Asunto: [News] » NEWS....LOL!!

It’s just a screw up because they don’t know a) how to code and b) don’t how to test.

They’re lucky they have sokker because they wouldn’t get development roles anywhere with any standards.

It’s why I made my statement telling people not to sack their coaches because I expect it will be reversed and re-executed when they fix it.

Edit: Looks like it’s not all eligible coaches but all eligible coaches where teams have failed to meet expectations, something like that.

Expect they won’t revert and just say whoops we will fix it so next season it doesn’t happen as that forces most teams to blow money on the recruit feature. Hopefully I’m wrong here and they reroll the formula with it working properly.

How they can’t test a relative simple conditional/probabilistic function to identify this issue is pretty poor though. Bugs happen but basic calculations that are easily testable for all forms of cases is a pretty low bar. Screams of incompetency.
(editado)

I will not comment on dev skillset, I saw it enough times XD

Whet it comes to coaches, there are report of some 100+ years old coaches that "survived" and there are coaches like mine - 68y, above expectations and will retire. So rng involved in everything....

I had a 63 retire :D.

I stand by its poor testing if it turns out that all coaches over 60 where teams failed to meet expectations have decided to retire. I expected a number to retire but yeah there’s a test case they didn’t consider testing properly.

It seems like if you met expectations you potentially get the right result for coaches retiring as there is a small % chance of retiring but I don’t have data or code to confirm that obviously. However, I’ve yet to see a coach over 60 not retire if team didn’t meet expectations which is clearly a bug.
(editado)

Apparently it is not true, since there is no 100% retirement decision. Max is 99%, so one can get lucky XD

I mean yeah probability wise nothing would be 100% certain which would indicate a bug if every side who failed to meet expectations had all their 60+ coaches retire. That’s what isn’t certain here but it is suspicious given they couldn’t even get the press room notifications right. All I want is transparency. Yes everything is fine or no there’s an issue. I’d also like full transparency on probabilities of retirement based on age and also expectations. Gives a good idea then if there’s a bug or just unlucky rng.

I didn't meet expectations and had an 83yo assistant decide he believes in this club and wants to continue. And my 77yo had coach decided he's had enough.

That’s good to know. Perhaps it’s more that I totally failed as opposed to not meeting expectations and then rng hit me. That’s fine. Most of my coach retirements I was expecting and aren’t too annoying to replace. The 67-68 unearthly will be a little annoying though.

I still question the need for unearthly coaches. This change should benefit the teams with lower coaching costs, so may be good for the Aus clubs financially compared to those with deeper pockets globally.

It’s huge for the head coach. Allows for flexibility in training multiple different positions, so your 10 trainees could be across all 4 of positions or you could have strikers that need different skills to each other so you can mix and match orders a bit.

On top of that it then maximises the amount of training you get each week towards a skill as well as towards the side skills.

I think if you’re going to have an unearthly this is the place to have it.

Next location is the youth school which is a little more unclear, however should maximise what you get from your youth school with the smallest margin of error of other coach types. It’s probably not necessarily required but it adds better talent estimation and player development I believe so it’s better but you can decide how much.

Assistants - pretty much add very little benefit to have unearthly if you have an unearthly head coach already and for what they do the cost of unearthly is unlikely to be worthwhile.

I think ideally you’d want at least 1 unearthly as a head coach to maximise training potential and options, then the rest is debatable as to whether you value the additional benefit. I’ve just gone to unearthly youth coach because I’ve been wanting to upgrade for a while and was sick of running an incredible.

Any established team in A League should be able to afford an unearthly coach if not two. Any team flirting with relegation might be another question given div2 would financially cripple you.

Did the jury every come in on whether the head coach contributes to random pops? I've just gone through the process of hiring a full set of coaches. I assumed not.

I went for a 4x16 brilliant head coach (46k), who I picked up on the TL for 9k. And a retiring brilliant youth coach (41k), bought for $2. I can't remember if I ever had an unearthly head coach. Maybe not, 'cos I only ever trained defenders and strikers. That's how I plan to repair my finances now.

I think you're right that established A-League teams should be able to afford unearthly. Though wages are higher than ever! It depends where your priorities lie on whether you spend on head/youth coach, top players or trainees.

If you committed to a title challenge, you might find a bit more pressure on wages. Those extra couple of players quickly eat up the budget.

Hi cometer, i do not agree with you. if you have ONE unearthly coach, then you must put him in as Junior coach. The benefits are that he gives more precision of ups and downs and more important, he gives more talent for the junior during his time passed into the center. For instance, let's say, the junior stays 32w and the hidden talent is 3.1 then with the unearthly coach he won't loose 0.x training upgrade. If the Junior coach would have been Magical then he'll loose 0.1 per week, with Brillant 0.2 par week and so on and finally, at the end of the 32 weeks, the difference will be 3.2 weeks lost with Magical = 1 skillpt lost, will be 6.4 weeks lost with Brilliant = 2 skillpts lost.
Which is important for the begining of a junior (and i have chosen a top talent junior here, imagine with a talent 4 or less)

For a strong team who can afford a strong team coach, you can maximize the cost with Brilliant / Magical coaches by exchnaging them sometimes, depending on which skill is missing for optimization of training. Obviously if you have enough money to get unearthly coach as head coach (cost difference with a magical is around 5-8k per week is not expensive in a budget). But for young teams, they must choose the lowest price for 2 coachs that give all unearthly skills for each position as here :

16 stamina 1 goalkeeper
16 pace 5 defender
8 technique 16 playmaker
16 passing 4 striker

and

16 stamina 16 goalkeeper
8 pace 16 defender
16 technique 4 playmaker
3 passing 16 striker

So my comment wasn’t directed at young clubs. I’d argue young clubs should steer clear of any unearthy coaches and just start with the bare bones (exc-formid assistants, incred youth coach and a head coach with unearthly in just the skills you’re training).

Reason I believe unearthly is better in head coach, it allows you to cheap out on assistants, allows you to train talented players and all of this you have complete control over. There’s no layer of rng above the players talent. You know what you’re getting and you see the results. You basically end up training 2 generations of players too without switching coaches.

Youth coach level won’t change talent, may make talent easier to identify but it still doesn’t always translate to better juniors out of the school. It’s still a lottery. You still have skill distribution, talent, age and time of pull as rng layers to get through. There’s no you pay an extra 40k per week and you get that back in value. You might, or you might not.

So if I could only afford one unearthly, I look at where I get certain results. That doesn’t mean I recommend a terrible youth coach either but if you have to prioritise I’d rather go cheaper on the area that has more rng and has alternative options. There really isn’t a comparable alternative but n the head coach. Switching coaches will hurt flexibility in training all positions and will hurt with how much general training you get.

For the record I have both unearthly on main and junior coach but if I could only have 1 I’d put it on my main coach everyday of the week. Can buy trainees with talent off other people if required without a youth coach.

@vivski
I’m almost certain it does. I mean the alternative is you fork out for better assistants and have a lower levelled head coach but I’m not sure that’s the best strategy.

In addition, head coach unearthly makes tactical discipline easier to get to higher levels too for those that like players playing where you put them.

What I can’t do is quantify how much each level difference gives to each of the scenarios. I assume it’s there but I assume it’s probably small-ish with diminishing returns between each subsequent level. So the cost between a magical and unearthly youth coach for example mightn’t translate to as big an increase as the cost of the wage difference.

It may be that a magical does well enough and you invest the money saved elsewhere. Smaller countries have no option here. We’re just big enough that our top league can just manage this but if you were like a bot dominated league forget it.

I must say, I agree with StefNihon here, if I have 1 unearthly coach, it is going on the youths.
I think this is where it makes the most difference.

Now if I'm trying to save money (which if I'm going for an unearthly coach, I'm probably not trying to save that much money), than I can see where you are coming from.

I remember Raul saying some time way back that the difference isn't big between magical and unearthly, 3-4%, so searching for one can be a lot of money without much return.

I would say I can afford to have an unearthly (as I'm not trying to compete with bigger nations clubs due to how big our disadvantage is anyway), but I just can't pull one. Have spent about 20-30M on this all up, and the game just won't let me get one.

If a team can afford only one top [magical/unearthly] coach the he definitely should be used as main coach, not youth coach.

Youth school is extremely random and in my case most of the time my unearthly coach only bring expenses. I haven't had a brilliant youth in YEARS, never had an unearthly youth and during ~18 years of youth school I had maybe 3 or 4 magical youths.

Most I get is trash. Now I have 13 youths and honestly I could delete at least 7 of them, I just keep them to play in youth league.

It depends obviously...

If you're not training young players and valuable young players then yeah, there's not much point in having a top coach.

For me unearthly as main is much better since you can juggle training every week AND you are sure that your young trainees get top level general and main training. And for 16-18yo players even one pop makes a big difference in price, same with talent graphs.