Subject: Reporting bugs

No, there is not. But seriously you guys won't be happy until you hear "I should have won" and you won't drop the subject, thus leading Vlady to waste his time on this. He explained it's not a bug, it's not a bug. Can we move on to other true bugs?

No, I don't want to hear "You should have won." And I also don't wan't to hear "You had 471/500 chances to win this particular match." It's wrong! Such an upset must not happen in 3 matches out of 50. With such strength difference it should be 3 in 500, maybe less. And this means 10 times less upsets for such a strength difference.

In your opinion that's "too much" but the Devs have looked at it, and they disagree, therefore it's not a bug. Can we please move on to real issues? Thanks

For me and for many others this is a real issue. In your opinion it's not. Devs haven't said anything, just vlady has. And he "thinks" it's ok.

You're right, it is my opinion that worrying about who is "stronger" on paper is a waste of time, since all that matters is the game result. As many others have pointed out, upsets are part of sports. Determining how many upsets is "too many" is a monumental waste of time. In my opinion.

In fact it's a thing that differentiates simulation from luck based games. And too many unpredictable results in a sport simulation game are repelling. A can't point out a bigger problem/bug in this game for some time now.

what you and everyone else arguing is missing is that just having the average number of games that are won/lost is not useful. You also need a standard deviation.

I wonder if it was simulated again how close to the 29/500 it would be? Could very well end up with 10/500 next time and would probably make the argument go away. However, thats anybodys guess without a sd.

Unpredctibality is what makes a good sports simulation. The best team doesn't always win, and that is due to the players performing or not performing. Great teams still lose, weak teams win.

If you aren't happy because "it's too unpredictable" then maybe you need to find another game, like Math Blaster.

The "best" team currently in the NHL is the Vancouver Canucks, counting only regulation losses, they have lost 23 percent of their games. Counting OT losses, they have lost 37% of their games.

The "Worst" team in the NHL is the Oilers, they have won 33% of their games.

So you think 6% is too much of an upset? Based on what?

Maybe you need to find some other game where you could tell people to play other sims, but with some credibility.
This guy has helped us in numerous occasions, which I can't say I seen from you.

When di I say that the best team should always win? You just don't want or can't get it and you're getting cynical.
And if the same match would end up with 10/500 next time, then the problem is even bigger than I tought.

Based on team strengths. You can't compare NHL or any serious major league with this. Teams quality in such leagues is not nearly such different. On the other hand I have stated a comparision to national teams, where quality differences are substantial and very noticable. And there are groups of teams that have never won a match against some other group of teams in the same division. And there are 4 divisions.

Think of it this way, if the "stronger team" should win with the odds you are thinking, what is the incentive to play the game for new/weaker teams?

I don't have the best team in the USA, not even in my own league. So I should just accept that I am supposed to lose more? Or should the owners of "lower quality" teams have a chance to win as well? Think of it from that perspective perhaps.

When I beat the #2 team in the USA 2 seasons ago in the National Cup, I was proud of my team pulling the upset. What were the odds of me winning? I don't know, nor do I care. In fact, it would make me feel awful to see the team I beat sitting there on the boards claiming the game must be broken because I should not have won the game, or the odds of me winning were too high

So think of the teams who are hungry for that 3 out of 50 chance to win, what it means to them to pull the upset, be it by strategy, or their "players" just performing. They are players and owners too, and an important part of the game as well.

If it seems i'm bitter when teams complain about losing, it's because I feel you guys are not thinking of the feelings or the importance of these games to the teams that won them.

You should look a bit better into this particular team and other teams in our league. This team was very competitive last season and has beaten me 2:0 for 11th placement. I was stronger on paper, but I had no problem with that. Then it has sold all the best players and now it has no chance to stay in 1st Slovenian league. In fact its strengths are comparable to some weak 3rd league teams. I seriously think in 38 matches it shouldn't have a single victory against teams with total strength above 60.

Yes, I looked at the ratings and the game, they were outshot, nearly doubled. But their goalie made the saves.

6% seems fair to me, considering the gaps in strength. But I don't think ANY team should be expected to go 0-38. Anything can happen, and like I said telling the winning team "oh, you just won because of a bug" is poor sportsmanship in my opinion.