: There was a comment something like: "it was done so that teams don't have 90 average players". And why the hell not? I've been here for over 6 months now and I should have a good team with all the effort I put in it. Problem #3: I've trained my junior squad all last season, and sold a lot of them at the beginning of this one to make room for new juniors from my schools. Noone said anything about juniors out of schools will be third of the potential that the ones I had, so now I sold my best juniors for pretty cheap, expecting new talents from schools, and those schools don't give me much back. Schools were not a problem last season. If you wanted good players you had to pay big bucks to build an excellent quality school, and it paid off. And that's the way it should work. You make a big investment, and you get good return. So, why try to fix something that's not broken? So my two excellent quality schools gave me two players with average 6 and 18, at 53% and 56% progression. Those are 80% and a 100% schools. So if players from those kind of schools come out with those averages and low progression now, what kind of player will other people get with lower quality and lower rating schools? Excellent Point! Hits the issue dead on my friend. You are correct in your analysis that the schools are/were never the problem. If you make a huge investment (look at just purchasing a Brazil "normal" school). That costs nearly $30 Million. I would certainly hope that such a large investment doesn't yield a player of 5 - 20 Average. I would hope that it would give you someone that is 35 - 40 Average, given the investment. (Not every single time of course) but it should occur frequently enough. Please just provide us with an answer, that is all we are looking for. |
21/09/2011 05:32 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
715 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Hopefully, this situation will be resolved soon. I think the higher quality countries (4+*) high and excellent schools should consistently turn out good players, and every once in a while (on average 1 in 10) a potential 80+ star player. I don't think that it will make too many superstar players because the player still needs to be trained properly and remain injury free to make it to that level. That said, I think even the lower countries (2* or lower) should have good players come out every now and then (1 in 5 or so), and once in a while (maybe 1 in 50) a potential star. **note, the numbers above are just examples, and should be relative to the # of *'s and the quality of the schools. And some of the countries need to have their schools re-evaluated (plz do some research on the countries!) and some countries need to be added. From a business perspective, this makes sense too. Nationalism can't be downplayed. How fun is it to have players repping your home country in a sim? (answer: VERY fun). It's even more incentive for ppl to join/stay (in) a already good game (which could be great, ironically, with better "management") now plz, add a school for India (and other countries who have a large population of visitors/managers to/on this site) and raise S.Korea's level.  Edited by jacobpark 21-09-2011 06:02 |
21/09/2011 05:52 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
997 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Here's another idea about schools (I guess I could put in to suggestions). Make every country available, but instead of rating countries, have schools rated and every country at the same level. Because let's be honest, it's not the color of your skin or your nationality that indicates how good you are at the sport, it's the quality of training that matters. So, just simplify the system. Countries are all rated the same, schools cost the same, the quality of schools indicates the quality of players they provide. So low quality school $10M to high quality let's say $50M. Because there is some great undiscovered talents in every country, it's the matter of training them. I'm pretty sure if India was about 5000 further north they would have a lot of good hockey players, but due to the lack of ice in that region, they don't focus on that sport. Why do Canadians are better at hockey? Because there is freaking ice everywhere and kids there start ice skating before they are able to walk. In my home country (Ukraine), why did Shakhtar Donetsk become a world class team? Because of money invested in to it. They researched, trained and developed players, bought some from overseas (good scouts)... all that makes a great team. Right now an excellent quality school in Ireland is about the same as a regular quality school in US. Just do it this way. 1. Pick a country (all cost the same and rated the same) 2. Pick a quality (low level will give you 20% rated school up to excellent level at 100% school) Simple. |
21/09/2011 06:52 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
366 msgs.
First-team player
|
So nobody yet has an answer? Anywhere? | 21/09/2011 14:25 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1835 msgs.
International
|
solirocket said: one very important question that no one asked yet: will the progression of free players be the same is was last year? Will there be free juniors with 70+ prog? If the answer is yes, then schools will be useless as you can get 30s juniors with high progression from scout. If the answer is no, then schools are still usefull because those rfee 30s juniors will have low progressions. I stated that in another thread. Yea, basically schools now suck and 30+ avg and probably 70+ prog freebie jrs are available. I haven't heard otherwise. Then again, nobody has heard anything legitimate regarding this topic so who knows. |
21/09/2011 14:38 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
366 msgs.
First-team player
|
Juniors aren't free anymore. I just had another scout return a search and none were free. | 21/09/2011 14:50 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1835 msgs.
International
|
My 93% rated scout finds freebie jrs still.... | 21/09/2011 15:10 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
8
