Forum » Suggestions » Match XP points | Date | |
---|---|---|
Username
75 msgs.
Rookie
|
This suggestion comes from an idea I had on another topic (below, between brackets, is the original thought). I think I should put it in an individual post to your appraisal as I think it would benefit all, whether they are farmers or not (thus you can't say that I'm only trying to put down the farming business). The idea is that the XP level of players (both junior and senior) should be differentiated by Match XP and Training XP: First of all...very important...on match days we shouldn't be able to train (to prevent receiving Match XP and Training XP in the same day), even on friendly match days. Then...each match played by players put on GREEN position should get higher increases on his personal level XP (YELLOW should receive slight increase, and RED none at all). Benched players no increase at all. Giving an example... ...now we see those little green arrows showing that the player trained that day and received a +0.001% increase on his XP level. The player that would be playing active part in the match (only titular players on starting line-up )...would get "Match XP"...instead of "Training XP": on Green position increase by +0.050% on Yellow position increase by +0.005% on Red position no increase (0%) This would make the players that play matches...more prone to increase his avg (XP) level faster than the ones that just sit there to train. No prejudice to farmers...that would still get on their active players good XP...and still be able to farm. What'ya think?! ***Original Thought*** [ Managers that do use the junior team as a team itself...and not just for training (having no team whatsoever)...should get better increases on stats (for instance, instead of +0.1...give +0.5) for players that do make an actual team (as a green player in his position) and do play games (favour the players that play, instead of the benched ones). This would make managers try to make some sense on ever having a junior line-up. Or else dev's should simply just take that junior line-up thing off...if the objective of junior squad is just to make money out of their youth. This idea would never pass as a good idea because, the top players, only want to use the junior squad to train and make bucketloads of money. But at least you have one that liked it. ] *** |
29/10/2013 18:31 |
- Div/Gr | ||
672 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Hebitsukai said: This suggestion comes from an idea I had on another topic (below, between brackets, is the original thought). I think I should put it in an individual post to your appraisal as I think it would benefit all, whether they are farmers or not (thus you can't say that I'm only trying to put down the farming business). The idea is that the XP level of players (both junior and senior) should be differentiated by Match XP and Training XP: First of all...very important...on match days we shouldn't be able to train (to prevent receiving Match XP and Training XP in the same day), even on friendly match days. Then...each match played by players put on GREEN position should get higher increases on his personal level XP (YELLOW should receive slight increase, and RED none at all). Benched players no increase at all. Giving an example... ...now we see those little green arrows showing that the player trained that day and received a +0.001% increase on his XP level. The player that would be playing active part in the match (only titular players on starting line-up )...would get "Match XP"...instead of "Training XP": on Green position increase by +0.050% on Yellow position increase by +0.005% on Red position no increase (0%) This would make the players that play matches...more prone to increase his avg (XP) level faster than the ones that just sit there to train. No prejudice to farmers...that would still get on their active players good XP...and still be able to farm. What'ya think?! ***Original Thought*** [ Managers that do use the junior team as a team itself...and not just for training (having no team whatsoever)...should get better increases on stats (for instance, instead of +0.1...give +0.5) for players that do make an actual team (as a green player in his position) and do play games (favour the players that play, instead of the benched ones). This would make managers try to make some sense on ever having a junior line-up. Or else dev's should simply just take that junior line-up thing off...if the objective of junior squad is just to make money out of their youth. This idea would never pass as a good idea because, the top players, only want to use the junior squad to train and make bucketloads of money. But at least you have one that liked it. ] *** Is this another one of those "down with farming" ideas? I appreciate the effort you put into this suggestion, however given that the above is true, I refuse to support it. I have stated many, many times over the years why I hate this category of suggestions and this will not be any different than the rest. Perhaps if you offered a way to make up for lost revenue and training, I could come around. PS: the idea that players shouldn't be trained during match days is bad- no offense to you (hopefully )- because most of us play matches 7 days per week. Our players would NEVER train. Edited by Aruen 29-10-2013 22:06 |
29/10/2013 21:48 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
280 msgs.
First-team player
|
Hebitsukai said: What'ya think?! Ermmm, okay. I'm sorry but I have read through your post a few times and I just don't get the benefit of making this change. Even assuming that when you say xp you don't mean experience as it relates to new skills but you mean % average I don't get the point. I do see a possible (major?) issue, though. If your starting 11 kept getting a 0.050% increase in average, that would be a 1% increase every 20 days. In an entire season (90ish days) that would be a 4.5% increase. That is a 4.5% increase to every player of your starting 11. That could create the situation where everyone in the game had super high average teams. With the way training and average increases are related right now, you can either train one specific area and increase those players a fair bit (but still less than 4.5% for established players) or you can train all positions and see a small increase over the entire squad. The idea of seeing my players increase by 4.5% over a season is mind-blowing. |
29/10/2013 22:35 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
75 msgs.
Rookie
|
Aruen said: Is this another one of those "down with farming" ideas? I appreciate the effort you put into this suggestion, however given that the above is true, I refuse to support it. I have stated many, many times over the years why I hate this category of suggestions and this will not be any different than the rest. PS: the idea that players shouldn't be trained during match days is bad- no offense to you (hopefully )- because most of us play matches 7 days per week. Our players would NEVER train. Edited by Aruen 29-10-2013 21:49 Edited by Aruen 29-10-2013 21:50 As I stated previously...no...it is not. And if you read the idea, you would see that this has no loss for anybody. Even farmers, would gain as much as non-farmers. You're worried about your 7 matches a week. I see your point...that would render training useless. But if you love farming so much...follow the idea and add to the discussion. Let me give an example of how Aruen would make a non-flaming reply: "Aruen said: I you don't agree with no-training on the same day part (because I play 7 matches per week) and I think we should win from Match XP and Training XP on the same day." Now that's a nice add-on to the suggestion. Makes it even better, wont you agree? And guess what??? I totally would agree with you. So you see? No harm done on picking up the idea...and improve it. Everybody's happy...and we all benefit, if it passes up to devs. CLEARLY...this time I took into consideration also the "farm-lovers"...and gave an idea that improves the chances of ALL getting better XP...favouring the players that play actual matches...is that so hard to understand? IRL...players that play...are better sold than the benched ones. This would simulate that (this is a simulator isn't it?). After all...a player that plays...always get more experience than a player that doesn't play, don't you agree? If "playing" players don't get advantages over the the benched ones...why do we play matches at all? Your posture is always to think that everyone is trying to take the rugg beneath your feet. And this is not the case. Be cool. |
29/10/2013 22:36 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
75 msgs.
Rookie
|
Shimmo said: Ermmm, okay. I'm sorry but I have read through your post a few times and I just don't get the benefit of making this change. Even assuming that when you say xp you don't mean experience as it relates to new skills but you mean % average I don't get the point. I do see a possible (major?) issue, though. If your starting 11 kept getting a 0.050% increase in average, that would be a 1% increase every 20 days. In an entire season (90ish days) that would be a 4.5% increase. That is a 4.5% increase to every player of your starting 11. That could create the situation where everyone in the game had super high average teams. With the way training and average increases are related right now, you can either train one specific area and increase those players a fair bit (but still less than 4.5% for established players) or you can train all positions and see a small increase over the entire squad. The idea of seeing my players increase by 4.5% over a season is mind-blowing. Maybe so. So change the percentages...instead of 0.050%...would be 0.025%...or 0.020% I don't know, I just gave an example. The idea is plain and simply to get the players that play matches...to get more XP than just by training. That would get them better avg to be sold somewhat faster than benched ones and for a good profit. |
29/10/2013 22:41 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
280 msgs.
First-team player
|
I think I understand where you are coming from now. IRL, players who play more games become better players than those who are sat on the subs bench. You want to see this reflected in the players' averages. At the moment the players who play get increases in their Experience. This lets them eventually get more Skills. Therefore the players who play are getting more benefit than the players who sit on the bench. |
29/10/2013 22:53 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
75 msgs.
Rookie
|
Shimmo said: I think I understand where you are coming from now. IRL, players who play more games become better players than those who are sat on the subs bench. You want to see this reflected in the players' averages. At the moment the players who play get increases in their Experience. This lets them eventually get more Skills. Therefore the players who play are getting more benefit than the players who sit on the bench. Exactly. That may be so...but it should be differentiated values...I mean...we only see the "daily increment of the player" (when aplies by training schedule)...we should be able to see for instance: "Player X received 0.001% from today's training and 0.020% from today's match." Actual example: Today I didn't have a match. The training gave to 8 players 0.001% and to 2 CF's 0.072% and 0.051% (CF's were scheduled to train). On match day...they should receive an xp bonus for playing the match...even if it's NOT "CFs" scheduled day to train...and that should be noticeable. Understand my point? |
29/10/2013 23:09 |
- Div/Gr | ||
672 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Hebitsukai said But if you love farming so much...follow the idea and add to the discussion. Let me give an example of how Aruen would make a non-flaming reply: Now that's a nice add-on to the suggestion. Makes it even better, wont you agree? And guess what??? I totally would agree with you. So you see? No harm done on picking up the idea...and improve it. Everybody's happy...and we all benefit, if it passes up to devs. Your posture is always to think that everyone is trying to take the rugg beneath your feet. And this is not the case. Be cool. I don't know who you think you are, but the last two or three times I've disagreed with you, I have not attacked you in any way, even as you accuse me of it. I attack your IDEA, which is perfectly acceptable considering I do not agree. That's called a difference of opinion. Instead, as you accuse me of attacking you, you start saying things about me that many would consider "flaming". Please stop doing this. AS WE GET BACK ON TOPIC, I agree with Shimmo as I don't see much of a benefit resulting from this change. As he said, players who are playing gain experience and more skills, which are incredibl y useful to have. A junior squad is meant to be nothing more than a training ground for future players. Their matches do not matter for anything except bragging rights. Some players (farmers) have found ways to maximize this and benefit immensely, and the benefit can be extended to anyone as long as they work hard. Players who play train the most, however limiting training to only players who play will affect Striker in more ways than I think you're forseeing right now. The detriments extend far beyond the junior squad to the market and eventually to the best of senior teams. If you want to limit training to just those who play, you need to have each player follow an individual training regimen, which wouldn't work because seniors would also follow this and you'd end up like the spanish server with too many good players selling too cheaply. My proposal is this: don't fix what isn't broken. Users have created an economy that has successfully run for 12 seasons now. Changing this economy would wreck some teams- mainly the highest divisions- and elevate others- mainly the lowest divisions. It's not worth it. |
30/10/2013 01:19 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
75 msgs.
Rookie
|
Aruen said: I don't know who you think you are, but the last two or three times I've disagreed with you, I have not attacked you in any way, even as you accuse me of it. I attack your IDEA, which is perfectly acceptable considering I do not agree. That's called a difference of opinion. Instead, as you accuse me of attacking you, you start saying things about me that many would consider "flaming". Please stop doing this. AS WE GET BACK ON TOPIC, I agree with Shimmo as I don't see much of a benefit resulting from this change. As he said, players who are playing gain experience and more skills, which are incredibl y useful to have. A junior squad is meant to be nothing more than a training ground for future players. Their matches do not matter for anything except bragging rights. Some players (farmers) have found ways to maximize this and benefit immensely, and the benefit can be extended to anyone as long as they work hard. Players who play train the most, however limiting training to only players who play will affect Striker in more ways than I think you're forseeing right now. The detriments extend far beyond the junior squad to the market and eventually to the best of senior teams. If you want to limit training to just those who play, you need to have each player follow an individual training regimen, which wouldn't work because seniors would also follow this and you'd end up like the spanish server with too many good players selling too cheaply. My proposal is this: don't fix what isn't broken. Users have created an economy that has successfully run for 12 seasons now. Changing this economy would wreck some teams- mainly the highest divisions- and elevate others- mainly the lowest divisions. It's not worth it. I'll be answering you privatly...as I try to respect other users on not having to read these personal quarrels. |
30/10/2013 02:27 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
75 msgs.
Rookie
|
Some OP reading this, please...delete my topics from the forum. I will dedicate myself solely playing the game. Thank you. |
30/10/2013 02:36 |
- Div/Gr | ||