Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Asunto: Bragging Topic
vivski para
uberfurious [del]
Peer pressured into getting this guy... :P
Elliott Matthews, age: 44
wage: 67 400 AU$
Training effectiveness as head coach: magical coach
unearthly of stamina, incredible of keeper
brilliant of pace, unearthly of defender
unearthly of technique, unearthly of playmaker
unearthly of passing, unearthly of striker
Elliott Matthews, age: 44
wage: 67 400 AU$
Training effectiveness as head coach: magical coach
unearthly of stamina, incredible of keeper
brilliant of pace, unearthly of defender
unearthly of technique, unearthly of playmaker
unearthly of passing, unearthly of striker
vivski para
uberfurious [del]
I'm lagging a bit behind with this thread. Haven't had time to post sumskills. Will do it soon.
My justification was this...
In sokker, the higher skills have always been a case of diminishing returns. The value increases exponentially and the effectiveness increases logarithmically (haven't used that for a while). So brilliant to magical head coach doesn't make a big difference for 300k per season.
And with assistants, according to the rules, only the general skill counts. So doing a full sumskill doesn't really mean much?
3x brilliant = 42
My rabble = 35
That's only a diff of 7pt, factoring in diminishing returns and minimal effect of assistants vs head coach... not such a big difference.
So the saving of $3M per season is pretty good justification.
Having said that, I've just splurged, so will see if it makes a difference. The main diff I find is in finding talented players to train. They train fast regardless of who's coaching and duds are worthless.
When I get a chance, I'll check out some pop rates from my older players and post them.
My justification was this...
In sokker, the higher skills have always been a case of diminishing returns. The value increases exponentially and the effectiveness increases logarithmically (haven't used that for a while). So brilliant to magical head coach doesn't make a big difference for 300k per season.
And with assistants, according to the rules, only the general skill counts. So doing a full sumskill doesn't really mean much?
3x brilliant = 42
My rabble = 35
That's only a diff of 7pt, factoring in diminishing returns and minimal effect of assistants vs head coach... not such a big difference.
So the saving of $3M per season is pretty good justification.
Having said that, I've just splurged, so will see if it makes a difference. The main diff I find is in finding talented players to train. They train fast regardless of who's coaching and duds are worthless.
When I get a chance, I'll check out some pop rates from my older players and post them.
uberfurious [del] para
vivski
Only 7 points?!?!? 7/35 = 20% less training!!!!
Plus the arguements about cost savings are out of date. Wages stayed the same. Ticket prices doubled.
(editado)
Plus the arguements about cost savings are out of date. Wages stayed the same. Ticket prices doubled.
(editado)
If I had to follow a side here, I'd back vivski's until I'm shown otherwise. I've been on a fairly similar path as vivski most of the time which is why I've still got a formidable as my 3rd assistant. I don't necessarily think it's a 20% reduction, that's assuming each point is linear, if it's logarithmic or else diminishing returns as I've had pretty much thought (and most of this game is non-linear anyway), then it's significantly less than that and not worth the exponential wage.
Cost savings are still cost savings, regardless of whether the base revenue has increased. A 300k saving then is still a 300k saving now given wages haven't changed, training formula hasn't changed. The fact you have higher revenue doesn't discount the fact it's a saving. You could make a question that 300k today is less than before as a result of incomes being higher but ultimately that doesn't really make much sense to this argument since it's about comparing the cost of high coaches verses the saving to go towards other players potentially better than what you could train.
Still I've gone in for the brilliants/magicals on the basis of just in case but I figure it's probably figure there's an ideal point from a cost benefit situation that is somewhere around that mark if not lower.
Cost savings are still cost savings, regardless of whether the base revenue has increased. A 300k saving then is still a 300k saving now given wages haven't changed, training formula hasn't changed. The fact you have higher revenue doesn't discount the fact it's a saving. You could make a question that 300k today is less than before as a result of incomes being higher but ultimately that doesn't really make much sense to this argument since it's about comparing the cost of high coaches verses the saving to go towards other players potentially better than what you could train.
Still I've gone in for the brilliants/magicals on the basis of just in case but I figure it's probably figure there's an ideal point from a cost benefit situation that is somewhere around that mark if not lower.
improvement is linear IMO. In unrelated news, check out the best U25 mids in Oz. Current or Ex steel fury players in bold.
Midfielders
Player Name (Age / Country) Rating
Frank Grella (24 / Australia) 81.0
Campbell McLaren (25 / Australia) 79.5
Craig Cunningham (25 / Australia) 79.0
Walter Groves (24 / Australia) 78.5
Julian O\\\\\\\'Carroll (23 / Australia) 78.0
Xavier Slater (23 / Australia) 76.0
Harrold Vieri (22 / Australia) 75.0
Clayton Haddleton (24 / Australia) 74.0
Oscar Chan (22 / Australia) 73.5
LOLZ
Midfielders
Player Name (Age / Country) Rating
Frank Grella (24 / Australia) 81.0
Campbell McLaren (25 / Australia) 79.5
Craig Cunningham (25 / Australia) 79.0
Walter Groves (24 / Australia) 78.5
Julian O\\\\\\\'Carroll (23 / Australia) 78.0
Xavier Slater (23 / Australia) 76.0
Harrold Vieri (22 / Australia) 75.0
Clayton Haddleton (24 / Australia) 74.0
Oscar Chan (22 / Australia) 73.5
LOLZ
Why do you buy triple divine strikers then? Save wage and buy 3xunearthly :p
In training, you always have to remember the hidden power of "random" pops. That is overlooked training that is actually very powerful indeed. Vieri - since coming to my team has bad maybe 7 random pops. Very useful and overlooked by most. Your coaches are training 6 skills every week, not just the one. 1 full training and 5 general at 10% effeciency (general rule of thumb) means that the lost training skill is 150% of the coaches sumskill difference. Looking at it that way brings down the wage difference equation. But no matter how you cut it, 5xunearthly definately isn't worth it!!
In training, you always have to remember the hidden power of "random" pops. That is overlooked training that is actually very powerful indeed. Vieri - since coming to my team has bad maybe 7 random pops. Very useful and overlooked by most. Your coaches are training 6 skills every week, not just the one. 1 full training and 5 general at 10% effeciency (general rule of thumb) means that the lost training skill is 150% of the coaches sumskill difference. Looking at it that way brings down the wage difference equation. But no matter how you cut it, 5xunearthly definately isn't worth it!!
Why do you buy triple divine strikers then? Save wage and buy 3xunearthly :p
I suspect it might be because player skills function slightly differently and this is where I get grey areas. Players from unearthly to divine to me is a bigger improvement than tragic to hopeless, hence the extra time to train it there and the extra wage at the top end (that is it's still not linear, it's exponential).
However, coaches skills aren't visibly executed in comparing A vs B situations, and yes whilst I feel the wage and skills are probably derived from the same set as players, there are other factors in the effectiveness of training that minimise the hit.
Where as a players level is pretty much entirely used (along with form and random chance), for training it doesn't necessarily take 100% from the skill, it depends on players individual talents, type and number of matches played in the week, head coach main training skill, assistants skill plus whatever formula (I'd doubt it would be linear, and still agree it's a diminishing return based formula). So the effect of the level increase in watered down in amongst the others more so than for players. It's worth noting that aside from all the other factors there are diminishing returns for playing multiple matches, whether that be 1,2,3 or 4 official matches in the week so it makes sense for other roles such as coaches to fit into a similar mould so to speak for the purposes of training.
Again, this isn't the source of truth by any means, I just feel that even though fields are calculated the same way, the actual equations they get used in are vastly different resulting in different outcomes.
Definitely you're receiving better training with the higher coaches, I don't dispute that. I do query in terms of how much better. You'll also be generating more general training pops (hate the word random in this case because it isn't actually random, but I know you just used it because that's the general terminology users call it). The problem is though general training pops take an eternity, so how much quicker do you get them and how much more frequent. That's where I think vivski and myself differ in views, we know we'd get more but is it really worth the extra expense for that tiny fraction more). I don't think it's a big difference as it would be noticeable if it was surely.
Well it's in fact 8 skills every week and not 6 as gk and stamina do receive general training, albeit gk is small and possibly only going to GK's.
In saying that, everything depends on whether the improvement is linear or whether the equation is non-linear (or linear where the variables aren't linear). It's not the case of exponential improvement, that would be noticeable. Vastly different stories come from believing in linear or diminishing returns and I think that's why we have this discussion atm.
I suspect it might be because player skills function slightly differently and this is where I get grey areas. Players from unearthly to divine to me is a bigger improvement than tragic to hopeless, hence the extra time to train it there and the extra wage at the top end (that is it's still not linear, it's exponential).
However, coaches skills aren't visibly executed in comparing A vs B situations, and yes whilst I feel the wage and skills are probably derived from the same set as players, there are other factors in the effectiveness of training that minimise the hit.
Where as a players level is pretty much entirely used (along with form and random chance), for training it doesn't necessarily take 100% from the skill, it depends on players individual talents, type and number of matches played in the week, head coach main training skill, assistants skill plus whatever formula (I'd doubt it would be linear, and still agree it's a diminishing return based formula). So the effect of the level increase in watered down in amongst the others more so than for players. It's worth noting that aside from all the other factors there are diminishing returns for playing multiple matches, whether that be 1,2,3 or 4 official matches in the week so it makes sense for other roles such as coaches to fit into a similar mould so to speak for the purposes of training.
Again, this isn't the source of truth by any means, I just feel that even though fields are calculated the same way, the actual equations they get used in are vastly different resulting in different outcomes.
Definitely you're receiving better training with the higher coaches, I don't dispute that. I do query in terms of how much better. You'll also be generating more general training pops (hate the word random in this case because it isn't actually random, but I know you just used it because that's the general terminology users call it). The problem is though general training pops take an eternity, so how much quicker do you get them and how much more frequent. That's where I think vivski and myself differ in views, we know we'd get more but is it really worth the extra expense for that tiny fraction more). I don't think it's a big difference as it would be noticeable if it was surely.
Well it's in fact 8 skills every week and not 6 as gk and stamina do receive general training, albeit gk is small and possibly only going to GK's.
In saying that, everything depends on whether the improvement is linear or whether the equation is non-linear (or linear where the variables aren't linear). It's not the case of exponential improvement, that would be noticeable. Vastly different stories come from believing in linear or diminishing returns and I think that's why we have this discussion atm.
The discussion is what makes the game interesting. Everyone other management game I've played has all of the formula's cracked and known because there is generally 1 factor at play. At that point the game because pure maths - boring. BT is like that. This game has so many factors at play that the mystery is maintained.... and I like that.
Training involves player skill, game time, game type, head coach ind skill, head coach general skills, assistant coaches total skill, training time, player age. When you include the unknown sub-skill levels of coaches and players it gets very complex.
Training involves player skill, game time, game type, head coach ind skill, head coach general skills, assistant coaches total skill, training time, player age. When you include the unknown sub-skill levels of coaches and players it gets very complex.
pffft, vieri is mine, you cant take credit for him :P
I'm going to brag for Krayzee here. Check out these legends still killing it :)
Jose Maras, age: 39
Official matches: 305
Goals in official matches: 670
Assists in official matches: 120
Shane Thompson, age: 42
Official matches: 381
Goals in official matches: 14
Assists in official matches: 238
Although of course, Shane never was as good as Andy :) :) :)
Andy Willis, age: 42
Official matches: 351
Goals in official matches: 40
Assists in official matches: 342
Jose Maras, age: 39
Official matches: 305
Goals in official matches: 670
Assists in official matches: 120
Shane Thompson, age: 42
Official matches: 381
Goals in official matches: 14
Assists in official matches: 238
Although of course, Shane never was as good as Andy :) :) :)
Andy Willis, age: 42
Official matches: 351
Goals in official matches: 40
Assists in official matches: 342
Just added Willis to the NT so he's not sackable. Living legend!
Ah, Maras. So many expectations, never really achieved them...
and Willis, my all time favourite club midfielder :D
I remember that I bought him with adequate pace and technique.
and Willis, my all time favourite club midfielder :D
I remember that I bought him with adequate pace and technique.
18 man squad. Everyone of them has a value above $1 million :-)