Tema: Suggestions

Same here... Last season I decided to move toward using my training facilities to train up those type of players along with some quality types as well. So when I'm rallying against this practice I'm also rallying against something I'm doing. Granted I'm not doing it on a huge scale like some.

I do believe the market will correct out some of this but there always will be suckers I suppose. I guess the devs just have to decide, or maybe they already have, how much they want the focus of this game to be on building a team and playing the games vs being a training mill churning out players.

One problem I've found with the "player chat" section is that you get ALL languages there.

I admit I've started training up players to sell, though i usually sell at 40 or 50 primary so the secondaries are still within a proper ratio. Why did i do it? because i realized the 30-30-25 player i found valuable wasn't worth anything on the market, I had to train the primaries above 40 just to sell. Its that or throw players away for nothing.

There are two sides on the issue of people being taken advantage of. I know of a person who is not a newbie, has a bunch of high rated players, but only trains the primaries. If he hasn't managed to figure out that his team keeps getting relegated because of this, how much responsibility do the developers or we have to teach him?

While none of us knows what the best ratios are (and shouldn't) the guide is pretty clear about what the worst ratios are. If people don't read the guide or choose to ignore it who's issue is that?

I'm not disagreeing with you tb, of course, just bringing up all the issues surrounding what is clearly a problem.

So i have this plan.

For the remainder of this season we should each choose 3 players and train them up specifically to sell to suckers on the market, and see who can make the most money from the sale of the 3 of them

I actually have a couple gems ready. One D-man I bought for 20k with the intention of keeping him. His Qs were in the 80s for both Def and Pass but Agr was in the 30s. Add to that his drop to 4/5 CL very quickly and he wasn't a long-term player any more. He is sitting at 79-30-19. Do you think I should even bother training his pass up? Say sell at 100-60-19 or what? He trains at .6/day. Just curious your thoughts. Oh ya, his name is Petr Prucha too... so he played in the NHL

I've also been training up a 3rd stringer goalie, with 86-30-23. I will just keep training him until I have another goalie come through the ranks that can replace him as a third.

Any ideas how much these guys would fetch? The problem with training is the inflation. A few months ago 40 primary got okay coin. Now 50 gets okay coin. You have to be able to train faster than the inflation. I get a crappy training player to 60 primary and then 60 primary is junk. -Sigh- I suppose this is why I have so many players on my team and a 16k daily excess player fee.

lets take this over to chit chat or something so as not to clog up the suggestions thread

The rating I was suggesting doesn't need to be exact. It just needs to show that a main attribute monster is a very poor player.

Let the market dictate. Stupid people will do stupid things regardless of information.

Like my parents? I'm sure they had education some 23+ years ago... yet still... here I am!

Antsa idea is actually exceptional. Wish I had thought of it. Put the actual star value of the player in the info supplied when on the market. It fixes the 1 atty junk issue in an instant. Well thought out sir. Blues this doesn't give away "secrets" it informs buyer of the REAL skill level of the players and keeps newbies from having millions "stolen" from them by these UNETHICAL sellers. It fixes the single biggest issue I have with the game. It restores competitive balance and allows the market to FAIRLY value any plyer by giving a complete picture as to the relative value of a player versus a teams current rooster. I love this idea as it does not give a ratio used by the game engine but rather a point of reference that is easily relative to compare to your present team. Please seriously consider adding star ratings to playrs on the market and even to each player card. It would be a terrific add on.

i disagree with everything you just said. Anything that involves giving away secrets is bad for the game.

I think people are waaay too concerned about what other people are doing, instead of worrying about their own team. Is winning a little digital trophy so important that we need to scour the game of anyone who plays in a way we disagree with. If I finish 3rd and the two teams ahead of me have UN Lineups without a single home grown player am I gonna whine that they "bought their team" or enjoy the fact that my team built without buying a single player for over 1m finished 3rd? If I play low and lose to a guy who plays normal every game, am I gonna whine that he only won because he played normal and doesn't conserve his energy? or am i gonna take solace in the fact that my strategy of saving energy for the postseason means i may lose a few more games now.

There are a million ways to play the game and that's what I like about it. There are already rules in place to restrict or punish constant selling. There are rules in place to stop overpayment for players. At some point we have to realize that people have to take responsibility for their own teams. And if they can't read the guide and figure out the difference between a good player and a bad player, who's fault is that really? The guys selling will change what they are selling when the buyers stop buying. So if you see a guy buying a lot of players, send him an e-mail and give him some advice. I think that's a better answer than giving away all the games secrets

I thought the game was about being a hockey manager, not about who trains the biggest main attribute monster...

First off STARS is not a secret!!! You might want to look at the teams home page on the top right hand side you'll see stars for EACH category. Offense, defense, goal and shot as well as overall team. Overall team would be the equivilant of the average stars for each player averaged for the team that played in the last league game. All the sugestion does is give this info for EACH individual player. That allows ETHICAL fiar play consistant with sportsmanship. This is a sim SPORTS games is it not?

You seem to be unable to comprehend the detrement caused to the game by this practice. As an American that's just gone through an economic crisis due to UNETHICAL market practices in the financial industry I'd have thought you more than most would understand how the UNETHICAL practices of some can hurt many not involved in the practice. Take a look at the difference between the US dollar and it's counterparts 2 years ago and now. Then look at the USA debt and keep adding trillions to it. You better wake up and smell the coffee!!!

How it hurts PPM. Sim games must incorporate a concept called competitive balance in order to be successful longterm. I like the game so it matters to me. If individuals can gain an advantage then someone else gains a DISadvantage. This creates an uncompetitive game over time. You have 3 groups of people. Those being taken advantage. Those who play fair and those who steal from others knowingly.

Those who gain get the following over those who play "fair" and ETHICAL. They get cash to raise facilities. Or turn the cash into buying premium "all star" pulls that make thier teams better than those who play ethically. That DESTROYS competitive balance. This will eventually cause these folks to leave the game in general.

Those who buy this 1 atty junk eventually fall behind in building facilities. The key to being competitive longterm. The team losses because players play terrible within the game engine. Eventual they realize the game is unbalanced and they quite.


The result of people quiting is less pro pack players. Fewer pro pack new buyers from present players like myself who'd be willing to buy pro if this issue and some game engine issue could be resolved fovourably IMHO. This is a business. Less pro means less money and that is not a good thing period. It's BIG picture thinking.

Giving the idividual star rating isn't giving away a secret that's just cow patties. It gives accurate information a buyer can use to make an informed decision about how much to spend in the market for a given player. This creates competitive balance. This will improve the game substantially not hurt it. ETHICS and sportsmanship aren't just important in a game but in RL. You and others should think about that including my good friend here Scott. A terrific person I think is going down the wrong path on this issue. Sorry about that Scott.

When you pull a bad atty player junk him and move on. That's what I do. With training/regen at 8 I could buy 30 primary guys 6/6 CL for 10K with 90% plus quality on the prime. Train them at .7 a day and steal from the unsuspecting very easily. They'd be 100 primary in 100 game days. I simply choose not to take advantage of others.

I want to make this last point clear. If the guide gave the exact ratios used by the game engine then I'd say "buyer beware". But the guide is far from complete in the area of player builds and frankly the 2 examples appear on the surface to some what contridict each other. Thus the disapproval of myself and other on 1 atty junk selling. The suggestion of adding stars for individual players resolves the 1 atty junk issue without giving away the exact ratio the engine uses. Thus you could say buyer beware again.

With all due respect, I fear you are the mistaken one on this issue. There is a parallel to the US banking and legislation, or lack thereof. It's a stretch however. You have a game and RL system where rules are in place and people are acting within that system. To bring in the ethics issue is where the stretch comes in to place. In the RL system (in a grossly simplified form) it was clearly an unethical situation with these mortgage back derivatives backing loans deliberately designed to fail in extreme levels. To write a series of loans you know will fail, then sell that package, then insure it against failure to the average of 10:1 was horrendous. These powers got their lacky congressman to slip in the measures to remove existing restrictions to allow this by who knows what form of payola. In this simple game we play it's a matter of people operating in straight forward transactions above board within the framework of the game. That's a HUGE difference!! I suppose you can apply a sense of ethics to the situation but that's another HUGE stretch!! One is clearly operating to deceive and profiteer where the other is creating a substandard product people are still willing to purchase.

Nobody is forcing anyone to buy these players. Then again on that same notion nobody forced so many people to take out loans on overinflated properties at ridiculous terms which they ultimately couldn't afford.... I guess there is a parallel!

There's a huge difference between giving out stars, pucks, or any other rating for overall team, or line strength and breaking it down to 1 individual player. When it's given as a line rating you still have to work out which players are contributing to that rating and how. If it's given as an individual player it takes out any of that guesswork.

Please don't get me wrong, I would like to see this practice changed as well. I just don't think giving away any more information regarding individual player builds is the answer.