HTs on Global/Transfer compare
|From:||flameron||(12470432.1) as reply to (?)|
|To: Everyone||29.1.2009 at 11:39|
|There is a new transfer compare available in the site now (MyHT soon I think).
The new transfer compare is now live and we advice you would try it a bit before reading the following text which explains how it works. I will be happy if you can translate this text into other languages for users that do not speak English.
With the new match engine and the fact secondary and tertiary skills become better with time, the need for a system that is able to return both good results and enough results became obvious. The new system is (almost in all cases) returning more results with better comparison in some cases or a bit more loosen restrictions in others. The basic logic was to try and find the balance between accurate results and enough results. For most players types we believe this is the result.
The main logic of the system is to check which player type is compared. Then a set of secondary tertiary and quartile skills are chosen. If the third or fourth skills are higher then the second they become secondary skills. In short the list of skills is sorted by the initial order having importance unless the skills are higher then the skill before them in the initial list by more then the difference in the initial skills.
After the sort the skills are checked. If secondary skills are very low or very high, we use ranges of skills instead of equal skills as we used to do. The same happen if the third skill is high or if the third and fourth skills are quite high and secondary is high. You will see what we mean by very high, high and quite high when you use the system. Third and fourth skills are always compared within ranges, but this time the ranges are fixed but chosen in relation to the player skills. This is done to save server load and to make sure enough results are given. We did that always with the balance issue (enough results while being accurate) in mind and actual value users give for skills as much as we could.
Fifth and sixth skills are always compared to be below weak even if in some cases they might be higher on the compared players.
Keepers got a new comparison method in which both defending and set pieces are compared. Set pieces skill is using ranges in all cases and we will test how it behaves. See below the set pieces place in transfer compare as we see it.
Many things are still not compared for the players, and there is reason why we do not compare them. Stamina – The new system do not compare stamina. We think it is the right choice as stamina is more like form in the new system. Its revealed, fluctuate, easy to change and fast to change. It is even more manageable then form. We believe form and stamina should be priced by the users as adding them into the equation might result much less results while giving very little information about price (due to the fact stamina and form have lower role in price compared to skills in most cases).
Exact Age – first it seems to matter mainly for young players and secondly the change we made did not touch most of the presentational sides of the feature making it impossible to change for now.
Specialty – Adding specialty will lead in most cases to much less comparisons, and we thought this is something which will not benefit the users. We also believe that no system that really takes all aspects of the player into consideration will return enough results to be relevant. So we think leaving some factors out, especially if they quite easy to price, is a good thing as we allow you to compare the base skills of the players which matter the most and add / reduce value according to the actual skills of the player.
Set pieces – since set pieces is so wide in range adding it to comparison might lead to too few results on many players even if the set pieces skills is limited by ranges and not exact skills. We also believe that since set pieces adds quite low value for players in the market unless being very high, it seems logical to neglect and let users price it themselves. We did add this to keepers in spite of that, but we are not sure its for the good.
Character, experience and Leadership (as well as Nationality) – All these have effects on price, and quite significant ones in some cases. Since comparing all the player attributes is the wrong thing to do as we explained previously, those should be neglected in the comparison. Users can estimate how much these add-ons are worth for them.
Your feedback is valuable. Please feel free to tell us about problems here in this thread, but try to give exact player skills and criteria list appearing on the player transfer compare page. Thanks.
|From:||flameron||(12470432.8) as reply to (12470432.6)|
|To: pimmies||29.1.2009 at 13:57|
But you cannot use the transfer compare for TDF. The speciality is not in the comparison so you are comparing midfielders with passing with your technical defensive forward.
Yes you can. Scoring is included (and playmaking is too) for playmakers (forwards) if its high enough.
|From:||flameron||(12470432.11) as reply to (12470432.10)|
|To: cmguimaraes||29.1.2009 at 14:26|
TDF is T and transfer compare don´t consider the T when comparing, so, no way you can use it before you clean the non-T from the list you recieve.
That will not happen. Specialty is not included in the TC tool for a reason I wrote in the opening post of this thread.
|From:||flameron||(12470432.17) as reply to (12470432.14)|
|To: rostomat||29.1.2009 at 14:49|
I have got one keeper with level 9 and one at level 11 SP, they both get a range from level 7 to 16 in transfer comparison. This seems a little wide, to my mind. I guess -2/+2 would lead to better results.
My Keeper at level 7 SP gets a transfer comparison <8, which is ok if seen isolated, but recognizing the next step (7 to 16) it seems to misfit.
How many comparisons do you get for the keepers with the SP? The ranges are fixed as I explained due to server load issue and lack of market value for low set pieces skills. In any case users see the range and I believe it is affecting their decision if your player skills are in the low section of the range or in the high section.
|From:||flameron||(12470432.38) as reply to (12470432.19)|
|To: theapple||29.1.2009 at 21:08|
Agreed. Why not to add for example 0-10 and 11+ Shouldn't reduce the results too much.
Because the result will give no additional information (you will still don't know what the SP level of the players on the list you got) and instead you will get 10% or less results which in most cases will lead to empty or very old comparison points.
|From:||flameron||(12470432.39) as reply to (12470432.20)|
|To: Ratsia||29.1.2009 at 21:11|
In any case users see the range and I believe it is affecting their decision if your player skills are in the low section of the range or in the high section.
A slight problem here is that the user has no way of knowing how high SP the other players on the list have. He can only assume that the list probably covers most of the range, but at least I don't know whether that holds even on average. What if almost all of them are always on the low end of the spectrum? This could happen systematically if the distribution of SP values is sufficiently skewed within HT in general. I mean, if the distribution is not close to uniform but reminds e.g. an exponential distribution.
Of course there is no way out of this without making SP more visible in the indicators we have for the players. If SP affected TSI or stars of the players (or had bigger effect on wage) then the issue would disappear. Any plans on something like that?
Tc is a tool that gives you information about the last 10 similar players according to a shown criteria that was sold. What you do with the information is a different question. I guess more knowledgeable users will make more out of this information. In any case all users get more information by this.
|From:||flameron||(12470432.40) as reply to (12470432.25)|
|To: Pirats||29.1.2009 at 21:15|
Regarding speciality and stamina: you didn't need to filter by them, it would be enough to add them as informative fields like age and form are shown now. Should not be hard to implement, but it would give much more information why prices fluctuate for players we compare our guy with.
Yes. This is something I thought of and hinted in my posts. Currently only changes to the logic of the feature were done but those presentations tweaks might be done in the future.
|From:||flameron||(12470432.79) as reply to (12470432.78)|
|To: Adam_F_Duritz||2.2.2009 at 21:43|
Before this thread dies I'd like to add my two cents.
When you click to compare the recently transferred players I'd like to be able to see their exact skills, specialty, T.S.I etc. at the time of transfer, to enable a better comparison. Especially as there is now a range included for certain secondaries.
The current system of simply linking to the player page is not much help. No skills are shown and if the player was transferred some time ago then comparison is pretty useless.
To allow this the Player name, Club and ID would be removed so that the players remain anonymous.
I understand this maybe impossible, but it's worth putting the idea forward.
My dream system will work something similar to what you ask. Maybe even with more then you asked. Sadly there are restrictions. the presentational tweaks are not included in those restrictions so it might happen some day. Can't tell now if soon or never but its something I am aware of its need.
To sum it up. If optional to show on the short list page specialty, age in days, secondary exact skill (or third skill if second is exact in the criteria), injury at sell time, experience, leadership, etc.
My guess most will not be included due to space, but I fully understand why you ask for it.