HTs on Global/Transfer regulations
|From:||HT-Tjecken||(12290452.1) as reply to (?)|
|To: Everyone||18.12.2008 at 10:02|
|I guess the word on the town today will be about the transfer regulations that the HFA and the Player Union have agreed on for next season. See MyHT space for more info. :)|
|From:||HT-Tjecken||(12290452.19) as reply to (12290452.12)|
|To: Mister_Muller||18.12.2008 at 10:20|
|Great change, but what about a old player who gets injured and only played one match until that time.. Than you are forced to put him on the TL for a price he must sell, otherwise he will be injured at your team for the rest of his life ?
Yes, in that case you'll have to be sure that the starting price is a not too high and you may think it's a bit harsh probably, but it will not happen that often, at least not for the normal casual user. But if you look from an other point of view, traders can't now easily put their players out for sale for an (over)price and wait until someone who's in a haste (or doesn't care) buys him. Such, quite dirty, tricks will not be as easy to perform now.
|From:||HT-Tjecken||(12290452.21) as reply to (12290452.13)|
|To: Mod-Postigod||18.12.2008 at 10:23|
|Tjecken - one question I'm sure many will ask, so I will get it out here now. Will the "appearance counter" start from 0 in Week 1 of next season, or will you be able to code in a start value equal either to
I hope we will be able to make the starting value into something greater than 0. I'll check it up.
|From:||HT-Tjecken||(12290452.35) as reply to (12290452.28)|
|To: BC-asafe||18.12.2008 at 10:41|
|I don't see what's wrong with making the starting value the actual value of the number of games the player has played for your team...
It could've been a problem of retrieving that data, but it's not. So, that's exactly how it will be done.
|From:||HT-Tjecken||(12290452.41) as reply to (12290452.37)|
|To: rabthegoalie||18.12.2008 at 10:44|
|Does playing a player for 1 minute i.e. sub coming on count as a game played? I could see the day traders battling it out during the times of friendlies to maximise players played and not interfere with current training regimes.
Yes, it does. But it's not that big difference, as you can only make 3 substitutions in each match.
|From:||HT-Johan||(12290452.135) as reply to (12290452.57)|
|To: rinoceros||18.12.2008 at 12:04|
|I'm not a trader.
But I I don't like that traders are now taken away their fun as a very limited number of other players are jealous.
Hattrick removed or diminished a lot of options for people who liked different play styles. Like: hospital, 50 set pieces training, flag chasing.
I'm afraid we end up with a game that can be played in just one way.
The main reason for this has not been to satisfy the jealously of a minority (or even a majority). In contrast to every thing else in this game, there has been no upper limit to how much success a trader (according to his definition) can accumulate, which does has system-wide effects. A team builder coach has natural limitations, a tactical coach has natural limitations, but traders has not had that - the team spirit effect or agent fees has simply not been potent enough, especially not for teams that are OK with sacrificing success on the field in the present. The unlimited nature of trading has made it too much of a necessity if you want to become a top team over time. I would say it is in effect quite few traders that are heavily affected by this (a few thousands at most) but they have had a big impact in the fun of a much larger group since their chosen strategy is so effective it closes out other styles of play from potential success.
What I like about this solution by the way is that it especially targets the amount of listings you make, rather than sales, creating a need for setting lower minimum bids when you do transfer list a player, reducing the risk of leaving a player unsold. This will make it less attractive to list players at prices way above market price (hoping a clueless manager picks him up), which we have seen has been a common strategy for the teams that make the most money on the transfer list. This change will reduce the amount of players on the transfer lists, but will probably make the market itself more liquid.
I should also say that we have never moralized about trading itself, it should always be allowed to play the game according to the rules. It is just that now the rules will change a tiny bit :) It is still OK to be a trader, and we have never questioned that.
|From:||HT-Johan||(12290452.142) as reply to (12290452.137)|
|To: Catalyst2950||18.12.2008 at 12:12|
So if you have seen that, why weren't the sellers banned? :)
It´s not against the rules to hope for a good price on the transfer. The problem is, that without a limit to listings, you can do this systematically. Now you can still do it, but it will count towards both other potential trades as well as players to field on the pitch.
|From:||HT-Johan||(12290452.152) as reply to (12290452.148)|
|To: Hoedinie||18.12.2008 at 12:25|
|Have you taken into account that the amount of money taken out of the economic system by transfer fees will reduce and therefor will almost sure lead to an increase of of money within the community and thereby prices paid for players?|
Will any action be taken to prevent this?
Yes, we are aware of this, but money supply is such a big issue on it´s own it has to be given solutions anyway. Not fixing a problem with trading to ease another problem did not seem like such a good idea.
|From:||HT-Johan||(12290452.153) as reply to (12290452.149)|
|To: Lou_Dog||18.12.2008 at 12:26|
|(sorry, haven´t followed the whole thread)
Are there any concrete plans to show the injury status while matches are played? Imho this is an absolute necessity to avoid newbies geting ripped of (without giving them a fair chance to repair their mistake).
Yes, there are concrete plans for this. This is however an overhaul of the entire way the match engine and the web as well handles data, so it will not happen overnight. Maybe within a season from now if things go as planned.
|From:||HT-Johan||(12290452.172) as reply to (12290452.158)|
|To: Lou_Dog||18.12.2008 at 12:59|
|Where btw is the "no hard caps" policy gone? This is the second time in a short period you introduce hard caps (granted, in case of max player limit i assume more a technical reason).
I think there is a risk in being too dogmatic about things like that. I mean, the previous implementation for limiting squad numbers may not have been "hard cap" but it had none of the virtue that you would have wanted from a soft cap solution, namely a gradual change in effect to decrease the motivation to do one thing or another. It used obscurity (hiding the 51st player and the rest of them) and a pseudo-hard cap in the form of squad penalties. Neither of them very logical I think.
The transfer limits has of course an upper absolute limit, but I don´t see it as a hard cap in the traditional sense as it is rather a link between one action in the game with something else that has a natural limit, and the manager has the power to influence how to spend this "resource".
|From:||HT-Johan||(12290452.173) as reply to (12290452.169)|
|To: kirin||18.12.2008 at 13:01|
|What about the injury in the match played between the bid and the transfer?|
Will be the transfers limitation held for injured players too?
If the player is injured he can be transfer listed and sold as an injured player, which he is, or he can be healed and sold as the healthy player, which he would then be.
|From:||HT-Tjecken||(12290452.262) as reply to (12290452.176)|
|To: Dr_Death||18.12.2008 at 15:04|
|Did you consider to generally allow listing for 0 €, regardless of the number of games played?
This would... (1) still have the effect you intended (2) be a safety net for all the (mostly absurd) special cases listed here (3) lower the feeling of being dominated by rules
(You would have to forbid that one bids for his own player in case of a 0€ listing, of course.)
In general we always aim to have rules which can be spelled out in one sentence, as that makes them easy to understand and also helps keeping Hattrick simple (now, we don't always succeed because we can't fulfill the aim with simple rules all the time, but that's another story). So, the question we should ask ourselves is if the special cases really need a "special solution" and if it's "worth" the trouble to introduce a more complex rule. In this case I don't think so as you directly introduce an exception to the general rule, and also an exception to the exception. And in a way I don't think your proposal would deal with the fact that the trading strategy is too superior these days either, even though it would deal with the "dirty overprice trick".
|From:||HT-Tjecken||(12290452.321) as reply to (12290452.308)|
|To: Duluozz||18.12.2008 at 16:09|
|Any idea what this means for prizes, in the long run ? I suspect prizes will drop.
Prices in the long run depend on so many things, not just trading. We do suspect a price drop as any regulation in a market almost always causes a drop, but not a huge one. And the current price level will be able to deal with a drop too, it will not be bad for the game (rather the other way round actually).
|From:||HT-Johan||(12290452.382) as reply to (12290452.379)|
|To: Pirats||18.12.2008 at 17:57|
|I have seen fantastic players with great skills hanging in the market waiting for someone rich enough to buy them and I would not blame the owner for wanting adequate price, which rarely anyone can pay, for his superplayer.
If you own a player like that and pay him a salary, don´t you think he will also get time on the field once a week? So there will be no reason you can list the player several times.
|From:||flameron||(12290452.648) as reply to (?)|
|To: Everyone||20.12.2008 at 21:14|
|I felt I should clarify several issues about this feature.
When analyzing the system several issues were quite clear. Trading profits of some teams were really high. On a weekly basis significant number of teams made a profit no team which rely on the core game features can make.
Trading is fun to many users , but more then that, many casual users and non traders act some times in ways that are similar to trading and will actually hate if "anti-trading" limits are activated. So we wanted to allow some trading but just not that profitable or powerful, and with limits on training and success if its taken to the extreme.
One obvious thing we saw on almost all profitable traders is that they tend to post their players with a starting list of above market price. We saw teams which post 20-30 players twice a week (or even more) and have only 5-6 trades a week, but very profitable ones. Another type of traders (fewer then the first type) sold huge amounts of players with low profits per player. In between there were additional types in which the number of trials to sell a player was lower then the first type and lower volume then the second type. They still posted players several times for sell before selling.
The idea of this change is that you are limited to 28 players sold every week, so really heavy traders are limited. But, if you think only those are affected you are wrong. Even the first type, the one selling 5-6 players a week is highly affected by this change. The reason is that they can not post each player twice a week hoping him to be sold in one of every 5-6 posting for very high price. To achieve the same goal they will need all the team players to be prospect trades. This change is limiting the number of players you can post above market price, but also at prices close to market price or slightly below. The assumption is that they will be able to sell few players a week and they will need to reduce their profit margins by far. It seems any path of traders is affected and will need to adjust the pricing strategy or the quantity strategy or both of them.
Yes, it may still be possible to trade and have a profit. We will monitor this ability after the change. No one exclude an option to have additional moves if it seems that trading is still too powerful. No change in Hattrick is a stand alone feature so this feature is also decided in the context of future changes planned to happen. Whoever likes trading should accept that from now on trading efficiently might need to be less efficient as trainer or less successful on the field.
|From:||flameron||(12290452.699) as reply to (12290452.694)|
|To: Catalyst2950||21.12.2008 at 15:18|
|Sure there was. Prices were rather stable for a couple of months and started showing even a slight increase as more and more high-level players were fired.
All that was needed at that point was simply to add a "wage per season" row on player pages.
Thats not true. I guess you rely on some common used sites and come to the wrong observation. Actually money leakage from the system became faster and faster and prices continued to decend at a stable pace.
In addition there were 10K users going bankrupt every week compared to ~1.5K today. It was not optional to keep the old deflation environment without killing the game for many users who are not into careful economical management.
|From:||flameron||(12290452.703) as reply to (12290452.700)|
|To: clawy||21.12.2008 at 15:29|
|How many of those 10k users have gone bankrupt just because they kept monoskilled players with huge salaries? Just asking for you're opinion of course, i doubt you have data on this :)|
You didn't solve the problem, just shifted it a little, it will reappear at a later date for sure. The change in training speed is obviously not enough, or at least its effect are way to slow.
Its off topic, but I know you are right. The economy of Hattrick is not built to have it self stable as there is no feedback from the economy overall situation to how money is created and taken from the system.
|From:||flameron||(12290452.708) as reply to (12290452.702)|
|Do you consider abandoned teams in this number? For instance, one of my league mates abandoned at the beginning of this season, I guess that with his weekly wages he could have gone bankrupt before actually becoming a BOT. Is he included in the 1,5 per week?
The question arises since I spend a lot of time on the Help conference in Italy (quite a big league), and while in 2006-2007 "Bankrupt!" threads were very common, I rarely stumble upon something of the kind, lately (at least a year and a half).
I do not know how many of the 1.5K are such abandoned teams, but I guess most of them in a sense, the same as the 10K were one year ago. Bankruptcy usually happen because you do not care much or not willing / able to do the needed things to survive. HT as a game is about success not survival so I can't agree with
I'm starting to suspect that it's now too simple to economically survive.
|From:||flameron||(12290452.718) as reply to (12290452.716)|
|To: Catalyst2950||21.12.2008 at 16:03|
|And yet the number of people playing Hattrick is only slightly higher than when those 10k users went bankrupt each week...
And as an answer to another reply:
Now we're back at the beginning. People are happily overspending, because they can cover their stupidly high wages and overtrained players through training profits. The game doesn't look very healthy to me.
As someone already say just few posts above, I see no problem with spending happily at the start. The game should become harder at the top, and frankly it is, as the users I find in top divisions know how to play the game and understand it in most cases. I do realize some of them chose a path you prefer did not exist and this thread is about one measure to reduce its power. I do realize that careful team builders seem to have too hard time in this game, but while I agree with their duration to the top being too long I find their way of playing really rewarded both in recognition and in power compred to rivals when getting to the top. Not saying everything is perfect though.
|From:||flameron||(12290452.721) as reply to (12290452.720)|
|To: Daveheart||21.12.2008 at 16:18|
Oh, finally. Did it? Really?
Well, OK then. I trust your statement. I'm surprised, however.
It was a surprise to me as well. But that is a fact.
|From:||flameron||(12290452.722) as reply to (12290452.719)|
|To: Catalyst2950||21.12.2008 at 16:20|
|Recognition and power mean very little when you can't remain on the top, which is reserved for people who treat their players like livestock (be it through industrial trading or industrial training). While the anti-DT measures will help, you still have to get rid of old money, and it's going to be a very long while until those issues are truly taken care of. Few people reading this will remain in HT until then; we're talking 4-5 years here.
Hattrick really, really fails when it comes to team building. It excels in player building, but the team aspect is just a joke. We don't have teams, we have collections of players. There are no incentives to keep players long-term, there is no way to build an entire squad from scratch all by yourself. Finished multiskilled players cost less than trainees.
Oh, and the majority of top-level teams are mostly clueless, not the other way round.
I agree with some of your observations and do not agree with some. Most of the time it feels you have a point just you take it to the extreme. I would really want to continue the discussion but its off topic here so I will prevent from replying just because of that.
|From:||HT-Tjecken||(12290452.740) as reply to (12290452.739)|
|To: Nilsinho||23.12.2008 at 11:32|
|I wanted to know whether previous TL-listings are remembered when the new season starts. So, for example, how many times can you list a player that (at the beginning of next season) has played 4 matches and got 2 listings on the TL?
No, previous listings are not rememberd. Transfer listings starts at 0, amount of matches start at the actual amount of matches.
This also answers your second question.
|From:||flameron||(12290452.763) as reply to (12290452.759)|
|To: PuckNtheNutz||29.12.2008 at 08:32|
|One obvious thing we saw on almost all profitable traders is that they tend to post their players with a starting list of above market price.
So you admit that you saw daytraders routinely breaking the rules?????
I am totally shocked by this.
Why not just let the GMs go in and modify the sale price then?
SERIOUSLY TOTALLY SHOCKED man. Any respect I had for you guys for limiting trading went out the door with that one sentenc :
almost all profitable traders is that they tend to post their players with a starting list of above market price.
You said they were breaking the rules.