Talk:Achievements - Revision history

Para Para: /* Headline text */

2012-08-31T14:59:19Z

Headline text

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:59, 31 August 2012
Line 8:		Line 8:

	But improving stamina does not. How should we notice that in the article ?		But improving stamina does not. How should we notice that in the article ?


			I have some doubt about headline layout. I think it is time to put down in the page that old editorial (really out of date!) and give more space to the "Achievements Weekly Updates", lost somewhere in that sea of bytes. I'm getting some good achievement myself lately and I assure that this list is very useful, I checked it very often. In the forum global thread about achievements is very asked too.
			To have an idea of what I'm talking about check for example in the italian version, where I already did this change. --[[User:Para Para\|Para Para]] 31 August 2012

	== Questions (will be removed when answered or admin if questions aren't allowed here) ==		== Questions (will be removed when answered or admin if questions aren't allowed here) ==

Para Para: /* Guessing about achievements */

2012-08-31T14:45:07Z

Guessing about achievements

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:45, 31 August 2012
Line 229:		Line 229:
	: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
	:: Yep a team got the 115 stars achievement. Listed in the "sample of hard to get achievements". Points are 85 so have added that back in. Looks better now I have to say - glad you agreed :) [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 10:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)		:: Yep a team got the 115 stars achievement. Listed in the "sample of hard to get achievements". Points are 85 so have added that back in. Looks better now I have to say - glad you agreed :) [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 10:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
			: I've added the 115+ stars achievement the day after it was discovered. The 18.5, 17.5, 16.5 etc. in the average match rating list was the effect of speculations in achievement global english thread, as they ask me to add the half point when some team didn't get the achievement even if reaching the asked performance. Anyway it doesn't matter. But I don't remember anything about 3 000+ members federation (maybe I didn't wrote it)--[[User:Para Para\|Para Para]]

Para Para: /* Top 10 Achievers */

2012-08-31T14:36:49Z

Top 10 Achievers

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:36, 31 August 2012
Line 219:		Line 219:
	::I would add Top 10 Achievers (as of DD-MM-AAAA) --[[User:Kiusap\|Kiusap]] 15:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)		::I would add Top 10 Achievers (as of DD-MM-AAAA) --[[User:Kiusap\|Kiusap]] 15:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
	::: I guess that data is already available - If you look at the history page you can see when the Top 10 was updated last. But I see your point.		::: I guess that data is already available - If you look at the history page you can see when the Top 10 was updated last. But I see your point.
			I added a link to the Hall of Fame which I think is the best way to check the table quickly and update it. Anyway lately the changes are little and the table is pretty stabilized.
			A little problem is Dandy de Tazmania, world top achiever but team now closed and then erased from Hattrick official achievements top 5. I don't know how to consider this fact.
			--[[User:Para Para\|Para Para]]

	== Guessing about achievements ==		== Guessing about achievements ==

Broughy1322 at 10:26, 14 August 2012

2012-08-14T10:26:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:26, 14 August 2012
Line 226:		Line 226:
	Thoughts? [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 12:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		Thoughts? [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 12:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
	: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
	:: Yep a team got 115 stars. Listed in the "sample of hard to get achievements". Points are 85. Looks better now I have to say - glad you agreed :) [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 18:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		:: Yep a team got the 115 stars achievement. Listed in the "sample of hard to get achievements". Points are 85 so have added that back in. Looks better now I have to say - glad you agreed :) [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 10:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Broughy1322 at 18:45, 13 August 2012

2012-08-13T18:45:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:45, 13 August 2012
Line 226:		Line 226:
	Thoughts? [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 12:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		Thoughts? [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 12:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
	: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
			:: Yep a team got 115 stars. Listed in the "sample of hard to get achievements". Points are 85. Looks better now I have to say - glad you agreed :) [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 18:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Nightwish: /* Guessing about achievements */

2012-08-13T15:32:09Z

Guessing about achievements

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:32, 13 August 2012
Line 225:		Line 225:
	I think we need to start distinguishing between achievements which we've actually seen (and can provide proof for in the "samples of hard to get achievements") and speculative achievements. In reality it doesn't matter too much as these are the hardest of all achievements to get, but in the interest of accuracy I don't think we should be including information that is as yet unknown.		I think we need to start distinguishing between achievements which we've actually seen (and can provide proof for in the "samples of hard to get achievements") and speculative achievements. In reality it doesn't matter too much as these are the hardest of all achievements to get, but in the interest of accuracy I don't think we should be including information that is as yet unknown.
	Thoughts? [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 12:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		Thoughts? [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 12:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
			: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Broughy1322 at 12:27, 13 August 2012

2012-08-13T12:27:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:27, 13 August 2012
Line 219:		Line 219:
	::I would add Top 10 Achievers (as of DD-MM-AAAA) --[[User:Kiusap\|Kiusap]] 15:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)		::I would add Top 10 Achievers (as of DD-MM-AAAA) --[[User:Kiusap\|Kiusap]] 15:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
	::: I guess that data is already available - If you look at the history page you can see when the Top 10 was updated last. But I see your point.		::: I guess that data is already available - If you look at the history page you can see when the Top 10 was updated last. But I see your point.


			== Guessing about achievements ==
			There have been some revisions on this page recently by [[User:Demonaire\|Demonaire]] and [[User:Para Para\|Para Para]] (there could have been others but they're the most recent) which have added speculative levels to the highest achievement levels, stating them as fact. As an example, nobody knows how many federation members are needed for the 100 points in that achievement, yet on this page 3000+ is being cited as the official number. In fact, the STOP federation got over 3000 members and its founder didn't get any new achievement, so it's actually not even likely to be that. Another example is the max number of stars in a single match at 120. 115 is the highest we've seen.
			I think we need to start distinguishing between achievements which we've actually seen (and can provide proof for in the "samples of hard to get achievements") and speculative achievements. In reality it doesn't matter too much as these are the hardest of all achievements to get, but in the interest of accuracy I don't think we should be including information that is as yet unknown.
			Thoughts? [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 12:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Cymrodor: /* Questions (will be removed when answered or admin if questions aren't allowed here) */

2008-12-17T02:20:38Z

Questions (will be removed when answered or admin if questions aren't allowed here)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:20, 17 December 2008
Line 10:		Line 10:

	== Questions (will be removed when answered or admin if questions aren't allowed here) ==		== Questions (will be removed when answered or admin if questions aren't allowed here) ==

			"Rebought a youth player"
			Must the player still be a youth when rebought? Or is it just that he was sold as a youth and then rebought any time later in his career? - Cymrodor, 17 December 2008


	Tell me, shouldn't there be a link in the left hand menu to Achievements? --Sporally 20:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)		Tell me, shouldn't there be a link in the left hand menu to Achievements? --Sporally 20:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

MD-JakobTrier: /* Top 10 Achievers */

2008-03-17T05:39:06Z

Top 10 Achievers

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:39, 17 March 2008
Line 210:		Line 210:
	--[[User:4nd3r5\|4nd3r5]]		--[[User:4nd3r5\|4nd3r5]]

	I think you are right that it will change quite a bit till the end of the season, but then it will slow down and become very fixed I think, with minor changes now and then.		:I think you are right that it will change quite a bit till the end of the season, but then it will slow down and become very fixed I think, with minor changes now and then.
	I think you are right that we will see the HT Supporter pack extended to include stats on this as well. The question is when.		I think you are right that we will see the HT Supporter pack extended to include stats on this as well. The question is when.

	--[[User:MD-JakobTrier\|MD-JakobTrier]]		--[[User:MD-JakobTrier\|MD-JakobTrier]]
	:I would add Top 10 Achievers (as of DD-MM-AAAA) --[[User:Kiusap\|Kiusap]] 15:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)		::I would add Top 10 Achievers (as of DD-MM-AAAA) --[[User:Kiusap\|Kiusap]] 15:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
			::: I guess that data is already available - If you look at the history page you can see when the Top 10 was updated last. But I see your point.

MD-JakobTrier: /* Questions (will be removed when answered or admin if questions aren't allowed here) */

2008-03-17T05:36:28Z

Questions (will be removed when answered or admin if questions aren't allowed here)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:36, 17 March 2008
Line 13:		Line 13:
	Tell me, shouldn't there be a link in the left hand menu to Achievements? --Sporally 20:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)		Tell me, shouldn't there be a link in the left hand menu to Achievements? --Sporally 20:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
	: Still no reply to this? --Sporally 19:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)		: Still no reply to this? --Sporally 19:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
			:: There is now. --[[User:MD-JakobTrier\|MD-JakobTrier]] 14:31, 17 March 2008 (JST)

	Can anyone tell me what zero expenses means?		Can anyone tell me what zero expenses means?
Line 18:		Line 19:
	:Are you sure that's all it means? You have to break even without the help of transfers and gate income? Has anyone actually earned these points? --[[User:Septimusjm\|septimusjm]] 14:47, 28 September 2007 (UTC)		:Are you sure that's all it means? You have to break even without the help of transfers and gate income? Has anyone actually earned these points? --[[User:Septimusjm\|septimusjm]] 14:47, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
	:: 100% impossible for established teams as that would demand you to remove your entire stadium, sell or fire your players and fire all of your staff. However, the problem is that you can't fire or sell your coach and thereby can't get to the point of 0 expenses. Only new teams can get this achievement - the first week of gaming is for one reason or another thought of as a 0 expense week. --Sporally 19:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)		:: 100% impossible for established teams as that would demand you to remove your entire stadium, sell or fire your players and fire all of your staff. However, the problem is that you can't fire or sell your coach and thereby can't get to the point of 0 expenses. Only new teams can get this achievement - the first week of gaming is for one reason or another thought of as a 0 expense week. --Sporally 19:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
			::: You need to have 0 expenses and until recently only new teams had this achievement, but because of the wage reduction to 0 at the last week of the season ending in March 2008 some older teams also got this achievement after removing their stadium etc. My team, [[Kawasaki Tigers]] (32183) was one of them. --[[User:MD-JakobTrier\|MD-JakobTrier]] 14:31, 17 March 2008 (JST)

	Youthfull line-up can also with a 22yr old field player, see matchid=107173761 and Common/achievements.asp?UserID=5612591. Probably the average age counts?		Youthfull line-up can also with a 22yr old field player, see matchid=107173761 and Common/achievements.asp?UserID=5612591. Probably the average age counts?
			: Yes, it is the average age that counts. Days are not counted, only the years and the average must be below 18. --[[User:MD-JakobTrier\|MD-JakobTrier]] 14:31, 17 March 2008 (JST)

	For the home growth team, does that count youth pull player??[[User:Newmathsking\|newmathsking]] 10:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)		For the home growth team, does that count youth pull player??[[User:Newmathsking\|newmathsking]] 10:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
			: Yes, Youth Pulls or players from your Youth Academy can be used to get this achievement --[[User:MD-JakobTrier\|MD-JakobTrier]] 14:31, 17 March 2008 (JST)

	"Team reached X stars in a match" - does anyone know how X is calculated?		"Team reached X stars in a match" - does anyone know how X is calculated?
	: How about simply sum of the stars given to your players in a single match. --[[User:Jhattara\|Jhattara]] 21:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)		: How about simply sum of the stars given to your players in a single match. --[[User:Jhattara\|Jhattara]] 21:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
			:: There has been a bug where the stars of the injured players also counted towards this "X". This bug should now have been fixed. I believe the brown stars have to be included when counting the stars these days --[[User:MD-JakobTrier\|MD-JakobTrier]] 14:31, 17 March 2008 (JST)

	anyone has a hint on why i did not get the dishonest squad achievement in this game: (136502800)		anyone has a hint on why i did not get the dishonest squad achievement in this game: (136502800)
	11 fielded players with 10 dishonest and 1 infamous should have been ok according to wiki information...		11 fielded players with 10 dishonest and 1 infamous should have been ok according to wiki information...
	: It might take a few days or weeks to get the achievement. Wait for some time and tell us if you get the achievement. --[[User:Jhattara\|Jhattara]] 09:49, 9 August 2007 (UTC)		: It might take a few days or weeks to get the achievement. Wait for some time and tell us if you get the achievement. --[[User:Jhattara\|Jhattara]] 09:49, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
			:: No such achievement exists. You had a dishonest ''lineup'', it is the ''squad'' you should focus on, eg. also the players that are not playing. --[[User:MD-JakobTrier\|MD-JakobTrier]] 14:31, 17 March 2008 (JST)

	== added points ==		== added points ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:45, 31 August 2012
Line 229:		Line 229:
	: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
	:: Yep a team got the 115 stars achievement. Listed in the "sample of hard to get achievements". Points are 85 so have added that back in. Looks better now I have to say - glad you agreed :) [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 10:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)		:: Yep a team got the 115 stars achievement. Listed in the "sample of hard to get achievements". Points are 85 so have added that back in. Looks better now I have to say - glad you agreed :) [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 10:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
			: I've added the 115+ stars achievement the day after it was discovered. The 18.5, 17.5, 16.5 etc. in the average match rating list was the effect of speculations in achievement global english thread, as they ask me to add the half point when some team didn't get the achievement even if reaching the asked performance. Anyway it doesn't matter. But I don't remember anything about 3 000+ members federation (maybe I didn't wrote it)--[[User:Para Para\|Para Para]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:26, 14 August 2012
Line 226:		Line 226:
	Thoughts? [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 12:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		Thoughts? [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 12:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
	: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
	:: Yep a team got 115 stars. Listed in the "sample of hard to get achievements". Points are 85. Looks better now I have to say - glad you agreed :) [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 18:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		:: Yep a team got the 115 stars achievement. Listed in the "sample of hard to get achievements". Points are 85 so have added that back in. Looks better now I have to say - glad you agreed :) [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 10:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:45, 13 August 2012
Line 226:		Line 226:
	Thoughts? [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 12:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		Thoughts? [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 12:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
	: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)		: Are there points for 115 stars? I removed it because I remembered teams not getting any points for that level. There has been a team that reached 120 but it never got an achievement for that; bug I guess.. And off course we shouldn't include wrong or unknown information, seems obvious to be; but clearly not to everyone. ^^ [[User:ZF-Nightwish\|ZF-Nightwish]] 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
			:: Yep a team got 115 stars. Listed in the "sample of hard to get achievements". Points are 85. Looks better now I have to say - glad you agreed :) [[User:Broughy1322\|Broughy1322]] 18:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)