|
|
| (32 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| === Success ===
| | By: HT-Tjecken |
| 28 From: HT-Bjorn<br>
| | To: Frank-LNC 10664071.30 as reply to 10664071.24 |
| To: HG-bard (2002523.90), answering 2002523.87<br> | | 8.2.2008 at 10:44 |
| 08-11-2004, at 09:44<br>
| | The whole new denomination scale of "hopeless", "prodigious", etc has been cancelled now? Does this mean all youth-players have the same training speed? |
| You say that I should forget about the rules I learnt before (that it requires good players and good ratings to win a match)<br>
| | For once and for all: That scale had nothing to do with training speed. |
|
| |
|
| LOL, that was indeed an interesting example of twisting someone's word until they take on a whole new meaning...<br>
| | All youth players don't have the same training speed, but the difference (which depend on their character, right now a hidden value) is marginal. |
|
| |
|
| I did not say that. Not even close.<br>
| | By: HT-Tjecken |
| | To: dancing_rob 10664071.45 as reply to 10664071.39 |
| | 8.2.2008 at 11:08 |
| | my best guess is that it referred to the difference between where the player was now (eg poor) and their max potential (eg solid) |
|
| |
|
| I am saying that anyone who wants to be successful in Hattrick needs to always be willing to add to his/her knowledge, learn new things, and even in some cases question established truths if new evidence come up.<br> | | I'm as intrigued as everyone else as to exactly what it meant though! |
| | Close, but no cigar. |
|
| |
|
| Of course it requires good players to win. Then top that up with some clever tactics and masterful long-term strategy and you are a sure winner.<br><br>
| | It was a combination of current skill level and potential skill level. |
|
| |
|
| 29 From: HT-Bjorn<br>
| |
| To: gixxgp (2002523.107), answering 2002523.101<br>
| |
| 08-11-2004, at 14:05<br>
| |
| This is a kick in the ass to all strategy that there is before the match. What is the point of preparing your match, basing yourself on your team ratings and your opponent's one, when you will have proof of your superiority or your inferiority only when you could read the match report?<br>
| |
|
| |
|
| Of course you will not have proof that you chose the right tactic until after the match, when you know what tactic your opponent chose, and how the tactic that you chose worked out against that which your opponent chose.<br>
| | By: HT-Tjecken |
| | To: Everyone 10664071.110 as reply to 10664071.103 |
| | 8.2.2008 at 14:47 |
| | I read on our youthacademy forum that people got trainingmessage with [level] in there instead of the real level. And then I literaqlly mean "[level]" instead of inadequate or apssable or whatever. |
| | Ok, this one is sorted out now. |
|
| |
|
| To answer your question: The point of preparring your match is to give yourself as good a chance as possible. To do so you use your knowledge of your own team, along with guesses about how your opponent's team will look and what tactic they will use. This is in no way different in HT from IRL.<br><br> | | By: flameron |
| | To: wildkick 10664071.331 as reply to 10664071.330 |
| | 10.2.2008 at 07:59 |
| | I don't think the youth team is the right place for Lars Langeland any more. At least when it comes to Passing, he's simply unable to improve any more. |
| | This is a new one too, but I guess it is about completed player. |
| | Last comment only means his passing is maxed out. |
|
| |
|
| 30 From: HT-Bjorn
| |
| To: Rupii_ZPF (2002523.108), answering 2002523.105
| |
| 08-11-2004, at 14:11<br>
| |
| Match report is the only data available for us. If it doesn't say everything 'bout our team's quality then what does? Our imagination? ;P<br>
| |
|
| |
|
| Who says match report doesn't say everything??? I didn't say that. I said the ratings doesn't say everything. The match report has further information to add. Some information is only known to the manager of your opponent. That is how it is supposed to be. It is also how it is IRL<br>
| | By: flameron |
| | To: wildkick 10664071.333 as reply to 10664071.332 |
| | 10.2.2008 at 08:03 |
| | Ok, I got that on IM, while training PM + PS. Meaning he could still be a PM talent? |
|
| |
|
| It seems like whatever I say in this thread is twisted into its exact opposite, and then other people use those twisted interpretations to continue debate. So, as soon as I say something it takes only a few posting before new myths are born. I give up. :-(<br><br>
| | The message is exact on the skill which is maxed out. |
| | If his PM is mentioned he will not respond to playmaking training. |
|
| |
|
| === AOW vs. AIM ===
| | By: flameron |
| | To: wildkick 10664071.335 as reply to 10664071.334 |
| | 10.2.2008 at 08:06 |
| | I got a similar message when training wing + ps with him (but then it wasnt mentioned which skill he was maxed in). Now I know ps cant be training - but then he could be trained in PM + WG, right? |
|
| |
|
| | I refer only to the new comment type in which the exact skill is stated. |
|
| |
|
| 31 From: HT-Bjorn
| |
| To: 666kajet 653584.8, answering 653584.1
| |
| 2003-11-14 18.42<br>
| |
| There have been more factors considered as well. For instance, we'd somewhat rather encourage AOW than AIM because AIM tend to go along with a midfield with wingers playing towards middle, which we think have been used slightly too frqquently (compared to IRL and compared to how we get a broader variation of tactics). AOW on the other hand encourages the use of offensive/normal wingers wich is on the "wanted" list. Differently put, the AOW being slightly (very slightly) more effective in doing its thing than AIM is part of the "lessen the playmaking dominance" package. Not much, but then, the difference you mention between AIM and AOW isn't that much either.<br><br>
| |
|
| |
|
| | By: flameron |
| | To: wildkick 10664071.337 as reply to 10664071.336 |
| | 10.2.2008 at 09:28 |
|
| |
|
| 32 From: HT-Bjorn
| | Ok. What about the old one that doesn't mentioned which skill? Could it be that one of the skills at the then current time could be worth training? |
| To: dturnip 653584.20, answering 653584.18
| |
| 2003-11-14 20.42<br>
| |
| In a thread before these tactics came out (I think) he mentioned that the chance of an attack coming on the left right or centre was roughly equal.<br>
| |
|
| |
|
| I have never said that.<br><br>
| | Yes. |
| | It meant that the total skills left to train are quite low. This message is removed due to better info in the new messages. |
|
| |
|
| x
| |
|
| |
|
| x
| | By: flameron |
| | To: wildkick 10664071.339 as reply to 10664071.338 |
| | 10.2.2008 at 09:33 |
| | Here are the messages: |
|
| |
|
| === Cards ===
| | NEW (training PM/PS): |
| | Match I don't think the youth team is the right place for Lars Langeland any more. At least when it comes to Passing, he's simply unable to improve any more. |
|
| |
|
| 43 From: HT-Hasse
| |
| To: fidemaster (2053056.20), answering 2053056.19
| |
| 17-11-2004, at 15:04<br>
| |
| Well, I retired after the 2000 season so I can not say for sure what has happened after that. Another problem is that each country has its own translation of the original text and that might result in slight variations due to language issues.<br>
| |
|
| |
|
| We were to tick a box on the matchreport for each yellow card and we had two boxes to choose from:<br>
| | PREVIOUS (at that time, trained WG/PS): |
| | Match In my opinion, Lars Langeland is not going to reach his potential as a footballer unless he gets some Playmaking training. |
|
| |
|
| 1. Something which could be translated as "foul play" or similar. This included bad tackles, pushes, handball and all other physical offences during play.<br>
| |
|
| |
|
| 2. "Unsportsmanlike conduct", which included things like protests, bad comments to other players, sabotage of free kicks etc, diving, exaggerated celebrating of goals, wearing of dangerous jewellery etc.<br><br>
| |
|
| |
|
| === Leadership / Bob / TS ===
| | The old message you put here is still valid. I meant the "can not improve" unrelated to skill message. |
|
| |
|
| 44 From: HT-Tjecken
| |
| To: Sb8heand 2047484.17, answering 2047484.15
| |
| 16-11-2004, at 12:37<br>
| |
| Correct, there is in fact one single player with excellent leadership. And he was created the "natural way", so there is a chance for a player to get excellent leadership - even if it's a very, very, very, very, very, very little chance.
| |
|
| |
|
| 46 From: HT-Hasse
| | By: flameron |
| To: Tjosan (2047484.122), answering 2047484.117 | | To: wildkick 10664071.341 as reply to 10664071.340 |
| 16-11-2004, at 17:18<br>
| | 10.2.2008 at 09:40 |
| Whoever tried to deny Bob was tweaked? None of the persons present at the time had anything to do with that fact though.<br>
| | Ok. You really think he can still be a good prospect when the coach says: " I don't think the youth team is the right place for Lars Langeland any more"? |
|
| |
|
| Bob was pulled like any other youth but was later tweaked (as an Easter egg) when it comes to his beloved team member thing.<br><br>
| | I know passing training will not do any good, ref. also your comment above. But if that sentence does not mean what it says, he might be able to improve in wing or pm? |
|
| |
|
| 47 HT-Hasse<br>
| | Regarding the old message, I thought that that meant that ONE of the skills he was training at that time, didnt do him any good. As he was training WG + PS, that might just be the passing part? Or, is further wing training out of the question as well? |
|
| |
|
| More or less correct but the fact that it used to be my player had no part in it. Neither had I any part in giving him this face.<br>
| | Maybe those messages means he is not going to improve much in ANY skill? |
|
| |
|
| Basically the story was that when the player faces were introduced those in the HT-team who worked with that wanted 2-3 players who were special for some reason, to give them special faces as a sort of easter-egg. This happened a while after the introduction of the faces. With Wozniak being the first non-Swedish superstar in the game he was an obvious choice. Especially since he also played in the very first World Cup final.<br>
| | (a bit messy post, but hope you get my point) |
|
| |
|
| The other players were Bob Sunesson and Marc O'Farrel. I don't know the story about O'Farrel.<br><br>
| | I gave you all the info you need. |
|
| |
|
| === Trading + Team spirit ===
| |
|
| |
|
| 48 HT-Hasse<br>
| |
| The TS penalty was introduced to penalise daytraders.<br>
| |
|
| |
|
| Actually it was not. It had nothing at all to do with daytrading. That it hurt some kinds of daytrading was just a side-effect.<br>
| | By: flameron |
| | To: Kniff 10664071.457 as reply to 10664071.455 |
| | 13.2.2008 at 09:31 |
| | I really like the new reports: |
|
| |
|
| Ok that is fine, but can you explain what was the reason it was introduced?<br>
| | "Também treinámos Criatividade esta semana. Ao observar o João Luz, parece-me que ele está no nível desastroso nesta característica." |
| Surely not just for realism?<br>
| |
|
| |
|
| Yup. That was the sole reason. This was also stated in the information that was published at the time.<br>
| | In english says something like my GK is disastrous PM at this time... |
|
| |
|
| === secondary skills ===
| | Very usefull information!! |
|
| |
|
| 49 HT-Hasse <br>
| |
| (it staat voor secundaries)<br>
| |
|
| |
|
| I don't know the current parameters of the match engine (mainly because I do not want to) but in my personal experience it has a lot more impact even today than what people generally think.<br>
| | yes my keeper got a scoring skill info. |
|
| |
|
| When I start restructuring my team (which will happen pretty soon) I will build a team which is quite different from the one I have today.<br><br>
| | It would be a nice realistic add on if player get a skill info for a skill that is important for the position he played, may be from same skill selection as for individual training. Keeper for example would get a keeper, defending or set pieces skill info, but never a scoring info. |
|
| |
|
| x
| |
|
| |
|
| === league system ===
| |
|
| |
|
| 55 HT-Tjecken
| | It is an option, but .... |
| over het uitbreiden van het aantal divisies in (2035249.23):
| |
|
| |
|
| I will not go in to details, but there are some really good reasons why we can't change the series system without doing a total redesign. A total redesign is not something we plan to do as it will be very time-consuming. Very. Or in other words so very time-consuming that it's in fact impossible.
| | The current implementation though gives you info that by mistake you did not spot. |
|
| |
|
| === Rent a player ===
| | Fot instance: If you got a keeper and do not know that you can learn it by this mechanism. Same for other skills. Thats important as well. |
|
| |
|
| 56 By: HT-Hasse
| | You can have your scout tell you on scoring and the trainer will one day tell you (inspite the fact the player plays as forward) that this guy has now passable defending. This is better than your suggestion. |
| To: Helker (2184210.33) as reply to 2184210.1
| |
| 14-12-2004 at 18:03
| |
| Over het verhuren van spelers
| |
|
| |
|
| Suggestions with a lot of thought behind is great! However, when it comes to this specific case the basic idea is about as old as Hattrick itself. There are a number of reasons why this is extremely unlikely to ever be realised. First of all it opens up for abuse in several ways.
| |
|
| |
|
| The biggest reasons though are the ones below: | | By: flameron |
| | To: Kniff 11733234.14 as reply to 11733234.12 |
| | 16.8.2008 at 22:14 |
| | Benotzer aus de Favoritten |
| | Any type of message could appear only once in training report. |
| | It should be random if several messgaes can be created (like several players have maxed out, gained skill, etc.). The order should be random as well (which means if you have two players that have maxed out you could get a messgae on any of them every week with no ability to predict the actual order - xx, yx, xy or yy should have the same probability for two training reports as a specific example). |
|
| |
|
| * It would seriously hurt the market. It would make it a lot more difficult to sell certain types of players.
| | If you have evidance that its not like that you could present them here and I will try and check. There is a wish to improve the current mechanism but we need resources which were not available lately. It might be prioritize lower with the other tasks planned for the future but my guess it will happen eventually. Please be patient with it (I know its not good how it works now). |
|
| |
|
| * It would benefit the extremely rich clubs, who can afford buying lots of players and then rent them to others and get them trained. After that they can recall them and sell them with an enormous profit.
| | By: flameron |
| | To: Kniff 11733234.18 as reply to 11733234.15 |
| | 16.8.2008 at 22:33 |
| | Benotzer aus de Favoritten |
| | Question is if there were other players that you know to reach their max potential in skills that were trained during the same week, and how many of them. |
|
| |
|
| * It would be a disaster for not so rich clubs. They can not afford to buy a lot of players and rent them to others. Furthermore these are the clubs who have average players for sale. Those players would become virtually impossible to sell. Those teams would be left behind for good.
| | If there are 2 players (including your keeper) its not that rare that you will get the same player reported several weeks in a row. It is reasonable to assume that only those users will feel annoyed and reply in the forum about that. Still, if it will look like there is a chance of a bug I will try and look into it (already did that with no sign of bug but will do it again). |
|
| |
|
| 57 By: HT-Hasse
| | By: flameron |
| To: Allanamin 2184210.36 as reply to 2184210.34 | | To: Ratsia 11733234.22 as reply to 11733234.16 |
| 14-12-2004 at 18:24
| | 16.8.2008 at 22:38 |
| Who would rent his players to someone if they did not get trained? I would certainly not do it. Every week the player gets older and is not trained properly he loses value.
| | Benotzer aus de Favoritten |
| | I'm not going to discuss the possible improvements as you said there are no resources now |
|
| |
|
| It would also still be devastating to the market. Instead of buying players lots of users would rent players.
| |
|
| |
|
| === friendly cups ===
| | Why not. Maybe you will have something we did not think of. |
|
| |
|
| 58 By: HT-Hasse
| | ... but could you at least add the information in the rules? Just two sentences saying the same thing I quoted. |
| To: ricouryves 2190245.5 as reply to 2190245.1
| |
| 15-12-2004 at 20:22
| |
| Het gaat hier over het ondersteunen van friendly cups in hattrick.
| |
|
| |
|
| Hattrick used to have a system similar to that but it did not work since a lot of organizers did not take the full responsibility to manage their cups properly. Starting cups was obviously more fun than actually taking care of them. It is highly unlikely to come back in any form.
| |
|
| |
|
| 59 By: HT-Hasse
| | Will check this. |
| To: MonsieurBon 2190245.9 as reply to 2190245.6
| |
| 15-12-2004 at 20:50
| |
| Because it creates more trouble than it adds to the game.
| |
|
| |
|
| That people do not play friendlies or do not use all supporter features does not hut anyone else than themselves. When someone starts a cup and then abandons it hurts others and creates extra work for our GMs.
| |
|
| |
|
| It was removed for a reason and will most likely never return
| | By: flameron |
| | To: Hasenohr 11733234.23 as reply to 11733234.21 |
| | 16.8.2008 at 22:40 |
| | Benotzer aus de Favoritten |
| | What´s about players, who got no addition of stars over two month? Ist it possible, that the messages will stop after a defined period of time? |
| | I saw some and hear about many more of this cases. |
|
| |
|
| x
| |
|
| |
| x
| |
|
| |
| x
| |
|
| |
| === possession ===
| |
|
| |
| 70 From: HT-Hasse
| |
| To: Jazz23 2237636.13, answering 2237636.9
| |
| 25-12-2004, at 22:31
| |
| No I want 56% to be 56%!!!
| |
| That should be 5 chances for one and 4 for other team... not always but average in 100 or 1000 games should be that! 'Cause now team with 56% gets about 75% of chances...
| |
|
| |
| No. On average a team with 56% possession does get 56% of the chances. But you forget that not all chances are reported. The chance has to be good enough to be presented in the match report.
| |
|
| |
| 71 From: HT-Hasse
| |
| To: Jazz23 2237636.16, answering 2237636.14
| |
| 25-12-2004, at 22:41
| |
| their defence is to weak to stop opponents attack so if they won 5:0 we can say that they got all chances.
| |
|
| |
| Sorry, but you can't. It does not work that way.
| |
|
| |
| 72 From: HT-Hasse
| |
| To: Jazz23 2237636.20, answering 2237636.19
| |
| 25-12-2004, at 22:44
| |
| And your point is?
| |
|
| |
| Besides, you cannot tell that it is 6:2 in chances. It is 6:2 in reported chances, which is a completely different thing.
| |
|
| |
| 73 From: HT-Hasse
| |
| To: Jazz23 2237636.31, answering 2237636.30
| |
| 25-12-2004, at 23:17
| |
| If it is a normal chance a team with 54% posession has 54% chance of getting it.
| |
|
| |
| 74 From: HT-Hasse
| |
| To: el-insaciable 2237636.48, answering 2237636.47
| |
| 25-12-2004, at 23:55
| |
| Actually your statement in this thread made me wonder... When it's calculated which team will get a chance, is there a randomfactor which decides how great the chance is? Or is it only the ratings (with an amount of random too) which has an influence?
| |
|
| |
| I don't know exactly how that works, and I don't want to know too much. It would spoil the fun of the game for me.
| |
|
| |
| x
| |
|
| |
| === national teams ===
| |
|
| |
| Hattrick » USA » Get rid of National teams
| |
|
| |
| 91 From: HT-Bjorn
| |
| To: Iedereen (2246244.20), answering 2246244.1
| |
| 27-12-2004, at 22:57
| |
| It is very simple. The National Teams provide two huge benefits to the game:
| |
|
| |
| 1. It is fun. Most people think it is fun. Of course there are people who do not think it is fun. Everything is like that. Some people don't use the conferences. That is not an argument for removing the conferences. Some people (bizarre as it may sound) don't even think Hattrick is fun. That is not a reason for removing Hattrick. (Yes, I know your main argument against NTs wasn't that you didn't think it was fun - but still: The fact that a lot of users enjoy the NTs is a strong argument for keeping it).
| |
|
| |
| 2. It provides interesting challenges and depth and complexity to the game. That alone is such a huge benefit to the game that it leaves most other argument insufficient. The NTs are not unfair: Every team in the game can afford to have, for instance, a Saudi Arabia potential U-20 player on the squad. Not having a NT player on your squad is a deliberate decision you've done. It may be wise or it may be unwise, or it may not matter, but at the end of the day it is your own choice. The amount of possible choices, even if non-obvious at first sight, sums up to the depth of this (and any) game. I want Hattrick to have more depth, not less. Hence we will certainly not remove depth-adding features just because some people have chosen not to use them (in fact, by choosing not to use them, they have benefited from the depth anyway).
| |
|
| |
| 92 From: HT-Bjorn
| |
| To: stevetrash (2246244.26), answering 2246244.24
| |
| 27-12-2004, at 23:32
| |
| Bjorn, can you verify what was said above about experience... it doesn't matter once you get above excellent?
| |
| That’s actually the thing that bothers me the most about the NTs.
| |
|
| |
| We always avoid "hard caps", so strictly speaking it keeps mattering, but somewhere around excellent, the effect per additional XP level gets rather small (increasingly small the further beyond your get). Divine contributes SLIGHTLY more than say extra-terrestrial. but very very little.
| |
|
| |
| 93 From: HT-Bjorn
| |
| To: HomaridII 2246244.72, answering 2246244.71
| |
| 01-01-2005, at 23:17
| |
| It is painfully obvious that many of the changes made during the past couple of seasons would be far less complicated to implement were national teams not around.
| |
|
| |
| And? They are clearly already made, so what is the problem with them having been complicated to implement? Also, being the one who has implemented them, I frankly don't see what you mean about them having been far more complicated because of the NTs.
| |
|
| |
| It is also obvious to many people playing that national teams directly effect how most smart managers manage their club teams,
| |
|
| |
| Yes, as I stated in my earlier posting, this is exactly the point, and very deliberate. As I previously stated, the presence of the national teams means there are more factors to take into consideration for the club manager. From my perspective as game designer, this is very healthy for the depth of the game, and depth is necessary for the game.
| |
|
| |
| which shouldn't be the case in a game intended to be about club teams.
| |
|
| |
| Yes it should.
| |
|
| |
| It saddens me a lot to see that firm claims that "Hattrick should not be... this and that..." is so much more common than "Hattrick could be..." in the conferences nowadays.
| |
|
| |
| Visit the team of many of the top clubs in HT and you will undoubtedly find more than 1 national team player to cut wages and for experience. This is not a coincidence.
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| Exactly, and it proves my point: NTs add to the depth. Depth provides challenges, especially for the more experienced users (those who have come to grips with the challenges that newbie’s face).
| |
|
| |
| I would ask you now: "Were National Teams not already part of Hattrick, would you implement them now
| |
|
| |
| That is one of the easiest questions I have ever had to answer: You bet I would. The National Teams are one of the best additions in the last few years. I just wish we had been able to do more such improvements.
| |
|
| |
| or would you rather try to incorporate some kind of club champions league or international club cup to the game
| |
|
| |
| The prioritizing between which of those two to implement first was right, yes, National teams was (and would still have been) a way much better thing to implement first, out of those two things.
| |
|
| |
| Not to mention that a large part of the problems Ht's GMs have to deal with. or at least the biggest and more controversial problems that GMs have to deal with are always regarding national teams.
| |
|
| |
| Sorry, but I must disagree again. That is simply not true. Except perhaps, regarding the "most controversial" part of your statement. That it being so proves that many people care and are interested in the national teams.
| |
|
| |
| 94 From: HT-Bjorn
| |
| To: modred 2246244.99, answering 2246244.92
| |
| 02-01-2005, at 16:48
| |
| *gives up and leaves conference*
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| x
| |
|
| |
| === newbies and new features ===
| |
|
| |
| 96 From: HT-Tjecken
| |
| To: Iedereen (2349939.141), answering 2349939.132
| |
| 17-01-2005, at 13:07
| |
| These recent changes will not hurt newbies at all, I think these changes will give newbies a much better game experience. It might be harder for them to expand their arena, but making a game easy is not the formula for a good game experience. And game experience is very important, and in fact what this is all about.
| |
|
| |
| It is a better experience to start out small and grow than starting big and shrink. It's a better game experience to be forced to choose between different strategies/actions for your teams growth than having one obvious strategy/action to "choose". So even if the game may be a _little_ more difficult for newbie’s (because they start with 100 supporters and the fact that it will be more costly to expand your arena, even if the need for expanding a 12k arena isn't that big the first seasons), they will for sure gain from a better game experience.
| |
|
| |
| What about the game experience these changes have on our "old" user then? Well, it's not as dramatic as for the newbie’s, but it may force you to think twice before expanding your arena. The costs side of the economy haven't been changed much since the start of Hattrick, which in fact may have hurt the game experience because salaries are the only cost today that really counts. The changes we've made which affects the cost side lately have all been adding game experience, just think of the "change coach" feature today compared to the old one, and we hope that the increased arena expanding costs also will give you a slightly better game experience.
| |
| Does this mean that more costs will be increased? Well, maybe - but we will announce such things well in advance on My Hattrick.
| |
|
| |
| Finally, I heard some of you saying things about the economy will be even worse because of this. Let me just remind you all about that the economy is growing (as I stated a few weeks ago) really good, and the new public (and fan) formulas will make it grow even faster as spectator income will be much higher than before.
| |
|
| |
| === starting conditions ===
| |
|
| |
| 97 From: HT-Hasse
| |
| To: mind_hunter666 (2359874.4), answering 2359874.1
| |
| 17-01-2005, at 19:18
| |
| Every time something in the game changes someone will gain and someone will lose. The only way to avoid this would be to never change anything at all. Using that principle Hattrick would still be played only in Swedish, with a couple of thousand users only.
| |
|
| |
| On the other hand there are lots of things which are better for you who started now than for others who started previously. For instance you start with an equivalent of 300,000 EURO. When I started I got 75,000 EURO. I also got a smaller stadium (6000) and worse players.
| |
|
| |
| And yes, you start with 100 supporters. But you also start with a lot more generous supporters than those who started a season ago. Most of them have lost a couple of hundred supporters. You will most likely gain quite a lot of supporters right from the start.
| |
|
| |
| 98 From: HT-Tjecken
| |
| To: Pranas (2349939.188), answering 2349939.150
| |
| 17-01-2005, at 15:58
| |
| The difference in when you started playing have always mattered, and there is now way to change that from happen if we don't like a game where all new starting teams will be just as good as the best ones in the league. Time does matter, and will always do so - yesterday, today and tomorrow.
| |
|
| |
| Also, I don't agree in your predictions about the gap will be bigger. It may be more expensive to expand your arena, but new users will also start with an arena almost twice (yes, it's almost doubled!) as big as before. With the increase ticket prices they have a chance to make even more money than "older newbie’s", and at the same time be able to invest money in your players (which in fact is really funny, especially for a newbie).
| |
|
| |
| As I said in my earlier post, making a game as simple as possible to reach the skill as older teams have is not the same thing as a good gaming experience. It may be your opinion, but not our. The best game experience is to start with something small and develop it with your own hands (and brain!) to something great, and it should not be as playing a self playing piano.
| |
|
| |
| === "feature" vs. "bug fix" ===
| |
|
| |
| 99 From: HT-Tjecken
| |
| To: Pranas 2349939.208, answering 2349939.206
| |
| 17-01-2005, at 17:57
| |
| Yes, sometimes we don't have the same opinion as some of our users. That doesn't mean we don't listen to users. That's in fact two different things.
| |
|
| |
| And if you, or anyone else, see every new feature or every change to the game as "fixing an error", I really recommend you to look at things a little bit differently. Just because we change things don't mean they were wrong before, but we found a way to make them better. We do make mistakes too of course, after all we're human beings, but we don't make mistakes all the time.
| |
|
| |
| === democracy/polls/new features ===
| |
|
| |
| 101 From: HT-Tjecken
| |
| To: eros22 (2349939.364), answering 2349939.356
| |
| 19-01-2005, at 12:07
| |
| And I also think I've answered on this a few weeks ago, but I'll take it again.
| |
|
| |
| First of all, let me just say (again) that Hattrick is not, and will not be, run after democratic decisions. This doesn't mean we don't listen to your opinions or what the community feels about different things, cause we really take that under consideration when making our decisions.
| |
| Why not a real democracy then? Well, someone already answered that one earlier in this thread: Because users don't have all information needed in order to make a decision what's best for the game. Secondly, in order to develop a game there has to be a vision for what you want to create, it's the most important thing. Without a vision you're lost, but what's also important is that you can't have two (or more) different visions. But as all Hattrick users, naturally, don't have the same vision it would mean that all decisions would be based on 500k different visions. Such decisions are not healthy at all for a game like Hattrick (and many other things as well).
| |
|
| |
| That stated we have failed to make you all aware that we listen to what you have to say. We listen, but most of the time we do only just that, not also recognizing that we need to tell you that we listen. Polls are one thing that can be used to improve the communication between developers and users, and polls can be very powerful. The "problem" with polls is that they may give everybody a feeling that the outcome of a poll is what will automatically happen next (depending on the questions asked of course), and then we're back on the above (decisions based on 500k different visions and opinions).
| |
| But I certainly hope I (we) can find a way to use polls more regularly, on certain topics and for certain issues, because polls are democratic in the sense that every vote counts equally and that they may be used even by people that do not visit the conferences regularly. We could then use the polls as advice to take under consideration when making our decisions. This is a real challenge, to find a poll system that would work well, but it is something we would like to try
| |
|
| |
| Finally some words about your prediction, an opinion I don't share. What many people seem to forget is that we have increased the income side a lot during the last seasons, for example:
| |
| - Increased ticket prices
| |
| - Increased sponsor money
| |
| - More generous fan formula (which is made even more generous to new teams)
| |
| - More generous spectator formula
| |
| Apart from this, salaries for new teams are lower today because of the new salary formula.
| |
|
| |
| But in order to keep this an interesting game, we also have to increase costs - because if getting money was easy this game wouldn't be as interesting anymore. I understand your concern and your opinion, but I don't agree in it. :)
| |
| I think we'll see more new teams/users staying in the game and finding the game more interesting and challenging now. And I don't expect to see more bankrupt teams either. If I'm right - time will tell.
| |
|
| |
| Anyway, I think I've made myself clear on our views of this, and related(?) ones, topic now. Maybe I shouldn't have "hidden" this answer this far back in the thread, but sometimes you can't choose.
| |
|
| |
| x
| |
|
| |
| === scoring a goal ===
| |
|
| |
| 104 HT Bjorn:
| |
| The difference between one team's attack ratings and another team's defence ratings, says nothing definite about the chances to score goals. Defence ratings can only be compared with other defence ratings, attack ratings only with other attack ratings.
| |
|
| |
| So you could say: when I met team A, they had poorer defence ratings than team B, (I had the same ratings) - But I still scored more against B. That’s strange.
| |
|
| |
| But you can’t say: I had titanic defence, while he only had magnificent attack. Titanic is better than magnificent, so it has to be a bug that he scored against me.
| |
|
| |
| x
| |
|
| |
| x
| |
|
| |
| === general statement ===
| |
|
| |
| 146 From: HT-Bjorn
| |
| To: Iedereen (2636166.29), answering 2636166.1
| |
| 25-02-2005, at 20:28
| |
| Everyone,
| |
|
| |
| Let me state here and now, once and for all:
| |
|
| |
| * I have not stated, and I will not state, whether the game engine is linear or not.
| |
|
| |
| * In a matter such as this one, there are very few members even of the HT-team who knows for sure exactly how it works. Remember that not every word spoken by a person with HT-prefix should automatically be considered an official statement representing the whole HT-team. (Although, you may consider this particular posting an official statement from the only one who knows for sure about this particular question :).
| |
|
| |
| * The Match Engine works exactly as it is intended in this respect (whether that be linear or non-linear). This also implies that there is no reason to suggest fixes for this or that, because we are well aware of the implications of how it works, and have designed the game engine as a whole based on that design.
| |
|
| |
| * I will (probably) not answer any follow-up questions in this or other threads about this matter, beyond what I state above.
| |
|
| |
| === hidden skills ===
| |
|
| |
| 147 HT-Hasse:
| |
| In your opinion, about how many hidden skills are there for a player?
| |
|
| |
| None. And we have stated that very clearly numerous times
| |
|
| |
| === possession ===
| |
|
| |
| 149 From: HT-Tjecken
| |
| To: redrobert (2942648.123), answering 2942648.109
| |
| 19-04-2005, at 10:19
| |
| the possession that is mentioned is from the 45th/90th minute. that's what ht-bjorn is saying and everything i observed so far proves this right.
| |
|
| |
| That's correct.
| |
|
| |
| 150 From: HT-Tjecken
| |
| To: Ratsia 2942648.125, answering 2942648.124
| |
| 19-04-2005, at 11:03
| |
| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| And it's looking more and more like it is too non-linear, so that even a small difference in possession averages a huge difference in how the chances are allocated.
| |
| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| For example, the difference in that particular match was by no means small. Elkabong's opponent had roughly 35% higher midfield rating. This is roughly the same as difference between average div III and div I teams in relatively established countries (difference measured by Hatstats, which is linear function of ratings and thus comparable to studying the difference of individual ratings). Yet, like you said, Elkabong was a favourite in that match, even though his midfield was in a sense two division levels below the opponent's midfield and the only part of the ratings that was better for him was attack.
| |
|
| |
| So, the question is "what is a small difference". I would never call 30-50% difference small, regardless of the rating in question. Getting 30-50% advantage on some area requires significant investments. Assuming identical formations (and other variables) this means roughly 30-50% better players. For example, "excellents instead of passables" or "supernaturals instead of outstandings". IMO those are huge differences.
| |
|
| |
| A 10% difference indeed is quite small, and in case of midfield it will give 52% possession and thus probably on average slightly less than 6 chances for the dominating team. This will not be a decisive thing in the match. Even 20% difference, which is not that small anymore, will only give 55% possession and probably 6-7 chances. It's still relatively easy to counter that by dominating other ratings.
| |
|
| |
| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Fix it up so that it is linear or at least close to it.
| |
| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| It could be tweaked a bit, but a linear system would be quite catastrophical. If the scoring probabilities would be linear as well, there really wouldn't be anything for us to play, because it would not matter how you position your players (strong side versus weak or vice versa and so on). Linearizing midfield alone would not cause exactly the same effect, but it would make midfield have almost no value at all if scoring formula remained the same as it is now.
| |
|
| |
| Very nice post in a very nice thread I must say. I love to read those threads like this where users really try to discover new stuff instead of just stating the same old myths again.
| |
| All users participating and reading this thread will/can actually even learn a lot from it (apparently even including elkabong this time :)).
| |
|
| |
| x
| |
|
| |
| x
| |
|
| |
| === Leadership ===
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| 154 HT-unknown
| |
| Ex-coaches still lose leadership
| |
|
| |
| x
| |
|
| |
| === health updates and training ===
| |
|
| |
| {{forum_message|
| |
| | from = HT-Hasse
| |
| | to = TommieW
| |
| | msgid = 5124789.20
| |
| | prevmsgid = 5124789.5
| |
| | datetime = 8-2-2006 at 21:16
| |
| | keywords = (training), (health update)
| |
| | text =
| |
| ''In every country there's first the daily health update, and directly after that the training.''
| |
|
| |
| That is incorrect. In fact there is no way of knowing which is updated first for a specific player.
| |
| }}
| |
|
| |
| {{forum_message|
| |
| | from = HT-Hasse
| |
| | to = TommieW
| |
| | msgid = 5124789.22
| |
| | prevmsgid = 5124789.21
| |
| | datetime = 8-2-2006 at 21:20
| |
| | keywords = (training), (health update)
| |
| | text =
| |
| ''Then I stand corrected. I always assumed the health update would be finished before the training starts (since it doesn't take that long and starts earlier)''
| |
|
| |
| To be quite clear it actually used to work that way once, but that was a very very long time ago (my guess is 2 years+).
| |
| }}
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| x
| |
|
| |
| === game version ===
| |
|
| |
| {{forum_message|
| |
| | from = HT-Jonas
| |
| | to = roselan
| |
| | msgid = 7146698.89
| |
| | prevmsgid = 7146698.85
| |
| | datetime = 18.10.2006 at 20.03
| |
| | keywords = (Hattrick version)
| |
| | text =
| |
|
| |
| Actually 7.1 or something like that, but never mind that :)
| |
|
| |
| /HT-Jonas - ''Lead Game Designer''
| |
|
| |
| ''"Adding a famous name to a quote makes the quote look more reliable" - Albert Einstein ''
| |
| }}
| |
|
| |
|
| | What I said is how it should work. If you got any strong case of something looking wierd you can post it here, but please add complete data so in case you miss something other users can help you understand without me needing to answer any reply. The more data (and a 100% verified data) is posted the higher the chance you will get an answer from other users or me. |
|
| |
|
| [[Category:HTs on Global|*]] | | [[Category:HTs on Global|*]] |
By: HT-Tjecken
To: Frank-LNC 10664071.30 as reply to 10664071.24
8.2.2008 at 10:44
The whole new denomination scale of "hopeless", "prodigious", etc has been cancelled now? Does this mean all youth-players have the same training speed?
For once and for all: That scale had nothing to do with training speed.
All youth players don't have the same training speed, but the difference (which depend on their character, right now a hidden value) is marginal.
By: HT-Tjecken
To: dancing_rob 10664071.45 as reply to 10664071.39
8.2.2008 at 11:08
my best guess is that it referred to the difference between where the player was now (eg poor) and their max potential (eg solid)
I'm as intrigued as everyone else as to exactly what it meant though!
Close, but no cigar.
It was a combination of current skill level and potential skill level.
By: HT-Tjecken
To: Everyone 10664071.110 as reply to 10664071.103
8.2.2008 at 14:47
I read on our youthacademy forum that people got trainingmessage with [level] in there instead of the real level. And then I literaqlly mean "[level]" instead of inadequate or apssable or whatever.
Ok, this one is sorted out now.
By: flameron
To: wildkick 10664071.331 as reply to 10664071.330
10.2.2008 at 07:59
I don't think the youth team is the right place for Lars Langeland any more. At least when it comes to Passing, he's simply unable to improve any more.
This is a new one too, but I guess it is about completed player.
Last comment only means his passing is maxed out.
By: flameron
To: wildkick 10664071.333 as reply to 10664071.332
10.2.2008 at 08:03
Ok, I got that on IM, while training PM + PS. Meaning he could still be a PM talent?
The message is exact on the skill which is maxed out.
If his PM is mentioned he will not respond to playmaking training.
By: flameron
To: wildkick 10664071.335 as reply to 10664071.334
10.2.2008 at 08:06
I got a similar message when training wing + ps with him (but then it wasnt mentioned which skill he was maxed in). Now I know ps cant be training - but then he could be trained in PM + WG, right?
I refer only to the new comment type in which the exact skill is stated.
By: flameron
To: wildkick 10664071.337 as reply to 10664071.336
10.2.2008 at 09:28
Ok. What about the old one that doesn't mentioned which skill? Could it be that one of the skills at the then current time could be worth training?
Yes.
It meant that the total skills left to train are quite low. This message is removed due to better info in the new messages.
By: flameron
To: wildkick 10664071.339 as reply to 10664071.338
10.2.2008 at 09:33
Here are the messages:
NEW (training PM/PS):
Match I don't think the youth team is the right place for Lars Langeland any more. At least when it comes to Passing, he's simply unable to improve any more.
PREVIOUS (at that time, trained WG/PS):
Match In my opinion, Lars Langeland is not going to reach his potential as a footballer unless he gets some Playmaking training.
The old message you put here is still valid. I meant the "can not improve" unrelated to skill message.
By: flameron
To: wildkick 10664071.341 as reply to 10664071.340
10.2.2008 at 09:40
Ok. You really think he can still be a good prospect when the coach says: " I don't think the youth team is the right place for Lars Langeland any more"?
I know passing training will not do any good, ref. also your comment above. But if that sentence does not mean what it says, he might be able to improve in wing or pm?
Regarding the old message, I thought that that meant that ONE of the skills he was training at that time, didnt do him any good. As he was training WG + PS, that might just be the passing part? Or, is further wing training out of the question as well?
Maybe those messages means he is not going to improve much in ANY skill?
(a bit messy post, but hope you get my point)
I gave you all the info you need.
By: flameron
To: Kniff 10664071.457 as reply to 10664071.455
13.2.2008 at 09:31
I really like the new reports:
"Também treinámos Criatividade esta semana. Ao observar o João Luz, parece-me que ele está no nível desastroso nesta característica."
In english says something like my GK is disastrous PM at this time...
Very usefull information!!
yes my keeper got a scoring skill info.
It would be a nice realistic add on if player get a skill info for a skill that is important for the position he played, may be from same skill selection as for individual training. Keeper for example would get a keeper, defending or set pieces skill info, but never a scoring info.
It is an option, but ....
The current implementation though gives you info that by mistake you did not spot.
Fot instance: If you got a keeper and do not know that you can learn it by this mechanism. Same for other skills. Thats important as well.
You can have your scout tell you on scoring and the trainer will one day tell you (inspite the fact the player plays as forward) that this guy has now passable defending. This is better than your suggestion.
By: flameron
To: Kniff 11733234.14 as reply to 11733234.12
16.8.2008 at 22:14
Benotzer aus de Favoritten
Any type of message could appear only once in training report.
It should be random if several messgaes can be created (like several players have maxed out, gained skill, etc.). The order should be random as well (which means if you have two players that have maxed out you could get a messgae on any of them every week with no ability to predict the actual order - xx, yx, xy or yy should have the same probability for two training reports as a specific example).
If you have evidance that its not like that you could present them here and I will try and check. There is a wish to improve the current mechanism but we need resources which were not available lately. It might be prioritize lower with the other tasks planned for the future but my guess it will happen eventually. Please be patient with it (I know its not good how it works now).
By: flameron
To: Kniff 11733234.18 as reply to 11733234.15
16.8.2008 at 22:33
Benotzer aus de Favoritten
Question is if there were other players that you know to reach their max potential in skills that were trained during the same week, and how many of them.
If there are 2 players (including your keeper) its not that rare that you will get the same player reported several weeks in a row. It is reasonable to assume that only those users will feel annoyed and reply in the forum about that. Still, if it will look like there is a chance of a bug I will try and look into it (already did that with no sign of bug but will do it again).
By: flameron
To: Ratsia 11733234.22 as reply to 11733234.16
16.8.2008 at 22:38
Benotzer aus de Favoritten
I'm not going to discuss the possible improvements as you said there are no resources now
Why not. Maybe you will have something we did not think of.
... but could you at least add the information in the rules? Just two sentences saying the same thing I quoted.
Will check this.
By: flameron
To: Hasenohr 11733234.23 as reply to 11733234.21
16.8.2008 at 22:40
Benotzer aus de Favoritten
What´s about players, who got no addition of stars over two month? Ist it possible, that the messages will stop after a defined period of time?
I saw some and hear about many more of this cases.
What I said is how it should work. If you got any strong case of something looking wierd you can post it here, but please add complete data so in case you miss something other users can help you understand without me needing to answer any reply. The more data (and a 100% verified data) is posted the higher the chance you will get an answer from other users or me.
