Difference between revisions of "HTs on Global"
(HT-Hasse on health updates at training time)
(added a HT-post)
|Line 2,080:||Line 2,080:|
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+).
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+).
Revision as of 12:53, 7 September 2006
Notice: This is a temporary data dump and is currently being categorized. The last message categorized is numbered "30". Help categorize the others if you wish, but make sure you watch whether other people are busy categorizing (this is probably so if new HT's_on_Global/[subject] messages appear on the Special:Recentchanges page). They might be just categorizing the very messages you are about to categorize...
The Category link at the bottom of the page leads to a list of current categories.
|From:||HT-Tjecken||(3348749.23) as reply to (3348749.11)|
|To: evenlamername||15-06-2005, at 12:46|
|Good question. :)
In my opinion playmaking is an accurate term for the skill playmaking. Playmaking imho is not about "the decisive pass", it's about keeping the ball in your team in order to get a chance to score. Passing on the other hand is not as accurate imo, as passing the ball to each other also is a part of playmaking in a way. Passing in Hattrick is, as you know, about the ability to pass "a decisive pass", making it more like assisting maybe. It could be a kind of a lame translation from Swedish from the beginning, but I don't know if there are any fantastic translation for the swedish word "framspel" (which more or less means the ability to pass a decisive pass).
Anyways, this doesn't really matter nowadays - cause as we all know: passing is the correct term for a decisive pass and nothing else, right? ;)
|From:||HT-Tjecken||(3348749.26) as reply to (3348749.22)|
|To: Pirats||15-06-2005, at 12:57|
|You can put it this way: Stamina is important for every player, but extra important for those players who use their playmaking skill.
The more playmaking a certain player uses, stamina becomes more important.
1 From: HT-Tjecken
To: evenlamername 3348749.23, answering 3348749.11
15-06-2005, at 12:46
Good question. :)
In my opinion playmaking is an accurate term for the skill playmaking. Playmaking imho is not about "the decisive pass", it's about keeping the ball in your team in order to get a chance to score. Passing on the other hand is not as accurate imo, as passing the ball to each other also is a part of playmaking in a way. Passing in Hattrick is, as you know, about the ability to pass "a decisive pass", making it more like assisting maybe. It could be a kind of a lame translation from Swedish from the beginning, but I don't know if there are any fantastic translation for the swedish word "framspel" (which more or less means the ability to pass a decisive pass).
Anyways, this doesn't really matter nowadays - cause as we all know: passing is the correct term for a decisive pass and nothing else, right? ;)
2 From: HT-Tjecken
To: Pirats 3348749.26, answering 3348749.22
15-06-2005, at 12:57
You can put it this way: Stamina is important for every player, but extra important for those players who use their playmaking skill.
The more playmaking a certain player uses, stamina becomes more important.
3 From: HT-Tjecken
To: evenlamername 3348749.31, answering 3348749.24
15-06-2005, at 13:12
Try to see it this way:
Playmaking is the ability to make use of your possession and turn it into an attack (a chance to score). In order to score on that chance you need a player who can pass a decisive pass (passing skill in Hattrick) to the scorer. Sometimes you might succeed even if you don't have a good passer, the ball might bounce your way and end up in front a fantastic scorer - but you'll be more succesful if you have both good passers and fantastic scorers.
Making passing affect the attack rating makes sense, often in irl football teams have great chances to score but the final passes are so lousy that the chance disappears. You'll still count such chance as a good chance to score even if it wasn't even close to score.
4 From: HT-Mattias
To: DriesEvil 3237002.48, answering 3237002.37
31-05-2005, at 01:40
The games FIFA 2004 and Soccer Manager have both been banned in mainland China because they called Taiwan Taiwan. As were 50 other games in January.
So yes, we were forced to change the name to Chinese Taipei, which is the official FIFA name for Taiwan. So call us spineless, but if a change of name is what it takes to keep our mainland Chinese users having access to Hattrick, then we have to do it.
In fact, most local Taiwanese in the Chinese Taipei conference don't seem to have a big problem with it. The ones who have protested the most against the name change are Europeans who don't know very much about the historic roots of the issue.
5 From: HT-Mattias
To: GetAssista 3391068.32, answering 3391068.6
22-06-2005, at 01:39
He-he, nice! Must be indeed some time seed in YP RNG
You are correct. The bug that creates the clones is that when two players make a youth pull within the same 3 milliseconds, the same random seed will be used. Therefore the players will be identical. This does not happen often, but with 600,000 active players it does happen sometimes.
We will fix this bug shortly.
6 From: HT-Mattias
To: Grischenko 3391068.36, answering 3391068.35
22-06-2005, at 01:58
You are correct. We will construct the seed out of the time and the team number, so that all youth pulls get a unique seed.
7 From: HT-Mattias
To: ballord 3391068.52, answering 3391068.37
22-06-2005, at 11:23
Should that really prevent clones from being pulled? I think in some way that's impossible. Like, let's say you use time divided by team id to get the random seed. Well, in that case different times could, divided by proportional team ids, result in the same seed. The trick is to construct a seed not by dividing time by teamID, but rater in this way: time*C+teamID, where C is a number that is larger than the largest teamID. This will always create a unique seed.
8 From: HT-Mattias
To: _Diegol_ 3391068.53, answering 3391068.46
22-06-2005, at 11:25
Maybe that seed will make some teams more propitious to pull better players than others. No, the random function is random enough, so that won't be the case.
9 From: HT-Mattias
To: Ratsia 3391068.84, answering 3391068.71
23-06-2005, at 02:44
It is correct that the first number (and arguably another few numbers) after reseeding typically has a detectable link to the seed.
To counter that, we call the random function a couple of times to "shuffle the deck" before we start using the numbers.
Due to the parallel nature of Hattrick, where many youth pulls can happen simultaneously, the practical solution is to reseed every time. And to make sure that we have a unique seed.
Regarding your fear that the random generator might only use the last few bits of the seed, let me assure you that we have made sure that in fact the whole seed is used.
We have made a statistical analysis of the youth pulls, and the distribution is in fact very random and is shaped as we want it.
Now, the change we have made (implemented tonight), only affects the selection of the seed. The way the player skills are calculated is unchanged. So the only difference will be the fact that there will be no more clones, since the same seed will not be used twice in the future.
10 By: HT-Bjorn
To: Mod-Rhoddry 2796895.19 as reply to 2796895.18
24/3-2005 at 06.10
Jag tror att det är tid som är reserverad så att matchmotorn skall kunna arbeta ikapp så att simuleringen av matcherna verkligen kan börja vid matchstart.
Så kan man uttrycka det, ja. Det är en slags tidsbuffert för lite olika saker och så att vi inte skall ha folk som lägger order precis när matcherna skall dras igång, vilket skulle kunna strula till det en smula.
Matchsimuleringen börjar prick.
Boiled-down-translation: Calculations start at kick-off :o) The 15 mins before match start is like a "time buffer" for different kinds of stuff and so that ppl won't place orders at the same moment matches are about to start, which could mess things up a bit.
11 From: dansyl
To: Iedereen 1476700.40, answering 1476700.39
16-07-2004, at 17:16
Ht frid geeft aan dat er een bug is gefixed betreffende de weergave van de ts. ts level 9 en 10 werden beiden altijd weergegeven als POE maar level 9 is WOC (walking on clouds). Dit is nu gefixed. Kortom bij sommigen van jullie kan de ts omschrijving ineens veranderd zijn ;-)
level 8 = delirious
level 9 = WOC
level 10 = POE
level 11- = shouldn't bee shown but due to the same reason as level 9 has been shown in hrf but nowhere else, the hrf can show levels higher than 10
Real level 9 showed up as POE (level 10) on site and in XML but as leve 9 in HRF and level 10 in RF description
Real level 10 was handled correctly by all.
Since people have been matching the correct HRF value with an incorrect description most people have thought POE=level9.
12 From: HT-Hasse
To: Chapo 1523089.24, answering 1523089.23
20-07-2004, at 16:49
Could you confirm that the scorer's choice is totally random?
No, because as far as I know it isn't. It also depends on position on the pitch as I understand it.
13 From: HT-Hasse
To: dansyl 1523089.29, answering 1523089.28
21-07-2004, at 12:14
I assume weather events are incorporated before the actual game too.
14 From: HT-Hasse
To: Payto 1523089.18, answering 1523089.17
20-07-2004, at 15:03
OK, I will clarify - the players performance of the day (do not get stars mixed into that) creates the values for the different team parts, which in their turn decide the outcome of the match.
Each individual player though might use skills that contribute to more than one team part (for instance both attack left wing and defence left wing).
The players receive an individual grade based upon all the skills they use, which as we have already seen may be parts of different team parts.
This is the only measurement of individual effort there is, and thus it is used to pick MOM etc. This is also basically the only way it could be done since it is impossible to measure individual effort in any other way.
This does not necessarily mean it was your most important player though. That might be your best defender, who you successfully placed on the flank where the other guy had his best winger. He did a good job closing the opponent's best flank, even though he might not have been the most talented player out there.
Pretty much as in real life don't you think btw?
15 By: HT-Bjorn
1636437.25 as reply to 1636437.20
20/8-2004 at 15.57
no answer on where HT stand other than the "formula" for calculating crowds to games has not changed.
If that's the case, how could we answer differently? We can't should say A when it is B, just for the sake of populism, to appease those who say "It is not A, it is B".
It has not changed.
Also, these threads tend to mix a whole bunch of completely different things.
I'll here just comment the complaining about losing supporters, which is what this thread was originally about, until it was hijacked by users who prefer spreading sarcasms about "intelligent fans" (taking things badly out of context while so doing) and complain about their spectator outcome in general
Losing supporters: The complaints tend to be founded in a complete lack of understanding how the fanclub size relates to what league level you are in. Many people think that just because it worked fine to pile up fanclub members early in their HT career, then it will remain linear like that forever. However, as I've repeatedly tried to get the message through: the size of your fanclub is strongly related to what level you are in.
There is a "balance size" for each division level. If you're doing OK, then you will reach this level and neither lose nor gain supporters a typical week. However, it is possible to be doing "above average" for a while (including using press spokesmen and similar means to boost fans mood). If you manage to maintain this "enhanced" situation for some time, your fanclub size will grow beyond the balance level.
But when your team then screw things up (lose in the cup against a worse team, for instance, or lose 5-0 in an important series match), then so much worse the fall is: You fall from an enhanced state.
Here's an example (hypothetical, and with dummy values NOT taken from the actual formula): Let's say a certain division has a balance level of 2000 fans. your team has 1900. For some time your team starts doing well and the fans stay happy. You will reach 2000 at an "accelerated speed" because you are currently below the balance level. However, the further beyond 2000 you go, the harder each new recruitment gets. And when finally, bad luck strikes and things start going wrong with the team, you will lose quite a lot, say lose 100 withing a few weeks, going from the exhanced level of 2200 to 2100.
Does this mean that it is meaningless to gain fans? No. If you stay at 2200 for some time, you will still have had 10% more income (although for a limited time) from the things depending on fanclub than you would have had otherwise. Just because it doesn't last forever, you'll still have gained more money than if you had stayed at 2000 all the time.
So, there are a few things to note: The 10% fanclub gain when you go up to higher division is not the big advantage of promoting. The big advantage is that you'll have a higher balance level. In fact, the 10% you gain may (or may not) bring you above the balance level of the new division. This is what some users have experienced as a drop of fanclub size early in the new season after promoting.
Why do we have a balance level? For starters, this rewards promotion somewhat. It is also an element of realism (yeah-yeah... I know, we have limited the realism on the whole on the matter of spectator sizes, but let's not take up that discussion here, I've answered that elsewhere).
Furthermore, it prevents the early starters from benefiting eternally from "a head start". I mean like this: If supporter gain had been linear, so you keep gaining fans as long as you win, then we could easily have had a situation where the oldest teams had fanclubs of 20.000 rather than 2000 members. So there has to be a limitation, although, we ALWAYS shun strict limits, we've made the limit "soft" (so you can cross it, but only temporary).
The fans want you to take all important matches seriously. The cup is very important to them. Like it or not, but that is the way the spectators of the HT universe thinks about things. Them fans are stubborn crazy little fools, but hey - that's why they fork out the fee to the entrance tickets each week (except when they are too angry with you failing them). When it comes to stubbornness of your fans, you have to take the bad with the good.
Over and out,
16 From: HT-Bjorn
To: Iedereen (1767768.21), answering 1767768.1
24-09-2004, at 10:05
It is very simple. I have no idea where the notion that it would depend on what team is home and what is away comes form, it has NOTHING to do with home/away team
Let me use and example: If someone comes home to visit me in my apartment, we might shake hands. So I raise my right hand. Now my visitor is supposed to raise his right hand. Clearly it is then the hand that is located on his right that should be lifted, not the hand that is located on the right side, seen from my "home perspective". Even if a reporter was watching this handshake standing behind me (the host), the reporter would still say that the visitor raised his right hand (because "his right hand" means exactly that - the hand that is on the right seen from the owner of the hand).
Hope this example clears some things up. If not, just forget the "home/away theory" and trust the the match report wording is correct (If it says "United moved up the right wing", then it is always Unitied's right wing. If it says "United's left defense allowed City to come through", then it is United's left defense that allowed City's right wing to come through).
Regarding the issue of people scoring on the "wrong" wing: Wing attacks often take the form of one player coming through on the (you guessed it...) wing and then make a pass into the middle. That means that it is often NOT the left winger that actually scores after the a left flank attack - in fact the other winger (but more often the strikers) or some other player, midfielder or even defender, has moved into the box near the goal and get to finish the attack off.
So, don't pay too much attention to who is actually scoring on a regular attack (things are different for "special event attcks", which are "individual achievements" to a much larger extent). What matters is if it is the left, right, middle (or set piece) that is generating the chance. Trust that part and consider the "who is scoring" as less important.
17 From: HT-Bjorn
To: beltsov (1767768.30), answering 1767768.25
24-09-2004, at 10:51
the match orders page is upside down.
I disagree. It is not upside down. Most people start reading a page from top to bottom. Most teams number their players from keeper to striker. Most people tend to start with the keeper when listing their team. Many (if admittedly not all) similar charts are oriented this way.
Flipping the page now would just confuse 400.000 users while not providing something profoundly better. Both orientations are possible and have their pros and cons. We've chosen this one and so we will stick to it.
18 From: HT-Bjorn
To: jarlrasm (1779268.68), answering 1779268.40
28-09-2004, at 13:00
I think they've messed those countries up a bit..
No we haven't. People please stop assuming we are stupid just because you don't understand our reasoing in various issues...! ;) That goes, by the way, for most cases when you think other people are stupid. Most usually "those other people" are not stupid - more often they just have access to different (usually better) information than you.
No one (to my knowledge) has requested that we add Kazakhstan, but there is a nice group of dedicated Kazhaks who have submitted their offer in helping out creating and promoting that league. Now, we cannot be sure of that, but we know for certain that "potential" is not the most important factor when determining which countries grow fast. Just look at China - 1.2 billion people, most of which are crazy about football, crazy about games and yet hardly no HT users. There are many reasons why it isn't bigger. Lack of "prophets" and lack of translation being the two foremost. Now, we're not considering any Kazakh translation yet ;) but at least the other factor (existing users who have expressed a willingness to promote it locally) looks better than for Kazakhstan.
Is the chance that a goalkeeper gets injured the same as an outfield player?
I’m not sure, but i don’t think so.
20 From: HT-Bjorn
To: Iedereen (2003552.20), answering 2003552.1
07-11-2004, at 15:57
Don't blame the engine for your lack of understanding of it. "Luck" or "back luck" tend to be the knee-jerk reaction to the unpleasant fact that someone has not yet fully mastered all aspects of the game. Blaming losses on "bad luck" will not help you reach the top series - in fact it will prevent you from refining your tactic, will prevent you from learning the game engine.
Random is part of any game (including real-life football as well as Hattrick) or indeed any aspect of life in a complex world. However, it matters every little for long term results, and it even matters very little for the outcome of all but a very small number of matches.
21 From: HT-Bjorn
To: myszka-ns (2003552.27), answering 2003552.21
07-11-2004, at 16:23
But the lottery is bigger and bigger :(.
No it is not. You are mistaken. Random is not more important, it is less important.
In last seasones was lottery but it was very little. In this season lottery rule Hattrick :(.
Not true. More likely, it is your understanding of the game that has become obsolete. Learn from your mistakes and the mistakes of others, instead of just saying that it is luck, just because you don't understand why a certain team lost.
Established truths slowly change as the best managers adjust their tactics over time. The longer you cling to old "truths" and treat all deviations from those obsolete "truths" as "random", then the more strange and hostile and "unlucky" your life in the HT world will seem.
22 From: HT-Bjorn
To: bbUnica (2003552.32), answering 2003552.26
07-11-2004, at 16:28
The real life random is so rare that I haven'r seen a game in which the worst team won against the better team.
That is because IRL you fully trust your eyes and what you see on the field, and treat all side statistics as secondary. In Hattrick many people do the opposite: They treat the match report (which is what actually happened) as secondary and think that the "truth" about which team was the best lies in the side statistcis (like team and player ratings).
The game engine similates a match. Step by step it advances through the match and the most important events are spat out as the match report.
The team ratings specify (more objectively than IRL) what the inparameters were. But, like in your Real Madrid example, inparameters doesn't tell the whole story.
23 From: HT-Bjorn
To: bi_ts (2003552.35), answering 2003552.28
07-11-2004, at 16:35
So we are all stupid morons....
No, I didn't say that.
I said that none of us (me included) fully grasp the complexity of such a complicated thing as the game engine (or the IRL "game engine"). There is always more to learn. We are all ignorants and we are all knowledgeable. None of us know everything and none know nothing.
However, to stop learning half-way and start saying that "random is increasing" is to act very foolishly. Random has not increased - in fact it has been made less important in HT 6.6. So, if you perceive the HT-world as less comprehensive, it is more likely to be because your relative understanding of the game engine has fallen behind other managers. This may sound like a harsh statement, but the choice is yours.
24 From: HT-Bjorn
To: HG-bard (2002523.47), answering 2002523.1
07-11-2004, at 15:46
If random matters so much - how come some of the best teams tend to win the cup and be in the top series, season after season, over and over again?
The fact that you cannot predict the outcome doesn't mean it is random. It means that it is a complex game that, just like real-life football, is not easily boiled down to some simple formula and prediction-models. As you know, people usually bet money on real-life football results, and knowledgeable betters do lose IRL too.
I'm sure that the users here could give hundreds of examples of matches that went "the wrong way".
"Wrong way" meaning it didn't go as most people predicted? How many people expected the Greeks to win the Euro 2004? You can be lucky in a single match, but you cannot win a tournament on pure luck. The same is true in Hattrick.
25 From: HT-Bjorn
To: sjeetje (2002523.51), answering 2002523.49
07-11-2004, at 16:04
Is it true that the random element in the cup is higher than in league-matches?
No, it is completely untrue. I hadn't heard that rumour, but then, there are always so many bizarre rumours going around that I am glad I don't have to hear most of them,
If the random element had been higher in the cup, then of course the rules had stated so.
26 From: HT-Bjorn
To: bbUnica (2002523.53), answering 2002523.50
07-11-2004, at 16:16
So, do you thing Greeks won Euro 2004 by being a weak team?
No, my point is the exact opposite: The Greeks won because they were a BETTER team. However, BEFORE the matches were played, few people realized that they were. I was using them as an example of how difficult it is to PREDICT a result. After the match, it is all very easy - all you have to do is to take a look at the match report.
By everybody's standards, the "game engine" of Euro 2004 could never had labeled Greece as "weak".
In fact, it is quite possible to label the separate positions in a winning team as inferior (player by player, or sector by sector) and yet say that the result was fair, if the winner was the one using a superior tactic for that particular match. That is what often happens in HT as well: One team with lower overall ratings use a smart tactic (smart against that particular opponent) and win. Afte rthe match some will just look at the ratings and then whine and say that it was unfair, when in fact it was perfectly fair becuase the winner outsmarted the loser with his tactic or some other subtle trick (for instance using a certain combination of specialist).
Remember: The ratings do not show everything that mattered in thematch. The match report does. Read it, and then read it again, and finally read between the lines of the match report. Don't treat the match report as the "wrong" or "dumb" data and the ratings as The Holy Absolute Truth as some does. Quite often it can be the other way around.
27 From: HT-Bjorn
To: brunop (2002523.78), answering 2002523.76
07-11-2004, at 23:36
Iemand beweert dat in zijn ogen defensie te zwaar meetelt (dat is ook de eerste keer dat ik dat hoor)
The typical HT defense line still consists of 3 defenders. IRL it is typically 4 defenders. As long as that is the situation: No, I do not think defenders are too dominant in HT.
As for SE - they are not just random. They take skills into account too.
28 From: HT-Bjorn
To: HG-bard (2002523.90), answering 2002523.87
08-11-2004, at 09:44
You say that I should forget about the rules I learnt before (that it requires good players and good ratings to win a match)
LOL, that was indeed an interesting example of twisting someone's word until they take on a whole new meaning...
I did not say that. Not even close.
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.
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.
29 From: HT-Bjorn
To: gixxgp (2002523.107), answering 2002523.101
08-11-2004, at 14:05
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?
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.
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.
30 From: HT-Bjorn
To: Rupii_ZPF (2002523.108), answering 2002523.105
08-11-2004, at 14:11
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
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
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. :-(
31 From: HT-Bjorn To: 666kajet 653584.8, answering 653584.1 2003-11-14 18.42
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.
32 From: HT-Bjorn To: dturnip 653584.20, answering 653584.18 2003-11-14 20.42
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.
I have never said that.
33 From: HT-Bjorn
To: Little-P 796145.68, answering 796145.62
17-01-2004, at 21:36
before you state that. Schweiz played 24,5* stars on the midfield, norway 23*, Schweiz couldn't even have played 20* with 4.
Never use stars to compare teams. Only use them to compare players.
34 By: HT-Bjorn
1484496.132 as reply to 1484496.1
11/7-2004 at 20.36
A few clarifications:
- We have not changed the crowd formula. I repeat: Not changed. It is the exact same
formula as it has been for as long as I can remember. Given a certain level of
supporter mood before the match, it will be the same results as last seasons
(assuming all other circumstances identical).
- I am convinced that there is no bug in the crowd formula. Bugs don't appear out of
thin air - someone must have changed something for them to appear, and we have not
- We did change, in HT 6.6, the formula for how fans are affected after the match by
certain results. The new formula gives on average the same level of effect as
previously - it is NOT generally more harsh. It is tilted to reward small wins and
punish small losses, compared to the old formula which was more benign to small
losses if there were loads of goals, and more harsh against small wins if there were
few goals. These changes are described in the HT 6.6 document.
- The crowd size (for league matches) is a function of:
¤ What match round (the later in the season, the more important matches, according
to the minds of the inhabitants of the HT universe).
¤ The difference of league position between the teams (importance)
¤ The league position of the home team
¤ The size of the fanclubs
¤ The supporter moods
¤ The weather
35 By: HT-Bjorn
To: one_to7 1484496.147 as reply to 1484496.141
11/7-2004 at 20.56
Does pulling back actually change anything? And if so, what/how?
Of course it changes things. I always thought the wording of that event gives
sufficient clues as to what happens - says something about caring less about attack
and more about defending, right? ;)
36 By: HT-Bjorn
To: dnbrt 1484496.153 as reply to 1484496.142
11/7-2004 at 21.01
- why is this the first time this happens?
It isn't. It's just the first time enough people have read the HT 6.6 document,
remembered only 10% of it ("it was something about them changing things related to
supporter mood"), seeing a low crowd size and jumping to conclusions in the
- there still is the matter of users who have just upgraded, and now found out that
there is much less chance that they will get their stadium filled.
There isn't less chance. There have been no general worsening of spectator outcome.
The one change, to the supporter mood, is neither worse nor better than the old one.
We weren't warned on advance about this.
But there isn't any "this"! :)
37 By: HT-Bjorn
To: worcaholic 1484496.157 as reply to 1484496.144
11/7-2004 at 21.03
thx for the infos, but I'm missing one factor: randomness. or isn't there any kind of random within this calculation?
Somewhat surprisingly: No, random is not part of these formulas (except indirectly
that weather is a function of random).
38 From: HT-Bjorn
1484496.159, answering 1484496.149
11-07-2004, at 21:06
It's pretty hilarious as in every country there are so much threads about it TODAY and there wasn't week, two weeks or couple of weeks ago !
More people in the Middle Ages were convinced that the Earth was flat than there is today. That doesn't mean there was any actual unflattening of the physical Earth by the time of Copernicus.
39 By: HT-Hasse
To: bannock 1484496.185 as reply to 1484496.178
11/7-2004 at 21.56
First of all you have to realize that 7-0 is not only a big loss - it is a disaster. And the system has open ends - there is not maximun or minimum output of any of the parameters. If one of them gives a very extreme input it is bound to have a big influence on the output.
Secondly, unlike IRL there are no "my" and "his" in this context. The parameters do not calculate two separate crowd numbers independently which are added together. They calculate one single crowd.
40 From: HT-Bjorn
To: MountainHawk 1484496.208, answering 1484496.207
12-07-2004, at 00:01
Yeah! You clearly forgot the square root! Everyone knows the HT's love square roots!!
41 From: HT-Hasse
To: Bayernstark 1484496.250, answering 1484496.244
12-07-2004, at 13:09
Don’t you think it might be wise to consider a limit
We don't like limits in any parameters.
42 From: HT-Tjecken
To: OgtheDim (2027150.13), answering 2027150.8
12-11-2004, at 15:34
In our opinion this game is not as good as it can be, there are still things that can get a lot better. I think you all agree on this. In order to make this game better, we must change things and add new features to the game as there are no other way to make it better.
With 500k customers, there's simply no way we can add a feature or make a change without some of you not liking it. But as you and me want this game to develop, there will be times when we can't make everyone happy every time. You'll like most changes, you'll maybe dislike one or two of them and there will be things you don't care at all about. And most of the things you dislike from the beginning you'll adopt sooner or later and start treating them as normal.
When reading the above, you'll maybe understand why we can't make all new features optional (as this feature). The list would be enormously long and creating a risk feeling you're not playing the same game as another user. So, we must draw the line for what can, and what can't, be optional somewhere.
Most things in this game will remain the same, but not all things. This feature is a part in a very important project making the game easier to adopt for newbies. Just because you and me had to find the info ourselves it's not unnecessary to make some things easier to adopt.
Finally, does this make us not listening to you (the community, our customers) at all? Of course not. We listen to what you have to say and take all of it under consideration when developing the game. But as I said above, we can't make everybody happy if we want to continue to develop the game. And we want to continue doing so.
43 From: HT-Hasse
To: fidemaster (2053056.20), answering 2053056.19
17-11-2004, at 15:04
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.
We were to tick a box on the matchreport for each yellow card and we had two boxes to choose from:
1. Something which could be translated as "foul play" or similar. This included bad tackles, pushes, handball and all other physical offences during play.
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.
44 From: HT-Tjecken
To: Sb8heand 2047484.17, answering 2047484.15
16-11-2004, at 12:37
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.
45 From: HT-Hasse To: Kaybol (2047484.101), answering 2047484.49 16-11-2004, at 16:41
Bob Sunesson's effect on TS was never confirmed, and even denied by the HT's.
Of course it is. How team spirit works is well described in the rules.
46 From: HT-Hasse
To: Tjosan (2047484.122), answering 2047484.117
16-11-2004, at 17:18
Whoever tried to deny Bob was tweaked? None of the persons present at the time had anything to do with that fact though.
Bob was pulled like any other youth but was later tweaked (as an Easter egg) when it comes to his beloved team member thing.
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.
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.
The other players were Bob Sunesson and Marc O'Farrel. I don't know the story about O'Farrel.
The TS penalty was introduced to penalise daytraders.
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.
Ok that is fine, but can you explain what was the reason it was introduced?
Surely not just for realism?
Yup. That was the sole reason. This was also stated in the information that was published at the time.
(it staat voor secundaries)
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.
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.
(Naar aanleiding van een vraag over geld die via transferkosten uit de economie stroomt)
Actually the total ammount of money is constantly increasing.
thats not surprising given the user base is constantly growing too.... how about the money per team?
That is increasing too.
I'm curious to know if you know how much the total amount of money should increase every season in order to keep up with the training?
Do you have well defined formulas for that relation?
Since it is not possible to predict influx of new users etc that is not possible. Furthermore it depends on what and how people train.
Instead economy is constantly monitored.
51 HT-unknown (waarschijnlijk HT-Hasse)
over de duurder wordende stadions
2. It will hurt new teams.
Yes it does. Just like a lot of other changes throughout the years have benefited new teams. Like the number of times the money they start with has been increased (currently they start with 300-500% of what many teams started with, including my own). Or the fact that they now start with a bigger stadium that I did, for instance.
The fact that some changes in the game might affect some groups of users in a negative way will never stop us from changing things we believe benefits the game as a whole.
Doubling the maintenance fees will force teams that can't fill up their stadiums to loss alot of money. thus they will diminish their stadiums
And why would we want to do that? There is no gain for Hattrick in making them lose more money than they currently do.
52 From: HT-Hasse
2178495.55, answering 2178495.54
13-12-2004, at 18:28
True, but you didn't say wether the entire construction (30k Euro + seats)will be doubled, or just seats
We said that the costs for increasing your stadium will be doubled. If you cannot figure out what that means I really think, no offense, that the problem is in your end. Both the above mentioned are among the costs you need to pay to increase your stadium. Hence both will be doubled.
If just the latter would have been doubled the announcement would have said so.
53 From: HT-Hasse
It is not a punishment. Such talk is nonsense. But they will have to pay the costs every time they increase their stadium, just like they get to enjoy the 10% increase of ticket prices every match they play and all other changes that have been made throughout the years that benefit them.
With your way of reasoning we would never be able to change anything in the game since there are always groups that suffer or benefit from every change.
54 From: HT-Hasse To: Gorgon 2178495.99, answering 2178495.90 14-12-2004, at 09:52 The point is not to offend or to avoid diplomacy. The point is to be as short and clear as possible, in order to avoid further confusion.
I really think people would save themselves a lot of worries and uncertainty if they read exactly what is written in all the different announcements that are being published. The constant problem is that people try to read things that are simply not there to be read. That is what creates confusion.
55 HT-Tjecken 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.
56 By: HT-Hasse 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:
- It would seriously hurt the market. It would make it a lot more difficult to sell certain types of players.
- 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.
- 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.
57 By: HT-Hasse To: Allanamin 2184210.36 as reply to 2184210.34 14-12-2004 at 18:24 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.
It would also still be devastating to the market. Instead of buying players lots of users would rent players.
58 By: HT-Hasse 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 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
60 HT-Hasse (2212022.26) I thought the amount of supporters that entered, depend on the team you played against..
That has no effect whatsoever in the league. The only things that affect supporter mood in the league is if you win/draw/lose and the number of goals you produce/let in.
In the cup however, it matters what league level (division) the team you play is in. If I, who play in the top league in Sweden, lose against a team from division VII, my supporters will probably put out a contract on my head. But if I do better and eventually lose to a team from division I, they will only be slightly upset (if I don't go out 9-0 or something like that).
61 By: HT-Tjecken To: grmbl (2193928.43), answering 2193928.20 20-12-2004, at 18:17 ("This discussion" is de discussie over verdediging die minder belangrijk is (zou zijn) dan aanval)
This discussion has been brought up a couple of times lately, as well in the past. Lately much because of Lokomotiv Lund's matches in Allsvenskan made a very offensive tactic/strategy more known to the global public.
The outcome of these discussions are also very interesting in a way, because most ppl just claim "defence doesn't matter" like an old mantra over and over again. Which of course sooner or later will be known as the "truth". Well, is this "truth" really the truth then?
No, of course not. Defence does matter. Just as there are proof for "offence is more important than defence" there's proof for the opposite situation. Many of Lokomotivs Lund's matches have been shown as great examples of how the offensive is so much more important than defence lately, but not that many posts tells you when he lost by 10-0 or the two losses against EM Tigers, who actually won both these matches because of a strong defence.
Isn't it a problem at all then? Well, there is a problem in a way as many teams tend to put more effort in their team's offense than their defence. Out of two reasons I guess: - It's generally more fun to play in an offensive way, no matter if it's good or bad. - The "truth" above, which makes team put even more effort in their team's offence.
The result of this is that more teams will have a stronger offence than defence, and when the offence becomes better than the defence overall the better part is logically the winner. This will of course encourage more teams to think that "defence" doesn't matter, which will make things even worse of course.
So the real problem is, if there is a problem, that many teams put much more effort in their offence than their defence. But that doesn't make the defence useless, because many teams show how important a good defence is. Like EM Tigers for instance.
62 By: HT-Hasse To: septimusjm 2212022.18 as reply to 2212022.16 20-12-2004 at 17:31 Yes, in theory that would be better. In reality it is not realistic though. For instance, in match 1 of the season the two newly promoted teams meet. Quite often one of them wins, giving them quite a good league position after round 1.
In round 2, however, they are going to play one of the two top ranked teams, perhaps even away. The result would normally be quite a massive loss which then would kill your supporter mood, especially if that team lost to the other top ranked team the week before. Hattrick would count that as a top team (the lousy newly promoted one) lost to a bottom team (in reality probably the best or second best team in the league). The consequences would be absurd to both teams. A very good team would get loads of new supporters for beating a really weak side, and the weak team would lose lots despite losing to a much better team.
As for the cup it has already been made a lot less painful to lose in general
63 From: HT-Tjecken To: Loke_ (2212022.109), answering 2212022.95 21-12-2004, at 13:01 Blijkbaar is de HT-economie nog niet helemaal stabiel (en is er sprake van deflatie):
I can understand why many users, just like you, want a change about the attendance calculation as the attendance today are a little bit lower than two seasons ago. But (hehe - there had to be a but, right? ;)):
The attendance formula has not changed, as I think you know. But the attendance formula is affected by the supporter mood, and that formula was changed two seasons ago which led to a spectator (and income) loss last season. To this season attendance incomes were raised, and teams today (globally) get more attendance income than they got two seasons ago. Not much more, but slightly more. The fact that we had a huge inflation two seasons ago should also be taken into consideration when discussing this. This means we're back and even past the income figures we had two seasons ago, but I wouldn't worry that much about a new huge inflation as the costs are better optimized than before.
So, the fact is that teams make more money out of spectators today, but still there are complains about the spectators. This, I think, is a pretty normal reaction, as the first thing you see is how many spectators came to watch a game. The overall income from the spectators comes secondly, if one even care to check it out.
Finally some words about the spectators formula. We could of course of course have changed the formula, but we chose to increase attendance money instead. This because the formula is one of those formulas you don't easily change. And as this formula effects the global economy a lot, you better be very sure of what changes it will cause. And in the situation we were in those days we didn't want to risk a huge inflation again nor a bigger deflation. I'm not saying there never will be a change in this formula (and I'm not saying there will be either ;)), but it will in that case require a lot of testing before. And a healthier economical situation. :)
all teams in the bottom of their division, loses supporters, sponsor income and most of all spectator income.
So you think it is strange that losing teams lose fans, sponsors and spectators? I don't. Besides, for some reason you totally "forget" the fact that ticket revenue per ticket was increased this season too. You are also missing that sponsor money is only partially affected by results. The most important factors for sponsors are what level you are in (division) and your spokespersons. I have been losing most of the season but my sponsor money keeps increasing week by week.
Now only an idiot or someone who really don't care about the economic part of the the came, would promote before they're sure that they can be among the top 4
There are a number of statements in this post that implies that you simply do not understand how a lot of the factors work. First of all, you mention sponsor money - the single factor except spokespersons that has the biggest importance for your sponsor money is the league level you are at.
en nog een
The only things that affect supporter mood in the league is if you win/draw/lose and the number of goals you produce/let in.
64 By: HT-Hasse To: ballord 2212022.55 as reply to 2212022.53 20-12-2004 at 22:16 I'm sorry, but I thought that home factor would also count somehow. Is that wrong?
Yes, you are right. That also plays a part
Deze is interessant voor het bepalen van de invloed van supporters en league op de opkomst (gemiddeld aantal supporters kan je zien in de supporterstatistieken)
65 By: HT-Hasse To: DrBLooD 2212022.82 as reply to 2212022.61 21-12-2004 at 00:39 So how about taking a look at more just picture instead of just picking a few matches, carefully selected to prove a non-existent point?
Below is the 20 Swedish series with the highest total attendance so far this season. It hardly supports the theory that the biggest crowds come in division III.
Rank Series Total Crowd 1 A 2,669,254 2 Ib 2,445,256 3 Ia 2,191,579 4 Id 2,084,586 5 IIh 1,810,724 6 IIm 2,056,888 7 IIn 1,703,095 8 IIo 2,053,330 9 IIk 1,578,861 10 IIg 1,833,706 11 IIa 1,764,395 12 IIl 1,852,822 13 Ic 2,009,250 14 IIj 1,820,445 15 IIe 1,792,622 16 IIf 1,716,267 17 IId 1,820,115 18 III.31 1,586,021 19 III.37 1,561,839 20 III.22 1,630,809
66 From: HT-Tjecken To: Pranas (2220095.47), answering 2220095.40 22-12-2004, at 16:06 you listen, if it fits you, that's also a fact
Well, in order to develop a game like Hattrick you got to have a vision to what game you want to create (which of course also is based on what game our users want). Some ideas fit the vision, some things may slightly change the vision and some things don't fit the vision at all. But a vision is a must. That said doesn't mean we don't listen, but you're right that we can show that we're listening in a much better way.
Let's say, 1 user wants one feature, and 499k other, you liked first one, which you would choose? If both ideas are good and possible to implement, why not both?
Second point - there are no doubt more important questions to users than to ask about match time, isn't? I think match times are very important. But as I said in my earlier post, we could use the poll system more often than today.
67 From: HT-Tjecken To: roselan (2193928.105), answering 2193928.103 22-12-2004, at 13:45 6.6 did decrease the importance of keepers in the defense. Does that mean that the exact same team (same sub-form, same everything) will get lower defense rating than pre-6.6? Nope, au contraire.
68 From: HT-Tjecken To: MD-JakobTrier (2193928.113), answering 2193928.109 22-12-2004, at 15:50 So it will depend on the strength of the keeper vs the defenders, right? Some teams have a super strong keeper and week defenders...
Ah, didn't think of that possibility really, but you're right. If you had a very good keeper and lousy defenders you might end up with worse defense ratings.
69 From: HT-Tjecken To: Jambo 2193928.117, answering 2193928.115 22-12-2004, at 16:18 Well, the keeper is still very important.
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.
75 From: HT-Tjecken To: Iedereen (2249571.1) 28-12-2004, at 14:32 I just posted an answer concerning the economical situation today in the Swedish conference, but I think this info could be out of global interest too.
The global economy is feeling very good these days, we have a really nice inflation (which has been going on for the whole season). Higher attendence income and more cupmathes have managed to increase the total amount of money, and have speed up the economy again. The economy will also get some more speed because of the increased price bonus money later this season. Fact is that this speed maybe is a little too high, but as there are increased costs (arena) next season and we've been experiencing some hard economical times lately we'll not do anything about it. At least not now.
76 From: HT-Tjecken To: Noahito 2249571.45, answering 2249571.38 28-12-2004, at 16:25 Your twisting my words a bit...
Two seasons ago: Huge inflation which crashed Last season: Deflation (or more or less +/- 0 in fact) This season: Inflation
If the total amount of money are increasing, tranfer prices will most likely after some time also start to increase. The opposite happens when it's a deflation, less money in the game will eventually make the transfer prices go down.
77 From: HT-Tjecken To: Noahito 2249571.63, answering 2249571.50 28-12-2004, at 16:57 But I'm not talking about transfer prices, I'm talking about the global economy (sum of cash (and income and expenses)). And btw, new members are taking into consideration in the figures.
But as I mentioned, the transfer market also follows the state of the global economy. Not by a sudden reaction, but the history shows the transfer prices evaluation slowly follows and adopts to the state of the global economy.
78 From: HT-Tjecken To: koendb I'm fully aware that the word I use here (inflation) is not utterly correct. But it's not completely wrong either. I guess you got what I was referring to too?
79 From: HT-Hasse To: badla 2249571.95, answering 2249571.92 28-12-2004, at 17:56 Let's say you train passing, you can train 14-15 players in passing. After some seasons, won't it just give the same amount of raise in wage as you would have just trained 4 wingers or 6 playmakers?
The point is that you should perhaps consider not to train the same thing "some seasons".
80 From: HT-Hasse To: saheki 2249571.101, answering 2249571.99 28-12-2004, at 18:17 So you mean, I should have daytraded, I should have stopped aiding the National Teams
No, I mean you should train players in the way you get the most out of his wages, which means you should not train them in one and the same skill season after season.
I also mean you should build a team that is good enough to win your league, not 2 times as good as needed.
When it comes to national team players, well I would never consider training the kind of players most national team coaches seem to prefer. I train players for my team foremost, not for the national teams.
And BTW - I am in the top division too.
81 From: HT-Hasse To: spekkie 2249571.109, answering 2249571.100 28-12-2004, at 18:32 Exactly! Inflation is influenced by the money supply and by the productivity of the economy. HTs can easily influence the former but it is not clear to me how they limit the ever improving skills of the players.
You really hit the spot here without knowing it. Because this is how most people think. Like someone wrote in an excellent post a bit above people focus too much on how things used to be instead of thinking about how they can adapt to the present situation.
You wrote "it is not clear to me how they limit the ever improving skills of the players". Well, the answer to that is very simple; by making players who are trained to insane levels in one skill very expensive to keep.
Change after change in the last few seasons have aimed to encourage people to train versatile players who are good in several useful skills rather that ridiculously extreme in one single skill. Still people insist on training players to divine ++ levels. Well, if you fail to get the message sent by the news in the game then don't blame the game if things don't exactly work out the way you hope them to.
The successful manager is the one who can combine old knowledge gathered by others with own inventive thinking and sharp decisions based on recent events. The user who bases his game on the numerous how-to guides around will never be a top-class manager at a competitive level.
82 From: HT-Hasse To: Mandrake 2249571.195, answering 2249571.186 28-12-2004, at 22:35 Just as much as I care for any other SE.
Well, I interpret that as you don't and if that is the case you have certainly missed an important part of Hattrick strategy.
As I said, even though you found it ridiculous, its like caring about defence for forwards so one can play pressing. Both add nothing to team ratings but some to a tactical skill.
So what are you more interested in - winning or team ratings? Carefully building a team with a good selection of special skills can considerably increase your results. SE goals are not about luck in the long run.
I believe having a forward with divine scoring gives me better general attack ratings than a supernatural with supernatural passing, even though they take quite a similar time to train.
Well that might be right, though I am not dead certain. But I would definitely choose an extra-terrestrial/supernatural in front of a divine scorer with nothing else.
Of course, better players need better wages: but the BEST players were affordable by the BEST teams.
Well, your interpretation of what the best player is is simply wrong for several positions.
I think the current wage rate for 1 high skilled player is exaggerated and crazy. Just look at Carey.
The only thing insane about Carey is to train him to that level, which BTW is something his owner has been very well aware of for lots of seasons. He just did it because he thinks it is fun.
83 From: HT-Hasse To: shinzui 2249571.237, answering 2249571.233 29-12-2004, at 00:07 I think the weights for secondaries need to be increased to make it more practical for combo training.
What would be the point if people in the conferences still claim "It is estimate that for the striker position 1 level of scoring is equal to 4 levels of passing." or "the game engine does not treat a world class scoring/excellent passing striker as equal to a titanic scoring/wretched passing striker" without having well-founded ground for statements like them even if they are still not correct?
84 From: HT-Hasse To: shinzui 2249571.253, answering 2249571.243 29-12-2004, at 00:46 Open up all the weights so that managers can see exactly what they are and you wouldn't have any question of mistaken estimations.
Revealing the formulas of the match engine is definitely something we will never do.
I should add though that there is no ratio or exchange rate between scoring and passing for instance. They are two different things. It would be like trying to answer how many kilos a minute is.
85 From: HT-Hasse To: svinefar 2249571.256, answering 2249571.244 29-12-2004, at 00:56 Why do we even have this conversation about secondaries when we are discussing economics?
Because they go together. A big reason many (mainly top) clubs have a hard time with economy is because their teams are built the wrong way.
Do you think that you have reacted fast enough to the clear signs of deflation?
I would rather say that we perhaps did not react fast enough to the massively overheated economy we had a couple of seasons back. That situation was not healthy, while economy as a whole is quite ok nowadays.
86 From: HT-Hasse To: Loke_ 2249571.261, answering 2249571.259 29-12-2004, at 01:06 So passing and scoring are not both contributing to attack ratings.
I never said that. Think of it like a highjumper - he needs both strength and speed to jump high, but that does not mean that strength and speed are two different ways of measuring the same thing.
87 From: HT-Hasse To: shinzui 2249571.378, answering 2249571.375 29-12-2004, at 20:20 The biggest problem I see with the game currently is that the HTs have created a situation where hardly anybody wants to strive to reach the highest division in their country. Because you have insured that any team that reaches the highest division will flirt with bankruptcy.
Sorry, but you have either not understood much of what I have answered you or you have simply ignored it. Lots of your comments are based on totally false presumptions. If you continue to stubbornly insist that the system is wrong rather than adapting to it and build your team accordingly, yes then you will probably go bankrupt or fall through the system. If you however choose to be a bit more open to the fact that it is perhaps you who are doing things the wrong way you will probably not. Banging your head against the wall might feel easier to accept on a psychological level, but it won't get you anywhere.
I am not saying that you are stupid. It took me quite a while to get the message too, and then I still had the advantage of closer proximity to the persons who engineered the system. But in the end it all comes down to the fact that those who can interpret and adapt to the situation will master the situation, while those who do not will fail. A large proportion of the latter will probably blame the game, because it lies in the nature of the human mind to try to find explanations outside our own actions to things that go wrong.
88 From: HT-Tjecken To: yo_anad (2193928.244), answering 2193928.238 30-12-2004, at 11:09 Midfielders also make impact on the total defence, just like the defenders and the keeper. So, this announcement only speaks about defending.
89 From: HT-Bjorn To: yo_anad (2193928.251), answering 2193928.238 30-12-2004, at 12:01 The My Hattrick announcement is a bit ambiguous.
it starts with a declaration to amend something wrong between midfield-defence-keepers, but the actual amendment it states only corrects issues between defence and keepers.
Good point. However, you cannot skip your goalie, but you can skip one of your defenders and put him as a midfielder, and this is what many have done, creating the once-almighty-now-just-dominant 3-5-2, and also other common tactics like 3-4-3 with two repositions.
By improving the weight of defenders (backs) (rather than defence which includes goalies and the defensive contribution of midfielders) in the game engine, we encourage those who wish to go from a 3-back defence to a more IRL-like 4-back defence, because defenders now pay slightly more off than before.
90 From: HT-Bjorn To: Buggle (2193928.273), answering 2193928.263 30-12-2004, at 17:11 Ya maybe, but doesn't it logically follow from what he said.
Dude, I am not crazy enough to rely on people to only draw the logical conclusions from what I write! ;-))) Quite often it is the exact opposite, so if we had indeed wanted to change the winger (or playmaking) effect of defenders, we certainly would have specifically said so.
I should clarify my previous statement (new stuff in italics):
By improving the weight of defenders (backs) (rather than increasing the weight of defence which includes goalies and the defensive contribution of midfielders) on the defence ratings in the game engine...
My statement is now a lot more unwieldy and bureaucratic, but strictly speaking more correct. :-)
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*
95 From: HT-Bjorn To: Iedereen 30-12-2004, at 04:05 Keep your eyes peeled for the US cup final next week - it will be an exciting battle between one GM (Idigum) and one HT (myself in the guise of Mean Losers FC).
I'm afraid GM-Idigum will have to count as no 1 favourite to the victory though.
96 From: HT-Tjecken To: Iedereen (2349939.141), answering 2349939.132 17-01-2005, at 13:07 These recent changes will not hurt newbie’s at all, I think these changes will give newbie’s 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.
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.
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.
100 From: HT-Hasse To: Pranas 2349939.235, answering 2349939.232 17-01-2005, at 19:40 my mistake, sorry. See? You can try that yourself, it's not so hard admitting your fault.
I resent your childish flame baits and take personal offence from them.
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.
102 From: HT-Hasse To: Mad_Dogg 2376294.24, answering 2376294.22 20-01-2005, at 21:22
Read less conferences. Read more rules ;-)
103 HT-unknown Derby matches doesn’t gather more people anymore
They never have. I do not know why people are saying that they used to give more spectators in the past, they never have.
nog een leuke
You are absolutely right - we always lie in the conferences! That is in fact why we invented the game from the beginning. It is all a part of a great plan to take over the World. We are just lucky no one else has found out.
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.
105 From: koendb To: dansyl (2355363.21), answering 2355363.20 28-01-2005, at 15:27 Volgens mij is dit een oude quote van Bjorn, maar zeker weten doe ik het niet :(
"Attack ratings are the way you measure your ability to score on the chances that your midfield creates. "A team with a low amount of self-confidence has trouble putting their opportunities away", meaning its ability in the attack zone (and consequently their attack ratings also) is lowered."
edit: klopt, het is van Bjorn en hij heeft 't gezegd op (of vlak voor) 28 mei 2004 Ik denk ook dat we hieruit kunnen opmaken dat het alleen de ratings beïnvloed.
106 HT-unknown over coaches No, it doesn't. It doesn't matter if you recruit internally or externally regarding the decay.
This is the first time I ever hear about a case like this, but it's too late to check up now as this happened over a year ago.
107 By: HT-Hasse To: Kanik 2442988.14 as reply to 2442988.1 30-01-2005 at 13:50 The thing is, to display for example 5 stars as one blue/red/green or any other color. So what about this change?? Is that possible??
Not very likely I am afraid. Stars are not intended for comparisons between teams and any change that encourages that is sending out the wrong message.
108 By: HT-Hasse To: pbritton 2442988.29 as reply to 2442988.27 30-01-2005 at 15:15 Even if this not the reason for showing stars, they must be there for some reason, otherwise why show stars at all?
There is one single purpose with the stars - to compare different performances for one and the same player.
109 By: HT-Hasse To: osci_oscbourne 2442988.31 as reply to 2442988.30 30-01-2005 at 15:19 what about comparing same performances on same position for different players ? :-)
No, that is not the purpose. That it can be used for that when it comes to some positions (i.e. goalies and central defenders played "normal") is another issue, but it is still not the purpose.
110 From: HT-Bjorn To: Iedereen (2551809.195), answering 2551809.192 14-02-2005, at 07:32 Very well. I have now made a change in the light of the potential threat that a gazillion people unite to play at the same arena, although it would be utterly unlikely that that would happen to the extent that this actually became a problem. Also, I admit that it is a bit unrealistic with even 10 or more matches on the same arena simultaneously.
So, from now on, you cannot challenge teams for a friendly on an arena that is busy (already booked) for a cup match or friendly within the next 7 days. Under certain circumstances it might still happen that two matches are played on the same Stadium complex simultaneously, but normally, it will not happen and in any case, the scenario of a 50.000 teams conspiracy to play at the same stadium is virtually impossible.
(Although I fail to see what the point of such a conspiracy to down the match engine would be).
Of course, this also means that you need to look a bit more before being able to find an arena that is available for friendlies (although high but not top ranking teams (thus still playing on the road in the cup), that are still in the cup are a good shot for finding a pitch that isn't already booked).
111 From: HT-Bjorn To: MD-JakobTrier 2551809.202, answering 2551809.197 14-02-2005, at 07:52 Will this in any way effect national teams looking for a stadium for a friendly match?
Nope. Not at the moment at least.
112 From: HT-Bjorn To: Jude999 2551809.203, answering 2551809.198 14-02-2005, at 07:53 Wondering one thing: What happens if 2 teams book a game in my stadium before I did. Can I not play my friendly in my stadium ?
You can still play there. This limitation only affects matches on neutral ground. That is, if it is not a match to be played on neutral ground, you are not restrained by the existence of already booked matches there.
113 From: HT-Bjorn To: Iedereen 2551809.205, answering 2551809.204 14-02-2005, at 08:19 Also, I've now added another feature that is relevant to this thing:
On your (indeed any) arena page, you can now see upcoming matches on that arena. This is useful both for those who plan to arrange a friendly on a neutral ground, and for arena owners who are curious who are arranging matches on your own arena. :)
114 HT-Bjorn over friendlies op neutral terrein No, you do not get bigger crowds.
This is something that have been requested by people who organize friendly cups, who can now have the final being played on neutral ground, just like the "real" cup.
115 From: HT-Tjecken To: GM-Ramuuns 2517078.22, answering 2517078.20 09-02-2005, at 11:35 And no not all GMs are created equal there are global GMs (the boses) and there are country GMs. Let me just comment on this because it's wrong and I don't want to create any space for new myths. :)
There are global GMs and there are local GMs (responsible for one country). There are also an organization within the GM group with different responsibilities, so there are some "bosses". But the global GMs are not bosses for the local GMs. A global GM and a local GM is equal in "rank".
Let me also say that the different responsibilities are only for internal issues.
116 From: HT-Tjecken To: MOD-CoachOle 2517078.54, answering 2517078.52 09-02-2005, at 16:57 Hmmm, and where do the likes of AlenS and darkjesus fit into it all?
They're classed as workers too aren't they?I don't know about these two in particular, but I know that there are some LAs who haven't gotten their prefix, because the language they are working on is still not released. That could be it.
117 From: HT-Hasse To: Rokavo 2517078.110, answering 2517078.27 10-02-2005, at 15:38` HT's just sit there and watch the community grow (looking at a counter), occasionally stopping this activity to watch The Simpsons :P
I don't like the Simpsons :-P
118 From: HT-Hasse To: pdjacks 2517078.113, answering 2517078.111 10-02-2005, at 15:43 Not even Maggie??
Sorry, but I don't even know who that is. I only know about Bart and Homer.
119 From: HT-Hasse To: pdjacks 2517078.114, answering 2517078.112 10-02-2005, at 15:44 If you're still here HT-Hasse, how do you feel about how Hattrick has progressed since it's early days? And do you feel that it will evolve as much in the future?
- lol* That is like asking me to explain the meaning of life or what to answer if a woman asks you "Do you think I should wear the blue dress or the re dress?".
In the first case I would answer "42" and in the second I would just run :-)
120 From: HT-Hasse To: pdjacks 2517078.120, answering 2517078.117 10-02-2005, at 15:51 lol :-) I know the feeling, but hey still it's better than if a man asked you.
Then at least I could provide an honest answer without risking extreme pain and permanent injury.
121 From: HT-Hasse To: MonsieurBon 2517078.122, answering 2517078.118 10-02-2005, at 15:52 you don't like women? ;)
I love women, but like any sensible man I am scared to death of them and go about just as carefully as I would do with a poisonous snake :-)
122 From: HT-Hasse To: MonsieurBon 2517078.124, answering 2517078.121 10-02-2005, at 15:53 what would that be? "Don't wear any clothes, darling!" ???
Probably more like "Whatever. I don't give a f*** what your wear. Now gimme another beer man!" ;-)
123 From: HT-Hasse To: MonsieurBon 2517078.126, answering 2517078.125 10-02-2005, at 15:57 Lol... So you like beer? So Bjorn says to you: "Hey Hasse, get some beers, we got another 10000 users captured!" ??
Both Björn and myself are single-malt guys more than anything else :-)
124 From: HT-Hasse To: pdjacks 2517078.130, answering 2517078.127 10-02-2005, at 16:03 Do you have a favourite blend?
I never buy blends. Only single-malt.
125 From: HT-Hasse To: pdjacks 2517078.134, answering 2517078.132 10-02-2005, at 16:13 Somewhat simplified a blend is a blend (duh!) between different whiskies, while a single-malt is one individual whisky.
Most whisky which is sold is blended.For instance all your well-known brands like Grant's, Johnnie Walker, Bell's etc. are blends, while brands like Laphroaig, Ardbeg, Bowmore Macallan etc. are single-malts.
A good link for further reading: (www.whiskyweb.com)
126 From: HT-Hasse To: MonsieurBon 2517078.135, answering 2517078.133 10-02-2005, at 16:14 BTW: Here's something for you! Do you understand german? (www.super-mega.de/traumfrau.php3)
Yes, I understand some basic German but the page did not work properly.
127 From: HT-Hasse To: MonsieurBon 2517078.138, answering 2517078.136 10-02-2005, at 16:18 I bet you didn't use IE, did you?
128 From: HT-Hasse To: iRev-Red 2517078.147, answering 2517078.145 10-02-2005, at 16:26 I stalk him too. He normally posts great information about Hattrick, although his whiskey lecture was worth a read as well. Very enlightening. I guess Hattrick isn't his only forte.
Then let me continue that lecture :-)
Whiskey = Irish stuff.
Whisky = Scottish.
Now there are certainly some good Irish ones to, but personally I am almost 100% on the Scottish stuff :-)
And for the guy who wanted information about the match engine - if you play against a team whose name has anything to do with chickens you should always play your reserves and PIC. Otherwise you will be plagued by injuries :-P
129 From: HT-Hasse To: yo_anad 2517078.150, answering 2517078.148 10-02-2005, at 16:31 If I play after drinking one blended malt and one single malt - would it be considered that I'm PICing?
No, it would be considered blasphemy :-P
130 From: HT-Hasse To: MonsieurBon 2517078.151, answering 2517078.149 10-02-2005, at 16:32 BTW: would you play a friendly?
When I am out of the cup I will get back to flagchasing and I prefer to go for the really small leagues.
131 From: HT-Hasse To: Fopper 2517078.226, answering 2517078.225 20-02-2005, at 23:21 The brand you call up, are nice ones, I want to add: Lagavulin
That is one of my favourites too. Lagavulin is also among the distilleries I have visited IRL :-)
You can find a few pictures from the trip, including 2-3 from Lagavulin, here: (www.flickr.com/photos/ior67/sets/77643/)
132 From: HT-Hasse To: Kusito 2517078.229, answering 2517078.228 20-02-2005, at 23:50 Yes I went to Talisker. Actually I was a bit disappointed with Skye. did not find it as beautiful as most people say. But I went on from there to the Outer Hebrides and that was a blast. I visited North and South Uist, Lewis and Harris.
When it comes to distilleries the best visits were IMHO Highland Park (Orkney), Ardbeg (Islay) and Bruichladdich (Ardbeg). What distinguished these three is that they were a lot more personal than the rest. Most of the others had very professional guides who were really impersonal and really made you feel like a tourist. In especially Highland Park there were very few visitors and everything was very laid-back. Ardbeg and Bruichladdich were very relaxed and personal too. That is why I am currently saving for my own barrel of Bruichladdich :-)
133 From: HT-Bjorn To: Sir_Maertens (2606121.12), answering 2606121.3 21-02-2005, at 01:46 I do not have time to dig deeply into every single example provided here, so I just dove into comparing two of them, that you seem to imply are identical to the extent that they need to have been generated by an identical random sequence. I took the first two from your list that had identical faces, namely number two and three:
Evert Tähkämaa (55448998) Giorgio Tischler (55252860)
True, these two are the same age and also happens to have exactly identical faces and seem to have the same skill levels. However, as you probably know, the skills are actually stored with loads of decimals and when I compare these two, all the skills differs in the decimals. This cannot possibly be due to training, so in every literal sense, these two players are completely different (except for the face and some attributes that do not have decimals, such as the age).
The hypothesis of an Attack of the Clones can hereby be firmly refuted :)
If there seems to be an upsurge in similar players, it is no doubt because of the Transfer Compare feature that makes it easier to spot them.
134 From: HT-Bjorn To: PatoBravo (2606121.27), answering 2606121.26 21-02-2005, at 03:41 There is a recurrent theory that players are not individually and randomly generated, istead they are selected randomly from a pre-created database. Do you wish to clarify this?
They are generated on the fly randomly.
The only thing that is selected randomly from a pre-created database is the names, which realistically only can be created this way of course.
135 By: HT-Bjorn To: LA-Tsukumo (2606121.17) as reply to 2606121.16 21-02-2005 at 02:14 I've seen a similar thing happening in a larger scale with some non-bot teams. Most of their players were very alike, too much to be just a coincidence.
Didn't you guys read my post?
Two players being "very much alike" is a pure coincidence unless they are identical. I can see the decimals, you can't. I see that they are totally different. if one player has 6.06384764 and another 6.3658374764 you are saying (although you use several such parameters of course) - "Hey, these guys have both 6 - how can that be a coincidence!?".
I say that from a “randomness working properly perspective" 6.06384764 is no more similar to 6.3658374764 than is say 5.274646373.
136 By: HT-Bjorn To: LA-Tsukumo (2606121.24) as reply to 2606121.22 21-02-2005 at 02:53 here were two teams (they had been just created for 2 new users) with like 9 or 10 players with same names and skills alike is something I cannot accept as a coincidence.
OK, you didn't mention that. However, something that happened 2 seasons ago or more is hardly anything we'd look into now anyway (nor could we). :)
The issue here was weather there is a sudden upsurge in this, and I see no signs about this, except that people are noticing SIMILAR (but not identical players) to a larger extent than before because of the Transfer Compare feature.
Having seen that there is no such new and current problem, I will leave the issue here.
137 From: HT-Bjorn To: dudup 2606121.30, answering 2606121.29 21-02-2005, at 05:34 Are the skills independently generated
138 From: HT-Bjorn To: one_to7 2606121.32, answering 2606121.31 21-02-2005, at 05:40 And don't you ever sleep? ;)
A HT never sleeps. :)
139 From: HT-Bjorn To: Sir_Maertens 2606121.216, answering 2606121.53 21-02-2005, at 17:04 Mikkel Randen (54787289) Dimitri Barrink (55589885) Marlon Mumment (55439977) Henrik Robertsson 17 years, passable form, healthy
Total Skill Index (TSI): 3 300 Wage: 900 €/week
Stamina: passable Goaltending: disastrous Playmaking: solid Passing: solid Winger: weak Defending: passable Scoring: wretched Set Pieces: weak
Benny Molquist (55174303) Mattias Andersson (55599178) Hidde Philippe (55569014) Dickee Johnson (55605164) Mo van der Varst Barry van Hassel Ezio Ciappesoni 17 years, passable form, healthy
Total Skill Index (TSI): 1 650 Wage: 716 €/week
Stamina: poor Goaltending: disastrous Playmaking: solid Passing: passable Winger: weak Defending: inadequate Scoring: poor Set Pieces: weak
Frank Grensjö (55596208) Gregorio Van Den Abeele (55518127) Kjell Dahle Romicã Ispas 17 years, passable form, healthy
Total Skill Index (TSI): 4 900 Wage: 1 021 €/week
Stamina: inadequate Goaltending: disastrous Playmaking: solid Passing: passable Winger: solid Defending: weak Scoring: passable Set Pieces: wretched
Peter Säflind (54925974) David Egerton (55379964) Bucky Hirsh (55716955) Corné Doeleman (55646015) Hanspeter Bossard (55433841) Eduardo Effgen 17 years, passable form, healthy
Total Skill Index (TSI): 460 Wage: 558 €/week
Stamina: wretched Goaltending: disastrous Playmaking: solid Passing: passable Winger: poor Defending: wretched Scoring: poor Set Pieces: weak
Bert Maessen (55025183) Joe van Tilborg (55627094) Zsolt Csont 17 years, passable form, healthy
Total Skill Index (TSI): 1 710 Wage: 712 €/week
Stamina: poor Goaltending: disastrous Playmaking: solid Passing: passable Winger: poor Defending: wretched Scoring: solid Set Pieces: poor
Knud-Erik Vinkler (55600707) Benone Negrea (55499014) Stefan Wade (55520713) 17 years, passable form, healthy
Total Skill Index (TSI): 1 130 Wage: 661 €/week
Stamina: weak Goaltending: disastrous Playmaking: solid Passing: passable Winger: inadequate Defending: wretched Scoring: wretched Set Pieces: poor
Luís Pessoa (54873726) Evert Tähkämaa (55448998) Giorgio Tischler (55252860) Edo Coppens (55585560) Pancracio Tagle (55636835) Rutger Bertl 17 years, passable form, healthy
Total Skill Index (TSI): 1 220 Wage: 645 €/week
Stamina: weak Goaltending: disastrous Playmaking: solid Passing: passable Winger: weak Defending: weak Scoring: poor Set Pieces: poor
Tue Frederiksen (55603674) Patrik Ramfeldt (55605965) Mike van Sorge (55636327) Piero Bianchi (55500606) Sammie Walker 17 years, passable form, healthy
Total Skill Index (TSI): 1 240 Wage: 628 €/week
Stamina: weak Goaltending: disastrous Playmaking: solid Passing: passable Winger: inadequate Defending: poor Scoring: inadequate Set Pieces: weak
Dom Wainwright (55090255) Frank Nilsen (55385407) Martin Strand (55378490) Adrián Ruiz 17 years, passable form, healthy
Total Skill Index (TSI): 1 420 Wage: 644 €/week
Stamina: weak Goaltending: disastrous Playmaking: solid Passing: passable Winger: poor Defending: poor Scoring: passable Set Pieces: poor
Ah, finally some solid examples! :-)
Thanks dude, these examples are very helpful.
I've looked into the first two sets of player you have there. The interesting thing is that, yes, some of their skills are identical into the last decimals. This cannot be a coincidence so it is clearly some sort of bug. The interesting thing is that some other attributes, such as the psychological attributes, of these players are not identical. Since these attributes are created at the same routine as the other ones, it should give me a good way of both finding the reason why this happens as well as a workaround for this problem.
- returns to code*
140 From: HT-Bjorn To: Sir_Maertens 2606121.236, answering 2606121.235 21-02-2005, at 18:50 U-20 teams will be much more exiting without those clones.
My goal is achieved, many people are angry at me now.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. Why will U-20 teams be better off and why would people be angry?
141 From: HT-Bjorn To: Sir_Maertens 2606121.245, answering 2606121.238 21-02-2005, at 19:23 because many 17 year old superpulls have clones in a few different countries. there is a winger type (TSI around 4000) that has been pulled at least 4 times in 4 different countries. If those guys are trained well, they will probably all reach their U-20 teams.
and people who were exploiting the clone thing for many months/years won't be happy if that will disappear... (they will blame me for doing so)
But what the bug did was not to create more of a certain kind of player, for instance very good ones, just that there are clones. But crappy clones have been just as common as good ones, so the general level of YPs has not been affected. I agree though that the U-20 teams could look silly with identical players opposing each other. :-)
As for people taking advantage of bugs, I will shed no tear for them just because that opportunity is taken away from them. :)
Anyhow. The bug is now fixed. The HT equivalent of the clone factory at planet Kamino has now been destroyed by the forces of good (me).
Thanks to all who helped with providing useful example thus helping me to track down this nasty old bug (yeah it must have been there for ages).
142 From: HT-Bjorn To: bolla 2606121.248, answering 2606121.241 21-02-2005, at 19:26 and we have in some cases selected players with high passing skill proven by clone-theory before others that we don't know.
Ah, I see... Well, it keeps amazing me how there always seems to be ways of taking advantage of even the most insignificant things somehow. With 500k users, there is always some clever type who comes up with a smart trick. :)
143 From: HT-Bjorn To: Devil-insanity 2606121.266, answering 2606121.262 21-02-2005, at 19:49 i little bit to quick fixed to be the total truth of the story imo , i just cant believe they would only spot it now and the fix it that easy ??? people are saying this for months maybe even years , tbh i still dont think u told us the truth and i also think we never will find out.
Is your login name perhaps related to the fact that what you just wrote sounds truly paranoid? ;)
I seems the world is full of people who have a world-view similar to the X Files and see government conspiracies and mysterious cover-ups everywhere, but your suspicion is, sorry to spoil the fun, utterly unfounded. We have no reason to do some mysterious cover-up by such a thing and yes, this was an easy fix. Most fixes are easy as soon as you have...
a) Been able to identify that there is actually is a problem, not just some incorrect and diffuse reports b) Understand why it is happening c) Can isolate the problem
As it happened, the examples provided in this thread turned out to indicate all three things in one go. After that all that was needed was to make some changes.
144 From: HT-Bjorn To: Devil-insanity 2606121.280, answering 2606121.273 21-02-2005, at 20:10 the evidence haves been given a million times in treads in the past. so please don’t come whit that.
The "evidence" I've seen previously have invariably shown that there is NO problem, because, like the examples I was first given in this thread, they were NOT clones. Then we finally got some real clones.
I am sure that there have been some proper evidence among the "million times" alleged clones have been posted, but unfortunately, we do not have time to read a million postings, let alone read them, dive into the database and then compare every single one of them.
145 From: HT-Hasse To: Iedereen 2606121.425, answering 2606121.424 22-02-2005, at 16:17 I think it is time to close this thread since the problem is solved but lots of users still read only the first posts and reply to them.
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.
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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
148 From: HT-Tjecken To: GM-Tommy_la 2927458.42, answering 2927458.26 15-04-2005, at 13:09 Correct.
There were no double training yesterday at all. But there was a bug that affected all teams training set pieces (but only those teams). We'll deal with this bug.
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.
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 :)).
151 HT-Tjecken (verschillende posts) At that time Bob wasn't as famous as he is today, you can say his star was about to rise but very few ppl was aware of him being such a beloved team member. Not even the HT-team (this was before I was a member of the team) was aware of it (even it they had started to hear some rumours about his stardom). However, I was still playing in the Swedish cup when Hasse asked me if Bob maybe could brighten up his team a little bit, until I was out of the cup. So, Hasse kind of lent him for a short while. Short Bob-history:
Bob was "born" at a Hattrick party. He's a keeper, but in fact better winger. So one can say he was cult from the day of his birth. I and some other made up stories around Bob, he was the best player, every girl's dream and so on... Around nine months later the HT-team (before I was a member of the team) made him "beloved", and when the faces were introduced Bob got a unique face. did Bob have solid leadership when they made him beloved? or is that a mith?
152 From: HT-Tjecken To: svinefar (2942625.136), answering 2942625.125 22-04-2005, at 10:01 The HT’s have told us: We aim at a steady inflation
Yes, we do (and are). But just as one_to7 says, we generally mean a steady inflation to the amount of money in the game (per team), not on player prices.
birne74 and Ratsia have also said something really important in this thread; why we can't measure whether it's an inflation by just comparing prices for magnificent midfielders (for example).
Anyways, some figures (pure fresh ones) will maybe shed a little more light on this current situation: The underlying economy flushes. We have an inflation in the game (see definition above) and have had so for the last two-three seasons. Last season there was an inflation around 6,5% even though many users built a new arena at the end of the season, and this season we're heading towards an even bigger inflation. It might in fact be time to cool things down a little bit soon (as always, if we will do anything with the economy affecting teams directly, we will announce it on MyHT well in advance).
Further more, the sponsors are giving around 4% more money to the teams this season (compared to last season) and the wages have increased by around 12%. But if we talk pure money, what teams have lost in increased wages they have (almost) taken back in more sponsor money. In addition to that we have the spectator income which has increased by around 20%, and if we talk pure money close to 3x wages increase.
Enough said about the underlying economy, now some words about the transfer market. The transfer market is meant to be a free open market (well, as free and as open as it can get in Hattrick), where supply and demand set price. We (HT) will try (and have always tried) to affect the transfer market as little as possible. Prices have been falling for a while (not much, or even not at all, this last season), true - but as the underlying economy flushes you'll have to seek the answer elsewhere than there. Some parts of the answer may come from game design decisions, some parts of the answer may come from the capability to adopt to the game and some parts of the answer are maybe hidden in the dark.
153 HT-Bjorn There’s no limit to how many injuries you can get
154 HT-unknown Ex-coaches still lose leadership
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4245352.2) as reply to (4245352.1)|
|To: Taste1||22-10-2005, at 12:42|
|Also, the contribution of winger skill for all positions (wing backs and midfielders, especially wingers) except those with "Towards middle" behaviour, has been boosted somewhat. After some discussion on the Dutch questions forum, I'd like to ask your opinion on this matter. What is the contribution of IM's to wing attack at this moment? And will it be important in the future? Or does this only start to get interesting when you play an inner mid towards wing? If it were to important, then finding good trainees for pm trainers will be hell - they need pm, passing, defending, wing and preferrably already some stamina!!
Inner mids playing Toward Wing have always had a winger skill contribution. That contribution has now been increased.
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4245352.8) as reply to (4245352.3)|
|To: Mod-Wizard||22-10-2005, at 12:53|
|so this statemend concerns only MTW and not normal, defensive or offensive M, right?
Since only MTW has a wing contribution to boost, only that is affected yes. We certainly have not added winger skill contribution to positions that never had had any winger skill contribution.
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4245352.13) as reply to (4245352.11)|
|To: AmonRaZZ||22-10-2005, at 13:01|
|Except for forwards, I presume.
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.24) as reply to (4244356.10)|
|To: Ratsia||22-10-2005, at 12:24|
FTW contributes less to center attacks than normal forwards. The contribution from FTW to center attacks is, however, somewhat bigger than it is to the opposite side.
FTW winger skill only contributes to attack on his own wing.
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.29) as reply to (4244356.19)|
|To: Ratsia||22-10-2005, at 12:31|
|In that case the announcement should definitely be fixed.
There will be another announcement showrtly that clarifies this issue. I could have sworn I wrote something about the reduction to center attack, but obviously I didn't. I will however wait a couple of hours or so until I have made sure that aren't other things that also need to be clarified before posting the new message.
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.31) as reply to (4244356.22)|
|To: Mr_Booze||22-10-2005, at 12:33|
|I have allways seen it as a little unfair that you could get a reasonable wing-attack only by having two forwards with very high "Scoring".
Yes, this is one of the issues that is being addressed with this change.
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.33) as reply to (4244356.25)|
|To: maorn||22-10-2005, at 12:35|
|What I meant is:
If you have a Forward Towards wing going towards your right wing, then his contribution to center attacks is smaller than his contribution to right wing attacks, but his contribution to center attacks is bigger than his contribution to left wing attacks.
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.37) as reply to (4244356.34)|
|To: MOD-Piwiks||22-10-2005, at 12:37|
|Further information on the new training mentioned in the 2005-09-12 posting one will be announced when the time is right for so doing. ;)|
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.39) as reply to (4244356.36)|
|To: Taste1||22-10-2005, at 12:39|
|Will you clarify further the influence on winging skills for Inner mids? Or do we have to guess? ;)
What do you need to have clarified?
Inner mids only use winger skill (and quite little at that) when they are played Towards Wing.
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.45) as reply to (4244356.42)|
|To: IrRichman||22-10-2005, at 12:51|
|Does the central attack rating stay the same for normal forwards?
You certainly have a valid point that the net effect of these changes will be slightly less goals overall as attacks are generally reduced, give the current composition of teams and players. There will be a period of adjustment before goal rates are back to normal.
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.59) as reply to (4244356.51)|
|To: IrRichman||22-10-2005, at 13:17|
|I still think it's an interesting tactic, but I really would not be happy if all forwards would drop in value...
If anything, more likely the opposite: If people come to think that their team's attack power is too weak they will buy better forwards, thus making prices rise.
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.62) as reply to (4244356.60)|
|To: IrRichman||22-10-2005, at 13:20|
|Winger skill ONLY contributes to players clearly ordered to move on the wings.
Wing-backs, Inner backs playing toward wing, wingers, IM playing towards wing and Forwards playing toward wing are the ones who can use their wing skill. I think this makes a lot of sense if you think about it. :)
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.69) as reply to (4244356.65)|
|To: IrRichman||22-10-2005, at 13:34|
|It does, but that makes my argument for increased central attack contibution even stronger!
Even with a nice winger subskill, a normal forward will be less effective as a centre forward, if you look at the total attack ratings thus: you could only use that winger skill if you reduce CA a lot
As I said - you do have a point. :)
This is not how we have done it this time, but since your point is valid, it will be assimilated into the vast heap of valid points that affects future decisions. :)
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.81) as reply to (4244356.71)|
|To: Jilkocfc||22-10-2005, at 14:57|
|A FTW uses his winger skill to increase wing attack, but not his scoring skill.
No, not correct.
FTW uses a lot of winger skill AND a lot of scorer skill on attacks on his flank.
For attacks in the middle and on the opposite wing, he just uses scorer skill (and less of it than he does on his own wing).
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.126) as reply to (4244356.123)|
|To: jsival||23-10-2005, at 11:47|
|I think that is bullshit. An extra innermid plays just like a normal innermid (of course with a penalty) and not more like a defending innermid.
If this was not the case, we would have written so in the rules.
|From:||HT-Bjorn||(4244356.127) as reply to (4244356.125)|
|To: Morelos||23-10-2005, at 11:48|
|he plays like a defensive im, what is in my opinion also logical and correct.
No he does not, the rules do not say so, and it would not be logical. The theory above is just mythology based on nothing in the rules or that we have said.
|From:||HT-Hasse||(4818792.15) as reply to (4818792.1)|
|To: gonzalviyo||7-1-2006 at 00:46|
|Hi, I've got one doubt I can't remember, did derbies in the past report more people to the stadium than matches between teams of two different regions? Thanks ;)
|From:||HT-Hasse||(5124789.20) as reply to (5124789.5)|
|To: TommieW||8-2-2006 at 21:16|
|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.
|From:||HT-Hasse||(5124789.22) as reply to (5124789.21)|
|To: TommieW||8-2-2006 at 21:20|
|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+).
|From:||HT-Tjecken||(3348749.20) as reply to (3348749.9)|
|To: tcelind||15-06-2005 at 12:30|
|It's more or less to clarify that midfield is more than just playmaking. To put it your way: they do behave more like midfielders. The offensive wing back on the other hand doesn't really behave like a midfielder in that sense. But as you might understand, it's a little bit like playing with words.|